diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/53809-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53809-0.txt | 17654 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 17654 deletions
diff --git a/old/53809-0.txt b/old/53809-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index ac35c18..0000000 --- a/old/53809-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,17654 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Saint John Chrysostom, his Life and Times, by -W. R. W. Stephens - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: Saint John Chrysostom, his Life and Times - A sketch of the church and the empire in the fourth century - -Author: W. R. W. Stephens - -Release Date: December 27, 2016 [EBook #53809] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SAINT JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, LIFE, TIMES *** - - - - -Produced by Turgut Dincer and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive) - - - - - - - -[Illustration: “COPIED FROM A FRONTISPIECE TO THE EDITION BY FRONTO -DUCÆUS, A.D. 1636, OF ST. CHRYSOSTOM’S WORKS (IN THE CATHEDRAL LIBRARY, -CHICHESTER). THE ORIGINAL IS STATED TO HAVE BEEN ENGRAVED FROM AN EIKON -OF GREAT ANTIQUITY, AT CONSTANTINOPLE, AND AGREES WITH THE NOTICES -OF CHRYSOSTOM’S APPEARANCE BY GREEK WRITERS, WHO DESCRIBE HIM AS -SHORT, WITH A LARGE HEAD, AMPLE, WRINKLED FOREHEAD, EYES DEEP-SET BUT -PLEASING, HOLLOW CHEEKS, AND A SCANTY GREY BEARD.”] - - SAINT JOHN CHRYSOSTOM - - HIS LIFE AND TIMES - - _A SKETCH OF THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE IN - THE FOURTH CENTURY._ - - BY W. R W. STEPHENS, M.A. - - PREBENDARY OF CHICHESTER AND RECTOR OF WOOLBEDING; AUTHOR OF “LIFE AND - LETTERS OF WALTER FARQUHAR HOOK, D.D.,” “CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM,” ETC. - - - With Portrait. - - - _SECOND EDITION._ - - - LONDON - JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET - 1880. - - _The right of translation is reserved._ - - - -PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. - - -The present edition of this Essay is substantially a reproduction -of the first. It is possible, indeed, and I hope probable, that the -fruits of nine years’ more experience and study would have manifested -themselves in some marked improvements upon the former work had I -rewritten or recast the whole of it. But after mature consideration -it did not seem to me that the defects of my original attempt were -sufficient to warrant such an expenditure of time and toil. - -I have therefore contented myself with carefully revising the text and -references, and making here and there a few slight alterations in the -way either of addition or omission. - - WOOLBEDING RECTORY, - _Feby. 20, 1880_. - - - - -PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. - - -The considerations which induced me to undertake this monograph are -mentioned in the introductory chapter. How far the design there -indicated has been satisfactorily fulfilled, it is for others to -decide. I am of course conscious of defects, for every workman’s ideal -aim should be higher than what he can actually accomplish. The work has -incurred a certain risk from having been once or twice suspended for a -considerable period; but I have always returned to it with increased -interest and pleasure, nor can I charge myself with having wittingly -bestowed less pains on one part than another. I have endeavoured to -make it a trustworthy narrative by drawing from the most original -sources to which I could gain access; and where, as in those portions -which touch on secular history, the lead of general historians, such -as Gibbon or De Broglie has been followed, I have, as far as possible, -consulted the authorities to which they refer. To modern authors from -whom I have derived valuable assistance for special parts of the -work, such as M. Amédée Thierry and Dr. Foerster, my obligations are -acknowledged in their proper place. - -Neander’s Life of St. Chrysostom has, of course, throughout been -frequently consulted. It is marked by the customary merits and defects -of that historian. It is full of research, information, thought, and -refined religious sentiment; but he fails to bring out strongly the -personality of his subject. We have abundance of Chrysostom’s sayings -and opinions, but somehow too little of Chrysostom himself. The fact -is that Neander seems always to be thinking more of those views and -theories about the growth of Christian doctrine and the Church, which -he wishes to impress upon men’s minds, than of the person about whom -he is writing. Thus, the subject of his biography becomes too much a -mere vehicle for conveying Neander’s own opinions, and the personality -of the character fades away in proportion. Some passages in the life -of his subject are related at inordinate length; others, because less -illustrative of Neander’s views, are imperfectly sketched, if not -omitted. - -In extracts from the works of Chrysostom, the somewhat difficult -question of the comparative advantages of translation and paraphrase -has been decided, on the whole, in favour of the latter. The -condensation of matter gained by a paraphrase is an important, indeed -necessary, object, if many specimens are to be given from such a very -voluminous author as Chrysostom. A careful endeavour, at the same time, -has been made to render faithfully the general sense of the original; -and wherever the peculiar beauty of the language or the importance of -the subject seemed to demand it, a translation has been given. - -From an early date in the sixteenth century down to the present -time the works of Chrysostom have occupied the attention of learned -editors. The first attempts, after the invention of printing, were -mainly confined to Latin translations of different portions. Afterwards -appeared— - -(1.) In 1529 the Greek text of the Homilies on St. Paul, published at -Vienna, “typis Stephani et fratrum,” with a preface by Maximus Donatus. -This was followed by the Commentaries on the New Testament, published -by Commelin, a printer at Heidelberg, four vols. folio, A.D. 1591-1602. - -(2.) In 1612 appeared a magnificent edition of the whole works, in -eight thick folio volumes, printed at Eton, and prepared by Sir -Henry Savile. Savile, born in 1549, was equally distinguished for -his knowledge of mathematics and Greek, in which he acted for a time -as tutor to Queen Elizabeth. He became Warden of Merton in 1585, and -Provost of Eton in 1596. Promotion in Church and State was offered -to him by James I., but declined, though he accepted a knighthood in -1604. His only son died about that time, and he devoted his fortune -henceforth entirely to the promotion of learning. The Savilian -Professorships of Geometry and Astronomy in Oxford were founded by -him, and a library furnished with mathematical books for the use of -his Professors. He spared no labour or expense to make his edition of -St. Chrysostom handsome and complete. He personally examined most of -the great libraries in Europe for mss., and, through the kindness of -English ambassadors and eminent men of learning abroad, his copyists -were admitted to the libraries of Paris, Basle, Augsburg, Munich, -Vienna, and other cities. He used the Commelinian edition as his -printer’s copy, carefully compared with five mss., the various readings -of which are marked (by a not very distinct plan) in the margin. The -chief value of the work consists in the prefaces and notes, contributed -some of them by Casaubon and other learned men, though by far the best -are Savile’s own. The whole cost of bringing out this grand edition is -said to have been £8000. Savile’s wife was so jealous of her husband’s -attachment to the work that she threatened to burn it. - -(3.) Meanwhile, Fronton le Duc, a French Jesuit, had been labouring -independently, but in most amicable intercourse with Savile, not only -to edit the works of Chrysostom complete, but accompanied by a Latin -translation, which he supplied himself for those pieces of which he -failed to find any good one already existing. His death arrested the -work, which was taken up, after a time, by the two brothers, Frederick -and Claude Morel, and completed by the latter in 1633. It was published -in Paris in 1636, in twelve large folio volumes. The Commelinian was -again used as the printer’s copy, with fewer alterations than in the -edition of Savile. - -(4.) We now come to the great Benedictine edition, prepared under the -care of Bernard de Montfaucon, who deserted the profession of arms at -the age of twenty to become, as a member of the brotherhood of St Maur, -one of the most marvellously industrious workers in literature that the -world has ever seen. In 1698, when the Benedictines had completed their -editions of SS. Augustine and Athanasius, they began to prepare for -an edition of Chrysostom, which they had intended to do for more than -thirty years. Montfaucon was sent to Italy, where he spent three years -in examining libraries; and, on his return, obtained leave from the -presidents of the congregation to employ four or five of the brethren -in collating mss. in the Royal Library at Paris, and in those of -Colbert and Coislin. Their labours extended over thirteen years; more -than 300 MSS., containing different portions of Chrysostom’s works, -having been discovered in those libraries. Montfaucon, meanwhile, -corresponded with learned men in all parts of Europe, in order to -procure materials and further collations. His correspondents in England -were Potter, Bishop of Oxford, Bentley, and Needham; and in Ireland, -Godwin, Bishop of Kilmore. The result was that, after more than twenty -years of incessant toil, Montfaucon produced an edition, in which -several pieces saw the light for the first time, and others, imperfect -in previous editions, were presented entire. The text after all is the -least satisfactory part of the work. Mr. Field has discovered that the -eight principal MSS. employed were not very carefully collated, and -that, though Savile’s text is extremely praised, that of Morel, by a -curious inconsistency, is most closely followed, which is little more -than a reproduction of the original Commelinian. The main value of the -edition consists in the prefaces, written by Montfaucon to every set -of homilies and every treatise, in which the chronology, contents, and -character of the composition are most fully and ably discussed. The -chronological arrangement also of the pieces is a great improvement -on the editions of Savile and Fronton le Duc, who had made no attempt -of that kind. The last volume, the thirteenth, contains a life of St -Chrysostom, a most copious index, and dissertations on the doctrine, -discipline, and heresies prevalent in his age, illustrated by notices -collected from his works. On the whole, the edition must be pronounced -a marvellous monument of ability and industry, especially when it is -considered that at the date of its completion, 1738, Montfaucon was -eighty-three years of age, and had been engaged for upwards of fifty -years in literary work of a most laborious description. He died in 1741. - -(5.) The last edition, which leaves little or nothing to be desired, -is that which I have used in preparing this volume—the Abbé Migne’s, -in 13 vols., Paris, 1863. It is substantially a reproduction of the -Benedictine, in a rather less cumbrous size, and embodies some of -the best corrections, notes, and prefaces of modern commentators, -especially those of Mr. Field to the Homilies of St. Matthew, and some -by the learned editor himself. - -A brief sketch of the principal forms in which Chrysostom’s works have -appeared seemed an appropriate introduction to the history of the man -himself. If the perusal of that history shall afford to readers half -as much interest, pleasure, and instruction as I have myself derived -from the composition of it, I shall feel amply rewarded for my labour; -and I gladly take this opportunity of expressing my gratitude to my -father-in-law for originally suggesting a work of this kind, and to -many friends, and especially my wife, for constant encouragement, -without which a mixture of indolence and diffidence might have -prevented the completion of my design. - - DENSWORTH COTTAGE, CHICHESTER, - _All Saints Day 1871_. - - - - -CONTENTS. - - - CHAPTER I. - PAGE - - Introductory, 1 - - - CHAPTER II. - - From his Birth to his Appointment to the Office of - Reader, A.D. 345 or A.D. 347 to A.D. 370, 9 - - - CHAPTER III. - - Commencement of ascetic life-Study under - Diodorus—Formation of an ascetic Brotherhood—The Letters - to Theodore, A.D. 370, 24 - - - CHAPTER IV. - - Chrysostom evades forcible Ordination to a Bishopric—The - Treatise “On the Priesthood.” A.D. 370, 371, 40 - - - CHAPTER V. - - Narrow Escape from Persecution—His Entrance into a - Monastery—The Monasticism of the East. A.D. 372, 57 - - - CHAPTER VI. - - Works produced during his monastic life—The letters to - Demetrius and Stelechius—Treatises addressed to the - Opponents of Monasticism—Letter to Stagirius, 69 - - - CHAPTER VII. - - Ordination as Deacon—Description of Antioch—Works - composed during his Diaconate. A.D. 381-386, 86 - - - CHAPTER VIII. - - Ordination to the Priesthood by Flavian—Inaugural - Discourse in the Cathedral—Homilies against the - Arians—Animadversions on the Chariot Races, A.D. 386, 103 - - - CHAPTER IX. - - Homilies against Pagans and Jews—Condition of the Jews in - Antioch—Judaising Christians—Homilies on Christmas Day - and New Year’s Day—Censure of Pagan Superstitions. A.D. - 386, 387, 120 - - - CHAPTER X. - - Survey of the first Decade of the Reign of Theodosius—His - Character—His Efforts for the Extirpation of Paganism - and Heresy—The Apologies of Symmachus and Libanius. A.D. - 379-389, 139 - - - CHAPTER XI. - - The Sedition at Antioch—The Homilies on the Statues—The - Results of the Sedition, A.D. 387, 150 - - - CHAPTER XII. - - Illness of Chrysostom—Homilies on Festivals - of Saints and Martyrs—Character of these - Festivals—Pilgrimages—Reliques—Character of Peasant - Clergy in neighbourhood of Antioch. A.D. 387, 177 - - - CHAPTER XIII. - - Survey of Events between A.D. 387 and A.D. 397—Ambrose - and Theodosius—Revolt of Arbogastes—Death of - Theodosius—The Ministers of Arcadius—Rufinus and - Eutropius, 186 - - - CHAPTER XIV. - - Death of Nectarius, Archbishop of - Constantinople—Eager Competition for the See—Election - of Chrysostom—His compulsory Removal from - Antioch—Consecration—Reforms—Homilies on various - subjects—Missionary Projects, 212 - - - CHAPTER XV. - - The Fall of Eutropius—His Retreat to the Sanctuary of the - Church—Right of Sanctuary maintained by Chrysostom—Death - of Eutropius—Revolt of Gothic Commanders Tribigild and - Gaïnas—Demand of Gaïnas for an Arian Church refused by - Chrysostom—Defeat and Death of Gaïnas. A.D. 399-401, 240 - - - CHAPTER XVI. - - Chrysostom’s Visit to Asia—Deposition of six simoniacal - Bishops—Legitimate Extent of his Jurisdiction—Return to - Constantinople—Rupture and reconciliation with Severian, - bishop of Gabala—Chrysostom’s increasing unpopularity - with the Clergy and wealthy Laity—His Friends—Olympias - the Deaconess—Formation of hostile Factions, which invite - the aid of Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria. A.D. 400, - 401, 265 - - - CHAPTER XVII. - - Circumstances which led to the interference of Theophilus - with the affairs of Chrysostom—Controversy about the - Writings of Origen—Persecution by Theophilus of the Monks - called “The Tall Brethren”—Their Flight to Palestine—To - Constantinople—Their Reception by Chrysostom—Theophilus - summoned to Constantinople. A.D. 395-403, 286 - - - CHAPTER XVIII. - - Theophilus arrives in Constantinople—Organises a Cabal - against Chrysostom—The Synod of the Oak—Chrysostom - pronounced contumacious for Non-appearance and expelled - from the city—Earthquake—Recall of Chrysostom—Ovations on - his Return—Flight of Theophilus. A.D. 403, 306 - - - CHAPTER XIX. - - An Image of Eudoxia placed in front of the - Cathedral—Chrysostom denounces it—Anger of the - Empress—The enemy returns to the charge—Another Council - formed—Chrysostom confined to his Palace—Violent scene in - the Cathedral and other places—Chrysostom again expelled, - A.D. 403, 404, 326 - - - CHAPTER XX. - - Fury of the people at the removal of - Chrysostom—Destruction of the Cathedral Church and - Senate-house by Fire—Persecution of Chrysostom’s - followers—Fugitives to Rome—Letters of Innocent - to Theophilus—To the Clergy of Constantinople—To - Chrysostom—Deputation of Western Bishops to - Constantinople repulsed—Sufferings of the Eastern - Church—Triumph of the Cabal. A.D. 404, 405, 341 - - - CHAPTER XXI. - - Chrysostom ordered to be removed to Cucusus—Perils - encountered at Cæsarea—Hardships of the Journey—Reaches - Cucusus—Letters written there to Olympias and other - Friends. A.D. 404, 361 - - - CHAPTER XXII. - - Chrysostom’s Sufferings from the winter cold—Depredations - of the Isaurians—The Mission in Phœnicia—Letters to - Innocent and the Italian Bishops—Chrysostom’s enemies - obtain an order for his Removal to Pityus—He dies - at Comana, A.D. 407—Reception of his Reliques at - Constantinople, A.D. 438, 379 - - - CHAPTER XXIII. - - Survey of Chrysostom’s Theological Teaching—Practical - tone of his Works—Reason of this—Doctrine of - Man’s Nature—Original Sin—Grace—Free-will—How - far Chrysostom Pelagian—Language on the - Trinity—Atonement—Justification—The two Sacraments—No - trace of Confession, Purgatory, or Mariolatry—Relations - towards the Pope—Liturgy of Chrysostom—His character as a - Commentator—Views on Inspiration—His Preaching—Personal - Appearance—References to Greek Classical - Authors—Comparison with St. Augustine, 390 - - APPENDIX, 433 - - INDEX, 435 - - - - - LIFE AND TIMES - - OF - - ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM. - - - - -CHAPTER I. - -INTRODUCTORY. - - -I. There are many great names in history which have been familiar to -us from almost our earliest years, but of the personal character, the -actual life of those who bore them, we are comparatively ignorant. We -know that they were men of genius; industrious, energetic workers, who, -as statesmen, reformers, warriors, writers, speakers, exercised a vital -influence for good or ill upon their fellow-men. They have achieved -a reputation which will never die; but from various causes their -personality does not stand out before us in clear and bold relief. -We know something about some of the most important passages in their -life, a few of their sayings, a little of their writings; but the men -themselves we do not know. - -Frequently the reason of this is, that though they occupy a place, -perhaps an important place, in the great drama of history, yet they -have not played one of the _foremost_ parts; and general history cannot -spare much time or space beyond what is necessary to describe the main -progress of events, and the actions and characters of those who were -most prominently concerned in them. Other men may have been greater -in themselves; they may have been first-rate in their own sphere, but -that sphere was too much secluded or circumscribed to admit of the -extensive and conspicuous public influence of which alone history takes -much cognisance. They are to history what those side or background -figures in the pictures of great medieval painters are to the grand -central subject of the piece: they do but help to fill up the canvas, -yet the picture would not be complete without them. They are notable -personages, well worthy of being separately depicted, though in the -large historical representation they play a subordinate part. - -To take out one of these side figures of history, and to make it the -centre of a separate picture, grouping round it all the great events -and characters among which it moved, is the work of a biographer. And -by many it will be felt that nothing invests the general history of -any period with such a living interest as viewing it through the light -of some one human life. How was this individual soul affected by the -movement of the great forces with which it was surrounded? How did it -affect them, in its turn, wherever in its progress it came into contact -with them? This one consideration will confer on many details of -history an importance and freshness of which they seemed too trivial or -too dull to be susceptible. - -II. Among these side characters in history, characters of men in -themselves belonging to the first rank, men whose names will be -renowned and honoured to the end of time, but precluded, by disposition -or circumstances, from taking the foremost place in the larger canvas -of general history, must be reckoned many of the great ecclesiastics of -the first four or five centuries of Christianity. Every one recognises -as great such names as Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, Basil, the two -Gregories, and many more. Every one would admit that the Church owes -them a debt, but it may be safely affirmed that here the acquaintance -of many with these eminent men begins and ends. A few scraps from -their writings quoted in commentaries, one or two remarkable acts -or sayings which have been thought worthy to be handed down, a few -passages in which their lives flit across the stage of general history, -complete the knowledge of many more. Such men, indeed, as Athanasius -and Ambrose are to some extent exceptions. The magnitude of the -principles for which they contended, the energy and ability which -they displayed in the contest, were too conspicuous to be passed over -by the general historian, civil or ecclesiastical. The proverbial -expression “Athanasius contra mundum” attests of itself the pre-eminent -greatness of the man. But with other luminaries of the Church, whose -powers were perhaps equally great, but not exercised on so public a -field or on behalf of such apparently vital questions, history has not -dealt, perhaps cannot consistently with its scope deal, in any degree -commensurate with their merits. Nor does this remark apply entirely to -civil history. Ecclesiastical history also is so much occupied with -the consideration of subjects on a large scale and covering a large -space of time,—the course of controversies, the growth of doctrines, -the relations between Church and State, changes in discipline, in -liturgies, in ritual,—that the history of those who lived among these -events, and who by their ability made or moulded them, is comparatively -lost sight of. The outward operations are seen, but the springs -which set them going are concealed. How can general history, for -instance, adequately set forth the character and the work of such men -as Savonarola or Erasmus, both in their widely different ways men of -such incomparable genius and incessant activity? It does not; it only -supplies a glimpse, a sketch, which make us long for a fuller vision, -a more finished picture.[1] - -III. It is designed to attempt, in the following pages, such a -supplementary chapter in ecclesiastical history. An endeavour will be -made not merely to chronicle the life and estimate the character of the -great preacher of Antioch and Constantinople, but to place him in the -centre of all the great movements, civil as well as religious, of his -time, and see what light he and they throw upon one another. - -The age in which he lived was a troublous one. The spectacle of a -tempestuous sea may in itself excite our interest and inspire us with -awe, but place in the midst of it a vessel containing human life, and -how deeply is our interest intensified! - -What was the general character and position of the clergy in the fourth -century? What was the attitude of the Church towards the sensuality, -selfishness, luxury, of an effete and debased civilisation on the one -hand, and the rude ferocity of young and strong barbarian races on the -other? To what extent had Christianity leavened, or had it appreciably -leavened at all, popular forms of thought and popular habits of life? -What was the existing phase of monasticism? what the ordinary form of -worship in the Catholic Church? what the established belief respecting -the sacraments and the great verities of the Christian faith? In answer -to such inquiries, and to many more, much useful information may be -extracted from the works of so prolific a writer and preacher as -Chrysostom. Being concerned also, as a preacher, with moral practice -more than with abstract theology, his homilies reflect, like the -writings of satirists, the manners of the age. The habits of private -life, the fashionable amusements, the absurdities of dress, all the -petty foibles, as well as the more serious vices of the society by -which he was surrounded, are dragged out without remorse, and made -the subjects of solemn admonition, or fierce invective, or withering -sarcasm, or ironical jest. - -IV. Nor does secular history, from which not a single chapter in -ecclesiastical history can without injury be dissociated, want for -copious illustration. Not only from the memorable story of the sedition -at Antioch, and from the public events at Constantinople, in which -Chrysostom played a conspicuous part, but from many an allusion or -incidental expression scattered up and down his works, we may collect -rays of light on the social and political condition of the Empire. We -get glimpses in his pages of a large mass of the population hovering -midway between Paganism and Christianity; we detect an oppressive -system of taxation, a widely-spread venality in the administration -of public business, a general insecurity of life arising from the -almost total absence of what we understand by police regulations, a -depressed agriculture, a great slave population, a vast turbulent army -as dangerous to the peace of society as the enemies from whom it was -supposed to defend it, the presence of barbarians in the country as -servants, soldiers, or colonists, the constantly-impending danger from -other hordes ever hovering on the frontier, and, like famished wolves, -gazing with hungry eyes on the plentiful prey which lay beyond it. But -in the midst of the national corruption we see great characters stand -out; and it is remarkable that they belong, without exception, to the -two elements which alone were strong and progressive in the midst of -the general debility and decadence. All the men of commanding genius -in this era were either Christian or barbarian. A young and growing -faith, a vigorous and manly race: these were the two forces destined to -work hand in hand for the destruction of an old and the establishment -of a new order of things. The chief doctors of Christianity in the -fourth century—Augustine, Chrysostom, Ambrose—are incomparably greater -than their contemporary advocates of the old religion and philosophy, -Symmachus or Libanius; even as the Gothic Alaric and Fravitta, and the -Vandal Stilicho, were the only generals who did not disgrace the Roman -arms. - -V. Some remarks on the theology of Chrysostom will be found in the -concluding chapter. The appellation of preacher,[2] by which he is -most generally known, is a true indicator of the sphere in which his -powers were greatest. It was in upholding a pure and lofty standard of -Christian morality, and in denouncing unchristian wickedness, that his -life was mainly spent, rather than, like Augustine’s, in constructing -and teaching a logical system of doctrine. The rage of his enemies, -to which he ultimately fell a victim, was not bred of the bitterness -of theological controversy, but of the natural antagonism between the -evil and the good. And it is partly on this account that neither the -remoteness of time, nor difference of circumstances, which separate -us from him, can dim the interest with which we read his story. He -fought not so much for any abstract question of theology or point -of ecclesiastical discipline, which may have lost its meaning and -importance for us, but for those grand principles of truth and justice, -Christian charity, and Christian holiness, which ought to be dear to -men equally in all ages. - -VI. But there is also in the struggle of Chrysostom with the secular -power an ecclesiastical and historical interest, as well as a moral -one. We see prefigured in his deposition the fate of the Eastern Church -in the Eastern capital of the Empire. As the papacy grew securely by -the retreat from the old Rome of any secular rival, so the patriarchate -of the new Rome was constantly, increasingly depressed by the presence -of such a rival. Of all the great churchmen who flourished in the -fourth century, Athanasius, Basil, the Gregories, Ambrose, Jerome, -Augustine, and Chrysostom, the last three alone survived into the -fifth century. But the glory of the Western Church was then only in -its infancy; the glory of the Eastern culminated in Chrysostom. From -his time the patriarchs of Constantinople fell more and more into -the servile position of court functionaries. The working out of that -grand idea, a visible organised Catholic Church, uniform in doctrine -and discipline, an idea which grew more and more as the political -disintegration of the Empire increased, was to be accomplished by the -more commanding, law-giving spirit of the West. Intrepid in spirit, -inflexible of purpose, though Chrysostom was, he could not subdue, -he could only provoke to more violent opposition, the powers with -which he was brought into collision. Ineffectual was his contest -with ecclesiastical corruption and secular tyranny, as compared -with a similar contest waged by his Western contemporary, Ambrose; -ineffectual also were the efforts, after his time, of the Church which -he represented to assert the full dignity of its position. - -VII. Chrysostom, and the contemporary fathers of the Eastern Church, -naturally seem very remote from us; but, in fact, they are nearer to -us in their modes of thought than many who in point of time are less -distant. They were brought up in the study of that Greek literature -with which we are familiar. Philosophy had not stiffened into -scholasticism. The ethics of Chrysostom are substantially the same -with the ethics of Butler. So, again, Eastern fathers of the fourth -century are far more nearly allied to us in theology than writers of -a few centuries later. If we are to look to “the rock” whence our -Anglican liturgy “was hewn,” and “to the hole of the pit” whence -Anglican reformed theology “was digged,” we must turn our eyes, above -all other directions, to the Eastern Church and the Eastern fathers. -It was observed by Mr. Alexander Knox,[3] that the earlier days of -the Greek Church seem resplendent with a glow of simple, fervent -piety, such as in a Church, as a whole, has never since been seen; and -that this character is strikingly in harmony with our own liturgy, so -overflowing with sublime aspirations, so Catholic, not bearing the -impress of any one system of theology, but containing what is best in -all. We may detect in Chrysostom the germ of medieval corruptions, -such as the invocation of saints, the adoration of relics, and a -sensuous conception of the change effected in the holy elements in the -Eucharist; but these are the raw material of error, not yet wrought -into definite shape. The Bishop of Rome is recognised, as will be seen -from Chrysostom’s correspondence with Innocent, as a great potentate, -whose intercessions are to be solicited in time of trouble and -difficulty, and to whose judgment much deference is to be paid, but by -no means as a supreme ruler in Christendom. - -Thus, the tone of Chrysostom’s language is far more akin to that of -our own Church than of the medieval or present Church of Rome. In his -habit of referring to Holy Scripture as the ultimate source and basis -of all true doctrine, “so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor -may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man as an article -of faith;” in his careful endeavour to ascertain the real meaning of -Scripture, not seeking for fanciful or mystical interpretations, or -supporting preconceived theories, but patiently labouring, with a -mixture of candour, reverence, and common sense, to ascertain the exact -literal sense of each passage;—in these points, no less than in his -theology, he bears an affinity to the best minds of our own reformed -Church, and fairly represents that faith of the Catholic Church before -the disruption of East and West in which Bishop Ken desired to die; -while his fervent piety, and his apostolic zeal as a preacher of -righteousness, must command the admiration of all earnest Christians, -to whatever country, age, or Church, they may belong. - - - - -CHAPTER II. - - FROM HIS BIRTH TO HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE OFFICE OF - READER, A.D. 345 OR A.D. 347 TO A.D. 370. - - -It has been well remarked by Sir Henry Savile, in the preface to his -noble edition of Chrysostom’s works, published in 1612, that, as with -great rivers, so often with great men, the middle and the close of -their career are dignified and distinguished, but the primary source -and early progress of the stream are difficult to ascertain and trace. -No one, he says, has been able to fix the exact date, the year, and the -consulship of Chrysostom’s birth. This is true; but at the same time -his birth, parentage, and education are not involved in such obscurity -as surrounds the earliest years of some other great luminaries of the -Eastern Church; his own friend, for instance, Theodore, Bishop of -Mopsuestia, and yet more notably, the great Athanasius. - -There is little doubt that his birth occurred not later than the year -A.D. 347, and not earlier than the year A.D. 345; and there is no doubt -that Antioch in Syria was the place of his birth, that his mother’s -name was Anthusa, his father’s Secundus, and that both were well born. -His mother was, if not actually baptized, very favourably inclined -to Christianity,[4] and, indeed, a woman of no ordinary piety. The -father had attained the rank of “magister militum” in the Imperial -army of Syria, and therefore enjoyed the title of “illustris.” He -died when his son John was an infant, leaving a young widow, about -twenty years of age, in comfortable circumstances, but harassed by the -difficulties and anxieties of her unprotected condition as mistress -of a household in days when servants were slaves, and life in large -cities altogether unguarded by such securities as are familiar to us. -Greatly did she dread the responsibility of bringing up a son in one of -the most turbulent and dissolute capitals of the Empire. Nothing, she -afterwards[5] declared to him, could have enabled her to pass through -such a furnace of trial but a consoling sense of divine support, and -the delight of contemplating the image of her husband as reproduced -in his son. How long a sister older than himself may have lived we -do not know; but the conversation between him and his mother, when -he was meditating a retreat into a monastery, seems to imply that he -was the only surviving child. All her love, all her care, all her -means and energies, were concentrated on the boy destined to become so -great a man, and exhibiting even in childhood no common ability and -aptitude for learning. But her chief anxiety was to train him in pious -habits, and to preserve him uncontaminated from the pollutions of the -vicious city in which they resided. She was to him what Monica was to -Augustine, and Nonna to Gregory Nazianzen. - -The great influence, indeed, of women upon the Christianity of -domestic life in that age is not a little remarkable. The Christians -were not such a pure and single-minded community as they had been. -The refining fires of persecution which burnt up the chaff of -hypocrisy or indifference were now extinguished; Christianity had a -recognised position; her bishops were in kings’ courts. The natural -consequences inevitably followed this attainment of security; there -were more Christians, but not more who were zealous; there were many -who hung very loosely to the Church—many who fluctuated between -the Church and Paganism. In the great Eastern cities of the Empire, -especially Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, the mass of the -so-called Christian population was largely infected by the dominant -vices—inordinate luxury, sensuality, selfish avarice, and display. -Christianity was in part paganised long before it had made any -appreciable progress towards the destruction of Paganism. But the -sincere and ardent piety of many amongst the women kept alive in many -a home the flame of Christian faith which would otherwise have been -smothered. The Emperor Julian imagined that his efforts to resuscitate -Paganism would have been successful in Antioch but for the strenuous -opposition of the Christian women. He complains “that they were -permitted by their husbands to take anything out of the house to bestow -it upon the Galilæans, or to give away to the poor, while they would -not expend the smallest trifle upon the worship of the gods.”[6] The -efforts also of the Governor Alexander, who was left in Antioch by -the Emperor to carry forward his designs of Pagan reformation, were -principally baffled through this female influence. He found that the -men would often consent to attend the temples and sacrifices, but -afterwards generally repented and retracted their adherence. This -relapse Libanius the sophist, in a letter[7] to the Governor, ascribes -to the home influence of the women. “When the men are out of doors,” he -says, “they obey you who give them the best advice, and they approach -the altars; but when they get home, their minds undergo a change; they -are wrought upon by the tears and entreaties of their wives, and they -again withdraw from the altars of the gods.” - -Anthusa did not marry again; very possibly she was deterred from -contracting a second marriage by religious scruples which Chrysostom -himself would certainly have approved.[8] The Pagans themselves -admired those women who dedicated themselves to a single life, or -abstained from marrying again. Chrysostom himself informs us that when -he began to attend the lectures of Libanius, his master inquired who -and what his parents were; and on being told that he was the son of a -widow who at the age of forty had lost her husband twenty years, he -exclaimed in a tone of mingled jealousy and admiration: “Heavens! what -women these Christians have!”[9] - -What instruction he received in early boyhood, beside his mother’s -careful moral and religious training; whether he was sent, a common -custom among Christian parents in that age,[10] to be taught by the -monks in one of the neighbouring monasteries, where he may have -imbibed an early taste for monastic retirement, we know not. He was -designed, however, not for the clerical but for the legal profession, -and at the age of twenty he began to attend the lectures of one of -the first sophists of the day, capable of giving him that secular -training and learning which would best enable him to cope with men of -the world. Libanius had achieved a reputation as a teacher of general -literature, rhetoric, and philosophy, and as an able and eloquent -defender of Paganism, not only in his native city Antioch, but in -the Empire at large. He was the friend and correspondent of Julian, -and on amicable terms with the Emperors Valens and Theodosius. He -had now returned to Antioch after lengthened residence in Athens -(where the chair of rhetoric had been offered to him, but declined), -in Nicomedia, and in Constantinople.[11] In attending daily lectures -at his school, the young Chrysostom became conversant with the best -classical Greek authors, both poets and philosophers. Of their teaching -he in later life retained little admiration,[12] and to the perusal -of their writings he probably seldom or never recurred for profit -or recreation, but his retentive memory enabled him to the last to -point and adorn his arguments with quotations from Homer, Plato, and -the Tragedians. In the school of Libanius also he began to practise -those nascent powers of eloquence which were destined to win for him -so mighty a fame, as well as the appellation of Chrysostomos, or the -Golden Mouth, by which, rather than by his proper name of John, he will -be known to the end of time.[13] Libanius, in a letter to Chrysostom, -praises highly a speech composed by him in honour of the Emperors, -and says they were happy in having so excellent a panegyrist.[14] The -Pagan sophist helped to forge the weapons which were afterwards to be -skilfully employed against the cause to which he was devoted. When he -was on his deathbed, he was asked by his friends who was in his opinion -capable of succeeding him. “It would have been John,” he replied, “had -not the Christians stolen him from us.”[15] But it did not immediately -appear that the learned advocate of Paganism was nourishing a traitor; -for Chrysostom had not yet been baptized, and began to seek an opening -for his powers in secular fields of activity.[16] He commenced practice -as a lawyer; some of his speeches gained great admiration, and were -highly commended by his old master Libanius. A brilliant career of -worldly ambition was open to him. The profession of the law was at that -time the great avenue to civil distinction. The amount of litigation -was enormous. One hundred and fifty advocates were required for the -court of the Prætorian Prefect of the East alone. The display of -talent in the law-courts frequently obtained for a man the government -of a province, whence the road was open to those higher dignities of -vice-prefect, prefect, patrician, consul, which were honoured by the -title of “illustrious.”[17] - -But the pure and upright disposition of the youthful advocate recoiled -from the licentiousness which corrupted society; from the avarice, -fraud, and artifice which marked the transactions of men of business; -from the chicanery and rapacity that sullied the profession which he -had entered.[18] He was accustomed to say later in life that “the -Bible was the fountain for watering the soul.” If he had drunk of -the classical fountains in the school of Libanius, he had imbibed -draughts yet deeper of the spiritual well-spring in quiet study of Holy -Scripture at home. And like many another in that degraded age, his -whole soul revolted from the glaring contrast presented by the ordinary -life of the world around him to that standard of holiness which was -held up in the Gospels. - -He had formed also an intimate friendship with a young man, his equal -in station and age, by whose influence he was diverted more and more -from secular life, and eventually induced altogether to abandon it. -This was Basil, who will come before us in the celebrated work on -the priesthood. He must not be confounded with the great Basil,[19] -Bishop of Cæsarea, in Cappadocia, who was some fifteen years older -than Chrysostom, having been born in A.D. 329, nor with Basil, Bishop -of Seleucia, who was present at the Council of Chalcedon in A.D. 451, -and must therefore have been considerably younger. Perhaps he may be -identified with a Basil, Bishop of Raphanea in Syria, not far from -Antioch, who attended the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381. - -Chrysostom has described his friendship with Basil in affecting -language:[20] “I had many genuine and true friends, men who understood -and strictly observed the laws of friendship; but one there was out of -the many who exceeded them all in attachment to me, and strove to leave -them all behind in the race, even as much as they themselves surpassed -ordinary acquaintances. He was one of those who accompanied me at all -times; we engaged in the same studies, and were instructed by the same -teachers; in our zeal and interest for the subjects on which we worked, -we were one. As we went to our lectures or returned from them, we were -accustomed to take counsel together on the line of life it would be -best to adopt; and here, too, we appeared to be unanimous.” - -Basil early determined this question for himself in favour of -monasticism; he decided, as Chrysostom expresses it, to follow the -“true philosophy.” This occasioned the first interruption to their -intercourse. Chrysostom, soon after the age of twenty, had embarked -on a secular career, and could not immediately make up his mind to -tread in the footsteps of his friend. “The balance,” he says, “was no -longer even;” the scale of Basil mounted, while that of Chrysostom was -depressed by the weight of earthly interests and desires.[21] But the -decisive act of Basil made a deep impression on his mind; separation -from his friend only increased his attachment to him, and his aversion -from life in the world. He began to withdraw more from ordinary -occupations and pleasures, and to spend more of his time in the study -of Holy Scripture. He formed acquaintance with Meletius, the deeply -respected Catholic Bishop of Antioch, and after three years, the usual -period of probation for catechumens, was baptized by him. - -A natural question arises: Why was he not baptized before, since his -mother was a Christian, and there is abundant evidence that infant -baptism was and had been the ordinary practice of the Church?[22] In -attempting a solution of the difficulty, it will be proper to mention -first certain reasons for delaying baptism which were prevalent in that -age, and which may partially have influenced the mind of Chrysostom’s -mother or himself. It may sound paradoxical to say that an exaggerated -estimation of the import and effect of baptism contributed in two ways -to its delay. But such appears to have been the case. It was regarded -by many as the most complete and final purgation of past sin, and -the most solemn pledge of a new and purified life for the future. To -sin, therefore, before baptism was comparatively harmless, if in the -waters of baptism the guilty stains could be washed away; but sin after -the reception of that holy sacrament was almost, if not altogether, -unpardonable—at least fraught with the most tremendous peril. Hence -some would delay baptism, as many now delay repentance, from a secret -or conscious reluctance to take a decisive step, and renounce the -pleasures of sin; and under the comfortable persuasion that some -day, by submitting to baptism, they would free themselves from the -responsibilities of their past life. Others, again, were deterred from -binding themselves under so solemn a covenant by a distrust of their -ability to fulfil their vows, and a timorous dread of the eternal -consequences if they failed. Against these misconceptions of the true -nature and proper use of the sacrament, the great Basil, the two -Gregories, and Chrysostom himself contend[23] with a vehemence and -indignation which proves them to have been common. Many parents thought -they would allow the fitful and unstable season of youth to pass before -they irrevocably bound their children under the most solemn engagements -of their Christian calling. The children, when they grew up, inherited -their scruples, and so the sacrament was indefinitely deferred. - -It is not impossible that such feelings may have influenced -Chrysostom’s mother and himself; but considering the natural and -healthy character of his piety, which seems to have grown by a gentle -and unintermitting progress from his childhood, they do not seem very -probable in his case. A more cogent cause for the delay may perhaps be -found in the distracted state of the Church in Antioch, which lasted, -with increasing complications, from A.D. 330, or fifteen years prior to -Chrysostom’s birth, up to the time of his baptism by Meletius, when a -brighter day was beginning to dawn. - -The vicissitudes of the Church in Antioch during that period form -a curious, though far from pleasing, picture of the inextricable -difficulties, the deplorable schisms, into which the Church at large -was plunged by the Arian controversy. Two years after the Council of -Nice, A.D. 327, the Arians, through the assistance of Constantia, -the Emperor’s sister, won the favour of Constantine. He lost no -time during this season of prosperity in procuring the deposition -of Catholic bishops. Eminent among these was Eustathius, Bishop of -Antioch. He was ejected by a synod held in his own city on false -charges of Sabellianism and adultery.[24] An Arian Bishop, Euphronius, -was appointed, but the Catholic congregation indignantly withdrew to -hold their services in another quarter of the town, on the opposite -side of the Orontes.[25] The see remained for some time entirely in -the hands of the Arians. When the Council of Sardica met in A.D. 342, -and the Arian faction seceded from it to hold a Council of their own -in Philippopolis, Stephen, Bishop of Antioch, was their president. -He was deposed in A.D. 349 by the Emperor Constantius, having been -detected as an accomplice in an infamous plot against some envoys -from the Western Church.[26] But “uno avulso non deficit alter;” he -was succeeded by another Arian, the eunuch Leontius.[27] He tried -to conciliate the Catholics by an artful and equivocating policy, -of which his manner of chanting the doxology was an instance. The -Arian form of it was “Glory be to the Father BY the Son _in_ the Holy -Ghost;” this the bishop was accustomed to slur in such an indistinct -voice that the prepositions could not be clearly if at all heard, -while he joined loudly in the second part of the hymn where all were -agreed.[28] He died towards the close of A.D. 357, when the see was -fraudulently seized by Eudoxius, Bishop of Germanicia. He favoured the -extreme Arians so openly that the Semi-Arians appealed to the Emperor -Constantius to summon a General Council. Their request was granted; but -the Arians, fearing that the Catholics and Semi-Arians would coalesce -to overwhelm them, artfully suggested that Rimini, the place proposed -for the Council, was too distant for the Eastern prelates, and that -the Assembly should be divided, part meeting at Rimini, and part at -Nice.[29] Their suggestion was accepted, and the result is well known. -Partly by arguments, partly by artifices and delays which wore out the -strength and patience of the members, the Arians completely carried the -day; the creed of Rimini was ordered by the Emperor to be everywhere -signed, and in the words of Jerome, “the world groaned and found itself -Arian.”[30] An Arian synod sat at Constantinople. Macedonius, the -archbishop, being considered too moderate, was deposed, and Eudoxius, -the usurper of Antioch, was elevated to the see in his stead;[31] and -Meletius, Bishop of Sebaste, in Armenia, was translated to the vacant -see of Antioch, A.D. 361. But in him the Arians had mistaken their man. -He was one of those who attended more to the practical moral teaching -than to the abstract theology of Christianity; and, being not perhaps -very precise in his language on doctrinal points, he had been reckoned -an Arian.[32] After his elevation to the see of Antioch, he confined -himself in his discourses to those practical topics on which all could -agree. But this was not allowed to last long. The Emperor Constantius -paid a visit to Antioch soon after the appointment of Meletius, and he -was instigated by the Arians to put the bishop to a crucial test. He -was commanded to preach on Proverbs viii. 22: “The Lord _possessed_ -me” (Septuagint ἔκτισε, that was the fatal word) “in the beginning,” -etc. The interpretation put on the word “formed” ἔκτισε would reveal -the man. Two other bishops discoursed first upon the same text: George -of Laodicea, Acacius of Cæsarea. The first construed the passage in a -purely Arian sense: the Word was a κτίσμα, “a created being,” though -the first in time and rank; the second preacher took a more moderate -line. Then came the turn of Meletius; short-hand writers took down -every word as it fell. Meletius was a mild and temperate man, but he -had his convictions, and he was no coward. To the horror of the Arians -(the secret joy, perhaps, of those who disliked him) he entirely -dissented from the Arian interpretation. The people loudly applauded -his sermon, and called aloud for some brief and compendious statement -of his doctrine. Meletius replied by a symbolical action: he held -up three fingers, and then closing two of them, he said: “Our minds -conceive of three, but we speak as to one.”[33] This was conclusive; -the objectionable prelate was banished to Melitene, his native place -in Armenia, thirty days after he had entered Antioch. Euzoius, who had -been an intimate friend and constant associate of Arius himself, was -put into the see. The Church of Antioch now split into three parties: -the old and rigid orthodox set, who, ever since the deposition of -Eustathius in A.D. 327, had adhered to his doctrine, and were called -after his name; the moderate Catholics, who regarded Meletius as their -bishop; and the Arians under Euzoius. The synod which had deposed him -published a thoroughly Arian creed, which declared the Son to have been -created out of nothing, and to be unlike the Father both in substance -and will.[34] - -This first banishment of Meletius, which occurred in A.D. 361, did -not last long. Julian, who became Emperor the same year, recalled all -the prelates who had been exiled in the two preceding reigns; partly, -perhaps, from a really liberal feeling, partly from a willingness to -foment the internal dissensions of the Church by placing the rival -bishops in close antagonism. Athanasius returned to Alexandria amidst -great ovations.[35] One of the questions which occupied the attention -of a synod convened by him was the schism of Antioch. Eusebius, Bishop -of Vercelli, a staunch Italian friend of Athanasius, was despatched -to Antioch in order to heal the division; but he had been unhappily -anticipated by another Western prelate, Lucifer of Cagliari, in -Sardinia, a brave defender of orthodoxy, for which with Eusebius he had -suffered exile, but a most unskilful peacemaker. He only complicated -the existing confusion by consecrating as bishop a priest of the -old Eustathian party, named Paulinus, instead of strengthening the -hands of Meletius.[36] The unhappy Church at Antioch, where the whole -Christian community amounted to not more than 100,000 souls,[37] was -thus torn to tatters. There were now three bishops: the Arian Euzoius, -Meletius, generally acknowledged by the Eastern Church, and Paulinus -by the Western. And, as if three rival heads were not sufficient, the -Apollinarians soon afterwards added a fourth. But the mild, prudent, -and charitable disposition of Meletius procured for him the affection -and esteem of the largest and most respectable part of the population, -as well as of the common people. Even when he was banished for the -first time after he had been only a month in Antioch, the populace -endeavoured to stone the prefect as he was conducting the bishop out -of the city. He was saved by Meletius himself, who threw a part of his -own mantle round him, to protect him from their fury. And after he -returned from exile the popularity of Meletius increased. In paintings -on the walls of houses and engravings on signet rings, his face was -often represented, and parents gave his name to their children both -to perpetuate his memory and to remind them of an example which was -worthy of their imitation.[38] Once more in A.D. 367, and yet again -in A.D. 370 or A.D. 371, when the Arians recovered the favour of the -Court under the Emperor Valens, he was sent into exile, but he returned -after the death of Valens in A.D. 378; and it was as Bishop of Antioch -that he presided over the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381, and -died during its session.[39] His funeral oration, pronounced by Gregory -Nyssen, is extant. The final reparation of that schism which he nobly -and constantly endeavoured to heal was not effected for nearly twenty -years, when Chrysostom, then Archbishop of Constantinople, accomplished -that good service for his native city. - -It is interesting to dwell at some length upon the history of the -Church in Antioch at this period, because it represents the painful -feuds in which the Church at large became entangled through the baneful -influence of the Arian controversy, that first great blow to the unity -of Christendom; when bishop was set up against bishop, and rival -councils manufactured rival creeds, when violence, and intrigue, and -diplomatic arts were employed too often by both sides to gain their -ends. But the distracted state of the Church at Antioch also supplies -a possible answer to the question why the baptism of Chrysostom was -delayed so long. One of the reasons frequently alleged for deferring -the reception of that sacrament was the desire of the candidate to -receive it at the hands of some particular bishop.[40] Now who were -the bishops of Antioch during the infancy and boyhood of Chrysostom? -The Arians were in possession of the see at the time of his birth, and -retained it till A.D. 361, when Meletius was appointed, but banished -almost immediately. The pious sensible mother and the well-disposed -youth would not unnaturally hold aloof from a Church over which -presided such prelates as Stephen, Leontius, Eudoxius, Euzoius. Their -minds may well have been so sorely perplexed and suspended between the -claims of opposing factions as to delay the reception of baptism from -the hands of any. - -But the prudent, conciliatory policy, the mild and amiable disposition -of Meletius, would engage the sympathy and respect of an affectionate, -pious, and sensible youth, such as Chrysostom was. He was about twenty -when Meletius was banished in 367 by the Emperor Valens; but the bishop -returned in a short time, when Chrysostom’s friend Basil had withdrawn -into religious seclusion, and he himself was feeling an increasing -repugnance to the world. He presented himself as a candidate for -baptism to the bishop, and after the usual three years of preparation -as a catechumen, was admitted into the Christian Church. - -There can be no doubt that baptism, from whatever cause delayed, must -on that very account have come home to the recipient with a peculiar -solemnity of meaning. It was an important epoch, often a decisive -turning-point in the life, a deliberate renunciation of the world, and -dedication of the whole man to God. So Chrysostom evidently felt it; -from this point we enter on a new phase in his life. He becomes for -a time an enthusiastic ascetic, and then settles down into that more -tranquil and steady, but intense glow of piety and love to God which -burned with undiminished force till the close of his career. - -The wise Bishop Meletius, however, desired to employ his powers in some -sphere of active labour in the Church. As a preliminary step to this -end, he ordained him soon after his baptism to the office of reader. -This order appears not to have been instituted in the Church before -the third century; at least there is no allusion to it in writers of -the first two centuries, and frequent references in writers of the -third and fourth.[41] The duty of readers was to read those portions -of Scripture which were introduced into the first service or “Missa -Catechumenorum,” which preceded the Communion, or “Missa Fidelium,” so -called because only the baptized were admitted to it. They read from -the Pulpitum or Tribunal Ecclesiæ, or Ambo, the reading-desk of the -Church, which must not be confounded with the Bema, or Tribunal of the -Sanctuary. This last was identical with the altar, or rather the steps -of the altar, and no rank lower than that of deacon was permitted to -read from this position. By the Novells of Justinian,[42] eighteen was -fixed as the youngest age at which any one could be ordained to this -office. But previous to this limitation, it was not uncommon to appoint -mere children. Cæsarius of Arles is said to have been made a reader at -the tender age of seven, and Victor Uticensis, describing the cruelties -of the Vandalic persecution in Africa, affirms that among 500 clergy or -more who perished by sword or famine, were many “infant readers.”[43] - -The ceremony of ordination appears to have been very simple. The Fourth -Council of Carthage ordains that the bishop should testify before -the congregation to the purity, the faith, and conversation of the -candidate. Then in their presence he is to place a Bible in his hands -with these words: “Take thou this book, and be thou a reader of the -word of God, which office if thou discharge faithfully and profitably -thou shalt have part with those who have ministered the word of -God.”[44] - - - - -CHAPTER III. - - COMMENCEMENT OF ASCETIC LIFE—STUDY UNDER - DIODORUS—FORMATION OF AN ASCETIC BROTHERHOOD—THE LETTERS - TO THEODORE. A.D. 370. - - -The enthusiasm of minds newly awakened to a full perception of -Christian holiness, and a deep sense of Christian obligations, was in -early times seldom contented with anything short of complete separation -from the world. The Oriental temperament especially has been at all -times inclined to passionate extremes. It oscillates between the most -abandoned licentiousness and intense asceticism. The second is the -corrective of the first; where the disease is desperate, the remedies -must be violent. Chrysostom, as will be perceived throughout his life, -was never carried to fanatical extremes; a certain sober-mindedness and -calm practical good sense eminently distinguished him, though mingled -with burning zeal. But in his youth especially he was not exempt from -the spirit of the age and country in which he lived. He irresistibly -gravitated towards that kind of life which his friend Basil had already -adopted—a life of retirement, contemplation, and pious study—“the -philosophy” of Christianity, as it was called at that time.[45] - -It does not appear that Basil had actually joined any monastic -community, but merely that he was leading a life of seclusion, and -practising some of the usual monastic austerities. Chrysostom, -indeed, distinctly asserts that, previous to his own baptism, their -intercourse had not been entirely broken off; only that it was -impossible for him, who had his business in the law-courts and found -his recreation in the theatre, to be so acceptable as formerly to one -who now never entered public places, and who was wholly devoted to -meditation, study, and prayer.[46] Their intercourse was necessarily -more rare, though their friendship was substantially unshaken. “When, -however, I had myself also lifted my head a little above this worldly -flood, he received me with open arms” (probably referring here to -his baptism or preparation for it); “but even then I was not able to -maintain my former equality, for he had the advantage of me in point of -time, and having manifested the greatest diligence, he had attained a -very lofty standard, and was ever soaring beyond me.”[47] - -This disparity, however, could not diminish their natural affection -for one another; and Basil at length obtained Chrysostom’s consent -to a plan which he had frequently urged—that they should abandon -their present homes and live together in some quiet abode, there to -strengthen each other in undisturbed study, meditation, and prayer. -But this project of the young enthusiasts was for a time frustrated -by the irresistible entreaties of Chrysostom’s mother, that he would -not deprive her of his protection, companionship, and help. The scene -is described by Chrysostom himself,[48] with a dramatic power worthy -of Greek tragedy. It reminds the reader of some of those long and -stately, yet elegant and affecting, narratives of the messenger who, -at the close of the play, _describes_ the final scene which is not -represented. Certainly it bespeaks the scholar of a man who had made -his pupils familiar with the best classical writers in Greek. “When -she knew that we were meditating this course, my mother took me by the -right hand and led me into her own chamber, and there, seating herself -near the bed on which she had given birth to me, wept fountains of -tears; to which she added words of lamentation more pitiable even than -the tears themselves. ‘I was not long permitted to enjoy the virtue of -thy father, my child: so it seemed good to God. My travail-pangs at -your birth were quickly succeeded by his death; bringing orphanhood -upon thee, and upon me an untimely widowhood, with all those miseries -of widowhood which those only who have experienced them can fairly -understand. For no description can approach the reality of that storm -and tempest which is undergone by her who having but lately issued -from her father’s home, and being unskilled in the ways of the world, -is suddenly plunged into grief insupportable, and compelled to endure -anxieties too great for her sex and age. For she has to correct the -negligence, to watch against the ill-doings, of her slaves, to baffle -the insidious schemes of kinsfolk, to meet with a brave front the -impudent threats and harshness of tax-collectors.’”[49] - -She then describes minutely the expense, and labour, and constant -anxiety which attended the education of a son; how she had refrained -from all thoughts of second marriage, that she might bestow her -undivided energies, time, and means upon him; how amply it had all been -rewarded by the delight of his presence, recalling the image of her -husband;—and now that he had grown up, would he leave her absolutely -forlorn? “In return for all these my services to you,” she cried, “I -implore you this one favour only—not to make me a second time a widow, -or to revive the grief which time has lulled. Wait for my death—perhaps -I shall soon be gone; when you have committed my body to the ground, -and mingled my bones with your father’s bones, then you will be free to -embark on any sea you please.” Such an appeal to his sense of filial -gratitude and duty could not be disregarded. Chrysostom yielded to -his mother’s entreaties, although Basil did not desist from urging his -favourite scheme.[50] - -At the same time he assimilated his life at home as much as possible -to the condition of a monk. He entirely withdrew from all worldly -occupations and amusements. He seldom went out of the house; he -strengthened his mind by study, his spirit by prayer, and subdued his -body by vigils and fasting, and sleeping upon the bare ground. He -maintained an almost constant silence, that his thoughts might be kept -abstracted from mundane things, and that no irritable or slanderous -speech might escape his lips. Some of his companions naturally lamented -what they regarded as a morose and melancholy change.[51] - -But the intercourse between him and Basil was more frequent than -before; and two other young men, who had been their fellow-students -at the school of Libanius, were persuaded to adopt the same kind -of secluded life. These two were Maximus, afterwards Bishop of -Seleucia, in Isauria; and Theodore, who became Bishop of Mopsuestia, -in Cilicia.[52] This little fraternity formed, with some others not -named, a voluntary association of youthful ascetics. They did not -dwell in a separate building, nor were they in any way established -as a monastic community, but (like Wesley and his young friends at -Oxford) they lived by rule, and practised monastic austerities. The -superintendence of their studies and general conduct they submitted -to Diodorus and Carterius, who were presidents of monasteries in the -vicinity of Antioch.[53] In addition to his own intrinsic merits and -eminence, Diodorus claims our attention, because there can be no doubt -that he exercised a great influence upon the minds of his two most -distinguished scholars, Chrysostom and Theodore. Indeed, judging from -the fragments of his works, and the notices of him by historians, it -is not too much to say that he was the founder of a method of Biblical -interpretation of which Chrysostom and Theodore became the most able -representatives. - -He was of noble family, and the friend of Meletius, who confided to -him and the priest Evagrius the chief care of his diocese during his -second exile under Valens about A.D. 370. And one of the first acts -of Meletius, on his return in A.D. 378, was to make Diodorus Bishop -of Tarsus. His writings in defence of Christianity were sufficiently -powerful and notorious to provoke the notice of Julian, who, in a -letter to Photinus, attacks him with no small asperity.[54] The Emperor -finds occasion for ridicule in the pale and wrinkled face and the -attenuated frame of Diodorus, wasted by his severe labours and ascetic -practices; and represents these disfigurements as punishments from the -offended gods against whom he had directed his pen. Being well known -as a warm friend of Meletius, Diodorus was exposed to some risk from -the Arian party during the exile of the bishop from A.D. 370-378. But -he was not deterred from frequenting the old town on the south side of -the Orontes, where the congregation of Meletius held their assemblies, -and diligently ministering to their spiritual needs. He accepted no -fixed stipend, but his necessities were supplied by the hospitality -of those among whom he laboured.[55] Of his voluminous writings, -a commentary on the Old and New Testament is that most frequently -quoted by ecclesiastical writers. They expressly and repeatedly -affirm that he adhered very closely to the literal and historical -meaning of the text, and that he was opposed to those mystical and -allegorical interpretations of Origen and the Alexandrian school, -which often disguised rather than elucidated the true significance -of the passage.[56] One evil of the allegorical method was, that it -destroyed a clear and critical perception of the differences between -the Older Revelation and the New. The Old Testament was regarded as a -kind of vast enigma, containing _implicitly_ the facts and doctrines -of the New. To detect subtle allusions to the coming of our Saviour, -to the events of his life, to his death and resurrection, in the acts, -speeches, and gestures of persons mentioned in the Old Testament, -was regarded as a kind of interpretation no less satisfactory than -it was ingenious. To believe indeed that the grand intention running -through Scripture from the beginning to the end is to bring men to -Jesus Christ; that the history of the fall of man is given to enable -us to appreciate the need of a Restorer, and to estimate his work at -its proper value; that the history of a dispensation based on law -enables us to accept with more thankfulness a dispensation of spirit; -that the history of the Jewish system of sacrifices is intended to -conduct us to the one great Sacrifice as the substance of previous -shadows, the fulfilment of previous types; that, alike in the law and -the prophets, intimations and hints and significant parallels of the -subsequent history to which they lead on are to be discerned;—this may -be reasonable, profitable, and true: but it can be neither profitable -nor true to see allusions, prophecies, and parallels in every minute -and trivial detail of that earlier history. - -From this vital error Diodorus appears to have emancipated himself and -his disciples. He perceived, as we shall see Chrysostom perceived, a -gradual development in Revelation: that the knowledge, and morality, -and faith of men under the Old Dispensation were less advanced than -those of men who lived under the New. One instance must suffice. He -remarks that the Mosaic precept, directing the brother of a man who had -died childless to raise up posterity to his brother by marrying his -wife, was given for the consolation of men who had as yet received no -clear promise respecting a resurrection from the dead.[57] There is -an approach to what some might deem rationalistic criticism, when he -affirms that the speech of God to men in the Old Testament was not an -external voice, but an inward spiritual intimation. When, for instance, -it is said that God gave a command to Adam, it is evident, he says, -that it was not made by a sound audible to the bodily ear, but that -God impressed the knowledge of the command upon him according to his -own proper energy, and that when Adam had received it his _condition_ -was the same _as_ if it had come to him through the actual hearing of -the ear. And this, he observes, is what God effected also in the case -of the prophets.[58] A similar rationalistic tendency is observable -in his explanation of the relation between the Divine and human -elements in the person of our blessed Lord. His language, in fact, on -this subject is Nestorian: a distinction was to be made between Him -who, according to his essence, _was_ Son of God—the Logos—and Him who -through Divine decree and adoption _became_ Son of God. He who was -born as Man from Mary was Son according to grace, but God the Logos -was Son according to nature. The Son of Mary became Son of God because -He was selected to be the receptacle or temple of God the Word. It was -only in an improper sense that God the Word was called Son of David; -the appellation was given to Him merely because the human temple in -which He dwelt belonged to the lineage of David.[59] It is clear that -Diodorus would have objected equally with Nestorius to apply the title -of “God-bearer” (Θεοτόκος) to the blessed Virgin. Sixty years later, -in A.D. 429, the streets of Constantinople and Alexandria resounded -with tumults excited by controversy about the subject of which this was -the watchword. But Diodorus happily lived too early for these dreadful -conflicts, and his scholar Theodore was not personally disturbed; -though long after his death, in A.D. 553, his writings were condemned -by the Fifth Œcumenical Council, because the Nestorians appealed -to them in confirmation of their tenets, and revered his memory. The -practical element in Diodorus, his method of literal and common-sense -interpretation of Holy Scripture, was inherited chiefly by Chrysostom; -the intellectual vein, his conceptions of the relation between the -Godhead and Manhood in Christ, his opinions respecting the final -restoration of mankind, which were almost equivalent to a denial of -eternal punishment, were reproduced mainly by Theodore. - -It was inevitable that those who, in an access of religious fervour, -had renounced the world and subjected themselves to the sternest -asceticism, should sometimes find that they had miscalculated their -powers. The passionate enthusiasm which for a time carried them -along the thorny path would begin to subside; a hankering after a -more natural, if not more worldly, life ensued; and occasionally the -reaction was so violent, the passions kept down in unnatural constraint -reasserted themselves with such force, that the ascetic flew back -to the pleasures and sometimes to the sins of the world, with an -appetite which was in painful contrast to his previous abstinence. -The youthful Theodore was for a time an instance, though far from an -extreme instance, of such reaction: the strain was too great for him; -he relapsed for a season into his former habits of life; he retired -from the little ascetic brotherhood to which Chrysostom and Basil -belonged. There is no evidence that he fell into any kind of sin; he -simply returned to the occupations and amusements of ordinary life. He -was in love with and desirous of marrying a young lady named Hermione. -But Chrysostom was at this period such an ardent ascetic; he was so -deeply impressed with the evil of the world; and regarded an austere -and absolute separation from it as so indispensable to the highest -standard of Christian life, that to him any divergence from that path, -when once adopted, seemed a positive sin. The relapse of Theodore -called forth two letters of lamentation, remonstrance, and exhortation -from his friend. They are the earliest of his extant works, and exhibit -a command of language which does credit to the training of Libanius -as well as to his own ability, and an intimate acquaintance with Holy -Scripture, which proves how much time he had already spent in diligent -and patient study. Since these epistles have been justly considered -among the finest of his productions, and represent his opinions at -an early stage of his life respecting repentance, a future life, the -advantages of asceticism and celibacy, some paraphrases from them will -be presented to the reader. - -He begins his first letter by quoting the words of Jeremiah: “Oh that -my head were waters, and mine eyes a fountain of tears!” - -“If the prophet uttered that lamentation over a ruined city, surely I -may express a like passionate sorrow over the fallen soul of a brother. -That soul which was once the temple of the Holy Spirit now lies open -and defenceless to become the prey of any hostile invader. The spirit -of avarice, of arrogance, of lust, may now find a free passage into -a heart which was once as pure and inaccessible to evil as heaven -itself. Wherefore I mourn and weep, nor will I cease from my mourning -until I see thee again in thy former brilliancy. For though this may -seem impossible to men, yet with God it is possible, for He it is -who lifteth the beggar from the earth and taketh the poor out of the -dunghill, that He may set him with the princes, even with the princes -of his people.” An eminent characteristic of Chrysostom is that he -is always hopeful of human nature; he never doubts the capacity of -man to rise, or the willingness of God to raise him. Theodore himself -appears to have been stricken with remorse, and to have drooped into -despondency, to rouse him from which and lead him to repose more -trustfully on the goodness of God, was one main purpose of Chrysostom’s -letters. “Despair was the devil’s work;” “it is he who tries to cut -off that hope whereby men are saved, which is the support and anchor -of the soul, which, like a long chain, let down from heaven, little -by little draws those who hold tightly to it up to heavenly heights, -and lifts them above the storm and tempest of these worldly ills. The -devil tries to extinguish that trust which is the source and strength -of prayer, which enables men to cry, ‘as the eyes of a maiden look unto -the hand of her mistress, even so our eyes wait upon the Lord our God -until He have mercy upon us.’ Yet if man will only believe it, there -is never a time at which any one, even the most abandoned sinner, may -not turn and repent and be accepted by God. For God being impassible, -his wrath is not a passion or an emotion; He punishes not in anger, -since He is unsusceptible by nature of injury from any insult or wrong -done by us, but in mercy, that He may bring men back to Himself.[60] -The many instances of God’s mercy; his relenting towards the Jews, and -even to Ahab, when he humbled himself; the repentance of Manasseh—of -the Ninevites—of the penitent thief—all accepted, although preceded by -a long course of sin, prove that the words ‘today if ye will hear his -voice’ are applicable to any time:—it is always ‘to-day’ as long as a -man lives; repentance is estimated not by length of time, but by the -disposition of the heart.” He acutely observes that “despondency often -conceals moral weakness; a secret though perhaps unconscious sympathy -with the sin which the man professes to deplore and hate.” “To fall is -natural, but to remain fallen argues a kind of acquiescence in evil, a -feebleness of moral purpose which is more displeasing to God than the -fall itself.”[61] - -But although he speaks in the most hopeful, encouraging language of -the efficacy of repentance, however late, if sincere, in _this life_, -no one can assert more strongly the impossibility of restoration when -the limits of this present existence have once been passed. In this -respect he differs alike from Origen, Diodorus, and his fellow-student -Theodore, and from believers in the later developed doctrine of -purgatory. “As long as we are here, it is possible, even if we sin -ten thousand times, to wash all away by repentance; but when once we -have been taken to that other world, even if we manifest the greatest -penitence, it will avail us naught, but however much we may gnash -with our teeth, and beat our breasts, and pour forth entreaties, no -one will be able even with the tip of his finger to cool us in the -flame; we shall only hear the same words as the rich man: ‘between us -and you there is a great gulf fixed.’”[62] Nothing is more remarkably -characteristic of Chrysostom’s productions, especially the earlier, -than a frequent recurrence to this truth: the existence of a great -impassable chasm between the two abodes of misery and bliss. Heaven -and hell were no distant dreamlands to him, but realities so nearly -and vividly present to his mind that they acted as powerful motives, -encouraging to holiness, deterring from vice. He paints the two -pictures in glowing colours, and submits them to the contemplation of -his friend. “When you hear of fire, think not that the fire in that -other world is like it; for this earthly fire burns up and consumes -whatever it lays hold of, but that burns continually those who are -seized by it and never ceases, wherefore it is called unquenchable. -For sinners must be clothed with immortality, not for honour, but -merely to supply a constant material for this punishment to feed upon; -and how terrible this is, a description would indeed never be able to -present, but from our experience of small sufferings it is possible to -form some little conception of those greater miseries. If you should -ever be in a bath which has been overheated, then I pray you consider -the fire of hell; or if ever you have been parched by a severe fever, -transfer your thoughts to that flame, and you will be able clearly to -distinguish the difference. For if a bath or a fever so distress and -agitate us, what will be our condition when we fall into that river of -fire which flows past the terrible Judge’s throne.”[63] “Heaven is, -indeed, a subject which transcends the powers of human language, yet -we can form a dim image of what it is like. It is the place ‘whence -sorrow and sighing shall flee away’ (Is. xxxv. 10); where poverty and -sickness are not to be dreaded; where no one injures or is injured, no -one provokes or is provoked; no one is harassed by anxiety about the -necessary wants, or frets over the loftier ambitions, of life; it is -the place where the tempest of human passions is lulled; where there is -neither night nor cold nor heat, nor changes of season, nor old age; -but everything belonging to decay is taken away, and incorruptible -glory reigns alone. But far above all these things, it is the place -where men will continually enjoy the society of Jesus Christ, together -with angels and archangels and all the powers above.”[64] “Open -your eyes,” he cries in a transport of feeling, “and contemplate in -imagination that heavenly theatre crowded not with men such as we see, -but with those who are nobler than gold or precious stones or sunbeams, -or any brilliant thing that can be seen; and not with men only, but -angels, thrones, dominions, powers ranged about the King whom we dare -not describe for his transcendent beauty, majesty, and splendour. If we -had to suffer ten thousand deaths every day; nay, if we had to undergo -hell itself, for the sake of beholding Christ coming in his glory, and -being numbered among the band of saints, would it not be well to submit -to all these things? ‘Master, it is a good thing for us to be here:’ -if such an exclamation burst from St. Peter on witnessing a partial and -veiled manifestation of Christ’s glory, what are we to say when the -reality shall be displayed, when the royal palace shall be thrown open -and we shall see the King Himself; no longer by means of a mirror, or -as it were in a riddle, but face to face; no longer through faith, but -actual sight.”[65] He passes on to some remarks upon the soul, which -are Platonic in character: “Man cannot alter the shape of his body, -but God has conceded to him a power, with the assistance of Divine -grace, of increasing the beauty of the soul. Even that soul which has -become deformed by the ugliness of sin may be restored to its pristine -beauty. No lover was ever so much captivated by the beauty of the -body as God loves and longs for the beauty of the human soul.[66] You -who are now transported with admiration of Hermione’s beauty” (the -girl whom Theodore wished to marry) “may, if you will, cultivate a -beauty in your own soul as far exceeding hers as heaven surpasses -earth. Beauty of the soul is the only true and permanent kind, and -if you could see it with the eye, you would admire it far more than -the loveliness of the rainbow and of roses, and other flowers which -are evanescent and feeble representations of the soul’s beauty.”[67] -He tells some curious stories of men who had relapsed from monastic -life and subsequently been reclaimed to it. One, a young man of noble -family and heir to great wealth, had thrown up all the splendour which -he might have commanded, and exchanged his riches and his gay clothing -for the poverty and mean garb of a recluse upon the mountains, and had -attained an astonishing degree of holiness. But some of his relations -seduced him from his retreat, and once more he might be seen riding on -horseback through the forum followed by a crowd of attendants. But the -holy brethren whom he had deserted ceased not to endeavour to recover -him; at first he treated them with haughty indifference, when they met -and saluted him, as he proudly rode through the streets. But at last, -as they desisted not day by day, he would leap from his horse when -they appeared, and listen with downcast eyes to their warnings; till, -as time went on, he was rescued from his worldly entanglements, and -restored to his desert and the study of the true philosophy, and now, -when Chrysostom wrote, he bestowed his wealth upon the poor, and had -attained the very pinnacle of virtue.[68] Earnestly, therefore, does he -implore Theodore to recover his trust in God, to repent and return to -the brotherhood which was buried in grief at his defection. “Now the -unbelieving and the worldly rejoice; but return to us, and our sorrow -and shame will be transferred to the adversary’s side.” “It was the -beginning of penitence which was arduous; the devil met the penitent -at the door of the city of refuge, but, if defeated there, the fury of -his assaults would diminish.” He warned him against an idle confession -of sinfulness not accompanied by any honest effort to amend. “Such was -no true confession, because not joined with the tears of contrition or -followed by alteration of life.”[69] But of Theodore he hoped better -things; as there were different degrees of glory reserved for men, -implied in our Lord’s mention of “many mansions,” and his declaring -that every one should be rewarded according to his works, he trusted -that Theodore might still obtain a high place; that he might be a -vessel of silver, if not of gold or precious stone, in the heavenly -house.[70] - -In the second epistle Chrysostom expresses more distinctly his view -respecting the solemn obligations of those who joined a religious -fraternity. “If tears and groanings could be transmitted through a -letter, this of mine would be filled with them; I weep that you have -blotted yourself out of the catalogue of the brethren, and trampled -on your covenant with Christ.” “The devil assaulted him with peculiar -fury, because he was anxious to conquer so worthy an antagonist; one -who had despised delicate fare and costly dress, who had spent whole -days in the study of Holy Scripture, and whole nights in prayer, who -had regarded the society of the brethren as a greater honour than any -worldly dignity. What, I pray you, is there that appears blessed and -enviable in the world? The prince is exposed to the wrath of the people -and the irrational outbursts of popular feeling—to the fear of princes -greater than himself—to anxieties about his subjects; and the ruler of -to-day is to-morrow a private man: for this present life no way differs -from a stage; as on that, one man plays the part of a king, another of -a general, a third of a common soldier; but when evening has come the -king is no king, the ruler no ruler, the general no general; so will -it be in _that_ day; each will receive his due reward, not according -to the character which he has enacted, but according to the works -which he has done.”[71] Theodore had clearly expressed his intention -of honourably marrying Hermione; but though Chrysostom allows that -marriage is an honourable estate, yet he boldly declares that for one -who like Theodore had made such a solemn renunciation of the world, it -was equally criminal with fornication. He had wholly dedicated himself -to the service of God, and he had no right to bind himself by any other -tie: to marry would be as culpable as desertion in a soldier. He points -out the miseries, the anxieties, the toils, often fruitless, which -accompanied secular life, especially in the married state. From all -such ills the life of the brotherhood was exempt: he alone was truly -free who lived for Christ; he was like one who, securely planted on -an eminence, beholds other men below him buffeting with the waves of -a tumultuous sea. For such a high vantage-ground Chrysostom implores -Theodore to make. He begs him to pardon the length of his letter: -“nothing but his ardent love for his friend could have constrained him -to write this second epistle. Many indeed had discouraged what they -regarded as a vain task and sowing upon a rock; but he was not so to -be diverted from his efforts: he trusted that by the grace of God his -letters would accomplish something; and if not, he should at least have -delivered himself from the reproach of silence.”[72] - -These letters are the productions of a youthful enthusiast, and -as such, allowances must be made for them. They abound not only -in eloquent passages, but in very fine and true observations upon -human nature—on penitence—on God’s mercy and pardon. It is only the -application of them to the case of Theodore which seems harsh and -overstrained. At a later period Chrysostom’s views on ascetic and -monastic life were modified; but in early life, though never fanatical, -they were what we should call extreme. His earnest efforts for the -restoration of his friend were crowned with success. Theodore abandoned -the world once more and his matrimonial intentions, and retired into -the seclusion of the brotherhood. Some twenty years later, in A.D. -394, he was made Bishop of Mopsuestia, which is pretty nearly all we -know about him, but the extant fragments of his voluminous writings -prove him to have been a man of no ordinary ability, and a powerful -commentator of the same sensible and rational school as Chrysostom -himself. We may be disposed to say, What of Hermione? Had she no claims -to be considered? But the ascetic line of life was regarded by the -earnest-minded as so indisputably the noblest which a Christian could -adopt, that her disappointment would not have been allowed to weigh -in the balance for a moment against what was considered the higher -call.[73] - - - - -CHAPTER IV. - -CHRYSOSTOM EVADES FORCIBLE ORDINATION TO A BISHOPRIC—THE TREATISE “ON -THE PRIESTHOOD.” A.D. 370, 371. - - -We now come to a curious passage in Chrysostom’s life; one in which -his conduct, from our moral standpoint, seems hardly justifiable. Yet -for one reason it is not to be regretted, since it was the originating -cause of his treatise “De Sacerdotio;” one of the ablest, most -instructive, and most eloquent works which he ever produced. - -Bishop Meletius had been banished in A.D. 370 or 371. The Arian Emperor -Valens, who had expelled him, was about to take up his residence in -Antioch. It was desirable therefore, without loss of time, to fill up -some vacant sees in Syria. The attention of the bishops, clergy, and -people was turned to Chrysostom and Basil, as men well qualified for -the episcopal office. - -According to a custom prevalent at that time, they might any day be -seized and compelled, however reluctant, to accept the dignity. So St. -Augustine was dragged, weeping, by the people before the bishop, and -his immediate ordination demanded by them, regardless of his tears.[74] -So St. Martin, Bishop of Tours, was torn from his cell, and conveyed -under a guard to his ordination.[75] The two friends were filled with -apprehension and alarm. Basil implored Chrysostom that they might act -in concert at the present crisis, and together accept or together evade -or resist the expected but unwelcome honour. - -Chrysostom affected to consent to this proposal, but in reality -determined to act otherwise. He regarded himself as totally unworthy -and incompetent to fill so sacred and responsible an office; but -considering Basil to be far more advanced in learning and piety, he -resolved that the Church should not, through his own weakness, lose -the services of his friend. Accordingly, when popular report proved -correct, and some emissaries from the electing body were sent to carry -off the young men (much, it would seem from Chrysostom’s account, -as policemen might arrest a prisoner), Chrysostom contrived to hide -himself. Basil, less wary, was captured, and imagined that Chrysostom -had already submitted; for the emissaries acted with subtlety when -he tried to resist them. They affected surprise that he should make -so violent a resistance, when his companion, who had the reputation -of a hotter temper, had yielded so mildly to the decision of the -Fathers.[76] Thus Basil was led to suppose that Chrysostom had already -submitted; and when he discovered too late the artifice of his friend -and his captors, he bitterly remonstrated with Chrysostom upon his -treacherous conduct. “The character of them both,” he complained, “was -compromised by this division in their counsels.” “You should have told -us where your friend was hidden,” said some, “and then we should have -contrived some means of capturing him;” to which poor Basil was ashamed -to reply that he had been ignorant of his friend’s concealment, lest -such a confession should cast a suspicion of unreality over the whole -of their supposed intimacy. “Chrysostom, on his side, was accused of -haughtiness and vanity for declining so great a dignity; though others -said that the electors deserved a still greater dishonour and defeat -for appointing over the heads of wiser, holier, and older men, mere -lads,[77] who had been but yesterday immersed in secular pursuits; that -they might now for a little while knit their brows, and go arrayed -in sombre robes and affect a grave countenance.”[78] Basil begged -Chrysostom for an explanation of his motives in this proceeding. “After -all their mutual protestations of indivisible friendship, he had been -suddenly cast off and turned adrift, like a vessel without ballast, to -encounter alone the angry tempests of the world. To whom should he now -turn for sympathy and aid in the trials to which he would surely be -exposed from slander, ribaldry, and insolence? The one who might have -helped him stood coldly aloof, and would be unable even to hear his -cries for assistance.”[79] - -We may be strongly disposed to sympathise with the disconsolate Basil. -But the conscience of Chrysostom appears to have been quite at ease -from first to last in this transaction. He regarded it as a “pious -fraud.” “When he beheld the mingled distress and displeasure of his -friend, he could not refrain from laughing for joy, and thanking God -for the successful issue of his plan.”[80] In the ensuing discussion -he boldly asserted the principle that deceit claims our admiration -when practised in a good cause and from a good motive. The greatest -successes in war, he argues, have been achieved through stratagem, as -well as by fair fighting in the open field; and, of the two, the first -are most to be admired, because they are gained without bloodshed, -and are triumphs of mental rather than bodily force.[81] But, retorts -poor Basil, I was not an enemy, and ought not to have been dealt -with as such. “True, my excellent friend,” replies Chrysostom, “but -this kind of fraud may sometimes be exercised towards our dearest -acquaintance.” “Physicians were often obliged to employ some artifice -to make refractory patients submit to their remedies. Once a man in a -raging fever resisted all the febrifugal draughts administered to him, -and loudly called for wine. The physician darkened the room, steeped -a warm oyster shell in wine, then filled it with water, and put it to -the patient’s lips, who eagerly swallowed the draught, believing it, -from the smell, to be wine.”[82] In the same category of justifiable -stratagem he places, not very discriminatingly, the circumcision of -Timothy by St. Paul, in order to conciliate the Jews, and St. Paul’s -observance of the ceremonial law at Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 26), for the -same purpose. Such contrivances he calls instances, not of treachery, -but of “good management” (οἰκονομία). There is something highly -Oriental, and alien to our Western moral sense, in the sophistical tone -of this whole discussion. If Basil really submitted to such arguments, -he was easily vanquished. He says, however, no more about the injustice -of his treatment, but, apparently accepting Chrysostom’s position that -for a useful purpose deceit is justifiable, he begs to be informed -“what advantage Chrysostom thought he had procured for himself or his -friend by this piece of management, or good policy, or whatever he -pleased to call it.” - -The remaining books on the Priesthood are occupied with the answer -to this inquiry. The line which Chrysostom takes is to point out the -pre-eminent dignity, difficulty, and danger of the priestly office, and -then to enlarge upon the peculiar fitness of his friend to discharge -its duties.[83] “What advantage could be greater than to be engaged -in that work which Christ had declared with his own lips to be the -special sign of love to Himself? For when He put the question three -times to the leader of the apostles (κορυφαῖος), ‘Lovest thou me?’ and -had been answered by a fervent asseveration of attachment, he added -each time, ‘Feed my sheep,’ or ‘Feed my lambs.’ ‘Lovest thou me _more_ -than these?’ had been the question, and the charge which followed it -had been always, ‘Feed my sheep;’ not, If thou lovest Me, practise -fasting, or incessant vigils, and sleep on the bare ground, or protect -the injured and be to the orphans as a father, and to their mother -as a husband; no, he passes by all these things, and says, ‘Feed my -sheep.’ Could his friend, therefore, complain that he had done ill in -compassing, even by fraud, his dedication to so glorious an office?[84] -As for himself, it was obvious that he could not have refused so great -an honour out of haughty contempt or disrespect to the electors. On -the contrary, it was when he considered the exceeding sanctity and -magnitude of the position, and its awful responsibilities—the heavenly -purity, the burning love towards God and man, the sound wisdom and -judgment, and moderation of temper required in those who were dedicated -to it—that his heart failed him. He felt himself utterly incompetent -and unworthy for so arduous a task. If some unskilled person were -suddenly to be called upon to take charge of a ship laden with a costly -freight, he would immediately refuse; and in like manner he himself -dared not risk by his present inexperience the safety of that vessel -which was laden with the precious merchandise of souls.[85] Vain-glory, -indeed, and pride would have induced him not to reject, but to covet, -so transcendent a dignity. The office of priest was discharged indeed -on earth, yet it held a place among heavenly ranks. And rightly; -for neither man, nor angel, nor archangel, nor created power of any -kind, but the Paraclete Himself, ordained this ministry. Therefore, -it became one who entered the priesthood to be as pure as if he had -already taken his stand in heaven itself among the powers above. ‘When -thou seest the Lord lying slain, and the priest standing and praying -over the sacrifice, when thou seest all sprinkled with that precious -blood, dost thou deem thyself still among men, still standing upon -this earth? art thou not rather transported immediately to heaven, -and, every carnal imagination being cast out, dost thou not, with -soul unveiled and pure mind, behold the things which are in heaven? -O miracle! O the goodness of God! He who is sitting with the Father -is yet at that hour held in the hands of all, and gives Himself to be -embraced and grasped by those who desire it. And this all do through -the eye of faith. Do these things seem to you to merit contempt? does -it seem possible to you that any one should be so elated as to slight -them?’[86] - -“Human nature possessed in the priesthood a power which had not been -committed by God to angels or archangels; for to none of _them_ had it -been said, ‘Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth or loose on earth shall -be bound or loosed in heaven.’ Was it possible to conceive that any -one should think lightly of such a gift? Away with such madness!—for -stark madness it would be to despise so great an authority, without -which it was not possible for man to obtain salvation, or the good -things promised to him. For if it were impossible for any one to enter -into the kingdom of heaven, except he were born again of water and -the Spirit; and if he who did not eat the flesh of the Lord and drink -his blood was ejected from life eternal, and if these things were -administered by none but the consecrated hands of the priest, how would -any one, apart from them, be able to escape the fire of hell, or obtain -the crown laid up for him?”[87] - -There are, perhaps, no passages elsewhere in Chrysostom expressed in -such a lofty sacerdotal tone; but it must be remembered that on any -supposition as to the date of this treatise, he was young when it was -composed, holding therefore, as on the subject of monasticism, more -enthusiastic, highly-wrought opinions than he afterwards entertained; -and moreover, that the whole treatise is written in a somewhat vehement -and excited style, as by one who was maintaining a position against an -antagonist. - -Having proved that his evasion of the episcopal office could have -arisen from no spirit of pride, but from a consciousness of his -infirmity and incapacity, he proceeds to point out the manifold and -peculiar dangers which encompassed it. “Vain-glory was a rock more -fatal than the Sirens. Many a priest was shipwrecked there, and torn to -pieces by the fierce monsters which dwelt upon it—wrath, despondency, -envy, strife, slander, falsehood, hypocrisy, love of praise, and a -multitude more. Often he became the slave and flatterer of great -people, even of women who had most improperly mixed themselves up with -ecclesiastical affairs, and especially exercised great influence in the -elections.”[88] - -The scenes, indeed, which often took place about this period at the -elections to bishoprics occasioned much scandal to the Church. In -earlier times, when the Christians were less numerous, more simple in -their habits, more unanimous,—when liability to persecution deterred -the indifferent, or pretenders, from their ranks,—the episcopal -office could be no object of worldly ambition. The clergy and the -people elected their bishop; and the fairness and simplicity with -which the election was usually conducted won the admiration of the -Emperor Alexander Severus.[89] But when Christianity was recognised -by the State, a bishopric in towns of importance became a position -of high dignity; and warm debates, often fierce tumults, attended -the election of candidates. Up to the time of Justinian at least, the -whole Christian population of the city or region over which the bishop -was to preside possessed a right to elect. Their choice was subject to -the approval of the bishops, and the confirmation of the metropolitan -of the province; but, on the other hand, neither the bishops nor the -metropolitan could legally obtrude a candidate of their own upon the -people. A charge brought against Hilary of Arles was, that he ordained -several bishops against the will and consent of the people. A just and -legitimate ordination, according to Cyprian, was one which had been -examined by the suffrage and judgment of all, both clergy and people. -Such, he observes, was the election of Cornelius to the see of Rome in -A.D. 251.[90] If the people were unanimous, there were loud cries of -ἄξιος, _dignus_, ἀνάξιος, _indignus_, as the case might be; but if they -were divided, it was usual for the metropolitan to give the preference -to the choice of the majority; or, if they appeared equally divided, -the metropolitan and his synod selected a man indifferent, if possible, -to both parties. Occasionally also, as in the case of Nectarius, the -predecessor of Chrysostom in the see of Constantinople, the Emperor -interposed, and appointed one chosen by himself. Sanguinary often -were the tumults which attended contested elections. The greater the -city, the greater the strife. In the celebrated contest for the see of -Rome in A.D. 366, between Damasus and Ursicinus, there was much hard -fighting and copious bloodshed. Damasus, with a furious and motley mob, -broke into the Julian Basilica, where Ursicinus was being consecrated -by Paul, Bishop of Tibur, and violently stopped the proceedings. Frays -of this kind lasted for some time. On one occasion, one hundred and -thirty dead bodies strewed the pavement of the Basilica of Licinius -till Damasus at last won the day. It is especially mentioned that -the ladies of Rome favoured his side.[91] It seems scarcely possible -to doubt that as these events must have been fresh in Chrysostom’s -recollection, he must be specially referring to them when, insisting on -freedom from ambition as one grand qualification for the priesthood, -he says “that he will pass by, lest they should seem incredible, the -tales of murders perpetrated in churches, and havoc wrought in cities -by contentions for bishoprics;” and when also he alludes indignantly -to the interference of women in the elections. “The elections,” he -says, “were generally made on public festivals, and were disgraceful -scenes of party feeling and intrigue. The clergy and the people were -never unanimous. The really important qualifications for the office -were seldom considered. Ambitious men spared no arts of bribery or -flattery by which to obtain places for themselves in the Church, -and to keep them when obtained. One candidate for a bishopric was -recommended to the electors because he belonged to a distinguished -family; another because he was wealthy, and would not burden the funds -of the Church.”[92] The provocations to ambition and worldly glory were -so great, both in the acquisition and in the exercise of the episcopal -office, that Chrysostom says he had “determined partly for these -reasons to avoid the snare.”[93] He shrank also from many other trials -incident to the office. There were always persons ready to detect and -magnify the slightest mistake or transgression in a priest. One little -error could not be retrieved by a multitude of successes, but darkened -the man’s whole life; for a kind of immaculate purity was exacted by -popular opinion of a priest, as if he were not a being of flesh and -blood, or subject to human passions. Often his brethren, the clergy, -were the most active in spreading mischievous reports about him, hoping -to rise themselves upon his ruin; like avaricious sons waiting for -their father’s death. Too often St. Paul’s description of the sympathy -between the several parts of the Christian body was inverted. ‘If one -member suffered, all the others rejoiced; if one member rejoiced, the -others suffered pain.’ A bishop had need be as impervious to slander -and envy as the three children in the burning fiery furnace.[94] What -a rare and difficult combination of qualities was required for the -efficient discharge of his duties in the face of such difficulties! -‘He must be dignified, yet not haughty; formidable, yet affable; -commanding, yet sociable; strictly impartial, yet courteous; lowly, -but not subservient; strong, yet gentle; promoting the worthy in spite -of all opposition, and with equal authority rejecting the unworthy, -though pushed forward by the favour of all; looking always to one -thing only—the welfare of the Church; doing nothing out of animosity -or partiality.’[95] The behaviour also of a priest in ordinary society -was jealously criticised. The flock were not satisfied unless he was -constantly paying calls. Not the sick only, but the sound desired to be -‘looked after’ (ἐπισκοπεῖσθαι),—not so much from any religious feeling, -as because the reception of such visits gratified their sense of their -own importance. Yet if a bishop often visited the house of a wealthy or -distinguished man to interest him in some design for the advantage of -the Church, he would soon be stigmatised as a parasitical flatterer. -Even the manner of his greetings to acquaintance in the streets was -criticised: ‘He smiled cordially on Mr. Such-an-one, and talked much -with him; but to me he only threw a commonplace remark.’”[96] - -It is amusing and instructive to read these observations. They prove -what important personages bishops had become. The interests of the -people were violently excited over their elections. They were subjected -to the mingled reverence, deference, and court, criticism, scandal, -and gossip, which are the inevitable lot of all persons who occupy an -exalted position in the world. - -In the fourth book Chrysostom speaks of some of the more mental -qualifications indispensable for a priest. Foremost among these was a -power of speaking: “That was the one grand instrument which enabled -him to heal the diseases of the body intrusted to his care. And, in -addition to this, he must be armed with a prompt and versatile wit, to -encounter the various assaults of heretics. Jews, Greeks, Manichæans, -Sabellians, Arians, all were narrowly watching for the smallest -loophole by which to force a breach in the walls of the Church. And, -unless the defender was very vigilant and skilful, while he was -keeping out the one he would let in the other. While he opposed the -blind deference of the Jews to their Mosaic Law, he must take care -not to encourage the Manichæans, who would eliminate the Law from -the Scriptures. While he asserted the Unity of the Godhead against -the Arians, there was danger of slipping into the Sabellian error of -confounding the Persons; and, while he divided the Persons against the -Sabellians, he must be careful to avoid the Arian error of dividing the -substance also. The line of orthodoxy was a narrow path hemmed in by -steep rocks on either side. Therefore it was of the deepest importance -that the priest should be a learned and effective speaker, that he -might not fall into error himself or lead others astray. For, if he -was seen to be worsted in a controversy with heretics, many became -alienated from the truth, mistaking the weakness of the defender for a -weakness in the cause itself.”[97] - -“But there was yet another task fraught with peril—the delivery of -sermons. The performances of a preacher were discussed by a curious and -critical public like those of actors. Congregations attached themselves -to their favourite preachers. Woe to the man who was detected in -plagiarisms! He was instantly reprobated like a common thief. - -“To become an effective preacher two things were necessary: first, -indifference to praise; secondly, power of speech; two qualities, the -one moral, the other intellectual, which were rarely found coexisting. -If a man possessed the first only, he became distasteful and despicable -to his congregation; for if he stood up and at first boldly uttered -powerful words which stung the consciences of his hearers, but, as he -proceeded, began to blush and hesitate and stumble, all the advantage -of his previous remarks would be wasted. The persons, who had secretly -felt annoyed by his telling reproofs would revenge themselves by -laughing at his embarrassment in speaking. If, on the other hand, -he was a weighty speaker, but not indifferent to applause, he would -probably trim his sails to catch the popular breeze, and study to be -pleasant rather than profitable, to the great detriment of himself and -of his flock.”[98] - -He makes some remarks eminently wise and true on the necessity of -study for the preparation of sermons. “It might seem strange, but in -truth study was even more indispensable for an eloquent than for an -ordinary preacher. Speaking was an acquired art, and when a man had -attained a high standard of excellence he was sure to decline unless -he kept himself up by constant study. The man of reputation was always -expected to say something new, and even in excess of the fame which -he had already acquired. Men sat in judgment on him without mercy, as -if he were not a human being subject to occasional despondency, or -anxiety, or irritation of temper; but as if he were an angel or some -infallible being, who ought always to remain at the same high level -of excellence. The mediocre man, on the other hand, from whom much was -not expected, would obtain a disproportionate amount of praise if he -said a good thing now and then.[99] The number of persons, however, in -any congregation, who were capable of appreciating a really learned -and powerful preacher, was very small; therefore a man ought not to -be much disheartened or annoyed by unfavourable criticisms. He should -be his own critic, aiming in all his work to win the favour of God. -Then, if the admiration of men followed, he would quietly accept it; -or, if withheld, he would not be distressed, but seek his consolation -in honest work and in a conscience void of offence.[100] But if a -priest was not superior to the love of admiration, all his labour -and eloquence would be wasted; either he would sacrifice truth to -popularity, or, failing to obtain so much applause as he desired, he -would relax his efforts. This last was a common defect in men whose -powers of preaching were only second-rate. Perceiving that even the -highly gifted could not sustain their reputation without incessant -study and practice, while they themselves, by the most strenuous -efforts, could gain but a very slender meed of praise, if any, they -abandoned themselves to indolence. The trial was especially great when -a man was surpassed in preaching by one who occupied an inferior rank -in the hierarchy, and who perhaps took every opportunity of parading -his superior powers. A kind of passion for listening to preaching -possessed, he says, both Pagans and Christians at this time; hence it -was very mortifying for a man to see a congregation looking forward to -the termination of his discourse, while to his rival they listened with -the utmost patience and attention, and were vexed only when his sermon -had come to an end.”[101] - -In the sixth book, Chrysostom enlarges on the dangers and trials which -beset the priest as compared with the tranquillity and security of the -monk—that life to which he still felt himself powerfully attracted. -“‘Who watch for your souls as they that must give an account.’ The -dread of the responsibility implied in that saying constantly agitated -his mind. For if it were better to be drowned in the sea than to offend -one of the little ones of Christ’s flock, what punishment must they -undergo who destroyed not one or two but a whole multitude?”[102] “Much -worldly wisdom was required in the priest; he must be conversant with -secular affairs, and adapt himself with versatility to all kinds of -circumstances and men; and yet he ought to keep his spirit as free, as -unfettered by worldly interests and ambitions as the hermit dwelling on -the mountains.”[103] - -The trials, indeed, which beset the priest so far exceeded those of -the monk, that Chrysostom considered the monastery, on the whole, a -bad school for active clerical life. “The monk lived in a calm; there -was little to oppose or thwart him. The skill of the pilot could not -be known till he had taken the helm in the open sea amidst rough -weather. Too many of those who had passed from the seclusion of the -cloister to the active sphere of the priest or bishop proved utterly -incapable of coping with the difficulties of their new situation. -They lost their head (ἰλιγγιῶσιν), and, often, instead of adding to -their virtue, were deprived of the good qualities which they already -possessed. Monasticism often served as a screen to failings which the -circumstances of active life drew out, just as the qualities of metal -were tested by the action of fire.”[104] - -Chrysostom concludes by saying that he was conscious of his own -infirmities; the irritability of his temper, his liability to -violent emotions, his susceptibility to praise and blame. All such -evil passions could, with the help of God’s grace, be tamed by the -severe treatment of the monastic life; like savage beasts who must -be kept on low fare. But in the public life of a priest they would -rage with incontrollable fury, because all would be pampered to the -full—vain-glory by honour and praise, pride by authority, envy by -the reputation of other men, bad temper by perpetual provocations, -covetousness by the liberality of donors to the Church, intemperance -by luxurious living.[105] He bids Basil picture the most implacable -and deadly contest between earthly forces which his imagination could -draw, and declares that this would but faintly express the conflict -between the soul and evil in the spiritual warfare of the world. “Many -accidents might put an end to earthly combat, at least for a time—the -approach of night, the fatigue of the combatants, the necessity of -taking food and sleep. But in the spiritual conflict there were no -breathing spaces. A man must always have his harness on his back, or he -would be surprised by the enemy.”[106] - -It is not surprising that Basil, after the fearful responsibilities -and perils of his new dignity had been thus powerfully set before him, -should declare that his trouble now was not so much how to answer the -accusers of Chrysostom as to defend himself before God. He besought his -friend to promise that he would continue to support and advise him in -all emergencies. Chrysostom replied that as far as it was possible he -would do so; but that he doubted not Christ, who had called Basil to -this good work, would enable him to discharge it with boldness. They -wept, embraced, and parted. And so Basil went forth to the unwelcome -honours and trials of his bishopric, while Chrysostom continued to lead -that monastic kind of life which was only a preparatory step to the -monastery itself. His friendship with Basil is curious and romantic. -Their intercourse was brought to a singular conclusion by the stratagem -of Chrysostom. Basil may have, according to his own earnest request, -continued to consult his friend in any difficulty or distress; but he -is never mentioned again. Although so intimately bound up with this -passage in Chrysostom’s life, there is something indistinct and shadowy -about his whole existence. He flits across the scene for a few moments, -and then disappears totally and for ever. - -The books on the Priesthood may be regarded as containing partly a real -account of an actual conversation between the two friends. But, as in -the dialogues of Plato, far more was probably added by the writer, so -that in parts the dialogue is only a form into which the opinions of -the author at the time of composition were cast. It is impossible to -decide with certainty the exact time at which the treatise may have -been written. It is not likely to have been later than his diaconate -in 381,[107] but more probably[108] the work may be assigned to the -six years of leisure spent in the seclusion of the monastery and -mountains—that is, to the period between Basil’s election to the -bishopric, and his own ordination as deacon. The treatise reads like -the production of one who had acquired considerable experience of -monastic life; who had deliberately calculated its advantages on the -one hand, and, on the other, had keenly observed and seriously weighed -the temptations and difficulties which attended the more secular career -of priest or bishop. It is a more mature work than the Epistles to -Theodore, and is free from such rapturous and excessive praise of the -ascetic life as they contain. - - - NOTE TO FOREGOING CHAPTER. - - It may excite surprise that men so young as Chrysostom - and Basil, the former at least being not more than - twenty-five or twenty-six, and not as yet ordained - deacon, should have been designated to the highest - office in the Church. The Council of Neocæsarea (about - A.D. 320—_vide_ Hefele, vol. i., Clark’s transl. p. 222) - fixed thirty as the age at which men became eligible for - the priesthood. The same age, then, at least, must have - been required for a bishop. - - The Constitutions called Apostolical fix the age at - fifty, but add a clause which really lets in all the - exceptions, “unless he be a man of singular merit and - worth, which may compensate for the want of years.” And, - in fact, there are numerous instances of men, both before - and after the time of Chrysostom, who were consecrated as - bishops under the age of thirty. The Council of Nice was - held not more than twenty years after the persecution of - Maximian, which Athanasius (Epist. ad Solitar., p. 382, - Paris edition) says he had only heard of from his father, - yet in five months after that Council he was ordained - Archbishop of Alexandria. Remigius of Rheims was only - twenty-two when he was made bishop, in A.D. 471. In like - manner, though it was enacted by the Council of Sardica, - A.D. 343-344, that none should rise to the Episcopal - throne _per saltum_, yet there are not a few examples of - this rule being transgressed. - - Augustine, when he created a See at Fassula, presented - Antonius, a reader (the very position Chrysostom now - filled) to the Primate, who ordained him without scruple - on Augustine’s recommendation (Aug. Ep. 261, ad Cælest.). - Cyprian, Ambrose, and Nestorius are celebrated instances - of the consecration of laymen to bishoprics. - - - - -CHAPTER V. - - NARROW ESCAPE FROM PERSECUTION—HIS ENTRANCE INTO A - MONASTERY—THE MONASTICISM OF THE EAST, A.D. 372. - - -About this time, 372-373, while Chrysostom was still residing in -Antioch, he narrowly escaped suffering the penalties of an imperial -decree issued by Valentinian and Valens against the practisers of -magical arts, or possessors even of magical books. A severe search was -instituted after suspected persons; soldiers were everywhere on the -watch to detect offenders. The persecution was carried on with peculiar -cruelty at Antioch, where it had been provoked by the detection of a -treasonable act of divination. The twenty-four letters of the alphabet -were arranged at intervals round the rim of a kind of charger, which -was placed on a tripod, consecrated with incantations and elaborate -ceremonies. The diviner, habited as a heathen priest, in linen robes, -sandals, and with a fillet wreathed about his head, chanted a hymn -to Apollo, the god of prophecy, while a ring in the centre of the -charger was slipped rapidly round a slender thread. The letters in -front of which the ring successively stopped indicated the character -of the oracle. The ring on this occasion was supposed to have pointed -to the first four letters in the name of the future Emperor, Θ Ε Ο -Δ. Theodorus, and probably many others who had the misfortune to own -the fatal syllables, were executed. There were, of course, multitudes -of eager informers, and zealous judges, who strove to allay the -suspicious fears of the Emperors, and to procure favour for themselves -by vigorous and wholesale prosecutions. Neither age, nor sex, nor rank -was spared; women and children, senators and philosophers, were dragged -to the tribunals, and committed to the prisons of Rome and Antioch -from the most distant parts of Italy and Asia. Many destroyed their -libraries in alarm—so many innocent books were liable to be represented -as mischievous or criminal; and thus much valuable literature -perished.[109] It was during this dreadful time, when suspicion was -instantly followed by arrest, and arrest by imprisonment, torture, -and probably death, that Chrysostom chanced to be walking with a -friend to the Church of the Martyr Babylas, outside the city. As they -passed through the gardens by the banks of the Orontes, they observed -fragments of a book floating down the stream. Curiosity led them to -fish it out; but, to their dismay, on examining it, they found that it -was inscribed with magical formulæ, and, to increase their alarm, a -soldier was approaching at no great distance. At first they knew not -how to act; they feared the book had been cast into the river by the -artifice of an informer to entrap some unwary victim. They determined, -however, to throw their dangerous discovery back into the river, and -happily the attention or suspicions of the soldier were not roused. -Chrysostom always gratefully looked back to this escape as a signal -instance of God’s mercy and protection.[110] - -It must have been soon after this incident and previous to the edict of -persecution against the monks issued by Valens in 373, that Chrysostom -exchanged what might be called the amateur kind of monastic life passed -in his own home for the monastery itself. Whether his mother was now -dead or had become reconciled to the separation, or whether her son’s -passionate enthusiasm for monastic retirement became irresistible, -it is impossible to determine. His mother is not mentioned by him in -his writings after this point, except in allusion to the past, which -is a strong presumption that she was no longer living. Bishop Meletius -would probably have endeavoured to detain him for some active work in -the Church, but he was now in exile; and to Flavian, the successor of -Meletius, Chrysostom was possibly not so intimately known. - -During the first four centuries of the Christian era, the enthusiasm -for monastic life prevailed with ever increasing force. We are, -perhaps, naturally inclined to associate monasticism chiefly with the -Western Christianity of the Middle Ages. But the original and by far -the most prolific parent of monasticism was the East. There were always -ascetics in the Christian Church; yet asceticism is the product not -so much of Christianity as of the East; of the oriental temperament, -which admires and cultivates it; of the oriental climate, which makes -it tolerable even when pushed to the most rigorous extremes. Asceticism -is the natural practical expression of that deeply-grounded conviction -of an essential antagonism between the flesh and spirit which pervades -all oriental creeds. Even the monastic form of it was known in the East -before Christianity. The Essenes in Judæa, the Therapeutæ in Egypt, -were prototypes of the active and contemplative communities of monks. - -The primitive ascetics of the Christian Church were not monks. They -were persons who raised themselves above the common level of religious -life by exercises in fasting, prayer, study, alms-giving, celibacy, -bodily privations of all kinds. These habits obtained for them great -admiration and reverence. Such persons are frequently designated by -writers of the first three centuries as “an ascetic,” “a follower of -the religious ascetics.”[111] But they did not form a class distinctly -marked off by dress and habitation from the rest of the world, like the -monks or even the anchorites of later time. They lived in the cities or -wherever their home might be, and were not subject to any rules beyond -those of their own private making. Eusebius calls them σπουδαῖοι, -“earnest persons;” and Clemens Alexandrinus ἐκλεκτῶν ἐκλεκτότεροι, -“more elect than the elect.”[112] Midway between the primitive ascetic -and the fully-developed monk must be placed the anchorite or hermit, -who made a step in the direction of monasticism by withdrawing -altogether from the city or populous places into the solitudes of -mountain or desert. Persecution assisted the impulse of religious -fervour. Paul retired to the Egyptian Thebaid during the persecution of -Decius in A.D. 251, and Antony during that of Maximin in A.D. 312. They -are justly named the fathers or founders of the anchorites, because, -though not actually the first, they were the most distinguished; and -the fame of their sanctity, their austerities, their miracles, produced -a tribe of followers. The further Antony retired into the depths of -the wilderness the more numerous became his disciples. They grouped -their cells around the habitation of the saintly father, and out of -the clusters grew in process of time the monastery. A number of cells -ranged in lines like an encampment, not incorporated in one building, -was called a “Laura” or street.[113] This was the earliest and simplest -kind of monastic establishment. It was a community, though without much -system or cohesion. - -The real founder of the Cœnobia or monasteries in the East was the -Egyptian Pachomius; he was the Benedict of the East. His rule was that -most generally adopted, not only in Egypt but throughout the oriental -portions of the Empire. He and Antony had now been dead about twenty -years, and Hilarius, the pupil and imitator of Antony, had lately -introduced monasticism on the Pachomian model into Syria. In about -fifty years more, the nomadic Saracens will gaze with veneration and -awe at the spectacle of Simeon on his pillar, forty miles from Antioch. -Thousands will come to receive baptism at his hands; his image will -have been placed over the entrance of the shops in Rome.[114] The -spirit had been already caught in the West. The feelings of abhorrence -with which the Italians first beheld the wild-looking Egyptian monks -who accompanied Athanasius to Rome had soon been exchanged for -veneration. The example of Marcellina, and the exhortations of her -brother Ambrose of Milan, had induced multitudes of women to take vows -of celibacy.[115] Most of the little islands on the coasts of the -Adriatic could boast of their monasteries or cells.[116] St. Martin -built his religious houses near Poitiers and Tours, and was followed to -his grave by two thousand brethren.[117] But St. Jerome, perhaps, more -than any one else, promoted the advance of monasticism in the West. -Born on the borders of East and West,[118] he mingled with the Eastern -Church at Antioch and Constantinople, and in the desert of Chalcis -had inured himself to the most severe forms of oriental asceticism, -and returned to Rome eager to impart to others a kindred spirit of -enthusiasm for the ascetic life. A little later, early in the fifth -century, John Cassianus, president of a religious establishment in -Marseilles, propagated monastic institutions of an oriental type in the -south of France, and made men conversant with the system by his work -on the rules of the cloister. These were the scattered forces which in -the West awaited the master mind and strong hand of Benedict to mould -and discipline them into a mighty system. The nearest approach in the -West to the Egyptian system of Pachomius was among the Benedictines of -Camaldoli. - -There is every reason to suppose on general grounds, and the -supposition is corroborated by notices in the writings of Chrysostom, -that the monasteries near Antioch, like the rest of the Syrian -monasteries, were based on the Pachomian model. Pachomius was a native -of the Thebaid, born in A.D. 292. He began to practise asceticism as -a hermit, but, according to the legend, was visited by an angel who -commanded him to promote the salvation of other men’s souls besides his -own, and presented him with a brazen tablet, on which were inscribed -the rules of the Order which he was to found. He established his first -community on Tabennæ, an island in the Nile, which became the parent of -a numerous offspring. Pachomius had the satisfaction in his lifetime of -seeing eight monasteries, containing in all 3000 monks, acknowledging -his rule; and after his death, in the first half of the fifth century, -their numbers had swelled to 50,000.[119] Chrysostom exulted with -Christian joy and pride over the spectacle of “Egypt, that land which -had been the mother of pagan literature and art, which had invented and -propagated every species of witchcraft, now despising all her ancient -customs, and holding up the Cross, in the desert no less if not more -than in the cities: ... for the sky was not more beautiful, spangled -with its hosts of stars, than the desert of Egypt studded in all -directions with the habitations of monks.”[120] - -By the Pachomian rule no one was admitted as a full monk till after -three years of probation, during which period he was tested by the most -severe exercises. If willing, after that period, to continue the same -exercises, he was admitted without further ceremony beyond making a -solemn declaration that he would adhere to the rules of the monastery. -That no irrevocable vow was taken by the members of the monastery near -Antioch which Chrysostom joined seems proved by his return to the -city after a residence in the monastery of several years’ duration. -According to Sozomen, the several parts of the dress worn by Pachomian -monks had a symbolical meaning. The tunic (a linen garment reaching as -far as the knees) had short sleeves, to remind the wearers that they -should be prompt to do such honest work only as needed no concealment. -The hood was typical of the innocence and purity of infants, who wore -the same kind of covering; the girdle and scarf, folded about the -back, shoulders, and arms, were to admonish them that they should -be perpetually ready to do active service for God. Each cell was -inhabited by three monks. They took their chief meal in a refectory, -and ate in silence,[121] with a veil so arranged over the face that -they could see only what was on the table. No strangers were admitted, -except travellers, to whom they were bound, by the rule of their -Order, to show hospitality. The common meal or supper took place at -three o’clock,[122] up to which time they usually fasted. When it was -concluded, a hymn was sung, of which Chrysostom gives us a specimen, -though not in metrical form:[123] “Blessed be God, who nourisheth me -from my youth up, who giveth food to all flesh: fill our hearts with -joy and gladness, that we, having all sufficiency at all times, may -abound unto every good work, through Jesus Christ our Lord, with Whom -be glory, and honour, and power to Thee, together with the Holy Ghost, -for ever and ever, Amen. Glory to Thee, O Lord! Glory to Thee, Holy -One! Glory to Thee, King, who hast given us food to make us glad! Fill -us with the Holy Spirit, that we may be found well pleasing in thy -sight, and not ashamed when Thou rewardest every man according to his -works.” - -The whole community in a Pachomian monastery was divided into -twenty-four classes, distinguished by the letters of the Greek -alphabet; the most ignorant, for instance, under class Iota, the more -learned under Xi or Zeta, such letters being in shape respectively -the simplest and the most complicated in the alphabet. Those hours -which were not devoted to services or study were occupied by manual -labour, partly to supply themselves with the necessaries of life, -partly to guard against the incursion of evil thoughts. There was a -proverbial saying attributed to some of the old Egyptian fathers, that -“a labouring monk was assaulted by one devil only, but an idle one -by an innumerable legion.” They wove baskets and mats, agriculture -was not neglected, nor even, among the Egyptian monks, ship-building. -Palladius, who visited the Egyptian monasteries about the close of the -fourth century, found, in the monastery of Panopolis, which contained -300 members, 15 tailors, 7 smiths, 4 carpenters, 12 camel-drivers, -15 tanners. Each monastery in Egypt had its steward, and a chief -steward stationed at the principal settlement had the supervision of -all the rest. All the products of monkish labour were shipped under -his inspection on the Nile for Alexandria. With the proceeds of their -sale, stores were purchased for the monasteries, and the surplus was -distributed amongst the sick and poor.[124] - -A monastery founded on this model might be fairly described as a kind -of village containing an industrial and religious population; and had -the Eastern monks adhered to this simple and innocent way of life, -such communities might have become more and more schools of learning, -centres of civilisation, and homes of piety. But they were increasingly -forgetful of the wholesome saying of Antony, that a monk in the city -was like “a fish out of water.” Instead of attending exclusively to -their pious and industrial exercises, they mixed themselves up with the -theological and political contests which too often convulsed the cities -of the Eastern Empire. Their influence or interference was frequently -the reverse of peace-making, judicious, or Christian. They would rush -with fanatical fury into the city, to rescue the orthodox, or to attack -those whom they considered heretical. The evil had grown to such a -height by the reign of Arcadius, that a law was passed by which monks -were strictly forbidden to commit such outrages on civil order, and -bishops were commanded to prosecute the authors of such attempts.[125] -Eastern monasticism, in fact, partook of the character which -distinguished the Eastern Church as a whole, and which we may regard as -one principal cause of its corruption and decay. A certain stability, -sobriety, self-control, a law-making and law-respecting spirit, as it -is the peculiar merit of the Western, so the want of it is the peculiar -defect of the Oriental temperament. Hence a curious co-existence of -extremes; the passions, unnaturally repressed at one outlet by intense -asceticism, burst forth with increased fury at another. He who had -subdued his body in the wilderness or on the mountains by fastings and -macerations entertained the most implacable animosity towards pagans -and heretics, and fought them like a ruffian (the word is not too -strong for truth), when some tumult in an adjacent city afforded him -an opportunity for this robust mode of displaying and defending his -orthodoxy. Western monasticism, on the other hand, is distinguished -by more gravity, more of the old Roman quality, a love of stern -discipline. It did not run to such lengths of fanatical asceticism, -and consequently was exempt from such disastrous reactions. It never -produced such a caricature of the anchorite as Simeon Stylites, or -such savage zealots as the monkish bands who dealt their sturdy blows -in the religious riots of Constantinople and Alexandria. From the -notices scattered up and down Chrysostom’s writings of the monasteries -in the neighbourhood of Antioch, it appears that they conformed in all -essential respects to the Pachomian model. We might anticipate, indeed, -that, where such a man as Diodorus was president or visitor, they would -be conducted on a simple and rational system. - -South of Antioch were the mountainous heights of Silpius and Casius, -whence rose the springs which in a variety of channels found their -way into the city, provided it with a constant and abundant supply -of the purest water, and irrigated the gardens for which it was -celebrated.[126] In this mountain region dwelt the communities of -monks, in separate huts or cells (κάλυβαι[127]), but subject to an -abbot, and a common rule. Chrysostom has in more passages than one -furnished us with a description of their ordinary costume, fare, and -way of life. He is fond of depicting their simple, frugal, and pious -habits, in contrast to the artificial and luxurious manners of the -gay and worldly people of the city. They were clad in coarse garments -of goat’s hair or camel’s hair, sometimes of skins, over their linen -tunics, which were worn both by night and day.[128] Before the first -rays of sunlight, the abbot went round, and struck those monks who were -still sleeping with his foot, to wake them. When all had risen,—fresh, -healthy, fasting, they sang together, under the precentorship of their -abbot, a hymn of praise to God. The hymn being ended, a common prayer -was offered up (again under the leadership of their abbot), and then -each at sunrise went to his allotted task, some to read, others to -write, others to manual labour, by which they made a good deal to -supply the necessities of the poor. Four hours in the day, the third, -the sixth, the ninth, and some time in the evening, were appointed for -prayers and psalms. When the daily work was concluded, they sat down, -or rather reclined, on strewn grass, to their common meal, which was -sometimes eaten out of doors by moonlight, and consisted of bread and -water only, with occasionally, for invalids, a little vegetable food -and oil. This frugal repast was followed by hymns, after which they -betook themselves to their straw couches, and slept, as Chrysostom -observes, free from those anxieties and apprehensions which beset the -worldly man. There was no need of bolts and bars, for there was no -fear of robbers. The monk had no possession but his body and soul, -and if his life was taken he would regard it as an advantage, for he -could say that to live was Christ, and to die was gain.[129] Those -words “mine and thine,” those fertile causes of innumerable strifes, -were unknown.[130] No lamentations were to be heard when any of the -brethren died. They did not say, “such a one is dead,” but, “he has -been perfected” (τετελείωται), and he was carried forth to burial -amidst hymns of praise, thanksgiving for his release, and the prayers -of his companions that they too might soon see the end of their labours -and struggles, and be permitted to behold Jesus Christ.[131] Such was -the simple and industrial kind of monastic body to which Chrysostom -for a time attached himself; and to the end of his life he regarded -such communities with the greatest admiration and sympathy. But he -never failed to maintain also the duty of work against those who -represented the perfection of the Christian life as consisting in mere -contemplation and prayer. Such a doctrine of otiose Christianity he -proved to be based on a too exclusive attention to certain passages in -the New Testament. If, for instance, our blessed Lord said to Martha, -“Thou art careful and troubled about many things, but one thing is -needful;” or again, “Take no thought for the morrow;” or, “Labour not -for the meat that perisheth”—all such passages were to be balanced and -harmonised by others, as, for example, St. Paul’s exhortation to the -Thessalonians to be “quiet and to do their own business,” and “let -him that stole steal no more, but rather let him labour, working with -his hands that which is good, that he may have to give to him that -needeth.” He points out that the words of our Lord do not inculcate -total abstinence from work, but only censure an undue anxiety about -earthly things, to the exclusion or neglect of spiritual concerns. -The contemplative form of monasticism, based on misconception of -Holy Scripture, had, he observes, seriously injured the cause of -Christianity, for it occasioned practical men of the world to deride it -as a source of indolence.[132] - - - - -CHAPTER VI. - - WORKS PRODUCED DURING HIS MONASTIC LIFE—THE LETTERS TO - DEMETRIUS AND STELECHIUS—TREATISES ADDRESSED TO THE - OPPONENTS OF MONASTICISM—LETTER TO STAGIRIUS. - - -Several treatises were composed by Chrysostom during his monastic -life. Among the first must be placed two books addressed to Demetrius -and Stelechius. Of these the former was evidently written soon after -the commencement of his retreat, for he speaks of having recently -determined to take the step, and of the petty anxieties about food -and other personal comforts which had at first unsettled his purpose -a little. But he had soon conquered these hankerings after the more -luxurious life which he had abandoned. It seemed to him a disgrace -that one to whom heaven and celestial joys were offered, such as eye -had not seen nor ear heard, should be so hesitating and timorous, when -those who undertook the management of public affairs did not shrink -from dangers and toil, and long journeys, and separation from wife and -children, and perhaps unfavourable criticism, but only inquired whether -the office were honourable and lucrative.[133] - -The aim of the books is to animate torpid characters to a warmer piety, -first by drawing a lively picture of the depravity of the times, -secondly by a glowing description of the fervent energy of apostles and -apostolic saints, and insisting that those lofty heights of Christian -holiness were not unattainable by the Christian of his own day, if -he bent the whole energy of his will, aided by Divine grace, to the -attempt. - -“So great,” he observes, “was the depravity of the times that if a -stranger were to compare the precepts of the Gospel with the actual -practice of society, he would infer that men were not the disciples, -but the enemies of Christ. And the most fatal symptom was their total -unconsciousness of this deep corruption. Society was like a body which -was outwardly vigorous, but concealed a wasting fever within; or like -an insane person who says and does all manner of shocking things, -but, instead of being ashamed, glories in the fancied possession of -superior wisdom.”[134] Chrysostom applies the test of the principal -precepts of morality in the Sermon on the Mount to the existing state -of Christian morals. Every one of them was shamelessly violated. A -kind of regard, superstitious or hypocritical, was paid to the command -in the letter, which was broken in the spirit. Persons, for instance, -who scrupled to use the actual expressions “fool” or “Raca,” heaped -all kinds of opprobrious epithets on their neighbours.[135] So the -command to be reconciled with a brother before approaching the altar -was really broken though formally kept. Men gave the kiss of peace -at the celebration of Holy Communion when admonished by the deacon -so to do, but continued to nourish resentful feelings in the heart -all the same.[136] Vainglory and ostentation robbed prayer, fasting -and almsgiving of their merit; and as for the precept “Judge not,” a -most uncharitable spirit of censoriousness pervaded every class of -society, including monks and ecclesiastics.[137] Contrast with this -false and hollow religion of the world the condition of one in whom -a deep compunction for sin, and a genuine love of Jesus Christ, was -awakened. The whole multitude of vain frivolous passions was dispersed -like dust before the wind. So it was with St. Paul. Having once turned -the eye of his soul towards heaven, and being entranced by the beauty -of that other world, he could not stoop to earth again. As a beggar, -in some gloomy hovel, if he saw a monarch glittering with gold and -radiant with jewels, might altogether for a time forget the squalor of -his dwelling-place in his eagerness to get inside the palace of the -king, so St. Paul forgot and despised the poverty and hardship of this -present world because the whole energy of his being was directed to the -attainment of that heavenly city.[138] But men objected to the citation -of apostolic examples. Paul and Peter, they said, were superhuman -characters; models beyond our limited powers. “Nay,” Chrysostom -replies, “these are feeble excuses. The Apostles were in all essential -points like ourselves. Did they not breathe the same kind of air? eat -the same kind of food? were not some of them married men? did they not -follow mechanical trades? nay more, had not some of them deeply sinned? -Men at the present day did not indeed receive grace at baptism to -work miracles, but they received enough to enable them to lead a good -and holy Christian life.[139] And the highest blessing of Christ—his -invitation to those who were called ‘blessed children’ to inherit the -kingdom prepared for them—was addressed, not to those who had wrought -miracles, but to those who had ministered to himself through feeding -the hungry, entertaining the stranger, visiting the sick and the -prisoners, who were his brethren. But grace, though undoubtedly given -by God, required man’s own co-operation to become effectual. Otherwise, -since God is no respecter of persons, it would have resided in equal -measure in all men; whereas we see that with one man it remains, from -another it departs; a third is never affected by it at all.”[140] The -second book on the same subject, addressed to another friend, named -Stelechius, is an expression of more rapturous and highly-wrought -feeling, and is more rhetorical in style. His description in the -beginning of the blessed freedom of the monk’s life from secular -vanities and cares, his remarks on David and St. Paul,[141] two of his -most favourite characters, and still more his masterly enumeration of -the manifold ways in which God manifests his providential care for -man,[142] well deserve to be read. They are too long to be translated -here in full, and a paraphrase would very inadequately represent such -passages, of which the peculiar beauty consists in the language more -even than in the ideas. One special interest of these books, written -immediately after his retirement from the world, is that they put -clearly before us what it was which drove him and many another to the -monastic life. It was a sense of the glaring and hideous contrast -between the Christianity of the Gospel and the Christianity of ordinary -society. A kind of implacable warfare,[143] as he expresses it, seemed -to be waged in the world against the commands of Christ; and he had -therefore determined, by seclusion from the world, to seek that kind of -life which he saw exhibited in the Gospels, but nowhere else.[144] - -But the largest and most powerful work which Chrysostom produced during -this period was occasioned by the decree of the Emperor Valens in A.D. -373—a decree which struck at the roots of monasticism. It directed -that monks should be dragged from their retreats, and compelled to -discharge their obligations as citizens, either by serving in the -army, or performing the functions of any civil office to which they -might be appointed.[145] The edict is said to have been enforced with -considerable rigour, and in Egypt this seems to have been the case. -But it was evidently far from complete or universal in its operation. -None of Chrysostom’s brethren appear to have been compelled to return -to the city; certainly he himself was not. But they were liable, of -course, to the persecution which, under the shelter of the decree, all -the enemies of their order directed against them. These enemies of -monasticism were of several kinds. There were the zealous adherents of -the old paganism; men like Libanius, who were opposed to Christianity -on principle, and especially to the monastic form of it, as encouraging -idleness, and the dereliction of the duties of good citizens. -There were also the more worldly-minded Christians who had adopted -Christianity more from impulse or conformity than from conviction, and -who disliked the standing protest of monastic life against their own -frivolity. They were irritated also by the influence which the monks -often acquired over their wives and children, sometimes alluring the -latter from that lucrative line of worldly life which their fathers had -marked out for them. And lastly, there were those who regretted that -some men should have taken up a position of direct antagonism to the -world, instead of mingling with it, and infusing good leaven into the -mass of evil. The treatise of Chrysostom addressed “to the assailants -of monastic life” was intended to meet most of these objections. - -A friend had brought the terrible tidings to his retreat of the -authorised persecution which had just broken out. He heard it with -indescribable horror. It was a sacrilege far worse than the destruction -of the Jewish Temple. That an Emperor (an Arian, indeed, yet professing -himself Christian) should organise the persecution, and that some -actually baptized persons should take, as his friend informed him, a -part in it, was an intolerable aggravation of the infliction. He would -rather die than witness such a calamity, and was ready to exclaim with -Elijah, “Now, O Lord, take away my life!” His friend roused him from -this state of despondency by suggesting that, instead of giving way -to useless lamentations, he should write an admonitory treatise to -the originators and abettors of this horrible persecution. At first -Chrysostom refused, partly from a feeling of incompetency, partly from -a dread of exposing to the pagans by his writings some of the internal -corruptions, dissensions, and weaknesses of the Church. His friend -replies that these were already but too notorious; and as for the -sufferings of the monks, they formed the topic of public conversation, -too often of public jest. In the market-place and in the doctors’ shops -the subject was freely canvassed, and many boasted of the part which -they had taken against the victims. “I was the first to lay hands on -such a monk,” one would cry, “and to give him a blow;” or, “I was -the first to discover his cell;” or, “I stimulated the judge against -him more than any one.” Such was the spirit of cruelty and profanity -by which even Christians were animated; and, as for the pagans, -they derided both parties. Roused by these dreadful communications, -the indignation of Chrysostom no longer hesitated to set about the -task.[146] - -His pity, he says, was excited chiefly for the persecutors; they were -purchasing eternal misery for themselves, while the future reward of -their victims would be in proportion to the magnitude of their present -sufferings, since “Blessed were those whom men should hate, persecute, -and revile for Christ’s sake, and great was to be their reward in -heaven.”[147] - -To persecute monks was to hinder that purity of life to which Christ -attached so deep an importance. It might be objected, Cannot men lead -lives uncontaminated at home? to which Chrysostom replies that he -heartily wishes they could, and that such good order and morality might -be established in cities as to make monasteries unnecessary. But at -present such gross iniquity prevailed in large towns, that men of pious -aspirations were compelled to fly to the mountain or the desert. The -blame should fall, not on those who escaped from the city, but on those -who made life there intolerable to virtuous men. He trusted the time -might come when these refugees would be able to return with safety to -the world.[148] - -If it was objected that on this principle of reasoning the mass of -mankind was condemned, he could only reply, in the words of Christ -himself, “Narrow is the way which leadeth unto life, and few there be -that find it.” We must not honour a multitude before truth. If all -flesh was once destroyed except eight persons, we cannot be surprised -if the number of men eventually saved shall be few. “I see,” he says, -“a constant perpetration of crimes which are all condemned by Christ -as meriting the punishment of hell—adultery, fornication, envy, anger, -evil speaking, and many more. The multitude which is engaged in this -wickedness is unmolested, but the monks who fly from it themselves, and -persuade others to take flight also, are persecuted without mercy.” So -much for the Christianity of the world.[149] - -In Book II. he expresses his astonishment that fathers should so -little understand what was best for their sons as to deter them from -studying “the true philosophy.” But in combating this error he will -put forward all that can be urged on their side. He imagines the case -of a pagan father, possessed of great worldly distinction and wealth. -He has an only son, in whom all his pride and hopes are centred; one -whom he expects to surpass himself in riches and honour. Suddenly this -son becomes converted to monasticism; this rich heir flies to the -mountains, puts on a dress coarser than that of the meanest servant, -toils at the menial occupations of gardening and drawing water, -becomes lean and pale. All the schemes of his father for the future -are frustrated, all past efforts for his education seem to have been -squandered. The little vessel which was his pride and pleasure is -wrecked at the very mouth of the harbour from which it was setting out -on the voyage of life. The parent has no longer any pleasure in life; -he mourns for his son as for one already dead.[150] - -Having thus stated the case on his adversary’s side as strongly as -possible, Chrysostom begins his own defence by asking which would be -best: that a man should be subject to thirst all his life, or wholly -exempt from it? Surely to be exempt from it. Apply this to the moral -appetites—love, avarice, and the rest. The monk is exempt from them; -the man of the world is distracted by them, if not overwhelmed. Again, -if the monk has no wealth of his own, he exercises a powerful influence -in directing the wealth of others. Religious men will part with much -of their riches according to his suggestions; if one refuses, another -will give. The resources, in fact, of the monk are quite inexhaustible; -many will subscribe to supply his wants or to execute his wishes, as -Crito said that he and his friends would subscribe for Socrates. It is -impossible to deprive the monk of his wealth or of his home; if you -strip him of everything he has, he rejoices, and thanks you for helping -him to live the life which he desires; and as for his home, the world -is his home; one place is the same as another to him; he needs nothing -but the pure air of heaven, wholesome streams, and herbs. As for high -place and rank, history suffices to teach us that the desert does not -destroy, and the palace does not give, true nobility. Plato—planting, -watering, and eating olives—was a far nobler personage than Dionysius -the Tyrant of Sicily, amidst all the wealth and splendour of a monarch. -Socrates—clad in a single garment, with his bare feet and his meagre -fare of bread, and dependent upon others for the mere necessaries of -life—was a far more illustrious character than Archelaus, who often -invited him, but in vain, to court. Real splendour and distinction -consisted not in fine raiment, or in positions of dignity and power, -but only in excellence of the soul and in philosophy.[151] - -He then proceeds to maintain that the influence of the monk was more -powerful than that of the man of the world, however distinguished he -might be. If he descended from his mountain solitude, and entered the -city, the people flocked round him, and pointed him out with reverence -and admiration, as if he were a messenger from heaven. His mean dress -commanded more respect than the purple robe and diadem of the monarch. -If he was required to interfere in matters of public interest, his -influence was greater than that of the powerful or wealthy; for he -could speak before an emperor with boldness and freedom, and without -incurring the suspicion of self-interested or ambitious motives. He was -a more effectual comforter of the mourners than any one in a prosperous -worldly condition was likely to be. If a father had lost his only son, -the sight of other men’s domestic happiness only revived his grief; but -the society of the monk, who disdained the ties of home and family, and -who talked to him of death as only a sleep, soothed his grief. Thus the -man who wished his son to possess real honour and power would permit -him to become a monk; for monks who were once mere peasants had been -visited in their cells and consulted by kings and ministers of state. - -Chrysostom concludes this book by relating the history of one of his -own brethren in the monastery, who, when first he desired to become -a monk, had been disowned by his father, a wealthy and distinguished -pagan, who threatened him with imprisonment, turned him out of doors, -and allowed him almost to perish with hunger. But, finding him -inflexible in his purpose, the father at last relented, and, at the -time when Chrysostom wrote, honoured, he might say venerated, that son, -considering the others, who occupied distinguished positions in the -world, scarcely worthy to be his servant.[152] - -As the second book was intended to meet the objections of a pagan -father, so the third contains admonitions to one who was professedly -Christian, but worldly-minded, on the duty of parents in regard to the -moral and religious education of their children. - -It appeared to him that the fathers of that day gave their sons none -but worldly counsel, inculcated none but worldly industry and prudence, -and encouraged to the emulation of none but worldly examples.[153] -The force of habit was intensely strong, especially when pleasure -co-operated with it, and parents, instead of counteracting habits of -worldliness, promoted them by their own example. God led the Israelites -through the wilderness as a kind of monastic training, to wean them -from the luxurious and sensual habits of an Egyptian life; yet even -then they hankered after the land of their bondage. How, then, could -the children of parents who left them in the midst of the Egypt of -vice, escape damnation? If they achieved anything good of themselves, -it was speedily crushed by the flood of worldly conversation which -issued from the parent. All those things which were condemned by -Christ—as wealth, popularity, strife, an evil eye, divorce—were -approved by parents of that day, and they threw a veil over the -ugliness of these vices, by giving them specious names. Devotion to -the hippodrome and theatre was called fashionable refinement; wealth -was called freedom; love of glory, high spirit; folly, boldness; -prodigality, benevolence; injustice, manliness. Virtues, on the -contrary, were depreciated by opprobrious names: temperance was called -rusticity; equity, cowardice; justice, unmanliness; modesty, meanness; -endurance of injury, feebleness. He truly remarks, that nothing -contributes so much to deter men from vice as calling vices plainly by -their proper names.[154] - -“How can children escape moral ruin, when all the labour of their -fathers is bestowed on the provision of superfluous things—fine houses, -dress, horses, beautiful statues, gilded ceilings—while they take no -pains about the soul, which is far more precious than any ornament -of gold?”[155] And there were worse evils behind: vice too monstrous -and unnatural to be named, but to which he was constrained to allude, -because he felt that it was poisoning with deadly venom the very vitals -of the social body. “Well,” but worldly men reply, “Would you have us -all turn philosophers, and let our worldly affairs go to ruin? Nay,” -says Chrysostom, “it is the want of the philosophic spirit and rule -which ruins everything now; it is your rich men—with troops of slaves -and swarms of parasites, eager for wealth and ambitious of distinction, -building fine houses, adding field to field, lending money at a -usurious rate of interest—who propagate the strife and litigation, and -envy, and murder, and general confusion, by which life is distracted. -These are they who bring down the vengeance of Heaven, in the shape of -droughts, and famines, and inundations, and earthquakes, and submersion -of cities, and pestilences. It is not the simple monk, or the -philosophic Christian, who is contented with a humble dwelling, a mean -dress, a little plot of ground. These last, shining like bright beacons -in a dark place, hold up the lamp of philosophy on high, and endeavour -to guide those who are tossing on the open sea in a dark night into the -haven of safety and repose.”[156] - -“In spite of law, disorder prevailed to such an extent, that the very -idea of God’s providence was lost. Men assigned the course of events -to fate, or to the stars, or to chance, or to spontaneous force. God -did, indeed, still rule; but He was like a pilot in a storm, whose -skill in managing and conducting the vessel in safety was not perceived -or appreciated by the passengers, owing to the confusion and fright -caused by the raging of the elements. In the monastery, on the other -hand, all was tranquillity and peace as in a community of angels. -He strenuously combated the error of supposing that sin was more -pardonable in a man of the world than in a monk. Anger, uncleanness, -swearing, and the like, were equally sinful in all. Christ made no -distinctions, but propounded one standard of morality for all alike. -Nothing had inflicted more injury on the moral tone of society than -the supposition that strictness of life was demanded of the monk -only.”[157] He strongly urges the advantage of sending youths for -education to monasteries, even for so long a period as ten or twenty -years. Men consented, he says, to part with their children, for the -purpose of learning some art or trade, or even so low an accomplishment -as rope-dancing; but when the object was to train their souls for -heaven, all kinds of impediments were raised. To object that few -attained through residence in a monastery that perfection of spiritual -life which some expected of them, was a mere excuse. In the case of -worldly things, on which men’s hearts were set, they thought of getting -as much as they could, not of reaching absolute perfection. A man did -not prevent his son from entering military service because the chances -of his becoming a prefect were small; why, then, hesitate to send your -son to a monastery because all monks do not become angels?[158] - -These treatises are remarkable productions, and deserve to be read, -not only because they exhibit Chrysostom’s best powers of argument -and style, but also because they throw light upon the character of -the man and the times in which he lived. He pleads his cause with the -ingenuity, as well as eloquence, of a man who had been trained for the -law courts. We find, indeed, that his opinions on the advantages of the -monastic life were modified as he grew older; but his bold condemnation -of worldliness, his denunciation of a cold secularised Christianity, -as contrasted with the purity of the Gospel standard, the deep -aspirations after personal holiness, the desire to be filled with a -fervent and overflowing love of Christ, the firm hold on the idea of -a superintending Providence, amidst social confusion and corruption; -these we find, as here, so always, conspicuous characteristics of the -man, and principal sources of his influence. - -From the frightful picture here drawn of social depravity, we perceive -the value—we might say, the necessity—of monasteries, as havens of -refuge for those who recoiled in horror from the surrounding pollution. -It is clear also that the influence of the monks was considerable. -Monasteries were recognised places of education, where pious parents -could depend on their children being virtuously brought up. The -Christian wife of a pagan or worldly husband could here find a safe -home for her boy, where he could escape the contamination of his -father’s influence or example. Chrysostom relates, in chapter 12, how -a Christian lady in Antioch, being afraid of the wrath of a harsh -and worldly-minded husband if she sent away her son to school at the -monastery, induced one of the monks, a friend of Chrysostom’s, to -reside for a time in the city, in the character of pedagogue. The boy, -thus subjected to his training, afterwards joined the society of the -monks; but Chrysostom, fearing the consequences both to the youth and -to the monastic body, should his father detect his secession, persuaded -him to return to the city, where he led an ascetic life, though not -habited in monkish dress. Out of these monastic schools, after years -of discipline and prayer, and study of the Word, there issued many a -pastor and preacher, well-armed champions of the truth, strong in the -Lord, and in the power of His might; like Chrysostom himself, instant -in season and out of season; stern denouncers of evil, even in kings’ -courts; holding out the light of the Gospel in the midst of a dark and -crooked generation. - -The foregoing extracts and paraphrases from these treatises prove -also that as philosophy was considered the highest flight in the -intellectual culture of the pagan, so was asceticism regarded as the -highest standard of Christian life; it was to the education of the -soul what philosophy was to the education of the mind, and hence it -was called by the same name. Possessed by this idea, Chrysostom threw -himself at this period of his life into the system with all the ardour -of his nature. If asceticism was good, it was right to carry it as -far as nature could bear it. He adopted the habits of an old member -of the brotherhood named Syrus, notorious for the severity of his -self-inflicted discipline. The day and greater part of the night were -spent in study, fastings and vigils. Bread and water were his only -habitual food. At the end of four years he proceeded a step further. -He withdrew from the community to one of those solitary caves with -which the mountains overhanging Antioch on its southern side abounded. -In fact, he exchanged the life of a monk for that of an anchorite. -His frame endured this additional strain for nearly two years, and -then gave way. His health was so much shattered that he was obliged to -abandon monastic life, and to return to the greater comfort of his home -in Antioch.[159] - -Meanwhile a friend of his, Stagirius by name—a person of noble birth, -who, in spite of his father’s opposition, had embraced monasticism—was -reduced to a more deplorable condition. While Chrysostom was confined -to his house by illness, a friend common to him and Stagirius brought -him the sad intelligence that Stagirius was affected with all the -symptoms of demoniacal possession—wringing of the hands, squinting of -the eyes, foaming at the mouth, strange inarticulate cries, shiverings, -and frightful visions at night.[160] We shall perhaps find little -difficulty in accounting for these distressing affections, as the -consequence of excessive austerities. The young man, who formerly lived -a gay life in the world, and in the midst of affluence, had in the -monastery fared on bread and water only, often kept vigil all night -long, spent his days in prayer and tears of penitence, preserved an -absolute silence, and read so many hours continuously, that his friends -and brother monks feared that his brain would become disordered.[161] -Very probably it was, and hence his visions and convulsions; but those -were not days in which men readily attributed any strange phenomena, -mental or bodily, to physical causes. We may believe in the action of -a spirit-world on the inhabitants of this earth; but we require good -evidence that any violent or strange affection of mind or body is due -to a directly spiritual agency, rather than to the operation of God -according to natural law. The cases of demoniacs in the Gospel stand -apart. Our Lord uses language which amounts to a distinct affirmation -that those men were actually possessed by evil spirits. To use such -expressions as “come out of him,” “enter no more into him,” and the -like, if there was no spirit concerned in the case at all, would have -been, to say the least, a mere unmeaning piece of acting, of which it -would be shocking to suppose our Lord capable. But to admit the direct -agency of spirit, when confirmed by such authoritative testimony, -is widely different from the hasty ascription to spiritual agency, -by an uncritical and unscientific age, of everything which cannot -be accounted for by the most superficial knowledge and observation. -Chrysostom, of course, not being beyond his age in such matters, did -not for a moment dispute the supposition that Stagirius was actually -possessed by a demon, but he displays a great deal of good sense in -dealing with the case. As the state of his own health did not permit -him to pay Stagirius a visit in person, he wrote his advice instead. He -perceived the fatal temptation to despair in a man who imagined that -the devil had got a firm hold upon him, and that every evil inclination -proceeded directly from this demoniacal invader. He will not allow -that the suggestion to suicide, of which Stagirius complained, came -direct from the demon, but rather from his own despondency,[162] with -which the devil had endeavoured to oppress him, that he might, under -cover of that, work his own purposes more effectually, just as robbers -attack houses in the dark. But this was to be shaken off by trust in -God; for the devil did not exercise a compulsory power over the hearts -of men; there must be a co-operation of the man’s own will. Eve fell -partly through her own inclination to sin: “When she saw that the -tree was good for food, and pleasant to the eyes, she took of the -fruit thereof and did eat;” and if Adam was so easily persuaded to -participate in her sin, he would have fallen even had no devil existed. - -Chrysostom endeavours also to console his friend by going through -the histories of saints in all times who have been afflicted. His -sufferings were not to be compared to those of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, -Moses, David, and St. Paul. “These afflictions were sent for remedial, -purgatorial purposes—that the soul might be saved in the day of the -Lord. It was not easy to say why such a person was tried by this or -that form of suffering, but if we knew exactly God’s motives, there -would be no test of faith. The indispensable thing was to be firmly -convinced that whatever God sent was right. Some men were disturbed -because the good were often troubled, and the wicked prosperous; but -such inequality in the distribution of reward and punishment in this -life suggested a future state where they would be finally adjusted. The -wicked who had here received his good things would there receive his -evil.[163] Stagirius had not been attacked by any demon when he was -living in carelessness and worldly pleasure, but when he had buckled -on his armour and appeared as an antagonist, then the devil descended -to the assault. Hence he had no need to be ashamed of his affliction; -the only thing to be ashamed of was sin, and it was owing to his -renunciation of sin that the devil assailed him. The real demoniacs -were those who were carried away by the impulses of unregulated -passions.” His summaries of the lives of the Old Testament saints, -which fill the rest of the second book and most of the third, are very -masterly, and display most intimate acquaintance with Holy Scripture in -all its parts. A powerful mind and retentive memory had profited by six -years of retirement largely devoted to study. - - - - -CHAPTER VII. - -ORDINATION AS DEACON—DESCRIPTION OF ANTIOCH—WORKS COMPOSED DURING HIS -DIACONATE. A.D. 381-386. - - -Probably one of the last acts of Bishop Meletius before he left -Antioch to attend the Council of Constantinople in 381, was to ordain -Chrysostom a deacon. The bishop never returned. He died during the -session of the council of which he was president, leaving both that -and the see of Antioch distracted by the most deplorable factions. It -will be remembered[164] that the Catholics of Antioch had, ever since -the ill-judged mission of Lucifer of Cagliari, been divided between -allegiance to Paulinus, a priest of the old Eustathian party, who had -been consecrated bishop by Lucifer, and Meletius, bishop of the more -moderate party. With the laudable purpose of healing this schism, it -is said that several of the clergy at Antioch, who were considered -most likely to succeed to a vacancy, bound themselves under an oath, -that in the event of either bishop dying, they would decline the offer -of the see, if made, and acknowledge the survivor. But on the death -of Meletius, their plan was frustrated. Either the Asiatics, who -generally favoured Meletius, refused to submit to the authority of -Paulinus, because he had been ordained by a Western prelate, or the -Eustathians who acknowledged Paulinus were unwilling on their side to -admit Meletians into their fold. In any case, the earnest endeavours -of Gregory of Nazianzum, now President of the Council, to unite the -two factions under one prelate were unsuccessful.[165] The Meletians -elected Flavian to be their bishop, one of the very priests who had, -under oath, renounced their pretensions to the see. This appointment -of course exposed Flavian to the imputation of perjury, but we may -hope that, like Gregory, he yielded to a pressing necessity only, -and to a conviction that the dissension would have been aggravated -and protracted if he had obdurately refused.[166] At any rate, as -will hereafter appear, his conduct, wherever it comes before us, is -worthy of all admiration, and Chrysostom must have filled the office -of deacon with happiness under his administration. A greater contrast -than the initiation of Chrysostom into clerical life, and that of a -young deacon in modern times, can scarcely be imagined. He was in his -thirty-seventh year, and had supplemented the good liberal education -of his youth by several years of devotion to close study of Scripture, -to rigorous mortification of the body, to prayer and meditation, and -to every means of promoting the culture of the soul. After this long -and careful training, he enters the subordinate ranks of the clergy, -not to discharge, like a modern deacon, duties as laborious, and often -as responsible, as those which pertained to the priest, but such light -and irresponsible tasks as were suitable to men who might be young, -and were necessarily inexperienced in pastoral work. The deacons were -sometimes called the Levites of the Christian Church.[167] It was their -office to take care of the holy table and its furniture, to administer -the cup to the laity, but not to a priest or a bishop, and occasionally -to read the Gospel.[168] They were in most churches permitted to -baptize.[169] But their peculiar duty in the services of the Church -was to call the attention of the people to every fresh movement, to -use a musical expression, in the progress of the service. Thus at the -close of the sermon, the deacon’s voice was heard crying: “Let the -hearers [_i.e._ the second order of catechumens who were permitted to -hear the sermon, but not the conclusion of the Eucharistic service] and -the unbelievers depart!”[170] Then he bid the remaining orders of the -catechumens, _i.e._ the energumens, the competentes, and the penitents -to pray for one another, and the people also to pray for them; ἐκτενῶς -δεηθῶμεν, “let us ardently pray for them”—such was the form. Again when -they were dismissed by the command ἀπολύεσθε, “disperse,” the faithful -were invited by the deacon to pray for the whole state of Christ’s -Church.[171] Thus the deacons were the sacred criers or heralds of -the Church; they “proclaimed or bid prayer,” they announced each part -as it was unfolded in the sacred drama of the Liturgy. The frequent -recurrence in our own Liturgy, without much apparent significance, of -the form “Let us pray,” is a remnant of these old diaconal invitations. -The deacons were not permitted to preach except by a special direction -of the bishop. Their duty in part corresponded to that of our -churchwardens; they were to reprove any improper behaviour during -divine service,[172] to bring cases of poverty and sickness before the -notice of the bishop, to distribute the alms under his direction, and -also to report to him grave moral offences.[173] They were essentially, -as the name implies, ministers to the bishops and priests, and were -often styled, in symbolical language, “the bishop’s eyes,” or “ears,” -or “right hand.” The attitude of respect, which they were bound to -maintain in church towards bishops and priests was in keeping with the -servitorial character of their office as a whole. While the priests had -their chairs ranged on either side of the central chair of the bishop -in the choir, the deacons stood humbly by, as if ready to receive and -execute the directions of their superiors.[174] Even the Roman deacons, -who rose rather above the natural lowliness of their office, did not -presume to sit in the church.[175] - -The duties of the diaconate must have brought Chrysostom into constant -intercourse with the Christian population of Antioch, and especially -with the poorer portion of it. The whole population of the city -amounted, according to Chrysostom’s statement, to 200,000,[176] and -the Christians to 100,000,[177] of whom 3000 were indigent, and mainly -supported by the bounty of the Church.[178] The deacon’s function of -searching out and relieving the necessitous by distribution of alms -must have been peculiarly congenial to him. There is no Christian -duty on which he more constantly and earnestly insists than that of -almsgiving, not only in order to alleviate the sufferings of poverty, -but as a means of counteracting the inordinate avarice and selfish -luxury which were the prevailing vices in the higher ranks of society, -both in Antioch and Constantinople. His hold upon the affections of the -common people, partly no doubt through his sympathy with their needs, -partly by his bold denunciation of the vices of the wealthy, partly by -his affectionate and earnest plain-speaking of Christian truth, was -remarkably strong throughout his life. As during the secluded leisure -of his monastic life he had acquired a profound intimacy with Holy -Scripture, so in the more active labours of his diaconate he enlarged -his knowledge of human nature, and stored up observations on the -character and manners of the people among whom he moved; qualifications -no less important for the formation of a great and effective preacher. - -It may not be uninteresting to take a brief glance at the character of -the city and its inhabitants among whom he was destined to labour for -the next seventeen years of his life. - -Both nature and art combined to make Antioch one of the most -delectable and luxurious residences in the world. The advantages of -its situation, in some most important respects, could scarcely be -exceeded. The river Orontes, connecting it with the sea about three -miles distant, was the throat through which the city was fed with -merchandise from all parts of the world. The wooded shores of the large -lake of Antioch some miles above the city, supplied the inhabitants -with fuel, and its waters yielded fish in great abundance. The hills -which impended over the town on the southern side sent down numerous -and copious streams, whose water, unsurpassed in purity, bubbled -up through the fountains which stood in the court of every house. -Northwards extended a fertile plain between the Orontes and Mount -Coryphæus. The northern winds were occasionally keen and searching, -but the prevailing western breezes coming up from the sea were so -delicately soft, yet refreshing, that the citizens delighted in summer -to sleep upon the flat roofs of their dwellings. These advantages, -however, were in some degree balanced by a liability to inundations -and earthquakes. Those hill-streams, the blessing and delight of the -inhabitants in summer, were sometimes swollen in winter by excessive -rains into torrents of incontrollable fury, and caused much damage -to the buildings which were situated near their course. But far more -destructive were the earthquakes. More than once, indeed, especially in -the reigns of Caligula, Claudius, and Trajan, the whole city was almost -shattered to pieces; but on each occasion, through public and private -exertions, it arose from its ruins in new and, if possible, increased -magnificence. The peculiar glories of Antioch were its gardens, and -baths, and colonnaded streets. As in its population, and religion, and -customs, so also in its architecture, it presented, as time went on, a -remarkable mixture of Asiatic, Greek, and Roman elements. The aim of -each Greek king and Roman emperor was to leave it more beautiful than -he had received it from the hands of his predecessor. Each marked his -reign by the erection of a temple or basilica, or bath, or aqueduct, or -theatre, or column. The church in which Chrysostom officiated, usually -called “the great Church,” to distinguish it from the smaller and older -church, called the Church of the Apostles, was begun by Constantine -and finished by Constantius. In the main principles of structure, we -may find some parallel to it in St. Vitale at Ravenna. It stood in -the centre of a large court, and was octangular in shape; chambers, -some of them subterranean, were clustered round it; the domed roof, -of an amazing height, was gilded on the inside; the floor was paved -with polished marbles; the walls and columns were adorned with images, -and glistened with precious stones; every part, indeed, was richly -embellished with bronze and golden ornament.[179] Among the principal -wonders of Antioch was the great street constructed by Antiochus -Epiphanes, nearly four miles in length, which traversed the city from -east to west; the natural inequalities of the ground were filled up, so -that the thoroughfare was a perfect level from end to end; the spacious -colonnades on either side were paved with red granite. From the centre -of this magnificent street, where stood a statue of Apollo, another -street, similar in character, but much shorter, was drawn at right -angles, leading northwards in the direction of the Orontes. Many of the -other streets were also colonnaded, so that the inhabitants, as they -pursued their errands of business or pleasure, were sheltered alike -from the scorching sun of summer and the rains of winter. Innumerable -lanterns at night illuminated the main thoroughfares with a brilliancy -which almost rivalled the light of day, and much of the business, as -well as the festivity, of the inhabitants was carried on by night.[180] - -The character of the inhabitants partook of the various -elements—Asiatic, Syrian, Greek, Jewish, Roman—which composed the whole -population. But the impulsive oriental temperament, subject at times -to fits of gloomy despondency, and to outbursts of wild ferocity, was -undoubtedly the most dominant. When not driven under the pressure of -excitement to either of these extremes, they abandoned themselves -very freely to those voluptuous recreations for which the character -of their city and climate afforded every facility and inducement. -The bath, the circus, the theatre, were the daily amusements of the -citizen; the Olympic games (instituted in the time of Commodus), which -were celebrated in the grove of Daphne, and the festivities held at -particular seasons in honour of different deities, were the greater -occasions to which he looked forward with all the eagerness of a -pleasure-loving nature. - -These main characteristics of the people are abundantly illustrated in -detail, as will be seen hereafter, in the homilies of Chrysostom. He is -ever, in them, labouring with indefatigable industry and earnestness -to lift the Christians above the frivolity and vices of the rest of -the population. His opportunities for investigating the condition of -the Christian community were great during his diaconate. He did not -as yet preach; but by observations on life and manners, he laid up -copious materials for preaching. And he was not idle in the use of his -pen, for to this period may be assigned the treatise on Virginity; a -letter addressed to a young widow; a book on the martyr Babylas; and, -perhaps, though this cannot certainly be determined, the six books on -the Priesthood.[181] - -The letter to a young widow must have been written soon after the -destruction of the Emperor Valens and his army by the Goths in -A.D. 378, since it contains a reference to that event as a recent -occurrence,[182] yet it must have been antecedent to the crushing -defeats inflicted on them by Theodosius in A.D. 382, because the writer -implies that at the time of composition the Goths were overrunning -large tracts of the empire with impunity, and mocking the helplessness -and timidity of the imperial troops.[183] The whole book is penetrated -with that profound sense of the misery and instability of things human, -which the corruption of society and recent calamities of the empire -impressed with peculiar force on the minds of reflecting persons; which -produced among pagans either melancholy or careless indifference, but -made Christians cling with a more earnest and tenacious trust to the -hopes and consolations of the Gospel. - -Therasius, the husband of the young widow, had died after five -years of married life. He is described by Chrysostom as having been -distinguished in rank, in ability, and, above all, in virtue; as having -held a high position in the army, with a reasonable expectation of -soon becoming a prefect. But these very excellencies and brilliant -prospects, which seemed to aggravate the sense of his loss, “ought,” -Chrysostom observes, “to be regarded as sources of consolation. If -death were a final and total destruction, then indeed it would have -been reasonable to lament the extinction of one so benevolent, so -gentle, so humble, prudent, and devout, as her late husband. But if -death was only the landing of the soul in a tranquil haven, only a -transition from the worse to better, from earth to heaven, from men -to angels and archangels, and to Him who is the Lord of angels, then -there was no place left for tears. It was better that he should depart -and be with Christ, his true King, serving Whom in that other world, -he would not be exposed to the dangers and animosities which attended -the service of an earthly monarch. They were, indeed, separated in -body, but neither length of time nor remoteness of place could sunder -the friendship of the soul. Endure patiently for a little time, and -you will behold again the face of your desire; perhaps even now, in -visions, his form will be permitted to visit you.”[184] If it was the -loss of the prefecture that she specially deplored, let her think -from what dangerous ambitions her husband had been preserved; think -of the fate of Theodorus, who was tempted by his high station to lay -a plot against the Emperor, and suffered capital punishment for his -treason.[185] The loftier a man’s ambitions in life, the more probable -a disastrous fall. Look at the tragical fate of the Emperors in the -course of the past fifty years. Two only, out of nine, had died natural -deaths; of the other seven, one had been killed by a usurper,[186] one -in battle,[187] one by a sedition of his domestic guards,[188] one by -the man who had invested him with the purple.[189] Julian had fallen -in battle in the Persian expedition. Valentinian I. died in a fit of -rage, and Valens had been burnt, together with his retinue, in a house -to which the Goths set fire. And of the widows of these Emperors, some -had perished by poison, others had died of despair and broken hearts. -Of those who yet survived, one was trembling for the safety of an -orphan son,[190] another had with difficulty obtained permission to -return from exile.[191] Of the wives of the present Emperors, one was -racked by constant anxiety on account of the youth and inexperience -of her husband,[192] the other was subject to no less anxiety for her -husband’s safety, who ever since his elevation to the throne had been -engaged in incessant warfare with the Goths.[193] Human ambition was -a hard taskmistress, who employed arrogance and avarice as her agents; -“do not then, mourn that your husband has been emancipated from her -tyranny.” Most of the wisest and noblest characters even of the pagan -world had resisted the allurements of ambition—Socrates, Epaminondas, -Aristides, Diogenes, Crates. Shall the Christian then complain, if God -takes one away from these temptations? He who cared least about glory, -who was natural and modest, and unambitious, often acquired most glory, -whereas he who was most eager and anxious to secure it, often obtained -nothing but derision and reproach. She believed that her husband might -have obtained the prefecture; it was a reasonable hope, but there was -many a slip betwixt the cup and the lip, and he who was king to-day was -dead to-morrow. “Strive, then, to equal and even surpass your husband -in piety and goodness, that you may be admitted into the same home, and -reunited to him in a bond far more lovely and enduring than that of -earthly wedlock.” - -In the long treatise “De Virginitate,” Chrysostom boldly declares his -preference for celibacy, but at the same time he exposes and denounces -the mischievous error of Marcionites and Manichæans, who condemned -marriage altogether as positive sin. “They were mistaken in supposing -that abstinence from marriage would procure them a high place in -heaven, because, even if it were granted that marriage was a positive -sin, it must be remembered that not those who abstained from sin, but -those who did positive good, would receive the highest rewards; not one -who abstained from calling his brother ‘Raca,’ but he who loved his -enemies. The celibacy of heretics, such as the Manichæans, was based on -the false conception that all created matter was evil, and that the -Creator Himself was an inferior being to the Supreme Deity. Hence their -celibacy was the work of the devil; they belonged to those mentioned -only to be condemned in 1 Tim. iv. 1-3 ‘as forbidding to marry.’[194] -Chastity of body was worthless, if the soul within was depraved; but -celibacy rightly cultivated, to preserve the purity of the soul towards -God, was better than marriage, better as heaven was better than earth, -and angels better than men.” He confronts the common objection: if -all men embraced celibacy, how would the race be propagated? “Myriads -of angels inhabit heaven, yet we believe they are not propagated by -matrimony, and it was only by the special provision and will of God, -that matrimony itself produced offspring. Sarah was barren till God -vouchsafed her Isaac. Marriage was the inferior state to conduct us -to the higher; it was to celibacy as the Law to the Gospel, it was -a crutch to support those who would otherwise fall into sin, but to -be dispensed with when possible. Let those, then, who reproached and -derided celibacy, put a restraint upon their lips, lest like Miriam, or -the children who mocked Elisha, they should be severely punished for -pouring contempt on so holy a state.”[195] - -We are enabled to understand from this work why the best Christianity -in the East was so disparaging of the married state. The woman had -not attained her proper place in society. She seems to have been -ill-educated, to have been kept, especially before marriage, in a state -of unnatural seclusion, which she broke when she could, and was too -often treated by the husband like a slave, with severity and distrust. -This degrading position was partly a remnant of a pagan state of -society, partly the offspring of oriental character and habits of life. -Christianity perceived the evil, but had not effected much towards -a remedy. Instead of endeavouring to elevate, to soften, and refine -the relation of one sex to the other, it encouraged rather a total -separation. The treatise now under notice presents curious pictures -of domestic life, if such it can be called, in that age. Matrimonial -matches were arranged entirely by the parents, the attentions of the -suitors were paid to the parents, not to the maiden herself. She -suffered an agony of suspense, while the favourite of yesterday was -supplanted by the superior charms of some rival of to-day, who in his -turn was superseded by a third. Sometimes, on the very eve of marriage, -the suitor whom she herself preferred was dismissed, and she was -finally handed over to another whom she disliked. The suitors also, on -their side, were racked by anxiety; for it was difficult to ascertain -what the real character, personal appearance, and manners were of the -maiden, who was always kept in the strictest seclusion. Then there was -often great difficulty in getting the dowry paid by the father-in-law, -which was an annoyance to each of the newly-married pair.[196] - -He draws a highly-wrought picture, with some caustic humour, of the -miseries of jealous wives and husbands. When a man constantly suspects -“his dearest love,”[197] for whom he would willingly sacrifice life -itself, what can console him? By day and night he has no peace, and -is irritable to all. Some men have even slain their wives, without -succeeding in cooling their own jealous rage. The trials of the wife -were more severe; her words, her very looks and sighs, were watched by -slaves, and reported to her husband, who was too jealous to distinguish -false tales from the true. The poor woman was reduced to the wretched -alternative of keeping her own apartment, or, if she went out, of -rendering an exact account of her proceedings. Untold wealth, sumptuous -fare, troops of servants, distinguished birth, amounted to nothing -when placed in the balance against such miseries as these. If it was -the woman who was jealous, she suffered more than the man, for she -could not keep him at home, or set the servants to watch him. If she -remonstrated with him, she would be told that she had better hold her -tongue, and keep her suspicions to herself. If the husband instituted -a suit against the wife, the laws were favourable to him, and he -could procure her condemnation, and even death; but if she were the -petitioner, he would escape.[198] - -It was very natural that the woman, who, before marriage, was cooped -up like a child in the parental home, should break out afterwards into -extravagance, dissipation, and frivolity, if not worse. An inordinate -amount of time and money was bestowed upon dress, though perhaps not -more than by the fashionable ladies of modern times. Women loaded -themselves with ornaments, under the delusion that these added to -their charms, whereas, Chrysostom observes, if the woman was naturally -beautiful, the ornaments only concealed and detracted from her charms. -If she was ugly, they only set off her ugliness by the glaring -contrast, and the effect on the spectator was ludicrous or painful. -But the adornment of the virgin who had dedicated herself to God was -altogether spiritual. She arrayed herself in gentleness, modesty, -poverty, humility, fasting, vigils. Incorporeal graces and incorporeal -beauty were the objects of her love and contemplation. She treated -enemies with such perfect courtesy and forbearance, that even the -depraved were put to shame in her presence. The goodness of the soul -within overflowed into all her outer actions.[199] From this rapturous -description of a highly spiritual kind of life, Chrysostom passes, -with versatile quickness, to a somewhat ludicrous picture of the petty -cares of life in the world. “The worldly lady thinks it a fine thing -to drive round the Forum; how much better to be independent, and use -her feet for the purpose for which God gave them! There was always some -difficulty about the mules: she and her husband wanted them at the -same time; one or both were lame or turned out to grass. A quiet and -modestly-dressed woman needed no carriage and attendants to protect -her in her passage through the streets, but might walk through the -Forum, free from any annoyance. Some might say it was pleasant to be -waited on by a troop of handmaids; but, on the contrary, such a charge -was attended with much anxiety. Not only had the sick to be taken care -of, but the indolent to be chastised, mischief, quarrels, and all -kinds of evil doings to be corrected; and if there happened to be one -distinguished by personal beauty, jealousy was added to all these other -cares, lest the husband should be so captivated by her charms as to -pay more attention to her than to her mistress.[200] If it was replied -to all these objections against married life, that Abraham and other -saints in the Old Testament were all married men, it must be remembered -that a much higher standard was required under the New Dispensation. -There were degrees of perfection. When Noah was said to be ‘perfect in -his generation,’ it meant relatively to that age in which he lived, for -what is perfect in relation to one era becomes imperfect for another. -Murder was forbidden by the Old Law, but hatred and wrath under the -New. A larger effusion of the Holy Spirit rendered Christian men fully -grown as compared with the children of the Old Dispensation. Degrees of -virtue, impossible then, were attainable now; and as the moral standard -under the Old Dispensation was lower, so the rewards of obedience were -less exalted. The Jews were encouraged to obedience by the promise of -an earthly country, Christians by the prospect of heaven. The Jews -were deterred from sin by menaces of temporal calamity; the Christian, -of eternal punishment. Let us, therefore, not spend our care upon -money-getting and wives and luxurious living, else how shall we ever -become men rather than children, and live in the spirit? for when we -have taken our journey to that other world, the time for contest will -have passed; then those who have not oil in their lamps will be unable -to borrow it from their neighbours, or he who has a soiled garment to -exchange it for another robe. When the Judge’s throne has been placed, -and He is seated upon it, and the fiery stream is ‘coming forth from -before Him’ (Dan. vii. 10), and the scrutiny of past life has begun: -though Noah, Daniel, and Job were to implore an alteration of the -sentence passed upon their own sons and daughters, their intercession -would not avail.”[201] - -The long treatise “De S. Babyla contra Julianum et Gentiles” presents -several interesting subjects for consideration. In the history of -the grove of Daphne we have a singular instance of the way in which -Grecian legend was transplanted into foreign soil. Daphne, the daughter -of the Grecian river-god Ladon, was, according to the Syrian version -of the myth, overtaken by Apollo near Antioch. Here it was, on the -banks, not of the Peneus, but of the Orontes, that the maiden prayed -to her mother earth to open her arms and shelter her from the pursuit -of the amorous god, and that the laurel plant sprang out of the spot -where she disappeared from the eyes of her disappointed lover. The -horse of Seleucus Nicator, founder of the Syrian monarchy, was said -to have struck his hoof upon one of the arrows which Apollo had -dropped in the hurry of his chase; in consequence of which the king -dedicated the place to the god. A temple was erected in his honour, -ample in proportions, and sumptuous in its adornments; the interior -walls were resplendent with polished marbles, the lofty ceiling was of -cypress wood. The colossal image of the god, enriched with gold and -gems, nearly reached the top of the roof; the draped portions were of -wood, the nude portions of marble. The fingers of the deity lightly -touched the lyre which hung from his shoulders, and in the other -hand he held a golden dish, as if about to pour a libation on the -earth, “and supplicate the venerable mother to give to his arms the -cold and beauteous Daphne.”[202] The whole grove became consecrated -to pleasure, under the guise of festivity in honour of the god. A -more beautiful combination of delights cannot well be conceived. The -grove was situated five miles to the south-west of Antioch, among the -outskirts of the hills, where many of the limpid streams, rushing down -towards the valley of the Orontes, mingled their waters. The road -which connected the city with this spot was lined on the left hand -with large gardens and groves, baths, fountains, and resting-places; -on the right were villas with vineyards and rose-gardens irrigated by -rivulets. Daphne itself was, according to Strabo,[203] eighty stadia, -or about ten miles, in circumference. It contained everything which -could gratify and charm the senses; the deep impenetrable shade of -cypress trees, the delicious sound and coolness of falling waters, -the fragrance of aromatic shrubs. Such a combination of all that was -voluptuous told with fatal and enervating effect upon the morals of -a people who were at all times disposed to an immoderate indulgence -in luxurious pleasures. Roman troops, and even Roman emperors, fell -victims to the allurements of the spot.[204] The annual celebration -of the Olympian games instituted here by Commodus was especially the -occasion of shocking excesses of every kind. But by the order of Gallus -Cæsar an attempt was made to introduce a pure association into the spot -hitherto abandoned to the licentiousness of pagan rites. The remains -of Babylas, the Bishop of Antioch, who had suffered martyrdom in the -reign of Decius, were transferred from their resting-place in the city -to the grove of Daphne. The chapel or martyry erected over the bones of -the Christian saint stood hard by the temple of the pagan deity. Here -it confronted the Christian visitor, as a warning to him not to take -part in pagan and licentious rites, abhorrent to the faith for which -the Bishop had died. But the remains of the martyr were not permitted -to rest in peace. When Julian visited Antioch, he consulted the oracle -of Apollo at Daphne respecting the issue of the expedition which he -was about to make into Persia. But the oracle was dumb. At length the -god yielded to the importunity of repeated prayers and sacrifices so -far as to explain the cause of his silence. He was disturbed by the -proximity of a dead body: “Break open the sepulchres, take up the -bones, and remove them hence.” The demand was interpreted as referring -to the remains of Babylas, and the wishes of the crestfallen oracle -were complied with.[205] But the insult done to the Christian martyr -was speedily avenged. Soon after the accomplishment of the impious -act, a violent thunderstorm broke over the temple, and the lightning -consumed both the roof of the building and the statue of the deity. At -the time when Chrysostom wrote, some twenty years after the occurrence, -the mournful wreck was yet standing; but the chapel again contained the -relics of the saint and martyr, and conferred blessings on the pilgrims -who resorted thither in crowds. The ruined and deserted temple, side -by side with the carefully-preserved church of the martyr, thronged -by devotees, presented a striking emblem of the fate of paganism, -crumbling and vanishing away before the presence of the new faith, -blasted by the lightning flash of a mightier force. A great portion of -the treatise of Chrysostom is occupied by an analysis of his old master -Libanius’s elegy over the fate of the stricken shrine of pagan worship. -The affected and inflated tone of the sophist’s composition deserves -the sarcasm and scorn which his pupil unsparingly pours upon it. - - - - -CHAPTER VIII. - - ORDINATION TO THE PRIESTHOOD BY FLAVIAN—INAUGURAL - DISCOURSE IN THE CATHEDRAL—HOMILIES AGAINST THE - ARIANS—ANIMADVERSIONS ON THE CHARIOT RACES. A.D. 386. - - -Chrysostom had used the office of a deacon well. The lofty tone of -Christian piety, the boldness, the ability, the command of language -manifested in his writings, marked him out as eminently qualified for -a preacher. His treatises, indeed, are distinguished by a vehemence -and energy which belong more to the fervour of the orator than to the -calmness of the writer. No doubt also men had not forgotten the talent -for speaking which he had displayed when he began to practise, nearly -twenty years before, as a lawyer. The Bishop Flavian ordained him a -priest in 386, and immediately appointed him to be one of the most -frequent preachers in the church. The bishop of a see like Antioch -at that time rather resembled the rector of a large town parish than -the bishop of modern times. He resided in Antioch, and discharged the -duties of a chief pastor, assisted by his staff of priests and deacons. -Where the whole Christian population amounted to not more than 100,000 -souls, as in Antioch,[206] that division into distinct districts, -such as were formed in Alexandria,[207] Rome, and Constantinople, -with separate churches, served by members of the central staff in -rotation, or by pastors especially appropriated to them, does not seem -to have been made. Chrysostom officiated and preached in the great -church, where the bishop also officiated. The less learned and less -able priests were appointed to the less responsible duties of visiting -the sick and the poor, and administering the sacraments. The vocation -of Chrysostom, however, was especially that of a teacher. It will be -readily acknowledged how difficult, how delicate an office preaching -was, in an age when Christianity and Paganism were still existing side -by side, and when the opinions of many men were floating in suspense -between the old faith and the new, and were liable to be distracted -from a firm hold upon the truth by Judaism and heresies of every shade. - -Either on the occasion of his ordination, or very soon after it, -Chrysostom preached an inaugural discourse, in the presence of the -bishop. It is distinguished by that flowery and exaggerated kind of -rhetoric which he occasionally displays in all its native oriental -luxuriance, and which is due to the school in which he was brought up, -rather than to the man. On such a public and formal occasion he appears -less as the Christian teacher than as the scholar of Libanius the -Rhetorician. His self-disparagement at the opening of his discourse, -and his flattering encomiums on Flavian and Meletius at the close, -would to modern, certainly at least to English, ears sound intolerably -affected. No doubt, however, they were acceptable to the taste of -his audience at Antioch; and, indeed, the whole discourse contains -nothing more overstrained or ornate than is to be found in some of -the most celebrated performances of the great French preachers in the -seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. - -A few paraphrases will suffice to illustrate the character of his -discourse. - -“He could scarcely believe what had befallen him, that he, an -insignificant and abject youth,[208] should find himself elevated to -such a height of dignity. The spectacle of so vast a multitude hanging -in expectation on his lips quite unnerved him, and would have dried up -fountains of eloquence, had he possessed such. How, then, could he hope -that his little trickling stream of words would not fail, and that the -feeble thoughts which he had put together with so much labour would not -vanish from his mind? - -“Wherefore he besought them to pray earnestly that he might be inspired -with courage to open his mouth boldly in this hitherto unattempted -work.[209] He wished to offer the first-fruits of his speech in praise -to God. As the tiller of the ground gave of his wheat, grapes, or -olives, so he would fain make an offering in kind; he would ‘praise the -name of God with a song, and magnify it with thanksgiving.’ But the -consciousness of sin made him shrink from the task, for as in a wreath -not only must the flowers be clean, but also the hands which wove it, -so in sacred hymns not only must the words be holy, but also the soul -of him who composed them. The words of the wise man who said, ‘praise -is not becoming in the mouth of a sinner,’[210] sealed up his lips, and -when David invited all creation, animate and inanimate, visible and -invisible, to ‘praise the Lord of Heaven, to praise him in the height,’ -he did not include the sinner in the invitation. He would rather -therefore dilate on the merits of some of his fellow-men who were -worthier than himself. The mention of their Christian virtues would be -an indirect way, legitimate for a sinner, of paying glory and honour -to God himself. And to whom should he address his praises first but -to their bishop, whom he might call the teacher of their country, and -through their country of the world at large? To enter fully, however, -into his manifold virtues was to dive into so deep a sea that he -feared he should lose himself in its profundities. To do justice to the -task would require an inspired and apostolic tongue. He must confine -himself to a few points. Although reared in the midst of affluence, -Flavian had surmounted the difficulties which impeded the entrance of -a rich man into the kingdom of heaven. He had been distinguished from -youth by perfect temperance and control over the bodily appetites, -by contempt of luxury and a costly table. Though untimely deprived -of parental care, and exposed to the temptations incident to wealth, -youth, and good birth, yet had he triumphed over them all. He had -assiduously cultivated his mind, and had put the bridle of fasting on -his body sufficient to curb excess, without impairing its strength and -usefulness; and though he had now glided into the haven of a calm old -age, yet he did not relax the severity of this personal discipline. -The death of their beloved father Meletius had caused great distress -and perplexity to the Church, but the appearance of his successor had -dispersed it, as clouds vanished before the sun. When Flavian mounted -the episcopal throne, Meletius himself seemed to have risen from his -tomb.” - -All that can be collected from history respecting Flavian’s character -confirms and justifies these eulogiums, though English taste would -prefer them to have been uttered after his death rather than in his -actual presence. Chrysostom concludes by saying that he had prolonged -his address beyond the bounds which became his position, but the -flowery field of praise had tempted him to linger. “He would conclude -his task by asking their prayers: prayers that their common mother -the Church might remain undisturbed and steadfast, and that the life -of their father, teacher, spiritual shepherd, and pilot, might be -prolonged; prayers finally that he, the preacher, might be strengthened -to bear the yoke which was laid upon him, might in the great day -restore safely the deposit which his Master had committed to his trust, -and obtain mercy for his sins through the grace and goodness of the -Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory, and power, and worship for ever -and ever.” - -We now enter on a period of ten years, during which Chrysostom -constantly resided in Antioch, and was occupied in the almost incessant -labour of preaching. The main bulk of those voluminous works which have -been preserved to our times belongs to this period; yet there can be -no doubt that, numerous as are the extant works, they represent but a -fraction of the discourses which he actually delivered. For we know, -on his own authority, that he frequently preached twice, occasionally -oftener, in the course of a week.[211] - -It does not fall within the scope of this essay to determine how many -of the homilies which we possess were delivered in each year, or to -enter into a critical examination of every set. But an attempt will be -made to extract from them whatever seems to throw light upon the life -and times of their author, upon events in which he played a conspicuous -part, or which were of great public importance; whatever also -illustrates the special condition of the Church,—her general practice, -her merits and defects, the dangers and difficulties with which, from -dissension within or heresy without, she had at this era to contend. - -The field of subjects on which the preacher was called to exercise -his powers was varied and extensive. Christianity was imperilled by -corruption of morals and corruption of faith. Not the laity only, -but the clergy also, at least in the great towns, had become deeply -infected by the prevalent follies and vices of the age. Again, -between the orthodox Christian and the Pagan every variety of heresy -intervened. The Arian, the Manichæan, the Marcionite, the Sabellian, -the Jew,—all were, so to say, touching and fraying the edge of pure -Christianity; the danger was, lest they should gradually so wear it -away as to injure the very vitals of the faith. Such were the evils -which Chrysostom bent his energies to redress, such the enemies whom he -manfully endeavoured to repel. He is alternately the champion of a pure -morality and of a sound faith. - -Among the discourses which belong to the first year of his priesthood -falls one delivered in commemoration of Bishop Meletius, the -predecessor of Flavian.[212] He had died at Constantinople about -the end of May A.D. 381, and Chrysostom in the commencement of his -homily remarks, that five years had now elapsed since the bishop had -taken his journey to the “Saviour of his longings.” The tone of the -discourse illustrates a characteristic of the times; a passionate -devotion to the memory of departed saints which was rapidly passing -into actual adoration; a subject on which more will be said hereafter. -The shrine which contained the reliques of Meletius was placed in the -sight of the preacher and the congregation, who swarmed round it like -bees.[213] When Chrysostom looked at the great multitude assembled -he congratulated the holy Meletius on enjoying such honour after his -death, and he congratulated the people also on the endurance of their -affection to their late spiritual father. Meletius was like the sound -root which though invisible proved its strength by the vigour of -its fruit. When he had returned from his first banishment the whole -Christian population had streamed forth to meet him. Happy those who -succeeded in clasping his feet, kissing his hand, hearing his voice. -Others who beheld him only at a distance felt that they too had -obtained a blessing from the mere sight. A kind of spiritual glory -emanated from his holy person, even as the shadows of St. Peter and St. -John had healed the sick on whom they fell. “Let us all, rulers and -ruled, men and women, old and young, free men and slaves, offer prayer, -taking the blessed Meletius into partnership with this our prayer -(since he has more confidence now in offering prayer, and entertains a -warmer affection towards us), that our love may be increased and that -as now we stand beside his shrine, so one day we may all be permitted -to approach his resting-place in the other world.” - -The discourses of Chrysostom against Arians and Jews fall within the -first year of his priesthood.[214] They are among the finest of his -productions, and deserve perusal on account of their intrinsic merit -no less than of the important points of doctrine with which they -are concerned. Antioch, indeed, may in some sort be regarded as the -cradle of Arianism. Paul of Samosata, who was deposed from the see of -Antioch in A.D. 272, advocated doctrines of a Sabellian character, but -that sophistical dialectical school of thought of which the Arians -were the most conspicuous representatives may be traced to him. His -original calling had been that of a sophist, and he was therefore by -training more fitted to attack established doctrines than to build up -a definite system of his own. Hence it is not surprising that, though -his own tendency was to Sabellian opinions, Lucian, his intimate -friend and fellow-countryman, held doctrines diametrically opposite, -or what were afterwards called Arian.[215] Lucian, when presbyter at -Antioch, was the teacher of Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia, of Leontius, -the Arian Bishop of Antioch, and perhaps also of Arius himself.[216] -Aëtius, and his pupil Eunomius, originators of the most extreme and -undisguised form of Arianism, resided in the beginning of their career -at Antioch. Eunomius, in fact, was the founder of a sect which was -called Eunomian after him; or sometimes Anomœan, because it denied not -only equality but even similarity (ὁμοιότης) between the Father and -the Son in the Holy Trinity. It was the most materialistic phase which -Arianism developed. Mystery was to be eliminated from revelation as -much as possible, sacramental grace was little recognised, asceticism -disparaged. Adherents of this school seem to have existed still in -some force at Antioch. A system marked by so much of cold intellectual -pride was especially repugnant to the fervid and humble faith of -Chrysostom. Yet in his assaults upon it he was neither precipitate nor -harsh. In his first homily “On the incomprehensible Nature of God,” he -says that, having observed several persons who were infected by this -heresy listening to his discourses, he had abstained from attacking -their errors, wishing to gain a firmer hold upon their interest before -engaging with them in controversy. But having been invited by them to -undertake the contest, he could not decline it, but would endeavour to -conduct it in a spirit of gentleness and love, since “the servant of -the Lord must not strive, but be gentle towards” all, as well as “apt -to teach.” He urges all disputants to remember our Lord’s answer when -He was buffeted, “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but -if well, why smitest thou me?”[217] - -He dilates on the arrogance of the Anomœans in pretending to understand -and to define the exact nature of God. “Professing themselves wise -they only discovered their folly. Imperfect knowledge on so profound a -subject was an inevitable part of the imperfection of our human state. -The condition of our present knowledge was this: we know many things -_about_ God, but we do not know _how_ they are or take place. For -example, we may know that He is everywhere and without beginning or -end, but _how_ He is thus, we know not. We know that He begat the Son, -and that the Holy Spirit proceeded from Him, but _how_ these things -can be we are unable to tell. This is analogous to our knowledge of -many things which are called natural. We eat various kinds of food, but -_how_ they nourish us and are transmuted into the several humours of -the body we do not understand.”[218] - -“Again, if the wisest and holiest men have confessed themselves -incompetent to fathom the _purposes_ and _dispensations_ of God, how -far more inscrutable must His _essence_ be! If David exclaims ‘Such -knowledge is too wonderful and excellent for me, I cannot attain unto -it;’ and St. Paul, ‘Oh the depth of the riches and wisdom of God! how -unsearchable are His judgments, how untraceable His ways!’ if the very -angels do not presume to discuss the nature of God, but humbly adore -Him with veiled faces, crying ‘Holy, Holy, Holy,’ how monstrous is the -conceit and irreverence of those who curiously investigate and pretend -to define the exact nature of the Godhead!”[219] - -He proceeds to dwell upon the littleness and feebleness of man, as -contrasted with the amazing and boundless power of God. The Eunomians -maintained that man could know the nature of God as much as God Himself -knew it. “What mad presumption was this! The Prophets exhaust all -available metaphors to express the insignificance of man as compared -with God. Men are ‘dust and ashes,’ ‘grass,’ and the ‘flower of -grass,’ ‘a vapour,’ ‘a shadow.’ Inanimate creation acknowledges the -irresistible supremacy of His power; ‘if He do but touch the hills they -shall smoke,’ ‘He shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars -thereof tremble’ (Job ix. 6).” “Seest thou not yon sky, how beautiful -it is, how vast, spangled with what a choir of stars? Five thousand -years and more has it stood, yet length of time has left no mark of -old age upon it: like a youthful vigorous body it retains the beauty -with which it was endowed at the beginning. This beautiful, this vast, -this starry, this ancient firmament, was made by that God into whose -nature you curiously pry, was made with as much ease as a man might for -pastime construct a hovel: ‘He established the sky like a roof, and -stretched it out like a tent over the earth’ (Isa. xl. 22). The solid, -durable earth He made, and all the nations of the world, even as far -as the British Isles, are but as a drop in a bucket; and shall man, who -is but an infinitesimal part of this drop, presume to inquire into the -nature of Him who made all these forces and whom they obey?”[220] “God -dwells in the light which no man can approach unto. If the light which -surrounds Him be inaccessible, how much more God Himself who is within -it? St. Paul rebukes those who presume to question the dispensation of -God. ‘Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall -the thing formed say unto him that formed it, Why hast thou made me -thus?’ How much more, then, would he have reproved dogmatic assumptions -respecting the nature of the great Dispenser?[221] The declaration -of St. John, that no man had seen God at any time, might appear at -variance with the descriptions in the prophets of visions of the Deity. -As: ‘I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, high and lifted up’ (Isa. -vi. 1). ‘I saw the Lord standing above the altar’ (Amos ix. 1). ‘I -beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did -sit, whose garment was white as snow,’ etc. (Dan. vii. 9). But the very -variety of forms under which God is said to have appeared proves that -these manifestations were merely condescensions to the weakness of -human nature, which requires something that the eye can see and the ear -can hear. They were only manifestations of the Deity adapted to man’s -capacity; not the Divine Nature itself, which is simple, incomposite, -devoid of shape. So also, when it is said of God the Son that He is -‘in the bosom of the Father,’ when He is described as standing, or -sitting, on the right hand of God, these expressions must not be -interpreted in too material a sense; they are expressions accommodated -to our understandings, to convey an idea of such an intimate union and -equality between the two Persons as is in itself incomprehensible.”[222] - -And this leads him on to consider the second error of the Arians—their -denial of absolute equality between the three Persons in the Godhead. -His arguments are based, as usual, entirely on an appeal to Holy -Scripture. He makes a skilful selection and combination of texts to -prove his point: that the titles “God” and “Lord” are common to the -first two Persons in the Trinity—the names Father and Son being added -merely to distinguish the Personality. Had the Father alone been God, -then it would have been superfluous to add the name Father at all: -“there is one God” would have been sufficient. But, as it was, the -titles “God” and “Lord” were applied to both Persons to prove their -equality in respect of Godhead. That the appellation of Lord no way -indicated inferiority was plain, because it was frequently applied to -the Father. “The Lord our God is one Lord,” Exod. xx. 2. “Great is our -Lord, and great is his power,” Ps. cxlvii. 5. On the other hand, Christ -is frequently entitled _God_, e.g. “Immanuel—_God_ with us.” “Christ -according to the flesh, who is over all, _God_ blessed for ever.” In -some instances the Father and the Son are both called Lord, or both -God, in the _same_ passage; as, for example, “The Lord said unto my -Lord, ... Thy throne, O God (the Son), is for ever and ever; ... -wherefore God (the Father), even thy God, hath anointed thee with the -oil of gladness,” etc.[223] - -The reason why Christ sometimes acted and spoke in a manner which -implied human infirmity and inferiority to the Father was twofold: -First, that men might be convinced that He did really, substantially, -exist in the truth of our human nature; that He was not a mere -phantom—the error of Marcion, Manes, and Valentinus—an error which -would have been still more prevalent had He not so clearly manifested -the reality of his humanity. On the other hand, He was reserved and -cautious in declaring the highest mystery—his divine union and -equality with the Father—out of condescension to the weakness of man’s -intellect, which recoiled from the more recondite mysteries. When He -told them that “Abraham rejoiced to see his day,” that “before Abraham -was He was,” “that the bread from heaven was his flesh, which He would -give for the life of the world,” that “hereafter they should see the -Son of Man coming in the clouds,” they were invariably offended. But, -on the contrary, He was chiefly accepted when He spoke words implying -more humiliation—for example, “I can of my own self do nothing, but as -my Father taught me, even so I speak.” “As He spake these words,” we -are told, “many believed on Him.”[224] - -Two other reasons might be assigned for this language of -self-abasement. One was, that He came to teach us humility,—“Learn of -me, for I am meek and lowly of heart.” He “came not to be ministered -unto but to minister.” He who bids others be lowly must first and -pre-eminently be lowly himself. Therefore He performed such acts -as washing his disciples’ feet; and the Incarnation itself was no -sign, as the Arian maintained, of inferiority, but only the highest -expression of that great principle of self-sacrificing love which He -came to teach. Lastly, by such language He directs our minds to the -apprehension of a clear distinction between the Persons in the Godhead. -If his sayings about Himself had all been of the same type as “I and my -Father are one,” the Sabellian error of confounding the Persons would -have become yet more prevalent than it was. Thus, we find throughout -our Lord’s life, in his acts and language, a careful mixture and -variation of character in order to present the two elements—the human -and divine—in equal proportions. He predicts his own sufferings and -death, yet quickly afterwards He prays the Father that He might be, if -possible, spared undergoing them. In the first act is pure divinity; -in the second, humanity shrinking from that pain which is abhorrent to -human nature.[225] - -This very fact, however, of our Lord’s praying, was laid hold of by -the Arians to prove the inferiority of his nature. This argument -Chrysostom meets in Homilies IX. and X. The raising of Lazarus had been -read in the Gospel for the day. “I perceive,” he says, “that many of -the Jews and heretics will find an excuse, in the prayer offered by -Christ before performing this miracle, to impugn his power, and say -He could not have done it without the Father’s assistance.” But this -fell to the ground, because on most other occasions our Lord wrought -his miracles without any prayer at all. To the dead maiden he simply -said, “Talitha cumi,” and she arose; the woman with an issue of blood -was healed without any word or touch from Him. In the case of Lazarus -He prayed, as He Himself declared, for the sake of the people, that -they might perceive that God heard his prayers—that there was a perfect -unanimity between the Father and the Son. Martha, in fact, had asked -for a prayer—“I know whatsoever thou shalt ask of God, God will give it -thee;” therefore He prayed; just as, when the centurion said, “Speak -the word only,” He spake the word and the servant was healed. If He had -needed help He would have invoked it before all his miracles. In fact -there was no kind of sovereign power which He hesitated to exercise. -“Son, be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee” ... “the Son of man -hath power on earth to forgive sins;”—to an evil spirit, “_I_ charge -thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him;” ... “to them of -old it was said, Thou shalt not kill; but _I_ say, whosoever is angry -with his brother without a cause,” etc. He represents Himself as saying -on the final day, “Come, ye blessed;” or “Depart, ye cursed.” Thus He -claims authority to absolve, to judge, to legislate. - -Homilies XI. and XII., against the Anomœans, were delivered some -ten years later at Constantinople, but as they contain no special -references to the events of that time, the continuity of this subject -may be maintained by extracting from them the argument there employed -to prove the equality of the Son with the Father. It is based on the -passage, “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work” (St. John v. 17); by -which our Saviour justified Himself from the accusation of breaking the -Sabbath when He healed the paralytic. The words “My Father worketh,” -Chrysostom observes, refer to the daily operations of God’s providence, -by which he sustains in being those things which he commanded into -existence. - -This upholding energy, our Lord declares, is active at all times and on -all days alike; and if it were not, the fabric of the universe would -fall to pieces. He claims a similar right to providential rule, which -implies equality with the Father. “My Father worketh, _and I_ work.” If -the Son had been inferior, such a method of justifying Himself would -only have added force to the charges of his enemies. If a subject of -the Emperor were to put on the imperial diadem and purple, it would be -no excuse to say that he wore them _because_ the Emperor wore them—“the -Emperor wears them, _and I_ wear them;”—on the contrary, it would -augment the offensiveness of his presumption and arrogance. If Christ -were not equal with the Father, it was the height of presumption to use -those words, “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.” - -In dealing with such lengthy homilies, it has been impossible to do -more than give specimens in a very condensed form of the main lines -of argument which Chrysostom adopts. They vary greatly in value; but -two points cannot fail to arrest the notice of any one who reads these -homilies through:—First, the profound acquaintance of their author -with Holy Scripture; extending apparently with equal force to every -part of the sacred volume. Old and New Testament and Apocrypha are -almost equally employed for argument, illustration, adornment; he is at -home everywhere. Secondly, upon Scripture all his arguments are based: -in none of his controversial homilies does Chrysostom take his stand -upon the platform of existing tradition, or rely on the authority of -the Church alone; “to the law and to the testimony” is always the way -with him. And this was a test at that time universally accepted. The -dispute with the most rationalistic and critical Arians seems never to -have turned on the _authority_, but only on the _interpretation_ of -Scripture. Scripture is appealed to as the supreme court for trying all -their differences; the only question was, as to the exact meaning of -its decisions. - -Again, we cannot fail to be struck by the ease and rapidity with which -he glances off from the most controversial and theological parts of his -discourse to practical reproof and exhortation. Nothing provoked him -more than to see the bulk of that large concourse of people, who had -been listening with profound attention to his address, leave the church -just as the celebration of the Eucharist was about to commence. “Deeply -do I groan to perceive that when your fellow-servant is speaking, -great is your earnestness, strained your attention, you crowd one upon -another, and stay till the very end; but that, when Christ is about -to appear in the holy mysteries, the church is empty and deserted.... -If my words had been laid up in your hearts they would have kept you -here, and brought you to the celebration of these most solemn mysteries -with greater piety; but as it is, my speech seems as fruitless as -the performance of a lute-player, for as soon as I have finished you -depart. Away with the frigid excuse of many: I can say prayers at -home, but I cannot at home hear homilies and doctrine. Thou deceivest -thyself, O man; you may indeed pray at home, but it is impossible to -pray _in the same manner_ as at church, where there is so large an -assembly of your spiritual fathers, and the cry of the worshippers -is sent up with one accord; where there is unanimity and concert in -prayer; and where the priests preside, that the weaker supplications -of the multitude being supported by theirs, which are more powerful, -may ascend together with these to heaven. First prayer, then discourse; -so say the Apostles—“But we will give ourselves to _prayer and_ to the -ministry of the word.”[226] - -Again, as frequently in other discourses, he reproves the congregation -for testifying their admiration of his words by applause. “You praise -what I have said, you receive my exhortation with tumults of applause; -but show your approbation by obedience; that is the praise which I -seek, the applause which comes through deeds.”[227] - -His hearers, in fact, were so closely packed, and so much absorbed in -listening to his discourse, that pickpockets often practised on them -with some success. Chrysostom advises them, therefore, to bring no -money or ornaments about their persons to church. It was a device of -the devil, who hoped by means of this annoyance to chill their zeal -in attending the services, just as he stripped Job of everything, not -merely to make him poor but to rob him if possible of his piety.[228] - -But the most inveterate enemy with which Chrysostom had to contend -was the circus. Against this he declaims with all the vehemence of -Evangelical invectives against horse-racing in modern times. The -indomitable passion for the chariot-races, and the silly eagerness -displayed about them by the inhabitants of Rome, Constantinople, and -Antioch, are among the most remarkable symptoms of the depraved state -of society under the later Empire. The whole populace was divided -into factions distinguished by the different colours adopted by the -charioteers, of which green and blue were the two chief favourites. -The animosity, the sanguinary tumults, the superstitions,[229] -folly, violence of every kind, which were mixed up with these popular -amusements, well deserved the unsparing severity with which they were -lashed by the great preacher. - -A few specimens shall be collected here from other homilies, as well as -from those immediately under consideration. - -“Again we have the horse-races; again our assembly is thinned. There -were many indeed whose absence he little regretted: they were to -the faithful amongst the congregation only as leaves to fruit.[230] -Sometimes, however, the church was deserted by those of whom he had -expected more fidelity. He felt disheartened, like a sower who had -scattered good seed plentifully, but with no adequate result. Gladly -and eagerly would he continue his exertions could he see any fruit of -his labours; but when, forgetful of all his exhortations and warnings, -and solemn remindings of the terrible doom, the unquenchable fire, -the undying worm, they again abandoned themselves to the diabolical -exhibitions of the race-course, with what heart could he return -to the unthankful task? They manifested, indeed, by applause, the -pleasure with which they heard his words, and then they hurried off -to the circus, and, sitting side by side with Jew or Pagan, they -applauded with a kind of frenzied eagerness the efforts of the several -charioteers; they rushed tumultuously along, jostling one another, and -shouting, ‘that horse didn’t run fairly,’ ‘that was tripped up and -fell,’ and the like.[231] Various excuses were pleaded for absence -from church—the exigencies of business, poverty, ill health, lameness; -but these impediments never prevented attendance at the Hippodrome. -In the church the chief places even were not always all occupied, but -_there_ old and young, rich and poor, crowded every available space -for standing or sitting; pushing, and squeezing, and trampling on -one another’s feet, while the sun poured down on their heads: yet -they appeared thoroughly to enjoy themselves, in spite of all these -discomforts; while in the church the length of the sermon, or the heat, -or the crowd, were perpetual subjects of complaint.”[232] - -Such are a few illustrations of one, but perhaps the most notable, -form among many in which the impulsiveness and frivolity of the people -of Antioch were displayed. “The building which the preacher had so -laboriously and industriously reared in the hearts of his disciples was -thus cruelly dashed down and levelled to the very ground by a few hours -of dissolving pleasure and iniquitous frivolity.”[233] - -Truly indeed might the lamentation of the prophet over the evanescent -piety of Ephraim and Judah have been applied to these people: “Your -goodness is as a morning cloud, and as the early dew it goeth away” -(Hos. vi. 4). - - - - -CHAPTER IX. - - HOMILIES AGAINST PAGANS AND JEWS—CONDITION OF THE JEWS IN - ANTIOCH—JUDAISING CHRISTIANS—HOMILIES ON CHRISTMAS DAY - AND NEW YEAR’S DAY—CENSURE OF PAGAN SUPERSTITIONS. A.D. - 386, 387. - - -In dealing with the Arians, the contest mainly turned, as has been -pointed out in the previous chapter, on the interpretation of -Scripture; but in doing battle with Pagans and Jews, with the former -especially, Chrysostom had of course to take up a different attitude. -The method which he adopts towards the Jew is to demonstrate the -fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy in the person and work of Jesus -Christ, and to insist on the consequent abrogation of the Jewish -dispensation. The ground on which he mainly relies against the Pagan is -the miraculous establishment and progress of Christianity in the face -of unprecedented opposition, as an evidence of its divine origin. - -The treatise addressed to Jews and Gentiles combined exhibits a -powerful application of both these methods.[234] “He would first of -all enter the lists against the Pagan. And here caution was requisite. -He would not say, when the Pagan asked how the divinity of Christ was -to be proved, that Christ created the world, raised the dead, healed -the sick, expelled demons, promised a resurrection and a heavenly -kingdom, because these were the very questions upon which they joined -issue. But he would start from a ground which even the Pagan would -accept: no one would venture to deny that the Christian religion was -founded by Jesus Christ, and from this simple fact he would undertake -to prove that Christ could be no less than God. No mere man could, in -so short a time, with such feeble instruments, and in the face of such -opposition arising from inveterate custom and forms of faith, have -subdued so many and such various races of mankind.[235] How contrary -to the common course of events, that He who was despised, weak, and -put to an ignominious death, should now be honoured and adored in all -regions of the earth! Emperors who have made laws, and altered the -constitution of states, who have ruled nations by their nod, in whose -hands was the power of life and death, pass away; their images are in -time destroyed, their actions forgotten, their adherents despised, -their very names buried in oblivion:—present grandeur is succeeded by -nothingness. In the case of Jesus Christ all is reversed. During his -lifetime, all seemed failure and degradation, but a career of glory -and triumph succeeded his death.[236] Before his death Judas betrayed -him, St. Peter denied him; after his death, St. Peter and the rest -of the Apostles traversed the world to bear witness to his truth, -and thousands of people have died rather than utter what the chief -of the Apostles once uttered from fear of a maid-servant’s taunts. -‘His rest shall be glorious:’—this was true, not only of the Master, -but also of his disciples. In that most royal city of Rome, monarchs, -prefects, generals, flocked to the sepulchres of the fisherman and the -tent-maker; and in Constantinople they who wore the diadem were content -to lay their bones in the porch of the Apostles’ Church, and to become -as it were the door-keepers of humble fishermen.[237] Christ had made -the most ignominious death, and the instrument of it, glorious. It -was written, ‘Cursed is he that hangeth on a tree,’ yet the cross had -become the object of desire and love; it was more honourable than the -whole world, for the imperial crown itself was not such an ornament -to the head: princes and subjects, men and women, bond and free, all -delighted to wear it imprinted on the brow. It was conspicuous on the -Holy Table, and in the ceremony of ordaining priests; in houses, in -market-places, by the wayside, and on mountain sides, on couches and -on garments, on ships, on drinking vessels, in mural decorations, the -cross was depicted. Whence all this extraordinary honour to a piece of -wood, unless the power of him who died upon it was divine?”[238] - -Christ had declared that the gates of hell should not prevail against -his Rock-founded Church. How far had this prediction been verified? In -a short space of time Christianity had abolished ancestral customs, -plucked up deeply-rooted habits, overturned altars and temples, caused -unclean rites and ceremonials to vanish away. Christian altars had been -erected in Italy, in Persia, in Scythia, in Africa. “What say I? even -the British Isles, which lie outside the boundaries of our world and -our sea, in the midst of the ocean itself, have experienced the power -of the Word, for even there churches and altars have been set up.” -Thus the world had been, so to say, cleared of thorns, and purified to -receive the seed of godliness. What a proof of superhuman power! The -progress of the Church had been encountered by customs which were not -only venerated but pleasant; yet these traditions, handed down through -long lines of ancestors, were abandoned for a religion far more severe -and laborious, a religion which substituted fasting for enjoyment, -poverty for money-getting, temperance for lasciviousness, meekness for -wrath, benevolence for ill-will. Men who had long been enervated -by luxury, and accustomed to the broad way, had been converted into -the narrow, rugged path, not by tens or twenties, but by multitudes -under the whole heaven. By whose agency had these mighty results been -wrought? By a few unlearned obscure men, without illustrious ancestors, -without money, without eloquence.[239] And all this in the teeth -of opposition of the most varied kind. For where the new doctrine -penetrated, it excited divisions and strife; children were set at -variance with parents, brother with brother, husband with wife, master -with servant. Yet, in spite of persecution and disruption of social -ties, the new faith grew and flourished. How could such unprecedented -marvels have come to pass but through the divine power, and in -obedience to that Word of God which is creative of actual results? Just -as, when He said “Let the earth bring forth grass,” the wilderness -became a garden, so when the expression of His purpose had gone forth, -“I will build my Church,” straightway the process began, and though -tyrants and people, sophists and orators, custom and religion, had been -arrayed against it, yet the Word, going forth like fire, consumed the -thorns, and scattered the good seed over the purified soil.[240] - -In attempting to convince the Jews of the divinity of Jesus Christ by -proving the exact fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy in his person -and work, Chrysostom displays that intimate familiarity with every part -of Scripture which is his eminent characteristic. - -The passages are, on the whole, most judiciously selected; some -corresponding passage from the New Testament being placed, if possible, -against each, with a careful attention even to verbal parallelism. For -instance, against the passage in Isaiah, “The Spirit of the Lord shall -_rest_ upon him,” he places the verse from St. John i. 32, “I beheld -the Spirit descending like a dove, and it _abode_ upon him.”[241] He -refers each event in Christ’s life, his Incarnation, his rejection by -the Jews, his betrayal, crucifixion, burial, resurrection, the descent -of the Holy Ghost, and the beginning of the Apostolic labours to some -corresponding prediction.[242] He sometimes, however, falls into the -error, less common in him than in other patristic interpreters, of -seeing direct references to the Messiah and the Messianic kingdom, to -the almost total exclusion of any other meaning. For instance, such -passages as “Their sound is gone out into all lands,” “That thou mayest -make princes in all lands,” are cited as if exclusively predictive of -the propagation of Christianity. In such words as “The virgins that be -her fellows shall bear her company,” he sees a distinct foreshadowing -of the honour to be paid to virginity under Christianity.[243] In other -passages, again, he is misled by ignorance of the Hebrew, and a too -literal adherence to the Septuagint translation. In the passage, “I -will make thy officers peace,” thine “exactors” being rendered in the -Septuagint bishops or overseers, he extracts from this word a direct -reference to the Christian priesthood.[244] “He shall descend like rain -into a fleece of wool” is interpreted as significant of the extreme -secrecy of Christ’s birth, and the noiseless gentleness with which his -kingdom was founded.[245] Whereas, the strict translation being “like -rain upon new-mown grass,” it is rather illustrative of the fruitful -results of Christ’s advent.[246] - -Such occasional defects, however, will not prevent us from according -the praise due to the great skill with which, on the whole, he has -worked out this method of argument, and the noble vindication of -Christianity in this treatise has seldom if ever been surpassed by -Chrysostom elsewhere. The several parts of his argument are unfolded in -orderly procession, and expressed with an eloquence at once luminous -and earnest, and which, though at times copious and ornate, does not -degenerate into the mere redundancy, still less into the affectations -and flowery artifices, of rhetoric; he is always real and earnest, he -is sometimes sublime. - -Closely connected with this treatise in subject, and not far distant -in time of composition, are the Homilies directed against Jews and -Judaising Christians. The Jews, ever since the time of Antiochus the -Great, were a considerable body in Antioch, and over the Christian -population exerted a seriously pernicious influence. Their position, -indeed, in the Empire at large had been increasingly favourable from -the reign of Hadrian to Constantine. Though they were not permitted -to approach Jerusalem, yet the worship in their synagogues was freely -tolerated; they were permitted to circumcise their own children though -not the children of proselytes; and their religious organisation -in the Empire was held together under the sway of the Patriarch of -Tiberias.[247] After the recognition of Christianity by the Empire, -the Jews, as a natural consequence, were less favourably treated. The -statutes of Constantine and Constantius were severe. Those Jews who -attempted the life of a Christian were to be burned. No Christians were -to become Jews, under pain of punishment. Jews were forbidden to marry -Christian women or to possess Christian slaves. The national character -of the Jew seems to have deteriorated, as the race became more widely -dispersed, and as their wealth and importance increased. They were no -longer indeed so morosely and sullenly proud as when they gloried in -the possession of a holy city and distinct religious ordinances, and -a geographical position which isolated them from the rest of mankind, -but neither were their faith or morals so pure. Self-indulgence, -sensualism, and low cunning corrupted their life; a superstitious and -material cast of thought depraved their faith. Their habits harmonised -too well with that propensity to luxury and licentiousness which was -the besetting vice of the people of Antioch; their materialism worked -hand in hand with the prevailing Arianism, if, indeed, Arianism may -not be regarded as in some sort its product. Certainly, whenever -popular insurrections caused by religious dissensions occurred either -in Antioch or in Alexandria, the Jews ranged themselves on the Arian -side, as if the spirit and character of the Arian sect were the most -congenial to their own.[248] - -Allowing for some exaggerations in the preacher, carried away by the -impulse of the moment, the invectives of Chrysostom must be permitted -to prove that the Jewish residents in Antioch were of a low and vicious -order. They seem to have been regarded by the common people with a -mixture of dislike and awe; the age was superstitious, and the Jews -availed themselves of superstitious terrors to make a livelihood, -especially through a kind of quackery in medicine. Their quarters -are denounced by Chrysostom as dens of robbers and habitations of -demons.[249] A whole day would not suffice to tell the tale of their -extortions, their thefts, their deceptions, their base methods of -traffic, such as the sale of amulets and charms.[250] Their priests -were no better than counterfeits, because they had not gone through all -the elaborate rites of consecration. They had no sacred ephod, no Urim -and Thummim, no altar, no sacrifice, no prophecy. - -The Festival of Trumpets was a scene of great debauchery, more -iniquitous than the proceedings in the theatre. Any catechumen who was -detected attending that festival was to be excluded from the porch of -the church; any communicant so detected was to be denied access to the -Holy Table. The booths erected at the Feast of Tabernacles were like -taverns, crowded with flute-players and ill-conditioned women. The -synagogues were frequented by the most abandoned characters of both -sexes, and dancers, actors, and charioteers were largely drawn from -the Jewish population. In spite of this, many Christians were seduced -to attend the Jewish festivals and fasts, and even to swear Jewish -oaths in the synagogues, under the superstitious impression that such -were more solemn and binding than any Christian forms. He had himself, -only three days ago, rescued a woman being dragged off, against her -will, to take an oath of this kind, by a man who professed himself -a Christian. On stopping to rebuke him in the sternest language, -Chrysostom was shocked to learn that the practice was extremely common -among Christians. He passionately exhorts the faithful to reclaim their -deluded brethren from these pernicious ways:—If twelve Apostles had -converted the larger part of the world, it would be a shame that the -Christians, who were the majority in the population of Antioch, should -fail to allay the plague of Judaism. What treason! what inconsistency, -that they, who worshipped the Crucified One, should associate with -the race which crucified Him.[251] The synagogue ought not to be an -object of reverence because it contained the Books of the Law and the -Prophets, but rather of abhorrence, because those who possessed the -Prophets refused to recognise Him of whom their writings spoke. Was the -temple of Serapis holy because it contained the Septuagint, deposited -there by Ptolemy Philadelphus?[252] - -Christians seem to have attended Jewish services much in that spirit -of curiosity with which Protestants sometimes go to Roman Catholic -churches, to be entertained by music, incense, and a grand ritual. They -maintained that the effect was solemnising; but, observes Chrysostom, -the value of the offering to God depends not on the nature of the -offering, but on the heart of the offerers. The worshippers sanctify -the temple, not the temple the worshippers. You would not touch or -address the murderer of your own son, and will you court the society -of those who slew the Son of God?[253] Let them consider that cry -uttered by the deacon from time to time in the celebration of the holy -mysteries: “Discern one another.”[254] So let them do. “If you discern -any one Judaising, hold him fast and expose him, that you may not -yourself participate in the danger.” - -“In military camps, if any soldier be detected sympathising with the -barbarian or the Persian, not only does he himself run a risk of his -life, but also any of his comrades who were conscious of his defection, -but did not represent it to the general. Since, then, you are the army -of Christ, search diligently whether any stranger has intruded into -your camp, and expose him, not that we may put him to death, but that -we may punish him, deliver him from his error and impiety, and render -him wholly our own; but if you willingly conceal him, be well assured -that you will sustain the same punishment with him.” This homily is -concluded by a solemn adjuration: “In the words of Moses, I call heaven -and earth to record against you this day, that if any of you now -present or absent attend the Feast of Trumpets, or enter a synagogue, -or observe a fast, or a sabbath, or any Jewish rite whatever, I am -guiltless of your blood. These discourses will rise up for both of -us in the great day of our Lord: if you shall have obeyed them, they -will give you confidence; but if otherwise, they will stand as severe -accusers against you.” Therefore he implored them to institute the most -rigorous search after the Judaising brethren. When their mother the -Church had lost a child, it was criminal to conceal either the captor -or the captured; let the men seek out the men, the women the women, the -slave his fellow-servant, and present the culprit to him before the -next assembly. - -Another Judaising practice, which he condemns in the severest -language, was the custom of keeping Easter on the 14th day of the -month, according to Jewish calculation, irrespective of the week-day -on which it might fall; thus sometimes feasting when the rest of -the Church was fasting, or fasting when the rest was feasting. The -existence of such a practice at this time was a remarkable instance of -the increasing influence of the Jews in Antioch and the neighbouring -regions. For up to the year A.D. 276, the Antiochene patriarchate had -observed Easter in conformity with the Catholic usage; the adoption -of the Jewish calculation was made after that date, when most of the -rest of Christendom had dropped it, and was therefore the subject of -special condemnation at the Council of Nice.[255] Such a discrepancy -in practice was regarded as a most serious rent in the unity of the -Church. Chrysostom denounces it especially as a contumacious disregard -of the Council of Nice, which had distinctly ordained by the mouths -of three hundred bishops that Easter should be kept at one and the -same time throughout Christendom. He implores the Judaisers to desist -from the idle inquiry into the exact dates of seasons; to follow the -Church, and to place harmony and charitable peace before all things. -It was impossible, in fact, to fix the actual day on which Christ -rose; therefore let them observe that day which the Church through her -bishops had prescribed. It was a less offence to fast on the wrong -day than to rend the unity of the Church. “How long halt ye between -two opinions?” if Judaism be true, embrace it altogether, and “cease -to annoy the Church; if Christianity be true, abide in it, and follow -it.”[256] - -The Jews themselves could not, in Chrysostom’s opinion, legally perform -sacrifices, or observe festivals of any kind. Jerusalem was the only -place in which such observances were commanded; and Jerusalem being -destroyed they became void.[257] They had been suspended during -the Captivity, to be resumed when the people returned to the holy -soil. If the Jews of the present day also expected restoration, let -them likewise suspend their rites; but, in fact, this never would -occur. The Temple never would be rebuilt, and restoration was a -vain hope. Jerusalem was to be trodden down of Gentiles till the -times of the Gentiles were fulfilled; and by the fulfilment of those -times Chrysostom understood the end of the world.[258] All four -Captivities of the Jews—their subjection to the Egyptians, Babylonians, -Antiochus, and the Romans—had been distinctly foretold. To each of -the _first three_ prophecy had assigned a limit; but to the last -_none_—it reached into all time; there was no sign or intimation of -any probable cessation.[259] The revolt of the Jews under Hadrian, -and under Constantine,[260] had ignominiously failed; the attempt of -Julian to rebuild the Temple had been frustrated by portents: fire -issuing from the foundations had consumed some of the workmen, and -scared the spectators; the naked substructions, left just as they -were when the work was abandoned, presented a visible monument of the -divinely-arrested work.[261] - -The eager exhortation reiterated in his last homily, that the faithful -should seek out their brethren who had been caught in the Jewish -snare, is a powerful rush of indignant eloquence, and a wholesome -admonition on the responsibility of all for the spiritual welfare of -their fellow-men. “Say not within thyself, I am a man of the world; -I have a wife and children; these matters belong to the priests and -the monks. The Samaritan in the parable did not say, Where are the -priests? where are the Pharisees? where are the Jewish authorities? -but seized the opportunity of doing a good deed, as if it was a great -advantage. In like manner, when you see any one requiring bodily or -spiritual care, say not within thyself, Why did not this or that man -attend to him?—but deliver him from his infirmity. If you find a piece -of gold in your path, you do not say, Why did not some other person -pick it up? but you eagerly anticipate others by seizing it yourself. -Even so, in the case of your fallen brethren, consider that you have -found a treasure in them and give the attention necessary for their -wants.” He besought them not to proclaim the calamity of the Church by -idly gossiping about the numbers of those who had observed some Jewish -custom, but to search them out; and, if necessary, to enter their -houses, tax them with their guilt, and solemnly warn them against the -iniquity of consorting with the enemies of Jesus Christ. “Listen not -to any excuses which they may plead on the ground of cures effected by -the Jews; expose their impostures, their incantations, their amulets, -their charms, their drugs.” Even if they really effected cures, it -would be better to die and save the soul, than resort to the enemies of -Christ to heal the body. Let them rather appeal to the assistance of -the martyrs and saints who were His friends, and had great confidence -in addressing Him. “Why did the Son of Man Himself enter the world? Was -it not to seek and to save wandering sheep? This do thou, according to -thy ability. I will not cease to speak, whether you hear or whether you -forbear. If you heed not, I shall do it, but with grief; if you listen -and obey, I shall do it, but with joy.”[262] - -It is difficult for us, in our altered position towards Jews and -heretics of all kinds, to sympathise with the vehemence of Chrysostom’s -feelings and language. Yet there can be no doubt that such dabbling, -if the word may be used, in the customs, the observances, the ritual of -an obsolete dispensation, and a debased people, did seriously imperil -purity of faith and morals, and unity of discipline, in the Christian -Church. - -Towards dissentient Christians, not infected by Judaism, Chrysostom -adopts a milder tone, and indeed restrains the immoderation of -party feeling in others with wholesome censure. He laments[263] the -distracted state of the Church in Antioch, which was now divided -into the three sections of Meletians, Eustathians, and Arians; but -he denounces the practice of anathematising. It was uncharitable and -presumptuous. St. Paul anathematised once only; the casting off of a -heretic ought to be as painful as plucking out an eye or cutting off -a limb. A holy man before their times, one of the successors of the -Apostles, and judged worthy of the honour of martyrdom, used to say, -that to assume the right to anathematise was as great a usurpation of -Christ’s authority as for a subject to put on the Imperial purple. -In dealing with erring brethren, the Christian should “in meekness -instruct those that oppose themselves, if God, peradventure, will -give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.” “If a man -accepts your counsel and confesses his error, you have saved him, and -delivered your own soul also; but if he will not, do you nevertheless -continue to testify with long-suffering and kindness, that the Judge -may not require his soul at thy hand. Hate him not; turn not from him; -persecute him not, but catch him in the net of sincere and genuine -charity. The person whom you anathematise is either living or dead; -if living, you do wrong to cut off one who may still be converted; -if dead, much more you do wrong; ‘to his own master he standeth or -falleth;’ and ‘who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been -his counsellor?’ You may anathematise heretical dogmas, but towards -the persons who hold them show the greatest possible forbearance, and -pray for their salvation.” - -In the winter of 386, Chrysostom preached a sermon on Christmas Day, -which, though not distinguished by any unusual merit, possesses an -interest of its own. We learn from it, that this festival was not -originally celebrated in the Eastern Church; it had been adopted from -the West, and, in Antioch at least, less than ten years before the year -of Chrysostom’s discourse. It had gradually increased in popularity, -and this year Chrysostom rejoiced to observe that the church was -crowded to overflowing. Rome had fixed the observance of the 25th of -December, and this was the day kept throughout Christendom from Thrace -to Gades; but the propriety of the date was much debated in the Eastern -Churches, and the observance of the festival at all was considered by -some as a questionable innovation. Chrysostom energetically vindicates -the dignity of the festival and the correctness of the date.[264] It -was the metropolis, so to say, of all other festivals, and as such -it was the most solemn and awful. For the incarnation of Christ was -the necessary condition of all the succeeding events of His career -on earth, and in the profundity of its mystery it exceeded them all. -That Christ should die was a natural consequence of human nature once -assumed; but that He, being God, should have stooped so low as to -assume that nature, was a mystery unfathomable to the mind of man! -“Wherefore I specially welcome and belove this day, and desire to make -you partakers in my affection. I pray and implore you all to come with -zeal and alacrity, every man first purging his own house, to behold -our Lord wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger; for if we -come with faith, we shall indeed behold Him lying in the manger; for -this Table supplies the place of the manger, and here also the body -of the Lord will lie, not wrapped in swaddling clothes, but invested -on all sides by the Holy Spirit. The initiated (or the baptized) -understand what I mean.”[265] But he warns his hearers against crowding -in a tumultuous and disorderly manner to partake of the holy feast. -“Approach with fear and trembling, with fasting and prayer, not making -an uproar, hustling and jostling one another: consider, O man, what -kind of sacrifice thou art about to handle; consider that thou, who -art dust and ashes, dost receive the body and blood of Christ.”[266] -This irreverent conduct at the reception of the Eucharist frequently -provoked the indignation and censure of Chrysostom. It occurred -especially at the greater festivals, because on those days multitudes -received the Eucharist who did not enter the church at other times. -“How,” he cries in the homily on the Epiphany, “shall we teach you what -is necessary concerning your soul, immortality, the kingdom of heaven, -the long-suffering and mercy of God, and a future judgment, when you -come to us only once or twice in the year?” Many of those who pushed -and kicked one another in the eagerness of each to get foremost to the -holy Table, withdrew from the church before the final thanksgiving. -“What,” Chrysostom cries, “when Christ is present, and the angels are -standing by, and this awe-inspiring Table is spread before you, and -your brethren are still partaking of the mysteries, will you hurry -away?” Too often they who thronged the church on these great occasions -led worldly and even vicious lives; they hurried away before the sacred -feast was ended, like Judas, to do the devil’s work.[267] Such is one -among many examples which may be elicited from Chrysostom’s works -of that Pagan grossness and superstition which was mingled with the -faith and the most solemn observances of Christianity. The vitality -of superstitious customs, the subtlety with which they have grafted -themselves upon Christianity, the tenacity with which they have clung -to men in spite of it late into modern times, is indeed extraordinary; -but for centuries their existence and influence were not appreciably if -at all affected by Christianity. A half Oriental, half Greek, partly -Jewish population, like that of Antioch, whose purer feelings and -nobler reason were seriously impaired by habits of licentiousness and -luxury, was naturally liable to superstitious terrors, and addicted -to superstitious practices of all kinds. Chrysostom is frequently -reproving his people for being anxious and afraid where there was no -cause, while they abandoned themselves to vice, the only worthy cause -for fear, without scruple or alarm. If Christmas Day was observed as a -Christian festival, though without becoming reverence, New Year’s Day -was given up to riotous festivity, thoroughly Pagan in character. The -houses were festooned with flowers, the inns were scenes of the most -disgraceful intemperance; men and women drinking undiluted wine there -from an early hour in the morning; auguries and omens were consulted -by which the horoscope of the year was cast. Good luck in the coming -year was supposed to depend (how is not clearly stated) on the manner -in which the first day was spent. This is the theme of the preacher’s -righteous indignation. The real happiness of the year was determined, -not by the observation of particular feasts, but by the amount of -goodness which we put into it. Sin was the only real evil, virtue the -only real good; therefore, if a man practised justice, almsgiving, -and prayer, his year could not fail to be propitious; for he who had -a clean conscience carried about with him a perpetual holy day, and -without this, the most brilliant and joyous festival was obscured by -darkness. “When thou seest the year completed, thank God that He has -brought thee safely to the conclusion of the cycle: prick thine heart, -reckon up the time of thy life, and say to thyself, The days are -hurrying along, the years are being fulfilled, I have advanced far on -the road, the judgment is at the doors, my life is pressing on towards -old age: well! what good have I done? shall I depart hence destitute -and empty of all righteousness?”[268] - -There is a fuller notice, in some of his homilies on the Epistle to -the Ephesians, of the many gross and senseless forms of superstition -which prevailed even among the communicants in the Christian Church. -He laments the decay of discipline, by which a more rigorous scrutiny -was once instituted into the characters of those who came to the holy -feast. If any one were to examine the lives of all those who partake -of the mysteries on Easter Day, he would find amongst them persons -who consulted auguries, who used drugs, and omens, and incantations; -even the adulterer, curser, and drunkard, dared to partake. Iniquitous -men had crept into the Church, the highest places of command were -bought and sold, till the pure livers had betaken themselves to the -mountains to escape from the contamination.[269] Some of the vulgar -superstitions of the day were ludicrously puerile. “This or that man -was the first to meet me as I walked out; consequently innumerable -ills will certainly befall me: that confounded servant of mine, in -giving me my shoes, handed me the left shoe first; this indicates dire -calamities and insults: as I stepped out, I started with the left foot -foremost; this too is a sign of misfortune: my right eye twitched -upwards as I went out; this portends tears.”[270] To strike the woof -with the comb in a particular way, the braying of a donkey, the crowing -of a cock, a sudden sneeze,—all these were indications of something -or other. “They suspect everything, and are more in bondage than if -they were slaves many times over. But let not us, brethren, fear such -things, but laughing them to scorn as men who live in the light, and -whose citizenship is in heaven, and who have nothing in common with -this earth, let us regard one thing only as terrible,—and that is, -sin.”[271] - - - - -CHAPTER X. - - SURVEY OF THE FIRST DECADE OF THE REIGN OF THEODOSIUS—HIS - CHARACTER—HIS EFFORTS FOR THE EXTIRPATION OF PAGANISM - AND HERESY—THE APOLOGIES OF SYMMACHUS AND LIBANIUS. A.D. - 379-389. - - -Before Chrysostom had laboured two full years in “confirming the souls -of the disciples” at Antioch, that city became the scene of events -memorable in history; and events in which the great preacher played an -honourable and distinguished part. - -The foremost man of the age, not only by position but also to a -great extent in character, was Theodosius the Emperor; Theodosius -the Great, deservedly so called in spite of one prominent defect in -character, and a few glaring misdeeds which tarnish his reputation. The -military exploits of his father, Theodosius the elder, had provoked -the jealousy of the court[272] and cost him his life, and the son, -who had manifested ability almost equal, in serving under him both -by land and sea against Scots and Saxons, Moors and Goths, was glad -to escape a similar ungrateful return for his services, by retiring -to the obscurity of his native village in Spain. He was disgraced -when the Empire had been liberated from danger by the exertions of -his father and himself; but in the hour of its utmost jeopardy, and -direst distress, he was recalled to more than his former position. The -total defeat and death of Valens, and the almost extermination of his -army before Hadrianople in A.D. 378, placed the Empire at the mercy -of victorious barbarians within the frontier, and on the edge of the -horizon more storm-clouds of Gothic or Hunnish invasion were lowering. -There was but one person to whom the mind of Gratian, the young Emperor -of the West, and his advisers, overwhelmed by the prospect of impending -calamity, instinctively turned as capable of saving the State in this -crisis. For three years Theodosius had been quietly cultivating his -farm between Valladolid and Segovia, when he was summoned to accept the -title of Augustus, together with all the responsibilities and perils -which attended the possessor, at such a time, of that venerable name. -He was equal to the situation; handsome with a manly beauty, courageous -and determined of purpose, just and politic in intention if not always -in act, he was endowed with some of the noblest qualities of a soldier -and a statesman, by which to rescue and reorganise a panic-stricken -and crumbling State. This is not the place to narrate the military -achievements of Theodosius. The original materials for information -respecting them are scanty; but they have been collected and arranged -by that historian whose indefatigable industry brings order out of -confusion, and whose luminous style lights up with interest even -the darkest and most meagre annals.[273] It is sufficient to remind -the reader of Gibbon, that Theodosius subdued the Goths, not in any -one or two great battles, but by frequent and skilfully contrived -engagements on a smaller scale. He thus gradually revived the drooping -courage and discipline of the imperial troops, and wore out the enemy. -The several tribes, on their submission, were settled in the waste -tracts of country, which they were to occupy free of taxation, on the -wise condition that they kept the land in a state of cultivation. -So a numerous colony of Visigoths was established in Thrace, and of -Ostrogoths in Phrygia and Lydia. The ability of Theodosius is proved -more by the results of his energy than by anything that we know of the -manner in which he accomplished them. He not only vanquished the Goths, -but arrested the progress of the usurper Maximus in the West, who was -leading his victorious legions to Italy, flushed with success after -the ignominious flight and assassination of Gratian. Theodosius was -not in a position, surrounded as he was by half-vanquished barbarians, -to dispute the passage of the conqueror; but by assuming a firm tone -in negotiations, he secured for Valentinian, Gratian’s brother and -successor, the sovereignty of Italy, Africa, and Western Illyricum, -surrendering for the present to the usurper the regions north of the -Alps. - -Theodosius was a Christian; as a Spaniard he was a Trinitarian, and as -a soldier he was anxious to establish one uniform type of religious -faith and ecclesiastical discipline throughout the Empire. But such a -task proved more impracticable than the reduction of military foes. -Neither Paganism nor Arianism could be extinguished in a few years -by suppressive edicts. Theodosius himself had been baptized in the -first year of his reign, A.D. 380, when his life was threatened by a -severe illness, and he had then announced his will and pleasure that -his own solemn declaration of faith should be accepted by his subjects -also. That faith which was “professed by the Pontiff Damasus, and -Peter, Bishop of Alexandria” was to be the faith of the Empire. “Let -us believe the sole deity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, -under an equal majesty and a pious Trinity. We authorise the followers -of this doctrine to assume the title of Catholic Christians, and as we -judge that all others are extravagant madmen, we brand them with the -infamous name of heretics.”[274] Their places of assembly were not to -enjoy the title of churches, and they themselves were to expect severe -civil penalties as well as the Divine condemnation. Damophilus, the -Arian Bishop of Constantinople, preferred exile to signing the creed -of Nice; and Gregory of Nazianzus was conducted by the Emperor in -person through the streets of Constantinople (though not without a -strong guard) to occupy the episcopal throne. A project for another -general council (after the Council of Constantinople, A.D. 381) was -entertained but abandoned, for the factious demeanour of the several -prelates and their partisans on their arrival did not augur a very -successful settlement of differences by that method. The Emperor fell -back, for the accomplishment of his object, on his own authority. On -July 25, A.D. 383, an edict was posted in Constantinople, prohibiting -all the heretics therein named, Arians, Eunomians, Macedonians, and -Manichæans, from holding any kind of assembly, public or private, -either in the cities or in the country. Any ground or building used -for such illegal purpose was to be confiscated to the State; and -the penalty of banishment was pronounced against those who allowed -themselves to be ordained priests or bishops of the heretical sects. -Historians concur in the opinion that few of these penalties were -actually enforced. The heretical sects were not animated by a spirit -of martyrdom; the intimidation was generally sufficient.[275] The -hypocrite or the indifferent conformed, the more conscientious retired -into obscurity. There seem to have been few if any Arian prelates of -great and commanding ability. All the leading ecclesiastics of the -day—Chrysostom, Jerome, Basil, the two Gregories, and Ambrose—were by -conviction on the side of the Emperor, and added all the weight of -their influence to his decrees. - -When measures had been taken for the suppression of heresy, it was the -Pagan’s turn to suffer. The spectacle of temples standing open for -worship side by side with Christian churches was a painful incongruity -in the eyes of Theodosius, with his soldier-like ideas of uniformity -and discipline. The first blow was directed against those disloyal sons -of the Church who had seceded to Paganism. They were deprived of the -power to make wills or to receive bequests.[276] The second step was -absolutely to prohibit all sacrifices in those temples which were still -open. Nearly twenty years before, the sacrifice of animals had been -forbidden by Valentinian and Valens, owing to their connection with -arts of divination, which were used for political purposes. As long -as such sacrifices were permitted, the priests could not refrain from -consulting the entrails of the victims, and pretending to read therein -future events: the death of this Emperor, the elevation of that, the -success or failure of expeditions, and the like, were intimated to -the people, always eager to know what is beyond the limits of human -knowledge. Such divinations encouraged a restless spirit in the -subjects, and often disaffected them towards the ruling power. That -these laws of Valentinian were renewed by Theodosius in 381, and again -in A.D. 385, proves that they had been imperfectly obeyed.[277] - -They were followed up by a yet more decisive step in A.D. 392. -Cynegius, the Prætorian Prefect of the East, the Counts Jovinus and -Gaudentius in the West, were commissioned to shut up the temples, to -destroy their contents, images, and vessels, and to confiscate their -property. In many instances the executors of the edict, aided by the -fanatical fury of monks, seem to have exceeded their instructions. -The great temple of Jupiter, at Apamea, in Syria, of which the roof -was supported on sixty massive columns, fell, but not unavenged; for -the Bishop Marcellus, who headed the assailants, fell a victim to the -rage of the exasperated rustics who defended it.[278] The safety of -the universe was represented by Pagans to depend on the preservation -of the colossal gold and silver image of Serapis at Alexandria. Even -Christians beheld with some trepidation an audacious soldier deal a -blow with a battle-axe on the cheek of this awful deity; but as the -only result of the gash was the issue of a swarm of rats who had -harboured in the sacred head, instead of the avenging thunders which -had been expected, a revulsion of feeling was experienced. The huge -idol was hewn to pieces, the limbs were dragged through the streets, -and the remains of the carcase burned in the amphitheatre, amidst the -derision of the populace. - -These were shattering blows to Paganism. But the religion of sentiment -and custom long survives the extinction of more solid if not reasonable -convictions. Chrysostom’s homily on New Year’s Day is only one among -many illustrations of the way in which Pagan rites and superstitions -lingered, especially in connection with public festivals. All the -Pagan concomitants of these festivals in the country districts—hymns, -libations, garlands, incense, lights—were strictly prohibited, -under heavy penalties, by Theodosius in A.D. 392, but, in the West -especially, the extirpation was very incomplete. The Bishops of Verona -and of Brescia protested, but in vain, against the proprietors of land -indulging their tenantry in these practices. Sicily, Corsica, and -Sardinia, were strongholds of Paganism as late as A.D. 600. Sacrifices -were offered to Apollo on Monte Casino till the establishment of St. -Benedict’s monastery in A.D. 529. - -The riotous populace of towns, and the simple country folk attached -to old customs, thus evinced some spirit in their resistance to -repressive enactments. But the hold which Paganism retained upon -intellectual people was feeble indeed. Two apologists only, with any -pretensions to ability, stepped forward to plead for the sinking -cause: Symmachus[279] in the West, and Libanius in the East; and their -intercessions are addressed to sentiments of affection for antiquity, -and compassion for oppressed weakness, rather than to the reason. -Symmachus, as is well known, pleaded twice for the retention of the -altar and statue of Victory in the senate-house at Rome. Eloquent and -touching, his appeal is directed to patriotic feeling and a sense of -political expediency, not to religious conviction. He does not profess -to _believe_ in the Pagan deities, but regards with a philosophic eye -the various kinds of faith in the world as so many forms of homage to -the great unknown Being who presides over the universe. “It is right to -recognise that what all adore can be at bottom but one Being only. We -contemplate the same stars; the same sky covers us; the same universe -encloses us. What matters it by what reasonings each seeks the truth? -a single path cannot conduct us to the grand secret of nature. As an -individual, a man may be a worshipper of Mithras, or of Christ, but as -a citizen it is his duty to conform to that worship which is bound up -with the history and glory of his country; to part from it is heartless -and disloyal.”[280] - -The memorial of Symmachus got into the hands of Ambrose, and was rather -rudely treated by him. He subjects it to a stern test of facts. Had -the national gods indeed protected the Romans from disaster? It was -maintained that by their aid the conquest of Italy by Hannibal had been -averted. Why then did they permit the invader to inflict such ravages -as he had done? Would not the Gauls also have captured the Capitol, but -for the timely cry of the goose? Where was Jupiter _then?_ but perhaps -he was speaking through the goose. The Carthaginians worshipped some -of the same deities as the Romans. If then the gods conquered with -the Romans they yielded with the Carthaginians. Paganism declined, -notwithstanding support; the Church flourished, in spite of opposition. -As to the abandonment of ancient customs, was not progress the law of -improvement? The glimmering dawn gradually brightened into the full and -perfect day; the riches of harvest and vintage came in the maturity -of the year; even so the faith of Christ had gradually planted itself -on the ruins of a worn-out creed, and was now reaping an abundant -harvest among all nations of the earth.[281] The whole reply of Ambrose -is pitched in the positive, confident, authoritative tone of one who -speaks from a conviction that he stands on the platform of absolute -truth, and that his cause is therefore inevitably destined to win. - -If the appeal of Symmachus was addressed to the sentiment of reverence -for _national_ antiquity, that of Libanius was directed to a sentiment -of attachment to _classical_ antiquity. The citizen mourns over the -suppression of a worship which was bound up with the history and -the glory of his country; the scholar sighs over the degradation of -that which was connected with all that was most beautiful in the -literature and life of the olden time—with the poetry of Homer and -the tragedians—with the festive song and dance—with the hills, and -fountains, and groves of Greece. He clings to the past with the love of -the antiquarian. Though his actual belief in the myths of the classical -era may not have been very deep or earnest, there is no doubt that -he entertained a genuine animosity towards the new faith which was -usurping their place. A flowery description of the origin and antiquity -of the honour paid to the gods is followed by a vehement invective -against the monks, “those black-robed creatures, more voracious -than elephants, who rush upon the temples, armed with stones, wood, -and fire; who break up the roofs, destroy the walls, throw down the -statues, raze the altars.” They glaringly exceeded the edicts of the -Emperor, which had forbidden the offering of sacrifice in the temples, -but had not commanded the actual destruction of the buildings.[282] -There is real feeling also in his description of the distress caused -in country districts by the demolition of the temples. “They were the -centres round which human habitations and civilisation grew; in them -the labourer placed all his hopes; to them he commended his wife, his -children, his plantation, his crops. Deprived of the gods, from whom -he expected the rewards of toil, he felt as if henceforth his labours -would be vain. Sometimes the very land was wrested from them on the -pretext that it had been consecrated to gods; if the poor despoiled -owners sought redress from the pastor (_i.e._ the bishop) of the -neighbouring town (falsely called pastor, since there was no gentleness -in his nature), he praised the robber and dismissed the complainers.” -No doubt to a great extent this was a true picture, and such harshness -and injustice must have retarded (as always happens when an attempt is -made to coerce opinion) the cause of Christianity, which the law was -intended to promote. - -Theodosius, however, was in principle far too upright to treat the -Church with a blind partiality. Cynegius, the Prefect, was ordered to -enforce the law at Alexandria with full rigour against those despicable -beings who sought to make traffic by informing against Pagans. -Constantine had exempted the clergy from serving in curial offices; -Theodosius compelled them to pay for substitutes, and renounce their -claims to patrimony. They were to enjoy immunity from torture when -brought to trial, but if detected in falsehood were to be visited with -penalties of peculiar severity, because they had abused the shelter of -the law which favoured them.[283] - -Such was Theodosius—a prudent and skilful general, a firm and upright -ruler; a sincere and simple-minded believer in Christianity, who did -his best, as head at once of the army, the civil government, and -the Church, to consolidate the fabric of the Empire. The barbarians -were repelled, or held down; taxes were collected with honesty and -firmness,—some of the most burdensome were taken off; Paganism and -heresy languished, however far from being extinguished, and the Emperor -fondly hoped that uniformity in faith and discipline would soon be -established throughout Christendom. - -The good genius of his life was the Empress Flacilla; she was a -Christian of a pure and noble type; imperial state had not corrupted -the simplicity or hardened the tenderness of her disposition. She was -accustomed to visit the hospitals in Constantinople, not attended by a -single slave or waiting-woman; administered food and medicine to the -patients, and dressed their wounds with her own hands. She was wont to -remind her husband of the great change in their worldly position, as a -motive to humility and gratitude to God. “It behoves thee to consider -what thou wert and what thou hast become; by constantly reflecting on -this thou wilt not be ungrateful to thy benefactor, but wilt guide the -kingdom which thou hast received with a due regard to law, and by so -doing wilt pay homage to Him who gave it thee.” - -She, we may well believe, restrained the impulses of that choleric -temper which was the principal defect in the Emperor’s character, and -which occasionally after her death burst forth into acts of deplorable -violence. This wise and pious monitress was taken from him in A.D. -385. She died at a watering-place in Thrace, whither she had gone to -recover her health after the shock caused by the death of the infant -Princess Pulcheria. Her body was brought back to Constantinople on a -melancholy day in autumn, when the skies poured down a gentle rain, as -if mingling their tears with those of the disconsolate people.[284] - -This condensed survey of the character and work of Theodosius, during -the first ten years of his reign, will assist us in forming a proper -estimate of his conduct in that memorable occurrence which brings his -life into contact with the life of Chrysostom. - - - - -CHAPTER XI. - - THE SEDITION AT ANTIOCH—THE HOMILIES ON THE STATUES—THE - RESULTS OF THE SEDITION. A.D. 387. - - -The wise counsel and softening influence of the Empress were removed -from her husband at an inopportune season. Political storms were -approaching, and the passionate temper of Theodosius was soon to be -subjected to a most severe trial. - -The year 388 would have completed the first decade of his reign. The -year 387 was the fifth of the reign of his son Arcadius, whom he had -nominally associated with himself in the government. The celebration -of these two events Theodosius, from motives of prudent economy and -convenience, resolved to combine. The army on such occasions claimed -a liberal donative, five gold pieces to each man. It was obviously -desirable, therefore, to avoid, if possible, the repetition of such a -donative within a short space of time. It was always a strain on the -royal treasury, and at the present juncture the strain was increased, -for the Goths were assuming a menacing attitude on the Danubian -frontier. It was necessary to mass troops in that direction, and, -with a view to provide for these expenses, it was proposed to raise -a special subsidy from the opulent cities of the Eastern empire. But -the inhabitants of Alexandria and Antioch were loath to part with -any of the wealth which they had accumulated during nearly ten years -of peace and exemption from onerous taxation. Large meetings were -held by the citizens of Alexandria in the theatres and other public -places; inflammatory and seditious speeches were made. “If we are to be -treated thus,” they cried, “a simple remedy is open: we will appeal to -Maximus in the West; he knows how to shake off a troublesome tyrant.” -Fortunately the Prefect Cynegius was a man of firmness and promptitude; -he made some arrests of the most conspicuous leaders of the mutinous -faction, and enforced an immediate payment of the tribute, and by these -decisive measures public order was restored. Either the people of -Antioch were more deeply disaffected, or no such energetic officer was -in that city to nip the spirit of rebellion in the bud. It is said that -the inhabitants entertained a grudge against the Emperor, because he -had never visited their city, which had been frequently graced by the -royal presence of his predecessors.[285] - -The edict which enjoined the levying of the tribute was proclaimed by -a herald on February 26. Large numbers of the people assembled on the -spot, collected chiefly into groups, amongst which were some persons -of distinction, senators and other civic functionaries, noble ladies, -and retired soldiers. An ominous silence succeeded the announcement -of the edict. The crowd then dispersed, but reassembled about the -prætorium, where the governor resided.[286] There they stood in gloomy -silence, save that the women, from time to time, raised a wailing -lamentation, crying that the ruin of the city was determined, and that -since the Emperor had abandoned them, God alone from henceforth could -come to their succour. At last a little band detached itself from the -mass, shouting that they must go and seek the Bishop Flavian, and -constrain him to intercede with the Emperor on their behalf. Flavian, -by accident or design, was absent from the episcopal residence, and -the mob returned to the prætorium, crying that the governor must -do them justice. The people appear to have been excited to violence -chiefly by those turbulent foreign adventurers who abounded in Antioch, -sordid venal creatures, often hired by actors to get up applause in -the theatres, or by great men not over popular to raise cheers when -they appeared in public places. But however stimulated, the passions -of the mob were thoroughly roused, and their fury vented itself in a -tumultuous rush into one of the great public baths, where they soon -tore everything to pieces. Having completed this work of destruction, -they hurried back once more to the hall of the unfortunate governor. -Here they were kept at bay by a guard for a sufficient time to -enable the governor to escape by a back-door, and when they at last -succeeded in bursting in, the vacancy of the place aggravated their -rage. The governor was not seated in the judicial chair, but they -found themselves face to face with the statues of the imperial family, -which as emblems of authority were ranged above it. They paused for a -few moments; highly excited as they were, imperial majesty, even so -represented, had some deterrent influence upon their fury. - -But, unfortunately, there were boys in the crowd; the love of -stone-throwing without respect of persons was as ardent in boy nature -fifteen hundred years ago as it is now. A stone was cast by one -of these juvenile hands, which hit one of the sacred statues. The -momentary feelings of reverence which had arrested the people were -dissipated. The images were mutilated, almost battered to pieces, and -the fragments dragged through the streets. Other images of the imperial -family with which the city was adorned were treated in the same manner; -the equestrian statue of Count Theodosius, father of the Emperor, was -dislodged from its pedestal and hacked about, amidst derisive shouts of -“Defend thyself, grand cavalier!”[287] - -The unrestrained fury of the people was inflamed by success; they began -to bring up torches and actually set fire to one of the principal -buildings of the city, when the governor, who had escaped their hands, -returned at the head of a company of archers. As usual with disorderly -mobs, however furious, they were unable to face the discipline of -military force; the soldiers were no sooner drawn up and preparing to -fix their weapons than rage turned to panic, and the mob, lately so -formidable, melted away. - -The whole tumult had not lasted more than three hours; before noon, -every one had returned to his home, the streets and squares were empty, -and a death-like stillness pervaded the city. Remorse was mingled with -great terror respecting the consequences of the outrage which had been -perpetrated. The Emperor, indeed, was humane and forgiving of wrongs -which concerned himself alone, but how would he brook the insults -done to the memory of his father and his tenderly beloved Empress? -One hope remained: Flavian, the bishop, was a favourite at court; his -intercessions might avail; the people besought him with tears to stand -their friend in this distress. From Antioch to Constantinople was a -long and perilous journey of 800 miles, and the winter was not yet -ended. Flavian was old, his only sister was seriously ill, and the -approaching season of Lent required his presence at Antioch, but a -sense of the emergency prevailed over all these obstacles. Animated by -the spirit of the Good Shepherd the intrepid old man was ready to lay -down his life for his flock, and set out upon his errand of mercy with -all possible speed, in the hope of overtaking the messengers who had -started before him, but had been detained at the foot of Mount Taurus -by a fall of snow.[288] - -During the absence of Flavian all the powers of Chrysostom as an -orator, a pastor, and a citizen, were called forth in attempting to -calm the fears and revive the deeply-dejected spirits of the people. -Perseveringly did he discharge this anxious and laborious task; almost -every day, for twenty-two days, that small figure was to be seen either -sitting in the Ambo, from which he sometimes preached on account of -his diminutive stature, or standing on the steps of the altar, the -preacher’s usual place;[289] and day after day, the crowds increased -which came to listen to the stream of golden eloquence which he poured -forth. With all the versatility of a consummate artist, he moved from -point to point. Sometimes a picture of the city’s agony melted his -hearers to tears, and then again he struck the note of encouragement -and revived their spirits by bidding them take comfort from the -well-known clemency of the Emperor, the probable success of the mission -of Flavian, and, above all, from trust in God. - -“The gay and noisy city, where once the busy people hummed like -bees around their hive, was petrified by fear into the most dismal -silence and desolation; the wealthier inhabitants had fled into the -country, those who remained shut themselves up in their houses, as if -the town had been in a state of siege. If any one ventured into the -market-place, where once the multitude poured along like the stream of -a mighty river, the pitiable sight of two or three cowering dejected -creatures in the midst of solitude soon drove him home again. The -sun itself seemed to veil its rays as if in mourning. The words of -the prophet were fulfilled, ‘Their sun shall go down at noon, and -their earth shall be darkened in a clear day’ (Amos viii. 9). Now -they might cry, ‘Send to the mourning women, and let them come, and -send for cunning women that they may come’ (Jer. ix. 17). Ye hills -and mountains, take up a wailing, let us invite all creation to -commiserate our woes, for this great city, this capital of Eastern -cities, is in danger of being destroyed out of the midst of the earth, -and there is no man to help her, for the Emperor, who has no equal -among men, has been insulted; therefore let us take refuge with the -King who is above, and summon Him to our aid.”[290] - -The chief reason of the people’s extreme dejection was, that the -governor and magistrates, probably to disarm any suspicion at court -of their own complicity in the sedition, were daily seizing real or -supposed culprits, and punishing them with the utmost rigour. Even -those who might have been pardoned on account of their tender age were -mercilessly handed over to the executioner. Chrysostom speaks of some -even having been burnt, and others thrown to wild beasts. The weeping -parents followed their unhappy offspring at a distance, powerless to -help but fearing to plead, like men on shore beholding with grief -shipwrecked sailors struggling in the water, but unable to rescue -them.[291] - -But the object of Chrysostom was, not to utter ineffectual -lamentations. He aimed at rousing the people from their profound -dejection, and printing, if possible, on their hearts, humbled and -softened by distress, deep and lasting impressions of good. He told -them that there was everything to be hoped for from the embassy of -Flavian. “The Emperor was pious, the bishop courageous, yet prudent and -adroit; God would not suffer his errand to be fruitless. The very sight -of that venerable man would dispose the royal mind to clemency. Flavian -would not fail to urge how especially suitable an act of forgiveness -was to that holy season, in which was commemorated the Death of Christ -for the sins of the whole world. He would remind the Emperor of the -parable of the two debtors, and warn him not to incur the risk of -being one day addressed by the words, ‘Thou wicked servant, I forgave -thee all that debt; shouldest not thou also have had compassion on -thy fellow-servants?’ He would represent that the outrages had not -been committed by the whole community, but chiefly by some lawless -strangers. He would plead that the inhabitants, even had they all -offended, had already undergone sufficient punishment in the anxiety -and alarm which they endured. It would be unreasonable to visit the -crime of a few by the extirpation of a whole city, a city which was the -most populous capital of the East, and dear to Christians as the place -where they had first received that sweet and lovely name.”[292] - -Meanwhile he earnestly calls upon the people to improve this season -of humiliation by a thorough repentance and reformation in respect of -the prevailing vices and follies. The words of St. Paul in writing -to the Philippians, “To write the same things to you, to me indeed -is not grievous, and for you it is safe,” might be aptly applied to -Chrysostom. He is never tired of denouncing special sins and exhorting -to the renunciation of them in every variety of language. Ostentatious -luxury, sordid avarice, religious formalism, a profane custom of -taking rash oaths, were the fashionable sins against which he waged an -incessant and implacable warfare. - -His exhortations are generally based on some passage read in the lesson -of the day. “What have we heard today? ‘Charge them that are rich in -this world, that they be not high-minded.’ He who says ‘the rich in -this world’ proves thereby that there are others rich in regard to a -future world, like Lazarus in the parable.” Wealth of this world was -a thankless runaway slave, which, if bound with thousands of fetters, -made off, fetters and all. Not that he would quarrel with wealth; it -was good in itself, but became evil when inordinately desired and -paraded, just as the evil of intoxication lay not in wine itself, but -in the abuse of it. The Apostle did not charge those who were rich to -become poor, but only not to be high-minded. “Let us adorn our own -souls before we embellish our houses. Is it not disgraceful to overlay -our walls with marbles and to neglect Christ, who is going about -unclothed? What profit is there, O man, in thy house? Wilt thou carry -it away with thee? Nay, thou must leave thy _house_; but thy _soul_ -thou wilt certainly take with thee. Lo! how great the danger which has -now overtaken us: let our houses, then, be our defenders; let them -rescue us from the impending peril;—but they will not be able. Be those -witnesses to my words who have now deserted their houses, and hurried -away to the wilderness as if afraid of nets and snares. Do you wish -to build large and splendid houses? I forbid you not, only build them -not upon the earth; build yourselves tabernacles in heaven—tabernacles -which never decay. Nothing is more slippery than wealth, which to-day -is with thee and to-morrow is against thee; which sharpens the eyes of -the envious on all sides; which is a foe in your own camp, an enemy in -your own household. Wealth makes the present danger more intolerable; -you see the poor man unencumbered and prepared for whatever may happen, -but the rich in a state of great embarrassment, and going about seeking -some place in which to bury his gold, or some person with whom to -deposit it. Why seek thy fellow-servants, O man? Christ stands ready -to receive and guard thy deposits—yea, not only to guard, but also to -multiply and to return with rich interest. No man plucks out of His -hand; men, when they receive a deposit from another, deem that they -have conferred a favour upon him; but Christ, on the contrary, declares -that He receives a favour, and, instead of demanding a reward, bestows -one upon you.”[293] - -He entreated them to make the present Lent a season of spiritual -renovation. Lent fell in the spring, when the stream of industry -which the winter had frozen began to flow again. The sailor launched -his vessel, the soldier furbished his sword, the farmer whetted his -scythe, the traveller set out confidently on his long journey, the -athlete stripped for the contest. “Even so let this fast be to us a -spiritual spring-tide; let us polish our spiritual armour, let us -breast the waves of evil passions, set out like travellers on our -journey heavenwards, and prepare like athletes for the combat. For the -Christian is both husbandman, and pilot, and soldier, and athlete, and -traveller. Hast thou seen the athlete? hast thou seen the soldier? if -thou art an athlete thou must strip to enter the lists; if thou art a -soldier thou must put on armour before taking thy place in the ranks. -How then to the same man can both these things be possible? How, dost -thou ask? I will tell thee. Strip thyself of thy worldly business, and -thou hast become an athlete; clothe thyself with spiritual armour, -and thou hast become a soldier. Strip thyself, for it is a season of -wrestling; clothe thyself, for we are engaged in a fierce warfare with -devils. Till thy soul, and cut away the thorns; sow the seed of piety, -plant the good plants of philosophy, and tend them with much care, and -thou hast become a husbandman, and St. Paul will say to thee, ‘The -husbandman which laboureth must first be a partaker of the fruits.’ -Whet thy sickle which thou hast blunted by surfeiting; sharpen it, I -say, by fasting. Enter on the road which leads to heaven, the rugged -and narrow road, and travel along it. And how shalt thou be able to set -out and travel? By buffeting thy body and bringing it into subjection; -for where the road is narrow, obesity, which comes from surfeiting, -is a great impediment. Repress the waves of foolish passions, repulse -the storm of wicked imaginations, preserve the vessel, display all -thy skill, and thou hast become a pilot.”[294] The originator and -instructor of all these arts was abstinence; not the vulgar kind of -abstinence, not abstinence from food only, but also from sins. “If thou -fastest, show me the results by thy deeds. What deeds, do you ask? -If you see a poor man, have pity on him; if an enemy, be reconciled; -if a friend in good reputation, regard him without envy. Fast not -only by thy mouth, but with thine eyes, thine ears, thy hands, thy -feet; avert thine eyes from unlawful sights, restrain thy hands from -deeds of violence, keep thy feet from entering places of pernicious -amusement, bridle thy mouth from uttering, and stop thine ears from -listening to tales of slander.” This kind of fast would be acceptable -to God, only it should be co-extensive with life. To spend a few days -in penance and then to relapse into the former course of life was only -an idle mockery.[295] He disparaged that rigorous kind of fasting which -some had carried to the extent of taking no food but bread and water. -Many boasted of the number of weeks they had fasted; this excessive -abstinence was likely to be followed by a reaction. Let them seek -rather to subdue evil passions and habits; let one week be devoted to -the suppression of swearing, another of anger, a third of slander, and -so gradually advancing they might at last attain the consummation of -virtue, and propitiate the displeasure of God.[296] “Let us not do now -what we have so often done, for frequently when earthquakes, or famine, -or drought have overtaken us, we have become temperate for three or -four days, and then have returned to our former ways of life. But, if -never before, now at least let us remain steadfast in the same state -of piety, that we may not again require to be chastised by another -scourge.”[297] - -Almost all the homilies are concluded by an admonition against the -sin of swearing, and the greater portion of some is devoted to this -topic. The passionate impetuous people of Antioch seem to have been -constantly betrayed into the folly of binding themselves by rash -oaths. The master, for instance, would take an oath to deprive his -slave of food, or the tutor his scholar, till a certain task was -accomplished, a threat which it was of course often impossible to -enforce. Hence perjury on the part of a superior, and loss of respect -on the side of the subordinate. Chrysostom himself had often dined at -a house where the mistress swore that she would beat a slave who had -made some mistake, while the husband would with another oath forbid -the punishment. Thus one of the two would be inevitably involved in -perjury.[298] He frequently exhorted his hearers to form a kind of -Christian club amongst themselves for the suppression of this vice. In -one place he suggests a stern remedy: “When you detect your wife or any -of your household yielding to this evil habit, order them supperless to -bed, and if you are guilty impose the same penalty on yourself.”[299] -Near the close of Lent he declares that he will repel from the holy -Table at Easter those whom he detects still addicted to this vice.[300] - -On the whole, the eager and earnest pastor may be said to have -rejoiced at the grand opportunity afforded by the humiliation of the -city, to effect a reformation in the moral life of the people. He -observed with great satisfaction, that if the forum was deserted the -church was thronged, just as in stormy weather the harbour is crowded -with vessels.[301] Many an intemperate man had been sobered, the -headstrong softened, or the indolent quickened into zeal. Many who once -assiduously frequented the theatre now spent their day in the church. -Meanwhile they must abide God’s pleasure for the removal of their -affliction. He had sent it for the purpose of purifying and chastening -them; He was waiting till He saw a genuine, an unshakeable repentance, -like a refiner watching a piece of precious metal in a crucible, and -waiting the proper moment for taking it out.[302] As for those who -said what they feared was not so much death, as _ignominious_ death by -the hand of the executioner, he protested that the only death really -miserable was a death in sin. Abel was murdered and was happy, Cain -lived and was miserable. John the Baptist was beheaded, St. Stephen was -stoned, yet their deaths were happy. To the Christian there was nothing -formidable in death itself. To dread death but not to be afraid of sin -was to act like children who are frightened by masks whilst they were -not afraid of fire. “What, I pray you, is death? It is like the putting -off of a garment, for the soul is invested with a body[303] as it were -with a garment, and this we shall put off for a little while by death, -only to receive it again in a more brilliant form. What, I pray you, -is death? It is but to go a journey for a season, or to take a longer -sleep than usual.” Death was but a release from toil, a tranquil haven. -“Mourn not over him who dies, but over him who, living in sin, is dead -while he liveth.”[304] - -Chrysostom’s own calmness, and his skill in diverting the thoughts of -his flock from present alarm, are manifested by the power and ease -with which he dilates on such grand topics as the creation, Divine -Providence, the nature of man, and his place in the scale of created -beings. His best thoughts, expressed in his best style on these -subjects, are to be found in the homilies now under consideration. - -The size and beauty of the universe, but still more the perfect -regularity with which the system worked, proclaimed a designing power. -The succession of day and night, the series of the seasons, like a -band of maidens dancing in a circle, the four elements of which the -world was composed, mingling in such exquisite proportions that they -exactly balanced one another, the sun tempering the action of water, -the water that of the sun, the sea unable to break its bounds or reduce -the earth to a mass of clay; who could contemplate all these forces at -work and suppose that they moved spontaneously, instead of adoring Him -who had arranged them all with a wisdom commensurate with the results? -As the health of the body depended on the due balance of those humours -of which it was composed, if the bile increased fever was produced, or -if the phlegmatic element prevailed many diseases were engendered, so -was it in the case of the universe: each element observed its proper -limits, restrained, as it were, with a bridle by the will of the Maker; -and the struggle between these elements was the source of peace for the -whole system. As the body failed, languished, died, in proportion as -the soul was withdrawn from it, so if the regulating and life-giving -power of God’s providence were removed from the earth, all would go to -rack and ruin, like a vessel deserted by her pilot.[305] - -In treating this subject, he manifests a keen appreciation of natural -beauties. The infinite varieties of flowers and herbs, trees, animals, -insects, and birds—the flowery fields below, the starry fields -above—the never-failing fountains—the sea receiving countless streams -into its bosom, yet never overflowing,—all proclaimed a Creator and -an Upholder, and drew from man the exclamation, “How manifold are Thy -works; in wisdom hast Thou made them all!” Yet, lest they should be -worshipped instead of the Maker, conditions of change, as decay or -death, were imposed upon all.[306] His observation of nature appears -in some of his similes. The poor female relatives hovering about the -courts of justice, when the culprits of the outrage on the statues were -being tried, he compares to parent birds, which wildly flutter round -the hunter who has stolen the young from their nest, in an agony of -grief, but impotent from weakness and fear.[307] He perceives in some -of the lower animals characteristics to be imitated or avoided, and -describes them with a kind of humour. The bee especially was a pattern -for imitation, not merely because it was industrious, but because it -toiled with an unconscious kind of self-sacrifice for the benefit of -others as well as itself. It was the most honourable of insects; the -spider, on the contrary, was the most ignoble, because it spread its -fine web for its own selfish gratification only. The innocence of the -dove, the docility of the ox, the light-heartedness of birds, were all -examples for imitation. The ferocity, or the cunning of other animals -or insects, were examples for avoidance. The good which brutes had by -nature man might acquire by force of moral purpose; and the sovereign -of the lower animals ought to comprise in his nature all the best -qualities of his subjects.[308] The plumage of the peacock, excelling -in variety and beauty all possible art of the dyer, evinced the -superhuman power of the Maker of all things.[309] - -His ethical doctrine bears singular resemblance to that of Butler. -God has bestowed on man a faculty of discerning right from wrong; He -has impressed upon him a natural law, the law of conscience. Hence -some commands are delivered without explanation: for instance, the -prohibition to kill, or to commit adultery, because these merely enjoin -what is already evident by the light of the natural law. On the other -hand, for the command to observe the Sabbath a reason is assigned, -because this was a special and temporary enactment. The obligation of -the law of conscience was universal and eternal. As soon as Adam had -sinned, he hid himself, a clear evidence of his consciousness of guilt, -although no written law existed at that time. - -The Greeks might attempt to deny the universality of this inherent law, -but to what other origin could they ascribe the laws which had been -made by their own ancestors concerning respect for life, the marriage -bond, covenants, trusts, and the like? They had indeed been handed down -from generation to generation; but whence did the first promulgators -derive the idea of them, if not from this moral sense? To the law -of conscience was added the energy of a moral purpose, προαίρεσις, -which enabled man to practise what conscience prescribed: conscience -informs man that temperance is right; moral purpose enables him to -become temperate. God had also endowed man with some natural virtues: -indignation at injustice, compassion for the injured, sympathy with the -joys and sorrows of our fellow-men.[310] At the same time Chrysostom -fully allows the value of training and teaching as supplementary to -and co-operating with all these natural gifts.[311] If conscience -grew languid, the admonition of parent and friend, and, in the case -of public offences, the law, stepped in, to effect what conscience -failed to do; and frequently God sent afflictions for the same remedial -purpose.[312] - -Thus day after day the indefatigable preacher sounded the note of -encouragement, or warning, or instruction. He not only held the -Christian flock together, but largely increased its numbers. His -eloquence frequently excited rapturous applause, which was invariably -repressed with sternness. On one occasion the congregation yielded -to a panic; a false rumour was circulated that a body of troops was -entering the city, to take vengeance on the inhabitants. The Prefect -entered the church to allay the fears of the affrighted people who -had fled thither, but Chrysostom was overwhelmed with shame, and -sharply upbraided them that a Christian congregation should owe the -restoration of calmness to a Pagan, whom they ought to have impressed, -like Paul before Agrippa, by a display of Christian firmness and -fortitude.[313] - -About the middle of Lent, two commissioners, Hellebicus and Cæsarius, -arrived at Antioch, invested with full powers to inquire into the late -outrage. Their authority was backed by a considerable military force. -They were men not only of intelligence and humanity, but Christians -in faith; and they had many friends in Antioch. They entered the -city, surrounded by a large multitude, who turned weeping faces and -held out supplicating hands towards them. The commissioners were -moved, and in deep silence entered the lodging provided for them; but -it was necessary for them to perform their duty, which was in the -first place to announce that Antioch was degraded from the rank of -capital of Syria, and its metropolitan honours were transferred to -the neighbouring city of Laodicea. Secondly, all the public baths, -circuses, theatres, and other places of recreation, were to be closed -for an indefinite time. Thirdly, the commissioners were to revise the -trials already held by the local governor, and to inflict rigorous -sentences upon all the guilty, especially any persons of distinction. -These judicial proceedings were to begin on the following day. - -The scene at the entrance of the court was a melancholy spectacle; the -wives and daughters of the accused hung around it in mean garments -sprinkled with ashes, and in attitudes of supplication or despair. - -There were no lawyers to plead for the prisoners; they had run away -or concealed themselves, to evade the perilous duty. Libanius alone, -towards evening, crept timidly into the court. Cæsarius, to whom he was -known, observed him, beckoned him to approach, and placed him by his -side. In a low voice he bade him take courage; he and his colleague -would endeavour as much as possible to spare life. Libanius earnestly -thanked him, and promised if he kept his word to immortalise him by an -oration in his honour.[314] - -An appeal, however, more effectual, was made to the mercy of the -commissioners, by persons widely different from Libanius. As they were -riding in state to the hall of justice on the second day, they saw -amongst the people a group of strange half-wild-looking beings, in -rough coarse garments, with long unkempt hair. These were hermits, who -had descended from their solitudes in the neighbouring mountains—some -who for years had not been seen in the streets of the city, but now -appeared to plead on behalf of the offending people. An old man, -diminutive in stature, whose clothing was in tatters, started forward -from the group as the commissioners passed by, seized the bridle of -one, and commanded them in a tone of authority to dismount. “Who is -this mad fellow?” inquired the commissioners. They were informed that -he was the revered hermit Macedonius, surnamed Crithophagus, or the -barley-eater, because barley was his only sustenance. Hellebicus and -Cæsarius immediately alighted, and, falling on their knees before him, -craved his pardon for having received him so rudely. “My friends,” -replied the solitary, “go to the Emperor and say, ‘You are an emperor, -but also a man, and you rule over beings who are of like nature with -yourself. Man was created after a Divine image and likeness; do not, -then, mercilessly command the image of God to be destroyed, for you -will provoke the Maker if you punish his image. For, consider that you -are doing this from displeasure at the injury inflicted on a statue -of bronze; and how far does a living rational creature exceed the -value of such an inanimate object! Let him consider that it is easy -to manufacture many statues in the place of those destroyed, but it -is wholly impossible for him to make a single hair again of those men -who have been put to death.’”[315] The other hermits declared that -they were all prepared to shed their blood and lay down their lives -for the culprits; that they would not withdraw from the city until -they were sent as ambassadors to the Emperor, or until the city itself -had been acquitted. The joy of Chrysostom at the courage displayed by -these hermits was extreme; their noble conduct compensated for the sad -pusillanimity lately exhibited by the congregation in the church. He -triumphantly contrasts them with the so-called philosophers of Antioch, -who appear to have displayed anything but philosophic calmness in the -hour of danger. “Where now are those long-bearded, cloak-wearing, -staff-bearing fellows—cynic refuse, more degraded than dogs licking -up the crumbs under the table, doing everything for their belly? Why, -they have all hurried out of the city and hidden themselves in caves -and dens, whilst those who inhabited the caves have entered the city, -and boldly walk about the forum as if no calamity had happened. Their -conduct illustrates what I have never ceased to maintain, that even -the furnace cannot injure one who lives in virtue. Such is the power -of philosophy introduced to man by Christ.”[316] The result of this -singular intercession was, that the commissioners consented to suspend -the execution of their sentence on those pronounced guilty, until an -appeal had been made to the Emperor. Meanwhile the prisoners were to -remain in confinement, and their property to be held by the State. - -The hermits were anxious to repair to the court of Theodosius, but -the commissioners wisely refused, making the length of the journey -an objection, but perhaps really because they feared such excitable -zealots might frustrate the object of their embassy by imprudent -behaviour. It was finally decided that Hellebicus should remain to -preserve order in Antioch, while his colleague went to Constantinople, -carrying with him an intercessory letter signed by the hermits, and -declaring that they were ready to give their own lives in ransom for -the city. - -Cæsarius departed amidst the blessings and acclamations of the -people.[317] - -What had the energetic preacher, who had sustained the spirits of -the people so long, been doing, since the arrival of the Emperor’s -legates? It had been, indeed, a relief to find that the city was not -to be surrendered to the sword; but to a proud and luxurious people -the loss of metropolitan rank, and the closing of the public baths, -theatres, and public places of amusement, were severe blows. Loud and -general was the lamentation over their fallen grandeur and their lost -enjoyments. Chrysostom expostulated with them on their discontent. -The real dignity of a city did not consist in pre-eminence of rank -or vastness of population, but in the virtue of its citizens. What -constituted the noblest distinction of Antioch?—the fact that the -disciples there were the first to be called Christians—that they had -sent relief to the distressed brethren in Judæa in the time of the -famine (Acts xi. 28, 29)—that they had sent Paul and Barnabas to that -Council at Jerusalem which had emancipated the Gentile Christians from -Judaic bondage. These were honourable distinctions, which no other -city, not even Rome itself, could rival. They enabled Antioch to look -the whole Christian world in the face, for they proved how great had -been her Christian courage and her Christian love. These were her true -metropolitan honours; and, if these were in aught diminished, not by -the size or beauty of her buildings, not by her airy colonnades or -her spacious porticos and promenades,[318] not by the sacred Grove of -Daphne, not by the number and loftiness of her cypresses, not by her -fountains or her multitudinous population, or her genial climate,—not -by these could she recover her tarnished reputation, but by equity, -almsgiving, vigils, prayers, temperance. External size and beauty did -not constitute real greatness. David was little of stature, yet he -prostrated by a single blow a very tower of flesh. Away with these -womanish complaints! “I have heard many in the forum saying, ‘Woe to -thee, Antioch! what has become of thee? how art thou dishonoured!’ and -when I heard I laughed at the childish understanding of those who say -such things. It behoves you not to speak thus now; but, when you see -dancing, and drunkenness, and singing, and blaspheming, and swearing, -then utter the cry, ‘Woe to thee, O city! what has become of thee?’ but -when you see only a few equitable, temperate, and moderate men in the -forum, then call the city happy.”[319] - -He remonstrates indignantly with them for their querulous complaints -of the prohibition to use the public baths. Bathing, indeed, was a -luxury so indispensable to the bodily health and comfort of the people, -that they now resorted to the river in large numbers, with very little -regard to decency. He reminds those who murmured over this deprivation -of their favourite indulgence, that a short time ago, when they were -daily expecting an incursion of soldiers, and were flying to the desert -and mountains, they would have been too thankful to escape with so -cheap a penalty. He urges the duty of reconciliation with enemies as -specially incumbent on them when such great efforts were being made -to obtain mercy for themselves. They should have one enemy alone, the -devil, with whom they should wage an implacable warfare.[320] - -Thus the prophet, ever vigilant for the true welfare and honour of his -people, ceased not to lift up his voice. - -Cæsarius travelled day and night, and in the course of a week -accomplished the eight hundred miles which separated Antioch from -Constantinople. But his arrival and his errand had been anticipated. -Flavian had reached the court a week before, and the pardon of Antioch -was already secured. The aged bishop returned to Antioch just in -time to celebrate Easter, and to augment the natural joyfulness of -the festival by the tidings which he brought. He had, however, been -preceded a few days by an express courier, who delivered the imperial -rescript to Hellebicus. When the contents were publicly proclaimed, -the pent-up feelings of the people burst forth into demonstrations of -almost frantic joy. Hellebicus was received with ovation wherever he -went. Libanius walked by his side, reciting passages from his orations, -in honour of Theodosius and praise of the two commissioners.[321] On -Holy Saturday, Flavian himself entered the city, partly attended, -partly borne along, by vast crowds of grateful people. On that night -the forum was decorated with garlands and illuminated by lanterns. On -the next morning, Easter Day, a vast concourse thronged the church, -and once more the well-known voice, which had exhorted and encouraged -and warned, during the days of their gloom, now poured forth in the -sunshine of their joy a pæan of thanksgiving and praise. - -“Blessed be God, who hath vouchsafed us to celebrate this holy feast -with great joy and gladness, who has restored the Head to the body, -the Shepherd to the sheep, the Master to his disciples, the Pontiff to -the priests. Blessed be God, who hath done exceeding abundantly above -all that we ask or think, for it seemed to us sufficient to be for a -time released from the impending calamities; but the merciful God, ever -exceeding in His gifts our petitions, has restored to us our father -sooner than all our expectation. And not only has our beloved prelate -escaped all the perils incident to so long a journey in the winter -season, but has found his sister, whom he left on the point of death, -still living to welcome his return.”[322] - -He then proceeds to describe the interview of Flavian with Theodosius, -as it had been related to him by an eye-witness. The bishop, when -introduced into the royal presence, stood at a distance, silently -weeping, bending low, and covering his face, as if he himself had been -the author of all the late offences. By this attitude he hoped to expel -emotions of anger, and introduce the emotion of pity into the Emperor’s -breast, before he undertook the actual defence of the city. - -Theodosius was moved; he advanced to the bishop, and used no harsh -or indignant language, but only mildly reproached with ingratitude a -city which he had always treated with lenity, and had long desired and -intended to visit. Even had the people been able to accuse him of any -injury done to them, they might at least have respected the dead, who -could do them no harm (alluding to the destruction of his wife’s and -father’s images). - -The aged prelate no longer remained silent. With a fresh flood of -tears, he poured forth his pathetic appeal to the Christian clemency -and forbearance of the Emperor. “He would not attempt to extenuate -the offence, the sense of their ingratitude caused them the deepest -distress, and they frankly confessed that it deserved the severest -chastisement which could be inflicted. Yet the noblest kind of revenge -which he could take was freely to forgive the insult; thereby he would -defeat the malice of those demons who had tried to work the ruin of -the people by seducing them from their allegiance. In like manner, -the devil had tried to compass the death of the human race, but his -malevolence had been frustrated by God, who offered even heaven to -those who had been excluded from paradise. A free pardon would secure -for him a station in the hearts of all his subjects, far more enduring -than those statues which had been broken down. He reminded him, how -once his great predecessor, Constantine, when urged to revenge some -insult done to one of his statues, passed his hand over his face, -and observed, with a quiet smile, that he did not feel the blow;—a -saying which had endeared him to his people more than his military -exploits. But why need he refer to Constantine? Theodosius himself, on -a previous Easter, had commanded a general release of prisoners, and -had nobly exclaimed, ‘Would that it were possible also for me to recall -the dead to life!’[323] Now he might in some sort realise that wish, -by restoring to life a whole city, which lay, as it were, dead under -remorse and fear. Such an act of clemency would both strengthen his -own throne and the cause of Christianity. Greeks, Jews, and barbarians -were waiting to hear his decision. If it was on the side of mercy, -all would applaud it, saying, ‘Heavens! how mighty is the power of -Christianity, which has restrained the wrath of a monarch who has not -his peer in the world.’ How noble a tale for posterity to hear, that -what the governor and magistrates of a great city dared not ask, had -been granted to the prayer of an old man, because he was the priest of -God, and from reverence to the Divine laws. He would solemnly remind -him of the words, ‘If ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither -will your Father which is in heaven forgive you your trespasses.’ He -begged him to remember that there was a day coming in which all men -would render an account of their actions, and to imitate the example -of God, who, though daily sustaining insults from man, did not cease -to bestow blessings upon him. He concluded by declaring that he would -never return to Antioch unless he could take back the imperial pardon, -but would enrol himself in another city.”[324] - -If Flavian’s intercession was thrown into the form of an oration at -all, it is clear that Chrysostom’s version of it, which has been here -greatly condensed from the original, must be his own, rather than the -speech actually delivered. If it had been only half as long, it could -not have been accurately related to him from memory, or faithfully -rehearsed by him afterwards. The excitement of addressing so large an -audience, on so great an occasion, would naturally stimulate him to -amplify and embellish. - -There is, however, no reason to doubt that Chrysostom has furnished us -with an accurate description of Flavian’s conduct in the interview, -and given us the main substance of his arguments. The whole narrative -of the occurrence illustrates the difference between the Eastern and -Western character. Compare the demeanour of Ambrose and of Flavian. -The first speaks in a tone of majestic authority, which brooks no -disputing; the other, though far from deficient in courage, approaches -the Emperor with that deferential and submissive manner which the -Oriental is accustomed to adopt in the presence of a potentate. His -tone is that of an appeal, though based upon the highest grounds; not -of a command. There is something of the courtier in Flavian; in Ambrose -there is more of the pope. - -To conclude Chrysostom’s account: the Emperor was deeply affected, -though, like Joseph, he refrained himself in the presence of -spectators. He declared his intention of granting a free pardon, in -language eminently Christian. “If the Lord of the earth, who became -a servant for our sakes, and was crucified by those whom He came to -benefit, prayed for the pardon of his crucifiers, what wonder was it -that a man should forgive his fellow-servants?” He begged Flavian to -return with all expedition, that he might release the people from the -agony of their suspense. The bishop entreated that the young prince -Arcadius might accompany him as a pledge of imperial favour to the -city. But Theodosius said that he designed to confer on Antioch a -greater honour. He requested the bishop to offer up prayers for the -termination of the present war, that he might ratify his pardon by a -visit to the city in person. The express courier was then despatched, -while Flavian followed at a pace more suitable to his dignity and -advanced age. - -Chrysostom concludes his discourse by a moral exhortation suggested -by those festive demonstrations of joy already described. “Let the -lanterns and the chaplets be to them emblems of spiritual things. Let -them not cease to be crowned with virtue or to light up a lamp in their -soul by the diligent practice of good works; let them rejoice with holy -joy, and thank God not only for rescuing them from destruction, but for -sending them so wholesome a chastisement, the salutary effects of which -would, he trusted, extend to many generations.”[325] - -Thus terminated the celebrated sedition of Antioch. It is a singular -and instructive picture of the times: the impulsive character of the -people in the great Eastern cities of the Empire, alternating between -frantic rage and abject despondency; the expectation of violent -imperial vengeance, nothing less than the extermination of the city; -the remarkable veneration paid to monks,—these are points which stand -out in vivid colours. But still more remarkably does this event supply -an example of the softening, humanising influence of Christianity, in -a fierce and heartless age. The issue reflects the greatest honour -on those who brought it to pass; and they were _all Christians_: the -intrepid old bishop, sacrificing comfort and risking life to intercede, -the generous Emperor who yielded to the persuasion of his Christian -arguments; the humane commissioners; and last, but not least, the -pastor and preacher, who with unwearied patience, invincible courage, -unfailing eloquence, sustained the fainting spirits of his flock, and -endeavoured to convert their calamity into an occasion of lasting good. - -One great and happy result of the recent trouble was a large accession -of Pagans to the ranks of the Church. When the city lay under ban, -the baths, theatres, and circus were closed, and the panic-stricken -people had no heart to pursue their ordinary business. But one place -had been constantly open. All knew that in the church prayer was being -offered up day by day; and to the first portion of the service, up -to the end of the sermon, there was free admission for all without -respect of creed. Curiosity alone, if not any deeper feeling, would -lead many Pagans to turn into the church, to hear what consolations, -what encouragements, the Christian preacher had to offer in this -season of general distress and painful suspense. And what had they -heard? They had heard an unsparing exposure and denunciation of the -follies and vices which prevailed in that great and dissolute city, a -trumpet-call to repentance and reformation; they had heard the fleeting -nature of earthly honour and earthly riches, their impotence to satisfy -the heart or to save the life in the time of danger and distress -vividly contrasted with the Christian’s aim of laying up incorruptible -treasure in an imperishable world; they had heard of the Christian’s -faith that righteousness was the only permanent good, as sin was the -only real evil, that to a good man death was only the transition to -a more blessed life, and that affliction was useful in purifying and -elevating the soul. They had heard the proofs of a Creator, and of His -providential care for the things which he had made as evinced by the -majesty, beauty, and organisation of the universe, by the conscience -and moral faculties of man, as well as by the more direct testimony -of the written word.[326] There is no evidence as to the number of -converts reclaimed from Paganism. Chrysostom only informs us[327] -that he was occupied for some time after the return of Flavian with -confirming in the faith those who “in consequence of the calamity had -come to better mind and deserted from the side of Gentile error.” - -The sermons themselves are lost. - - - - -CHAPTER XII. - - ILLNESS OF CHRYSOSTOM—HOMILIES ON FESTIVALS - OF SAINTS AND MARTYRS—CHARACTER OF THESE - FESTIVALS—PILGRIMAGES—RELIQUES—CHARACTER OF PEASANT - CLERGY IN NEIGHBOURHOOD OF ANTIOCH. A.D. 387. - - -Very probably the physical labour and mental strain which Chrysostom -had undergone during the events recorded in the previous chapter may -have brought on the illness to which he alludes in the homily preached -on the Sunday before Ascension Day.[328] He was prevented by this -attack from taking part in the services which were held some time after -Easter under the conduct of Bishop Flavian at the chapels built over -the remains of martyrs and saints.[329] A variety of homilies delivered -by Chrysostom at such “martyries” on other occasions are extant, and it -may be as well to introduce here such indications as can be collected -from them of the general feeling of the Church, as well as of himself, -with regard to saints, and such kindred subjects as pilgrimages and -reliques. - -Churches had in most instances been erected to commemorate the death of -a martyr, or to mark the spot where he died. Tertullian’s saying that -“the blood of martyrs was the seed of the Church” thus became verified -in a literal, material sense. Socrates (iv. 23) even speaks of the -churches of St. Paul and St. Peter at Rome as their “martyries,” as -Eusebius[330] also calls the church which Constantine built on Golgotha -the “martyry” of our Saviour. By the age of Chrysostom the festivals -of martyrs and saints had grown so numerous that frequently more than -one occurred in the same week.[331] Good Friday and Ascension Day, and -the Sunday after Whitsun Day (not observed as Trinity Sunday till much -later), were especially dedicated to the commemoration of saints.[332] -The congregation kept a vigil the night before, or very early before -dawn on the Saints’ day itself. The vigil consisted of psalms, hymns, -and prayers, and was followed early in the day by a full service, when, -in addition to the ordinary lessons of the day, the acts or passions -of the saint or martyr were read. St. Augustine permitted his people -to sit during the reading of them because they were often of great -length. Pope Gelasius forbade them to be read because they were so -seldom authentic.[333] The martyries were generally outside the city -walls, not always built over the grave of the saint, but close to it; -in which case the congregation assembled at the grave first, and walked -in procession from it to the church, singing hymns as they went. There -can be no doubt that Chrysostom believed in the intercessory power of -departed saints, and encouraged the invocation of their intercession. -They were nearer to the Divine ear, and by virtue of their glorious -deaths had justly obtained more confidence in making their requests to -God than had the inhabitants of earth. He implores Christians not to -resort for medical assistance to Jews, who were the enemies of Christ, -but to seek aid from His friends the saints and martyrs, who had much -confidence in addressing God.[334] At the close of his homily on the -festival of two soldiers who had been beheaded by Julian for obstinate -adherence to Christianity, he says: “Let us constantly visit them, -touch their shrine, and with faith embrace their reliques, that we may -derive some blessing therefrom; for like soldiers who converse freely -with their sovereign when they display their wounds, so these, bearing -their heads in their hands, are easily able to effect what they desire -at the court of the King of Heaven.”[335] So, again, in the homily on -Bernice and Prosdoke: “Let us fall down before their reliques ... let -us embrace their shrines: not only on their festival, but at other -times, let us resort to them and invoke them to become our protectors; -for they can use much boldness of speech when dead, more, indeed, than -when they were alive, for now they bear in their bodies the marks of -Jesus Christ ... let us therefore procure for ourselves, through them, -favour from God.”[336] Thus the saint is to be appealed to as a kind -of friend at court, who will present petitions, and use his influence -to obtain a favourable answer from the Monarch; but the further step -of invoking saints as the _direct_ dispensers of spiritual and other -benefits had not yet been taken. The feeling of the Church of Smyrna -towards their beloved martyr and bishop Polycarp, as expressed in -A.D. 160 to the Church of Philomelium, still represented the general -state of feeling in the Church.[337] The Jews and other malignants had -suggested, when the remains of Polycarp had been earnestly asked for, -that the Christians intended to worship him; and “this they said, being -ignorant that we should never be able to desert Christ, or worship any -other Being. For Him, being the Son of God, we adore, but the martyrs, -as the disciples and imitators of the Lord, we love with a deserved -affection; desiring to become partners and fellow-disciples with them.” -The language of St. Augustine and St. Chrysostom thoroughly corresponds -to that in the passage just cited. “Our religion,” says Augustine, -“consists not in the worship of dead men; because if they lived piously -they are not considered likely to desire that kind of honour; but would -wish Him to be worshipped by us through whose illumination they rejoice -to have us partners with them in their merit. They are therefore to be -honoured for the sake of imitation, not to be worshipped as a religious -act.”[338] And in another place: “Christian people celebrate the -memory of martyrs with religious solemnity, to stimulate imitation, to -become partners in their merits, and to be assisted by their prayers; -but in doing this we never offer sacrifice to a martyr, but only to -Him who is the God of martyrs.”[339] A multitude of passages might be -cited from Chrysostom’s homilies on Saints’ Festivals, in which he -passionately exhorts to the imitation and emulation of their noble -lives and glorious deaths, and dwells on the great advantages to the -Church arising from these solemn commemorations. The very memory of -the martyrs wrought upon the minds of men in confirming them against -the assaults of wicked spirits, and delivering them from impure and -unseemly thoughts; ... the death of the martyrs was the exhortation -of the faithful, the confidence of Churches, the confirmation of -Christianity, ... the reproach of devils, the condemnation of Satan, -a consolation in affliction, a motive to patience, encouragement to -fortitude, the root, fountain, mother of all which is good.[340] - -But if no inculcations to direct worship of saints are to be found in -Chrysostom, it is evident that no small virtue was ascribed by popular -faith (and, in his opinion, justly) to their remains.[341] Miracles -of healing were wrought, or supposed to be wrought, at their tombs; -demons were expelled by the application of their ashes to the persons -possessed. It is obvious that, where such a belief has taken possession -of the popular mind, prayer will very soon be addressed to the saint -for the direct bestowal of those advantages which are supposed to be -derivable from his reliques. Pilgrimages were fashionable in all parts -of Christendom. Prefects and generals, when they visited Rome, hastened -to pay their devotion at the tombs of the tentmaker and fisherman; -journeys were made into Arabia to visit the supposed site of Job’s -dunghill.[342] - -Two different causes seem to have led on the mind of the Church to an -increasing veneration of martyrs. First, the Church owed to them a real -debt; the heroic steadfastness of their deaths contributed much to -promote and establish Christianity. Chrysostom observes how the sight -of the aged Ignatius going to die at Rome for his faith—going not only -with calmness, but even with alacrity—mightily confirmed the souls of -the disciples in the several cities through which he passed.[343] “As -irrigation made gardens fruitful, so the blood of martyrs gave drink -to the Churches.”[344] Honour, affection, veneration, easily pass into -actual adoration. - -Secondly, there is a natural desire to bridge over the chasm which -divides the human nature from the Divine, and earth from heaven, by -enlisting the agency of some intermediate being. In its earliest -conflicts with heresy, theology was chiefly engaged in zealously -defending the pure divinity of Christ—his co-equal, co-eternal -power and majesty with the Father. The more He was withdrawn into a -less accessible region of exalted deity, the more this need of the -half-deified human interpositor was felt, and worked itself out at last -into a distinct article of faith. - -Some of those abuses of saints’ days, which we are apt to associate -more especially with medieval times, were far from uncommon in the days -of Chrysostom. The day which had begun in fasting, and was preceded -by a vigil, too often terminated in a very carnal kind of revelry. -“Ye have turned night into day by your holy vigils: do not turn day -into night by drunkenness, surfeiting, and lascivious songs; let not -any one see you misbehaving in an inn on your return home.”[345] A -custom prevailed of holding a “love-feast,” at or near the tomb of -the saint, which was furnished by the oblations of the wealthier -devotees. Chrysostom on one occasion urges his congregation to attend -such a sacred banquet when they dispersed after service, instead of -hurrying off to the diabolical entertainments at Daphne. The sight -of the martyrs, standing as it were near their table, would prevent -their pleasure from running to excess.[346] But there is abundant -evidence in other contemporary writers that these meetings too often -did degenerate into scenes of mere conviviality and intemperance. -St. Augustine speaks of those who “made themselves drunk at the -commemoration of martyrs.”[347] St. Ambrose prohibited all such feasts -in the churches of Milan; and St. Augustine cited his example to obtain -a similar prohibition from Aurelius, the Primate of Carthage.[348] -St. Basil reprobates a growing custom of trading near the martyries -on festival days, under pretence of making a better provision for the -feasts, to which we may fairly, perhaps, attribute the universal -custom in Christendom of holding fairs on saints’ days.[349] As they -were in medieval times, so in Roman Catholic countries at the present -day, the booths of the fair are in close contiguity with the walls of -the church, and they who attend mass in the morning, as well as those -who do not attend it at all, may disgrace themselves by drunkenness -and all kinds of folly in the evening. Such abuses are an inevitable -consequence of keeping up the observance of days after the real -enthusiasm for the person or cause which they commemorate has begun to -grow, or has altogether grown, cold. Little may ever have been really -known about the saint whose memory is celebrated, and that little -ceases to speak with any meaning to the minds of later generations. -The service, which was once a living reality, becomes a cold and empty -form, or the place of religious enthusiasm is supplied by some form of -sensual excitement. Crowds of peasants will not fail to be attracted to -a church which blazes with thousands of candles arranged in fantastic -patterns, and which rings with noisy sensational music: they probably -place a superstitious faith in the tutelary power of their patron: but -how different is all this from the hearty, genuine, reasonable devotion -of more enlightened worshippers to the Lord Himself, and the less -strong but more real respect and honour paid by such to His day! It is -surely one among many proofs of the deep and lasting hold of Christ’s -character upon the mind of men, of the applicability of its influence -to all times and places, and of its Divine superiority to that of all -His followers, however exalted, that abuses which have accompanied the -commemorations of saints have never extended in the same degree to His -day.[350] - -As already remarked, Chrysostom was prevented this year by illness -from attending the festivals of saints and martyrs, which fell very -thickly between Easter and Whitsun Day. He commences his homily -preached on the Sunday before Ascension Day with an allusion to his -recent sickness, and tells his congregation that, though absent in body -from their sacred festivities, he had been present and rejoiced with -them in spirit; and now, though he had not fully recovered his health, -he could not refrain from meeting his beloved and much-longed-for -flock again. He was the more anxious also to occupy his accustomed -place on that day, because large numbers of the rustic population -from the neighbouring country had flocked into the city and attended -the services of the church. They spoke a different dialect, but they -were one with the Christian inhabitants of the town in the soundness -of their faith; and their habits of simple piety, pure morality, and -honourable industry, put to shame the dissolute manners and indolence -which prevailed in the city. Their peasant clergy were a noble race of -men; they might be seen, one while yoking their oxen to the plough, -and marking out furrows in the soil, another while mounting the pulpit -and ploughing the hearts of their flock; now cutting away thorns from -the ground with a sickle, now cleansing men’s minds from sin by their -discourse: for they were not ashamed of hard work, like the people of -the city, but of idleness, knowing that it was idleness which taught -men vice, and had been from the beginning to those who loved it the -schoolmaster of all iniquity. Though little skilled, by training, -in reasoning or rhetoric, they proved more than a match for those -counterfeit philosophers who paraded themselves about the streets with -their professional cloak, staff, and beard, but who could not give -any satisfactory information on the subjects upon which they expended -such a heap of words,—as the immortality of the soul, the creation of -the world, Divine Providence, a future world and judgment. The rustic -pastor, being simply and firmly persuaded of the truth of these things, -could instruct men with clearness and decision about them; he could -give solid matter, the others only polished language, like a man who -should have a sword with a silver ornamented hilt, but a weak blade. -Their wives were not luxurious creatures, covering themselves with -unguents, paints, and dyes, but simple, sober, quiet matrons; which -increased the influence of the pastor over the people committed to his -charge, and caused the precept of St. Paul, “having food and raiment, -let us be therewith content,” to be strictly observed[351] among them. - - - - -CHAPTER XIII. - - SURVEY OF EVENTS BETWEEN A.D. 387 AND A.D. 397—AMBROSE - AND THEODOSIUS—REVOLT OF ARBOGASTES—DEATH OF - THEODOSIUS—THE MINISTERS OF ARCADIUS—RUFINUS AND - EUTROPIUS. - - -Some account has now been given of the most remarkable among the -homilies delivered by Chrysostom during the first year of his -priesthood; not only because to follow the course of the Christian -seasons through the cycle of one year seemed the most convenient -method of giving specimens of his ordinary style of preaching, but -also because these first efforts were seldom if ever surpassed in -power and beauty by his later productions. A more extensive survey of -his theology, under its several heads, is reserved for the concluding -chapter; and the remainder of the ten years during which he resided at -Antioch being uneventful as regards his life, it will be profitable to -fill up the gap by taking a glance at the world outside his present -sphere. Some knowledge of contemporary events and men is indeed -necessary to a just appreciation of his position and conduct, when he -is summoned to occupy a more public and exalted station. - -It is a melancholy scene which meets the eye. The mighty fabric of -the Empire crumbles, perhaps more rapidly in this decade than in any -previous period of equal length—like an old man whose constitution is -thoroughly broken. - -Effeminate luxury in the civilised population is matched by the rude -ferocity of the barbarians who hem it in or mingle with it, and the new -barbarian patch agrees ill with the old garment, which is not strong -enough to bear it. The pages of historians are filled with tales of -murder, massacre, treachery, venality, corruption, everywhere and of -all kinds. There is no national greatness, but great men move across -the stage: Theodosius himself, generous, just though passionate, -vigorous when roused to a sense of emergency; the last Emperor who -deserved the name of “great;” Ambrose, the intrepid advocate of -religious duty to God and man, the champion of the rights of Church and -hierarchy; Stilicho, the skilful commander of armies and able guardian -of the Empire after the death of Theodosius; Alaric, the very type of -Gothic force; Rufinus and Eutropius, the clever, scheming adventurers, -destitute of all nobility, who in a degenerate court contrive to raise -themselves to the pinnacle of power, and are suddenly toppled headlong -from it. - -The most commanding public character in the West at this time was, and -for some years had been, Ambrose, Archbishop of Milan. Disliked but -feared by the Arian court, respected and beloved by the people, he -fought in some respects a similar battle to that in which Chrysostom -was afterwards engaged in the East, and amidst many differences there -are also many parallels in the character and history of the two men: -the same fearless courage to speak what they believed to be God’s -truth, in the face of royalty itself, animated both; in both cases -was it rewarded by virulent persecution; both had to contend with an -imperious, passionate woman; both were protected from her fury by the -populace keeping guard night and day before the walls of the church. -In A.D. 384, Ambrose had been summoned before a royal council, and, in -the presence of the young Emperor Valentinian II. and the Queen-mother -Justina, had been commanded to surrender the Portian Basilica for the -use of the Arians. But Ambrose had replied undauntedly, that not one -inch of ground which had been consecrated to truth would he concede -to error.[352] For more than two years Ambrose maintained his ground -against all the stratagems of his adversaries. On one occasion they -seized the Portian Basilica, but dared not hold it in the face of the -infuriated people. Messengers from court endeavoured to maintain before -the archbishop that the Emperor had a right to dispose of the churches -as he pleased, but the argument was contemptuously dismissed as a base -sophistry. “What!” he cried; “the Emperor has no right to violate the -house of a private individual, and think you that he may do violence -to the house of God? No! let him take all that is mine—my land, my -money, though these belong to the poor; if he seeks my patrimony, let -him seize it; if my person, I will present it to him: but the church it -is not lawful for me to surrender, or for him to accept.”[353] Force -was not more successful than argument. Soldiers were sent to dislodge -him and his congregation from one of the basilicas, but instead of -drawing their swords they fell on their knees, and declared that they -came not to attack the archbishop, but to pray with him. The effect of -an edict was tried in A.D. 386,[354] which permitted free worship to -all who professed the creed of Rimini (an Arian creed), and rendered -liable to capital punishment any who should impede the action of the -edict, as offenders against the imperial majesty. Under shelter of this -edict, the Portian Basilica was again demanded, but Ambrose refused to -recognise such an edict, which militated against his sense of duty to -a higher power. “God forbid that I should yield the heritage of Jesus -Christ. Naboth would not part with the vineyard of his fathers to Ahab, -and should I surrender the house of God? the heritage of Dionysius, who -died in exile for the faith; of Eustorgius the confessor; of Miroclus, -and all the faithful bishops which were before me?”[355] But though -Ambrose disobeyed, the penalties of the edict were not enforced upon -him. An order of banishment was served upon him, expressed in vague -terms: “Depart from the city, and go where you please.” But Ambrose -did not please to go anywhere, and remained where he was, moving up -and down the city, and officiating as usual in the churches, using in -his sermons the same Scripture parallels to indicate the Queen-mother, -“Herodias” and “Jezebel,” which Chrysostom afterwards applied to the -Empress Eudoxia. He preaches day after day, guarded by his faithful -flock, who during passion-tide suffered him not to quit the cathedral -for fear of violence to his person. Amongst that crowd, touched by the -spell of the chants and hymns which Ambrose taught the people[356] to -beguile the tediousness of their watch, and impressed by his pungent -and decisive doctrine, are two remarkable persons, a mother and her -son. They are Monica and Augustine. Monica is among the most faithful -in watching, the most earnest in praying for the welfare of the bishop -and the church. Augustine is about thirty-two years old; he has been in -many places and passed through many phases of thought. He has subdued -the vices and follies which stained his youth; he has shaken off the -errors of Manicheism which for a time enthralled him; he has been a -teacher of rhetoric at Tagaste, at Carthage, at Rome; and Symmachus -has now obtained for him a professorial chair at Milan. But Pagan -literature is losing its hold upon him. Plato no longer fascinates -him equally with Holy Scripture. He is gravitating steadily towards -Christianity, and in another year, April 387, just about the time that -Chrysostom is delivering his homilies on the Statues, he will crown -his mother’s hopes by making a public confession of his faith, and -receiving baptism at the hands of Ambrose.[357] - -One more effort was made to win the contest, this time through -diplomacy. The court proposed that the question under dispute should -be settled by arbitration, the judges to be selected by Ambrose -and Auxentius the Arian bishop. But Ambrose would not accept the -arbitrators nominated by Auxentius, four of whom were Pagans and one a -catechumen. In the name of himself and the clergy of his province he -denied the validity of the tribunal. In an address to the people the -same lofty tone of independence was maintained. “He would pay deference -to the Emperor, but never yield in things unlawful: the Emperor was ‘in -the Church, not above it.’”[358] So he remained master of the field. -The unfinished basilica, which had been the prize contended for, was -consecrated by Ambrose with great pomp, and the joy of the people -was completed by the discovery of the martyrs’ skeletons beneath the -pavement, pronounced to be those of Gervasius and Protasius, who had -suffered in the persecution of Diocletian. When demoniacs shuddered on -being placed in proximity to these reliques, and a blind man was cured -by the application to his eyes of a handkerchief which had been placed -in contact with these same reliques, the crown was put on the triumph -of Ambrose; the people were more firmly convinced than ever that his -cause was the cause of God.[359] - -He was so indisputably the ablest man of the time in the West, that, -when danger impended over the state, the very court which persecuted -him turned to him to rescue the country. Threatening messages came from -the court of Maximus at Treves. Ambrose was the ambassador selected to -go and pacify or intimidate the tyrant. Maximus was a Catholic, and -a ruthless persecutor of those whom he deemed heretics, especially -Priscillianists; yet Ambrose did not hesitate to denounce his cruelty -to brethren who were Christians, however erring, as well as his -disloyal attitude towards Valentinian. The embassy was unsuccessful, -but the dignity of the ambassador and of the court which he represented -was fully maintained. The artifices by which another ambassador, the -Syrian Domninus, was blinded to the preparations of Maximus for the -invasion of Italy; the passage of the Alps by the usurper; the flight -of Justina and her son to Thessalonica; the prompt march of Theodosius -to the succour of Italy, and his complete victory over Maximus, near -Aquileia,—belong to the secular historian; but the connection between -Theodosius and Ambrose will be related here more in detail. - -There is no account of the first meeting between the two great -characters of the day—the Emperor and the archbishop. That Ambrose -immediately exercised influence over the imperial mind may be inferred -from the mildness of the measures by which the embers of the late -revolution were extinguished. No bloody executions took place; no -rigorous search for rebels was made; the mother and daughter of -Maximus—who had been himself beheaded—were provided with a maintenance. -Ambrose, in one of his letters, thanks the Emperor for granting -liberty, at his request, to several exiles and prisoners, and for -remitting the sentence of death to others. - -Theodosius could be generous to enemies, and was the zealous friend of -Catholic Christianity, but he was a strict punisher of any violations -of civil order, even when the offenders were Christian. The people of -Callinicum in Osrhoene, instigated by the bishop and some fanatical -monks, had set fire to a Jewish synagogue, and to a church of the sect -of Valentinians. The Emperor directed the Count of the East to punish -the offenders, and commanded the bishop to restore the buildings at the -expense of the Church. But the extension of such favour to heretics was -in the sight of Ambrose intolerable. It might, indeed, have been wrong -to disturb civil order, but it was far more wrong to reinstate error: -to order Christians to rebuild a place of worship for those who set -Christ at naught was, in his eyes, simple profanity. He expressed his -opinion to the Emperor in a letter. It is the first great instance of -the Church distinctly claiming a pre-eminence of authority superseding -that of civil law. “If I am not worthy to be listened to by you, how -can I be worthy to transmit, as your priest, your vows and prayers -to God?” Basing on this ground his right to speak out his mind, he -declares that “if the Bishop of Callinicum obeyed the imperial command, -he would be guilty of culpable weakness, and the Emperor would be -responsible for it. If he refused to obey, the Emperor could execute -his will by force of arms only; the labarum, perhaps the standard -of Christ, would be employed to rebuild a temple where Christ would -be denied. What a monstrous inconsistency!” The last words which it -contained were: “I have endeavoured to make myself heard in the palace; -do not place me under the necessity of making myself heard in the -church;” but the letter was unanswered, and so Ambrose put his threat -into execution. He preached in Milan in the presence of the Emperor; -“he compared the Christian priest to the prophets of the Old Testament, -whose duty it was to proclaim God’s message to the king himself, as -Nathan did to David. As the Israelites were warned not to say, when -they entered the land of Canaan, ‘My virtue has deserved these good -things,’ but ‘the Lord God has given them,’ so the Emperor should -remember that he was what he was by the mercy of God. Therefore, he -ought to love the body of Christ, the Church—to wash, kiss, and anoint -her feet, that all the dwelling where Christ reposes might be filled -with the odour; that is, he ought to honour his least disciples, and -pardon their faults; every one of the members of the Christian body was -necessary to it, and ought to receive his protection.” - -Having uttered such words, he descended from the altar steps. -Theodosius perceived that the archbishop had taken up his parable -against him, and as Ambrose was going out of the church he stopped him, -saying, “Is it I whom you have made the subject of your discourse?” -“I have said that which I deemed useful for you,” Ambrose replied. -“I perceive it is of the synagogue that you would speak,” rejoined -Theodosius. “I own that my commands have been a little severe, but -I have already softened them, and these monks are troublesome men.” -“I am going to offer the sacrifice,” said Ambrose; “enable me to do -so without fear for you; deliver me from the load which oppresses my -spirit.” “It shall be so,” responded the Emperor; “my orders shall be -mitigated; I give you my promise.” But Ambrose was not satisfied with -so vague an assurance. “Suppress the whole matter,” he said; “swear it -to me, and, on your sworn promise, I proceed to offer the sacrifice.” -The Emperor swore; Ambrose celebrated mass; “and never,” said he, in -a letter written the day after to his sister, “did I experience such -sensible marks of the presence of God in prayer.”[360] - -In the spring of A.D. 389, Theodosius made his triumphal entry into -Rome, accompanied by Valentinian and his own son Honorius, a boy -of ten. His arrival was preceded by two popular enactments: one -a decree, renouncing for himself and family all bequests made by -codicils—striking a blow at a vicious custom, which had long prevailed, -of bribing imperial favour for particular families, by bequeathing -large legacies to the reigning sovereign. By heathen emperors these -bequests had been sought with great cupidity; sick or old men were -sometimes threatened with an acceleration of death, unless they -satisfied the royal expectations in this way. The other, no less -popular, decree was, to abolish the custom by which royal couriers, -when conveying news of victory, exacted donations from the villages -through which they passed. The victory of Theodosius over Maximus was -the first which had been gratuitously proclaimed along the route to -Rome; and the people greeted the Emperor as he made his progress to the -capital with all the warmer welcome in consequence.[361] - -Rome had at this period scarcely recovered from the ferment into which -society had been thrown by the three years’ residence of Jerome, A.D. -382-385. His denunciations of clerical luxury; his cutting satires on -the vices and follies of the laity; his allurement to monastic life of -some of the wealthiest and noblest of the Roman ladies, had stirred up -a tumult of feeling for the most part adverse to him. But Theodosius -prudently abstained from interfering with the religious debates of -Rome. In Constantinople he was the absolute sovereign; in Rome he -desired to appear simply as the successful general and the foremost -citizen. He assumed no imperial or Asiatic splendour; he exhibited -no fastidious abhorrence of statues, temples, and other remnants of -Paganism. Symmachus, the most eminent Pagan citizen, was cordially -received, and gratified by the promise of consulship. The result of -this amiable and moderate conduct was that some of the most powerful -Roman families embraced the faith of the Emperor. - -A.D. 390. But the generosity which Theodosius had manifested towards -the people of Antioch, his moderation after the defeat of Maximus, and -during his triumphal residence in Rome, was presently stained by one -of those paroxysms of anger to which he was occasionally subject. The -intercession of Flavian had averted any such outburst in the case of -the sedition of Antioch; the authority of Ambrose, too late to prevent -the crime, enforced penance for the cruel vengeance executed on the -people of Thessalonica. - -Botheric, the governor of Thessalonica, had imprisoned a favourite -charioteer for attempting to commit a disgusting crime. The people, -passionately attached to the races of the circus, demanded his release -on a certain day to take part in the contest. The governor refused, -and the people then broke out into rebellion; the tumult was with -difficulty quelled by the troops, and not before Botheric had been -mortally wounded, several other officers torn to pieces, and their -mangled remains dragged through the streets. The irritation of the -Emperor, on hearing of this barbarous violence, was extreme; and all -the more so, because of Thessalonica he could have expected better -things. It did not contain, like Antioch, Rome, or Alexandria, a large -mixed population, but one almost exclusively Christian, and for the -most part even Catholic. The city was the scene of his early triumphs, -and frequently honoured by his visits. It is possible that Ambrose may -have pushed his exhortations to clemency too far in the first glow of -the Emperor’s resentment. At any rate, the counsel of those rivals or -enemies of Ambrose, who represented that the affair belonged purely to -civil government, and should be decided independently of all clerical -interference, prevailed. Rufinus, the flattering, heartless courtier, -persuaded Theodosius that a public offence of such magnitude deserved -the most merciless punishment which could be inflicted. Orders were -issued to the officials at Thessalonica to assemble the populace, as -if for a fête, in the circus, and then to let in the troops upon them. -This barbarous mandate was too faithfully executed. The unsuspecting -victims crowded into their favourite place of amusement; at a given -signal the soldiers rushed in, and in the course of two or three -hours the ground was strewn with some 7000 corpses of men, women, and -children.[362] The horror of the people of Milan was only equalled by -their astonishment. Was it possible that he who had displayed such -magnanimity and Christian moderation could be guilty of an act which -savoured of the most heathen treachery and ferocity? When the Emperor -returned from Rome, Ambrose withdrew from Milan into the country, -and thence wrote to him a letter expressing his horror at the recent -massacre; exhorting him to the deepest repentance and humiliation as -the only hope of obtaining mercy from God, and declaring that he could -not celebrate mass again in his presence. The mode by which the Emperor -was to expiate his guilt is not indicated in this epistle, and he -presented himself soon afterwards at the doors of the cathedral church -with his usual royal retinue. But he was confronted by Ambrose in his -pontifical robes, who with flashing eyes expressed his astonishment -at such audacity, and barred the entrance with his person. “I see, -Emperor, you are ignorant of the flagrancy of the murder which you have -perpetrated. Perhaps your unlimited power blinds you to your guilt, -and obscures your reason. Yet consider your frail and mortal nature; -think of the dust from which you were formed, and to which you will -return, and beneath the splendid veil of your purple recognise the -infirmity of the flesh which it covers. You rule over men who are your -brethren by nature, and by service to a common King, the Creator of all -things. How then will you dare to plant your feet in His sanctuary, -and elevate your hands towards Him, all dripping as they are with the -blood of men unjustly slain? How will you take into your hands the -sacred body of the Lord, or dare to put His precious blood to those -lips, which by a word of anger have spilt the blood of so many innocent -victims? Withdraw, then, and add not a fresh crime to those with which -you are already burdened.” The Emperor returned, conscience-stricken -and weeping, to his palace. For eight months no intercourse took place -between him and Ambrose. Christmas approached; exclusion from the -church at such a season seemed insupportable to the Emperor. Rufinus -found him one day dissolved in tears. “The church of God,” he cried, -“is open to the slave and the beggar, but to me it is closed, and -with it the gates of heaven; for I remember the words of the Lord: -‘Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.’” Rufinus -sought to console him: “I will hasten to Ambrose, and force him to -release you from this bond.” “No,” said the Emperor, “you will not -persuade Ambrose to violate divine law from any fear of imperial -power.” Rufinus, however, sought an interview with the archbishop; -but Ambrose spurned him indignantly from him, as being the chief -counsellor of the late massacre. Rufinus informed him that the Emperor -was approaching. “If he comes,” said the prelate, “I will repel him -from the vestibule of the church.” The minister returned to the Emperor -discomfited, and advised him to abstain from visiting the church; but -Theodosius had subdued all pride, and replied that he would now go and -submit to any humiliation which Ambrose might see proper to impose. He -advanced to the church. Perceiving the archbishop in the exterior court -or atrium, he cried, “I have come; deliver me from my sins.” “What -madness,” replied Ambrose, “has prompted you to violate the sanctuary, -and to trample on divine law?” “I ask for my deliverance,” said the -humbled monarch; “shut not the door which God has opened to all -penitents.” “And where is your penitence?” said the archbishop; “show -me your remedies for healing your wounds.” “It is for _you_ to show -them to _me_,” Theodosius replied; “for me to accept them.” Once more -Ambrose had gained the day. He could prescribe his own terms. First, -he required that the recurrence of a similar crime should be guarded -against by a decree which should interpose a delay of thirty days -between a sentence of confiscation or death and the execution of it. At -the expiration of this period the sentence was to be presented to the -Emperor for final reconsideration. Theodosius consented, ordered the -law to be drawn up, and subscribed it with his own hand. He was then -admitted within the walls, but in deeply penitential guise; stripped -of imperial ornaments, prostrate on the pavement, beating his breast, -tearing his hair, and crying aloud, “My soul cleaveth unto the dust, -quicken thou me according to thy word.” So he remained during the first -portion of the Liturgy. When the offertory began, he rose, advanced -within the choir to present his offering, and was about to resume the -place which at Constantinople he usually occupied—a seat in the midst -of the clergy, in the more elevated portion of the choir. But Ambrose -determined, by taking advantage of the Emperor’s present humiliation, -to put a stop to this custom. An archdeacon stepped up to Theodosius, -and informed him that no layman might remain in the choir during the -celebration. The submissive Emperor withdrew outside the rails. When -he had returned to Constantinople, he was invited by Nectarius, the -archbishop, to occupy his accustomed chair in the choir. “No!” replied -Theodosius, with a sigh; “I have learned at Milan the insignificance -of an Emperor in the Church, and the difference between him and a -bishop. But no one here tells me the truth. I know not any bishop -save Ambrose who deserves the name.”[363] He had hit the truth. The -difference between the conduct of Ambrose and of Nectarius symbolised -the difference between the character of the Western and Eastern Church -generally: the one stern, commanding, jealous of any encroachment of -the civil power; the other, subservient, submissive, courtier-like; the -one aspiring and advancing, the other receding and decadent. Chrysostom -would have told him the truth; but Chrysostom, in his uncompromising -and fearless honesty of purpose and speech, is such a grand exception -among the patriarchs of Constantinople, that he proves the general -rule. Even Flavian had only _supplicated_ mercy from the Emperor; -Ambrose _commanded_ it. - -On one subject the deference of Theodosius for the opinion of Ambrose -caused him some embarrassment. Ambrose, in common with the other -Western prelates, had recognised Paulinus as Bishop of Antioch—the -priest of the Eustathian party who had been consecrated by Lucifer of -Cagliari; and he now acknowledged Evagrius, his successor. Theodosius -was distracted between his friendship for Flavian, the rival of -Evagrius, and for Ambrose. Flavian was summoned to court. The Emperor -implored him to go to Rome and justify his claims before the Pope; but -Flavian refused. At the suggestion of Ambrose, the Western Bishops -assembled in council at Capua, and there delegated the decision to -Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria. Once more Flavian was summoned to -court, and advised to submit to the arbitration of Theophilus; but he -was still intractable. “Take my bishopric at once, and give it to whom -you please; but I will submit neither my honour nor my faith to the -judgment of my equals.” Nearly eighteen months were consumed in these -negotiations. The West grew impatient. The letters of Ambrose took a -severer tone: “Flavian has something to fear; that is why he avoids -examination. Will he place himself outside the Church, the communion -of Rome, and intercourse with his brethren?” The strife was mercifully -broken off by the sudden death of Evagrius, before he had time to -designate a successor; and the wound was salved, though not healed. -That final good work was destined to be accomplished by Chrysostom.[364] - -A.D. 392. Only a few years more of life remained for Theodosius, and -his reign was occupied at the end as at the beginning by quelling -rebellion in the West. When he returned to the East, in A.D. 391, after -the defeat of Maximus, he had generously left the youthful Valentinian -in full possession of all his hereditary dominions, which he had -rescued for him from the usurper. Arbogastes, a Gaul, was appointed -general of the forces; Ambrose was a kind of general counsellor. But -Arbogastes was bold, ambitious, unscrupulous. He possessed much -power; he determined to acquire the whole. He obeyed the commands of -his young sovereign or not, as suited his pleasure and purposes, and -surrounded him with creatures of his own, who, under the semblance -of courtiers, acted as spies and gaolers. Valentinian’s residence at -Vienne, in Gaul, became his prison rather than his palace. The sequel -belongs to secular history, and is well known. An open rupture took -place. Arbogastes threw off the mask. Valentinian was found strangled, -too late to receive baptism at the hands of Ambrose, whose coming he -had awaited with great eagerness as soon as he knew that his life was -in danger.[365] Once more Italy became the prey of a usurper; once more -the veteran Emperor of the East roused himself from his well-earned -repose, collected a huge force, consulted John, the hermit of the -Thebaid, on the issue of the war, solicited the favour of Heaven by -visiting the principal places of devotion in the city, and kneeling -on flint before the tombs of martyrs and apostles, then set out on -his march, and by the summer of A.D. 394 again looked down from the -Alps on the plains of Venetia, near the scene of his former victory -over one usurper, and now covered with the tents belonging to the -army of another. He prosecuted the campaign in the same religious -spirit in which he had undertaken it. The first assault made on the -5th of September against the enemy was repulsed. Theodosius rallied -and harangued the troops lifted up his eyes to heaven, and cried: “O -Lord, Thou knowest that I have undertaken this war only for the honour -of thy Son, and to prevent crime going unpunished; stretch forth, I -pray Thee, thy hand over thy servants, that the heathen say not of us, -‘Where is their God?’” The second assault was more successful; the -night was spent by the Emperor in prayer, who was rewarded towards dawn -by a vision of two horsemen, clothed in white, who bade him be of good -cheer, for that they were the apostles St. Philip and St. John, and -would not fail to come to his succour on the following day. The issue -of that day was decisive; the overthrow of Arbogastes complete; his -army routed; himself slain.[366] - -The conqueror was received by Ambrose, at Milan, with transports -of joy. The victory was nobly signalised by a display of Christian -clemency. Free pardon was proclaimed in the church (whither the -offenders had fled for refuge) to all those Milanese who had joined the -side of the usurper. Among them were the children of Arbogastes, and of -the puppet king whom he had set up, Eugenius. They were made to expiate -the crimes of their Pagan fathers by submitting to baptism.[367] - -But there was an increasing shade of gloom which overcast the general -sunshine of joy. The health of Theodosius, long undermined by a -disease, was now manifestly fast giving way. He was sensible of his -danger, and despatched a message to Constantinople, desiring that his -younger son, Honorius, should be sent to join him at Milan. The young -prince, accompanied by his cousin Serena (the wife of Stilicho) and -his little sister Placidia, set off without delay. They reached Milan -early in the year A.D. 395. Some shocks of earthquake, and terrific -storms, which coincided with their arrival, were regarded as portents -of future evil. The malady of Theodosius, a dropsical disorder, was -rapidly gaining ground. He revived a little at the sight of his son, -and received the Eucharist from the hands of Ambrose, which he had -hitherto refused, as having too recently been engaged in the sanguinary -scenes of war. He gave audience to a deputation of Western bishops, -who came to pay him homage, and besought them to heal the schism of -Antioch by acknowledging Flavian. He besought the Pagan members of the -senate of Rome to embrace the Christian faith, adding the somewhat -potent argument, that Pagan worship must no longer expect any pecuniary -aid from the State. He appeared for a few times at the circus, where -races were held in honour of his victory and the arrival of the young -prince; but one day, while dining, he was taken suddenly worse, and -expired early the next morning, Jan. 17th, A.D. 395, in the fiftieth -year of his age, and the sixteenth of his reign. Those who watched by -his bedside thought they detected the name of Ambrose faintly murmured -by his dying lips.[368] - -So passed away the last great Emperor of the Roman world.[369] He had -persistently kept in view a single and noble aim—the consolidation -of the Empire. He had repelled invasion, crushed rebellion, laboured -to extirpate heathenism, to suppress heresy, to reconcile opposing -factions in the Church; and the work seemed advancing when he was -called away, and years ensued of misrule and disorder, Gothic -devastation, and internal corruption and decadence. - -The history of the Empire under Arcadius and Honorius presents a -pitiable picture of imbecility on the part of the sovereigns; of -infidelity and unscrupulous ambition on the part of their ministers. -Theodosius himself, as he lay on his death-bed, was perhaps conscious -of impending troubles. The words supposed by Claudian to be spoken by -the shade of Theodosius to his son Arcadius: “Res incompositas fateor -tumidasque reliqui,”[370] express at any rate the true condition of -affairs. To Stilicho he commended his younger son, Honorius, and the -interests of the Western Empire, but added a request that he would not -neglect Arcadius and the Eastern portion of the Empire also. The legal -guardian, however, of Arcadius was not a man who would tamely submit -to any supervision, or to any encroachment, fancied or real, upon the -rights of his office. He was as jealous of Stilicho as Constantinople -was of Rome. Discernment of character cannot be reckoned among the -great qualities of Theodosius; otherwise he would not have intrusted -his two sons to the guardianship of two men dissimilar in all respects -but one—an insatiable love of power. He had placed the two weak princes -in the hands of deadly rivals. - -Rufinus, the guardian of Arcadius and regent of the East, was an -Aquitanian Gaul, born at Elusa, the modern Eauze, at the foot of the -Pyrenees.[371] He was the very model of an accomplished adventurer. -Sprung from poverty and obscurity, he was gifted by nature with a -handsome figure, a noble demeanour, a ready tongue, an inventive, -versatile wit.[372] He made his way, after residing in Milan and Rome, -to the court of Constantinople; and found in Theodosius a patron who -could appreciate his talents without detecting his vices. He rapidly -rose till he had attained the high distinction of “Master of the -Offices,” in A.D. 390; of consul, in connection with Arcadius, in A.D. -392; and, in A.D. 394, prætorian prefect _in presenti_, a position -second only to that of the Emperor himself.[373] He affected the -warmest zeal for the Catholic faith, and threw himself heartily into -the schemes of Theodosius for the suppression of heresy, no less than -into those for the consolidation of the social and political fabric. - -But underneath this appearance of patriotic enthusiasm he indulged what -Claudian terms an “accursed thirst” for gain.[374] By unjust law-suits -he wrested patrimonies from the poor, and manœuvred to marry the -daughters and widows of the wealthy to his own favourites, in order -that he might reap their legacies and gifts. If any exposure of these -iniquities was threatened, he stopped the mouths of accusers by large -bribes, and compensated his extortions from towns by making presents to -their churches or enlarging their public buildings. - -When Theodosius departed for the Italian war, Rufinus, being left -as guardian of Arcadius, began to conceive the project of elevating -himself to the imperial throne. He made a magnificent display of his -piety. Hard by his villa, or rather palace, in the suburb of Chalcedon, -called the Oak, a spot which afterwards acquired a melancholy notoriety -in the history of Chrysostom, he had built a church and a monastery -attached to it. This church he now determined to dedicate with great -pomp, and at the same time to be baptized himself. For this purpose -he assembled nineteen Eastern bishops, chiefly metropolitans, and a -number of Egyptian hermits; strange-looking figures, who, with their -raiment of skins, their flowing beards and long hair, excited much -superstitious reverence. In the midst of this august assembly, the -depredator of the East descended into the baptismal waters, arrayed in -the white robes typical of innocence. The celebrated Egyptian solitary, -Ammonius (who will come before us again), administered the sacrament, -and Gregory of Nyssa delivered a discourse.[375] Rufinus now surrounded -himself with a powerful party of followers; Arcadius was too stupid to -see, or too timid to oppose, the dangerous ambition of his so-called -protector. - -But the death of Theodosius and the elevation of Stilicho to the -guardianship of the West brought the intriguer face to face with an -able and determined soldier, who united some of the ferocity of the -barbarian with the steadfast patriotism of an old Roman. This last, -indeed, was the character which Stilicho, a Vandal by birth, but -educated at Rome, more especially emulated. It was his ambition to be -compared to Fabricius, Curtius, Camillus.[376] Great was his delight -when Claudius, himself called a second Virgil, likened him in his -verses to Scipio.[377] The poet declared that Theodosius had never -fought without Stilicho, though Stilicho had fought without Theodosius. -He was made not only the guardian but father-in-law of Honorius, -who was betrothed to his eldest daughter beside the death-bed of -Theodosius; the father dying in the happy assurance that, by creating -this parental tie, he had secured the fidelity of his minister. The boy -and girl were brought into the sick-room, exchanged rings, and repeated -the words which were dictated to them.[378] - -The regent of the East naturally became profoundly jealous of the -regent of the West, and in point of royal connection determined to -be even with him. He humoured Arcadius into a consent to marry his -own daughter; and his scheme seemed on the point of completion when -an inopportune matter of business took him away to Antioch, and his -enemy, the chamberlain Eutropius, took advantage of his absence to -frustrate the plan. A Frankish general, called Bautho, who had been -elevated to the consulship, but had prematurely died, left a daughter -of rare beauty named Eudoxia. The orphan girl was brought up by a -friend of Bautho, the son of Promotus, a magister militum, whom -Rufinus, in revenge for an insult, had caused to be assassinated. -Eutropius introduced a portrait of the young beauty to the notice -of Arcadius. Curiosity, and soon a tenderer sentiment, were excited -in the young Emperor’s breast; the cunning chamberlain fanned the -flame, till he was able to persuade the royal youth that Eudoxia was -a more eligible bride than the daughter of the low-born Gaul.[379] -The intrigue was conducted with such secrecy that Rufinus, on his -return from Antioch, remained unsuspicious, and his boastful remarks -on the approaching nuptials excited the indignation of the public. The -wedding-day was fixed for April 25, A.D. 395. Eutropius selected from -the imperial wardrobe some of the costliest female robes and jewels -which it contained. They were placed on litters, which, escorted by a -large train of splendidly apparelled serving-men, paraded the streets, -on the way, as was supposed, to the house of Rufinus. What was the -astonishment of the populace when the procession suddenly turned in -another direction, and presently stopped in front of the house of -Promotus! A loud shout of joy burst from the lips of the multitude, and -proclaimed to Rufinus the unpopularity of his project, and the general -satisfaction at its defeat. The bride thus cunningly substituted was -destined to play a conspicuous part in the later scenes of Chrysostom’s -career. She inherited the fair beauty, the energetic spirit, the -impulsive, sometimes fierce, temper of the race from which she sprang. -Her father had remained firmly attached to the Pagan religion of his -ancestors, but, in deference to Theodosius, his patron, he had allowed -his daughter to be baptized and educated in the Christian faith.[380] -Impatient of control, she resolved to possess herself of her husband’s -confidence in order to govern through him, and gradually to disengage -herself from the management alike of Rufinus and Eutropius. - -Rufinus had been thoroughly outwitted in his matrimonial scheme, but -his resources were far from being exhausted. The sequel of his life -belongs too exclusively to secular history to be more than glanced at -here. He played a subtle and desperate game, seldom if ever surpassed -in villainy. Some Hunnish tribes, encouraged by him, made incursions -into Armenia, Pontus, Cappadocia, and even as far as the vicinity -of Antioch.[381] The court was in the extremity of alarm, for the -main forces of the army and treasury had been drained to the West -when Theodosius marched against Arbogastes, and remained in the hands -of Stilicho. Worse still, the formidable chieftain Alaric, of the -royal race of the Visigoths, who had lately distinguished himself in -the Italian wars under Theodosius, began to complain of unrequited -services, and with a motley force of Huns, Alani, Sarmatians, and -Goths, descended into Thrace, and ravaged the country up to the walls -of Constantinople. The inhabitants were convulsed with panic; all -except the artful intriguer, who had already struck his bargain with -the invaders. He rode out of Constantinople accoutred as a Gothic -warrior, went through the farce of an interview with Alaric, and -returned with the joyful intelligence that his intercessions had -saved the city, and that the Gothic prince had consented to withdraw -his troops. And so he did; not, however, to retire to the Gothic -settlements in the north, but to pour southwards in a devastating -flood over Greece. This was the plot of Rufinus. The possession of the -Illyrian provinces was disputed between the courts of East and West. -Alaric occupied these. Stilicho, with extraordinary energy, collected a -large army, advanced against the devastator, who was supposed to be the -common enemy of the whole Empire; but when on the point of attacking -him, he was arrested by a message from Constantinople, which commanded -him to abstain from any hostilities against the ravager of Greece. “He -was the good friend of Arcadius: he occupied the province of Illyria as -his ally, which Stilicho was to evacuate immediately, and to restore -the troops and treasure which belonged to the East.” The troops were -sent back by Stilicho under the command of Gaïnas, but with the -secret understanding that he should compass the death of Rufinus. The -result is well known. Rufinus fell just as he was placing his foot on -the topmost round of his ladder of ambition. He was standing on the -tribune, where Arcadius was to proclaim him Cæsar, in the presence -of a vast multitude; he was making a flowery harangue to the troops, -complimenting them on their exploits, congratulating them on their -restoration to their homes, when those very troops closed in upon him, -plunged their swords into his body, and presently hacked it to pieces. -A soldier who got hold of his right arm, and having crooked the fingers -of the hand, went about the town, holding it in front of him, and -crying, “An obol, an obol for him who never had enough,” collected a -large sum by his grim and savage jest.[382] - -Arcadius was quite incapable of handling the reins of government -himself, and the downfall of one all-powerful minister would in any -case have been quickly followed by the rise of another; but, as it -happened, there was one ready to step immediately into the vacant -place. The fortunes of this person, the eunuch Eutropius, ran a strange -career. Born a slave, somewhere in the region of the Euphrates, and -condemned in infancy to the most degraded condition possible even to -slavery, he passed in boyhood and youth through the hands of many -owners. He performed the most menial offices as a household slave, -cutting wood, drawing water, or whisking the flies from his mistress’s -face with a large fan. Arinthus, an old magister militum, who had -become possessed of him, presented him to his daughter on her marriage; -and, in the words of Claudian, “the future consul of the East was -made over as part of a marriage dowry.”[383] But the young lady grew -tired of the slave, who was getting elderly and wrinkled, and without -attempting to sell him, simply turned him out of doors.[384] He lived -for a time, picking up a precarious livelihood, and often in great -want, till an officer about court at Constantinople took pity on him, -and with some difficulty obtained for him a situation in the lowest -ranks of the imperial chamberlains.[385] This was the beginning of -his rise. By the diligence and precision with which he discharged his -ordinary duties, by occasional witty sayings, and the semblance of a -fervent piety, he attracted the notice of the Emperor Theodosius, and -gradually acquired his confidence so as to be employed on difficult -and delicate missions. He it was whom the Emperor sent to consult the -hermit John in Egypt before undertaking the Italian campaign in A.D. -394.[386] - -On the death of Theodosius he became, in the capacity of grand -chamberlain, the intimate adviser and constant attendant of Arcadius; -and, when Rufinus was removed, the government was practically in his -hands, though he was careful to avoid the error of his late rival, -and was content with the reality without the display of power. He -continued to execute all the household duties which fell to his lot -as chamberlain with humble assiduity, and sought no other title than -what he possessed.[387] But it was soon apparent, to the amusement of -the East and the indignation of the West, that the eunuch slave was -really master of the Emperor of half the Roman world. He gradually -removed by his arts the friends of Theodosius from the principal posts -of trust, and replaced them by creatures of his own. By surrounding -his royal charge with a crowd of frivolous companions; by dissipating -his thoughts amidst a perpetual round of amusement, public spectacles, -chariot races, and the like; by taking him every spring to Ancyra in -Phrygia, where he was subjected to the soft enchantments of a delicious -climate and luxurious manner of life, he made the naturally feeble mind -of Arcadius more feeble still, and withdrew it from the influence of -every superior intellect but his own.[388] - -Whilst the effeminate monarch languished in inglorious ease in Phrygia, -the fairest and most renowned portions of his Empire were overrun by -the barbarian forces of Alaric. The sacred pass of Thermopylæ was -violated by the Gothic prince, and the ravager spread his devastations -over Peloponnesus. Once more Stilicho hastened to the rescue; once more -his hand was stayed by the astonishing announcement that Alaric was -rewarded for his career of spoliation by being made commander-in-chief -of the forces of the East. Thus the invader was turned into the -position of friend, and the defender into the position of rebel, who -had to withdraw with feelings of shame, disappointment, and rage. -To such base arts did the court of Arcadius, under the direction of -Eutropius, stoop to protect itself in its pitiful jealousy of its rival -in the West.[389] - -Eutropius mounted to the summit of power by the simple process of -putting all dangerous competitors out of the way, under various -pretexts, as treasonable or otherwise public offenders.[390] He -deprived them of their last hope of escape, by abolishing the right -of the Church to afford asylum to fugitives.[391] He sold the chief -functions of the State, and the command of the provinces, to the -highest bidders. He was ambitious even of military glory; and, to the -amusement of the enemy, as well as of the imperial army, appeared in -military costume at the head of the troops, to repel an incursion -of Huns. He succeeded, however, more in his negotiations by which -he bought off the enemy, than in his martial exploits, and returned -mortified by the ridicule which had attended his attempts in war.[392] - -From the pettiest detail of domestic life to the most serious affairs -of state, the minister was supreme. Arcadius was little more than a -magnificently dressed puppet. The descriptions of his palace read like -accounts in fairy tales: it swarmed with slaves of every conceivable -variety of race, profession, and costume; the floors of the imperial -apartments were sprinkled with gold dust, in the carriage of which -from Asia a special service of vessels and wagons was constantly -engaged.[393] The great annual public spectacle was the departure of -the Emperor for his summer sojourn in Phrygia. From an early hour the -streets were thronged with people eagerly waiting for the pageant. -At length, from the portals of the palace there issued a gorgeous -procession; soldiers in white uniform, with gold-brocaded ensigns; then -the body guard, called domestics, with their tribunes and generals -arrayed in robes flashing with gold, mounted on horses with golden -caparisons; each rider bore a gilded lance in the right hand, and in -the left a gilded shield studded with precious stones. In the rear, -surrounded by a grand cortége of state officials, came the imperial -car, drawn by milk-white mules, clothed in purple housings, which -were tricked out with gold and jewels. The sides of the car also were -gilded, and flashed out rays of golden light as it moved along towards -the harbour, where rode a fleet of barges richly decorated, waiting -to convey the royal traveller to the opposite shore of the Bosporus. -In strange contrast to all this splendour appeared in the centre of -the car the dull and somnolent countenance of the young Arcadius and -the wrinkled visage of his old minister. The multitude, ever greedy of -show, would eagerly strain forward their necks to catch a glimpse, if -it were only of the imperial ear-rings, or the circlet of his diadem, -or the strings of pearls upon his robe. With such empty exhibitions of -their puppet king did the wily minister seek to amuse the frivolous -inhabitants of the capital, while he himself enjoyed the exercise of -real power.[394] - - - - -CHAPTER XIV. - - DEATH OF NECTARIUS, ARCHBISHOP OF - CONSTANTINOPLE—EAGER COMPETITION FOR THE SEE—ELECTION - OF CHRYSOSTOM—HIS COMPULSORY REMOVAL FROM - ANTIOCH—CONSECRATION—REFORMS—HOMILIES ON VARIOUS - SUBJECTS—MISSIONARY PROJECTS. - - -Such was the political and social condition of the Empire in the year -A.D. 397. In September of that year died Nectarius, Archbishop of -Constantinople, a man of an easy, amiable disposition, who, not taking -a very elevated or severe view of the duties of his position, had -administered the see for sixteen years, without annoyance, but without -distinction.[395] A conscientious discharge, indeed, of episcopal -duties was at this epoch beset by no small difficulties in the great -cities of the Empire. Bishops of important sees now occupied a high -social rank.[396] This had to be assumed (in Constantinople at least) -in the midst of an intriguing, factious court, a corrupt, frivolous -people, and a demoralised, or at least secularised, clergy. “Nothing,” -said St. Augustine, “can in this life, and especially at this time, -be easier or more agreeable than the office of bishop, presbyter, or -deacon, if discharged in a perfunctory and adulatory manner; nothing -can in this life, and especially at this time, be more laborious and -perilous than such an office, if discharged as our heavenly Commander -bids us.”[397] And the testimony of Chrysostom’s friend, Isidore, Abbot -of Pelusium, is to the same effect: “True freedom and independence are -not to be found in these distinguished positions: it is so difficult to -rule some, and to submit to others; to direct some, and to be directed -by others; to be complaisant to some and severe to others.” Into this -difficult and delicate position the pious, single-minded, unworldly, -but courageous preacher of Antioch was to be suddenly transplanted, -and that in a city where the difficulties incident to such a position -existed in peculiar force. - -At the time of the decease of Nectarius, several bishops happened to -be sojourning in Constantinople on business, and as tidings of the -vacancy of the see got abroad, the number of episcopal visitors largely -increased; some coming as candidates, others by the invitation of the -Emperor, who wished to make the ceremony of consecration as dignified -and august as possible.[398] Constantinople became convulsed by all -those factious disputes and dissensions which usually attended the -election of a bishop to an important see, and which Chrysostom has so -vividly described in his treatise on the priesthood.[399] From dawn -of day the places of public resort were occupied by the candidates -and their partisans paying court, or paying bribes to the common -people; canvassing the nobles and the wealthy not without the potent -aid of rich and costly gifts, some statue from Greece or silk from -India, or perfumes from Arabia.[400] One of the most conspicuous -candidates was Isidore, a presbyter of Alexandria. His claims were -eagerly pushed by Theophilus, Archbishop of Alexandria, who had a -strong personal interest in securing his success. For Isidore was in -possession of a rather awkward secret in the past history of Theophilus -himself. When the war between Theodosius and the usurper Maximus was -impending, Isidore had been despatched by the Archbishop to Italy -with letters of congratulation to be presented to him who should -prove the conqueror. Isidore waited till victory had declared itself -in favour of Theodosius; presented the humble felicitations of the -patriarch, and returned to Alexandria. But he was unable on his return -to produce the other letter, designed for Maximus had he proved the -victor. According to his own account, it had been abstracted by the -reader who had accompanied him on the journey. Theophilus, however, -suspected the fidelity of Isidore himself, and that some ugly stories -which began to circulate respecting the affair had emanated from him. -The see of Constantinople, if secured through his interest, would be -an effectual means, he thought, of stopping the mouth of Isidore.[401] -But he was doomed to disappointment. While the several candidates and -their patrons were exhausting all their arts on the spot to obtain -the favour of the electors, the clergy and people, distracted by -conflicting bribes and arguments, unanimously decided to summon a man -from a distance who had not come forward at all. They submitted the -name of Chrysostom to the Emperor, who immediately approved their -choice.[402] In fact, the election of Chrysostom was in all probability -the suggestion of Eutropius. During a recent visit on public business -to Antioch, he had heard and recognised the eloquence of the great -preacher. Even if the heart of the man was not touched by the pungent -warnings, or warmed by the kindling exhortations of Chrysostom, he had -plenty of astuteness to perceive, if only such an eloquence could be -employed in the service of the Government, what a powerful engine it -would be.[403] The appointment, at any rate, was certain to be welcomed -by the people, and of popularity Eutropius stood greatly in need. By -the people of Antioch indeed Chrysostom was so deeply and ardently -beloved, that the question was how to remove him without causing -a disturbance of the public peace. The excitable feelings of the -populace at Antioch were at all times a train of powder which needed -but the application of a spark to cause a serious explosion of tumult. -The difficulty was solved by a mixture of force and fraud highly -characteristic of the chief designer and executor of the project. -Eutropius addressed a letter to Asterius, the Count of the East, who -resided in Antioch, and who promptly acted on his instructions. He -proposed to the unsuspecting Chrysostom that they should pay a visit -together to one of the martyries outside the city walls. Well pleased -to make this pious pilgrimage, the saintly preacher accompanied his -captor through the Roman gate, and turned his back on his beloved -native city, which he was destined never to revisit. At the martyry he -was seized by some Government officials, and carried on to Pagræ, the -first station on the high road for Constantinople. Here a chariot and -horses awaited them, together with one of the imperial chamberlains, -a “magister militum,” and an escort of soldiers. The bewildered -Chrysostom was hurried into the chariot, without any attention being -paid to his remonstrances or inquiries; the horses were put into a -smart gallop, and the pace well kept up to the next stage, where a -similar equipage was in waiting. Such was the rapid, but, considering -all the circumstances, undignified approach of the future archbishop to -take possession of his see.[404] - -Great was the joy of the people on his arrival, great the mortification -and consternation of the rival candidates. Theophilus loudly declared -that he would take no part in the ordination. “You will ordain him,” -said Eutropius, “or take your trial on the charges contained in these -documents;” producing certain papers of accusations brought against -him from various quarters, at the sight of which Theophilus turned -pale. His opposition was effectually silenced, though he nourished his -revenge for a future day.[405] And we may presume that he took the -lead, by virtue of his rank, in the ceremony of consecration—that is, -that he pronounced the consecration prayer and blessing, while two -other bishops held the gospels over the head, and the other prelates -who were present laid their hands on the head of the recipient of -consecration.[406] The ceremony took place on February 26, A.D. 398, -in the presence of a vast concourse of people, who came, no doubt, -not only to witness the spectacle, but to hear from the lips of one -so famed for eloquence the “Sermo enthronisticus,” or homily on the -lesson for the day, which was delivered by the new Patriarch[407] after -he had been conducted to his throne, and which was regarded as a test -of his powers. This discourse has not been preserved, but Chrysostom -alludes to it in the homily numbered xi. against the Anomœans, which -was the second discourse he delivered as archbishop. He there reminds -his hearers how in his first discourse he had promised, in his warfare -with heretics, to trust, not in the carnal weapons of human dialectic, -but in the spiritual armour of Holy Scripture, even as David had -confronted and prevailed over the Philistine with weapons which the -warrior despised, but which were crowned with success because blessed -by God.[408] In the review already taken of his discourses against -Arians and other heretics, it has been seen how faithfully he adhered -to this principle. - -The disadvantages of a monastic, secluded training, in one who was -called upon to occupy a large and important see, have been pointed -out by no one better than by Chrysostom himself,[409] and he now -experienced the truth of his own observations. His genius was not -of that practical order which displays itself in great discernment -of character and tact in the management of men; and his virtues were -of that austere kind, the virtues of the monk rather than of the -Christian citizen, joined to a certain irritability of temper and -inflexibility of will, which were ill calculated to first conciliate -and then delicately lead on to a purer way of life the undisciplined -flock committed to his care.[410] If Nectarius had been too much the -man of the world, his successor was, for the position in which he was -placed, too much the saint of the cloister. The new wine burst the old -bottles. He began immediately to reform with an unsparing hand—first -of all within the limits of his own palace. The costly store of silken -and gold-embroidered robes, the rich marbles, ornaments, and vessels of -various kinds which his courtly predecessor had accumulated, were sold -in exchange for homelier articles, and the surplus was applied to the -aid of hospitals and the relief of the destitute.[411] The bishop, and -many of the clergy of Constantinople, had been accustomed to entertain -and be entertained by the wealthy and the great. Ammianus Marcellinus -contrasts the luxurious style of living affected by the bishops of -great cities, who “rode about in their carriages, elaborately dressed, -and gave princely banquets,” with the frugal fare, the cheap clothing, -the modest deportment of the provincial bishops.[412] The admonition -of Jerome also to an episcopal friend demonstrates the tendency at -this period to an immoderate and worldly hospitality on the part of -the clergy. “Avoid,” he says, “giving great entertainments to the -laity, and especially to those who occupy high stations; for it is -not very reputable to see the lictors and guards of a consul waiting -outside the doors of a priest of Jesus Christ, nor that the judge of -a province should dine more sumptuously with you than in the palace. -If it be pretended that you do this only to be able to intercede with -him for poor criminals, there is no judge who will not pay greater -respect to a frugal priest than to a rich one, and show more deference -to your piety than to your wealth.”[413] Chrysostom, like Jerome, was -an uncompromising ascetic in his views on clerical life. He ate in -solitude the spare and simple diet of a monk, and declared that he -would never set foot at Court except on pressing affairs concerning -the welfare of the Church. When one considers what the character of -that Court was, it must be confessed that the resolution highly became -a Christian bishop.[414] His own seclusion might have been easily -tolerated if he had not exacted the same severe simplicity of life -in his clergy. He denounced their parasitical flatteries, and their -propensity to seek entertainments at the tables of the wealthy, and -insisted that their stipends must be quite sufficient to supply them -with the necessaries of life. He suspended many from their cures on -account of worldly or immoral conduct, and repelled others from the -Eucharist. Several of these became the most active organisers of -hostile cabals. - -But there was another cause of the archbishop’s unpopularity with -his clergy, which arose from his vigorous assaults upon a deep and -apparently most prevalent evil. - -Celibacy appears never to have been made obligatory on the clergy -of the Eastern Church. The Synod of Elvira, which enjoins celibacy, -was a purely Spanish synod;[415] and the decree of Pope Siricius to -the same effect, in A.D. 385, could not affect any countries beyond -Italy, Spain, and perhaps Southern Gaul. That decree is a remarkable -instance of the law-giving spirit of the Western Church, which hardened -tendencies into binding statutes. But sentiment and opinion were quite -as strong in favour of clerical celibacy in the East as in the West. -It was proposed at the Council of Nice that a canon should be passed -enforcing it upon every order of the clergy; a proposal which was -defeated only by the influence of the aged Egyptian monk Paphnutius, -who, though he had never been married, and had always lived an ascetic -life, earnestly deprecated the imposition of a burden upon all men -which some men only were able to bear. The result was that the clergy -were permitted to retain their wives whom they had married before -ordination, but were forbidden to marry after ordination. And this is -called “the ancient tradition of the Church.”[416] There can be no -doubt, however, that a profound conviction possessed the minds of all -the most earnest Christians in Eastern Christendom that the unmarried -life was inherently better than the married; and, consequently, -clerical celibacy was honoured and encouraged, though marriage was -allowable. On the other hand, there grew up, side by side with the -practice of celibacy, a custom which broke it in the spirit while it -was preserved in the letter. The same Council of Nice which by one -canon freely granted to the clergy the society of their lawful wives, -by another prohibits unmarried clergy of every rank to have any woman -dwelling under the same roof who was not their mother, sister, or -aunt.[417] It was the transgression of this canon which was indignantly -complained of by several writers[418] and at councils[419] in or near -the time of Chrysostom, as well as by Chrysostom himself. Under the -name of spiritual sisters, young women, often consecrated virgins of -the Church, lived, as they maintained, in all innocent and sisterly -affection with unmarried priests. But the risk to the morals of both -was imminent, and the scandal which it brought upon the clergy in the -eyes of the world was certain. Chrysostom denounces the custom on both -these grounds. Whether two treatises, one addressed to the men, the -other to the women, were composed at Constantinople, or, as Socrates -says, during his diaconate, they embody his views on the whole subject, -and afford a curious insight into clerical life in the great cities at -this epoch.[420] - -He places the offenders on the horns of a dilemma. “If you are weak, -the temptation to evil is so great, that for your own sake you ought -to avoid it; if you are strong, you ought to abandon the practice for -the sake of those who are weak.” They brought a great scandal on the -Church and opened the mouths of adversaries. An isolated sin would be -less severely visited than one which, though comparatively small in -itself, caused others also to offend. They should imitate the wisdom -of St. Paul, who would not do a thing in itself desirable or harmless, -if the evil resulting to some exceeded any possible advantage to -others.[421] A pretext for the reception of these unmarried women was -made on the ground that they were orphans who had no protectors. But -this became a great snare both to the women and the clergy: they were -occupied with the management of property instead of devoting themselves -to spiritual concerns. It would be far better that a maiden should -marry, than, by abstaining from marriage, involve herself and others in -worldly business who ought to be free from it. If poor, it was better -she should remain poor and friendless, than be received into a home -where the danger incurred by the soul would far exceed the advantages -procured for the body. There were many aged women who were poor, -friendless, maimed, or diseased; the city was full of them. These were -the most deserving objects of clerical charity, and on them it could -be exercised without fear of reproach.[422] These “spiritual sisters” -appear from Chrysostom’s account to have often lived very much like -fine ladies of fashion. “How incongruous and ludicrous,” he says, -“when you enter the house of one who calls himself a single man, to see -articles of female dress and instruments of female occupation lying -about—girdles, head-gear, wool-baskets, spindles, distaffs!” In the -elaboration of their dress these companions often surpassed actresses; -they were gossips and match-makers. The man who ought to have renounced -all worldly calls might be seen inquiring at the silversmith’s if his -lady’s mirror was ready, her casket finished, her flask returned; -from the silversmith’s he hurried to the perfumer’s to see about her -scents; from the perfumer to the linen-draper, and so on upon a round -of shopping. All this business and worldly worry made them harsh to -the servants, who retaliated by secretly abusing their master and -mistress.[423] This was bad enough, but the clergy were not ashamed to -display their servile attachment to these women even in the churches. -They received them at the doors, forced others to make way for them, -and walked in front of them with a proud air, when they ought not to -have been able to lift up their heads for shame.[424] - -Chrysostom implores the clergy as a suppliant, to free themselves from -these disgraceful and degrading connections. “Christ would have them be -strenuous soldiers and combatants. He did not arm them with spiritual -weapons to help women sew and weave, but to engage with the invisible -powers, to put to flight the forces of Satan, and to lead captive the -rulers of spiritual darkness. If a soldier who was fully equipped were -to run in-doors and sit down with the women just at the moment of the -enemy’s attack, when the trumpet summoned every one to the combat, -would you not run your sword through the craven on the spot? How much -more would God be offended with the Christian soldier who evaded the -combat with the spiritual enemy?”[425] - -The rigour with which Chrysostom pressed reformation upon the clergy -in these and many other points, not being tempered by a conciliatory -manner or genial way of life, excited a vehement spirit of opposition. -He was encouraged in his severity by his Archdeacon Serapion, who on -one occasion had said, in the hearing of a large body of clergy: “You -will never subdue these mutinous priests, my Lord Bishop, till you -drive them all before you as with a single rod.”[426] In fact, a large -body of the more worldly clergy seem to have regarded the archbishop -and his deacon with much the same mingled feelings of fear and aversion -which unruly schoolboys entertain towards an austere master. - -The rigorous discipline exacted from the clergy was probably by no -means distasteful to the people or the Court, and by the eloquence of -their new bishop they were entranced so long as his declamations were -poured forth against the vices and follies of society in general. The -Empress and archbishop stood for a time high in each other’s favour. -She conducted with him a vast torchlight procession in which the -reliques of some martyrs were conveyed to the martyry of St. Thomas in -Drypia, a considerable distance outside the city. A rapturous homily -was delivered by Chrysostom when they reached the chapel at dawn of -day. “What shall I say? I am verily mad with joy; yet such a madness -is better than even wisdom itself. Of what shall I most discourse?—the -virtue of the martyrs, the alacrity of the city, the zeal of the -Empress, the concourse of the nobles, the worsting of the demons?”... -“Women, more delicate than wax, leaving their comfortable homes, -emulated the stoutest men in the eagerness with which they made this -long pilgrimage on foot. Nobles, leaving their chariots, their lictors, -their attendants, mingled in the common crowd. And why speak of them -when she who wears the diadem, and is arrayed in purple, has not -consented along the whole route to be separated from the rest even by -a little space, but has followed the saints like their handmaid, with -her finger on the shrine and upon the veil covering it—she, visible to -the whole multitude, whom not even all the chamberlains of the palace -are usually permitted to see?” The mixture of races in Constantinople -is indicated in one passage, where, comparing the Empress to Miriam -leading the chorus of triumphant Israelites, he says: “_She_, indeed, -led forth a people of one language only, but _thou_ innumerable bands, -chanting the Psalms of David, some in the Roman, some in the Syrian, -some in a barbarian, some in the Greek tongue.” The procession moved -along like a stream of fire, or continuous golden chain; the moon shone -down upon the crowd of the faithful, and in the midst the Empress, more -brilliant than the moon itself; for what was the moon compared to a -soul adorned with such faith? He called her blessed, for the ends of -the earth would hear of and extol this glorious act of piety. If the -deed of the poor sinful woman in the Gospel, who anointed our Lord’s -feet, was to be proclaimed throughout the world, how much more that -of a modest, dignified, chaste woman, who displayed such piety in the -midst of imperial state. And there is much more of the same Oriental, -rhapsodical, rhetoric.[427] - -The Emperor made a pilgrimage on the following day to the shrine, -accompanied by all the great officials of the Court; and another -discourse, similar in tone though not quite so extravagantly rapturous, -was delivered by the archbishop. - -As in Antioch, so also and with still greater vehemence in -Constantinople, the voice of Chrysostom was incessantly lifted up -against those vices which specially beset a large mixed population -living under a corrupt despotism. Here, as there, the avarice and -luxury of the wealthy are the themes of his indignant invective; the -wrongs and pitiable poverty of the poor the occasions of his pathetic -appeal. One day lamenting the paucity of worshippers, he exclaims: “O -tyranny of money which drives the greater part of our brethren from the -fold! for it is nothing but that grievous disease, that never-quenched -furnace, which drives them hence; this mistress, more ferocious than -any barbarian or wild beast, fiercer than the very demons, taking her -slaves with her, is now conducting them round the Forum, inflicting -upon them her oppressive commands, nor suffers them to take a little -breath from their destructive labours.”... “May you derive great good -from the zeal with which you listen to these words, for your groanings -and the smitings of your foreheads prove that the seed which I have -sown is already bearing fruit.”[428] - -A signal instance of the passionate attachment of the people to the -Circensian and theatrical exhibitions occurred about the close of the -first year of his episcopate.[429] A violent rain had half inundated -the fields and almost destroyed the growing crops; solemn processional -litanies were made to the churches of the Apostles on both sides of -the Bosporus; yet two days later the majority of that multitude, which -had just been invoking the intercession of saints and supplicating -the mercy of God, poured into the circus, and might be seen wildly -applauding and cheering on the chariots; and from that they hastened -to witness with eager eyes the indecent performances of the theatre: -“while I,” said the archbishop, “sitting at home and hearing your -shouts, suffered worse agonies than those who are tossed by storms at -sea.”[430]... “What defence will you be able to make when you have -to render an account of that day’s work? For thee the sun rose, the -moon lit up the night, choirs of stars spangled the sky; for thee the -winds blew, and rivers ran, seeds germinated, plants grew, and the -whole course of nature kept its proper order: but thou, when Creation -is ministering to thy needs, thou fulfillest the pleasure of the -devil.”[431]... “Say not that few have wandered from the fold; though -it were but five or two or one, the loss would be great. The shepherd -in the Gospel left the ninety-and-nine, and hastened after the one, nor -did he return till he had made up the complete number of the flock by -its restoration. Though it be only one, yet it is a soul for which this -visible world was created, for which laws and statutes and the diverse -operations of God have been put in motion, yea, for whose sake God -spared not His only Son.”... “Therefore I loudly declare that if any -one after this admonition shall desert the fold for the pestilent vice -of the theatre, I will not admit him inside these rails.[432] I will -not administer to him the holy mysteries or allow him to touch the holy -table, but expel him as shepherds drive out the diseased sheep from the -fold lest they should contaminate the rest.” - -The iniquity of the people’s defection had been aggravated on this -occasion by the fact that the days on which they had rushed in such -crowds to the circus and theatre were Good Friday and Holy Saturday. -On the Sunday following Easter Day the church was fully thronged. An -aged Galatian bishop, being present, was requested, according to a -polite custom of that time, to preach. But the congregation expressed -their disapproval by shouts of dissent, and by withdrawing in large -numbers. They wanted to hear what more their eloquent castigator had to -say on the subject on which he had so vehemently declaimed on Easter -Day. Chrysostom was so much gratified and encouraged by the alacrity -which the people had thus manifested to listen to his objurgations -that his censures of the chariot races, the next time he preached, -were milder than usual. He contents himself with observing that the -shocking accident of the day before, when a young man about to be -married had been run over in the course and cut to pieces by the -chariot wheels, was a damning proof of the wild folly and wickedness -of these spectacles. Nor does he rebuke them very sharply for their -discourtesy to the Galatian prelate.[433] They always resented the -preaching of a stranger; on several occasions Chrysostom had to appeal -to their feelings of respect for the custom of the Church, or enlarge -on the reverence due to the preacher, either on account of his age or -his great virtues, before they would listen patiently. - -It is impossible to determine in the case of every homily or set of -homilies whether they were delivered at Antioch or Constantinople, -but the character of society seems to have been in its main features -so similar in the two cities that it may be allowable to collect into -one place notices on various social subjects scattered up and down -Chrysostom’s works. - -The extremes of wealth and poverty, barbaric splendour, and abject -beggary, existed side by side in hideous and glaring contrast. The -passion for the use of the precious metals was amazing. Vessels for -the meanest purposes were made of silver; superfluous display without -regard to utility prevailed everywhere. “If it were in their power, I -verily believe that some men would have the ground they walk on,[434] -the walls of their houses, and perhaps even the sky and air, made of -gold.” Clothes were in the opinion of Chrysostom a memorial of man’s -fall from that state of innocence in which they had been unnecessary, -and were therefore to be made of as little consequence as possible. -“Say, ye who indulge in such grandeur as to discard all woollen -garments and array yourselves in silk only, and have even advanced to -such a height of madness as to weave gold into your robes (for most -women do this), to what purpose do you deck out your persons in these -things, not perceiving that the covering of dress was devised for us -after the transgression in the place of a severe punishment?”[435] - -The particular make of shoes worn by the fashionable young ladies and -gentlemen of the day seems to have excited his special indignation. “To -put silk threads into your boots, how disgraceful, how ridiculous![436] -Ships are built, sailors hired, pilots appointed, the sails are -spread, the sea crossed, wife, children, and home left behind, the -country of the barbarian entered, and the life of the merchant exposed -to a thousand perils, in order that after it all you may trick out -the leather of your boots with these silken threads: what form of -madness can be worse?”... “He who ought to bend his thoughts and eyes -heavenwards casts them down upon his shoes instead. His chief care, as -he walks delicately through the Forum, is to avoid soiling his boots -with mire or dust. Will you let your soul grovel in the mire while you -are taking care of your boots? Boots were made to be soiled; if you -cannot bear this, take them off and wear them on your head instead of -on your feet. You laugh when I say these words, but I rather weep for -your folly.”[437] Again, “You may see one sitting in his chariot with -haughty brow, touching as it were the clouds in the senseless pride of -his heart; but think him not really lofty, for it is not the sitting up -in a chariot drawn by mules, but only virtue mounting to the vault of -heaven which really elevates a man. Or if you see another on horseback, -attended by a troop of lictors driving the multitude out of his way in -the Forum, call him not happy on that account. How ridiculous! why, -prithee, do you drive your fellow-creatures before you? Were you made -a wolf or a lion? Your Lord Jesus Christ raised man to heaven; you do -not condescend to share even the market-place with him. When you put -a gold bit on your horse, a gold bracelet on your slave’s arm, when -your clothes even to your shoes are gilded, you are feeding that most -ferocious of monsters, avarice; you are robbing the orphan, denuding -the widow, and acting as the common enemy of all. When your body is -committed to the ground the memory of your ambition will not be buried -with you, for each passer-by, as he contemplates the height and size -of your grand mansions, will say to himself or his neighbour, ‘How -many tears did it cost to build that house! how many orphans were left -naked! how many widows wronged! how many persons deprived of wages!’ -Thus the exact contrary of what you expected comes to pass: you desired -to obtain glory during your life, and lo! even after death you are not -delivered from accusers.”[438] - -Such are the natural expressions of indignation on the part of one -trained in a monkish school of piety and austere simplicity of life, -when brought into practical contact with a corrupt civilisation. Every -denunciation of inordinate luxury is coupled with an exhortation to the -relief of distress. Almsgiving is represented as the one certain method -of laying up treasure in heaven, and the true riches are increased -in proportion as this world’s goods are given away. He lived in the -days when social science and political economy did not exist; he only -perceived the moral wrong of profuse luxury and extreme destitution -side by side, and the only method which he could suggest for rectifying -the evil was to impress on the wealthy the duty of almsgiving on a -large scale. Beggars swarmed in the streets, and thronged the entrances -of the churches and public baths;[439] and he is for ever exhorting -his congregations to relieve these unfortunate people. All honour to -his simple Christian charity! though of course he could not have given -worse advice with a view to curing the evil which he deplored. The -man who wore shoes inwoven with silk or gold threads may have been a -ridiculous fop, and yet have done more good by buying his finery, the -produce of honest labour, than did the pious member of Chrysostom’s -congregation who flung his money to the beggars congregated at the -church doors. - -The luxurious habits and extravagant dress of the ladies were especial -objects of Chrysostom’s attack; but he draws a charming picture, on -the other side, of the influence which good Christian wives might, -and which many did, exercise upon their husbands. The close of the -exhortation in our own “Marriage Service” seems almost as if suggested -by a passage in which he quotes Sarah the wife of Abraham as a pattern -of dutiful obedience to her husband, as adorned with virtue, instead -of the outward adorning of “plaiting the hair and putting on of -apparel.”[440] “The good wife, as she remains more at home than the -man, and has more leisure for ‘pious contemplation’ (φιλοσοφία), can -calm and soothe the husband when he returns harassed by business, cut -off his superfluous cares, and so send him back free of the troubles -contracted in the Forum, and carrying with him the good lessons which -he has learned at home.”... “No influence is more potent than that -of a careful and discreet wife to harmonise and mould the soul of a -man.”... “I could mention many hard, intractable men who have been -softened in this manner.” And this influence would be in proportion -to the Christian purity and simplicity of her own life. “When thy -husband shall see thee modest, not a lover of ornament, not demanding -an unnecessary allowance, then he will listen to thy counsel. When you -seek not gold or pearls, or costly array, but modesty, temperance, -and benevolence, in proportion as you manifest these virtues yourself, -you may demand them of him; these are the ornaments which never fail -to attract; this is the adornment which old age does not dissolve or -disease destroy.”... “When your husband sees you laying aside luxury, -he will lay aside the love of gain, and will be more inclined to deeds -of charity. With what face, O ye wives, can you exhort your husbands to -almsgiving, when you consume the largest portion of his means on the -decoration of your own persons?”[441] - -He urgently represents to the wealthy proprietors of land in the -country the solemn duty incumbent on them of providing for the -spiritual welfare of the people on their estate, by building a church -and maintaining a pastor among them. “There are many who possess farms -and fields, but all their anxiety is to make a bath-house to their -mansion, to build entrance courts and servants’ offices; but how the -souls of their dependants are cultivated they care not.”... “If you -see thorns in a field, you cut them down and burn them; but when you -see the souls of your labourers beset with thorns and cut them not -down, tell me, do you not fear when you reflect on the account which -will be exacted from you for these things? Ought not every Christian -estate-holder to build a church and to make it his aim before all -things else that his people should be Christian?”... “Therefore I -exhort, I supplicate as a favour, or rather I affirm it as a principle, -that no one should be seen in possession of an estate which is not -provided with a church.” He concludes by drawing a pleasing picture -of the benefit derived from the residence of a pastor in the quiet -country village; the softening, humanising, civilising effect of his -presence; the relief given to the needy, the comfort to the sick and -dying; the pleasant repose which the proprietor may enjoy when he -withdraws for a time from the turmoil of city life, and worships among -his grateful people in the church which he has founded, and where his -name will be blessed for many future generations. “And think of the -reward in heaven; Christ said, ‘If thou lovest me feed my sheep.’ If -you were to see any of the royal sheep or horses destitute of shelter -and exposed to attack, and were to house them, provide stabling for -them, and appoint some one to tend them, with how great a gift would -the sovereign requite you. And think you that, if you fold Christ’s -flock and set a shepherd over them, He will not do some great thing for -you?”[442] - -The responsibility indeed of _every_ Christian man to promote the -spiritual welfare of his brethren is one of the topics on which -Chrysostom most constantly and earnestly dilates. “Nothing can be more -chilling than the sight of a Christian who makes no efforts to save -others. Neither poverty, nor humble station, nor bodily infirmity -can exempt men and women from the obligation of this great duty. To -hide our Christian light, under pretence of weakness, is as great an -insult to God as if we were to say that He could not make His sun to -shine.”[443] - -The practice of swearing deep oaths about trifles appears to have -been as prevalent at Constantinople as at Antioch, and equally to -have excited the indignation of the Archbishop. He would not cease -to denounce this devilish habit, and that vehemently, lest he should -incur the condemnation pronounced on Eli, who rebuked, but not with -sufficient severity. He would unsparingly repel from the threshold of -the Church any who persisted in this pernicious vice, were he emperor -or prince. Men might deride his vehemence, but they forgot that he was -only the servant of Jesus Christ; their mockery fell on the Master -rather than the minister. Let them laugh and jest as much as they -would; he was placed there to suffer it. “Obey my voice or depose me -from this my office. I cannot consent to mount this throne unless I -accomplish something great. If I cannot do this, it were better for me -to stand below. As long as I sit here I cannot refrain, not so much out -of fear of punishment to myself as on account of your salvation, which -I earnestly desire.”[444] - -Immoderate addiction to the pleasures of the table is a frequently -recurring subject of censure. He depicts in lively terms the freshness, -activity, and good health of the temperate man; the lethargy, the -headaches, the cramps, the gout, the sickness of the glutton. Here is -his portrait of a fat gourmand:—“To whom is not the man disagreeable -who makes obesity his study, and has to be dragged about like a -seal? I speak not of those who are such by nature, but of those who, -naturally graceful, have brought their bodies into this condition -through luxurious living. The sun has risen, he has darted everywhere -his brilliant rays, he has roused every one to his work: the tiller has -taken his hoe, the smith his hammer, each workman his proper tool; the -woman sets to work to spin or weave; while he like a hog goes forth -to the occupation of filling his stomach, seeking how to provide for -a costly table. When the sun has filled the market-place, and other -men have already tired themselves with work, he rises from his bed, -stretching himself like a fatting pig. Then he sits a long time on his -couch to shake off the drunkenness of the previous evening, after which -he adorns himself and walks out a spectacle of ugliness, not so much -like a man as a man-shaped beast.”... “Who might not justly say, ‘this -fellow is a burden to the earth; he has come into the world in vain; -nay, not in vain, alas! but to the injury both of himself and other -people?’”[445] - -Such passages as these prove that the power of Chrysostom to captivate -his hearers consisted not always in eloquence or ornate rhetoric, -but in a kind of bold and rough plain-speaking, which dragged out -into broad daylight the most flagrant evils of the time, and painted -them in strong coarse colours, to excite derision or disgust. But the -fickleness and impulsiveness of the people were fatal obstacles to -the retention of fixed and durable impressions. The population upon -whom Chrysostom poured forth his torrents of exhortation or invective -was more debased than that to which Savonarola preached; not so -vigorous, not so homogeneous, not so much animated by a sentiment of -citizenship, not under the refining influence of a taste for literature -and art.[446] It was a vast, disorderly medley of incoherent elements, -destitute of those political privileges, and of that industrial -commercial spirit, which inspire the character with manly energy and -independence. A passionate, invincible love of pleasure, an abandoned -devotion to such public amusements as in no way appealed to the -intellect, and were calculated to debase and relax the finer moral -feelings,—these were insuperable bars to the substantial success of -the Christian reformer. A large proportion of his hearers seem to have -listened to his discourses as pleasant exhibitions of bold satire -and eloquent declamation; they applauded, they laughed, they wept, -they were smitten with something like compunction; and Chrysostom -confesses that at the moment he could not repress a natural feeling -of gratification at the effect produced; but that when he went home, -and reflected that the benefit which his hearers should have derived -generally evaporated in empty applause, instead of manifesting itself -in some solid improvement, he wept and groaned from vexation. What men -learned in the church was undone in the theatre: “his work was like -that of a man who attempted to clean a piece of ground into which a -muddy stream was constantly flowing.”[447] - -His letters to individuals, and the eulogia which he passes at the -beginning of some of his homilies on the zeal, piety, and attention -of his flock, prove indeed that there were bright exceptions, but the -mass of the people remained irreclaimable. On grand festivals, such as -Easter Day, vast crowds attended the church; the very precincts were -thronged, and the multitude surged backwards and forwards like the -waves of the sea. A large portion was composed of the fashionable and -rich; but Chrysostom greatly preferred those smaller congregations, -consisting chiefly of poor, who attended regularly, and on whose -attachment to the Church he could depend. He enjoyed these quiet -services, free from the bustle and disturbance of large crowds.[448] -The wealthy and the gay spared little time for the services of the -Church, though they never pleaded business as an excuse for absence -from the theatre. If they came now and then, they did so as a kind -of condescension and favour shown to God and his priest. They lazily -slumbered, or idly gossiped during the service; yet they boasted of -their attendance afterwards.[449] - -After the account in previous chapters of Chrysostom’s method of -dealing with the prevalent heresies of the day at Antioch, there -is no occasion to say much more. The same forms of error had to be -encountered at Constantinople by much the same arguments. Only one, -Novatianism, appears to have been more prominent in this city than at -Antioch. The exclusive pretensions to purity of doctrine and moral life -made by the Novatians excited his special indignation. “What arrogance! -what boastfulness is this! Can you, being a man, call yourself clean? -Nay, what madness is it? As well call the sea free from waves; for as -waves never cease to move on the sea, so do sins never cease to work in -us.”[450] The harshness of the Novatians, in refusing the readmission -of apostates on repentance, was peculiarly offensive to his merciful -and hopeful view of human nature. Sicinnius, the Novatian bishop in -Constantinople, wrote a book against him, in which he makes a handle -of particular expressions in Chrysostom’s homilies detached from their -context; such as, “Repent a thousand times, and enter the Church;” ... -“let the unclean person, the adulterer, the thief, enter;” but omitting -the words which follow—“that he may learn to do these things no more. -I draw all, I throw my net over all, desiring to catch not those only -who are sound, but those who are sick.”[451] A hopefulness and love, -which never despaired of the sinner, are eminently characteristic of -Chrysostom; and the strong words of encouragement and comfort which he -used were of course susceptible of a construction injurious to him, by -those who prided themselves on enforcing a very rigid standard of moral -and ecclesiastical discipline. - -Twenty years had elapsed since Gregory Nazianzenus, with much -reluctance and trembling, had accepted the See of Constantinople. The -city was at that time a very stronghold of Arianism. Arians had held -the see for nearly forty years. The services of the orthodox were held -in a private house, and were at first exposed to violent disturbance -from the populace, which, hounded on by the Arian clergy, hooted and -threw stones at the worshippers. But the eloquence, combined with -the holiness, of Gregory had subdued this violent opposition. The -ranks of the orthodox were swelled, and the little house was enlarged -into a noble church, under the name of Anastasia, as significant of -the revival of the true faith.[452] Imperial authority completed the -work which Gregory had begun. The Arians and other sectaries were -prohibited by various enactments from assembling for worship within -the city walls;[453] but in the time of Chrysostom they began again to -molest the faithful. On Saturdays and Sundays they made a practice of -assembling in colonnades and public places, and there loudly singing -Arian songs—songs, that is, embodying Arian doctrine, like the Thalia -composed by Arius; abstract statements of theology, very unpoetical in -form, very incapable, as we should have supposed, of exciting popular -feeling.[454] This noisy singing went on during the greater part of the -night; at dawn they marched through the streets singing antiphonally, -and then held assemblies for worship outside the gates. Chrysostom, -with more of zeal perhaps than wisdom, organised rival processions -of antiphonal singers; the Empress supplied them with tapers mounted -on silver crosses. Street frays were the inevitable consequence of -these counter demonstrations; the Arians took to their old practice of -stone-throwing; Briso, one of the Emperor’s chamberlains, was wounded -by a stone in the forehead, and several persons killed on both sides, -after which the Arian assemblies were suppressed by royal order. - -The practical energy of Chrysostom was not confined within the limits -of his own diocese. He did not forget his native city, but laboured, -and laboured successfully, to heal the schism by which the Church -of Antioch had been so long distracted. Theophilus, Patriarch of -Alexandria, consented at his earnest request to join with him in the -despatch of an embassy to Rome, to supplicate the recognition of -Flavian as sole bishop. Acacius, Bishop of Berœa, and Isidore, for -whom Theophilus had striven to obtain the See of Constantinople, were -selected to carry the petition, and they returned with a favourable -answer from the Bishops of the West. It is a satisfaction to find -Chrysostom united in this charitable work with those who afterwards -became his most malignant enemies.[455] - -His missionary efforts extended northwards to the Danube, and -southwards to Phœnicia, Syria, and Palestine. He sought out men of -apostolic zeal to evangelise some Scythian tribes on the banks of the -Danube, and appointed a Gothic bishop, Unilas, who accomplished great -things, but died in A.D. 404, when Chrysostom was in exile, and unable -to appoint a successor.[456] A novel spectacle was witnessed one day -in the Church of St. Paul. A large number of Goths being present, -Chrysostom ordered some portions of the Bible to be read in Gothic, and -caused a Gothic presbyter to address his countrymen in their native -tongue. The Archbishop, who preached afterwards, rejoiced in the -occurrence as a visible illustration of the diffusion of the Gospel -among all nations and languages, a triumph before their very eyes over -Jews and Pagans, and a fulfilment of such prophecy as “Their sound is -gone out into all lands;” “The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, -and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.” “Where is the philosophy -of Plato and Pythagoras? Extinguished. Where is the teaching of the -tent-maker and the fisherman? Not only in Judæa, but also among the -barbarians, as ye have this day perceived, it shines more brilliantly -than the sun itself. Scythians, and Thracians, Samaritans, Moors, and -Indians, and those who inhabit the extremities of the world, possess -this teaching translated into their own language; they possess such -philosophy as was never dreamed of by those who wear a beard and thrust -passengers aside with their staff in the Forum, and shake their wise -locks, looking more like lions than men.”... “Nay! our world has not -sufficed for these evangelists; they have betaken themselves even to -the ocean, and enclosed barbarian regions and the British Isles in -their net.”[457] Chrysostom assigned a church in Constantinople for -the use of the Scythian inhabitants (probably Gothic, for the Greek -historians used the word Scythian very vaguely), ordained native -readers, deacons, and presbyters, and frequently preached there himself -through the medium of an interpreter.[458] Some of his letters when -in exile are addressed to Gothic monks, who occupied the house where -Promotus had lived.[459] They were staunch friends to him during his -exile, and the monastic body established in this house existed in the -seventh century. - -Porphyry, Bishop of Gaza, wrote a letter to Chrysostom in A.D. 398, -urging him to obtain an order from the Emperor for the destruction -of Pagan temples in that city. Chrysostom did not cease to solicit -Eutropius till he had procured an edict, not indeed for the -destruction, but for the closing of the temples, and the demolition of -the idols which they contained. In the following year, however, A.D. -399, an edict was issued addressed to Eutychianus, Prefect of the East, -directing that the temples should be demolished throughout the country. -This appears to have been obtained chiefly through the influence of -Chrysostom; and large bodies of monks were sent by him into Phœnicia, -where especially paganism prevailed, who were to use every effort to -extirpate it, both by assisting in the destruction of temples, and -by the propagation of Christian truth. The money required for this -missionary expedition was supplied by the liberality of some ladies -in Constantinople, rich not only in faith, but also in the wealth of -this world. The welfare of these missionary projects continued, as will -hereafter be seen, to engage his most anxious attention throughout his -exile to the very close of his life.[460] - - - - -CHAPTER XV. - - THE FALL OF EUTROPIUS—HIS RETREAT TO THE SANCTUARY OF THE - CHURCH—RIGHT OF SANCTUARY MAINTAINED BY CHRYSOSTOM—DEATH - OF EUTROPIUS—REVOLT OF GOTHIC COMMANDERS TRIBIGILD AND - GAÏNAS—DEMAND OF GAÏNAS FOR AN ARIAN CHURCH REFUSED BY - CHRYSOSTOM—DEFEAT AND DEATH OF GAÏNAS. A.D. 399-401. - - -The Empress Eudoxia had rejoiced to discover that the new Archbishop, -although he mainly owed his promotion to the supreme minister of -the Court, was by no means disposed to be ruled by him. If, indeed, -Eutropius had expected to be rewarded for the elevation of Chrysostom -by finding in him a complaisant servant, he sustained a severe -disappointment. Some little pretences which the minister made of -assisting the Church, by patronising Chrysostom’s missionary projects, -could not disguise the iniquitous venality of his administration, or -protect him from the solemn warnings and severe censure of one who -was no respecter of persons. In fact, when the Archbishop declaimed -against the cupidity, injustice, and extortions of the rich, it was -obvious to all that Eutropius was the most signal example of those -vices. Eudoxia was anxiously aiming to compass the fall of the detested -minister; detested by her more especially, not only because he thwarted -her influence with Arcadius generally, but had also persuaded him to -withhold from her the title of Augusta until she should present a male -heir to the throne. She spared no pains therefore to conciliate the -Archbishop, who might prove a valuable ally to her cause. It has been -seen with what an appearance at least of humble piety she took part in -the nocturnal procession which conducted some sacred reliques to their -resting-place outside Constantinople. - -Her chamberlain, Amantius (himself distinguished for unaffected -Christian piety), was the frequent bearer to the Archbishop of her -liberal contributions to the support of churches, or the relief of the -poor. With her own hands, it is said, she traced designs for basilicas -to be erected at her expense in some of the country districts.[461] -Chrysostom was always ready to welcome as genuine any manifestations -of religious feeling. Such practical proofs of her attachment to -the Church completely captivated him, and for the present his rich -vocabulary could hardly furnish language adequate to express his -admiration and gratitude.[462] - -Meanwhile, the poor doomed minister, not content to remain as he -began, enjoying the reality of power without the name, prepared the -way for his own destruction by inducing the Emperor to bestow on him -the titles of Patrician and Consul. The acquisition of these venerated -and venerable names by the eunuch slave caused a profound emotion of -indignation and shame throughout the Empire, but especially in the -Western capital, where they were bound up with all the most noble -and glorious memories in the history of the nation. It is true the -consulship was now an empty honour, destitute of all the great duties -and responsibilities which formerly were attached to it. But the year -was still named after the consul, and the character of the man was by -a superstitious feeling projected on to the year which he inaugurated. -The name of the odious Eutropius, eunuch and slave, if prefixed to the -year, would seem to overshadow it with a kind of ominous and baleful -blight, and to be in itself a portent of incalculable disaster. -In short, after their indignation had vented itself in much bitter -sarcasm, the Romans resolved that the consulship of Eutropius should -never be inscribed at the Capitol. A solemn deputation from the people -and senate waited on Honorius and Stilicho at Milan, to submit their -decision, and to implore the imperial assent. Their spokesman recounted -the glorious exploits of Theodosius and (by a flattering courtesy) -of his son. The Saxon by the ocean, defeated; Britain delivered from -the Picts; Gaul protected from the menaces of Germany! “Through thee -Rome beholds the Frank humbled at her feet, the Suevian discomfited, -and the Rhine, submissive to thy rule, salutes thee under the name of -Germanicus. But the East, alas! envies us our prosperity; abominable -conspiracies are fermenting there which tend to break up our unity” ... -the revolt of Gildo, the destruction of African towns, the famine of -Rome, all these calamities were the work of Eutropius, and for these he -was rewarded with the consulship! The East, accustomed to stoop under -the sceptre of women, might accept the rule of a eunuch slave; but that -to which the Orontes and the Halys submitted as ordinary custom would -be a foul stain on the waters of the Tiber. The image of Eutropius -should never be placed in the same rank with those of Æmilius, of -Decius, of Camillus, the saviours and supporters of their country, the -champions of Roman freedom!... “Rise from your tombs, ancient Romans, -pride of Latium; behold an unknown colleague on your curule chairs; -rise and avenge the majesty of the Roman name!”[463] - -Honorius, prompted no doubt by Stilicho, accorded a favourable reply -to the supplication of the Roman people. Mallius Theodorus, prætorian -prefect of Italy, a man eminent in virtue and ability as lawyer, -soldier, and writer, and not less popular than distinguished, was -nominated Consul by Honorius amidst general approbation, and his name -appears in the Fasti of the West without a colleague.[464] - -No doubt some of the virtuous indignation of the Romans is to be -attributed to the jealousy which now ran high between East and -West, but we may also not fancifully discern genuine sparks of the -independent spirit of their forefathers. Amidst the general decadence -and degeneracy of the whole Empire, the West did not descend, could -not have descended, to such depths of servile adulation as did the -Byzantines on the occasion of the inauguration of Eutropius as Consul. -When, arrayed in an ample Roman robe, he assumed his seat in the -palace of the Cæsars, the doors were thrown open to an eager crowd of -flatterers. The senate, the generals, all the high functionaries of the -state, poured in to offer their homage to the great personage; emulated -each other in the honour of kissing his hand, and even his wrinkled -visage. They saluted him as the bulwark of the laws, and the parent of -the Emperor. Statues of bronze or marble were placed in various parts -of the city, representing him in the costume of warrior or judge, and -the inscriptions on their pedestals styled him third founder of the -city after Byzas and Constantine. - -No wonder that Claudian declaimed with bitter sarcasm against “a -Byzantine nobility and Greek Quirites,” and even invokes Neptune by a -stroke of his trident to unseat and submerge the degenerate city which -had inflicted such a deep disgrace upon the Empire.[465] - -And in truth a blow of no mean force, though directed not by the hand -of a mythic deity, but of a stout barbarian was about to descend on -the Eastern capital. The consequences of it were averted only by the -sacrifice of the new consul who had chiefly provoked it; upon him -it came with crushing effect: he fell never to rise again. In the -final scene of this curious drama the Archbishop plays a conspicuous -part, and therefore it must be unfolded from the beginning. But, -independently of this, it throws light upon the condition of the -Eastern Empire at that period. - -Tribigild, a Gothic soldier of distinction, had been, according to -a usage now prevalent, promoted to the rank of Tribune, and placed -in command of a military colony of Gruthongi (a large branch of -the Ostrogoths), established in the region of Phrygia, near the -town of Nacolea. The recent elevation of Alaric to the rank of -Commander-in-chief of the Roman forces in the East had encouraged the -pretensions and raised the expectations of all barbarian commanders. -In the February or March next after the appointment of Eutropius to -the consulship, Tribigild appeared at court to solicit promotion for -himself and a higher rate of pay for his martial colonists, who, too -ignorant or too proud to maintain themselves by cultivating the soil, -were perishing of hunger in the midst of the most productive regions of -Asia Minor. His suit was one among many of similar applications at that -time constantly brought before the Court, and it was coldly dismissed -by the Emperor’s minister. Tribigild was not one to return home and -brood in sullen and ineffective silence over his repulse. Gaïnas, the -Gothic leader, to whom it will be remembered Stilicho had confided the -task of putting Rufinus to death, was still in Constantinople; and he -was a relation of Tribigild, who found in him a sympathiser to inflame -rather than soothe his sense of wrong. In this irritated frame of mind, -like a train of powder only needing the application of a match to -produce an explosion, he returned to Phrygia. According to Claudian, -that match was applied by his wife. He dramatically describes her -welcome of the returning husband: “She flies to meet him, embraces him -with her snow-white arms, and eagerly inquires what honours or rewards -he brings back from the generous prince.” When the chieftain relates -his ineffectual errand, and the cold disdain with which he had been -treated by Eutropius, the chieftainess tears her face with her nails, -and with bitter irony bids her husband sheathe his sword and attend to -his plough or his vine. She contrasts her own condition with the happy -wives and sisters of other warriors; they enjoyed rich spoils in the -shape of adornments or of beautiful Grecian handmaids. “Alaric, who -broke treaties, was rewarded for it, but those who observe them remain -poor. Alaric invaded and pillaged Epirus, and was made commander of the -forces; _you_ go humbly to solicit your due and are repulsed. Enrich -yourself with booty, and you will be a Roman citizen as soon as you -please.”[466] No doubt this scene, whether wholly imaginary or not, -faithfully represents the feelings which, since the fatal promotion of -Alaric, must have encouraged treasonable designs on the part of many -barbarian chiefs. At any rate, whether the resentment of Tribigild -was inflamed or not by the irony of his wife, he resolved to cast -off allegiance to the Empire. He mustered his forces, which gladly -abandoned their feeble attempts at husbandry to return to the more -congenial pursuit of war and plunder. The rich country of Phrygia was -rapidly overrun, and some of the fortified towns, owing partly to the -decay of their walls, were captured. All Asia Minor was convulsed with -apprehension, and appealed to Constantinople for protection. - -Eutropius affected to treat the rebellion as a petty insurrection, -the suppression of which belonged rather to the judge armed with -instruments of torture than to a military force. He declined the -proffered assistance of Gaïnas, but secretly negotiated with Tribigild, -in the hope of subduing him by means of promotion or of a bribe in -money. The Goth, proud to have turned the tables upon the minister who -had recently treated him with scorn, steadfastly declined to accept -any satisfaction but one—the head of Eutropius himself. Thus war was -inevitable; but who was to conduct it? Eutropius dared not trust -Gaïnas to act against his own countryman and kinsman. He retained -him therefore at Constantinople in command of the city troops, and -committed the management of the legions to one of his favourites, -Leo, described by Claudian as a man “abounding in flesh, but scant -of brains;”[467] once a wool-carder, but, under the administration -of the eunuch, a military commander. His obesity made him an object -of derision to the army, and, joined to his natural incapacity and -ignorance, rendered him the most unfit man to conduct an expedition -against the subtle and active barbarian. Leo crossed the Bosporus with -a large, ill-disciplined army, whose approach was welcomed by the -devastated provinces, which vainly rejoiced at the prospect of speedy -deliverance from the ravager. The enemy, meanwhile, had retreated -southwards through Pisidia, and after a narrow escape from destruction -in the defiles of Mount Taurus, where the inhabitants made a fierce -stand, he emerged into Pamphylia, and awaited Leo in the vast plain -of the Eurymedon and Melas, which extends between the chain of Taurus -and the sea. The doughty commander of the imperial forces eagerly -pursued the Goths, and flattered himself, as the artful chieftain -pretended to retreat in alarm, that he had cooped him up by the sea. -In the confident anticipation of success, the discipline, such as it -was, of Leo’s camp became still more relaxed. Little or no watch was -kept; festivity, drunkenness, and disorder of all kinds prevailed; -while the general had allowed himself to be drawn into a fatal position -between a wary enemy in front and an impassable morass in his rear. In -the depth of a dark night, the Goth swooped down upon his prey: all -were asleep in the camp, the slumbers of many deepened by drunkenness. -Those who were not killed on the spot fled in wild confusion, but only -to flounder in the marsh, in the oozy bed of which large numbers were -absorbed. A few scattered remnants reached the Bosporus by devious -routes, to carry tidings of the disaster to Constantinople. Leo himself -had plunged on horseback into the morass; the animal soon sank under -the weight of his bulky rider, who, after vain struggles to extricate -himself, was finally sucked beneath the quag. To such a bathos have -the annals of Roman warfare descended! A Roman general suffocated in -mud![468] - -The news of this disaster struck panic into the population and Court -of Constantinople. There was but one who rejoiced; for he saw himself -master of the situation. This was Gaïnas; he was the only man at hand -capable of confronting Tribigild, and he was despatched across the -Bosporus with his barbarian auxiliaries. But he did nothing to check -the enemy, who had resumed his career of pillage. He represented that -the forces opposed to him were insuperable, but expressed a firm -conviction that Tribigild would become as loyal a servant as himself on -one condition—the surrender of the minister Eutropius, the principal -author of all the evils of the State.[469] - -Arcadius was placed in a state of cruel perplexity. We need not -suppose that he was attached to Eutropius, but his weak and indolent -nature shrank from the responsibility and labour to which, through -the industry of his ambitious minister, he had been a stranger. Now, -however, from all quarters the truth was forced upon him, that if he -would save his throne, he must part with his newly-made consul. Ugly -rumours were prevalent that Stilicho was meditating a march to the -East, and at the same time a new king, hostile to the Empire, had -ascended the throne in Persia.[470] But a nearer and more persuasive -enemy of Eutropius was at hand to give the finishing impulse to his -fall. The profound jealousy of his power entertained by Eudoxia has -been already intimated. Not only had the title of Augusta been withheld -from her through his influence, but he had even carried his arrogance -so far at this time as to declare that his hand, which had elevated -her, could also depose her from her present position altogether. The -proud Frankish blood of the Empress could ill brook such words from the -lips of an upstart menial, consul though he now was. With a passionate -gesture she dismissed him from her presence, hastened to her two young -children, Flaccilla and Pulcheria, and with them made her way into the -apartment of Arcadius. To his inquiries as to the purpose of her sudden -appearance she made at first no reply save by a flood of tears, in -which the children, from natural sympathy, joined; but presently, in -language broken by sobs, she related a tale of insults received at the -hands of Eutropius, and the crowning insult of the whole series. This -was the blow which was completely to fell the tottering minister. He -was summoned to the imperial presence, and having been informed that he -was deprived of his official dignity, and his property confiscated, he -was commanded instantly to quit the palace under pain of death.[471] - -The poor wretch, who had mounted from the lowest dregs of society to -the grandest position a subject could occupy, was thus by a single blow -suddenly reduced to the position from which he had started; and even -worse, for death stared him in the face. The bows and smiles with which -courtiers had greeted him that morning, when he was still the royal -favourite, concealed, he well knew, a hatred and a scorn which were not -confined to them, but animated the whole population, and only needed -opportunity to declare themselves. That opportunity had come. He had -no friends; whither should he fly? There was but one place to which -he could in his extremity naturally turn—the sanctuary of the Church; -but here, by the cruel irony of his fate, a law emanating from himself -barred his entrance. - -The right of asylum, which was once possessed by many of the Pagan -temples, passed over, by a natural transition, about the time of -Constantine, to Christian churches. However useful in ages of great -rudeness and ferocity this right may be, either to shelter the innocent -from lawless violence, or to give offenders protection from vindictive -rage till the time of equitable trial, it inevitably becomes, sooner -or later, an intolerable interference with the natural course of law -and justice. Tiberius had found it expedient to restrict or abolish -such rights attached to many of the Greek and Asiatic temples. Their -suppression was resisted partly from feelings of pride, partly of -mercenary interest, partly of respect for the sanctity of the places, -as in the case in our own country of the sanctuary of Westminster.[472] -In the reign of Theodosius I. a law was passed which excepted gross -criminals and public debtors, and another in the reign of Arcadius, -which excepted Jewish debtors who pretended to be Christians, from -the privileges of asylum;[473] but by a law of September, A.D. 397, -suggested by Eutropius, clergy and monks, in whose churches or convents -fugitives might shelter, were obliged to surrender them to the officers -of justice, though they might appeal to the Court in their favour.[474] -The special object of Eutropius had been to cut off all retreat from -the victims of his jealous ambition or avarice; and now he was one -of the first to want the protection which he had himself abolished. -But he knew, no one better, that the law had excited much resentment -and resistance on the part of the Church; and it might well be that -the Archbishop would gladly connive at the violation of the obnoxious -measure by the very person who had framed it. He resolved to make the -attempt. In the humblest guise of a suppliant, tears streaming down his -puckered cheeks, his scant grey hairs smeared with dust, he crept into -the cathedral, pushed aside the curtain which divided the chancel or -sanctuary from the nave, and, clinging closely to the holy table,[475] -awaited the approach of the Archbishop or any of the clergy.[476] The -enemy was on his track. As he lay quaking with terror, he could hear -on the other side of the thin partition the trampling of feet, mingled -with the clattering of arms and voices raised in threatening tones by -soldiers on the search. At this crisis he was found by the Archbishop, -in a state of pitiable and abject terror; his cheek blanched with a -death-like pallor, his teeth chattering, his whole frame quivering, as -with faltering lips he craved the asylum of the Church.[477] - -He was not repulsed as the destroyer of that shelter which he now -sought. Chrysostom rejoiced in the opportunity afforded to the Church -of exhibiting at once her clemency and power, by taking a noble revenge -upon her former adversary. The clamour of the soldiers on the other -side of the veil increased. Chrysostom led the unhappy fugitive to the -sacristy; and having concealed him there, he confronted his pursuers, -asserted the inviolability of the Church’s sanctuary, and refused to -surrender the refugee. “None shall penetrate the sanctuary save over my -body; the Church is the Bride of Jesus Christ, who has intrusted her -honour to me, and I will never betray it.” The soldiers threatened to -lay violent hands on the Archbishop; but he freely presented himself to -them, and only desired to be conducted to the Emperor, that the whole -affair might be submitted to his judgment. He was accordingly placed -between two rows of spearmen, and marched like a prisoner from the -cathedral to the palace.[478] - -The populace meanwhile had heard of the wonderful event of the day. The -news of the detested minister’s degradation had circulated through the -Hippodrome, where a grand performance had attracted large multitudes. -The spectators rose in a mass, uttered a shout of exultation, and -vociferously demanded the head of the culprit.[479] - -Chrysostom meanwhile maintained before the Emperor his lofty tone -of authority in vindication of the Church’s right of asylum. Human -laws could not weigh in the balance against divine; the very man who -had assailed the Church’s divine right was now forced, in his day -of distress, to plead in favour of it. The Emperor was moved, as he -always was by any one who possessed some of that force of character -which he himself lacked. Some feelings of compassion also for his late -minister’s humiliation may have mingled themselves with superstitious -dread of incurring Divine wrath. He promised to respect the retreat of -Eutropius. But, on learning his decision, the troops which were in the -city became indignant and furious in their demands that the culprit -should be surrendered to justice. The Emperor made an address to them, -entreating them even with tears to remember that they had received -benefits as well as wrongs from the object of their present rage, and, -above all things, imploring them to respect the sanctity of the holy -table, to which the suppliant was clinging. By such words he restrained -them with difficulty from the commission of any immediate violence.[480] - -The following day was Sunday; but the places of public amusement and -resort were deserted, and such a vast concourse of men and women -thronged the cathedral as was rarely seen except on Easter Day.[481] -All were in a flutter of expectation to hear what the “golden mouth” -would utter, the mouth of him who had dared, in defence of the Church’s -right, to defy the arm of the law, and to stem the tide of popular -feeling. But few perhaps were prepared to witness such a dramatic -scene as was actually presented, and which gave additional force and -effect to the words of the preacher. It was a common practice with -the Archbishop, on account partly of his diminutive stature and some -feebleness of voice, to preach from the “ambo,” or high reading-desk, -which stood a little westward of the chancel, and therefore brought him -into closer proximity with the people.[482] On the present occasion, -he had just taken his seat on the ambo, and a sea of upturned faces -was directed towards his thin pale countenance in expectation of the -stream of golden eloquence, when the curtain which separated the nave -from the chancel was partially drawn aside, and disclosed to the view -of the multitude the cowering form of the unhappy Eutropius, clinging -to one of the columns which supported the holy table. Many a time had -the Archbishop preached to light minds and unheeding ears on the vain -and fleeting character of worldly honour, prosperity, luxury, wealth; -now he would enforce attention, and drive his lesson home to the hearts -of a vast audience, by pointing to a visible example of fallen grandeur -in the poor unhappy creature who lay grovelling behind him. Presently -he burst forth: “‘ματαιότης ματαιοτήτων!—O vanity of vanities!’” words -how seasonable at all times, how pre-eminently seasonable now. “Where -now are the pomp and circumstance of yonder man’s consulship? where his -torch-light festivities? where the applause which once greeted him? -where his banquets and garlands? Where is the stir that once attended -his appearance in the streets, the flattering compliments addressed to -him in the amphitheatre? They are gone, they are all gone; one rude -blast has shattered all the leaves, and shows us the tree stripped -quite bare, and shaken to its very roots.”... “These things were but -as visions of the night, which fade at dawn; or vernal flowers, which -wither when the spring is past; as shadows which flitted away, as -bubbles which burst, as cobwebs which rent.”... “Therefore we chant -continuously this heavenly strain: ματαιότης ματαιοτήτων καὶ πάντα -ματαιότης. For these are words which should be inscribed on our walls -and on our garments, in the market-place, by the wayside, on our doors, -but above all should they be written in the conscience, and engraved -upon the mind of every one.” Then, turning towards the pitiable figure -by the holy table: “Did I not continually warn thee that wealth was a -runaway slave, a thankless servant? but thou wouldst not heed, thou -wouldst not be persuaded. Lo! now experience has proved to thee that it -is not only fugitive and thankless, but murderous also; for this it is -which has caused thee to tremble now with fear. Did not I declare, when -you rebuked me for telling you the truth, ‘I love thee better than thy -flatterers; I who reprove thee care for thee more than thy complaisant -friends?’ Did I not add that the wounds inflicted by a friend were to -be valued more than the kisses given by an enemy? If thou hadst endured -my wounds, the kisses of thy enemies would not have wrought thee this -destruction.”... “We act not like thy false friends, who have fled from -thee, and are procuring their own safety through thy distress; the -Church, which you treated as an enemy, has opened her bosom to receive -thee; the theatre, which you favoured, has betrayed thee, and whetted -the sword against thee.”[483] He thus depicted, he said, the abject -condition of the minister, not from any desire to insult the prostrate, -not to drown one who was tossed on the billows of misfortune; but to -warn those who were still sailing with a fair wind, lest they should -be hurried into the same abyss. Who had been more exalted than this -man? Had he not surpassed all in wealth? had he not climbed to the -very pinnacle of grandeur? yet now he had become more miserable than a -prisoner, more pitiable than a slave.... It was the glory of the Church -to have afforded shelter to an enemy; the suppliant was the ornament -of the altar. “What!” you say, “is this iniquitous, rapacious creature -an ornament to the altar?” Hush! the sinful woman was permitted to -touch the feet of Jesus Christ Himself, a permission which excites not -our reproach, but our admiration and praise.... The degradation of -Eutropius was a wholesome example both to the rich and poor. “Let some -rich man enter the church, and he will derive much advantage from what -he sees. The spectacle of one, lately at the pinnacle of power, now -crouching with fear like a hare or a frog, chained to yonder pillar not -by fetters, but by fright, will repress arrogance, and subdue pride, -and will teach him the truth of the Scripture precept: ‘All flesh is -grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass.’ On the other -hand, let a poor man enter, and he will learn not to be discontented, -or to deplore his lot; but will be grateful to his poverty, which is to -him as a most secure asylum, a most tranquil haven, a most impenetrable -fortress.”[484] The Archbishop concluded by exhorting the people to -mercy and forgiveness, following the example of their Emperor. How else -could they with a clear conscience join in the Holy Mysteries about to -be celebrated, or join in the prayer: “Forgive us our trespasses, as -we forgive them that trespass against us?” He did not deny that the -offender had committed great crimes, but the present was a season not -for judgment but for mercy. If they would enjoy the favour of God, -who had declared, “I will have mercy and not sacrifice,” they would -intercede with the Emperor for the life of their enemy. So would they -obtain the mercy of God for themselves, and remission of their own -sins; so would they shed glory on their Church, and win the praise of -their humane sovereign, while their own clemency would be extolled to -the ends of the earth.” - -The people probably thought that sufficient mercy had already been -exercised by respecting the asylum of the Church as against the law, -and no further effort, so far as is known, was made on behalf of the -fallen minister. He remained for several days more in the sanctuary, -and then secretly and suddenly quitted it. Whether he fled designedly, -mistrusting the security of his retreat, perhaps even, with the -suspiciousness natural to a deceitful person, mistrusting the fidelity -of his protectors, and hoping to make his escape from Constantinople -in disguise; or whether he surrendered himself on the condition that -exile should be substituted for capital punishment, cannot with perfect -certainty be determined. It is implied by one writer[485] that he was -seized and forcibly removed from the sanctuary. Chrysostom, on the -other hand, declares that he would never have been given up, had he -not abandoned the Church.[486] However and wherever he may have been -captured, some promise appears to have been made that his life at least -should be spared. He was put on board a vessel which conveyed him to -Cyprus, that island being designed, it was said, to be the place of -his banishment for the remainder of his life.[487] But his enemies had -determined that his life should be brief. A suit was instituted against -him at Constantinople on a variety of charges under the presidency of -Aurelian, Prætorian Prefect. Over and above all his other crimes, he -was found guilty of mingling with the ordinary costume of the consul -certain ornaments or badges which belonged exclusively to the Emperors, -and even of harnessing to his chariot animals of the imperial colour -and breed. These were found to be treasonable offences, on the strength -of which, in spite of some misgivings and hesitation on the part of -Arcadius, which were overruled by Eudoxia and Gaïnas, the miserable -culprit was recalled from Cyprus to Chalcedon, and there beheaded. -As he entered that city, he might have seen affixed to the walls the -imperial sentence, by the terms of which his property was declared -confiscated to the State, his acts as consul were cancelled, the -title of the year was changed, the world invited to rejoice at the -purification of the consulship, and to cease to groan over the sight of -the monstrosity which had disgraced and disfigured the divine honour -of that sacred office. Finally, it was commanded that all statues or -representations whatever of Eutropius in public places should be thrown -down and broken in pieces.[488] - -Thus the earnest desire of Eudoxia was accomplished: she remained -mistress of the field, mistress, as she fondly hoped, of the Empire. -The government for the present passed from the hands of a eunuch and -slave into the hands of a woman. The possible rivals to her supremacy -were the Gothic commander Gaïnas and the Archbishop. In what manner -she was brought into hostile collision with these two very different -personages remains now to be related. The Goth was determined in the -ambitious pursuit of power, the Archbishop equally determined in the -conscientious discharge of duty. The collision of the ruling powers -with him was yet to come, but the contest with Gaïnas immediately -succeeded the fall of Eutropius. - -The Empress procured the elevation of Aurelian, Prætorian Prefect, -to the consulship, and of her favourite (some said her criminal -lover[489]), Count John, to the office of Comptroller of the Royal -Treasury, or sacred largesses. The public affairs of the Empire were -discussed and settled in a sort of cabinet council by her and her -friends, of whom three wealthy but avaricious ladies, Castricia, -Eugraphia, and Marcia, were the most influential. The haughty and -manly spirit of the Gothic warrior naturally disdained to be directed -by a coterie of women. He united his army with that of Tribigild, -and the two forces assumed a menacing attitude in the vicinity of -Constantinople, on the Asiatic side of the Bosporus. Gaïnas opened -negotiations with the Emperor, refusing to communicate with any lesser -power, complained that his services had been inadequately requited, and -demanded, as a preliminary to any further correspondence, the surrender -of three principal favourites at Court—Aurelian the Consul, Saturninus -the husband of Castricia, and the Count John. The embarrassment of the -Court was extreme; but the three ministers, in a genuine spirit, to all -appearance, of Roman courage and self-sacrifice for the good of the -State, crossed the Bosporus, and sent word to the camp of Gaïnas that -they had come to surrender themselves into his hands. The chieftain -subjected them to a grim practical jest. He caused them to be loaded -with chains, and received them in his tent in the presence of an -executioner. After all manner of insults had been heaped upon them, the -executioner approached and swung his sword over them with a furious -countenance as if on the point of decapitating, but, checking the -impending blow, only made a slight scratch on their necks so as just -to draw blood. This savage farce having been performed, the three were -simply detained in the camp without suffering further violence.[490] - -Chrysostom appears to have laboured diligently to mitigate the demands -of Gaïnas. His language, in a homily delivered just after the surrender -of the three captives, implies that some degree of success had attended -his efforts, but it manifests also a feeling of great depression, -caused by the unsettled, indeed anarchical, state of public affairs. - -“After a long interval of silence, I return to you, my beloved -disciples—a silence occasioned, not by any indifference or indolence, -but by my absence spent in earnest endeavours to allay a tempest, -and to bring into a haven those who were beginning to drown.”... “For -this purpose I have withdrawn from you for a time, going backwards and -forwards” [across the Bosporus], “exhorting, beseeching, supplicating, -so as to avert the calamity which was impending over the higher -powers. But now that these dismal matters have been concluded I -return to you....” He had gone to rescue those who were falling and -tempest-tossed; he came back to confirm those who were still standing -and at rest, lest they should become victims of some calamity. “For -there is nothing secure, nothing stable in human affairs; they are -like a raging sea, every day producing strange and fearful shipwrecks. -The world is full of tumult and confusion; everywhere are cliffs and -precipices, rocks and reefs, fearfulness and trembling, peril and -suspicion. No one trusts any one; each man is afraid of his neighbour. -The time is at hand which the prophet depicted in those words: ‘Trust -not in a friend, put not confidence in a guide’ (Micah vii. 5); civil -strife prevails everywhere, not honest open warfare, but veiled under -ten thousand masks. Many are the fleeces beneath which are concealed -innumerable wolves; so that one might live more safely among enemies -than among those who appear to be friends.”[491] - -It is possible that the intercessions of Chrysostom may have saved -the lives of the three captives, or averted any immediate assault of -the Gothic army; but Gaïnas was in a position to dictate any terms -he pleased, and his army was like a great swelling wave, threatening -at any moment to break in overwhelming force upon the capital. An -interview with the Emperor, protected from any insidious attack by the -solemn oath of each party, took place in the church of St. Euphemia, -situated on a lofty eminence above the city of Chalcedon. The Gothic -leader no longer pretended to disguise his ambitious designs. He -demanded to be made Consul and Commander-in-chief of the Imperial -army, cavalry and infantry, Roman as well as barbarian troops; in -short, he aspired to be in position the Stilicho of the East. The -Emperor yielded to these ignominious terms, which in effect placed his -capital at the mercy of a foreign invader. The troops were rapidly -transported from the Asiatic side of the Bosporus and occupied -Constantinople. They waited but the word of their commander to fly -upon the booty with which the wealthy and luxurious city teemed, and -which they beheld with hungry eyes; but for a time the signal was not -given.[492] - -Gaïnas, either from sincere attachment to the Arian form of faith, or -possibly from ambition to display his power to his countrymen, who -were mainly of the Arian persuasion, demanded the abolition of that -law of Theodosius by which Arians were prohibited from public worship -inside the city walls. He represented that it was specially indecorous -for the Commander-in-chief of the Imperial forces to go outside the -city to pay his public devotions. Arcadius, intimidated, and as usual -on the point of yielding, referred the matter to the Archbishop. -Chrysostom earnestly and indignantly deprecated any concession; to -give up one of the Catholic churches to the Arians would be to cast -things holy to the dogs, and to reward the impious at the expense of -the reverent worshippers of Jesus Christ. He begged the Emperor to -allow the whole matter to be discussed between himself and Gaïnas -in the royal presence, when he trusted that, by the help of God, he -should succeed in silencing the Gothic heretic, and in repressing any -repetition of his profane demand.[493] Gaïnas was not averse from the -interview; he rather prided himself on his skill in theological debate, -and boasted of having vanquished the monk Nilus on the question of the -identity, or similarity, of substance in the first two Persons of -the Holy Trinity.[494] The Emperor was well satisfied to act the part -of a quiet, irresponsible auditor. Accordingly, on the following day, -Chrysostom appeared at the palace, accompanied by all those bishops who -were in Constantinople at the time. Gaïnas put forward his demand. The -Archbishop replied that it was impossible for a prince who laid claim -to piety to take any step adverse to the interests of the Catholic -faith. If Gaïnas wished to worship inside the walls, all the churches -in the city were open to him. When the Goth claimed a right to possess -one for his own sect, in consideration of his great services to the -State, Chrysostom repelled the demand with indignant scorn. “You have -already rewards far exceeding your deserts; you are Commander-in-chief -and Consul. Consider what once you were, and what now you are; consider -your former destitution and your present abundance. Look at the -magnificence of your consular robes, and remember the rags in which -you crossed the Danube. Speak not then of ingratitude on the part of -those who have laden you with honours. Remember the oaths by which you -swore fidelity to the great Theodosius and to his children.” He then -cited the prohibitory law issued by Theodosius in A.D. 381, called -upon the Emperor to enforce it, and on the Gothic commander to observe -it. The ecclesiastical historians concur in affirming that the Goth -was completely vanquished by the authoritative demeanour and eloquence -of the Archbishop, and for the time at least desisted from pressing -his demand; but it appears that Arcadius was obliged to satisfy his -rapacity by melting the plate of the Apostles’ Church.[495] - -Possibly, indeed, extortion of money had been the object of Gaïnas -from the beginning in making his demand for an Arian church. The -plunder-loving spirit of his army was aroused, and the gold and -silver visible on the counters of money-changers, and in the shops -of wealthy jewellers, was a temptation constantly dangling before -their eyes, till a rumour of violent intentions, or perhaps common -prudence, caused the owners to remove these alluring treasures into -secret places of safety. If the enemy had entertained any design upon -the shops, it was transferred from them to the palace, upon which they -made a nocturnal assault. According to some accounts, it was repulsed -by the vigorous courage of the citizens, who fell with arms upon the -assailants; according to others, Gaïnas was scared in several attempts -by a vision of an angelic host planted in bright array around the walls -of the palace.[496] The materials for the history of these occurrences -are so meagre that it is impossible to ascertain details, but, from -whatever cause, Gaïnas resolved to escape from the city. Fearing that -if he attempted to quit it openly with his troops, he might be forcibly -stopped or impeded in his departure, he pretended to be under the -influence of a demon and that he desired to offer up prayers for relief -from his affliction at the martyry of St. John at Hebdomon, seven miles -outside Constantinople. - -As he was going out, however, by one of the gates on this pretext, -the guards stationed at the gate perceived that his followers were -taking with them a quantity of arms which they endeavoured to conceal. -The guards refused to let them pass; a fray ensued in which the -guards were killed. The inhabitants were seized with mingled rage -and terror. Gaïnas was declared by royal decree a public enemy. He -himself was outside the walls, and the city gates were now all closed -to cut him off and such forces as were with him from those who were -left inside Constantinople. A large number of these assembled in -and around the church of the Goths. Here they were attacked by the -infuriated populace, which set fire to the building. The Goths perished -wholesale in the flames or by the sword. Gaïnas, with the remainder -of his followers, betook himself to a life of plunder in the Thracian -Chersonese. But he found the inhabitants generally prepared to offer -a stout resistance to his pillaging bands, which were soon reduced -to great straits for subsistence. Meanwhile, a countryman of his in -Constantinople was organising measures for his destruction. Fravitta -was one of those Goths who had become assimilated to the people among -whom they lived. He had married a Roman lady, and was eminent alike -for refinement of manners, for valour in arms, and for honest fidelity -to the government which he served.[497] He offered to lead out such -forces as could be placed at his disposal, pledged himself to clear -the Chersonese of the rebels, and drive them, if necessary, beyond the -Danube. The offer was accepted with joy, and Fravitta defeated the -enemy in several engagements. Gaïnas attempted to cross the Hellespont, -and throw his troops again into the fertile regions of Asia Minor; -but his flimsy fleet of hastily-constructed rafts, being attacked -by a well-managed body of galleys in the middle of the passage, was -dispersed or broken in pieces, and a large part of his army was -drowned. Gaïnas then determined, with the remnant of his followers, to -beat a hasty retreat in the direction of the Danube, where he hoped to -be joined by some of his own countrymen, and renew the offensive. The -accounts of his march are not quite harmonious, and somewhat obscure. -According to Zosimus,[498] he was hotly pursued by Fravitta from place -to place, across the range of Hæmus up to the shores of the Danube, -into the waters of which he plunged on horseback, and with a scanty -band of followers gained the opposite bank, intending thence to make -his way to the settlements of his forefathers on the banks of the -Pruth or Borysthenes. But his design was frustrated by an unexpected -enemy. The Huns occupied at that time the region immediately north of -the Danube, and their king, Uldes or Uldin, was disposed to enter into -friendly relations with the Roman Empire. He took up the pursuit which -Fravitta had abandoned at the river frontier, chased the unhappy Goth -like a wild beast from one hiding-place to another, till at last the -prey was caught and killed. His head was carried on the point of a -lance to Constantinople, as a visible pledge of the good-will of the -Hunnish chief. Sozomen and Socrates,[499] on the other hand, represent -him to have been overtaken, routed, and slain by Roman troops in -Thrace.[500] - -Theodoret has a vague story of his own, that when Gaïnas was ravaging -Thrace, neither warrior nor ambassador could be found courageous enough -to encounter him but Chrysostom, who, yielding to the public appeal, -set forth to intercede, and was most respectfully received by the -barbarian, who placed the right hand of the Archbishop on his own eyes, -and brought his children to his knees—it may be presumed, to receive -his blessing. Theodoret does not venture to affirm that the mission -availed to induce the Goth to lay down his arms, and the whole story -has an unreal and romantic character.[501] - -Three aspirants to the absolute control of the Eastern Empire, widely -different in race, character, and original condition of life—Rufinus, -Eutropius, Gaïnas—had alike perished by a violent death. Fravitta was -made consul, but he was too loyal or too unambitious to go beyond the -line of his legitimate power. Eudoxia now stood without a rival in -the management of the Emperor and the kingdom. Her influence over her -husband was enhanced by the birth of a prince, who afterwards mounted -the throne as Theodosius II.; and thus the final obstacle was removed -to her being solemnly proclaimed Empress under the venerable title of -Augusta. - - - - -CHAPTER XVI. - - CHRYSOSTOM’S VISIT TO ASIA—DEPOSITION OF SIX SIMONIACAL - BISHOPS—LEGITIMATE EXTENT OF HIS JURISDICTION—RETURN TO - CONSTANTINOPLE—RUPTURE AND RECONCILIATION WITH SEVERIAN, - BISHOP OF GABALA—CHRYSOSTOM’S INCREASING UNPOPULARITY - WITH THE CLERGY AND WEALTHY LAITY—HIS FRIENDS—OLYMPIAS - THE DEACONESS—FORMATION OF HOSTILE FACTIONS, WHICH INVITE - THE AID OF THEOPHILUS, PATRIARCH OF ALEXANDRIA. A.D. 400, - 401. - - -Up to this point the episcopal career of Chrysostom may be pronounced -eminently successful. He had distinguished himself not only as a -vigorous reformer of ecclesiastical discipline, an eloquent master of -pure Christian doctrine, and preacher of lofty Christian morality, -but he had done good service to the State; and even while he upheld -with inflexible firmness the full rights of the Church, he had not by -overbearing or haughty independence forfeited the goodwill, respect, -and admiration of the Emperor and Eudoxia. But now the horizon -gradually darkens. We have to begin unravelling a tangled skein of -troubles, to trace a series of subtle intrigues, against which the -single-minded honesty of Chrysostom was ill matched, ultimately -bringing about his degradation, exile, and death. We are fortunate -in possessing, to guide us among these complicated proceedings, the -narrative of one who was not only an eye-witness, but an actor in many -of the scenes which he relates.[502] - -In the spring of the year A.D. 400, during the military usurpation of -Gaïnas, twenty-two prelates had assembled in Constantinople to confer -with the Archbishop on ecclesiastical business.[503] Palladius has -mentioned the names of a few, Theotimus from Scythia, Ammon an Egyptian -from Thrace, Arabianus from Galatia. One Sunday when the conclave was -sitting, Eusebius, bishop of Valentinopolis in Asia, apparently not -himself a member of the synod, entered the place of assembly, and -presented a document addressed to the Archbishop as President, which -contained seven grave charges against Antoninus, bishop of Ephesus: “He -had melted down some of the sacred vessels to make plate for his son; -he had transferred some of the marble at the entrance of the baptistry -to his own bath; he had placed some fallen columns which belonged to -the Church in his own dining-room; he had retained in his employment -a servant who had committed murder; he had taken possession of some -property in land which had been left to the Church by Basilina, the -mother of Julian; he had resumed intercourse with his wife, and had -children born to him, after his ordination; lastly, the worst offence -of all, he had instituted a regular system of selling bishoprics on a -scale proportioned to the revenue of the sees.” Chrysostom probably -perceived, or suspected from the eagerness of the accuser, that he -entertained some personal animosity towards the accused. He replied -with calmness and caution: “Brother Eusebius, since accusations made -under the influence of agitated feelings are often not easy to prove, -let me beseech you to withdraw the written accusation, while we -endeavour to correct the causes of your annoyance.” Eusebius waxed hot, -and repeated his tale of charges with much vehemence and acrimony of -tone. The hour of service was approaching; Chrysostom committed to -Paul, bishop of Heraclea, who appeared friendly to Antoninus, the task -of attempting to conciliate Eusebius, and passed with the remainder of -the prelates into the cathedral. - -The opening salutation, “Peace be with you,” was pronounced by the -Archbishop as he took his seat in the centre of the other bishops, -ranged, according to custom, on either side of him round the wall -of the choir or tribune. The service was proceeding, when, to the -amazement alike of the clergy and the congregation, Eusebius abruptly -entered the choir, hurried up to the Archbishop, and again presented -the document of charges, adjuring him by the life of the Emperor and -other tremendous oaths to attend to its contents. From the agitation of -his manner, the people imagined that he must be a suppliant entreating -the Archbishop to intercede with the Emperor for his life. To avoid a -disturbance in the face of the congregation, Chrysostom received the -paper of charges, but when the lessons for the day had been read, and -the Liturgy of the Faithful (Missa Fidelium) was about to begin, he -desired Pansophius, bishop of Pissida, to “offer the gifts,” and, with -the rest of the prelates, quitted the church. His serenity of mind was -ruffled by the impetuous behaviour of Eusebius, and he dreaded the -possibility of infringing our Lord’s command to abstain from bringing -a gift to the altar when “thy brother hath aught against thee.” After -the conclusion of the service, he took his seat with the other bishops -in the baptistry, and summoned Eusebius into the presence of the -conclave. Once more the accuser was warned not to advance charges which -he might not be able to substantiate, and was reminded that when once -the indictment had been formally lodged, he could not, being a bishop, -retract the prosecution. Eusebius, however, intimated his willingness -to accept all the responsibility of persevering with the accusation. -The list of charges was then formally read. The bishops concurred in -pronouncing each of the alleged offences to be a gross violation of -ecclesiastical law, but recommended that Antoninus should be tried upon -the cardinal crime of simony, since this transcended, and in a manner -comprehended, all the rest. “Love of money was the root of all evil;” -and he who would basely sell for money the highest spiritual office, -would not scruple to dispose of sacred vessels, marbles, or land -belonging to the Church. The Archbishop then turned to the accused: -“What say you, brother Antoninus, to these things?” The Bishop of -Ephesus replied by a flat denial of the charges. A similar question -being addressed to some of the bishops there present, described -as purchasers of their sees, was answered by a similar denial. An -examination of such witnesses as could be procured lasted till two -o’clock in the day, when, owing to the lack of further evidence, the -proceedings were adjourned. Considering the gravity of the affair, and -the inconvenience of collecting the witnesses from Asia, the Archbishop -announced his intention of paying a visit to Asia Minor in person. -Antoninus, conscious of guilt, and aware of the rigorous scrutiny to -which his conduct would be subjected, was now thoroughly alarmed. -He made interest with a nobleman at court, whose estates he managed -(contrary to ecclesiastical law) in Asia, and besought him to prevent -the visit of the Archbishop, pledging himself to present the necessary -witnesses at Constantinople. The Archbishop, accordingly, found his -intended departure opposed by the Court. It was represented that the -absence of the chief pastor from the capital, undesirable at all -times, might be especially inconvenient at a crisis when tumults were -apprehended from the movements of Gaïnas; and it was unnecessary, as -the appearance of witnesses from Asia in due time was guaranteed.[504] -Any delay was an immediate relief to the accused; and there was a -further hope that, by bribery or intimidation, the ultimate production -of the witnesses might be prevented. But he was disappointed; for -though the Archbishop consented to defer his own visit to Asia, he -appointed, with the sanction of the synod, three delegates to proceed -thither immediately and institute an inquiry into the case of Antoninus. - -The delegates were instructed to hold their court at Hypœpœ, a town -not far from Ephesus, in conjunction with the bishops of the province; -and the Archbishop and his synod further determined, that if either -the accuser or accused failed to appear there within two months, he -should be excommunicated. One of the delegates, Hesychius, bishop of -Parium on the Hellespont, was a friend of Antoninus, and withdrew from -the mission under the pretence of illness; the other two, Syncletius, -bishop of Trajanopolis in Thrace, and Palladius, bishop of Hellenopolis -in Bithynia, proceeded to Smyrna, announced their arrival to the -accuser and defendant by letter, and summoned them to appear at Hypœpœ -within the appointed time. The summons was obeyed, but the appearance -of the two was only for the purpose of playing off a farce before the -commissioners. Strange to relate, a reconciliation had taken place -between Antoninus and his apparently implacable accuser. Eusebius -had yielded to the temptation to commit the very crime which he had -so vehemently denounced. A bribe of money had quelled his righteous -indignation; plaintiff and defendant were now accomplices, whose one -interest was to conceal their joint iniquities. They professed great -willingness to produce their witnesses, but pleaded the difficulty -of collecting persons who lived in different and distant places, and -were engaged in various occupations. The commissioners requested the -accuser to name a period within which he could guarantee the appearance -of his witnesses. Eusebius required forty days. As this space of -time covered the hottest part of the summer, it was hoped that the -patience or health of the commissioners would be too much exhausted -at the expiration of it to prosecute the inquiry. Eusebius then -departed, ostensibly to search for witnesses; but, in fact, he quietly -sneaked away to Constantinople, and concealed himself in some obscure -corner in that great city. The forty days expired, and, Eusebius not -appearing, the two delegates wrote to the bishops of Asia, pronouncing -him excommunicated for contumacy. They lingered a whole month longer -in Asia, and then returned to Constantinople. Here they chanced to -light upon Eusebius, and upbraided him with his faithless conduct. -He affected to have been ill, and renewed his promises to produce -witnesses. During these prolonged delays Antoninus died; and Chrysostom -now received earnest solicitations from the clergy of Ephesus, and from -the neighbouring bishops, to apply a healing hand to the wounds and -diseases of the Asiatic Church. “We beseech your Dignity[505] to come -down and stamp a divine impress on the Church of Ephesus, which has -long been distressed, partly by the adherents of Arius, partly by those -who, in the midst of their avarice and arrogance, pretend to be on our -side; for very many are they who lie in wait like grievous wolves, -eager to seize the episcopal throne by money.”[506] - -The death of Gaïnas in January, A.D. 401, set Chrysostom free to comply -with this earnest appeal to his authority and aid. It was the depth of -the winter season; his health was infirm and impaired by the strain -of the past year’s anxiety and toil; but the zeal of the Archbishop -disregarded these impediments. He embarked at Constantinople without -delay, leaving Severian, Bishop of Gabala, to act as deputy bishop in -his absence. Such a violent north wind sprang up soon after starting, -that the crew of the vessel, afraid of being driven on Proconnesus, -lay at anchor for two days under shelter of the promontory of Trito. On -the third day they took advantage of a southerly breeze to land near -Apamea in Bithynia, where Chrysostom was joined by three bishops, Paul -of Heraclea, Cyrinus of Chalcedon, and Palladius of Hellenopolis. With -these companions he proceeded by land to Ephesus. There he was received -with hearty welcome by the clergy and by seventy bishops. - -The first business to which the Archbishop and this council of prelates -addressed themselves was the election of a new bishop to the see of -Ephesus. As usual there were many rival candidates, and factions -supporting each with equal vehemence. Chrysostom fell back on the -expedient of putting forward a candidate regarded with indifference -by all parties. The plan succeeded, and Heracleides was elected. He -was a deacon of three years’ standing, ordained by Chrysostom, and -in immediate attendance on him; a native of Cyprus, who had received -an ascetic training in the desert of Scetis, a man of ability and -learning. He comes before us again as a fellow-sufferer with the -Archbishop, to whom he had owed his elevation. - -Not long after the arrival of Chrysostom, Eusebius, the original -persecutor of Antoninus and of the simoniacal bishops, appeared, and -requested to be re-admitted to communion with his brethren. The request -was not immediately granted; but it was determined to proceed with the -trial of the accused bishops, to prove whose guilt Eusebius affirmed -that he could produce abundant evidence. The witnesses were examined, -and the crime being considered fully proven in the case of six bishops, -the offenders were summoned into the presence of the council. At first -they stoutly denied their guilt, but finally gave way before the minute -and circumstantial depositions of lay, clerical, and even female -witnesses as to the place, time, and quality of the purchases which -they had transacted. They pleaded partly the prevalence of the custom -in excuse for their crime, and partly their anxiety to be exempted -from the burden of discharging curial duties; that is, from serving on -the common and municipal council of their city. Every estate-holder -to the amount of twenty-five acres of land was bound to serve in the -curia of his city. Many of the functions incident to that office, such -as the assessment and collection of imposts, were (especially under -an ill-administered despotism) invidious and onerous. Constantine had -exempted the clergy from curial office, and the consequence was that -many men got themselves ordained simply to evade the disagreeable duty; -and this becoming detrimental both to the Church and State, the law -of Constantine underwent modifications by his successors. The Church -passed canons forbidding those who were curiales to be ordained, the -effect of which was to diminish the number of wealthy men who entered -the ranks of the clergy.[507] The Asiatic bishops, therefore, if -curiales when ordained, had acted against the laws of the Church, -and could not legally have claimed exemption from curial duties on -the ground of their orders. They sued for mercy to the council; they -entreated that, if deprived of their sees, the money which they had -paid to obtain them might be returned. In many cases it had been -procured with much difficulty; some had even parted with the furniture -of their wives to raise the requisite amount. The Archbishop undertook -to intercede with the Emperor for their exemption from curial duty; the -ecclesiastical question he submitted to the council. The decision of -the prelates, under the influence of their president, was temperate and -wise. The six bishops were to be deprived of their sees, but allowed -to receive the Eucharist inside the altar rails with the clergy, and -the heirs of Antoninus were required to restore their purchase-money to -them. The deposed prelates were superseded by the appointment of six -men, unmarried, eminent for learning and purity of life.[508] - -On his return through Bithynia the Archbishop was detained by a not -less difficult and delicate piece of business. Gerontius, Archbishop -of Nicomedia, the metropolitan of Bithynia, was a singular specimen of -an ecclesiastical adventurer. He had been a deacon at Milan, but was -expelled by Ambrose for misconduct. He made his way to Constantinople, -where, by general cleverness, and by some real or pretended skill in -medicine, he became a favourite with people of rank, and through the -interest of some influential friends obtained the See of Nicomedia. -He was consecrated by Helladius, bishop of Heraclea, for whose son -Gerontius had managed to procure a high appointment in the army. The -new bishop of Nicomedia gained the attachment of his people, again it -is said, through his skill in curing diseases of the body rather than -of the soul. Ambrose incessantly demanded of Nectarius, then Patriarch -of Constantinople, that he should be deposed; but Nectarius did not -venture to incur the displeasure of the Nicomedians. The bolder spirit -and more scrupulous conscience of Chrysostom did not hesitate to strike -the blow which his more worldly and courtly predecessor had shrunk -from striking. Gerontius was deposed, whether by the sole authority -of the Archbishop, or by the decree of a council acting under his -influence, is not stated. Pansophius, formerly tutor to the Empress, -a man of piety, wisdom, and gentleness, was promoted to the see. But -the Nicomedians bewailed the loss of their favourite; they went about -the streets in procession, singing litanies, as if in the time of some -great national calamity.[509] - -Before quitting Asia, Chrysostom is also said to have taken active -measures for the suppression of the worship of Midas at Ephesus, and -of Cybele in Phrygia.[510] All these proceedings are worth recording, -not only as of some ecclesiastical interest in themselves, but also -because they were all remembered and turned against him by his enemies. -It has been much debated whether Chrysostom, by his acts in Asia, -overstrained his legal powers, or rather, whether he exceeded the -legal boundaries of his jurisdiction as Patriarch of Constantinople. -The fact seems to be that the importance of his see was in that -growing state which enabled the possessor of it, if a man of energy -and ability, to go great lengths without any exception being taken to -his authority, unless and until a hostile feeling was provoked against -him. By the Council of Constantinople, A.D. 381, the Patriarch of that -city was restricted in his jurisdiction to the diocese of Thrace.[511] -His authority over the dioceses of Asia Minor and Pontus was not -established till the Council of Chalcedon, A.D. 451, when there was -a long discussion on the subject, and the papal legates especially -resisted any claim to such an extension; but it was affirmed that the -Patriarchs had _long enjoyed_ the privilege of ordaining metropolitans -to the provinces of those dioceses, and so it was finally conveyed to -them by that Council; and the additional right was granted them of -hearing appeals from these metropolitans.[512] Theodoret (c. 28) simply -observes that the jurisdiction of Chrysostom extended not only over the -six provinces of Thrace, but also over Asia and Pontus. The Council of -Constantinople gave the bishop of that see the first rank after the -Bishop of Rome, because Constantinople was “a new Rome.” The Council -of Chalcedon declared him for the same reason to be invested with -_equal_ privileges. - -Chrysostom was welcomed, on his return to Constantinople, with hearty -demonstrations of joy. On the following day he was at his post in the -cathedral, and once more addressing his beloved flock. In somewhat -rapturous language he expresses his thankfulness at learning that their -fidelity to the Church, and their attachment to their spiritual father, -had not been impaired by his absence, which had lasted more than a -hundred days. They were disappointed that he had not returned in time -to celebrate Easter with them. But he consoles them by representing -that every participation of the Eucharist was a kind of Easter. “_As -often_ as ye eat this bread, ye do show forth the Lord’s death till He -come.” “They were not tied to time and place like the Jew. Wherever -and whenever the Christian celebrated that holy feast with joy and -love, there was the true Paschal Festival.”[513] They regretted also -that so many had been baptized by other hands than his. “What then? -that does not impair the gift of God; _I_ was not present when they -were baptized, but _Christ_ was present.” “In a document signed by the -Emperor, the only question of importance is the autograph; the quality -of the ink and paper matters not. Even so in baptism, the tongue and -the hand of the priest are but as the paper and pen: the hand which -writes is the Holy Spirit Himself.”[514] - -The thankfulness and joy of Chrysostom at the affectionate reception -with which he was greeted by the people were probably felt and -expressed the more warmly, owing to some unpleasant accounts which -had been forwarded to him by his deacon Serapion, that Severian, -Bishop of Gabala, had been endeavouring to undermine his influence -in his absence. It will be remembered that to Severian Chrysostom -had intrusted his episcopal duties during his visitation journey in -Asia. The circumstance of a bishop of Syria residing for so long a -time in Constantinople is worth considering, and affords a curious -insight into the character of the times. Antiochus, Bishop of Ptolemais -in Phœnicia, had a reputation as a learned and eloquent man; he -paid a visit to Constantinople, and excited much admiration by his -discourses. Severian, hearing of his success, was animated by a spirit -of emulation, if not envy, which could not be satisfied till he had -exhibited his powers on the same theatre. He carefully composed a -large stock of sermons, and set out to try his fortune in the capital. -The unsuspicious and generous Archbishop received him cordially, and -frequently invited him to preach. Severian possessed some powers of -speaking, though he had a harsh provincial accent, and he exerted all -his eloquence in the church, and all his arts of flattery out of it, -to win the confidence and admiration, not only of the Archbishop, -but also of the chief personages at court, and even the Emperor and -Empress. It was with their full approval that he remained as deputy -of the Archbishop during his sojourn in Asia. But he found himself -narrowly and suspiciously watched by the Archdeacon Serapion, who -opposed some of his proceedings as arbitrary, and made no concealment -of his dislike. One day after the return of Chrysostom, Severian -passed through an apartment of the episcopal palace where Serapion was -sitting. Serapion rose not to make the customary salutation of respect. -Severian, irritated by his discourtesy, exclaimed in a loud voice: -“If Serapion dies a Christian, then Jesus Christ was not incarnate.” -The last clause only of the sentence was repeated by Serapion to -Chrysostom. It was corroborated by witnesses; the indignation of the -Archbishop was excited. Severian was peremptorily commanded to quit -the city. The Empress resented the expulsion of a favourite preacher, -and commanded the Archbishop to recall him. Chrysostom yielded so -far, but was inflexible in his refusal to admit the offender to -communion, till Eudoxia came in person to the Church of the Apostles, -placed her infant son Theodosius on his knees, and conjured him by -solemn oaths to listen to her request. The Archbishop then, but with -some reluctance, consented.[515] He was, however, thoroughly honest -in doing that to which he had once made up his mind. Fearing that his -congregation, in their zealous attachment to him, might disapprove of -the reconciliation, he delivered a short address on the subject. He was -their spiritual father, and he trusted therefore they would extend to -him the respect and obedience of affectionate and dutiful children. He -came to them with the most appropriate message that could be delivered -by the mouth of a bishop—a message of peace and love. There was also -a further duty incumbent on all—respectful submission to the civil -powers. If the apostle Paul said, “Be subject to principalities and -powers” (Tit. iii. 1), how especially was this precept incumbent on -the subjects of a religious sovereign who laboured for the good of -the Church? He besought them to receive Severian with a full heart -and with open arms. The request was received by the congregation with -expressions of approbation. He thanked them for their obedience, and -concluded with a prayer that God would grant a fixed and lasting peace -to His Church. - -Severian addressed them the next day in a rhetorical and artificial -discourse on the beauty and blessings of peace—a subject painfully -incongruous with the subsequent conduct of the speaker; for this -misunderstanding with the Bishop of Gabala was the first muttering -of the storm which was soon to burst over the head of the doomed -Archbishop.[516] - -The inevitable fate of one who attempts to reform a deeply corrupt -society, and a secularised clergy, on an ascetic model befell -Chrysostom. He lashed with almost equal severity the most unpardonable -crimes and the more venial foibles and follies of the age. His -denunciations of heartless rapacity, sensuality, luxury, addiction -to debasing and immoral amusements, might have been borne; but he -presumed—an intolerable offence!—to censure the fashionable ladies for -setting off their complexions with paint, and surmounting their heads -with piles of false hair. The clergy, too, might have tolerated his -condemnation of the grosser offences, such as simony or concubinage, -but they resented his restraint of their indulgence in the pleasures -of society, and of their propensity to frequent the entertainments -of the noble and wealthy. He was, as Palladius expresses it, “like a -lamp burning before sore eyes,” for what he bade others be, that he -was pre-eminently himself.[517] None could say that he was one man in -the pulpit and another out of it. To set an example to his worldly -clergy, and to avoid contamination, he gave up his episcopal income, -save what sufficed to supply his simple daily wants. He resolutely -abstained from mingling in general society, and ate his frugal meals -in the seclusion of his own apartment. Thus, with the exception of a -few deeply attached friends, who measured practical Christianity by the -same standard as himself, he became deeply unpopular among the upper -ranks of society. With the poor it was otherwise; they regarded him as -a kind of champion, because he denounced the oppressions and extortions -of the rich, and the tyranny of masters over slaves, and because he was -ever inculcating the duty of almsgiving. In the eyes of his friends he -was the saint, pure in life, severe in discipline, sublime in doctrine; -in the eyes of his enemies he was the sacerdotal tyrant, odious to the -clergy as an inexorable enforcer of a rule of life intolerably rigid, -odious to clergy and laity as an inhospitable, if not haughty recluse; -a vigilant and merciless censor who rode roughshod over established -customs. Individuals at last, among clergy and laity, who conceived -that they themselves, or at any rate the section of society to which -they belonged, were the butts at which more especially the Archbishop -aimed his shafts, began to discuss their grievances, till their -conferences gradually assumed the shape of positive organised hostility -against the disturber of their peace. But before entering on the -troublous history of his enemies’ machinations, it may be well to take -a glance at the most conspicuous of Chrysostom’s friends. - -The list of those who are known to us by more than their mere names -is soon exhausted. Among the clergy may be reckoned Heracleides, made -Bishop of Ephesus in the place of Antoninus; Proclus, afterwards (in -A.D. 434) Patriarch of Constantinople, at present the receiver of those -who demanded audiences with the Patriarch; Cassianus, founder of the -Monastery of St. Victor at Marseilles, and his friend and companion -Germanus; Helladius, the priest of the palace, probably equivalent -to private chaplain; Serapion, the deacon[518] or archdeacon,[519] -afterwards made Bishop of Heraclea in Thrace, from which see he was -expelled in the persecution which befell Chrysostom’s followers. With -most of these men he maintained a constant and affectionate intercourse -or correspondence during his exile to the close of his life. With such -intimate companions and friends the austerity and reserve of manner -which he assumed towards those outside this circle vanished. All the -natural amiability and playful humour of his disposition shone out when -he was in their company; he called some of them by nicknames of his own -invention, especially those who practised such ascetic exercises as he -specially approved.[520] - -Three ladies are distinguished as among his most faithful friends. -Salvina was the daughter of the African rebel Gildo, and had been -married by Theodosius to Nebridius, nephew of his Empress, in the -hope—a vain one as it proved—that this tie would attach Gildo to -the Empire. Her husband died young; she vowed perpetual widowhood, -and became the patroness and protectress at the court of Arcadius of -oriental churches and ecclesiastics. - -Pentadia was wife of the consul Timasius; and when her husband was -banished by Eutropius to the Oasis of Egypt, she had been persecuted by -the merciless tyrant, and fled for refuge to the Church, where she was -protected in sanctuary by the Archbishop in spite of the opposition of -her persecutor. - -But by far the most eminent of Chrysostom’s female friends was the -deaconess Olympias. She sprang from a noble but Pagan family. Her -grandfather, Ablavius, was a prætorian prefect, highly esteemed and -trusted by Constantine the Great, and her father, Seleucus, had -attained the rank of count. She was early left an orphan, endowed -with great personal beauty, and heiress to a vast fortune. Her uncle -and guardian, Procopius, was a man of probity and piety, a friend -and correspondent of Gregory Nazianzenus. Her instructress also, -Theodosia, sister of St. Amphilocius, was a woman of piety; one whom -Gregory recommended Olympias to imitate as a very model of excellence -in speech and conduct. Under this happy training, the girl grew up to -emulate and surpass her preceptress in goodness. Gregory delighted to -call her “his own Olympias,” and to be called “father” by her.[521] -There could be no difficulty in finding a suitor for a lady possessed -of every attraction. The anxiety of Procopius was to secure a worthy -one. Nebridius was selected; a young man, but high in official rank; -Count or Intendant of the Domain in A.D. 382, Prefect of Constantinople -in A.D. 386. They were wedded in A.D. 384. Many bishops assisted at -the ceremony, but Gregory was prevented from attending by the state -of his health. He wrote a letter to Procopius, saying that in spirit, -nevertheless, he would join their hands to one another and to God. -Part of the letter is written in a vein of sprightly humour. “It -would have been very unbecoming for a gouty old fellow like himself -to be seen hobbling about among the dancers and merry-makers at the -nuptials.”[522] He also addressed a poem to Olympias, in which he -gives her advice how she ought to conduct herself as a married woman. -She did not long need his counsel. Nebridius died about two years -after their marriage. Olympias regarded this early dissolution of the -marriage-bond as an intimation of the Divine will that she should -henceforth live free from the worldly entanglements and cares incident -to married life. The Emperor Theodosius desired to unite her to a -Spaniard named Elpidius, a kinsman of his own, but she steadfastly -refused. The Emperor acted in that despotic manner which occasionally -marred his usually generous character. He ordered the property of -Olympias to be confiscated till she should be thirty years of age; she -was even denied freedom of intercourse with her episcopal friends, and -of access to the Church. But she only thanked the Emperor for those -deprivations, which were intended to make her hanker after worldly -life. “You have exercised towards your humble handmaiden a virtue -becoming a monarch and suitable even to a bishop; you have directed -what was to me a heavy burden, and the distribution of it an anxiety, -to be kept in safe custody. You could not have conferred a greater -blessing upon me, unless you had ordered it to be bestowed upon the -churches and the poor.” The Emperor was softened; at any rate he -perceived the uselessness, if not the injustice, of his treatment. He -cancelled the order for the confiscation of her property, and left her -in the undisturbed enjoyment of single life and of her possessions. -Henceforward her time and wealth were devoted to the interests of the -Church. She was the friend, entertainer, adviser of many of the most -eminent ecclesiastics of the day; the liberal patroness of their works -in Greece, Asia, Syria, not only by donations of money but even of -landed property. We may not admire what was regarded in those days as -among the most admirable traits of saintliness, a total disregard to -personal neatness and cleanliness; but we can admire her frugal living, -and entire devotion of her time to ministering to the wants of the -sick, the needy, and the ignorant. Her too indiscriminate liberality -was restrained by Chrysostom, who represented to her that, as her -wealth was a trust committed to her by God, she ought to be prudent -in the distribution of it. This salutary advice procured for him the -ill-will of many avaricious bishops and clergy, who had profited, or -hoped to profit, by her wealth.[523] She, on her side, repaid the -Archbishop for his spiritual care by many little feminine attentions -to his bodily wants, especially by seeing that he was supplied with -wholesome food, and did not overstrain his feeble constitution by a too -rigid abstinence.[524] - -The leaders of the faction hostile to Chrysostom among the clergy were -the two bishops already mentioned—Severian of Gabala and Antiochus -of Ptolemais. To these was added a third in the person of Acacius, -Bishop of Berœa. He had, in A.D. 401 or A.D. 402, paid a visit to -Constantinople, and, in a fit of rage at what he considered the mean -lodging and inhospitable entertainment of the Archbishop, had coarsely -exclaimed, in the hearing of some of the clergy, “I’ll season a dainty -dish for him.”[525] The ladies who acquired a melancholy pre-eminence -among the enemies of the Archbishop were the intimate friends of -the Empress, already mentioned—Marsa, widow of Promotus, the consul -whom Rufinus murdered; Castricia, wife of the consul Saturninus; -and Eugraphia, a wealthy widow,—all rich women “who used _for_ -evil the wealth which their husbands had _through_ evil obtained.” -Proud, intriguing, licentious, they were all exasperated against the -Archbishop for the censure which he had unsparingly pronounced upon -their moral conduct, as well as their vain and extravagant display -in dress. The house of Eugraphia became the rendezvous of all clergy -and monks, as well as laity, who were disaffected to him. Among the -clergy was Atticus, who was obtruded on the see as Archbishop after the -banishment of Chrysostom. This worthy cabal collected, and disseminated -with praiseworthy industry, whatever tales could damage the character -and influence of the Archbishop. His real failings were exaggerated, -others were invented, and his language misrepresented. He was -irascible, inhospitable, uncourteous, parsimonious; he had unmercifully -assailed Eutropius with harsh language when he fled for refuge to -the Church; he had behaved disrespectfully to Gaïnas when he was -“magister militum;” but, worse than all, he had audaciously attacked -the Augusta herself, and had insulted her sacred majesty by indicating -her under the name of Jezebel. This is scarcely credible in itself, -and is distinctly contradicted by the most trustworthy authorities; -but it is stated that he had reproved the Empress for appropriating -with harshness, if not violence, a piece of land; and of course the -blows which he directed against inordinate luxury, unseemly parade -of dress and the like, fell heavily upon the most prominent leader -in these follies. She was probably mortified also to find that her -display of religious zeal, her pious attendance on the services of the -Church, her pilgrimages, her really liberal donations to good works, -did not protect her from censure in other things. Chrysostom was not -one of those who would connive at evil for the benefit, as some might -have represented it, of the Church. He would not sacrifice what he -believed to be the interests of morality, for the supposed advantage -either of himself or of the Church over which he ruled. Wrong was -wrong and must be rebuked, though the actor was the Empress herself, -though that Empress was inclined to be the benefactress and patroness -of the Church, and though she might become, as she _did_ become, his -implacable foe. - -The clergy only needed an equally potent leader on their side, and -then the organisation of the hostile forces would be complete. Such -a chief was to be found in the Patriarch of Alexandria, Theophilus, -who had already displayed a malignant spirit at the ordination of -the Archbishop, though intimidated by Eutropius into submission. He -was only waiting his opportunity for revenge, which a concurrence of -circumstances now put into his hands. - -After making the most of such charges as gossip, aided by malice, could -manufacture at Constantinople, the enemy employed one of the party, a -despicable Syrian monk named Isaac, to make a scrutinising inquiry at -Antioch into the previous life of Chrysostom. A youth passed in such a -licentious and voluptuous city could not fail, they thought, to betray -some stains if submitted to a rigorous inspection. But their malevolent -expectations were disappointed, for their miserable spy could bring -back nothing but unmixed praise of an immaculate youth and a pious -manhood.[526] - -At this juncture the intriguers applied to Theophilus, and they could -not have secured a more willing and able director of their plans. The -character of this prelate, and his prominent position in the final -events of Chrysostom’s career, demand some notice. Of his family and -early life little is known. He had a sister who sympathised with -him in his ambitious schemes; and Cyril, who succeeded him in the -patriarchate, and too largely inherited his spirit, was his nephew. -He spent a portion of his younger manhood as a recluse in the Nitrian -desert, where he became familiar with the most eminent anchorites of -that period, Elurion, Ammon, Isidore, and Macarius. He was secretary to -Athanasius, and a presbyter of Alexandria under Peter, his successor; -and, on the death of Timothy in A.D. 385, who succeeded Peter, he -was elevated to the see. All historians concur in admitting that he -possessed great ability; that he was capable of conceiving great -projects, and executing them with courage and address. Jerome has -described him as deeply skilled in science, especially mathematics and -astrology, and highly praises his eloquence.[527] He had a passion -for building, and his episcopate was distinguished equally by the -destruction of Pagan temples and the erection of Christian churches. -The most splendid of these were the church of St. John the Baptist at -Alexandria, and another at Canopus. But to gratify this expensive taste -he was grasping of money, too often to the neglect of those indigent -people who were dependent on the alms of the Church. He combined his -efforts with Chrysostom’s, as has been already related, in healing -the schism of Antioch in A.D. 399, after which little is known of his -history, till he becomes Chrysostom’s implacable and too successful -foe.[528] - - - - -CHAPTER XVII. - - CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH LED TO THE INTERFERENCE OF THEOPHILUS - WITH THE AFFAIRS OF CHRYSOSTOM—CONTROVERSY ABOUT THE - WRITINGS OF ORIGEN—PERSECUTION BY THEOPHILUS OF THE MONKS - CALLED “THE TALL BRETHREN”—THEIR FLIGHT TO PALESTINE—TO - CONSTANTINOPLE—THEIR RECEPTION BY CHRYSOSTOM—THEOPHILUS - SUMMONED TO CONSTANTINOPLE. A.D. 395-403. - - -In tracing to its starting-point the interference of Theophilus with -the affairs of Chrysostom, we have to unravel a curious and tangled -skein of controversy. The doctrines of Origen were as much an occasion -of strife a hundred and fifty years after his death, as he himself -had been during his life. With one hand holding on to the philosophy -of the past, and with the other firmly grasping the Christianity -of the present, he was persecuted by Pagans, yet never universally -accepted and cordially trusted by the Church.[529] So with his system -of doctrine; it became a sort of debatable ground for the possession -of which contending parties strove. The prize was worth the struggle; -for the genius of Origen could not be questioned, but the quantity -of his writings being enormous,[530] and the range of his doctrine -wide and many-sided, narrow-minded partisans, grasping only a part -of it, condemned or extolled him unfairly on a single issue. The -mystical element in his teaching was carried by some of his admirers -to extremes of fanciful, allegorical, interpretation of Scripture, -such as he himself would never have devised or approved. To others of -a more prosaic, material cast of thought this same mystical vein was -repugnant, and was denounced by them with characteristic coarseness. -Men of larger minds, who had patience to peruse his voluminous works, -and ability to criticise them, admired his genius, recognised his great -services to Christianity, heartily embraced much of his teaching, -questioned some portions, and rejected others. Such were Gregory -Nazianzenus, Basil, Chrysostom, and Jerome, who would never have been -so great as writers, or commentators, had they not been students of -Origen. As a general statement, it may be true to say that he was less -acceptable to the colder, more practical, more realistic mind of the -Western Church, than to the lively imagination and speculative spirit -of Oriental churchmen. The most controverted points, indeed, in his -system were of a kind with which the Western mind did not naturally -concern itself. The pre-existence of souls; their entrance into human -bodies after the fall as the punishment of sin; their emancipation from -the flesh in the resurrection; the ultimate salvation of all spirits, -including Satan himself,—these are questions singularly congenial to -Oriental, singularly alien from Western, thought. The Origenistic -controversy fell into abeyance before the engrossing interest and -importance of the Arian contest; but when that wave had spent itself, -it revived, and just at this period all the greatest names of the day -became engaged on one side or the other. As usual, the real questions -at issue were too often forgotten amidst the personal jealousies, -intrigues, angry recriminations to which the discussion of them gave -birth. - -In spite of his doubtful orthodoxy, the Egyptian Church could not fail -to be proud of so distinguished a son as Origen, and Theophilus was at -first his earnest defender. Some of the more illiterate Egyptian monks -had recoiled from Origen’s highly spiritual conception of the Deity -into an opposite extreme. Interpreting literally those passages of -Scripture where God is spoken of as if possessing human emotions and -corporeal parts, they altogether humanised His nature; they conceived -of Him as a Being _not_ “without body, parts, or passions;” they -obtained, in consequence, the designation of “Anthropomorphites.” -Against this humanising, material conception Theophilus, in a paschal -letter, directed argument and proof.[531] It was received by many of -the monks with dismay, sorrow, and resistance. Serapion, one of the -most aged, burst into tears when informed that the mind of the Eastern -Church concurred, on the whole, with the doctrine of Theophilus, and -exclaimed, “My God is taken away, and I know not what to worship.”[532] - -Rufinus, a monk of Aquileia, and for a time the ardent friend of -Jerome, was, during a visit to Egypt, initiated by Theophilus into the -doctrines of Origen, conceived a warm admiration for them, extolled -him as the light of the Gospel next to the Apostles, and imparted -some of his own enthusiasm to John, bishop of Jerusalem, whom he soon -afterwards visited. Jerome fully appreciated the merits of Origen, -though his larger mind and more extensive knowledge were not blind to -his defects. - -Such were the amicable relations between the leading churchmen of the -East in A.D. 395, when a visitor from the West threw among them the -apple of discord. This was Aterbius, a pilgrim, who had a reputation -as a subtle theologian, and appears, immediately on his arrival in -Jerusalem, to have applied himself to the business of detecting heresy. -He entered into friendly intercourse for a short time with the bishop -and Rufinus, and then suddenly included Jerome with them both in a -public denunciation as Origenists, and declared the whole diocese -of Jerusalem to be infected with that heresy. Jerome immediately -and indignantly repudiated the charge; he declared that he was not -an Origenist, for that he merely read the works of Origen with -reservations, as he might those of a heretic.[533] Rufinus would not -condescend to make any defence, oral or written, but shut himself up -in his cloister in sullen silence till Aterbius had quitted Jerusalem, -fearing, so Jerome affirms, to condemn what he really approved, or -to incur the reproach of heresy by an open resistance.[534] John of -Jerusalem was equally indignant at the accusation, but displeased with -Jerome for publicly exculpating himself independently of his bishop. -In fact, the episcopal pride of the Bishop of Jerusalem was severely -wounded at this time, both by the pre-eminence of the metropolitan -see of Cæsarea,[535] and by the reputation of Jerome’s monastic -establishment at Bethlehem, which attracted visitors from all parts of -Christendom. - -When the minds of all were thus ruffled, a second and far more -mischievous visitor arrived in the person of Epiphanius, the -octogenarian Bishop of Constantia, Metropolitan of Cyprus. He was -one of those men who, joining some erudition and a high reputation -for rigid orthodoxy to a narrow mind and impulsive temper, figure -prominently in theological warfare as the very personifications of -discord. Shocked at the intelligence of the heretical tendency in -Palestine, and vexed that it should have been detected by a stranger -rather than by himself, who was a native of Palestine, and the visitor -of a monastery between Jerusalem and Hebron, he lost not a moment in -setting out for the Holy City. He accepted the hospitality of the -Bishop John, and spent the evening in all amity with him, nor was the -obnoxious subject of dispute mentioned between them.[536] - -A strange scene took place on the following day. - -In the church of the Holy Sepulchre, in the presence of a large -congregation, Epiphanius fulminated a discourse against Origen, his -doctrines, and all who favoured them. Bishop John and his clergy -expressed their contempt by grimaces, sneers, and impatient scratchings -of their heads. At last an archdeacon stepped forward, and required -Epiphanius, in the name of the bishop, to desist from his discourse. -The assembly was dissolved, but met again in the afternoon, largely -augmented, in the church of the Holy Cross. This time Bishop John -discoursed, and denounced the Anthropomorphites, or Humanisers, under -which opprobrious name the partisans of Origen endeavoured to include -all their opponents. Pale and trembling, and in a voice quivering -with passion, the bishop directed his discourse, and turned his body, -towards Epiphanius, who sat motionless in his chair. The invective -being concluded, the aged Bishop of Constantia rose and pronounced -these words with solemn deliberation: “All that John, my brother in -the priesthood, my son in age, has just said against the heresy of -the Anthropomorphites I thoroughly approve; and as we both condemn -that absurd belief, it is only just that we should both denounce the -errors of Origen.”[537] A general laugh and acclamation on the part -of the assembly proclaimed their sense of this speech as a successful -hit. John made one more effort to right himself. He preached again in -the church of the Holy Cross, this time on the chief verities of the -faith, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Atonement, the condition of -souls before and after this life. It was intended to be a grand and -convincing display of his orthodoxy, and at the moment Epiphanius -expressed even approbation. On subsequent reflection, however, the aged -critic thought he discovered that it teemed with error. He abruptly -quitted Jerusalem, repaired to Bethlehem, resisted the solicitation -of Jerome and his friends to be reconciled, and addressed a circular -letter to all the monasteries of Palestine, requiring them to break off -communion with the Bishop of Jerusalem. - -Rufinus ranged himself immediately on the side of Bishop John; but -Jerome, though with somewhat balanced feelings, sided on the whole with -Epiphanius. Then the pent-up jealousy of John towards the monasteries -of Bethlehem burst forth; they were placed under interdict, and the -church of the Holy Manger closed against them. They were in despair -for want of a priest to celebrate the Eucharist; but Epiphanius -provided one through a forcible ordination. The young Paulinian had -always steadfastly declined holy orders, though considered eminently -qualified by his learning and virtue. He was now on a visit to the -monastery of Epiphanius, near Eleutheropolis. When Epiphanius was -celebrating the Eucharist, the young man was seized by the deacons, -dragged to the steps of the altar, and there made to kneel. Epiphanius -approached, cut off some of his hair, ordained him deacon, and -obliged him to assist in the celebration on the spot. At a fresh sign -from the bishop he was a second time seized, gagged to prevent his -adjuring the bishop in the name of Jesus Christ, and when he rose -from his knees he was declared to be a priest.[538] The joy which -filled the monasteries of Bethlehem was only to be equalled by the -indignation of their opponents at Jerusalem. John actually applied -(not without money, it is said) to Rufinus at Constantinople, then -Prætorian Prefect, and even procured a decree of banishment against -Jerome;[539] but, the murder of Rufinus taking place soon afterwards, -the governor of Cæsarea evaded the execution of the decree. Jerome -retaliated by one of those fierce, nervous philippics which exhibit -more command of language than of temper. The governor of Palestine made -a praiseworthy but ineffectual effort to bring about a reconciliation. -John had determined to invite an arbitrator, from whom he expected -a strong partiality for his own cause. He appealed to Theophilus, -from whom Rufinus, the monk, had derived his first acquaintance with -Origen. Jerome indignantly complained of this invocation of a foreign -jurisdiction. Was not Cæsarea the metropolitan see of Palestine? why -this contempt of ecclesiastical law?[540] Theophilus, however, had no -scruples in accepting the appeal. It was just one of those recognitions -of pre-eminence which the Patriarch of Alexandria, like the Bishops of -Rome, joyfully welcomed. The gratification of ambition was pleasantly -disguised from others, and perhaps from themselves, under the semblance -of peacemaking. Theophilus despatched Isidore as his legate to -Palestine. His arrival was preceded by two letters, one intended for -the Bishop of Jerusalem, the other for Vincentius, the presbyter and -friend of Jerome at Bethlehem. - -Unfortunately the letter intended for the bishop was delivered to -Vincentius, and he and Jerome read with indignation assurances of -sympathy and friendship towards John, and expressions of contempt -for Jerome and his party, the language, in short, of an accomplice -rather than of an arbitrator. It set forth in flowery oriental terms -the confidence of the legate in the success of his mission; “as smoke -disperses in the air, as wax melts before the fire, so will these -enemies, who always resist the faith, and seek to disturb it now, -by means of simple ignorant men be dispersed on my arrival.”[541] -The legate took up his abode at Jerusalem, and spent his time in -familiar intercourse with the bishop and Rufinus. To Bethlehem he -paid occasional visits, where he conducted himself with dictatorial -haughtiness. Jerome and the monks plainly perceived that the so-called -arbitrator was committed to one side—which was not theirs. - -But on a sudden, in A.D. 398, the Patriarch wheeled round; he -discovered that he had been in error. “The writings of Origen were -fraught with danger to the unlearned, however profitable to philosophic -minds.” Such was the reason alleged for this sudden revulsion of -opinion. The real reasons appear to have been of a less calm and -philosophic character. One of the most distinguished presbyters in -Alexandria at this time was Isidore, an octogenarian. His youth -had been spent in pious seclusion, among the monks of Scetis and -Nitria, and his piety had attracted the notice of Athanasius, whom he -accompanied to Rome in A.D. 341, and by whom he was afterwards ordained -priest. He became the Hospitaller of the Church in Alexandria, whose -duty it was to attend to the reception of Christian visitors. In spite -of great personal austerity, he was, as became his position, gentle -and amiable to all men, even Pagans, when brought into contact with -them. In A.D. 398, at the age of eighty, he had been employed to carry -to Rome the recognition by Theophilus of Flavian as bishop of Antioch; -and now, in the extremity of age, he was destined to become the first -victim of a persecution by Theophilus, which, beginning with him, -culminated in the deposition and exile of Chrysostom.[542] - -An opulent widow committed to Isidore a large sum of money to be -expended on clothing for the poor of Alexandria, and adjured him by a -solemn oath to conceal the trust from Theophilus, lest the Patriarch’s -well-known cupidity should be tempted to appropriate the money to -aid his grand operations in building. The precaution, however, was -vain: nothing said or done in his diocese could escape the vigilance -of informers in the employ of Theophilus. Isidore was questioned -by the Patriarch concerning the charitable gift, and required to -place the money at his disposal; but the hospitaller refused, and -boldly maintained that it would be better bestowed on the bodies -of the sick and poor, which were the temples of God, than on the -erection of buildings. The Patriarch was astounded at the temerity -of his disobedience, but dissembled for the moment the depth of his -resentment. Two months later, in a convocation of the clergy, he -produced a paper containing the charge of a horrible and unmentionable -crime against Isidore, which the Patriarch said he had received -eighteen years ago, but had been unable to prove from the absence of -the principal witness. The whole charge turned out to be a baseless -fabrication; but Isidore was ejected from the priesthood by the -contrivance of Theophilus.[543] - -The aged hospitaller fled to the peaceful retreat of his earlier -days, the desert of Nitria. The most distinguished of the monks in -this seclusion were four brothers—Ammon, Dioscorus, Eusebius, and -Euthymius—eminent alike for their piety and the height of their -stature, whence they were known by the name of the “tall brethren.” -They were venerated as the fathers of the Nitrian monks. Theophilus -had in former times professed the highest admiration and respect for -their virtues. He had made the eldest, Dioscorus, bishop of Hermopolis, -and had persuaded, if not compelled, Eusebius and Euthymius, much -against their will, to be presbyters in Alexandria.[544] Their simple -piety was so much shocked by the avarice and other failings of the -Patriarch, that they implored him to release them from clerical -duties and restore them to the freedom of the desert. When Theophilus -discovered their real reason for requesting this permission he was -furious, and tried to intimidate them into submission by fierce -menaces, but in vain. They withdrew, and for a time the Patriarch was -at a loss how to execute vengeance on men who had few possessions of -any kind to be deprived of. But now the opportunity arrived. Isidore, -the excommunicated hospitaller, had been sheltered in their friendly -retreat. Theophilus devised a malignant plan for disturbing their -peace. The “tall brethren” belonged to that more mystical order of -monks which embraced Origen’s doctrine of a purely spiritual Deity, and -were determined adversaries of the more sensuous and anthropomorphite -school. Theophilus now scrupled not to declare himself in favour of -the Anthropomorphites, whom he had formerly denounced. He encouraged -the more coarse and ignorant to make violent and tumultuous assaults -on the monastic retreat of Nitria, and, directed the bishops of the -neighbourhood to eject several of the most distinguished monks, -including Ammon. They repaired to Alexandria, sought an interview -with Theophilus, requested to hear the cause of their ejection, and -remonstrated on the treatment of Isidore. Theophilus burst into a -violent rage, changed colour at every moment, glared on them with -bloodshot eyes, dealt blows to Ammon on his face, and, while the blood -trickled down, shouted, “Heretic, anathematise Origen.” One of the -number was put in prison to intimidate the rest; but they all entered -it voluntarily together, and refused to come out unless their companion -also was released. This was at length permitted, but the design of -persecution was followed up. The Patriarch’s paschal letter of A.D. 401 -is chiefly occupied with a condemnation of Origen and his disciples. -He confesses, indeed, that he had himself at one time been cast into -that fiery furnace of error, but, like the three children, he had come -out unscathed; “not even his hair or garments had been singed.” He -describes himself as having now returned from the land of captivity to -the true Jerusalem; Origen and his doctrines are condemned with much -heat; and a prominent place is assigned to him and all his disciples in -the infernal regions.[545] - -But Theophilus was far from being contented to stop at this point. He -convoked a synod of neighbouring bishops. The monks were not informed -of it, nor invited to appear and make their defence. Three of the most -eminent were excommunicated as heretics and magicians. It was in vain -that the monks protested against the injustice of condemning Origen -or his readers on the strength of a few passages only, and those, as -they maintained, in many instances garbled or interpolated. A synodical -letter was published, addressed to the Catholic world, reprobating the -writings of Origen. It produced a profound sensation in Rome, where the -Pope Anastasius anathematised Origen.[546] But the humiliation of the -Nitrian brethren was not yet complete. Five most insignificant monks, -scarce worthy, according to Palladius, to discharge menial offices as -lay brethren, were ordained by Theophilus, one to a bishopric, one to -be priest, and the three others to be deacons. A small town was created -a see, there being none vacant to receive the new bishop. With these -tools the Patriarch could rapidly execute his designs. His creatures -prepared, under his direction, a list of complaints and charges against -the Nitrian monks, which they publicly presented to him in church. -Armed with this, he had an interview with the governor of Egypt, and -obtained from him an order for the forcible expulsion of insubordinate -monks from the settlement at Nitria. With a troop of soldiers and -a rabble of rascals, such as in all large towns are ready for the -perpetration of any mischief, whom he had previously primed with drink, -the Patriarch fell by night upon the monastic dwellings. Dioscorus was -the first victim of his rage. He was one of the “tall brethren,” who -had been compelled by Theophilus to become bishop of Hermopolis. He was -now dragged before the Patriarch by some rude Ethiopian slaves, and -told that he was deprived of his see. Diligent search was made for the -three other brethren, but they were undiscoverably hidden in a well. -The fury of the Patriarch expended itself principally upon inanimate -objects; the dwellings of the monks were pillaged and burned, together -with their valuable libraries, and, to the horror of the pious, even -some of the Eucharistic elements[547] were consumed in the general -destruction. - -The havoc being completed, Theophilus returned to Alexandria. The -terrified monks came out of their hiding-places, and, wrapping -themselves in their sheepskins, their only remaining property, set -out from their beloved solitudes to seek shelter and a new home -elsewhere. Three hundred, following the “tall brethren,” took their -journey towards Palestine; the rest dispersed in different directions. -Not more than eighty arrived with the four brethren at Jerusalem, -whence they shortly afterwards withdrew northwards to Scythopolis, -a place eminently adapted to their wants by its situation in a -well-watered valley rich in palm-trees, of which the leaves furnished -materials for mats, baskets, and the other articles usually wrought -by monkish labour.[548] But distance did not diminish the malice -of their persecutor. They were pursued by letters from Theophilus -addressed to all the bishops of Palestine, who were admonished -not to grant ecclesiastical communion or shelter to the heretical -fugitives. Jerome mentions two commissioners who scoured Palestine, -and left no hole or cave unexplored in the diligence of their search -for the offenders.[549] Thus hunted and harassed, the poor monks at -length resolved to embark for Constantinople, throw themselves on -the generosity of the Emperor and Archbishop, and submit their cause -to their decision. They reached the capital, fifty in number; their -foreign aspect, bare arms and knees, and primitive garb of white -sheepskins, excited much curiosity and interest among the people of -Constantinople. They repaired first of all to Chrysostom, in the hope -that his authority would be sufficient to procure them justice, -without an application to the civil powers. The Archbishop received -them with great kindness and respect, and shed tears of compassion when -he heard the tale of their sufferings and wanderings. But he acted with -caution; he consulted some Alexandrian clergy who were at this time -in Constantinople engaged in distributing presents to conciliate, or, -more properly speaking, to bribe, the favour of persons just appointed -to civil offices in Egypt. They admitted the virtues and hard usage -of the monks, but recommended him not to incur the displeasure of -Theophilus by admitting them to communion. The monks were lodged in the -precincts of the church of Anastasia; Olympias and other pious women -attended to their wants, which were to some extent supplied by the -produce of their own manual labour. They were admitted to prayer in the -church, but excluded from the Eucharist until the merits of their cause -should have been carefully sifted, and their excommunication revoked. -Chrysostom, unsuspicious of others, in his own innocence, was sanguine -of his power to obtain their restitution. He despatched a letter to -Theophilus, in which he besought him in courteous and friendly terms -to be reconciled with the fugitives, and thereby to confer a favour on -himself, his spiritual son and brother. But no notice was taken of the -request; and meanwhile the agents of Theophilus were busily employed at -Constantinople in disseminating injurious tales about the monks—they -were heretics, magicians, rebels. - -Throughout the rest of Christendom Theophilus pursued a different -method. He toiled with diligence worthy of a better cause to obtain a -wide condemnation of Origen and his works. Could he once secure such -a general condemnation, and then prove Chrysostom and the monks to be -at variance with it, he would possess a powerful engine in working the -ruin of both. It is difficult to believe that even Theophilus would -have pursued the monks with such insatiable animosity had they not -fled to the patriarch of that see which was regarded with peculiar -jealousy by the bishops of Alexandria, and had not the present occupant -of that see been elected in preference to the candidate put forward by -himself. Thus he clutched at the opportunity of depressing his rival, -and punishing his victims, the monks, at the same time. - -He found a faction hostile to the Archbishop already existing in -Constantinople, and quite ready to submit the management of their -interests to his skilful direction. The persecution of the monks was -quickly dropped. Their supposed offence was only the handle by which to -compass the destruction of a more formidable foe. Jerome contributed -powerful aid to the designs of Theophilus by favourable notices of -him in his letters, depreciating the conduct of the monks.[550] But -a more active auxiliary appeared in the Bishop of Constantia, whose -advanced age seems never to have diminished the alacrity with which he -entered the lists of controversy. Theophilus, in his Origenistic days, -had attacked Epiphanius with some vehemence as an anthropomorphite; -but he now wrote a letter to the bishop expressing regret for his -former language, and his increasing conviction of the mischievous -tendency of Origen’s doctrines.[551] He implored his holy brother -to convene a council of the bishops of Cyprus without delay, for -the purpose of condemning the heretic, and of drawing up letters, -announcing their decision, to be sent round to the principal sees, -especially Constantinople, where the heretical and contumacious monks -were harboured. Epiphanius flattered himself that he had converted the -Patriarch, and was delighted to receive such a powerful accession to -his side. The council was summoned, the condemnation carried, and the -letters despatched.[552] Theophilus himself, at the commencement of -A.D. 402, issued a paschal letter, which contained a subtle exposition -and refutation of the Origenistic errors. The letter was translated, -and highly commended, both for matter and expression, by Jerome.[553] - -To Chrysostom himself Theophilus wrote a sharp complaint of his -protecting heretics, and violating the canon of Nice, which prohibited -any bishop from exercising jurisdiction in matters relating to another -see. The cause of the Nitrian monks, he asserted, could not be decided -legally anywhere but in a council of Egyptian bishops. It will be -borne in mind, however, that Chrysostom had carefully abstained from -pronouncing any decision, through a council or otherwise, on the affair -of the monks. They, indeed, became provoked with him that he did not -espouse their cause more heartily. The agents of Theophilus were busily -engaged in damaging their character; a little money easily persuaded -the sailors and others employed in the Alexandrian corn trade to point -at the monks in the streets as magicians and heretics. The monks -declared to Chrysostom their resolution to appeal to the civil powers -to obtain a formal prosecution of their accusers as base calumniators. -Chrysostom remonstrated, and declined, if that step were taken, to -mediate any more in their affair. Some of his enemies in Constantinople -did not fail to represent this as a cruel desertion of those whom he -had at first befriended.[554] - -Thus hostile forces were on all sides closing round the Archbishop, -but he continued apparently unconscious of the snares which were being -woven for him. The Origenistic controversy, into the vortex of which -his enemies sought to drag him, possessed little interest for him. The -more mystical, abstract speculations of Origen’s theology were alien -from his practical sphere of work and practical habit of mind; and, in -common with the other chief representatives of the Antiochene school, -Diodorus and Theodore, he neither wholly embraced nor wholly rejected -his system of doctrine. At any rate, he paid no attention to the letter -from Cyprus, which requested him to join in the condemnation of Origen -and his writings. This was precisely what his enemies wanted. - -The Nitrian monks, cast off by the Archbishop when they had announced -their intention of appealing to secular authority, drew up documents -filled with charges of the most flagrant crimes against their accusers -and against Theophilus. They demanded that their calumniators in -Constantinople should be immediately tried by the prefect, and that -Theophilus should be summoned to defend his conduct before a council -under the presidency of Chrysostom. One day, as the Empress was riding -in her litter to worship in the church of St. John the Baptist at -Hebdomon, she was accosted by some of those strange skin-clad beings -of whom, and of whose wanderings and wrongs, she had heard much. She -caused her litter to stop, bowed graciously to the monks, and implored -the favour of their prayers for the Empire, the Emperor, herself, and -her children. The monks presented their petition; Eudoxia courteously -accepted it, and promised them that the council which they desired -should be convened; that Theophilus should be summoned to attend it, -and that the accusers now in Constantinople should either substantiate -their charges, or suffer the penalties of calumnious defamation. This -inquiry was immediately instituted; the poor culprits confessed that -they had been paid agents of Theophilus, and that their accusations -had been dictated by him. They therefore entreated that their trial -might be deferred till his arrival. Meanwhile, however, they were put -in prison, where one of them died; and as the arrival of Theophilus -continued to be delayed, they were banished to Proconnesus for libel. -An officer was despatched to Alexandria to serve Theophilus with a -peremptory summons to appear at Constantinople, and empowered to -enforce his obedience, if he was reluctant.[555] - -Thus the preparations for a judicial investigation of the affair of the -monks emanated not from Chrysostom, but from the throne, although he -was represented by his enemies as the originator, and by Jerome he is -styled a parricide for labouring to condemn Theophilus.[556] Chrysostom -seems, in fact, to have dismissed alike the business of the monks and -the theological question of Origenism from his mind. Intent on edifying -the Church, instead of agitating it by personal or polemical strife, he -quietly pursued his daily routine of duties as chief pastor, feeding -his flock with the wholesome food of the Word and of the bread of life. - -Theophilus was unable to evade obedience to the summons which commanded -him to repair to Constantinople. His only hope now was to change -his position from that of the accused into that of the accuser. The -council which was called together for the purpose of investigating -his conduct should, by his contrivance, be transferred into a council -for arraigning Chrysostom of heresy and misdemeanour. The letters of -Epiphanius and Theophilus having failed to obtain from Chrysostom that -condemnation which they demanded of the writings of Origen, the Bishop -of Constantia, at the urgent request of Theophilus, set forth at the -beginning of A.D. 403 for Constantinople, bringing the decree of the -Council of Cyprus for the signature of the Archbishop. Theophilus -slowly proceeded overland from Egypt through Syria, Cilicia, and Asia -Minor, in order to bring up as many bishops as possible to the council, -who would be prepared to act under his direction. Epiphanius, having -landed, halted at the church of St. John, outside Constantinople, held -an assembly of clergy, and even, it is said, committed the irregularity -of ordaining a deacon.[557] Chrysostom, however, acted with all due -courtesy and discretion. He sent out a large body of clergy to welcome -the visitor by inviting and conducting him to the hospitable lodging -prepared for him in the archiepiscopal palace. Epiphanius, acting on -preconceived judgment of the two chief subjects in dispute, declined -the offer unless the Archbishop would consent to expel the monks, and -to sign the decree against Origen. Chrysostom justly replied that -he could not anticipate the decision of a council which was being -summoned for the very purpose of considering both these questions. -Epiphanius, therefore, found a lodging elsewhere, and diligently strove -to induce such bishops as he could collect to sign the decree.[558] -His reputation for learning, orthodoxy, and piety secured the consent -of many, but on the part of many more there was determined opposition. -Eminent among these was Theotimus, a Goth by birth, but educated in -Greece, who had been made Bishop of Tomis and Metropolitan of Scythia. -He was a man of genuine sanctity, ascetic habits, and courageous -spirit. Tomis was a great central market of Gothic and Hunnish tribes, -and the bishop used boldly to enter the motley concourse and try to win -converts. He would invite savage Huns to partake of some hospitable -entertainment in his house, and by gifts and little attentions, and -courteous treatment, he sought to soften their ferocity, and effect an -opening in their hearts for the reception of Christian teaching. He -came to be regarded by them with a kind of superstitious reverence, -and was commonly called by them “the god of the Christians.” Over his -half-episcopal, half-barbarian costume flowed the long hair which -betokened his Gothic origin. He lifted up his voice with boldness -to denounce the present ill-considered condemnation of the works of -Origen. It was unseemly and unjust, he maintained, to pass a coarse -and sweeping sentence on the entire works of one whose genius had been -acknowledged by the whole Church. He produced a volume of Origen, and -from it read some beautiful, powerful passages of irreproachable -orthodoxy. Then, turning to Epiphanius, he asked him how he could -attack a man to whom the Church owed a thousand similar, and even more -beautiful, passages. “How call him a son of Satan? Place what is good -in him on one side, and what is bad on the other, and then choose.”[559] - -This courageous protest, however, did not divert Epiphanius and his -partisans from their course of action. In fact, they proceeded a step -further. It was arranged that when a large congregation was collected -in the Church of the Apostles, Epiphanius should enter and harangue -the assembly, denouncing both the writings of Origen and his admirers, -especially the “tall brethren,” and even Chrysostom himself as their -protector. Chrysostom, however, received intimation of their design, -and by his direction Serapion confronted Epiphanius at the entrance of -the church, and told him that “he had already violated ecclesiastical -law by ordaining a deacon in the diocese and church of another bishop, -but to minister and preach without permission was a still grosser -outrage; a popular tumult would probably ensue, and Epiphanius would -be held responsible for any violence which might be committed.” -Epiphanius, though not without angry remonstrances, desisted.[560] - -Eudoxia seems to have placed special faith in the intercessions of -ecclesiastical visitors of distinction. As she had formerly asked -the prayers of the “tall brethren,” so now, the young prince her son -(afterwards Theodosius II.), being attacked by an alarming illness, she -implored the prayers of Epiphanius on his behalf. The bishop replied -that her child’s recovery depended on her repudiation of the heretical -refugees. The Empress, however, declared that she should prefer simply -to resign her son’s life to the will of God who gave it without -complying with the requisition of Epiphanius.[561] - -It may be that these incidents were beginning to tell upon the -reason of the aged zealot, and open his eyes to the irregularity -of his proceedings; at any rate, shortly after this, he granted an -interview to Ammon and his brothers. The record of the conversation is -instructive. “Allow me to ask, holy father,” said Ammon, “whether you -have ever read any of our works or those of our disciples?” Epiphanius -was obliged to confess that he had not even seen them, and that he had -formed his judgment simply from general report. “How then,” replied -Ammon, “can you venture to condemn us when you have no proof of our -opinions? We have pursued a widely different course. We conversed with -your disciples, we read your works, among others one entitled the -‘Anchor of Faith;’ and when we met with persons who ridiculed your -opinions, and asserted that your writings were replete with heresy, we -have defended you as our father. Is it just, on such slender ground as -common report, to condemn those who have so zealously befriended you?” -These bold and pungent remarks are said to have wrought compunction in -the heart of the aged bishop. He began to perceive that he had been -made the agent of a plot, and he lost no time in extricating himself -from it by departing from Constantinople. His farewell words to some of -the bishops who accompanied him to the ship were: “I leave to you the -city, the palace, and this piece of acting.”[562] - - - - -CHAPTER XVIII. - - THEOPHILUS ARRIVES IN CONSTANTINOPLE—ORGANISES A CABAL - AGAINST CHRYSOSTOM—THE SYNOD OF THE OAK—CHRYSOSTOM - PRONOUNCED CONTUMACIOUS FOR NON-APPEARANCE AND EXPELLED - FROM THE CITY—EARTHQUAKE—RECALL OF CHRYSOSTOM—OVATIONS ON - HIS RETURN—FLIGHT OF THEOPHILUS. A.D. 403. - - -Regardless of the forces which had been set in motion against him, -Chrysostom pursued his usual course of work without any variation. The -reins of discipline were held tightly as ever; the Word was preached, -in season and out of season, with unabated diligence; the people were -exhorted, admonished, rebuked with the same irrepressible earnestness. -His enemies took advantage of a sermon, specially directed against -the follies and vices of fashionable ladies, to represent it as an -attack upon the Empress herself.[563] Eudoxia, credulous and impulsive -by nature, and probably irritated because the Archbishop did not pay -her servile homage, complained to the Emperor of the insult which had -been cast upon her, and was induced by the hostile party to expect the -arrival of Theophilus as an opportunity for redressing her wrongs. That -prelate was now rapidly approaching, with a large number of bishops -collected from Egypt, Syria, and Asia Minor. Twenty-eight, on whose -partisanship he could reckon, travelled by sea to Chalcedon. Many -bishops had become disaffected to Chrysostom in Asia Minor, owing to -the rigorous investigation recently made by him into the state of the -Church in that region, and they readily joined the camp of Theophilus. -Prominent among them was Gerontius of Nicomedia, whom, as will be -remembered, he had deposed. The whole force was at length (June 403) -assembled at Chalcedon, and a council of war was held, to determine -the plan of operations. None was more virulent in his denunciation of -Chrysostom, as tyrannical, proud, and heretical, than Cyrinus, bishop -of Chalcedon. He was an Egyptian by birth, and Theophilus reckoned on -him as a valuable ally, but was deprived of his services by a curious -incident. Maruthas, bishop of Mesopotamia, accidentally trod on the -foot of Cyrinus: a wound ensued, the wound gangrened, the foot had to -be amputated, but the mortification spread, and, after two years of -lingering pain, put an end to his life.[564] - -Theophilus made his entrance into Constantinople about the middle of -June. He had been summoned as a defendant, but, according to his design -already indicated, he appeared surrounded by all the pomp and dignity -of a judge. None of the bishops, indeed, or clergy of Constantinople -came to greet him on landing, but the crews of the Alexandrian -corn-fleet gave him a hearty welcome, and he was accompanied by a large -retinue, not only of bishops and clergy, but of Alexandrian sailors, -laden with some of the costliest produce of Egypt and the East, a -very potent auxiliary in obtaining partisans. As on the arrival of -Epiphanius, so now, Chrysostom did not fail to offer the customary -hospitality due to a brother bishop; but Theophilus disdainfully -declined it, passed by the palace and the metropolitan church, which -episcopal visitors usually entered on their arrival, and proceeded to -the suburb of Pera, where a lodging had been prepared for him in a -house of the Emperor’s, called the Palace of Placidia. - -During the three weeks that he resided here, he refused to hold any -communication with Chrysostom, or to enter his church; nor did he -vouchsafe any reply to the frequent entreaties of the Archbishop that -he would state his reasons for such conduct. His house became the -resort of all the disaffected clergy or affronted ladies and gentlemen -in the city, who were drawn thither, not only by a common hatred to -Chrysostom, but also by the handsome gifts, the elegant and dainty -repasts, and the winning flattery with which they were treated by -Theophilus.[565] These arts were the more necessary because Theophilus -had a double part to play: to arrest the course of the accusation -instituted against himself, as well as to organise a powerful cabal -against Chrysostom. In the former he was helped by the scruples or -peacefulness of Chrysostom himself. The Archbishop was directed by the -Court to repair to Pera, and preside over an inquiry into the crimes -of which Theophilus was accused. But he declined, on the plea that the -ecclesiastical affairs of one province could not, according to the -Canons of Nice, be judged in another; partly also, as he affirmed, out -of respect for his brother Patriarch. The truth probably was, that he -foresaw the vindictive and turbulent spirit of Theophilus would never -submit to the decisions of a council under the presidency of his rival -in that see of which Alexandria was especially jealous. Otherwise there -is no doubt that a General Council at Constantinople would have been -competent to judge the Patriarch of Alexandria; whereas a Provincial -Council in Egypt could not have judged him, he being supreme there by -virtue of his position as Patriarch.[566] Chrysostom himself also might -legally have been arraigned before a General Council; but, as will be -seen, the synod composed by Theophilus was far from being entitled to -that appellation. - -The obstacle of his own trial being thus disposed of, it only remained -for Theophilus to prosecute his design against his rival with mingled -subtlety and boldness. The first step was to secure a sufficient number -of witnesses, and a list of accusations, which, being presented to the -Emperor, would furnish a plausible reason for summoning a council. -The next step would be to pack that council with bishops hostile to -Chrysostom. Two despicable deacons, who had been expelled from their -office by the Archbishop for homicide and adultery, were well content -to draw up a list of charges on a promise from Theophilus that they -should be restored to their former position. The accusations seem to -have been of a puerile character; and if the source of them was known, -it would seem inconceivable that the Court should have entertained -them, did we not remember that the influence of the Empress, as well -as of many of the most powerful courtiers, was now turned or rapidly -turning against the Archbishop, and that the bribes of Theophilus were -permeating the whole city. - -The attachment of the people, however, to Chrysostom was known to be -so strong, that it was deemed prudent by the enemy to hold the synod -at a safe distance from the city. A suburb of Chalcedon, called “The -Oak,” where Rufinus, the late prefect, had built a palace, church, and -monastery, was selected as a convenient place for the assembly.[567] -The bishops, after all the exertions of Theophilus, did not amount to -more than thirty-six, of whom twenty-nine were Egyptians.[568] Among -the latter was Cyril, the successor of Theophilus. Chrysostom was -summoned to appear before the synod. The scene in the archiepiscopal -palace immediately preceding the summons has been described by -Palladius, with the vivid and minute exactness of an eye-witness. - -“We were sitting, to the number of forty bishops, in the dining-hall -of the palace, marvelling at the audacity with which one, who had -been commanded to appear as a culprit at Constantinople, had arrived -with a train of bishops, had altered the sentiments of nobles and -magistrates, and perverted the majority even of the clergy. Whilst we -were wondering, John, inspired by the Spirit of God, addressed to us -all the following words: ‘Pray for me, my brethren, and, if ye love -Christ, let no one for my sake desert his see, for I am now ready to be -offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. Like him who spoke -these words, I perceive that I am about to relinquish life, for I know -the intrigues of Satan, that he will not endure any longer the burden -of my words which are delivered against him. May ye obtain mercy, and -in your prayers remember me.’ Seized with inexpressible sorrow, some of -us began to weep, and others to leave the assembly, after kissing, amid -tears and sobs, the sacred head and eyes, and eloquent mouth, of the -Archbishop. He, however, exhorted them to return, and, as they hovered -near, like bees humming round their hive, ‘Sit down, my brethren,’ he -said, ‘and do not weep, unnerving me by your tears, for to me to live -is Christ, to die is gain. Recall the words which I have so frequently -spoken to you. Present life is a journey; both its good and painful -things pass away. Present time is like a fair: we buy, we sell, and the -assembly is dissolved. Are we better than the Patriarchs, the Prophets, -the Apostles, that this life should remain to us for ever?’ Here one -of the company uttering a cry exclaimed: ‘Nay, but what we lament is -our own bereavement and the widowhood of the Church, the derangement -of sacred laws, the ambition of those who fear not the Lord, and -violently seize the highest positions; the destitution of the poor, and -the loss of sound teaching.’ But John replied, striking, as was his -custom when cogitating, the palm of his left hand with the forefinger -of his right: ‘Enough, my brother—no more; only, as I was saying, do -not abandon your churches, for neither did the office of teaching begin -with me, nor in me has it ended. Did not Moses die, and was not Joshua -found to succeed him? Did not Samuel die, but was not David anointed? -Jeremy departed this life, but Baruch was left; Elijah was taken up, -but Elisha prophesied in his place; Paul was beheaded, but did he not -leave Timothy, Titus, Apollos, and a host of others to work after him?’ -To these words Eulysius, bishop of Apamea, in Bithynia, observed: -‘If we retain our sees, it will become necessary for us to hold -communion with the authors of your deposition, and to subscribe to your -condemnation.’[569] To which the holy John replied: ‘Communicate by all -means, so as to avoid rending the unity of the Church; but abstain from -subscribing, for I am not conscious of having done anything to deserve -deposition.’” - -At this point in the conference it was announced that certain -emissaries from the “Synod of the Oak” had arrived. Chrysostom gave -orders that they should be admitted, inquired, when they entered, to -what rank in the hierarchy they belonged, and, on being informed that -they were bishops, requested them to be seated, and to declare the -purpose of their coming. The two bishops, young men recently raised -to the episcopate in Libya, replied, “We are merely the bearers of a -document which we request that you will command to be read.” Chrysostom -gave the order, and a servant of Theophilus read the missive. “The holy -Synod assembled at the Oak to John” (thus did his enemies deprive him -of all his titles). “We have received a list containing an infinite -number of charges against you. Present yourself, therefore, before us, -bringing with you the priests Serapion and Tigrius, for their presence -is necessary.” The bishops who were with Chrysostom were very indignant -at the insolent tenor of the message. A reply to the following effect -was drawn up, addressed to Theophilus, and despatched by the hand of -three bishops and two priests: “Subvert not nor rend the Church for -which God became incarnate; but if, in contempt of the canons framed by -318 bishops at Nice, you choose to judge a cause beyond the boundaries -of your jurisdiction, cross the straits into our city, which is at -least strictly governed by law, and do not, after the example of Cain, -call Abel out into the open field. For we have charges of palpable -crimes against you, drawn up under more than sixty heads; our synod, -also, is more numerous than yours, and is assembled, by the grace of -God, after a peaceful manner, not for the disruption of the Church. -For you are but thirty-six in number, collected out of a single -province;[570] but we are forty, from several provinces, and seven are -metropolitans. It is only reasonable that the less should be judged, -according to the canons, by the greater.” - -Chrysostom approved of this answer of the bishops, but sent a separate -letter on his own behalf: “Hitherto I am wholly ignorant whether any -one has anything to say against me; but if any one has assailed me, and -you wish me to appear before you, eject from your assembly my declared -enemies. I raise no question respecting the place where I ought to be -tried, although the most proper place is the city.” He proceeds to say -that he objected to his declared and implacable enemies, Theophilus, -Acacius, Severian, and Antiochus, being allowed to sit on the council -at all. “He could convict Theophilus of having said in Alexandria -and Lycia, ‘I am setting out for the capital to depose John;’ which, -indeed, is true, for, since he set foot in Constantinople, he has -refused to meet or communicate with me. What, then, will one do, after -the trial, who has acted as my enemy before it?” When these men should -have been eliminated from the synod, or legally constituted as his -accusers, he would appear before a council, even if composed of members -from all Christendom; but till this condition was complied with, he -would refuse to present himself though summoned ten thousand times -over.[571] - -He demanded, in short, to be tried by an œcumenical synod, as the only -tribunal which could legally exact obedience from him. The Synod of the -Oak, composed as it was mainly of Egyptians and of declared enemies, -could not possibly pretend to that character. If the Imperial Court had -been upright and courageous, not susceptible of flattery and bribes, -not induced by personal animosity against the Archbishop to favour or -connive at the proceedings of his enemies, such a synod could not have -been held. That it was held, and succeeded in the purpose for which it -met, will ever be a stain upon the Church and the Empire of the East. - -But although viciously constituted and, indeed, all the more on that -very account, the synod made much display of complying in formalities -with the established order of an ecclesiastical court of judicature. -The prosecution was to be carried on in the name of a plaintiff who was -to be present, and to submit his charge in writing. The defendant was -to be cited to appear and defend himself; and if he failed to appear -after three or four citations, he would be pronounced contumacious, and -as such be punishable by the synod with excommunication and deposition. -The further penalties of imprisonment, exile, or death could not be -inflicted by any but the secular power. - -Theophilus was president of the synod, and the prosecution was -conducted in the name of John, Archdeacon of Constantinople, who -cherished malice against Chrysostom because he had once been suspended -by him for ill-treating a slave, though afterwards restored. The -charges were drawn up under twenty-nine heads. The evidence of most -worthless witnesses was accepted, or, more properly speaking, invited. -A strange medley of monstrous and incredible offences was included in -the list of charges prepared by the Archdeacon John—acts of personal -violence, as well as violations of ecclesiastical discipline. “He had -struck people on the face, had calumniated many of his clergy, had -called one Epiphanius fool and demoniac, had imprisoned others, had -accused his archdeacons of robbing his pallium for an unlawful purpose; -he had despotically and illegally deposed bishops in Asia, and had -ordained others without sufficient inquiry into their qualifications, -mental or moral; he had alienated the property and sold the ornaments -of the Church; he held private interviews with women, he dined on -Cyclopian fare, he ate a small cake after holy communion, he had -administered both sacraments, after he himself or the recipients had -eaten.”[572] The crowning charge was that of treasonable language -against the Empress—“he had called her Jezebel.” This was the trump -card of the cabal. If the Emperor’s Court could be persuaded to believe -him guilty on this point, exile at least, and probably death, would be -the inevitable consequence. - -Such were the principal charges in the list presented by the Archdeacon -John. A second list, presented by Isaac the monk, accused him of -extending sympathy and hospitality to Origenists, of instigating the -people to sedition, of using unseemly expressions in his sermons, such -as “I exult, I am beside myself with joy,” or language which gave a -dangerous encouragement to sinners; for example, “as often as you sin -come to me and I will heal you.” - -By artfully making slight alterations in expressions actually used, -and tearing them from their context, it was easy to represent them as -mischievous or blasphemous. It is not surprising then that Chrysostom -steadfastly refused to answer in person such a list of partly -monstrous, partly puerile, accusations before such a synod. He pursued -the only dignified course possible under the circumstances. When a -notary from the Emperor came to him with a rescript, and showed him -the petition inserted in it from the synod, that the Emperor would -compel the attendance of the Archbishop; and when, presently, a second -deputation from the synod, consisting of a renegade priest of his own -clergy, and Isaac the monk, brought a peremptory summons from the -synod, he inflexibly maintained the same attitude. “I will not attend -a synod which is composed of my enemies, and to which I am summoned by -my own clergy. I appeal to a lawfully constituted General Council.” The -citations were rapidly repeated three or four times, and always met -by the same response. The cabal expended their fury on the messengers -of the Archbishop; they beat one bishop, tore the clothes of another, -and placed on the neck of a third the chains which they had designed -for the person of Chrysostom himself, their intention having been to -put him secretly on board ship, and send him off to some remote part -of the Empire. Some of the clergy were so much intimidated by these -violent proceedings that they dared not return to Constantinople. -Demetrius, however, Bishop of Pessina, denounced the conduct of the -synod, quitted it, and returned to the Archbishop. After several more -ineffectual citations, the synod, at its twelfth session, declared -that it would proceed to judgment against Chrysostom as contumacious. -Either by a happy coincidence, or by the contrivance of Theophilus, -a message arrived from the Court on the same day, urging the bishops -to decide the cause as speedily as possible. With much alacrity the -request was obeyed. They drew up a despatch to the Emperor—a formal -statement: “Whereas John, being accused of crimes, has declined to -appear before us, and that in such cases ecclesiastical law pronounces -deposition, we have hereby deposed him; but as the indictment against -him contains charges of treason as well as ecclesiastical offences, we -leave these to be dealt with by you, since it belongs not to us to take -cognisance of them.” The synod waited for the Imperial ratification -of their verdict, and meanwhile issued a circular to the clergy of -Constantinople, informing them of the deposition of their spiritual -father.[573] - -Having attained, as he believed, the object of his intrigue, Theophilus -went through the form of reconciliation with the “tall brethren” in -the presence of the synod. The facility with which they were restored -to favour on a simple request for pardon is in strange contrast to the -relentless animosity with which they had been hitherto pursued, and -indicates that their persecution had been maintained simply as the -means to securing a more important victim. - -Both Dioscorus and Ammon had recently died, the latter predicting -with his dying lips that the Church was about to be distressed by a -furious persecution, and torn by a deplorable schism. He was buried -in that church of the Apostles, in the suburb of The Oak, where, nine -years before, he had baptized the founder, the Prefect Rufinus. The -monks of the foundation celebrated his obsequies with great pomp; and -Theophilus, his bitter persecutor, condescended to weep over his death, -and publicly declare that he had never known a monk of more exalted -saintliness.[574] - -The triumph of the synod seemed to be completed by the receipt of -an Imperial rescript, ratifying the sentence of deposition, and -announcing that the Archbishop would be banished. Many members of the -synod were probably disappointed at the mildness of the penalty; but -the people of Constantinople were enraged, and impeded the execution -of the sentence. It was evening when the impending degradation of -their Archbishop became known. During the whole of the night, crowds -of people watched outside the Archbishop’s palace and the cathedral -to guard against his forcible abduction. Early in the morning they -thronged the church, loudly protested against the injustice of the -sentence, and demanded with shouts the submission of his cause to -a General Council. For three days and nights the flock incessantly -guarded their beloved pastor. Under their protection he passed to -and from the palace and the church. On the second day he delivered a -discourse to them in the cathedral. The first portion of it is in all -respects worthy of Chrysostom; the conclusion, involved and rugged, -seems to have been added by another hand, and extracts will not be made -from it here.[575] - -“Many are the billows, and terrible the storms, which threaten us; -but we fear not to be overwhelmed, for we stand upon the rock. Let -the sea rage, it cannot dissolve the rock; let the billows rise, they -cannot sink the vessel of Jesus Christ. Tell me, what is it we fear? -death?—‘To me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.’ Or exile?—‘The -earth is the Lord’s and the fulness thereof.’ Or confiscation of -goods?—‘We brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can -carry nothing out.’”... “I fear not poverty, I desire not wealth; I -dread not death, I do not pray for life, save for the sake of your -advancement. I beseech you be of good courage; no man will be able to -separate us, for ‘that which God hath joined together no man can put -asunder.’ If man cannot dissolve marriage, how much less the Church of -God! Thou, oh my enemy! only renderest me more illustrious, and wastest -thine own strength, ‘for it is hard to kick against the pricks.’ Waves -do not break the rock, but are themselves dispersed into foam against -it. Nothing, oh man! is stronger than the Church, ... it is stronger -even than Heaven, ‘for Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words -shall not pass away.’ What words? ‘Thou art Peter, and on this rock I -will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against -it.’ If thou disbelievest the words, yet believe the facts. How many -tyrants have attempted to overcome the Church; how often have wild -beasts, and the sword, and the furnace, and the boiling caldron, been -employed against it, yet have they not prevailed. Where are those who -made war upon it? They have been silenced and consigned to oblivion. -Where is the Church? It shines above the brightness of the sun. Let -none of the things that have been done disturb you. Grant me one favour -only,—unwavering faith. Was not St. Peter on the point of sinking, not -because of the uncontrollable onset of the waves, but because of the -weakness of his faith? Did man’s votes bring me here, that man should -put me down? I say not this in a spirit of boastfulness—God forbid—but -in the desire to settle your agitated minds.”... “Let no one trouble -you; give heed to your prayers. This disturbance is the devil’s work, -that he might destroy your zeal in the sacred Litanies; but he does not -succeed. We find you even more earnest than before. To-morrow I shall -go out with you in the Litany, for where you are, there I am. Though -locally separated, we are in spirit united; we are one body, the body -is not separated from its head; even death cannot separate us.”... “For -your sakes I am ready to be slaughtered ten thousand times over, since -death is to me the warrant of immortality. These intrigues are to me -but the occasion of security. I say these things to listening ears; -so many days have you watched, and nothing has moved you from your -purpose. Neither length of time nor threats have enervated you; you -have done what I have always been desiring, despised the things of this -world, bidden farewell to earth, released yourselves from the fetters -of the body: this is my crown, my consolation, my anointing; this the -suggestion to me of immortality.” - -Another discourse[576] contains much to the same effect, and a -declaration of his belief that the real cause of his deposition was his -sturdy opposition to the corrupt manners and morals of the age. “You -know,” he says, “why they are going to depose me—because I spread no -fine carpets, and wear no silken robes; because I have not pampered -their gluttony, or made presents in gold and silver.” He would comfort -and encourage himself with the prospect of being reckoned among those -who had suffered for righteousness’ sake. The cruel and capricious -woman, who one day called him “a thirteenth apostle,” and the next “a -Judas,” would receive a just retribution for her conduct. - -The attachment of the people to the Archbishop, and their sense of -the injustice with which he was treated, were so strong that, with -his powers of swaying their feelings, he might easily have raised a -formidable sedition, and defied, for an indefinite time, the sentence -of the synod and the edict of the Emperor. But his sentiments were -too loyal, too Christian, too peaceful, for any such desperate and -violent measures. He might have continued to demand the reference of -his cause to a General Council; but, had this been granted, there was -the extreme probability that his enemies would refuse, and persuade -many more to refuse, a recognition of its decision. Then would follow -one of those melancholy schisms, of which the Church already knew too -well the misery. He determined to bow to the storm. On the third day -after his deposition by the council, and about noon, when the people -were not guarding the approaches to the church quite so vigilantly, he -passed out, unperceived, by one of the side entrances, and surrendered -himself to some of the Court officials, who conducted him at nightfall -to the harbour. In spite of the darkness, he was recognised by some of -the people, who followed him with loud cries of distress. He besought -them to abstain from the commission of violence, commended them to the -care of Jesus Christ, cited the example of Job blessing and thanking -God in the midst of trouble, and declared that he patiently waited for -the decision of an Œcumenical Council. The vessel in which he embarked -conveyed him the same night to Hieron,[577] on the Bithynian coast, at -the mouth of the Euxine. Perhaps owing to the dangerous proximity of -this place to Chalcedon, the headquarters of his enemies, he removed -(being apparently uncontrolled in his movements) to a country-house -belonging to a friend, near Prænetum, on the Astacene gulf opposite -Nicomedia. - -When the departure of the Archbishop became generally known on the -succeeding day, the indignation of the people burst into a blaze. The -places of public resort were thronged with clamorous crowds denouncing -the synod and demanding a General Council. They flocked into the -churches to pour forth their lamentations, and to invoke the Divine -intervention on behalf of their injured Patriarch. A revulsion of -feeling in his favour took place among many of the clergy who had -hitherto been opposed to him. The arrival of Theophilus with a large -retinue was not calculated to allay the agitation. Force was employed -to dislodge the people from the churches; the struggle occasioned -bloodshed, and even some loss of life, chiefly among monks. The -worthless clergy who had been deposed by Chrysostom, some of them -for flagrant crimes, were restored by Theophilus. Severian of Gabala -mounted a pulpit in one of the churches, and extolled the act of -deposition. “Even were the Patriarch,” he said, “guiltless of other -offences, the penalty was due to his arrogance, for ‘God resisteth the -proud,’ even if He forgave other sins.” The people were furious at this -barefaced attempt to justify injustice. They thronged the approaches -to the Imperial palace itself, and with loud shouts demanded the -restoration of the Patriarch.[578] - -A natural phenomenon, not rare in Constantinople, but regarded under -the circumstances as a Divine visitation, opportunely concurred with -this demand. The city, the palace, but more especially the bedchamber -of the Empress, were agitated by a severe shock of earthquake. The -friends of Chrysostom rejoiced at this manifestation of the wrath -of Heaven; his enemies were alarmed. The terrified Empress eagerly -promoted the demand of the people for the restoration of the exile. -Messengers were sent across the Bosporus to seek him, for the exact -place of his retreat appears to have been unknown. Briso, the Empress’s -chamberlain, a man of Christian piety and a personal friend of -Chrysostom, discovered him at Prænetum. He was the bearer of a humble, -we might say abject, letter of self-exculpation from the Empress. “Let -not your holiness (ἡ ἁγιωσύνη) imagine that I was cognisant of what -has been done. I am guiltless of thy blood. Wicked and corrupt men -have contrived this plot. I remember the baptism of my children by thy -hands. God whom I serve is witness of my tears.” She informs him how -she had fallen at the feet of the Emperor, and had represented to him -that there was no hope for the Empire except through the restoration -of the Archbishop.[579] - -Chrysostom yielded to the solicitation so far as to embark and cross -the Bosporus, but he declined at first to advance nearer Constantinople -than the suburb of Mariamna, two leagues from the capital by sea. He -declared that he would not enter the city until he had been acquitted -by a General Council. But the impetuosity of the people would brook -no delay. Tidings of his approach had preceded him. The Bosporus was -studded with boats crowded with his friends, bearing torches and -chanting psalms of welcome. The halt at Mariamna was suspected to -be a contrivance of the enemy, who wished to deprive the Patriarch -of the honours awaiting him. Their denunciations of the Emperor and -Empress grew loud and menacing. An Imperial secretary arrived at -Mariamna, urging Chrysostom to enter the city without loss of time. -The Archbishop consented, and, attended by about thirty bishops, -amidst the acclamations of the populace, was conducted to the Church -of the Apostles. Again he remonstrated, and expressed scruples at -entering till the sentence of deposition should have been revoked by a -legitimate council. But the eagerness of the people was irrepressible. -He was borne into the church, and compelled to take his seat on the -episcopal throne and pronounce a benediction upon the assembly. When -he had complied with their request, they would not be satisfied till -he had addressed them in an extempore discourse. The address exists -only in a Latin translation. Its brevity, and the abrupt style of the -opening sentences, indicate the extemporaneous character of it.[580] - -“What shall I say, or how shall I speak? ‘Blessed be God.’ So spoke -I when I departed, and I utter the same again: yea, even in my exile -I did not cease to say these words. Ye remember how I quoted Job, -and said, ‘Blessed be the name of the Lord for ever.’ Such was the -pledge I left with you when I set forth; such is the thanksgiving I -repeat on my return. ‘Blessed be the name of the Lord for ever.’ Our -lot varies, but our manner of giving glory is one. I gave thanks when -I was expelled, I give thanks when I return. The conditions of summer -and winter are different, but the end is one—the prosperity of the -field. Blessed be God who permitted the storm, blessed be God who has -dispersed it and wrought a calm. These things I say, that I may prepare -you to bless God at all times. Have good things happened to you? Bless -God, and the good remains; have evil things occurred? bless God still, -and the evil is removed.”... “Behold what great results have been -wrought by the stratagems of my enemies. They have augmented your zeal, -inflamed your affectionate longing for me, and procured me lovers in -hundreds. Formerly I was beloved by my own people only; now even the -Jews pay me respect. My enemies hoped to sever me from my own friends; -and, instead, they have brought even aliens into our ranks.”... “To-day -the Circensian games take place, but no one is present there; all -have poured like a torrent into the church, and your voices are as -streams which flow to Heaven and declare your affection towards your -father.” He congratulates them on putting the enemy to flight. “Many -are the sheep, yet nowhere is the wolf seen; the devouring beasts -are overwhelmed, the wolves have fled. Who has pursued them? Not I -the shepherd, but ye the sheep. O noble flock! in the absence of the -shepherd ye have routed the wolves. O beauty and chastity of the -wife! how hast thou repulsed the adulterer, because thou lovedst thy -husband!”... “Where are our enemies? in ignominy;—where are we? in -triumph.”[581] - -On the following day the Archbishop delivered another address, pitched -in the same strain, but amplified and more ornate. It opens with a -singular comparison between the meditated seduction of Abraham’s -wife by Pharaoh, and the plot of Theophilus to corrupt the chastity -of the Church of Constantinople. The courage and faith of the flock -in resisting the wolf during the absence of their shepherd, their -enthusiastic welcome of his return, when the sea, as he expresses it, -became a city (alluding to the crowds who had gone out to meet him -on the Bosporus), and the market-place was converted into one vast -church—these are again the topics on which he dilates with thankful -joy. He applies to himself the verse: “They that sow in tears shall -reap in joy; he that now goeth on his way weeping, and beareth forth -good seed, shall doubtless come again with joy, and bring his sheaves -with him.” The Empress is extolled in language which to any but -oriental ears must sound painfully fulsome and adulatory. She had -sent a message to him on the previous evening, saying, “My prayer is -fulfilled, my object accomplished. I have obtained a crown better than -the diadem itself. I have received back the priest, I have restored the -head to the body, the pilot to the ship, the shepherd to the flock, -the husband to the home.” In return for this complimentary greeting -(complimentary, it must be confessed, to herself as much as to the -Archbishop) she is styled by him “most devout Queen, mother of the -churches, nurse of monks, protectress of saints, staff of the poor.” -The people were so much delighted with these laudations of the Empress, -that the address was constantly interrupted by their acclamations.[582] - -When the object of the Synod at the Oak had eventually failed through -the recall of Chrysostom, many of the members lost no time in returning -to their several sees. Theophilus and a few of his most resolute -partisans appear to have lurked in the city, waiting a possible -opportunity for resuming their intrigues. This they attempted, -according to two historians,[583] by instigating accusations against -Heracleides, who had been consecrated Bishop of Ephesus by Chrysostom. -The friends of Heracleides and of the Archbishop protested against the -illegality of such proceedings in the absence of the defendant. The -question was taken up by the populace. Fierce and sanguinary frays -were fought in the streets between the citizens and the Alexandrian -followers of Theophilus. At length he and his followers consulted their -safety by a precipitate flight. This account is not incompatible with -the assertion of Chrysostom himself in his letter to Innocent, that -after his recall he incessantly demanded the convocation of a General -Council to absolve him from the verdict of the false synod, and to -reinstate him in possession of his see; that the Emperor consented, and -that, as soon as the imperial summonses were issued in all directions, -Theophilus, dreading the scrutiny of his conduct, embarked in the dead -of night, and sailed in haste for Alexandria.[584] The citation of the -council, and the hostility of the people, may well have concurred to -hasten his departure. The General Council seems never to have regularly -assembled. Theophilus was cited to attend it after he had returned to -Alexandria, but excused himself on the plea that the Alexandrians were -so deeply attached to him, he feared a sedition would take place if -he were again to absent himself. No less than sixty bishops, however, -who had congregated in Constantinople, though not apparently convened -in synodal form, solemnly declared their sense of the illegality -and injustice of the late proceedings at the Synod of the Oak, and -confirmed Chrysostom in the resumption of his see. - - - - -CHAPTER XIX. - - AN IMAGE OF EUDOXIA PLACED IN FRONT OF THE - CATHEDRAL—CHRYSOSTOM DENOUNCES IT—ANGER OF THE - EMPRESS—THE ENEMY RETURNS TO THE CHARGE—ANOTHER COUNCIL - FORMED—CHRYSOSTOM CONFINED TO HIS PALACE—VIOLENT SCENE IN - THE CATHEDRAL AND OTHER PLACES—CHRYSOSTOM AGAIN EXPELLED. - A.D. 403, 404. - - -The storm had passed over for the moment, and the atmosphere seemed -serene: but in reality it was charged with all the old elements -of disturbance. The Archbishop owed his restoration to a mere -superstitious impulse on the part of the Empress, seconded by the -enthusiastic devotion of the common people to his person and his cause. -But as the revulsion of feeling which had led to his recall died away, -and he himself resumed with unabated zeal his former work of moral and -ecclesiastical reformation, the irritation and animosity of the more -corrupt portion of the clergy and laity revived. In two months after -his return an occasion arose which brought him into serious collision -with the Court. This was the signal for the reappearance of his -enemies; they flocked from far and near—Egypt, Syria, Asia, as well as -his own more immediate diocese—and swooped down upon their prey with -the avidity of vultures. - -The pride and ambition of Eudoxia were not satisfied by the enjoyment -of a power really greater than her husband’s, and of respect outwardly -equal; she was determined to receive that half-idolatrous kind of -homage which custom, handed down from Pagan times, still paid to -the Emperor, but to him alone. The smaller forum of Constantinople -was a great square,[585] on one side of which stood the grand curia -or senate-house, which Constantine had enriched with the sumptuous -spoils of many Pagan temples, and especially with the statues of -the Muses brought from the grove of Helicon; opposite to it was the -entrance of St. Sophia, and the remaining sides of the forum were -bounded by handsome public and a few private buildings all faced with -colonnades. In the centre was a stone platform paved with various -marbles, from which speeches were delivered on great public occasions. -On this platform the Empress determined to gratify her vanity by the -erection of a lofty column of porphyry surmounted by a silvern image of -herself. This design was accomplished in September a.d. 403, and the -erection of the statue was celebrated by all the Pagan ceremonies and -festivities, including music and dancing, with which the adoration of -the Emperor’s image was usually attended. These rites had been retained -by the Christian Emperors because they were supposed to be useful in -maintaining a loyal spirit among the people, but the Pagan elements -were afterwards suppressed by Theodosius II.[586] - -The position of Eudoxia’s column in front of the vestibule of St. -Sophia, and the disturbance caused to the sacred services within -by the noisy, tumultuous proceedings outside, were regarded by the -Patriarch as a disgrace to an Empress calling herself Christian, an -outrage and insult flung in the very face of the Church. He denounced -the heathenish ceremony with his usual vehemence before the people, -and complained of it to the prefect of the city. The prefect was a -Manichæan, and no friend to Chrysostom. Instead of endeavouring to -conciliate both parties, he reported to the Empress, probably with -some exaggeration, the condemnation pronounced by the Patriarch on -the indulgence of her pride. The resentment of Eudoxia was fierce. -She rallied the enemies of Chrysostom around her to devise means for -crushing the audacious prelate. Acacius, Severian, and others of the -old troop were soon upon the scene, and conferring with their old -confederates, the Marsas and Castriccias, the rich worldly dames, and -the dandy young clergy of Constantinople. There was no diminution -meanwhile in the tide of invective poured forth from the golden mouth, -and the pungency of his sarcasms did not lose force in the reports of -them which were carried to the royal ears.[587] - -Once more the faction applied to the Patriarch of Alexandria, -inviting him to come and conduct their operations. But he was too -wary to involve himself personally in another campaign, to terminate -perhaps in a second ignominious flight. His influence, however, even -at a distance, was potent. The stratagem adopted this time was to -counterfeit that General Council which had been constantly demanded -by Chrysostom; packing it with hostile bishops who were ostensibly -convened to revise, but in reality to confirm, the decision issued -by the Synod of the Oak. Theophilus, then, having excused attendance -at Constantinople in person, sent three “pitiful bishops” (ἐλεείνους -ἐπισκόπους), creatures of his own on whom he could rely, to execute -his designs.[588] They were armed with the 12th Canon of the Council -of Antioch held in A.D. 341, which declared that any bishop who, after -deposition, appealed to the secular power for restoration, should, -for that very act, be regarded by the Church as permanently and -irrevocably deposed. The Council of Antioch had been swayed by Arian -influence, and this same canon had been aimed against Athanasius, who -had returned from exile to Alexandria under the Imperial sanction. It -had been repudiated by the Western bishops, and some of the Eastern, -at the Council of Sardica, and indeed by all who maintained communion -with Athanasius. Theophilus, however, proposed to base the present -proceedings against Chrysostom on this foundation; to turn, in fact, -against the greatest luminary of Constantinople the engine which had -been originally constructed against the greatest ornament of the -Alexandrian see. The instrument would work well if proper hands could -be procured to work it. Syria, Cappadocia, Pontus, Phrygia, were once -more ransacked to supply the council with disaffected prelates. To -the old names of Acacius of Berœa, Severian of Gabala, Antiochus and -Cyrinus, may be added, as leaders of the malignants, Leontius, bishop -of Ancyra in Galatia, Brison of Philippopolis in Thrace, Ammon of -Laodicea in Pisidia; among those honourably distinguished as friendly -to the Patriarch were Theodore of Tyana, Elpidius of Laodicea, -Tranquillus (see unknown), and Alexander of Basilinopolis in Bithynia. -Theodore, however, perceiving the malevolent intention with which the -council was convoked, quitted Constantinople soon after his arrival. - -The council met about the close of the year A.D. 403. It was customary -for the Emperor to attend Divine service in state on Christmas Day, but -he was induced by the enemies of Chrysostom to refuse on this occasion, -alleging that it was impossible to be present where the Patriarch -officiated till he had been cleared of the serious charges brought -against him. It was proposed at first to affect to meet the demand of -Chrysostom for an equitable trial, and to hear all the charges which -had been preferred at the Synod of the Oak. But, the witnesses were so -backward to appear, and the attitude of the defendant betokened such -confidence in his cause, that it was deemed more prudent by his enemies -to stake the whole issue on the canon of the Council of Antioch. If -that was once admitted, there would be an end of the whole matter. -The Archbishop, having been deposed already once for all, was not -competent to appear and plead his cause before a council. Chrysostom -and his friends opposed the adoption of such a course with two powerful -arguments. They represented that the Council of Antioch had been -managed by an Arian bishop and influenced by an Arian emperor, and -the object of it had been to harass the great Athanasius. In the next -place, the Synod of the Oak had been illegally constituted; sixty-five -bishops had repudiated its decision; Chrysostom, therefore, was not -legally deposed, and the canon of Antioch was in consequence not -applicable to his case. This last objection was not permitted by his -enemies. Leontius boldly declared, what appears to have been a palpable -lie, that a larger number of bishops than sixty-five had voted against -Chrysostom in the Synod.[589] - -Thus the question as to the validity of the Council of Antioch became -the knot of the whole affair. It was debated with such vehemence on -both sides, that at length the adversaries of the Patriarch proposed -that a deputation from the two contending parties should plead the -case before the Emperor, and submit the decision to him. It may be -presumed from their making the proposal that they felt secure of a -verdict favourable to their side, and, at the same time, by this step -a semblance of impartiality would be imparted to the proceedings. The -deputies met in the royal presence. When the heat which marked the -beginning of the discussion had cooled down a little, Elpidius of -Laodicea with much gentleness of manner made an astute proposal. He -was an old man, eminent for stainlessness of character, as well as for -learning in ecclesiastical lore. “Let us not,” he said, “weary the -clemency of your Majesty any longer; only let our brethren, Acacius -and Antiochus, subscribe a declaration that they are of the same faith -with those who promulgated these canons, which they maintain to be the -production of orthodox men, and the controversy will be at an end.” The -Emperor perceived the adroitness of the proposal, and observed with -a smile to Antiochus, that the plan struck him as the most expedient -which could be devised. Antiochus and his colleagues turned livid with -perplexity and rage, but, being fairly caught in the dilemma, were -forced to dissemble their feelings, and simulated a willing consent -to sign the proposed declaration. The promise was made, but never -executed. The deputies retired, and the adversaries of the Patriarch -laboured with redoubled energy to procure his final condemnation; but -we have no record of any formal session or formally declared sentence. -Chrysostom continued to preach and discharge his other functions with, -if possible, increased diligence, and still acted as president over the -floating synod of more than forty bishops who constantly adhered to -his cause. His enemies, on the other hand, acted as if the sentence of -condemnation had been passed, and continually requested the Emperor to -put it into execution.[590] - -A.D. 404. As Easter approached, they became more importunate in -their demand. They dreaded the demonstrations which might be made -in favour of their victim by the large congregations which on Holy -Saturday and Easter Day were wont to assemble in the churches. They -succeeded in prevailing on the Emperor to prohibit the Patriarch, as -having been deposed and excommunicated by two councils, from entering -or officiating in the church at Easter-tide. Chrysostom had always -expressed an earnest desire to be tried before a lawful council, and -to abide by its decision. This request had been systematically evaded -even when ostensibly complied with. His whole soul rebelled with -honest indignation against these insidious and persistent attempts -to misrepresent his conduct, and he determined now to resist them by -taking his stand on the lofty ground of his Divine mission. “I received -this church from God my Saviour, and am charged with the care of the -salvation of this flock, nor am I at liberty to abandon it. Expel me by -force if you will, since the city belongs to you, that I may have your -authority as an excuse for deserting my post.”[591] - -The Emperor, though with some shame, sent officials who removed the -Archbishop from the church to his palace, with a strict injunction that -he should not attempt to leave it. This was a cautious preliminary to -final expulsion, suggested by superstitious dread of any earthquake -or other manifestation of Divine displeasure. Should any such occur -again, the Archbishop could be released in a moment; if not, they might -proceed to further measures. - -Easter Eve arrived, the greatest day in the year for the baptism of -converts. Three thousand were to be “initiated” this year. Chrysostom -was again commanded to abstain from entering the church, but answered -according to the tenor of his former reply, that he would not desist -from officiating unless compelled by actual force. The feeble Arcadius -was alarmed, and hesitated how to act. He scrupled to use force on so -sacred a day, and dreaded an insurrection of the populace. As usual, -he tried to shift responsibility from his own shoulders. He sent for -Acacius and Antiochus, and requested their advice in the present -emergency. They were too far committed now to draw back, and promptly -replied that they would take on their heads the deposition of the -Archbishop. - -One more effort was made to avert the impending calamity. The forty -bishops who maintained a close friendship with Chrysostom accosted the -Emperor and Empress as they were visiting, according to their custom -at this season, some of the martyr chapels outside the city. They -entreated their majesties with tears to spare the Church her chief -pastor, especially on account of the season, and for the sake of those -who were about to be baptized. But Arcadius and Eudoxia turned a deaf -ear to their piteous appeal. The bishops retired, grief-stricken, to -mourn over the wrongs of their Church and Patriarch; but not before -one of them, Paul, bishop of Crateia, had lifted up his voice in bold -and solemn warning:—“Take heed, Eudoxia; fear God; have pity on your -children. Do not outrage by bloodshed the sacred and solemn festival of -Jesus Christ.”[592] - -The church of St. Sophia became the scene, on the night of that -Easter Eve, of shocking tumult. A vast congregation from the city and -surrounding towns, including many of the catechumens, was keeping vigil -to greet the dawn of the Resurrection morning. Suddenly a body of -soldiers burst in with noise and violence, and took possession of the -choir. The confusion may be imagined. Women and children fled shrieking -in wild disorder. Many of the female catechumens, only half-dressed, in -preparation for the reception of baptism, were hurriedly driven out of -the baptistry with the deaconesses who attended them. Some were even -wounded, and the sacred fonts stained with blood. Some of the soldiers, -unbaptized men, penetrated even to the chamber where the Eucharistic -elements were kept, and profaned them with their gaze and touch. The -clergy were forcibly ejected in their vestments, and several were -wounded. The pitiable spectacle of the mingled troop of men, women, -children, and clergy, violently chased along the streets by the brutal -soldiery, moved even Jews and Gentiles to compassion. The clergy, -however, rallied the scattered flock in the Baths of Constantine, the -largest public baths in the city. Here they proceeded with the Easter -services in due order; some reading the Scriptures, others baptizing. -The churches of Constantinople were deserted, which the adversary -wished to force the people to attend in the absence of the Archbishop, -in the hope that the Court might thus suppose him to be unpopular. - -Such is the description of these violent scenes as drawn by the -pen of Chrysostom himself, in a letter[593] written soon after the -occurrences, and addressed to Innocent I., bishop of Rome, Venerius, -bishop of Milan, and Chromatius, bishop of Aquileia. “You may imagine -the rest,” he concludes; “great as these calamities are, there is no -prospect of their immediate termination; on the contrary, the evil -extends every day. The spirit of insubordination is rapidly spreading -from the capital to the provinces, from the head to the members. Clergy -rebel against their bishop, and one bishop assails another. People -are, or soon will be, split into factions. All places are racked by -the throes of coming trouble, and the confusion is universal. Having -been informed of all these things, then, my most reverend and prudent -lords, display, I pray you, the courage and zeal which becomes you -in restraining this lawlessness which has crept into the churches. -For if it were to become a prevailing and allowable custom, for any -at their pleasure to pass into foreign and distant dioceses, and to -expel whomsoever any one may choose, and act as they like on their own -private authority, be sure that all discipline will go to pieces, and -a kind of implacable warfare will pervade the world, all expelling -or being themselves expelled. Wherefore, to prevent the subjection -of the world to such confusion, I beseech you to enjoin that these -acts so illegally performed in my absence, when I had not declined -fair judgment, may be reckoned invalid, as indeed in the nature of -things they are, and that those who have been detected taking part -in these iniquitous proceedings may be subjected to the penalty of -ecclesiastical law; while we who have not been proved guilty may -continue to enjoy your correspondence and friendship as aforetime.” He -closes his letter by affirming that he was still prepared to prove his -innocence and the guilt of his accusers before a legally constituted -council. - -This letter is interesting not only in itself, but because it -illustrates remarkably the growing tendency of Christendom to appeal -to the arbitration of the Western Church, and especially of the Bishop -of Rome, in matters of ecclesiastical discipline. The law-making, -law-protecting spirit of the West is invoked to restrain the turbulence -and licentiousness of the East. The Patriarch of the Eastern Rome -appeals to the great bishops of the West, as the champions of an -ecclesiastical discipline which he confesses himself unable to enforce, -or to see any prospect of establishing. No jealousy is entertained -of the Patriarch of the old Rome by the Patriarch of the new. The -interference of Innocent is courted, a certain primacy is accorded -him, but at the same time he is not addressed as a supreme arbitrator; -assistance and sympathy are solicited from him as from an elder -brother, and two other prelates of Italy are joint recipients with him -of the appeal. The effect of this letter will shortly be related; for -the present, the course of events at Constantinople must be followed. - -It did not suit the purpose of Acacius and his party to allow the -congregation which had been hunted out of St. Sophia to proceed with -their service in the baths unmolested. If the Emperor entered the -church in the morning and found it deserted, the vacancy on so great -a day would reveal too plainly the intense devotion of the people to -their bishop. The aim of the conspirators was to force the people -to attend the services, which were to be marked by the absence of -Chrysostom alone. They accordingly applied to Anthemius, Master of -the Offices, to disperse the congregation, if necessary by force. -Anthemius, however, was a moderate, prudent man, and kindly disposed -towards the Patriarch. He refused to interfere, pleading the advanced -hour of the night, the vastness of the assembly, and the risk of -serious tumult. He yielded, however, to their persevering and urgent -demands so far as to direct Lucius, a subordinate officer, commander -of a Thracian corps called the Scutarii, to present himself with his -troops at the entrance of the baths, and exhort the people to return -to the church, as the more proper place for conducting the services. -He was strictly charged to abstain from violence. He acted on his -instructions, and harangued the congregation, but without effect. The -chanting of the Psalms and the administration of baptism to crowds -of catechumens were proceeded with. Lucius returned and reported his -errand ineffectual. Acacius and his colleagues urged him with all their -eloquence, and with promises of rich reward, probably more effective -than their golden words, to make another effort, and to use force if -persuasion were not regarded. They gave him some ecclesiastics to -accompany him and, as it were, sanction their proceedings. Whether they -began by exhortation is not recorded; at any rate, if it was given, -no attention was paid to it, and it was quickly seconded by barbarian -violence. Lucius himself pushed his way to the place of baptism, and -laid about him with a truncheon upon candidates, deacons, and priests, -some of them aged men, and dispersed them in all directions. The -soldiers seized and plundered the women of their ornaments, the clergy -of their vestments, and the sacred vessels belonging to the Church; -they beat the fugitives and dragged them off to the prisons. The -natural solitude and silence of the streets, in the hour immediately -preceding dawn, were disturbed by the cries of the captives and the -shouts of their brutal captors. - -In the morning the street walls were covered with proclamations, -menacing with severe punishment any who persisted in maintaining -intercourse with the Patriarch.[594] - -The baths were effectually emptied of the congregation; but to fill -the churches could not so easily be accomplished; in fact, they -were entirely deserted. Large numbers of the dispersed congregation -who had escaped the hands of the soldiers fled outside the walls of -Constantinople, and, with indefatigable zeal, sought to complete the -celebration of the Paschal rites as best they could in the secure -recesses of woods or valleys. A large number assembled in a field -called Pempton, because five miles from the Forum of Constantine, an -open space surrounded by wood and intended to be used as a Hippodrome. -In the course of the day—Easter Day—the Emperor and his retinue -happened to ride, or perhaps were maliciously conducted, near the -spot. The eye of Arcadius was attracted by the sight of a large body -of people, many of them clothed in white, crowded together outside the -Hippodrome. Unhappily, the Emperor was attended by courtiers inimical -to the Archbishop. They replied to his inquiries respecting the nature -of the concourse, that it was a body of heretics who had met to worship -there in order to escape interference. Arcadius was weak enough to -allow, without further inquiry, a number of soldiers who formed part of -his escort to ride in upon the assembly and seize the most conspicuous -leaders. A number of priests were captured, and several rich and noble -ladies, whom the soldiers despoiled of their head-dresses and earrings -with great barbarity, in one instance even tearing away with the -appendage a portion of the ear itself. - -One more attempt was made to assemble in a wooden hippodrome, built -by Constantine, called the Xulodrome; but once more they were driven -out, and hunted from place to place with relentless diligence. These -repeated assaults broke up the flock of Chrysostom; the prisons were -filled with the Johnites, as they were called after the name of their -bishop, and the churches were empty. The prison walls echoed to the -sound of the chants and hymns of the martyrs, but the churches to the -noise of scourge and fierce threats administered to those who ventured -to enter. This was done in the hope that they might be coerced by -torture to anathematise the Archbishop.[595] - -He himself, however, meanwhile continued to reside two months in his -palace, though not without risk. Twice, as it was believed, attempts -were made to assassinate him, but frustrated. Suspicion fell first -on a man who affected demoniacal possession, and hovered much about -the precincts of the palace. A dagger was found upon his person; the -people seized him and dragged him before the prefect; but Chrysostom -procured his release through the intercession of some bishops, just as -he was about to be examined by torture. A second attempt was supposed -to be intended by a slave, who ran at full speed towards the entrance -of the palace, and plunged a dagger, in some instances with fatal -effect, into several passers-by who endeavoured to stop him. He was -at last surrounded and captured by the people, when he confessed that -he had been bribed by his master, a priest named Elpidius, to try and -assassinate the Archbishop. The fury of the people was appeased by the -imprisonment of the man; but they now resolved to take the protection -of their Archbishop into their own hands. They divided themselves into -companies, which kept watch by turns, night and day, over the episcopal -palace. The hostile party, dreading any further impediments to the -execution of their iniquitous sentence, now hurried matters to their -conclusion. Five days after Pentecost, four bishops—Acacius, Antiochus, -Severian, and Cyrinus—obtained an interview with the Emperor. They -represented that the city never would be tranquil till the removal -of the Archbishop had been effected, and that his remaining in the -palace after his condemnation was a gross violation of ecclesiastical -law. They avowed themselves willing to take the responsibility of his -deposition on their own heads, and besought the Emperor not to be more -lenient and concessive than were bishops and priests.[596] - -June, A.D. 404. The long-hoped-for mandate was at length issued. It was -conveyed to the Archbishop by the notary Patricius, and informed him -that Acacius and three other bishops having charged themselves with -the responsibility of his deposition, he must commend himself to God, -and quit the church and the palace without delay. The martyr received -the cruel order with meek submission, and prepared to act upon it with -prompt obedience. He passed from his palace to his church, saying to -the bishops who accompanied him, “Come, let us pray and say farewell to -the Angel of the Church. At my own fate I can rejoice, I only grieve -for the sorrow of the people.” One of his friends, a nobleman, conveyed -a warning to him to avoid by a secret departure the risk of exciting -popular tumult. He informed him that Lucius was waiting with troops in -one of the public baths to compel his removal in the event of any delay -or resistance, and that the consequences of any attempt at a rescue by -the populace might be serious. - -Chrysostom acted on his advice. He entered the choir with his friendly -bishops, bestowed on them a farewell kiss and farewell words; then -bidding them wait for him there while he went to repose, he entered the -baptistry, and sent for the deaconesses, Olympias, Pentadia, Procla, -and Salvina. “Come hither, my daughters,” he said, “and hearken to me: -my career, I perceive, is coming to an end; I have finished my course, -and perchance ye will see my face no more. Now I exhort you to this: -let not any of you break off her accustomed benevolence towards the -Church. If any man is appointed my successor without having canvassed -the office, and against his own will, but by the common consent of all, -submit to his authority as if he were Chrysostom himself; so may ye -obtain mercy. Remember me in your prayers.” The women threw themselves -at his feet dissolved in tears. The Archbishop made a sign to one of -the priests to remove the women, lest, as he said, their wailing should -attract the attention of the people outside. He directed that the mule -on which he was accustomed to ride should be saddled and taken to the -western gate of the cathedral; and while the people’s attention was -diverted by this feint, he passed out, unobserved, by a small door near -the east end, and surrendered himself to some soldiers who were at hand -to convey him to the port. So he departed from the church, the scene of -his indefatigable labours, whose walls were never again to resound to -his eloquence. He went out, and, in the emphatic words of the historian -to whose narrative we are indebted for the minute picture of these -occurrences, “the Angel of the Church went out with him.” Two bishops, -Cyriacus of Synnada in Phrygia, and Eulysius of Apamea in Bithynia, -accompanied him on board the vessel which conveyed him across the -straits to the Bithynian coast.[597] - - - - -CHAPTER XX. - - FURY OF THE PEOPLE AT THE REMOVAL OF - CHRYSOSTOM—DESTRUCTION OF THE CATHEDRAL CHURCH AND - SENATE-HOUSE BY FIRE—PERSECUTION OF CHRYSOSTOM’S - FOLLOWERS—FUGITIVES TO ROME—LETTERS OF INNOCENT - TO THEOPHILUS—TO THE CLERGY OF CONSTANTINOPLE—TO - CHRYSOSTOM—DEPUTATION OF WESTERN BISHOPS TO - CONSTANTINOPLE REPULSED—SUFFERINGS OF THE EASTERN - CHURCH—TRIUMPH OF THE CABAL. A.D. 404, 405. - - -The people, meanwhile, both within the church and outside, were not -long in discovering that the Archbishop had disappeared from the -building and its precincts. They became furiously agitated: some -rushed to the harbour, but too late to obstruct the embarkation. The -doors of the cathedral, which had been locked by some of the cabal, -who anticipated a rush of the people as soon as the departure of -Chrysostom should have been discovered, were fiercely battered by the -crowd on both sides. Jews and Pagans looked on, and jeered derisively -at the tumult. The horror of this scene of wild confusion was suddenly -increased by the apparition of fire bursting forth from the building. -How kindled, by accident or design, it is impossible to determine. Each -party fiercely charged the other with the guilt of the catastrophe, and -some attributed it to miraculous interference of heavenly powers. The -conflagration broke out in or near the throne of the Archbishop, which -it consumed, and then spread to the roof. In three hours the edifice, -whose erection and embellishment had been the work of many years, was -reduced to a heap of cinders. The only portion not destroyed was the -treasury which contained the sacred vessels of silver and gold, as if -expressly to confute one of the charges made against the Archbishop, -that he had sold all the most valuable ornaments belonging to the -church. Germanus and Cassian, the custodians of the treasury, when they -fled to Rome, carried with them a copy of the inventory of all these -articles, which, when they surrendered their office, had been handed -over to the prefect and some of the other chief functionaries of the -city. - -The conflagration, however, did not confine itself to the cathedral. -A violent north wind carried the flames across the Forum, and ignited -the great curia or senate-house; not, however, that side of it which -faced the cathedral, but the further side, which looked into the little -forum where the royal palace was situated. The whole senate-house was -destroyed. The statues of the Muses which Constantine had brought from -Helicon were consumed, and all the other principal adornments. The -images of Zeus and Athene alone were found intact, beneath a heap of -ruins and of masses of molten lead which had dropped upon them from the -burning roof.[598] - -The real or affected suspicion that the Archbishop and his flock were -the incendiaries was quite a sufficient pretext for treating them -with rigour. He himself, with Cyriacus and Eulysius, was detained in -chains under a strict guard in Bithynia. These two companions were -taken from him and conveyed bound to Chalcedon, but after examination -were dismissed as innocent. But at Constantinople the persecution -was enforced with merciless severity under the auspices of Optatus, -a Pagan, now prefect in the place of Studius. All the followers of -the Archbishop, clerical and lay, high and low, were subjected, if -caught, to rigorous inquisition, and most of them to severe punishment. -Chrysostom wrote a letter from Bithynia to the Emperor, imploring -that he might at least be allowed to appear and defend himself and -his clergy from the atrocious charge of incendiarism, but the letter -received no attention; and as the poor exile continued his journey to -Nice, his sufferings were enhanced by pitiable intelligence of the -persecution inflicted on bishops, priests, and deacons who refused to -anathematise him or recognise the validity of his deposition. But the -spirit of the exile was not only brave to support his own troubles, but -could spare some of its energy to encourage those, who were suffering -in his cause, to patience, fortitude, resignation, and even joy.[599] - -In times of religious persecution, the language of the New Testament, -about the blessedness of tribulation as a pledge of future happiness -and a means of preparation for it, comes home to men’s hearts with -a reality and force which seem to exceed our present application -of it to the troubles and sorrows of ordinary life. Those who were -firmly persuaded that their cause was the cause of truth and of -Jesus Christ read the words, “Blessed are ye when ye are persecuted -for righteousness’ sake,” or, “Happy are ye when men revile you and -persecute you,” as if spoken directly to themselves; and they really -did “rejoice in that day, and leap for joy.” Such are the texts which -Chrysostom cites for the consolation of his suffering friends. He -speaks of their exposure to intimidation by threats, imprisonment, -frequent appearance in judges’ courts, torture at the hands of the -executioner, shameless false evidence, coarse ribaldry, and scurrilous -jests; but “blessed were they, yea, thrice blessed, and more than that, -to endure imprisonment and chains, for not only was their fortitude the -subject of admiration everywhere, but their present sufferings were the -measure of their future happiness, and their names had been inscribed -in the Book of Life.”[600] - -The destruction of the church and senate-house was the first pretext -for instituting persecution against the adherents of Chrysostom; -the second was, their refusal to recognise his successor. One week -after his deposition, Arsacius, brother of Nectarius the predecessor -of Chrysostom, was, apparently by the simple exercise of Imperial -authority, elevated to the see. He was eighty years old, and is -quaintly described by Palladius as “muter than a fish, and more -incapable than a frog.”[601] The probable aim of the Empress was -to secure a man whose servility might be depended on. His brother, -Nectarius, had once desired to make him Bishop of Tarsus; and, on his -declining to accept the promotion, had taunted him with ambitiously -reserving himself for the see of Constantinople; whereupon Arsacius had -taken an oath that he never would accept any bishopric. But ambition -and Imperial authority overcame his scruples. He is described by the -historians as a man of pious disposition and mild conduct; with one -exception: that he persecuted with relentless vigour the contumacious -adherents of his predecessor. By Chrysostom he is denounced as a wolf, -and in a figurative sense as an adulterer, on account of his usurpation -of the see during the lifetime of its legitimate occupant.[602] -Arsacius applied to the civil powers for assistance to compel the -Johnites to attend the churches where he and his clergy officiated. A -tribune was directed to attack a body of them who had assembled for -worship in some remote part of the city. The soldiers dispersed the -assembly, took several of the most eminent persons prisoners, and, -as usual, stripped the women of their golden girdles, jewels, and -earrings. The only consequence of this was, that the Johnites became -more attached to the cause and memory of their late Archbishop. Some of -them fled the city, and many more refrained as much as possible from -appearing in public places, such as the Forum and the baths. Meetings -of some kind for worship were not discontinued, or were soon resumed, -for we find Chrysostom, in one of his letters written during his -exile, reproving two priests, Theophilus and Salustius, for slackness -in attending such assemblies.[603] But worshippers ran great risks. The -prefect Optatus, who succeeded Studius, probably because the latter was -considered too lenient, appears to have entertained all the animosity -of a thorough Pagan against Christians, and to have rejoiced in the -present opportunity of inflicting sufferings upon them. He combined -the two charges of incendiarism and contumacy in his prosecution of -the Johnites, and endeavoured to extort confessions of guilt from his -victims with merciless barbarity. - -A few instances are recorded, and they are quite enough to sicken us of -the tale of such horrors. Eutropius, a reader, was commanded to name -the persons who had set fire to the church. He refused. He was young -and delicate, and it was thought a confession might be wrung from him -under the agony of torture. He was lashed with a scourge, his cheeks -were scraped, and his sides lacerated with iron teeth, after which -lighted torches were applied to the wounded parts. No information could -be extorted from him: he was therefore conveyed to prison, and thrown -into a dungeon, where he expired. Some priests, adherents of Arsacius, -buried him by night, that his mangled body might not be seen by any -eyes but those of his enemies. Celestial music was said to have been -heard at the time of his interment. - -Tigrius, the priest, whose presence with Serapion had been demanded at -the Synod of the Oak, was another victim. He was stripped, scourged -on his back, and then stretched on the rack till his bones were -dislocated. He survived the torture, and was banished to Mesopotamia. -Serapion himself, now bishop of Heraclea in Thrace, was seized, tried -on several calumnious charges, barbarously scourged, and sent into -exile. - -Those ladies also who were most distinguished for their friendship with -the deposed Archbishop, and for the dedication of their time and money -to the Church, were marked objects of persecution. They were brought -before the prefect, and admonished by him to acknowledge Arsacius, -and so save themselves from future annoyance. A few from timidity -complied; but Olympias, who was subjected to a severer examination, -confronted it with a dauntless spirit. She was bluntly asked why she -had set fire to the “Great Church.” “My manner of life,” replied the -accused, “is a sufficient refutation of such a charge; a person who -has expended large sums of money to restore and embellish the churches -of God is not likely to burn and demolish them.” “I know your past -course of life well,” cried the prefect. “If you know aught against -it, then descend from your place there as judge, and come forward as -my accuser,” replied the undaunted Olympias. Perceiving that she was -not to be browbeaten, Optatus proposed the same course to her which had -been adopted by some other women as a means of exemption from further -persecution, namely, communion with Arsacius; but she scornfully -rejected the base compromise. “I have been publicly calumniated by a -charge which cannot be proven, and I will not accede to any terms till -I have been cleared from this accusation. Even if you resort to force, -I will not hold communion with those from whom I ought to secede, nor -do anything contrary to the principles of my holy religion.” She made -a request, which was granted, that she might be allowed a few days -to consult with lawyers on the proper means of legally refuting the -libellous accusation. The prefect, however (on what pretence is not -stated), sent for her again, and exacted a heavy fine, in the hope -that she would be induced to yield. The fine was paid without any -reluctance, but her refusal to acknowledge the usurper was inflexible; -and to avoid, if possible, further pressure and persecution, she -retired to Cyzicus, on the other side of the straits.[604] - -The tidings of her fortitude and loyalty were conveyed to the exiled -Chrysostom, and so cheered his spirit in the midst of depression and -sickness that his sufferings seemed to him as nothing. “When many men -and women, old and young, highly reputed for their virtue, had turned -their backs on the enemy almost before the conflict had begun, she, on -the other hand, after many encounters, so far from being enervated, was -even invigorated; she spread forth the sails of patience, and floated -securely as on a calm sea; so far from being overwhelmed by the storm, -she was scarcely sprinkled by the spray. In the seclusion of her little -house she was able to inspire courage into the hearts of others, and -had been to them a haven of comfort and a tower of strength.”[605] - -The deaconess Pentadia, widow of the consul Timasius, was another -victim. She led the life of a recluse, never going beyond the walls -of her house except to church. She was now dragged from her retreat -through the Forum to the prefect’s tribunal, and thence to prison, -charged with being an accomplice in the late fire. Several persons were -put to the torture before her eyes, in order to intimidate her into -a confession; but in vain. Her firm demeanour, courageous answers, -and powerful demonstrations of her innocence, confounded and silenced -her adversaries, and elicited the admiration of the public. Beyond -imprisonment, no indignities seem to have been inflicted on her; and -when desirous to quit the capital, she was persuaded by Chrysostom to -remain, who represented the great value of her presence and example -in animating others to undergo their present afflictions. She had -apparently intended to try and join him in his place of exile, when he -had been removed to Cucusus, on the confines of Lesser Armenia, for -he dwells on the great risk to her delicate health from a journey in -winter, and the danger of being plundered by the Isaurian robbers, who -were just then, he says, in a powerful condition. He, therefore, on -all grounds, begs her to remain where she is, but to relieve his mind -from anxiety about her affairs and health by constantly writing to -him.[606] - -Meanwhile, the injured Church of Constantinople did not cease through -letters and emissaries to solicit the interference of the Western -Church. The first intimation of the calamities we have been describing -which reached the ears of Rome was through a messenger despatched -by Theophilus. The letter which he brought was inscribed “From Pope -Theophilus to Pope Innocent,” and stated in the barest manner, without -assigning his reasons or mentioning any assessors in his judgment, -that he had deposed Chrysostom, and that it behoved Innocent to break -off communion with him. The Pope was displeased by the cool and curt -character of the letter, and somewhat perplexed how to notice or reply -to so inexplicit a despatch. Eusebius, a deacon from Constantinople, -who was in Rome at the time on some ecclesiastical business, obtained -an interview with Innocent, and entreated him not to act till -information should be received from Constantinople, which, he added -(on what grounds does not appear), he had good reason to expect would -arrive in a short time. Three days afterwards four bishops did arrive, -bearing the letter from Chrysostom to Innocent which contained that -pathetic and perspicuous narrative of the recent occurrences, from -which extracts have been made in the preceding chapter. They brought -two other letters, one from the forty friendly bishops, another from -the clergy of Constantinople. - -Innocent no longer hesitated to pronounce an opinion. His letter -to Theophilus is brief, decisive, almost peremptory in tone. “The -See of Rome,” he said, “would maintain communion with Alexandria -and Constantinople to avoid rending the unity of the Church; but -he annulled (ἀθέτησας) the deposition of John apparently made by -Theophilus. It was impossible to recognise the validity of a sentence -pronounced by such an irregular synod as that lately convened at -Chalcedon. If Theophilus had confidence in the justice of that -sentence, he must appear in person to prove it before a General Council -called together and regulated according to the Canons of Nice.” A few -days after the despatch of this letter, Peter, an Alexandrian priest, -arrived with a deacon from Constantinople, bearing another letter -from Theophilus, and certain minutes, so called, of the acts of the -Synod of the Oak. Innocent, having perused the minutes, was indignant -at the mingled monstrosity and levity of the charges brought against -Chrysostom, and at the condemnation having been pronounced in the -absence of the defendant. He ordered special prayers and fasts to be -observed by the Church for the restoration of concord, and addressed to -Theophilus a sharp letter of reproof.[607] - -It is not easy to make out precisely how many communications passed -each way between the Churches of Rome and Constantinople, or the exact -date of each; but several letters are distinctly mentioned. Theotecnus, -a priest from Constantinople, brought a letter from twenty-five of the -forty bishops who had constantly adhered to Chrysostom, in which they -described the expulsion of the Patriarch and the conflagration of the -church. Innocent replied by a letter of condolence, and exhortation -to bear their trial with Christian fortitude and patience, for at -present he confessed, with deep regret, that he saw small prospect -of rendering much effectual aid, “owing to the opposition of certain -persons powerful for evil,” alluding probably to the jealousies between -the Courts of the two brothers, Honorius and Arcadius. The cabal -also sent a letter to Innocent, containing their version of the late -transactions. Their emissary was Paternus, who called himself a priest -of Constantinople; “an ugly little fellow,” says Palladius, “and very -unintelligible.” The letter was written in the names of Arsacius, -Paulus, Antiochus, Cyrinus, Severian, and some others; and, among -other opprobrious charges, distinctly accused Chrysostom of setting -fire to the church. Innocent treated the letter with much disdain, and -would not condescend to answer it. Some days afterwards, Cyriacus, -bishop of Synnada, arrived in Rome as a fugitive, in consequence of an -Imperial edict, which directed the deposition of any bishop who refused -to communicate with Arsacius and Theophilus, and the confiscation of -his property, if he had any. After Cyriacus arrived Eulysius, bishop -of Apamea in Bithynia, bringing a letter from fifteen of the forty -friendly bishops, which described all the past and present distress -of the Church caused by Chrysostom’s enemies, and in all respects -confirmed the oral account of Cyriacus. In the course of another month, -Palladius, bishop of Hellenopolis, fled to Rome from the intolerable -harshness of magisterial decrees, which now subjected to confiscation -the house of any one who should be found to have harboured bishop, -priest, or even layman, who communicated with Chrysostom. From a -letter of Chrysostom[608] it appears that Palladius and many others -lived for some time in concealment at Constantinople, in the hope of -escaping persecution. They were courteously lodged in Rome by one -Pinianus and his wife, by Juliana, Proba, and other Roman ladies, whom -Chrysostom warmly thanks for their kindness in letters written by -him from Cucusus.[609] Germanus the priest, and Cassian the deacon, -custodians of the Church treasury at Constantinople, also came to -Rome, bringing a letter from the whole body of the clergy who adhered -to Chrysostom, describing the violent deposition and expulsion of the -Archbishop, and the tyranny of their adversaries under which they were -now suffering.[610] - -The reply of Innocent to this letter from the clergy of Constantinople -is dignified as well as sympathetic. He exhorts, as usual, to patience, -and to the derivation of comfort from the remembrance of the sufferings -of all God’s saints in past times. But he deeply deplores their wrongs, -and again expresses his reprobation in the strongest terms of the -illegality of the late proceedings. “The canon which prohibited the -ordination of a successor during the lifetime of the reigning bishop -had been grossly violated. The Canons of Antioch, on which the synod -had relied, were invalid, having been composed by heretics, and they -had been rejected by the Council of Sardica. The Canons of Nice alone -were entitled to the obedience of the Church; but adversaries and -heretics were always attempting to subvert them.”... “What steps, then, -should be taken in the existing crisis? Plainly a General Council must -be convoked: that was the only means of appeasing the fury of the -tempest. He was watching an opportunity to accomplish this: meanwhile, -they must wait in patience, and trust the goodness of God for the -restoration of tranquillity and good order.” - -To Chrysostom Innocent wrote, as friend to friend, as a bishop to a -brother bishop, a letter of Christian consolation and encouragement, -not entering into the legal questions of the case, and not pledging -himself to decisive action of any kind. It was not necessary to remind -one, who was himself the teacher and pastor of a great people, that God -often tried the best of men, and put their patience to the severest -tests, and that they are firmly supported under the greatest calamities -by the approving voice of conscience.... A good man may be severely -tried, but cannot be overcome, since he is preserved and guarded by -the truth of Holy Scripture. Holy Scripture supplied abundant examples -of suffering saints who did not receive their crowns until they had -undergone the heaviest trials with patience. “Take courage, then, -honoured brother, from the testimony of conscience. When you have been -purified by affliction, you will enter into the haven of peace in the -presence of Christ our Lord.”[611] - -Innocent, however, not only wrote commonplace letters of condolence, -but exerted himself to obtain the council which he had recommended -to the Church of Constantinople as the only means of redressing her -wrongs. He wrote a letter to Honorius, then at Ravenna, representing -the lamentable condition of the Church of Constantinople, which -elicited from the Emperor an order for the convention of an Italian -synod. This synod, after a due consideration of all the circumstances, -was to submit its decision and suggestions to himself. The result of -the deliberations of the Italian bishops, swayed no doubt by Innocent, -was to request the Emperor to write to his brother Arcadius, urging -the convocation of a General Council to be held in Thessalonica, which -would be a convenient meeting-point for the prelates of East and West. -Honorius complied, and the letter was despatched under the care of a -deputation from the Italian Church, consisting of five bishops, two -priests, and a deacon. The Emperor calls it the third letter[612] which -he had written relative to the affairs of Constantinople. He professes -great solicitude for the peace of the Church, “on which,” he observes, -“the peace of our Empire depends;” and with a view to this object, -he urges the convocation of a council at Thessalonica, and specially -entreats that the attendance of Theophilus, who was, he is informed, -author of all these disturbances, should be insisted upon. He commends -the deputation to the honourable care of Arcadius; and that he may know -the sentiments of the Italian Church on the present state of affairs, -he sends him two letters as samples of many, one from the Bishop of -Rome, the other from the Bishop of Aquileia. - -The only bishop on the deputation whose see is mentioned was Æmilius, -bishop of Beneventum. The Oriental refugees, Cyriacus, Demetrius, -Palladius, and Eulysius, accompanied the Italians. They were the -bearers not only of letters from Honorius, Innocent, and the bishops -Chromatius of Aquileia and Venerius of Milan, but also of a memorial -from the Italian synod, which recommended that Chrysostom should be -reinstated in his see before he was required to take his trial before -a council. He would then, it was observed, have no reasonable excuse -for declining to attend it. The deputation was absent four months. On -their return the members had a pitiful tale to tell of failure in their -errand, and of personal suffering from maltreatment. They touched at -Athens on their voyage out, whence they had intended to proceed to -Thessalonica, and lay the letters first of all before Anysius, bishop -of that place; but at Athens they were arrested by a military officer, -who placed them on board two vessels under charge of a centurion, to -be conveyed to Constantinople. A furious southerly gale sprang up -soon after their departure, and, after a voyage of some danger, they -arrived, late on the third day, at the suburb of Constantinople called -Victor. But, instead of being allowed to proceed to the city, they were -shut up in a fortress named Athyra, on the coast—the Romans in a single -chamber, the Orientals in separate apartments. No servant even was -permitted to attend them. They were commanded to deliver up the letters -which they had brought, but refused, as being ambassadors, to surrender -them to any but to the Emperor himself. Secretaries and messengers were -sent in succession, but the ambassadors steadfastly adhered to their -refusal. The letters were at length wrested from their possession by -sheer violence: one bishop’s thumb was broken in the struggle. On the -following day a large bribe was offered them if they would recognise -Atticus (the aged Arsacius was now dead) as Patriarch, and say no more -about the trial of Chrysostom. This base proposal was firmly resisted; -and, seeing the utter hopelessness of their mission, they requested -to be released as soon as possible, and suffered to return to their -dioceses in safety. The Italians saw no more of their companions from -the East. They themselves were thrust into a miserable vessel, with -twenty soldiers of various grades, and conveyed to Lampsacus, on the -Asiatic coast, where they embarked in another vessel, and, after a -tedious voyage of twenty days, arrived at Hydruntum, in Calabria.[613] - -Neither the Papacy nor the Empire of the West was sufficiently -powerful at this time to insist further upon justice being done to the -Patriarch, in the face of the determined animosity of the ruling powers -at Constantinople; but the friends of the martyr deemed that they -read unequivocal signs of the Divine displeasure in the misfortunes -which befell some of Chrysostom’s greatest personal enemies. Thrace -and Illyria were ravaged by an incursion of Huns, and the Isaurians, -a predatory barbarian race, which inhabited the fastnesses of Mount -Taurus, committed fearful havoc in Syria and Asia Minor. Cyrinus, -bishop of Chalcedon, one of the four who had taken on them the -responsibility of Chrysostom’s condemnation, died in great agony -from the wound in his foot, originally caused when his foot had been -trodden upon by Bishop Maruthas, more than a year ago, just before the -Synod of the Oak. At the end of September, Constantinople was visited -by a destructive fall of hailstones of extraordinary size; and on -October 6, A.D. 404, died the Empress Eudoxia. Nilus, one of the most -eminent anchorites of the day, once prefect of Constantinople, who -had abandoned wealth, family, and position for the solitudes of Mount -Sinai, addressed two letters of reproof and warning to Arcadius on the -iniquitous banishment of Chrysostom and inhuman persecution of his -followers. “How can you expect to see Constantinople delivered from -visitations of earthquake and fire from Heaven, after the enormities -which have there been perpetrated; after crime has been established -there by the authority of laws; after the thrice-blessed John, the -pillar of the Church, the lamp of truth, the trumpet of Jesus Christ, -has been driven from the city? How can I grant my prayers (Arcadius had -apparently begged the intercession of the saint to remove the national -troubles) to a city stricken by the wrath of God, whose thunder is -every moment ready to fall upon her?”[614] - -But human and divine warnings were alike wasted; the enemies of the -Patriarch had complete sway over the Court, and suffered it not -to swerve from the path of persecution. The Western bishops and -presbyters, after the disastrous termination of their embassy to -Constantinople, returned home, without honour indeed, but unmolested. -Their Eastern colleagues did not escape so easily. They were conveyed -to places of exile in the most distant and opposite quarters of the -Empire. Cyriacus was confined in a Persian fortress beyond Emessa; -Eulysius in Arabia; Palladius on the confines of Ethiopia; Demetrius -was to have been confined in one of the Egyptian oases, but died -of the harsh treatment to which he was subjected on the journey. -The exiles suffered such brutal insults and indignities from the -soldiers who conducted them to these places, that the desire of life -was extinguished. The little money which they had collected for the -expenses of their journey was taken from them by their guards, who -divided it among themselves. They were forced to perform in one day -the distance of two days’ journey. They were not permitted to enter -any churches on their route, but forced into Jewish or Samaritan -synagogues, and lodged at night in low inns, where their ears were -shocked by the filthy conversation of abandoned characters of both -sexes. Yet even some of these degraded people were won to a more -respectful behaviour, if not actually converted, by the Christian -exhortations and instruction of the captives. The “Word of God was not -bound.” Some of the bishops friendly to Theophilus bribed the soldiers -to hurry the exiles out of their dioceses as quickly as possible. -Distinguished among these malignants were the bishops of Tarsus, -Antioch, Ancyra, and of Cæsarea in Palestine. Most of the bishops of -Cappadocia, on the other hand, especially Theodorus of Tyana, and -Bosporius of Colonia, accorded them a compassionate and courteous -reception.[615] - -Arsacius died in November A.D. 404. Out of many ambitious candidates -for the vacant throne, Atticus, a presbyter, who had taken an active -part in the persecution of Chrysostom, a native of Sebaste in Armenia, -was appointed. He was a man of moderate abilities and generally mild -disposition, but relentless in his determination to crush out the -party of the exiled Patriarch. By his influence an Imperial rescript -was obtained, which decreed that “any bishop who did not communicate -with Theophilus, Porphyry of Antioch, and Atticus, should be ejected -from the Church, and his property confiscated.” The wealthy, for the -most part, bowed to the storm; the poor sought peace of body and of -conscience in flight either to Rome or monasteries. This rescript, -aimed at the bishops, was followed up by another directed against the -laity. Any layman who refused to recognise the above-mentioned prelates -was, if a civilian, to be deprived of any office which he might hold; -if a soldier, of his military girdle; if an artisan, to be heavily -fined or banished. Bishops and presbyters were dispersed as fugitives -into all parts of the Empire. Some sought retirement in some secluded -little country property of their own, and obtained a precarious -livelihood by manual labour, farming, or fishing.[616] - -But, in spite of all the various means of coercion at Constantinople, -in spite of trials, torture, imprisonment, banishment, the bulk -of the people could not be brought to attend the ministration of -Atticus and his clergy. Their churches were comparatively empty, -while the persecuted adherents of the exile persistently held their -services in some sequestered valley, or on some lonely hillside. In -fact, persecution, as has always been the case, only intensified the -attachment of many to the person and the cause which it was intended -to crush, and so far defeated its own object. Chrysostom himself -observes,[617] that many of those who had enjoyed a high reputation -for piety were the first to fall away when brought to the test of -persecution; whereas others, who had formerly been abandoned to -frivolity and vice, now renounced the theatre and circus, hastened -into the desert to attend the assembly of the Catholics at worship, -and displayed the greatest fortitude before the judge when brought to -trial, in the face of torture, and with the prospect of imprisonment or -exile. - -The party now in power could not convert the hearts of clergy or people -to their side, but they could, and did, change the outward aspect of -the Church. The men of probity and piety with whom Chrysostom had -replaced the six simoniacal bishops deposed in Asia were expelled, -and the delinquents restored. The Church in that region was reduced -to a disgraceful state. Ordinations were conducted, not amidst prayer -and fasting, but feasting, drunkenness, and gross bribery. The see of -Heracleides, the good bishop of Ephesus, appointed by Chrysostom, was -occupied by a eunuch, a monster of iniquity. The people in disgust -deserted the churches. - -The death of Flavian, bishop of Antioch, nearly coincided with the -banishment of Chrysostom. The people of Antioch were much attached to a -priest named Constantius, a man described by Palladius as a faithful -and incorruptible servant of the Church from his earliest youth, first -as a messenger who carried ecclesiastical despatches, then as reader, -deacon, priest. He had won the love and admiration of the people by his -gentle, amiable disposition, his intelligence, strict integrity, and -exemplary piety. There was a general desire to make him bishop, but -an ambitious priest named Porphyry frustrated the design. By bribery, -and calumnious stories conveyed to the Court at Constantinople, he -procured an Imperial rescript condemning Constantius to be banished -to one of the oases as a disturber of the people. With the assistance -of his friends Constantius escaped to Cyprus. Porphyry meanwhile -imprisoned several of the clergy of Antioch, and seized the opportunity -of the Olympian festival (when most of the inhabitants had poured out -to the celebrated suburb of Daphne) to enter the church with a few -bishops and clergy; and then, with doors fast closed, he was hurriedly -ordained, so hurriedly that some portions of the service were omitted. -Acacius, Severian, and Antiochus, who had officiated, immediately fled. -The people were enraged when they discovered the trick, surrounded -Porphyry’s house, and threatened to burn it to the ground. He applied -for protection to the prefect, who lent him a body of troops, with -which he forcibly took possession of the church. He contrived to get -an unscrupulous and cruel man sent from Constantinople to be captain -of the city guards, terror of whom drove the people to attend the -churches, though they did so with disgust, and earnestly prayed for -retribution from Heaven on the authors of this wickedness.[618] - -Innocent remained inflexibly attached to the cause of Chrysostom. The -Church of Rome and the Italian bishops broke off all communion with -Theophilus and Atticus, and ceased not to demand the convocation of a -General Council, as the only tribunal by which the Patriarch could be -lawfully acquitted or condemned.[619] But the Court of Ravenna was -not in a position to support these demands by intimidation or actual -force. All the skill of Stilicho and all the resources at his command -were barely sufficient to repel the persevering efforts of Alaric and -Rhadagaisus to take the great prize which they so eagerly coveted, the -capital of the Roman Empire. The inevitable fall of Rome was averted -only for a little while. - -Thus the spirit of lawlessness and selfishness took advantage of the -impotence of the secular power both in Rome and Constantinople to work -its will upon the Church. It dealt a blow to Christian morality and -ecclesiastical discipline from which the Church at Constantinople never -recovered, and which caused a throb of pain from one end of Christendom -to the other; for, in spite of all differences and divisions, -Christendom was one then, so that, if one member suffered, all the -members suffered with it; and what was done and said, and thought and -felt, in the Church of Alexandria, or Antioch, or Constantinople, was -not unknown or unregarded by the Churches of Rome or Milan, and through -them made its impress on the Churches even of Gaul and Spain. - - - - -CHAPTER XXI. - - CHRYSOSTOM ORDERED TO BE REMOVED TO CUCUSUS—PERILS - ENCOUNTERED AT CÆSAREA—HARDSHIPS OF THE JOURNEY—REACHES - CUCUSUS—LETTERS WRITTEN THERE TO OLYMPIAS AND OTHER - FRIENDS. A.D. 404. - - -It now only remains to follow the illustrious exile along his painful -journey to its melancholy or, if we regard him as the Christian martyr, -its glorious termination. - -He was removed, as has been already seen, from Constantinople on -June 20, and conveyed, in the course of a few days, to Nicæa. Here -he remained till July 4, and several of his letters to Olympias were -written from this place. The soft yet fresh sea air revived his health, -which had suffered from the feverish and harassing scenes that he had -gone through at Constantinople, and from the journey begun in the very -middle of the summer heat. Nothing could exceed the kindness of the -soldiers under whose custody he travelled, who discharged towards him -all the duties of servants as well as of guards.[620] His ultimate -destination was not known for some time by himself or his friends. -Common report sent him to Scythia,[621] but the intention of his -enemies appears to have changed from time to time. Sebaste in Armenia -had been first proposed, but finally Cucusus, a village in the Tauric -range on the edge of Cilicia and the Lesser Armenia, was fixed upon. It -was a remote and desolate spot, subject to frequent attacks from the -marauding Isaurians; and at first Chrysostom earnestly entreated his -friends in Constantinople to try and procure a more agreeable place -of exile, a favour frequently granted to criminals. Olympias, Bishop -Cyriacus, Briso the chamberlain, and a lady named Theodora, repeatedly -interceded on his behalf; but their efforts were ineffectual.[622] The -Empress herself, it would appear, selected Cucusus, and was inexorable -in her decision.[623] - -From beginning to end of his exile Chrysostom’s mind was occupied with -organising such work as yet remained possible to him. It has been seen -with what zeal he had planted a missionary settlement in Phœnicia. This -project continued to the close of his life to be an object of his most -solicitous interest. On July 3, the eve of his departure from Nicæa, he -addressed a letter to a priest named Constantius,[624] apparently the -superintendent of the missionary work in Phœnicia and the surrounding -countries. He implores him to prosecute his labours for the extirpation -of Paganism with zeal undiminished, and undismayed by the present -afflicted state of the bishop and the see, to whom the mission owed -its origin. “The pilot and the physician, far from relaxing their -efforts when the ship and the patient are in peril, redouble their -efforts to save them.” He begs Constantius to inform him year by year -how many temples are destroyed, how many churches built, how many good -Christians immigrate into Phœnicia. He had himself persuaded a recluse, -whom he found at Nicæa, to go and place himself under the direction of -Constantius in the missionary work. He had, he says, happily concluded, -just about the time of his deposition, arrangements for the suppression -of Marcionism, which was very prevalent at Salamis, in Cyprus. He -begs Constantius to write to his friend Bishop Cyriacus, if still in -Constantinople, and request him to carry these plans into effect. -Finally, he implores the prayers of Constantius and all faithful -people for the cessation of the present calamities of the Church, -especially of the intolerable evils which had befallen it in Asia; -alluding no doubt to the restoration of the simoniacal bishops. - -On July 4 or 5 the exile started from Nicæa on his toilsome and -perilous journey in the midsummer heat, across the scorching plains -of Galatia and Cappadocia. He describes himself[625] as an object of -great compassion to travellers whom he met coming from Armenia and the -East, who stopped to weep and wail over his distress. His route lay -in a diagonal line across the centre of Asia Minor, ascending first -of all near the stream of the river Sangarius, which in its upper -course winds through vast plains of black bituminous soil, scantily -cultivated, but supplying pasture to great herds of cattle. Chrysostom -had always been an ascetic liver, but he had not a robust frame, and -he had been accustomed to wholesome food and the frequent use of the -bath. Continuous travelling by night as well as day, the scorching -sun, hot dust, hard bread, brackish water, and deprivation of the -bath, threw him into a fever; but either from fear of the Isaurians, -or of Leontius, bishop of Ancyra, in Galatia, one of his most virulent -enemies, the journey was pursued without intermission till he arrived, -more dead than alive, at Cæsarea, in Cappadocia. - -He has left us a detailed account of the perils which befell him here, -and a melancholy picture indeed it is of the ferocity and cunning of -which bishops and monks were capable under the influence of fanatical -partisanship.[626] Having escaped, he says, from the Galatian -(probably meaning Leontius), he was met, as he approached Cæsarea, -by several persons, who informed him that Pharetrius the bishop was -eagerly expecting him, and preparing to welcome him with affectionate -hospitality. He confesses that he himself mistrusted these specious -offers, but he kept his suspicions to himself. On his arrival at -Cæsarea, in a state of extreme exhaustion, Pharetrius did not appear, -but he was enthusiastically received by the people as well as some -monks and nuns. The extreme kindness and skill of physicians (one of -whom declared his intention of accompanying him to the end of his -journey), wholesome food, and the use of the bath, so much renovated -his strength and diminished his fever, that he became anxious in a day -or two to resume his journey. But just at this juncture the city was -thrown into consternation by tidings that a large body of Isaurians -was ravaging the neighbourhood, and had already burned a town with -much slaughter. All the available troops in Cæsarea were marched out, -and the whole male population, including old men, turned out to man -the walls. During this time of suspense, the house in which Chrysostom -lodged was besieged by a large body of monks, who with furious cries -and gestures demanded his surrender. The prætorians who guarded him -were terrified by the fierce behaviour of these fanatics, and declared -that they would rather face the Isaurians than fall into the hands of -these “wild beasts.” The governor of the city succeeded in protecting -the person of Chrysostom, but not in quelling the fury of the monks, -who renewed their assault still more hotly on the following day. The -Bishop Pharetrius was very generally suspected to be the instigator -of these attacks, and an appeal was made to him to interpose his -authority, that the Archbishop might at least enjoy a few days’ -repose, which the state of his health greatly needed. But the envy of -Pharetrius was embittered by the popularity of Chrysostom, and the -great kindness and compassion which his hardships had elicited from -clergy and people. He refused to interfere; but Chrysostom’s friends -took advantage of a brief lull in the hostile visits of the monks to -convey him in a litter outside the town, amidst the lamentations of the -attendant people, and imprecations on the author of the malevolent -assaults. When he was once outside the town several of the clergy -joined him, and besought him not to think of trusting himself to -Pharetrius; it would be worse, they declared, than falling into the -hands of the Isaurians: “only escape from our hands, and wherever you -fall you will fall safely.” - -At this crisis a lady named Seleucia, the wife of Rufinus, a man of -rank and a friend of Chrysostom, entreated him to accept a lodging -at her country house, about five miles out of the city. He accepted -the offer; but, unknown to him, Pharetrius, whose rage was inflamed -by the rescue of his prey, visited the house, and threatened to take -vengeance on the mistress if her guest was not surrendered. This demand -was refused, and the lady gave orders to her steward, in the event of -any attack by monks, to collect all the labourers on the estate and -repel the assault by force. But her courage at last gave way under the -pressure of incessant menaces from Pharetrius, and it was resolved to -remove the Archbishop, not less for his own safety than for that of -the person whose roof had afforded him shelter. In the dead of night, -when Chrysostom was sleeping, unconscious of impending danger, he was -roused by a companion, the priest Evethius, who told him that he must -instantly prepare for flight. It was midnight, and the sky murky and -moonless; but they dared not light torches for fear of attracting the -observation of their enemies. The road was rugged and rocky; the mule -which carried the Archbishop’s litter fell, and he was thrown out. -Evethius took him by the hand and led, or rather dragged, him along. -In such a pitiable plight, faint with fatigue and fever-stricken, -did the bishop of the second see in Christendom stumble and totter -in the darkness along the Cappadocian mountain path. “Were not these -calamities,” he writes to Olympias, “sufficient to blot out many sins, -and suggest to me a hope of future glory?” - -Of the remainder of his journey to Cucusus we possess no detailed -narrative. He only speaks in general terms of his sufferings for thirty -days from fever, aggravated by the want of a bath, and by deficient -accommodation of every kind in a journey made along a rough road, -through a desolate mountainous country, liable to an attack at any -moment from Isaurian bandits.[627] Desolate though the region was, -however, he speaks of monks and nuns occasionally meeting him in large -numbers, and loudly bewailing his calamities, exclaiming that it “had -been better the sun should have hidden his rays, than that the mouth of -Chrysostom should have been closed.”[628] About seventy days[629] after -his departure from Constantinople, that is, about the end of August -or beginning of September, Cucusus was reached. After the fatigues -and dangers of his journey, it was a haven of rest to the exhausted -exile, though he describes it as in itself the most desolate place -in the world; a mere village high up in the eastern range of Taurus, -on the confines of Lesser Armenia, Cilicia, and Cappadocia.[630] But -it was protected from the Isaurians by a strong garrison, and it -contained many warm-hearted friends of the Archbishop, who emulated -one another in showing him attention. Several had sent invitations to -him, before he left Cæsarea, to accept a lodging at their houses, but -more especially one whom he calls “my Lord Diodorus,” who had known him -in Constantinople. This generous personage not only placed his whole -house at the disposal of Chrysostom, betaking himself to a country -villa to make room for his guest, but furnished it with every possible -defence against the cold of the approaching winter, in that altitude -very severe. The Bishop of Cucusus not only received him with great -civility, but was even desirous that his own throne should be occupied -by the illustrious exile, that his flock might profit by the eloquence -of the greatest teacher and preacher of the day; but Chrysostom thought -it prudent to decline the honour.[631] - -Many of his friends in Constantinople and other places, who owned -property near Cucusus, directed their stewards to provide in -various ways for the comfort of the exile, and some of his friends -actually came to share his fortunes in person. The aged deaconess, -Sabiniana, arrived from Constantinople with the fixed determination -of accompanying him to his final place of exile, whatever that might -be. Constantius, the presbyter of Antioch, whom the people had wished -to make bishop, also took up his abode at Cucusus, as well to escape -from the persecution of Porphyry as from his zealous attachment to -Chrysostom.[632] Thus the natural disadvantages of the place, the want -of good physicians and of a plentiful market, the severity of the -heat in summer and cold in winter, were largely compensated by the -enjoyment of freedom, rest, and the kind attention of friends. He warns -his supporters in Constantinople, who were endeavouring to procure a -change of destination for him, to be careful that he was not removed -to a place worse than Cucusus, where he possessed all substantial -necessaries and comforts of life. If, however, they thought there was a -chance of obtaining Cyzicus or Nicomedia, they were not to desist from -their efforts; but he was convinced that another long and fatiguing -journey to a spot as remote and desolate as Cucusus would kill him.[633] - -The leisure of the exile was profitably employed in writing letters -to every variety of friends—men of rank, ladies, deaconesses in -Constantinople, bishops, clergy, missionary monks, and his kind -acquaintances in Cæsarea, especially the physician Hymnetius, who had -attended him there with affectionate care. As might be expected, -none of his letters describe his condition so minutely or pour forth -so unrestrainedly his fears and hopes, his causes of distress or -joy, as those written to Olympias. The style in which she is usually -addressed is at once respectful, affectionate, and paternal: “To my -lady, the most reverend and religious deaconess Olympias, Bishop John -sends you greeting in the Lord.” They are seventeen in number, written -at different stages of his exile; nor is it possible to determine -precisely the date of each. The first three seem to have been written -from Cucusus, and are mainly devoted to the aim of consoling her under -the present calamities of the Church; to dissipating, as he expresses -it, that cloud of sorrow which surrounded her.[634] “Come now, let me -soften the wound of your sadness, and disperse the sad cogitations -which compose this gloomy cloud of care. What is it which upsets your -mind, and occasions your grief and despondency? Is it the fierce and -lowering storm which has overtaken the Churches and enveloped all -with the darkness of a moonless night, which is growing to a head -every day, and has already wrought many lamentable shipwrecks? All -this I know; it shall not be gainsaid: and, if you like, I can form -an image of the things now being done so as to represent the tragedy -more distinctly to thee. We behold a sea heaved up from its lowest -depths, some sailors floating dead, others struggling in the waves, the -planks of the vessel breaking up, the masts sprung, the canvas torn, -the oars dashed out of the sailors’ hands, the pilots, seated on the -deck, clasping their knees with their hands, and crying aloud at the -hopelessness of their situation; neither sky nor sea clearly visible, -but all one impenetrable gloom, and monsters of the deep attacking the -shipwrecked crew on every side. But why attempt further to describe -the indescribable? Yet, when I see all this, I do not despair, when I -consider who is the Disposer of this whole universe—One who masters -the storm, not by the contrivance of art, but can calm it by His nod -alone. He does not always destroy what is terrible in its beginning, -but waits till it has come to its consummation; and then, when most -men are in despair, He works marvels and does things beyond all -expectation, displaying a power which belongs to Him alone. Wherefore, -faint not, for there is only one thing, Olympias, which is really -terrible, there is only one real trial—and that is sin. All things -else, whether they be insidious assaults of foes, or hatred, or -calumny, or abuse, or confiscation of goods, or exile, or the sharpened -sword, and war raging throughout the world, are but as a tale; they -endure but for a season, they are perishable, and have their sphere -in a mortal body, and do no injury to the vigilant soul.”... “Why, -then, do you fear temporal things, which flow away like the stream of -a river?”... “Let none of these things which happen vex you; cease to -entreat the help of this person or that, but continually beseech Jesus -Christ, whom you serve, merely to bow the head, and all these troubles -will be dissolved; if not in an instant of time, that is because He -is waiting till wickedness has grown to a height, and then he will -suddenly change the storm into a calm....” - -He enters into an eloquent review of the sufferings and persecution to -which our blessed Lord was subjected from His birth to His death, in -order to prove that apparent failure is a fallacious test of the truth -and real value of man’s character and work. - -“Why are you troubled because one man has been expelled and another -introduced into his place? Christ was crucified, and the life of -Barabbas, the robber, was asked. How many must have been shocked and -repelled by this ignominious termination to a life of miracles! But -in every stage of His life there was much to surprise and offend and -try the faith. His birth was the cause of death to many innocent -children in Bethlehem; poverty, danger, exile, marked His infancy. He -was misunderstood and suspected throughout His ministry. ‘Thou art a -Samaritan, and hast a devil;’ ‘He deceiveth the people;’ ‘He casteth -out devils through the chief of the devils;’ ‘He was a gluttonous man -and winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners.’ His discernment of -purity and goodness was questioned, because He permitted the sinful -woman to approach Him; ‘neither did His brethren believe on Him.’ You -speak of many having been frightened out of the straight path by the -present calamities. How many of Christ’s disciples stumbled at the -time of His crucifixion! One betrayed Him, another denied Him, the -others fled, and He was led to trial bound and alone. How many, think -you, were offended when they beheld Him, who a little while ago was -raising the dead, cleansing the lepers, expelling devils, multiplying -loaves, now bound, forlorn, surrounded by coarse soldiers, followed by -a crowd of tumultuous priests? How many when He was being scourged, -and they saw Him torn by the lash, and standing with bleeding body -before the governor’s tribunal? How many, again, when He was mocked, -now with a crown of thorns, now with a purple robe, now with a reed in -His hand? How many when He was smitten on the cheek, and they cried, -‘Prophesy, who is he that smote Thee?’ and dragged Him hither and -thither, consuming a whole day in jesting and revilement in the midst -of the throng of Jewish spectators? How many when He was led to the -cross with the marks of the scourge upon His back? How many when the -soldiers divided His raiment among themselves? How many when fastened -to the cross and crucified?” And, after our Lord’s Ascension, what had -been the lot of the early Church? Calamity, persecution, discomfiture, -weakness, the offence of many and the defection of many. Yet the truth -of Jesus Christ’s Gospel had not been obscured; it had shone more and -more brightly: God had wrought out the triumph of His Church. - -The above is a much-condensed rendering of passages which can hardly -be too much admired for the spirit as well as style in which they are -written. The union of a Christian philosophy and a Christian faith, -a philosophy which traces a principle in God’s modes of operation, -and a faith which contentedly accepts whatever happens, in the firm -belief that, be it pleasant or painful, it is part of some purpose of -God; a philosophy which traces in every suffering of Christ’s servants -for the cause of truth a reflection of the Master’s sufferings, and a -faith which enables the sufferer not only to be cheerful himself, but -to cheer others, form, indeed, a noble object of contemplation. In a -letter written to Olympias, just after his hardships and perils at -Cæsarea, he begs her to rejoice, as he declares he can himself rejoice, -in suffering as a pledge of future glory. He never had desisted, and -never would desist, from declaring that the only real calamity to a -man’s self was sin; all other evils were as dust and smoke. Spoliation -of goods was freedom; banishment was but a change of abode; death was -but the discharge of nature’s debt, which all must eventually pay. So -much has been at all times, and is still, uttered by Christian writers -and preachers about patience and joy in affliction, that we may be -disposed to pass over language of this kind sometimes as a hackneyed -commonplace; but it must be remembered that, in Chrysostom’s case, the -speaker was an actual sufferer. His words were not the sentimental -utterances of a rhetorical preacher addressing an admiring audience, -but convictions deliberately expressed by a persecuted sufferer, who -was really living by the principles which he was accustomed to preach. - -The rapturous and lavish praise which in some of his letters he bestows -upon the virtues of Olympias would by a lady of piety in modern -times be distrusted as flattery, and distasteful as a dangerous -encouragement to self-righteousness and conceit; but the language of -ornate compliment, which would be offensive to Western taste, seems -natural to Orientals: and it may therefore be supposed that its effect -in elating the mind of the recipient is faint in proportion. Chrysostom -begins his second letter by recommending Olympias to divert her mind -from those calamities and sins, for which she was no way responsible, -by directing it to the final judgment. The awe with which she must -contemplate that scene, in which she, together with all others, is -individually concerned and interested, will expel the useless grief -which mourns over iniquity wrought by others. But he breaks off -suddenly from such a line of argument, as inapplicable to the case -of so angelic a being as Olympias. “To me, indeed, and those who, -like me, have been plunged beneath a sea of sins, such discourse is -necessary, for it excites and alarms; but you, who abound in goodness, -and who have already touched the very vault of Heaven, cannot even be -pricked by such language; wherefore, in addressing you, I will chant -another strain and strike another string.” He does indeed; he invites -her to count over her own perfections, and to dwell with complacent -satisfaction on the heavenly rewards which are surely in store for -her.... “It would fill a volume to relate the history of her patience, -tried in such a variety of ways from her youth. She had laid such -vigorous siege to her body, though naturally delicate and nurtured -in the lap of luxury, that it might truly be called dead; and these -austerities had raised for her such a swarm of maladies as defied -the skill of physicians, and involved her in continual suffering. To -speak, indeed, of patience and self-control, in reference to her fasts -and vigils, would be inaccurate, because those expressions implied a -conquest over oppugnant passions. But she had no desires to conquer: -they were not merely subdued but extinguished. It was as easy and -natural to her to fast as it was to others to eat, as natural to her -to pass the night in vigil as to others to sleep.” With an admiring -comment on her squalid and neglected attire he closes this singular -enumeration of her perfections, lest, as he expresses it, he should -lose himself in an illimitable sea if he attempted to wade further; his -object being, not to make an exhaustive catalogue of her virtues, but -only such as might be sufficient to lift her out of her present state -of depression. - -It is worth making such extracts as these, because they enable us to -see how widely remote Chrysostom was from the mind and taste of our own -times in some points, although in others he seems so nearly congenial. -There is another vein of thought in this letter which is still more -alien. “If,” he says, “in addition to the rewards of her chastity, -her fasts, her vigils, her prayers, her boundless hospitality, she -wishes to enjoy the sight of her adversaries, those iniquitous and -blood-stained men undergoing punishment for their crimes, that pleasure -also shall be hers. Lazarus saw Dives tormented in flames. This you -will experience. For if he, who neglected but one man, suffered such -punishment, if it was expedient for the man who should offend one -little one to be hanged or cast into the sea, what penalty will be -exacted of men who have offended so large a part of the world, upset so -many churches, and surpassed the ferocity of barbarians and robbers? -You will see them fast bound, tormented in flames, gnashing their -teeth, overwhelmed with useless sorrow and vain remorse; and they, in -their turn, will behold you wearing a crown in the blessed mansions, -exulting with angels, reigning with Christ; and they will cry aloud -and groan, repenting of the contumely which they fastened upon thee, -supplicating, but in vain, thy pity and compassion.”[635] - -To our ears of course such language is extraordinarily shocking; but it -is valuable as a warning, in estimating the character of Chrysostom, -not to judge him or any individual by words or deeds, which are not -so much the offspring of the man as of the age and circumstances in -which he lived. Chrysostom had exercised as well as taught meekness, -forbearance, and charity towards all men, enemies as well as friends; -but he lived when the minds of Christians had for generations been -inured to scenes of persecution, and to such a rigorous system and -barbarous execution of criminal law as are hardly conceivable by us. -Fierce opposition of party against party, violence and bloodshed put -down, if at all, by the stern hand of force, hardened public feeling, -and the individual, however amiable and gentle by nature, inevitably -becomes infected by the prevailing mode of thought; he must look -at things and judge of things more or less from the same point of -view as the generality of men amongst whom he lives. What would seem -revoltingly cruel to a humane man now, appeared to a man who lived some -hundreds of years ago, though perhaps equally humane by nature, and in -private life amiable, a merely natural and just retribution. - -The letters of Chrysostom to those bishops[636] who remained loyal to -his cause are full of asseverations that his affection for them cannot -be diminished by separation or distance. He exhorts them to continue -their labours with unabated zeal, and carefully to abstain from all -communion with the adverse party. Small though their numbers were, -yet their fortitude under persecution would so much encourage others -that their conduct might be the salvation of the Church. Several of -his letters to laymen in Constantinople are models of wise Christian -counsel. He is never less than the pastor, while he is always the -friend. He writes to one Gemellus,[637] on his promotion to some high -magisterial office, that, “while others congratulated him merely on his -new honours, _he_ would rather dwell with thankfulness on the abundant -opportunities Gemellus would now possess of exercising wisdom and -gentleness on a large scale. He doubted not Gemellus would prove to -those who were attached to the vain glories of this earth, that the -true dignity of the magistrate consisted not in the robe or the girdle -of office, or in the voice of the herald, but in reforming what was -evil, and repairing what was falling to pieces, in punishing injustice, -and preventing the right from being oppressed by might. He knew the -boldness of Gemellus, his freedom of speech, his magnanimity, his -contempt for the things of this world, his mildness, his benevolence; -and he was persuaded that he would be as a haven to the shipwrecked, as -a staff to the fallen, a tower of defence to those who were oppressed -by tyranny.” Gemellus appears to have been on the point of receiving -baptism, and perhaps on that account to have been exposed to a rather -trying degree of persecution. Chrysostom begs him not to delay baptism -in the hope of receiving it from his hands, because the grace of the -sacrament would be equally effectual by whatever hands administered, -and his own joy would be none the less.[638] - -So again, in his letter to Anthemius, who had recently been made -prefect and consul:—“Nothing has been really added to you; it is not -the prefect or the consul whom I love, but my most dear and gentle Lord -Anthemius, full of philosophy and understanding. I do not felicitate -thee because thou hast climbed to this throne, but because thou hast -gained a grander sphere wherein to exercise thy benevolence and -wisdom.”[639] - -He was less distant from Antioch than Constantinople, and was cheered -by visits from not a few of his old friends in his native city, and -maintained a correspondence by letter with many more; but intercourse -of either kind was much impeded by the dangers and difficulties of the -roads, and at times by the severity of the climate.[640] The illegal -seizure of the see of Antioch by Porphyry, and the harsh treatment to -which the orthodox were subjected under his administration, caused them -to turn to Chrysostom, not only with sympathy as a fellow-sufferer, but -also for guidance, comfort, and some kind of episcopal superintendence. -Their presents to him were so numerous that he felt compelled -sometimes to decline them, or to request permission that they might be -transferred to the aid of the missionary work in Phœnicia.[641] - -Much of his thought and correspondence was concerned in providing for -the welfare of the Church in Persia, Phœnicia, and among the Goths. -In his fourteenth letter to Olympias he begs her to use her best -endeavours to detach Maruthas, bishop of Martyropolis in Persia, from -the influence of the hostile party; “to lift him out of the slough” -is his expression, for he greatly needed his assistance on account of -affairs in Persia; and he was very anxious to know what Maruthas had -accomplished there, and whether he had received two letters recently -sent by himself. From this it would seem as if Maruthas, who had been -present at the Synod of the Oak (when he caused the fatal injury -to the foot of Cyrinus), had returned to Persia and again visited -Constantinople, and that Chrysostom had hopes of working in connexion -with him for the good of the Church in Persia.[642] In the same epistle -he expresses his sorrow at having heard, through some Gothic monks -with whom Serapion had sought shelter, that the Gothic bishop Unilas, -whom he had recently consecrated, was dead, after a short but active -career, and that the Gothic king had written to request that a new -bishop should be sent out. Chrysostom was fearful lest Atticus and -his party should appoint one; and he urges that everything should be -done to delay the appointment if possible till winter came, when the -season would prevent any one being sent till the following spring. -Meanwhile, Moduarius, the deacon who had brought the letter from the -Gothic prince, was to repair secretly and quietly to Cucusus, and there -confer with Chrysostom on this important matter, to avert if possible -the appointment of an improper person to so difficult a charge. - -But of course the exile’s interest was pre-eminently centred on that -city of which he could not but consider himself still the chief pastor, -although deprived of his external authority over it. Banishment, -imprisonment, and intimidation had thinned the ranks of the orthodox; -and among the remaining pastors there were some whose neglect of duty, -the result of indolence or faint-heartedness, called forth severe -rebukes from their former chief. “He had heard with concern, and -was vexed that the information had not come direct from the clergy -themselves, that a priest, Salustius, had preached only five times -between the end of June and October, and that he and Theophilus, -another priest, rarely attended Divine service at all.”[643] To -Theophilus he writes a letter of mingled sorrow and reproof, expressing -a hope that the report may be incorrect, and begging him to refute it, -or to amend his conduct. He reminds him of the dreadful punishment -which was inflicted on the servant who buried the talent which he ought -to have used, and of the fearful responsibility of neglecting that most -beautiful flock, which, by the grace of God, was being strengthened in -goodness, though now agitated by so terrible a tempest.[644] Several of -his clergy and friends are upbraided with more or less of affectionate -expostulation for slackness in writing to him; others are praised -for their unshakable fortitude, patience, and zeal under affliction. -He had learned with much concern from Domitianus, to whom the care -of the widows and virgins of the Church was confided, that they were -reduced to extreme indigence, and he entreats his friend Valentinus -to sustain his well-known character for benevolence by relieving their -necessities.[645] - -Peanius, a man of rank and position in Constantinople, is thanked and -praised for the unremitting zeal, yet tempered with moderation, with -which he had resisted the usurping party, had stood inflexible in -loyalty when others had fled, and had exerted himself for the welfare -of the Church, not only in Constantinople, but also in Phœnicia, -Palestine, and Cilicia. Chrysostom observes in the same letter that the -members of the Church in those regions had, with very few exceptions, -refused to recognise Arsacius.[646] - -Those clergy and other persons who had been imprisoned on the charge -of incendiarism were released in the beginning of September;[647] and -Chrysostom, having heard of their liberation, was eagerly expecting a -visit from them when he wrote (about the end of October probably) to -Elpidius, bishop of Laodicea,[648] in Syria, a prelate venerable in -years and eminent in piety, who had as a priest accompanied Meletius -to the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381, and was his counterpart -in the moderation and gentleness of his disposition. Chrysostom wrote -to thank him for his zeal in endeavouring to retain the bishops, -not only in his own region, but in all parts of the world, in loyal -fidelity to the exiled Patriarch. Elpidius proved the sincerity of his -own attachment to his friend by suffering deposition from his see, and -imprisonment for three years in his own house. Alexander, the successor -of the usurper Porphyry in the see of Antioch, restored Elpidius to his -see about A.D. 414—a recognition of his merits which received the high -approbation of Pope Innocent.[649] - -Thus by letters did the exile maintain his influence over all varieties -of people in distant and opposite quarters of the Empire. Exhortation -and reproof, consolation and encouragement, or the mere expression of -affectionate goodwill, are the main chords struck, as circumstances -require. But there is one tone which pervades all alike—the unshakable -Christian faith of the writer. His deep belief that all suffering was -sent for a remedial chastening purpose, and that, if resignedly borne, -it enhanced the glory of the reward reserved for those who should -suffer for righteousness’ sake; that sin is the only real evil, that -expatriation and persecution, and even death, since they touch only the -external and temporal, are to be regarded as mere shadows, cobwebs, and -dreams; that distance and material obstacles cannot impede the wings of -affection and prayer, and that the cause of right and truth, although -long depressed, will eventually triumph—these are convictions firmly -rooted, which he never tires of repeating, and on the strength of which -he lived cheerful and contented. - -The wide range of his influence, and the nobility of his Christian -resignation and fortitude, maintained during his exile, have elicited -the admiration of a historian not lavish of his compliments to -Christian saints. “Every tongue,” says Gibbon, “repeated the praises of -his genius and virtue; and the respectful attention of the Christian -world was fixed on a desert spot among the mountains of Taurus.”[650] - - - - -CHAPTER XXII. - - CHRYSOSTOM’S SUFFERINGS FROM THE WINTER COLD—DEPREDATIONS - OF THE ISAURIANS—THE MISSION IN PHŒNICIA—LETTERS TO - INNOCENT AND THE ITALIAN BISHOPS—CHRYSOSTOM’S ENEMIES - OBTAIN AN ORDER FOR HIS REMOVAL TO PITYUS—HE DIES - AT COMANA, A.D. 407—RECEPTION OF HIS RELIQUES AT - CONSTANTINOPLE, A.D. 438. - - -Thus the autumn of A.D. 404 wore away. The time of the exile was -occupied, not unpleasantly, by sending and receiving letters, and his -spirits were cheered by occasional visits from friends. The destitute -in the neighbourhood of Cucusus were relieved by his alms; the mourners -comforted by his affectionate sympathy; some persons taken captive by -the Isaurians obtained a release through his intercession or ransom. -But the winter, always severe in that elevated region, set in this year -with unusual rigour: all communication with the outer world was cut off -by the impassable condition of the roads, and the cold told cruelly on -the delicate constitution of the poor exile. In a letter to Olympias, -written just on the return of spring A.D. 405, he draws a pitiable -picture of his winter sufferings. For days together he lay in bed; but, -in spite of being wrapped under a very pile of blankets, with a fire -constantly burning in his room, he could not keep out the cold. He -suffered from constant sleeplessness, headache, sickness and aversion -from all food; but, with the return of milder weather in spring, “he -was brought up again from the gates of death;” and he compares the -softness of the climate at that season to the amenity of the air of -Antioch. His spirits also were raised by the arrival of messengers from -Constantinople, bringing letters from Olympias and other friends.[651] - -But the blessings of restoration to health and warm weather were -counterbalanced by the misery of constant disturbance from the Isaurian -bandits, who commenced their marauding campaigns as soon as the -break-up of winter made the country practicable for their operations. -They swarmed over the whole neighbourhood, and the roads which had been -impassable from snow were now impassable from robbers, who mingled much -merciless bloodshed with their plunder. When the full blaze also of -summer heat came, Chrysostom found it almost as injurious to his health -as the excessive cold; but he kept up his correspondence with his -friends with unabated assiduity.[652] - -The mission in Phœnicia occupied a great deal of his attention -during this year. He had written, as already related, from Nice to -Constantius, the superintendent of the mission, exhorting him not to -allow the work to flag, owing to his own deposition and banishment, -but rather to carry it on with additional energy. The efforts of the -missionaries had begun to provoke a rather fierce opposition on the -part of the Pagans, and attempts were made to deprive them of the bare -necessaries of life. But Chrysostom’s confidence and zeal never failed -for a moment. The missionaries were to keep him informed of their -wants, for, through the liberality of his friends, he could supply -them with all that they required. He was ably seconded by Nicolaus, -a priest, who, though living at a distance, supplied the mission not -only with money but with men. Gerontius, a presbyter whom Chrysostom -had persuaded to abandon a solitary ascetic way of life for missionary -work, was anxious to visit Cucusus on his way to Phœnicia; but -Chrysostom begs him not to delay, as the work was urgent and winter was -approaching. He represents the greater advantages of the active life -Gerontius was now embracing. There would be nothing to prevent him -observing his fasts, vigils, and other ascetic practices, as before, -for the good of his own soul, and at the same time, by his missionary -labours, he would reap the reward of those who save the souls of -others.[653] - -The Pagan resistance assumed more alarming proportions as time went -on. A letter written to the missionaries seems to imply, by its tone -of mingled warning and exhortation, that their courage was beginning -to fail. Chrysostom had recourse to his favourite comparisons of the -pilot and the physician, who exert twofold energy as the violence of -the storm and the disease increase. Rufinus, a presbyter, seems to -have been sent into Phœnicia as a kind of special agent to restore -peace, and is stimulated to his work by an animated letter. “I hear -that the rage of the Greeks in Phœnicia has burst forth again, that -several monks have been wounded, and some even killed. Wherefore I -urge you the more earnestly to set out upon your journey with great -speed, and take up your position.”... “If you saw a house in a blaze -you would not retreat, but advance upon it as quickly as possible, so -as to anticipate the flames. When all is tranquillity it is within the -compass of almost any one to make converts, but when Satan is raging -and the devils are in arms, then, to make a gallant stand and rescue -those who are falling into the hands of the enemy, is the work of a -noble, vigilant spirit, a work which befits an alert and lofty mind -like yours, an apostolic achievement worthy of crowns innumerable and -rewards which defy description.” He entreats Rufinus to write to him -from every halting-place on his journey, and to keep him constantly -informed of all which might take place after his arrival. He would -send, if necessary, ten thousand times to Constantinople, in order to -provide Rufinus with all things necessary to facilitate his journey -and procure his ultimate success. The letter closes with a passage -which remarkably illustrates the importance attached to reliques. -“With regard to the reliques of the holy martyrs, feel no anxiety, -for I immediately despatched the most religious presbyter, my Lord -Terentius, to my Lord Oneius, the most religious Bishop of Arabissus, -who possesses many reliques indisputably genuine, which in a few days -we will forward to you into Phœnicia.”... “Use diligence to get the -churches which are yet unroofed completed before the winter.”[654] - -There is no further record of the future progress or ultimate issue of -this mission, in which the heart of the exile was so deeply wrapped up. -Theodoret (v. 29) merely says that through the energy of Chrysostom -the extirpation of idolatry in Phœnicia, and the destruction of -Pagan temples, were successfully carried on. But there are instances -of the existence of Paganism mentioned in the middle of the fifth -century;[655] and it is only too certain that, under the feeble and -degenerate successors of Chrysostom, the work would not receive any -powerful impulse. Partly from the absence of a great central organising -force like the Papacy, partly from the irregular and unpractical -temperament of the Eastern nature, missionary enterprises have not -proceeded in great number from the Eastern Church. The preaching of -Ulphilas to the Goths, the missions organised by Chrysostom among the -Goths and in Phœnicia, and the missionary labours of the Nestorians in -Asia, are but the rare exceptions which prove the rule. - -The misery and desolation caused in the neighbourhood of Cucusus by -the Isaurians seem to have culminated in the winter of A.D. 405-406 -and the ensuing spring. The inhabitants of the villages fled from -their homes at the approach of these formidable robbers, and sought a -precarious refuge in woods and caves. Many perished from cold in these -wild retreats, and many more at the hands of the ruffian robbers, who -showed no mercy even to the aged, the women and children. Chrysostom -himself was, like others, frequently moving from place to place, now -in this village, now in that, sometimes in the woods or secluded -places. The only spot in which the poor harassed people seem to have -found tolerable security was in the strong fortress of Arabissus, a -neighbouring town. Yet even here they ran considerable risks. A body of -300 Isaurians attacked and very nearly captured it in the middle of the -night; and the discomfort was extreme at all times, for the castle was -crowded like a prison; the difficulty of obtaining food was often very -great, and the difficulty of corresponding with friends still greater. -Privation, anxiety, and frequent hurried movements in cold weather -brought severe illness on Chrysostom again. Physicians attended him -with great kindness, but the impossibility of procuring comforts and -wholesome food rendered their services almost nugatory. His greatest -grief, however, seems to have been the difficulty of maintaining -regular correspondence with friends. The bearer of a letter from -Olympias actually fell into the hands of the robbers, but was released; -in consequence of which Chrysostom entreats her not to send any more -special messengers, but only to avail herself of such persons as were -obliged by business to pass through his place of exile. He would not -add to his present sufferings the distress of knowing that any life had -been lost on his account.[656] - -To the year A.D. 406 belong those letters of affectionate gratitude, -written to the bishops of the West, for their zeal in supporting his -cause, especially those who had undertaken a long and perilous voyage -to Constantinople to intercede in his behalf. These letters were sent -by the hands of Evethius, the presbyter, who had for some time been his -companion in exile. One letter may be quoted as an example: “I had -already been amazed at your zeal, on behalf of the reformation of the -Church, displayed for a long time; but most of all am I now astonished -at your great earnestness, in having undertaken so long a journey by -sea, full of labour and toil, on behalf of the interests of the Church. -I have longed continually to write to you, and offer you the salutation -due to your piety; but since that is not possible, living as I now am -in a region almost inaccessible, I take advantage of a most honourable -and reverend presbyter to send you greeting, and to beseech you to -persevere to the end in harmony with such a noble beginning. For ye -know how great will be the reward of your patience, how vast the return -from a benevolent God to those who labour for the common peace, and -undergo so great a conflict.”[657] - -To Chromatius, bishop of Aquileia, he writes thus: “The loud-voiced -trumpet of your warm and genuine affection has sounded forth even as -far as to me, a clear and far-reaching blast indeed, extending to the -very extremities of the world. Distant as we are, we know, not less -than those present with thee, thy exceeding and burning love; wherefore -we long extremely to enjoy a meeting with thee face to face. But, since -the wilderness in which we are imprisoned precludes this, we fulfil -our desire, as well as we can, by writing to you through our most -honourable and reverend presbyter, expressing our great gratitude for -the zeal which you have for so long a time displayed in our behalf; -and we beg you, when he returns, or by the hands of chance messengers -who may visit this desolate spot, to send tidings of your health, for -you know how much pleasure it will afford us to hear frequently of the -welfare of those who are so warmly disposed towards us.”[658] - -The letter written by Chrysostom in A.D. 406 to Innocent is full of -grateful acknowledgments for all the efforts which he had made, and -was still making, on his behalf. “Though separated by so vast a length -of journey, yet are we near your Holiness, beholding with the eye of -the soul your courage, your genuine, inflexible firmness, and we derive -constant and abiding consolation from you. For the higher the waves -are lifted up, the more numerous the rocks and reefs, the more does -your untiring vigilance increase.... This is now the third year of my -exile, spent in the midst of famine, pestilence, continual sieges, an -indescribable wilderness, and the pillage of the Isaurians. In the -midst of these distresses and dangers, your constant and firm affection -is no ordinary solace to me.”[659] - -There is a letter also addressed to Aurelius,[660] bishop of Carthage, -thanking him for bold and persevering intercession in his behalf. -The Church of Africa appears to have adhered to what was at first -the resolution of the Roman Church, to maintain communion with -both Chrysostom and Theophilus. St. Augustine has bestowed a high -eulogium on Chrysostom,[661] and an African council, in A.D. 407, -passed a resolution to address a letter to Innocent, praying that -the intercourse between the Churches of Rome and Alexandria might be -resumed. - -The health of the exile appears to have suffered less than usual, in -the winter of A.D. 406-7, from the effects of the cold. By carefully -remaining in the house, and for the most part in bed, wrapped up in -blankets in an apartment where a fire was kept constantly burning, and -by use of a medicine sent him by a lady, his attacks of headache and -of sickness were averted or alleviated. He had become inured to the -want of exercise, the deprivation of the bath, and the smokiness of -the room; and even the natives were astonished at the firmness with -which so feeble and “spidery” (ἀραχνώδης) a frame endured the severity -of the climate. He began to feel a persuasion that God would not have -preserved him so miraculously through such various perils, if it were -not His purpose to restore him to his former position, that he might -accomplish some work for the Church.[662] - -But the chief work which he was destined to accomplish was to exhibit -to the close of his life, now rapidly approaching, a noble spectacle -of Christian fortitude and patience, of one continuing to the last to -hope in God, to put his trust in God, and still to give Him thanks. -The malicious envy of his enemies was augmented by the admiration and -affection which pursued their victim from all parts of Christendom, -and the correspondence which was maintained with him even in the -mountain fortress which they had selected for his prison. The only -remedy was to remove him yet further, to a more remote and still more -inaccessible region. They worked upon the Emperor and the Court, whose -jealousy had been already excited by the interference of the West; -and, in the middle of June, A.D. 407, an order was obtained by them -for the removal of the exile to Pityus, on the eastern coast of the -Euxine, near the very frontier of the Empire, in the most desolate -country, inhabited by savage, barbarous people. The two prætorian -soldiers charged with conveying him thither were instructed to push on -the journey with the most inexorable haste, and encouraged to hope for -promotion should their prisoner die on the road. One of the two had -some sparks of humanity, and furtively showed some little kindness to -the sufferer; but the other followed out the cruel directions given him -with merciless fidelity. Chrysostom had, some time ago, expressed his -conviction that he could not survive the fatigue of another long and -laborious journey, yet for three months his fragile frame endured the -strain till he reached Comana in Pontus. A former bishop of that place, -Basiliscus, had suffered martyrdom in the persecution of Maximinus, -together with Lucian of Antioch. Chrysostom was lodged in the precincts -of the church erected in honour of Basiliscus, above five miles outside -the town. Here, so runs the story, the martyred bishop appeared to -him in the night, stood beside him, and said, “Be of good cheer, for -by to-morrow we shall be together.” A similar vision was vouchsafed -to one of the presbyters of the church. He was bidden “to prepare a -place for our brother John.” In the morning, Chrysostom entreated his -guards to allow him to stay where he was till eleven o’clock; but they -were inflexible, and the weary march was resumed. When, however, they -had proceeded about thirty stadia, he became so ill that they were -compelled to return to the martyry. Here he asked for white garments, -and having been clothed in them, he distributed his own raiment among -the clergy who were present. The Eucharist was administered to him, he -spoke a few farewell words to the ecclesiastics who stood around him, -and with the words “Glory be to God for all things, Amen,” on his lips, -the weary exile breathed his last. - - “Rest comes at length; though life be long and dreary, - The day must dawn, and darksome night be past; - All journeys end in welcomes to the weary, - And heaven, the heart’s true home, will come at last.” - -The promise of Basiliscus was literally fulfilled—he was buried in the -same grave with the martyr, in the presence of a large concourse of -monks and nuns.[663] - -The enemies of Chrysostom thus succeeded in wreaking their vengeance -to the full upon the person of their victim—“Non missura cutem, nisi -plena cruoris hirudo;” but they were powerless to obliterate his -memory. A sense of the cruelty and injustice with which he had been -treated grew throughout Christendom, and he was more honoured and -admired after his death than he had been during his life. His followers -in Constantinople, under the appellation of Johnites, persisted in -refusing to hold any communion with Atticus; and in the course of -ten years, Atticus himself was constrained, by the solicitations of -the Court and people, by the example of other prelates, especially -Alexander of Antioch, and by a natural desire to maintain communion -with the Western Church, to admit the name of Chrysostom into the -diptychs of the Church of Constantinople. Cyril, the nephew and -successor of Theophilus, who inherited in too many points his uncle’s -spirit as well as his see, yielded a more tardy and reluctant consent -to the recognition of his uncle’s foe.[664] - -But a still higher honour was yet to be paid to his memory by the -Church from which he had been so violently expelled. In A.D. 434, -Proclus, formerly a disciple of Chrysostom, was elevated to the see of -Constantinople. He conceived that the only effectual means of doing -justice to the injured saint, and reconciling the Johnites to the -Church, would be to transport his remains to the city. The consent -of the Emperor Theodosius II. was obtained. On January 27,[665] A.D. -438, the reliques of the banished Archbishop were brought to the -shores of the Bosporus. As once before in his lifetime, to greet him -on his return from exile, so now, and in still greater numbers, the -people, bearing torches, crowded the waters of the strait with their -boats to welcome the return of all which remained of their beloved and -much-wronged spiritual father. The young Emperor, stooping down, laid -his face on the reliquary, and implored forgiveness of the injuries -which his parents had inflicted on the saint whose ashes it contained. -That reliquary was then deposited near the altar of the Church of the -Apostles.[666] It is the sad story, so often repeated in history, of -goodness and greatness, unrecognised, slighted, injured, cut short in -a career of usefulness by one generation, abundantly, but too late, -acknowledged in the next; when posterity, paying to the memory and the -tomb the honours which should have been bestowed on the living man, can -only utter the remorseful prayer— - - “His saltem accumulem donis, et fungar inani - Munere....” - - - - -CHAPTER XXIII. - - SURVEY OF CHRYSOSTOM’S THEOLOGICAL TEACHING—PRACTICAL - TONE OF HIS WORKS—REASON OF THIS—DOCTRINE OF - MAN’S NATURE—ORIGINAL SIN—GRACE—FREE-WILL—HOW - FAR CHRYSOSTOM PELAGIAN—LANGUAGE ON THE - TRINITY—ATONEMENT—JUSTIFICATION—THE TWO SACRAMENTS—NO - TRACE OF CONFESSION, PURGATORY, OR MARIOLATRY—RELATIONS - TOWARDS THE POPE—LITURGY OF CHRYSOSTOM—HIS CHARACTER AS A - COMMENTATOR—VIEWS ON INSPIRATION—HIS PREACHING—PERSONAL - APPEARANCE—REFERENCES TO GREEK CLASSICAL - AUTHORS—COMPARISON WITH ST. AUGUSTINE. - - -The main characteristics of Chrysostom as a theologian and interpreter -of Scripture, as well as a pastor and preacher, have, it is hoped, been -already indicated in the course of the preceding narrative; but it may -be desirable to supplement, by a fuller and more methodical survey, -notices which were necessarily sometimes brief and incidental in the -biographical chapters.[667] - -Some evidence, therefore, of his theological teaching and method of -interpretation will first of all be collected from his writings, -and arranged under different heads. Two difficulties in the way of -executing this task faithfully should be borne in mind: first, the -voluminous bulk of Chrysostom’s works (as Suidas observed, that it -belonged to God rather than man to know them all), which renders a -successful search for the selection of what are really the most -telling passages in illustration of each point far from easy; -secondly, that Chrysostom, being a preacher rather than a writer, was -of course liable to slip into inexact or exaggerated language, under -the influence of excitement, or a desire to make an impression on the -feelings of his hearers. An attentive perusal, however, of his writings -leads the reader to the conclusion that he was very seldom carried -away by the impulse of the moment into merely vague or rhetorical -expressions, and that he was especially preserved from this failing by -his habit of combining the expository with the practical and hortatory -line of preaching. His discourses are careful commentaries as well as -practical addresses. Week after week it was his custom to go through -some book of Holy Scripture, verse by verse, clause by clause, almost -word by word; endeavouring with all diligence and patience to ascertain -the exact meaning of the passage before him, to place it clearly before -his audience, and to base his practical exhortation upon it. - -The remark has been so often repeated, as to have become almost a -truism, that the theology of the East is distinguished from the -theology of the West by its more speculative, metaphysical character. -It deals more especially with the most profound and abstract -mysteries—the being and nature of the Godhead, of angels, of the whole -spiritual realm. It might, therefore, occasion some surprise to find -the homilies of Chrysostom marked by such an eminently practical tone. -But the apparent contradiction is easily explained. It is precisely -because Greek philosophy and theology were chiefly concerned with the -most abstract questions, that the Greek preacher, speaking on matters -not abstract, but practical, relating to moral conduct, is especially -free in his language from philosophical or technical terms. On the -other hand, in the Western Church exactly the reverse occurs. The -best intellectual powers of the Roman having been mainly exercised on -jurisprudence, the mind of Roman theologians naturally turned most -powerfully towards practical questions which had most affinity to that -science with which they were chiefly conversant—such as the relation -of man to God, the nature of sin, the means of discharging the debt -owed by man, the problem of the free-will of man, and providence of -God. Western theology is coloured by the language of Roman law, as -Eastern theology is coloured by the language of Greek philosophy. -“Merit,” “satisfaction,” “decrees,” “forensic justification,” “imputed -righteousness,” are terms which do not occur in the writings of the -Greek theologian, because they are the expressions of ideas in which -he felt no interest. They are the offspring of the Roman mind, in -which legal ideas were dominant. Hence the Western theologian is most -technical and scientific in the region of practical questions; the -Greek, on the other hand, is more entirely free from the influence of -philosophy in that region than in any other. - -In accordance with this distinction, we find that Chrysostom, in -treating of those practical questions with which, as a preacher and -pastor, he was mainly concerned—the nature and the work of Jesus -Christ, providence, grace, the nature of man, sin, faith, repentance, -good works, and the like—casts his thoughts into the most free, -natural, untechnical, and therefore forcible language possible. - -To consider first of all his exposition of man’s nature. The majority -of the Oriental fathers made a triple division, into body, soul, and -spirit—the soul (ψυχή) being equivalent to the animal life, the spirit -(πνεῦμα or ψυχὴ λογική) to the reason. Chrysostom makes a twofold -division only, into body and soul, and reserves the word “spirit” to -designate the Holy Spirit.[668] Man, when first created, came like -a pure golden statue fresh out of the artist’s hands, destined, if -he had not fallen, to enjoy a yet higher and nobler dignity than he -then possessed.[669] His being made “in the image of God” Chrysostom -interprets to signify that dominance over the lower animals which God -Himself exercises over the whole creation, and the peculiar superiority -of man’s nature to theirs consists in his reasoning power, as well as -in his endowment with the gift of immortality.[670] Man fell through -his own weakness and indolent negligence (ῥᾳθυμία), and then became -deprived of that immortality and divine wisdom with which he had been -previously gifted; but his nature was not essentially _changed_, it -was only weakened.[671] Evil is not an integral part of man; it is not -an inherent substantial force (δύναμις ἐνυπόστατος):[672] it is the -moral purpose (προαίρεσις) which is perverted when men sin. If evil was -a part of our nature, it would be no more reprehensible than natural -appetites and affections. If man’s will was not unfettered, there would -be no merit in goodness and no blame in evil. There is no constraint -either to holiness or to sin; neither does God compel to the one, nor -do the fleshly appetites compel to the other.[673] The body was not, -as the Manichæans erroneously maintained, the seat of sin; it was the -creation of God equally with the soul; the whole burden, therefore, of -responsibility in sin must be thrown on the “moral purpose.” Here was -the root of all evil; the conception of necessity and immutability is -bound up with the idea of nature. We do not try to alter that which is -by nature (φύσει): sin therefore is not by nature, because by means of -education, laws, and punishments we do seek to alter that.[674] Sin -is through the moral purpose which is susceptible of change, and till -the moral purpose has come into activity sin cannot properly be said -to exist: infants, therefore, and very young children, are free from -sin.[675] Our first parents fell through moral negligence (ῥᾳθυμία); -and this is the principal cause of sin now. They marked out a path -which has been trodden ever since; they yielded to appetite, and the -force of the will has been weakened thereby in all their posterity, who -have become subject to the punishment of death; so that though sin is -not a part of man’s nature, yet his nature is readily inclined to evil -(ὀξυῤῥεπὴς πρὸς κακίαν): but this tendency will be controlled by the -moral purpose if that is in a healthy condition.[676] - -Chrysostom would thus readily allow the expressions “hereditary -tendency to sin,” “hereditary liability to the punishment of death,” -but he shrinks from the expression “hereditary sin.” His anxiety to -insist on the complete freedom of the human will was very natural -in the earnest Christian preacher of holiness, who lived in an age -when men were frequently encountered who, in the midst of wickedness, -complained that they were abandoned to the dominion of devils or to the -irresistible course of fate. They transferred all guilt from themselves -to the powers of evil, all responsibility to the Creator Himself, -who had withdrawn from them, as they maintained, the protection of -His good providence. To counteract the disastrous effects of such -philosophy, which surrendered the will to the current of the passions, -like an unballasted ship cast adrift before the storm, it was indeed -necessary to maintain very resolutely and boldly the essential freedom -of the will, to insist on man’s moral responsibility, and the duty -of vigilant, strenuous exertion. Chrysostom frequently exposes the -absurdity as well as the moral evil of a doctrine of necessity. If -human actions are necessary and preordained results of circumstances, -then teaching and government become mere pieces of acting, destitute -of any practical influence; they are also unjust, since you have no -right to punish a person who has acted under compulsion. Such a theory -ought, also, logically to paralyse human industry. If a plentiful -harvest is predetermined by the decrees of fate, you may spare yourself -the trouble of ploughing, sowing, and other laborious operations; or, -if Clotho has turned her distaff in the other direction, all your -exertions will fail to produce an abundant crop. Such a doctrine is -repugnant to our natural sense, and contradicts our own consciousness -and inward experience. We feel that we are free, and all human action -proceeds on the principle of supposing man to be free. We teach and we -punish. The plea of necessity would be rejected in a court of law as -an impudent and futile excuse for crime. Such a theory is utterly at -variance also with God’s mode of addressing man, which always implies -freedom of volition; as, for instance, “If _ye will_ hearken unto me, -ye shall eat the fat of the land; but if _ye will not_ hearken, the -sword shall devour you.”[677] - -Profoundly convinced, therefore, of a universal tendency to sin -on the one hand, but of an essential freedom of the will on the -other, Chrysostom sounds alternately the note of warning and of -encouragement—warning against that weakness, indolence, languor of -the moral purpose which occasions a fall; encouragement to the full -use of those powers with which all men are gifted, and to avoid that -despondency which will prevent a man from rising again when he has -fallen. St. Paul repented, and, not despairing, became equal to angels; -Judas repenting, but despairing, was hurried into self-inflicted death. -Despair was the devil’s most powerful instrument for working the -destruction of man.[678] Chrysostom therefore earnestly combated any -view of Christian life which daunted and discouraged man’s efforts, by -winding them too high, or placing before them an unattainable standard. -Men sometimes said we cannot be like St. Peter and St. Paul, because -we are not gifted with their miraculous power. But, he replies, you -may emulate their Christian graces: these are within the reach of all, -and these are, by our Lord’s own declaration, the most important. “_By -this_ shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one -to another;” the moral works of the Apostles, works of love, mercy, and -faith, were far more instrumental in the conversion of the world than -their merely miraculous powers.[679] - -Urgently, however, as Chrysostom, in his desire to stimulate exertion -and strengthen the moral life, insists on the absolute freedom of -the will, he maintains no less clearly the insufficiency of man’s -nature to accomplish good without the Divine assistance. No one has -described in more forcible language the powerful hold of sin upon human -nature. Sin is like a terrible pit, containing fierce monsters, and -full of darkness.[680] It is more terrible than a demon,[681] it is a -great demon;[682] it is like fire; when once it has got a hold on the -thoughts of the heart, if it is not quenched it spreads further and -further, and becomes increasingly difficult to subdue;[683] it is a -heavy burden, more oppressive than lead.[684] Christ saw us lying cast -away upon the ground, perishing under the tyranny of sin, and He took -compassion on us.[685] In the infant weakness and liability to sin are -inherent, though not sin itself. The moral nature of the infant is like -a plant, which will grow healthily by a process of natural development, -unless exposed to injurious influences; but it requires the protection -of grace, “therefore we baptize infants to impart holiness and -goodness, as well as to establish a relationship with God.” This -passage is quoted by St. Augustine in his earnest vindication of -Chrysostom from Pelagianism.[686] But the passages on which Augustine -mainly depends to prove Chrysostom’s adherence to the tenet of original -sin are in his exposition of Romans v. 12-14:—“Death reigned from Adam -to Moses. How reigned? In likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is -a figure of One to come. How a figure? Because, as he became a cause -of death to those who were born from him, although they had not eaten -of the tree, even so Christ has become to His posterity the procurer -of righteousness, though they have not done righteousness, which He -has bestowed upon us all through His cross.” Augustine quotes also his -observation on Christ’s tears over the grave of Lazarus:—“He wept to -think that men, who were capable of immortality, had been made mortal -by the devil;” and his remarks on Genesis i. 28, about the subjection -of the lower animals to man: “that man’s present dread of wild beasts -was entirely owing to the Fall, and had not existed previous to that: -it was inherited by all Adam’s posterity, because they inherited his -degradation through the Fall.” All these passages, however, do not -amount to more than the doctrine of a universally inherited tendency -to sin, and therefore liability to its punishment, death. In his -interpretation of the passage, “the free gift is of many offences unto -justification,” this last word is plainly taken by him in the sense of -making man righteous, not accounting him as such.[687] - -His conception of the relation between the will and power of God on -the one hand, and man’s freedom on the other, appears to be this:—All -men, without exception, are through Christ called to salvation; -predestination means no more than God’s original design, conceived -prior to the Fall, of bringing all men to salvation. So, after the -Fall, His redemptive plan or purpose embraces all men; but, on the -other hand, it constrains no one. According to His absolute will all -men are to be saved; but the accomplishment of His purpose is limited -by the freedom of choice which He has Himself bestowed on man, whereby -man may either accept the proffered favour and be eternally blessed, or -reject it and be eternally condemned. God’s election of those who are -called is not compulsory, but persuasive;[688] hence, many of those who -have been called perish through their rejection of grace: they, and not -God, are the authors of their own condemnation. God knows beforehand -what each man will be, good or bad; but He does not constrain him to be -one or the other.[689] The illustration of the potter in Romans ix. 20 -must not be pressed too closely; St. Paul’s object simply is to enforce -the duty of unconditional obedience. A vessel of wrath is one who -obdurately resists God’s grace; he was never _intended_ by God to be a -vessel of wrath. “The vessels of mercy are said to have been prepared -afore by God unto glory,” but the vessels of wrath to be fitted (not by -God—He is not mentioned—but by sin) unto destruction.[690] So again, -he acutely observes that, in the account of the final judgment (St. -Matt. xxv.), the destiny of the _good_ only is referred to God. “Come, -ye blessed _of my Father_, inherit the kingdom prepared _for you_;” -but, “Depart, ye cursed” (not “of my Father”), “into everlasting fire, -prepared” (not for you, but) “for the devil and his angels.” - -On St. John vi. 44, he remarks, it is perfectly true that only they -who are drawn and taught by the Father can come to Christ; but away -with the paltry pretence that those who are not thus drawn and taught -are emancipated from blame; for this very thing, the being led and -instructed, depends on their own moral choice. Two factors, therefore, -Divine grace which presents, and human will which appropriates, are -co-efficients in the work of man’s salvation; God’s love and man’s -faith must work hand in hand. God provides opportunities, encourages -by promises, arouses by calls; and the moment these are responded to, -the moment man begins to will and to do what is right, he is abundantly -assisted by grace. But Chrysostom recognises nothing approaching -the doctrine of final perseverance. St. Paul might have relapsed, -Judas might have been saved (De Laud. Ap. Pauli, Hom. ii. 4). In his -commentary on Phil. ii. 12-13, “It is God which worketh in us both to -will and to do of his good pleasure,” the spontaneity of man’s will -is carefully maintained. It may be said, if God works the will in us, -why does the apostle exhort us to work? for if God wrought the wish, -it is vain to speak of obedience; the whole work is God’s from the -beginning. No! Chrysostom says, what St. Paul means is, that if your -will works, God will augment your will, and quicken it into activity -and zeal. Hast thou given alms? you are the more prompted to give; -hast thou abstained from giving? negligence will increase upon you. -The histories of Abraham, Job, Elijah, St. Paul, and other saints, -are frequently cited to prove his central principle, that God in the -moral and spiritual sense helps those only who help themselves. “When -He, who knows the secrets of our hearts, sees us eagerly prepare for -the contest of virtue, He instantly supplies us with His assistance, -lightening our labours, and strengthening the weakness of our nature. -In the Olympian contests the trainer stands by as a spectator merely, -awaiting the issue, and unable to contribute anything to the efforts of -the contender; whereas our Master accompanies us, extends His hand to -us, all but subdues our antagonist, arranges everything to enable us to -prevail, that He may place the amaranthine wreath upon our brows.”[691] -God does not anticipate (φθάνει) man’s own volitions (βουλήσεις), -but when these are once bent in the right direction, God’s grace -powerfully promotes them; and without this divine co-operation holiness -is unattainable.[692] But as, according to Chrysostom’s conceptions, -the first movement towards good moral practice comes from the man -himself, he often speaks of a man’s salvation depending on his own -moral choice. He is not, therefore, in harmony with the mind of our -Church as expressed in the Article, that “we have no power to do -good works, pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God -_preventing_ us, that we may have a good will;” but his language -thoroughly concurs with the subsequent clause, “and working with us -when we have that good will.” In the technical language of theology, he -recognises assisting, but not prevenient, grace. - -It has been well remarked by Mr. Alexander Knox (“Remains,” vol. iii. -79), that “the advocates for efficient grace have been too generally -antiperfectionists, and the perfectionists, on the other hand, too -little aware that we are not sufficient so much as to think anything -as of ourselves, but that it is God which worketh in us both to will -and to do of His good pleasure.” The perfect conception of the true -Christian standard of character could only be found, he thought, in a -union of the systems of St. Chrysostom and St. Augustine. It must not -be imagined, however, that Chrysostom regarded Divine grace as merely -accessory or subsidiary to man’s own will and purpose. He fails not to -represent it as indispensable to every human soul, however powerfully -inclined of itself to good. The human will, weakened and depraved by -evil, is not for a moment to rank as co-ordinate in its action with -the work of the Holy Spirit: the real efficient force in the work of -sanctification is the Holy Spirit. The beginnings, indeed (ἀρχαί), are -our own, and we must contribute what we can, small and cheap though it -be, because, unless we do our part, we shall not obtain the Divine -assistance; but though the initiatory step is ours, the accomplishment -of the work is altogether God’s, and, since the major part is His, we -commonly say that the whole is His.[693] - -He invariably speaks of the Old Dispensation as a period when Divine -grace was given in less measure than under the Gospel, because then sin -had not been blotted out, nor death vanquished. The achievements of -holy men like Abraham and Job in this period were therefore deserving -of peculiar praise, and their faults, on the other hand, were entitled -to more indulgent judgment, because they laboured under disadvantages. -When the Lamb which taketh away the sins of the world had been slain, -and the reconciliation between man and God had been effected, then -spiritual gifts of a higher order were imparted as a sign and a pledge -that the old hostility had ceased.[694] - -Turning now to theology, strictly so called, to the being and nature -of the Godhead, we find comparatively little said by Chrysostom, -except incidentally, on a subject more congenial to the theologian -and student than to the earnest, practical preacher. In opposition to -the rationalistic doctrine of the Arians, who affected to comprehend -the Divine Nature, he strenuously maintained, as we have seen,[695] -its inscrutability, and denounced any curious investigation of it as -at once foolish and profane. God has condescended to appear to us in -a form which is intelligible, and it is presumption to attempt to -penetrate beyond the limits which He has placed to a knowledge of -Himself. Chrysostom takes the dogma of the one substance (ὁμοουσία), -established at Nice, as the basis of his position against the Arians, -and seeks to prove it, not by speculative argument, after the manner of -the Alexandrian school, but by reference to Holy Scripture. He uses the -word “substance” (οὐσία) to designate the essential nature and “person” -(ὑπόστασις), the personality of the Godhead, and points out that words -which relate to the οὐσία, as Lord and God, are applied to all the -Persons; whereas the other terms—Father, Son, Holy Spirit—indicating -distinction of personality, are each applied to one Person only in the -Godhead. Yet the Persons are not related to the substance as parts -to the whole: God the Son is to God the Father as a beam of the sun, -inseparable from Him, identical with Him in substance, yet retaining -His own personality.[696] He is equally careful to guard the divinity -of Christ against the rationalising school of Paul of Samosata, and the -distinctness of His personality as against the Sabellians. St. Paul, -he observes, does not dwell too much upon the abasement of Christ, -lest Paul of Samosata should take advantage; neither does he dwell -exclusively upon the exaltation, lest Sabellius should spring upon -him.[697] - -The equal divinity and distinct personality of the Holy Ghost are no -less clearly and forcibly demonstrated by a collection and comparison -of passages. St. Paul, for instance, in 1 Cor. xii. 6, speaks of God as -“working all in all;” in verse 11 of the same chapter, he uses the same -language of the Holy Spirit. Into any metaphysical, abstract discussion -of the nature of the Godhead Chrysostom does not enter. He simply -endeavours to guard the faith of the Church by a careful exposition of -Holy Scripture, on which that faith was based, and by an exposure of -the one-sided, or perverted, interpretations on which the current forms -of heresy depended. - -The union of the two natures in the person of our blessed Lord was, as -is well known, a subject of constant speculation and of prolific error -in the first five centuries. Here, again, the good sense of Chrysostom, -united to his careful study of Holy Scripture, enabled him to hold -the balance between two divergent methods—one which attended too -exclusively to the humanitarian point of view, the other which brought -out the divinity, but at the expense of the manhood. He earnestly -maintains the veritable assumption of humanity by the Word. Our nature -could not have been elevated to the divine if the Saviour had not -_really_ partaken of it; neither could He have brought help to our race -if He had appeared in the unveiled glory of His Godhead, for sun and -moon, earth and sea, and even man himself, would have perished at the -brightness of His presence. Therefore He veiled his Godhead in flesh, -and came not as the Lord in outward semblance, but in lowliness and -abasement.[698] And this very condescension enhanced His dignity and -extended His dominion: before the Incarnation He was adored by angels -only, but afterwards by the whole race of redeemed man.[699] He assumed -our nature, even in its liability to death, but not as contaminated -by sin.[700] There were in Him three elements—body and soul making up -the human nature, and the Logos or Word making up the divine. These -two natures were _united_ but not _fused_. “We, indeed, are body and -soul, but He is God and soul and body; remaining what He was, He took -that which He was not, and having become flesh, He remained God, being -the Word. The one He became He assumed; the other He was. Let us not -then confound, neither let us divide; one God, one Christ the Son of -God; and when I say one, I speak of union, not fusion” (ἕνωσιν λέγω -οὐ σύγχυσιν).[701] Jesus Christ was subject to death, susceptible of -pain and all those emotions and sensations which belong to the human -body, otherwise His would not have been a real body, but the weakness -pertaining to human nature was entirely overruled by the constant -operation of the Logos. If He is said to have been lowered or exalted, -this was only as man, since the Godhead was incapable of either, being -absolutely perfect. When the Holy Ghost is said to have descended -upon Him at His baptism, this must be considered to refer to His human -nature only; the manhood, not the Godhead, is anointed. Or when we read -that He walked not in Judæa, because the Jews sought to kill Him, and -then, just afterwards, that He passed through the midst of His enemies -unscathed, we have a direct manifestation, in close correspondence, of -the Godhead and the manhood.[702] - -In speaking of the redemptive work of our blessed Lord, Chrysostom’s -language is too rapturously eloquent to be very precise. There are -in him several traces of the idea which began with Irenæus, and was -developed by Origen, that the devil through the Fall acquired an actual -right over man, and that a kind of pious fraud was practised upon him -to deprive him of this right through the Incarnation and death of -Jesus. By the noiseless, unostentatious manner in which our Saviour -assumed humanity, veiling His Godhead under it, He, as it were, stole -unawares upon the devil, who was not fully conscious of the majesty -and might of his adversary. The devil assaulted Christ as if Christ -had been merely man, and he was disappointed in his expectation. He -was vanquished by his own weapons, his tyranny was destroyed by means -of those very things which were his strength; the curse of sin and of -death were his most trusted pieces: Christ submitted Himself to be -bruised by them, and yet crushed them by His submission.[703] - -On the other hand, we find also in Chrysostom the customary conception -of a debt discharged, a ransom paid, a sacrifice offered once for all. -“Adam sinned and died; Christ sinned not and yet died. Wherefore? that -he who sinned and died might be able, through Him who died but sinned -not, to throw off the grasp of death. This is what takes place also in -money transactions. Often some one who is a debtor, not being able to -pay, is detained in bonds; another, who owes nothing but is able to lay -down the sum, pays it and releases the responsible person. Thus has it -been in the case of man. Man was the debtor, was detained by the devil, -and could not pay; Christ owed nothing, nor was He holden by the devil, -but He was able to pay the debt. He came and He paid down death on -behalf of him who was detained in bondage.[704] - -From this point of view the person to whom the debt is due and is -discharged is the devil; from another, the satisfaction is regarded -as due to God, owing to the violation of man’s obedience, and is paid -to Him through the sacrifice of a sinless life. “It was right that -all men should fulfil the righteousness of God; but, since no one did -this, Christ came and completely fulfilled it.”[705] He was Himself -both the sacrificer and the victim; the cross being the altar. He -suffered outside the city that the prophecy, “He was numbered with the -transgressors,” might be fulfilled, and also that the _universality_ of -the sacrifice might be proclaimed.[706] Chrysostom is not careful to -distinguish between the alienation of man from God, and of God from man -through the Fall. He represents the hostility as in some sort existing -on both sides. Christ did the work of a mediator by interposing Himself -between the two parties, and reconciling each to the other. The -references to such a fundamental verity are of course numerous, often -full of beauty of expression and tenderness of feeling, and glowing -earnestness. What he specially delights to dwell upon, as might be -expected from his warm, affectionate disposition, is the exceeding -love of Christ to man, and the hearty return which gratitude for such -a benefit ought to draw forth from us. Like St. Paul, he often will -break forth, in the midst of some argument or practical address, into a -burst of rapturous and adoring praise. “What reward shall I give unto -the Lord for all the benefits which He hath done unto me? Who shall -express the noble acts of the Lord, or show forth all His praise? He -abased Himself that He might exalt thee; He died to make thee immortal; -He became a curse that thou mightest obtain a blessing.... When the -world lay in darkness, the light of the Cross was held up like a torch -shining in a dark place, and the light at the top of it was the Sun of -Righteousness Himself.”[707] - -Chrysostom’s doctrine of justification is naturally coloured by his -ethics. Maintaining, as he did, that the corruption of man’s nature -consisted in a weakness of the moral purpose, a crooked tendency -of the will, rather than in any inherent indelible stain in that -nature itself, his exhortations are directed rather to inculcate -energetic action, a gradual process of improvement of the will with -the Divine help, than that entire dependence through faith on the -mercy of God which springs out of a deep conviction of the sinner’s -own insufficiency. The logical tendency of the Augustinian view of the -intense and radical depravity of man’s nature is to induce a total -repudiation of the efficacy of personal effort, a total disavowal -of all personal merit. Hence justification comes to be regarded as -purely an act of acquittal on God’s part, a boon which the despairing -sinner by an act of faith thankfully accepts. Such is not the position -of Chrysostom, or of those who, like the Cambridge Divines of the -seventeenth century, have trodden in his footsteps. With him the -condition of a pardoned sinner consists rather in that renovation of -the spiritual and moral life which is the result of long and laborious -effort, aided of course by Divine grace, a succession of moral acts -eventually producing “a new creature.” Faith is not so much regarded -merely as the instrument or hand held out, by which God’s gift is -appropriated, as the first in a row of good works, a fruitful source of -all good action. “Abraham,” he says, “believed God, and it was counted -to him for righteousness. Why? To prove that belief itself, in the -first instance, and obedience to the call of God, come from our own -good judgment (εὐγνωμοσύνη); but as soon as the foundation of faith is -laid, we require the alliance of the Holy Spirit, that it may remain -constantly unshakable and inflexible.”[708] “Faith is the mother of all -good, the sure staff of man’s tottering footsteps, the anchor of his -tempest-tossed soul, without which he would be like a ship cast adrift -on the sea to the mercy of winds and waves.”[709] “It is more stable -and secure than reason, for it carries its own proof with it; the -conclusions of reason may be diverted by counter-arguments, but faith -stands above argument, and is not distracted by it.”[710] - -He does not, indeed, shrink from a bold declaration of the value of -good works, but he is far from teaching men to depend on them as -efficient causes of salvation. They are to be stored up as a kind of -viaticum for our journey to the other world. “As those who are in a -foreign country, when they wish to return to their own land, take -pains, a long time beforehand, to collect means sufficient for their -journey, so surely ought we, who are but strangers and settlers on this -earth, to lay up a store of provisions through spiritual virtue, that -when our Master shall command our return into our native country, we -may be prepared and may carry part of our store with us, having sent -the other in advance.”[711] On the other hand, he constantly insists -that it is the favour and mercy of God alone which, in the end, bestows -salvation on us. Faith and good works are necessary conditions, but not -efficient causes of salvation. God has graciously willed that they who -have faith and good works shall be saved: let no man therefore boast. -We could not do good works without God’s assisting grace, nor could -they in the end and at the best save us if it were not His merciful -and gracious will.[712] Therefore, let no one pride himself on his -good works; above all things, let him cultivate a spirit of humility -and modesty: St. Paul, after all his labours, confessed that he was -not meet to be called an apostle, but was what he was by the grace of -God.[713] “What is impossible with men is possible with God.” “Tell me -not I have sinned much, and how can I be saved? _Thou_ art not able, -but thy Master is able so to blot out thy sins that no trace even of -them shall remain. In the natural body, indeed, though the wound may -be healed, yet the scar remains; but God does not suffer the scar -even to remain, but, together with release from punishment, grants -righteousness also, and makes the sinner to be equal to him who has -not sinned. He makes the sin neither to be nor to have been.... Sin is -drowned in the ocean of God’s mercy, just as a spark is extinguished in -a flood of water.”[714] - -It was, no doubt, the trustful dependence of Chrysostom on Divine -grace, coupled with his firm conviction of the free capacity of man to -turn to what is good, which enabled him to pitch all his exhortations -to Christian holiness in such a singularly cheerful, hopeful tone. -To his sanguine temperament it seemed as if man’s natural capacities -for good, aided by grace obtained through prayer, could accomplish -anything. “The effect of prayer on the heart is like that of the rising -sun upon the natural world; as the wild beasts come forth by night to -prowl and prey, but the sun ariseth, and they get them away together -and lay them down in their dens, so, when the soul is illuminated by -prayer, the irrational and brutal passions are put to flight, anger is -calmed, lust is extinguished, envy is expelled; prayer is the treasure -of the poor, the security of the rich; the poorest of all men is -rich if he can pray, and the rich man who cannot pray is miserably -poor. Ahab without prayer was impotent amidst his splendour; Elijah -with prayer was mighty in his coarse garment of sheepskin.”[715] “It -is impossible, impossible that a man who calls constantly on God with -proper zeal should ever sin; his spirit is proof against temptation so -long as the effect of his praying lasts, and when it begins to fail, -then he must pray again. And this may be done anywhere, in the market -or in the shop, since prayer demands the outstretched soul rather than -the extended hands.”[716] Long prayers were to be avoided; they gave -great opportunities to Satan to distract the attention, which could not -easily bear a lengthened strain. Prayers should be frequent and short; -thus we should best comply with the direction of St. Paul to pray -without ceasing.[717] - -It remains to collect some notices of Chrysostom’s teaching with -reference to the two Sacraments. - -The number of those who, as Christian children of decidedly Christian -parents, were baptized in infancy appears to have been small at this -period, compared with those who, like Chrysostom himself, joined the -ranks of the Church at a later epoch of life. There were many whose -parents, or who themselves, hovered not so much between Christianity -and any definite form of paganism, as between Christianity and -worldliness. The sermons addressed by Chrysostom and his contemporaries -to catechumens, and the frequent allusions to them, the minute -directions respecting their instruction, their division into classes, -the custom of calling the first part of the service to which they were -admitted the Missa Catechumenorum, prove that numerous they must have -been. I have failed to find any passages in which Chrysostom urgently -inculcates infant baptism, and, considering his views respecting -original sin, this is not surprising; but he earnestly denounces a -custom of deferring baptism, prevalent among those who were already -believers, or professing to be such. Often it was delayed till men -believed themselves to be at the point of death—a practice which he -especially deprecates, because at such a time “the recipient was -often in a restless, suffering state of mind and body, most unfit to -receive that holy sacrament; the entrance of the priest was regarded -by the sorrowful attendants as a certain evidence of the approaching -end; and when the sick man could not recognise those who were present, -or hear a voice, or answer in those words by which he was to enter -into a blessed covenant with our Lord, but lay like a log or a stone, -what possible advantage could there be in the reception of the -sacrament?”[718] Again, it was often delayed till a man conceived that -he had received a distinct call and intimation that it was the will -of God. This Chrysostom regarded as being too often a mere cloak for -moral indolence, a reluctance of men to bind themselves under the high -responsibilities of the Christian vocation.[719] - -He certainly considered baptism as being not merely a solemn initiation -into the Christian covenant, and instrument of remission of sin, but -also of moral renovation. This, however, is represented as a blessing -naturally derivable from the entrance into the new and holy federal -relation with God. In his comment on the passage, “and such were some -of you; but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified -in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,” he observes that such words -signify that they were not only purified from past uncleanness, but had -become holy and righteous. “For such is the benevolence of the Divine -gift; if an imperial letter consisting of a few lines discharges men -from liability to punishment for any number of offences, and advances -others to great honour, much more will the Holy Spirit of God, which -can do all things, release us from all wickedness, bestow on us -abundant righteousness, and fill us with much confidence.” The nature -of the baptized was, therefore, like a vessel which had not only been -cleansed from past defilements, but recast in the furnace so as to -come out in a new shape.[720] He is far, however, from regarding such -a change as final. The virtue of baptism is effectual at the time, but -the grace then given is as a trust to be carefully guarded; a talent to -be traded with, a seed of righteousness to be diligently cultivated, -the dawning of a light to shine more and more unto the perfect day. As -Christ becomes at that time the clothing, the food, the habitation of -the Christian, the recipient of these favours has to take care that he -does not wrong this intimate relationship. Therefore he is ordered to -say at baptism, “I renounce thee, Satan;” that is the declaration of a -covenant with his Master. A firm determination to abandon past sin and -eradicate evil habits—in a word, repentance—should take place previous -to baptism. “Just as the painter freely alters the lineaments of his -picture, when it is sketched in outline, by rubbing out or putting -in, but when once he has added the colour, he is no longer at liberty -to make alterations; in like manner erase evil habits before baptism, -before the true colouring of the Holy Spirit has been thrown over the -soul: take care when this has been received, and the royal image shines -forth clearly, that you do not blot it out any more, and inflict wounds -and scars on the beauty given thee by God.”[721] - -In another place he contrasts the baptism of the Jews, of John the -Baptist, and of Jesus Christ. “The first was only a cleansing of the -body from ceremonial defilements, the second was a means of enforcing -an exhortation to repentance, the third was accompanied by remission -of sins: it releases and purges the soul from sin, and gives a supply -of the Holy Spirit.”[722] “When the merciful God saw the extremity of -our weakness, and the incurable nature of our sickness, requiring a -great work of healing, He conferred upon us that renovation which comes -through the laver of regeneration, in order that, being divested of the -old man, that is, of evil works, and having put on the new, we might go -forward in the path of virtue.”[723] - -In considering those passages which relate to the Holy Eucharist, it -must be carefully borne in mind that Chrysostom lived in an age when -that Sacrament had not become a battle-field of controversy. He was -under no constraint in his language, because he did not feel that every -word he used was liable to be criticised, or misunderstood, or torn -to pieces in the strife of contending parties. He enjoyed because he -disputed not. Filled with thankfulness and joy to overflowing for the -unspeakable benefits derived from that Sacrament, he is not cautious -or scrupulously precise in his expressions, but gives the freest rein -to the enthusiasm of his feelings; his object being not to support -any rigidly defined theory or system, but to infuse a certain spirit, -to encourage a proper moral tone and temper in reference to the whole -subject. - -Three ideas, however, are apparent as dominant in his mind—a sacrifice, -a presence of Christ, a reception of Christ. In several of the -passages about to be presented, all the three points will appear in -similar and simultaneous force. In one homily,[724] where he severely -censures the too prevalent custom of attending the Eucharist on -great festivals only, and then behaving in a disorderly manner, the -worshippers hustling and trampling on one another in their tumultuous -haste to approach the holy table, and then hurrying out of church -immediately after the reception, without waiting for the conclusion of -the service—“What,” he exclaims, “O man, art thou doing? When Christ -is present, and the angels are standing by, and the awe-inspiring -table is spread before thee, dost thou withdraw?... If you are invited -to a feast and are filled before the other guests, you do not dare to -withdraw while the rest of your friends are still reclining at the -table; and here, when the mysteries of Christ are being celebrated, and -the holy feast is still going on, dost thou retreat in the middle?” -Again: “Since, then, we are about to see this evening, as a lamb slain -and sacrificed, Him who was crucified, let us approach, I pray you, -with trembling awe. The angels, who surpass our nature, stood beside -His empty tomb with great reverence; and shall we, who are about to -stand beside, not an empty sepulchre, but the very table which bears -the Lamb, shall we approach with noise and confusion?”[725] Again: “It -is now time to draw near the awe-inspiring table.... Christ is present, -and He who arranged that first table, even He arranges this present -one. For it is not man who makes the things which are set before us -become the body and blood of Christ, but it is Christ Himself, who -was crucified for us. The priest stands fulfilling his part (σχῆμα) -by uttering the appointed words, but the power and the grace are of -God. ‘This is my body,’ He says. This expression changes the character -(μεταῤῥυθμίζει) of the elements, and as that sentence, ‘increase -and multiply,’ once spoken, extends through all time, enabling the -procreative power of our nature, even so that expression, ‘this is my -body,’ once uttered, does at every table in the churches from that time -to the present day, and even till Christ’s coming, make the sacrifice -perfect.”[726] Speaking of the sacrifice of Isaac, he observes that it -was perfect so far as Abraham was concerned, because his _intention_ -did not fail, though the knife was not actually drawn across his son’s -throat; “for a sacrifice is possible even without blood—the initiated -(_i.e._ the baptized) know what I mean: on this account, also, that -sacrifice was made without blood, since it was destined to be a figure -of this sacrifice of ours.”[727] - -Perhaps the most significant passage with reference to the sacrificial -idea is one where, after contrasting the many and ineffective -sacrifices of the Jews with the one perfect, efficacious sacrifice of -Christ, he proceeds: “What then? do we not offer every day? We do offer -certainly, but making a memorial of His death; and this memorial is -one, not many. How one, not many? Because the sacrifice was offered -once for all, as that great sacrifice was in the Holy of Holies. This -is a figure of that great sacrifice as that was of this; for we do not -offer one victim to-day and another to-morrow, but always the same: -wherefore the sacrifice is one. Well, on this ground, because He is -offered in many places, are there many Christs? Nay, by no means, but -one Christ everywhere, complete both in this world and in the other; -one body. As then, though offered in many places, He is but one body, -so is there but one sacrifice. Our High Priest is He who offers the -sacrifice which cleanses us. We offer that now which was offered then; -which is indeed inconsumable. This takes place now for a memorial -of what took place then: ‘Do this,’ said He, ‘for my memorial.’ We -do not then offer a different sacrifice as the high priest formerly -did, but always the same; _or, rather, we celebrate a memorial of a -Sacrifice_.”[728] - -There are other passages in which the idea, no less prominently set -forth, is that of a holy feast. Elijah bequeathed his mantle and a -double portion of his spirit to Elisha, “but the Son of God, when He -ascended, left us His own flesh.... He who did not decline to shed -His blood for all, and imparts to us again His flesh and blood, what -will He refuse to do for our salvation?”[729] Again: “Consider, O man, -what kind of sacrifice thou art about to touch, what kind of table to -approach; reflect that thou who art but dust and ashes receivest the -body and blood of Christ.”[730] The sedulous care with which he urges -the duty of moral cleansing before venturing to approach the holy table -proceeds chiefly from regarding it as a holy feast. “How shall we -behold the sacred passover? How shall we receive the sacred feast? How -partake of the adorable mysteries with that tongue whereby we trampled -on the Law of God and defiled our soul? for if one would not touch a -royal robe with defiled hands, how shall we receive the Lord’s body -with an unclean tongue?”[731] - -These passages, which are but a few specimens extracted from a large -number on the same subject, are yet sufficient to show how easy it -would be for the partisans of contending schools to press the language -of Chrysostom into support of their own system. The truth is, that -in the case of this, as of other subjects, we find in Chrysostom and -his contemporaries the raw material, which has been wrought out by -the toil and strife of later times into definite sharply chiselled -dogmas. Nothing, therefore, can really be more unfair than to regard, -as a direct friend or opponent, one who lived and wrote long before -controversy had arisen on the subjects of which he treated. He might -innocently employ expressions which we should deem it incautious to -use, because we know the interpretation of which they are susceptible, -or because we see in them incipient symptoms of an idea which in -process of time grew into a mischievous error. It is instructive also -to notice how harmless doctrines which afterwards became mischievous -were when they were not pushed to an extremity, not made integral -parts of a system of belief. It does not occur to us, for instance, -for a moment to suppose that such invocation of saints as was -manifestly approved by Chrysostom was the least detrimental to that -free intercourse which ought to exist between the soul of man and God -Himself. As Dr. Pusey has observed: “Through volumes of St. Augustine -and St. Chrysostom there is no mention of any reliance except on -Christ alone.”[732] There is not the least approach to that system of -stepping-stones or halting-places between God and man, which the Roman -Church established by means of confession, saint-worship, and, above -all, Mariolatry. - -There is no trace in Chrysostom of priestly confession as an ordinance -of the Church. When he speaks of the misery which ensues on the -commission of sin, he urges the sinner to relieve his conscience by a -free confession with repentance and tears. “And why are you ashamed to -do so?” he proceeds, “for to whom do you confess? Is it to a man or -a fellow-servant who might reproach or expose you? Nay, it is to the -Lord, tender and merciful: it is to the physician that you show your -wound.”[733] Again, in speaking of prayer, he contrasts the freedom of -access to God with the difficulties and impediments which encounter the -delivery of a petition to some great man. “This last could be reached -only through porters, flatterers, parasites; whereas God is invoked -without the intervention of any one, without money, without expense of -any kind.”[734] This reads like a prophetical sarcasm on a Church which -ultimately made a traffic of dispensing what cannot really be dispensed -by man, because it is the free gift of God. - -Nor is there any symptom in Chrysostom of a tendency to the theory of -Purgatory. The condition of man after death is always represented by -him as final and irrevocable. His tone, when exhorting to repentance, -is always in harmony with the following passage: “For the day will come -when the theatre of this world will be dissolved, and then it is not -possible to contend any longer: this is the season of repentance, that -of judgment; this of contest, that of crowning; this of labour, that of -repose.”[735] - -But of all medieval additions to the purer faith of primitive times, -Mariolatry has grown to the most extraordinary dimensions.[736] Of any -tendency to this error there is in Chrysostom a remarkable absence. -In fact, his notices of the Blessed Virgin, not very frequent, are -on the whole, we might almost say, unnecessarily disparaging. In his -commentary on the Marriage Feast at Cana, he suggests that the Virgin, -in mentioning the failure of wine to our Lord, may have been anxious -to draw out His miraculous powers, partly to place the guests under -an obligation to Him, partly to enhance her own dignity through the -display of her Son’s divine powers. He considers that the appeal sprang -from the same feeling which prompted His brethren to say, “Show Thyself -to the world;” and he proceeds to observe that our Lord, while never -failing to manifest dutiful reverence and affectionate care towards His -mother, has taught us, by His conduct and language to her, that the -tie of mere earthly kindred entitled her not to higher privileges, and -placed her in no more intimate spiritual relationship with Himself than -any one might through love and obedience enjoy. “Who is my mother, and -who are my brethren? and looking round about on His disciples, He said, -Behold my mother and my brethren; for whosoever shall do the will of my -Father, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.” “Heavens!” -Chrysostom exclaims, “what honour! what reward! to what a pinnacle does -He exalt those who follow Him! How many women have blessed the Holy -Virgin and her womb, and have longed to be such mothers! What then -prevents it? Behold, he opens a broad way for us: not women only, but -men also are permitted to be placed in the same rank.” “The demand -to see Him was made by His mother in an ambitious spirit: she wished -to show to the people how much authority she possessed over Him; at -any rate, the request was unreasonable and unseasonable. If she and -His brethren desired to speak with Him on matters of doctrine, they -might have done so in the presence of the others; but if on private -matters, it was an ill-timed interruption to His discourse on weightier -subjects.”[737] Again: “When a woman in the company cried out, ‘Blessed -is the womb that bare Thee!’ He instantly corrected her: ‘Yea, _rather_ -blessed are they that hear the word of God and keep it.’” It is -possible that the general sentiment of the age may have regarded the -Virgin with more veneration, but Chrysostom could not have ventured -to use such language had the cultus been in any but its very earliest -stage, if then. She is called holy by him; she intercedes[738] for Eve, -who is a type of herself, but of worship paid to her there is not the -slightest evidence.[739] - -It is almost superfluous to observe that Chrysostom knew and -acknowledged nothing of papal supremacy, in the sense which those -words conveyed to the minds of later generations. In common with -the rest of Christendom, he paid great deference and respect to the -metropolitan at Rome, and he was quite free from those feelings of -jealousy which were entertained by the patriarchs of Constantinople, -as time went on, owing to the increasing pretensions and exactions of -the Roman See. If he respects Innocent, as occupying the chair of St. -Peter, he equally respects Flavian, bishop of Antioch (who was not in -communion with Rome), for the same reason; he calls him “our common -father and teacher, who has inherited St. Peter’s virtue and his -chair.” The letter written to Innocent during exile was addressed also -to the Bishops of Milan and Aquileia. In his commentary on Galatians -ii. he proves the equality of St. Paul with St. Peter. No doubt he -assigns an eminent rank to St. Peter, speaking of him as “leader of the -band” (κορυφαῖος) of apostles, and as intrusted with the “presidency” -(προστασίαν) of the brethren: but these words do not imply absolute -authority, and the same appellations are applied to St. Paul also. - -Scattered up and down the discourses of Chrysostom there are abundant -references to the liturgical forms, and manner of using them, which -were in vogue in his time. If we had no other authority, we could learn -from him alone that the service consisted of two parts—the first, -called Missa Catechumenorum, because the catechumens were permitted -to be present at it, which included an opening salutation of “Peace -be with you,” with the response, “And with thy spirit;” psalms sung -antiphonally; appointed lessons according to the season or the day (as -Genesis was read during Lent, the Acts of the Apostles in Pentecost, -that is, during the fifty days between Easter and Whitsun Day); the -sermon, frequently in Chrysostom’s case on the lesson for the day, -the preacher usually sitting, and the people standing; then prayers, -announced by the deacon, for the catechumens, the “possessed,” and the -penitents; the benediction by the bishop, and dismissal by the deacon, -who bade them “depart in peace.” The second part of the service then -began, called Missa Fidelium, because the baptized only were permitted -to be present. Chrysostom strongly denounces an increasing tendency -on the part of many to remain during this second and more sacred -portion without participating. He plainly declares that all those -who were baptized should communicate, and tells them, if they were -not worthy to receive the Eucharist, neither could they be worthy to -join in the prayers which preceded the reception, and therefore they -ought to quit the church, with the catechumens and penitents, when -the deacon commanded all unbaptized, ungodly, and unbelieving persons -to depart.[740] The usual order of the Missa Fidelium was “the silent -prayer” (εὐχὴ διὰ σιωπῆς), on part of the priest and people (which the -latter too often abused, Chrysostom feared, to imprecate vengeance on -their enemies[741]); then a prayer somewhat equivalent to our bidding -prayer in form, and to our prayer for the Church Militant in substance, -the deacon bidding or proclaiming the forms, and the people responding; -then a prayer of invocation made by the bishop, which was also called -“collecta,” because in it the prayers of the people were considered -to be gathered or summed up; the oblations of the people presented -by the deacons; the kiss of peace, the reading of the diptychs, the -ablution of the priest’s hands, the bringing of the elements to the -bishop at the altar, while the priests stood on each side, and deacons -held large fans to drive away the flies; a secret prayer offered by the -bishop; the benediction, “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,” etc., -to which the people responded “And with thy spirit;” followed by “Lift -up your hearts”—“We lift them up unto the Lord;” “Let us give thanks -to our Lord God”—“It is meet and right so to do;” a long thanksgiving, -terminating with the Ter Sanctus, in which the people joined; the -consecration prayer, including the words of our Lord at the time of -institution, and an invocation of the Holy Spirit to make the elements -become the body and blood of Christ; a prayer for all members of the -Church, living and dead; the doxology, the Creed; a prayer of the -bishop for sanctification; the words pronounced by him, “Holy things -for holy people” (τὰ ἅγια τοῖς ἁγίοις); the reception by the clergy and -laity in both kinds, taking the elements into their hands; concluding -prayers, and dismissal by the deacon proclaiming, “Go in peace.” -Nearly all of the forms indicated in this sketch are more or less -clearly referred to or quoted in Chrysostom’s works, and from these, -with the aid of other contemporary writers and documents, we might -construct a liturgy which would more nearly resemble that actually used -by him than the liturgy called by his name resembles it.[742] For in -this, as in the so-called liturgy of Basil, it is impossible now to -determine how much was actually composed by the Father who gave his -name to it. It cannot be proved that Chrysostom actually corrected or -improved at all the liturgy which he found in use at Constantinople. -It may only have come to be called after him as being the greatest -luminary who ever occupied the see. The statement, however, made -in a tract ascribed to Proclus, Patriarch of Constantinople in the -fifth century, is not in itself improbable, that Chrysostom found the -existing liturgy so long that many of the congregation, being men of -business, and pressed for time, left before the service was concluded, -or came in after it had begun, and therefore he abridged and otherwise -altered it. In any case, many alterations were made by different -churches and bishops in the course of time, as in other liturgies, so -also in those which bear the name of Basil and Chrysostom; and hence, -as Montfaucon, Savile, Cave, and others have remarked, you cannot find -any two copies which are exactly alike. - -A critical estimate of Chrysostom’s value as a commentator hardly -falls within the scope of an essay on his life, but a few general -observations on this head may not be deemed out of place here. The -same fact was the cause in him of much excellence and some defect -in this department. He was a preacher whose primary object was to -convert souls. This earnest, practical aim, of which he never lost -sight, helped to protect him from lapsing into idle, fanciful, mystical -interpretations of Scripture; but, on the other hand, it hindered -his entering so fully into all the historical, grammatical, or even -doctrinal questions which might be raised about a passage as he would -have done had he been exclusively a commentator. His dominant aim -being to affect the heart and the moral practice of his hearers, he -is content when he has elicited from the passage all that will be -most useful for that purpose, and the continuity of the commentary is -frequently marred by sudden digressions. His ignorance of Hebrew was of -course fatal to his being an accurate interpreter of the Old Testament, -since he was entirely dependent on the Septuagint translation. And -even in Greek, though few would deny him the merit of fine scholarship -on the whole, though his command of the language as an orator is -masterly, his style luminous, his diction copious and rich without -being offensively ornate or redundant, yet his hold upon the language -for critical purposes is neither that of a man who spoke it when it was -in its purest stage, nor that of a scholar who, living in a later age -and speaking a different tongue, has made a careful, laborious study of -it as a dead language. - -But two invaluable qualifications for an interpreter Chrysostom did -possess—a thorough love for the Sacred Book, and a thorough familiarity -with every part of it. There is no topic on which he dwells more -frequently and earnestly than on the duty of every Christian man and -woman to study the Bible; and what he bade others do, that he did -pre-eminently himself. He rebukes the silly vanity of rich people who -prided themselves on possessing finely written and handsomely bound -copies of the Bible, but who knew little about the contents. Study of -the Bible was more necessary for the layman than the monk, because he -was exposed to more constant and formidable temptations. The Christian -without a knowledge of his Bible was like a workman without his tools. -Like the tree planted by the water-side, the soul of the diligent -reader would be continually nourished and refreshed. There were no -difficulties which would not yield to a patient study of it. Neither -earthly grandeur, nor friends, nor indeed any human thing, could afford -in suffering such comfort as the reading of Holy Scripture, for this -was the companionship of God.[743] - -The honest, straightforward common sense which marks his practical -exhortations was a useful quality to him also as an interpreter. One -of his principles is, that sound doctrine could not be extracted -from Holy Scripture but by a careful comparison of many passages not -isolated from their context.[744] Allegorical interpretations were by -no means to be rejected, but to be used with caution; men too often -made the mistake of dictating what Scripture should mean instead of -submitting to be taught by it: they _introduced_ a meaning instead of -_eliciting_ it.[745] Thus, though he often accepts popular types—as -Boaz and Ruth are figures of Christ and His bride the Church; and -Noah, Joseph, Joshua, are all in different ways representative of our -Lord; though sometimes particular expressions in Messianic prophecies -are forced, for instance, in Isaiah’s description of Immanuel, the -“butter and honey” there spoken of he supposes to be intended to -indicate the reality of our Lord’s humanity[746]—yet his customary aim -is to discover the literal sense and direct historical bearing of the -passage. At the same time he fully recognises a general foreshadowing -of Jesus Christ, and the complete fulfilment in Him ultimately of -prophecies which immediately refer to persons and events nearly, if -not quite, contemporaneous with the utterance. He fails not also to -point out the moral aspect of prophecy as a system of teaching rather -than prediction, as preparatory to the advent of Jesus Christ in the -flesh, not only by informing men’s minds, but disciplining their hearts -to receive Him.[747] Hence the holy men who lived, under the Old -Dispensation, in faith on God’s promises, knew Christ as it were by -anticipation, and were to be reckoned as members of the one body.[748] - -He had a clear conception of the essential coherence between the Old -and New Testament. He observes that the very words “old” and “new” -are relative terms: _new_ implies an antecedent _old_, preparatory -to it. The condition of the recipients, the circumstances and age in -which they lived, being different, necessitated a difference in the -treatment. A physician treated the same patient at different times by -directly contrary methods; sometimes administering sweet, sometimes -bitter medicines, sometimes using the lancet, sometimes cautery, but -always with the same ultimate end in view—the health of his patient. So -the Old and New Testaments were different, but not, as the Manichæans -maintained, antagonistic. The commandment, “Thou shalt not kill,” -attacked the fruit and consequence of vice; the precept, “Whosoever is -angry with his brother without a cause,” etc., struck at the root. This -was an illustration in a small instance of the general truth that the -New Dispensation was only a completion and expansion of the Old. Those, -therefore, who rejected the Old Testament dishonoured the New, which -was based upon it, and presupposes it.[749] - -He is equally rational in his manner of accounting for the variations -in the Gospel narratives. That they differ in details, but agree in -essential matters, he regards as a powerful evidence of veracity. Exact -and verbal coincidence in every particular would have excited in the -minds of opponents a suspicion of concerted agreement.[750] Authors -might write variously without being at variance; if there had been -ten thousand evangelists, yet the Gospel itself would have been but -one.[751] Each evangelist tells substantially the same tale, but varied -according to the readers for whom he wrote, and the special object -which he had in view. So St. Matthew wrote in Hebrew for the Jews, -St. Mark for the disciples in Egypt, St. John to set forth the divine -aspect of our Lord’s life. Thus we have variety in unity, and unity in -variety.[752] - -In his commentaries on the Epistles he is careful to consider each -as a connected whole; and, in order to impress this on his hearers, -he frequently recapitulates at the beginning of a homily all the -steps by which the part under consideration has been reached. In his -introductions to each letter he generally makes useful observations -on the author, the time, place, and style of composition, the readers -for whom it was intended, the general character and arrangement of -its contents. He regarded the Bible as in such a sense written under -the inspiration of God, that no passage, no word even, was to be -despised;[753] that men wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, -but not to the total deprivation of their own human understanding and -personal character. The prophet was not like the seer who spoke under -constraint, not knowing what he said; he retained his own faculties and -style; only all his powers were quickened, energised by the Spirit to -the utterance of words which unassisted he could not have uttered.[754] - -Chrysostom’s influence as a preacher was not aided by any external -advantages of person. Like so many men who have possessed great powers -of command over the minds of others—like St. Paul, Athanasius, John -Wesley—he was little of stature; his frame was attenuated by the -austerities of his youth and his habitually ascetic mode of life; -his cheeks were pale and hollow; his eyes deeply set, but bright -and piercing; his broad and lofty forehead was furrowed by wrinkles; -his head was bald. He frequently delivered his discourses sitting in -the ambo, or high reading-desk, just inside the nave, in order to -be near his hearers and well raised above them. But these physical -disadvantages were more than compensated by other more important -qualities. A power of exposition which unfolded in lucid order, passage -by passage, the meaning of the book in hand; a rapid transition from -clear exposition, or keen logical argument, to fervid exhortation, -or pathetic appeal, or indignant denunciation; the versatile ease -with which he could lay hold of any little incident of the moment, -such as the lighting of the lamps in the church, and use it to -illustrate his discourse; the mixture of plain common-sense, simple -boldness, and tender affection, with which he would strike home to the -hearts and consciences of his hearers—all these are not only general -characteristics of the man, but are usually to be found manifested -more or less in the compass of each discourse. It is this rare union -of powers which constitutes his superiority to almost all the other -Christian preachers with whom he might be, or has been, compared. -Savonarola had all, and more than all, his fire and vehemence, but -untempered by his sober, calm good sense, and wanting his rational -method of interpretation. Chrysostom was eager and impetuous at times -in speech as well as in action, but never fanatical. Jeremy Taylor -combines, like Chrysostom, real earnestness of purpose with rhetorical -forms of expression and florid imagery; but, on the whole, his style -is far more artificial, and is overlaid with a multifarious learning -from which Chrysostom’s was entirely free. Wesley is almost his match -in simple, straightforward, practical exhortation, but does not rise -into flights of eloquence like his. The great French preachers, again, -resemble him in his more ornate and declamatory vein, but they lack -that simpler common-sense style of address which equally distinguished -him. Whether the sobriquet of Chrysostomos, “the golden mouth,” was -given to him in his lifetime is extremely doubtful; at any rate, it -seems not to have been commonly used till afterwards. John is the only -name by which he is mentioned in the writings of historians who were -most nearly contemporaneous, but the other was a well-known appellation -before the end of the fifth century.[755] - -The preservation of Chrysostom’s discourses we owe mainly to the -custom, prevalent in the Eastern Church at that time, of having the -sermons of famous preachers taken down by shorthand writers as they -were spoken; but some of them Chrysostom published himself.[756] -To what extent they may have been written before preaching it is -impossible to say. The expository parts were evidently the result of -previous study and preparation; the actual diction of the practical -portions he may have left to the suggestion of the moment, though the -main subjects of his address had been always decided upon beforehand. -Extempore remarks were frequently called forth by the behaviour of the -congregation, or some passing incident. The discourse delivered after -his return from exile we also know to have been purely impromptu; and -Suidas observes that he “had a tongue which exceeded the cataracts of -the Nile in fluency, so that he delivered many of his panegyrics on -the martyrs extempore without the least hesitation.”[757] His hearers -were sometimes rapt in such profound attention that pickpockets took -advantage of it:[758] sometimes they were melted to tears, or beat -their breasts and faces, and uttered groans and cries to Heaven for -mercy; at other times they clapped their hands or shouted—marks of -approbation frequently paid at that time to eloquent preachers, but -always sternly reproved by Chrysostom. - -Although his style is generally exuberantly rich, yet it is seldom -offensively redundant, for every word is usually telling; and at times -he is epigrammatically terse. A few instances will suffice:—“The fire -of sin is large, but it is quenched by a few tears;” “Pain was given -on account of sin, yet through pain sin is dissolved;” “Riches are -called possessions (κτήματα) that we may possess them, not be possessed -by them;” “You are master of much wealth, do not be a slave to that -whereof God has made you master;” “Scripture relates the sins of -saints, that we may fear; the conversion of sinners, that we may hope.” -He refers to a visitation of Antioch by an earthquake, as God “shaking -the city, but establishing your minds; making the city crumble, but -consolidating your judgment.” - -His familiarity with classical Greek authors is apparent sometimes -in direct references. He speaks of “the smoothness of Isocrates, the -weight of Demosthenes, the dignity of Thucydides, the sublimity of -Plato.”[759] He quotes the beginning of the “Apology,” to show that -if Socrates did not put a high value on mere fine talking, how much -less should the Christian.[760] He illustrates the readiness of men -to supply the wants of the monk by a passage from Plato, where Crito -says that his money, and that of Cebes and many others, is at the -disposal of Socrates; and, go where he will, he may rely on finding -friends.[761] Sometimes we detect a thought derived, it may have been -unconsciously, from classical sources. When he compares the crowd of -the congregation before him to the sea, and the play upon the surface -of that sea of heads to the effect of a strong west wind stirring and -bending the ears of corn,[762] it is impossible not to think that the -idea was suggested by the well-known simile in Homer (Il. ii. 147). -Again, when, in speaking of David’s sin, he compares the body to a -chariot and the soul to the charioteer, and says that, when the soul -is intoxicated by passion, the chariot is dragged along at random, it -can hardly be fanciful to see a reflection of Plato’s celebrated image -of the charioteer and horses in the “Phædrus.”[763] - -But whatever admiration Chrysostom may have retained of those authors -whom he had studied in his youth, it was confined to their language, -for with their ideas and modes of thought he had, so far as we can -judge, abandoned all sympathy. Nor was this unnatural. Christianity -existed in such close contact with Pagan corruption, and it had -suffered so much from Pagan persecution, that the revulsion of earnest -Christians from all things Pagan was total and indiscriminating. -“The old order changeth, yielding place to new;” and the new, having -fought a hard struggle with the old, is for a long time incapable -of recognising merit in anything belonging to it. There are several -allusions in Chrysostom to the “Republic” of Plato, but they are always -depreciative. He fastens on a few points, such as the regulations -about marriage and female work, and condemns it on these as absurd -and childish, quite failing to consider the idea in its grandeur as a -whole.[764] Yet it is instructive to notice that he never hesitates -to assign to Plato the first place among the heathen philosophers, -dignifying him with the title of Coryphæus.[765] He often compares -the failure of Plato’s teaching to regenerate men in every rank with -the successful labours of St. Paul and the other apostles; but while -he rejoices that the writings and doctrine of the philosopher were -eclipsed by the tentmaker and fisherman, and well-nigh forgotten, he -evidently regarded it as the most signal triumph which Christianity had -achieved.[766] - -Unquestionable as the intellectual genius of Chrysostom was, yet it -is rather in the purity of his moral character, his single-minded -boldness of purpose, and the glowing piety which burns through all -his writings, that we find the secret of his influence. If it was -rather the mission of Augustine to mould the minds of men so as to -take a firm grasp of certain great doctrines, it was the mission of -Chrysostom to inflame the whole heart with a fervent love of God. -Rightly has he been called the great teacher of consummate holiness, -as Augustine was the great teacher of efficient grace;[767] rightly -has it been remarked that, like Fénélon, he is to be ranked among -those who may be termed disciples of St. John, men who seem to have -been pious without intermission from their childhood upwards, and of -whose piety the leading characteristics are ease, cheerfulness, and -elevation; while Augustine belongs to the disciples of St. Paul, those -who have been converted from error to truth, or from sin to holiness, -and whose characteristics are gravity, earnestness, depth.[768] If -Augustine has done more valuable service in building up the Church at -large, Chrysostom is the more loveable to the individual, and speaks -out of a heart overflowing with love to God and man, unconstrained by -the fetters of a severe and rigid system. Yet it is precisely on this -account that he has not been so generally appreciated as he deserves. -His tone is too catholic for the Romanist, or for the sectarian -partisan of any denomination. “It would be easy to produce abundant -instances of his oratorical abilities; I wish it were in my power to -record as many of his evangelical excellencies.” Such is the verdict -of a narrow-minded historian,[769] and the comparative estimation in -which he held St. Augustine and St. Chrysostom may be inferred from the -number of pages in his History given to each: St. Augustine is favoured -with 187, Chrysostom with 20. But he whose judgment is not cramped by -the shackles of some harsh and stiff theory of Gospel truth will surely -allow that Chrysostom not only preached the Gospel but lived it. To the -last moment of his life he exhibited that calm, cheerful faith, that -patient resignation under affliction, and untiring perseverance for -the good of others, which are pre-eminently the marks of a Christian -saint. The cause for which he fought and died in a corrupt age was the -cause of Christian holiness; and, therefore, by the great medieval -poet of Christendom he is rightly placed in Paradise between two men -who, widely different indeed in character and circumstances from him -and from one another, yet resembled him in this, that they freely and -courageously spoke of God’s “testimonies even before kings, and were -not ashamed”—Nathan the Seer, and Anselm the Primate of all England:— - - “Natan profeta, e’l metropolitano - Crisostomo, ed Anselmo....”[770] - - - -APPENDIX. - -[_Vide ante_, p. 415 note.] - - -ON THE LETTER TO CÆSARIUS (CHRYS. OP. vol. iii. p. 755). - -The history of this letter, and the controversy connected with it, are -curious and interesting. Peter Martyr transcribed a Latin translation -of it, which he found in a manuscript at Florence, carried it with him -to England, and deposited it in the library of Archbishop Cranmer. -After Cranmer’s death, and the dispersion of his library, the letter -disappeared. Peter Martyr had not stated the source from which he -had derived it, and, therefore, when the assailants of the doctrine -of Transubstantiation wished to make use of it, their opponents -always maintained that it did not exist. In 1680, however, Emericus -Bigotius discovered a copy in the library of St. Mark’s Convent, at -Florence, probably the same which Peter Martyr, himself a Florentine, -had transcribed. Emericus appended it to his edition of Palladius’s -“Life of Chrysostom,” and in his preface endeavoured to vindicate its -authenticity; but the Doctors of the Sorbonne suppressed the letter, -and such portions of the preface as related to it. Emericus, however, -had retained in his own possession some of the entire copies after -they were printed, before they came into the licenser’s hands. The -translation was published by Stephanus Le Moyne in 1685, by Jacob -Basnage in 1687, and in 1689 by Harduin, a Jesuit, who strenuously -maintained the Roman Catholic interpretation of the passage on the -Eucharist. Montfaucon adopted Harduin’s version of it, annexing a few -fragments in the Greek, picked out of Anastasius and John Damascene. - -John Damascene, Anastasius, and Nicephorus refer to the letter as -authentic, nor does Harduin venture to dispute it; but there are -several points of evidence which seem to mark it as belonging to a -later age than that of Chrysostom. It is not quoted before Leontius, in -the latter part of the sixth century, although it might usefully have -been employed against the Eutychians. There are expressions in it which -were not in common use till after Cyril of Alexandria had employed -them against Nestorius. The language generally is that of one who had -lived in the midst of the Nestorian and Eutychian controversies, and -the style of the Greek fragments, as well as the tone of the Latin -translation, are extremely unlike Chrysostom’s manner: the sentences -are abrupt and rugged, and a kind of scholastic, dogmatic tone pervades -the whole composition. The general scope of the letter is clear: it is -to maintain the doctrine of the two natures under one person in Jesus -Christ, against the heresy of the Apollinarians; or, if we accept the -theory of Montfaucon, the intention of the author, living in the time -of the Eutychian heresy, was to strike a blow at that by forging a -letter supposed to be addressed by Chrysostom to a friend, warning -him against Apollinarian errors, which had much in common with the -Eutychian. The passage in which the writer illustrates his position by -a reference to the Holy Eucharist has been construed by Roman Catholics -and Protestants in a sense agreeable to their own views on the subject. -The writer has been labouring to prove that there were two distinct -natures in the one person of God the Son Incarnate, and he proceeds as -follows:—“Just as the bread before consecration is called bread, but -when the Divine grace sanctifies it through the agency of the priest it -is liberated from the appellation of bread, and is regarded as worthy -of the appellation of the Lord’s body, although the nature of bread -remains in it, and we speak not of two bodies, but one body of the Son; -so here, the Divine nature being seated in the human body, the two -together make up but one Son, one Person.” - - - - -FOOTNOTES: - -[1] In the case of Savonarola such a want has now been fairly well -supplied by Villari and other writers. For a good portrait of Erasmus, -see “Erasmus, his Life and Character,” by Robert Blackley Drummond, -B.A. 2 vols., 1873. - -[2] “That godly clerk and great preacher” is the description of him in -the English Homilies, Hom. i. - -[3] “Remains,” vol. iii. Letters to Dr. Woodward and Mrs. Hannah More. - -[4] Wall, on _Infant Baptism_, endeavours to prove that she was a -Pagan, in order to account for the delay in Chrysostom’s baptism, but -his reasons are far from convincing. - -[5] De Sacerdot. lib. i. c. 5. - -[6] Julian: Misopogon, p. 363. - -[7] Epist. 1057. - -[8] Epist. ad viduam jun., vol. i. - -[9] Ibid. p. 601. - -[10] Adv. Oppug. Vit. Monast. lib. iii. c. 11. - -[11] Liban. de fortuna sua, pp. 13-137. - -[12] See concluding Chapter. - -[13] See concluding Chapter. - -[14] Quoted by Isidore of Pelusium, lib. ii. ep. 42. - -[15] Sozomen, viii. c. 2. - -[16] Isidore Pel., lib. ii. ep. 42; De Sacerdot. i. c. 4. - -[17] Gibbon, iii. 52, note; Milman’s edition. - -[18] Gibbon, iii. 53; for an account of the character of lawyers at -this period see Amm. Marcellinus, lxxx. c. 4. - -[19] As Socrates, book vi. chap. 3, has done. - -[20] De Sacerdot. lib. i. c. 1. - -[21] De Sacerdot. c. iii. - -[22] See references in Bingham, vol. iii. b. xi. Wall, vol. ii. - -[23] Basil: Exhort. ad Baptismum; Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 40 de Bapt.; -Nyssen, de Bapt.; Chrysost. in Acta Apost. vol. ix. hom. i. _in fine_, -and in Illumin. Catechesis, vol. ii. p. 223. - -[24] Philostorgius, ii. 7; Socrates, i. 23; Theod. i. 21. - -[25] Socr. i. 24; Theod. i. 22. - -[26] Athanas. Hist. Arian. 20, 21; Theod. ii. 9, 10. - -[27] Socr. ii. 26; he had been deposed from the rank of presbyter -because he was a eunuch, in accordance with the provision of the -Council of Nice, c. i. Labbe, i. p. 28. - -[28] Sozom. iii. 20; Theod. ii. 24. - -[29] Sozom. iv. 12-16; Theod. ii. 26. In consequence of an earthquake -at Nice, it was removed to Seleucia in Isauria. - -[30] Rufin. i. 21; Socr. ii. 36, 37; Sozom. iv. 19; Jerome c. Lucif. -18, 19. - -[31] Socr. ii. 42, 43. - -[32] Sozom. iv. 28. - -[33] Theod. ii. 31; Sozom. iv. 28. - -[34] Socr. ii. 45. - -[35] The Arian Bishop George having been murdered by the Pagan -population, Socr. iii. 5. - -[36] Rufin. i. 27; Socr. iii. 6; Sozom. v. 12. - -[37] Chrysost. Hom. in Matt. 85, vol. vii. p. 762. - -[38] Chrysost. Hom. in Melet. - -[39] Tillemont, viii. 374. - -[40] Greg. Nazian., Orat. de Bapt. 40; Chrysost. Ep. 132, ad Gemellum. - -[41] Tertullian is the first who mentions it; de Prescript. c. 41. - -[42] Just. Nov. cxxiii. c. 13. - -[43] Quoted in Bingham, vol. i. p. 378. - -[44] Conc. Carth. iv. c. 8; Labbe, vol. ii. - -[45] _Vide_ quotations in Suicer, Thesaur. _sub verbo_ φιλοσοφία. - -[46] De Sacerdot. i. c. 4. - -[47] Ibid. c. 3. - -[48] Ibid. c. 5. - -[49] For the oppressive manner in which taxes were collected see -Gibbon, iii. 78 _et seq._, Milman’s edit. - -[50] De Sacerdot. i. c. 6. - -[51] Ibid. vi. c. 12. - -[52] Socr. vi. c. 3. - -[53] Ibid. vi. 3. - -[54] In Facund. Hermiana, Pro Def. trium capit., lib. iv. c. 2, in -Gall. and bibl. patr. xi. p. 706. - -[55] Chrysost. Hom. in Diodor., vol. iii. p. 761. - -[56] Socr. vi. 3. - -[57] Niceph. σειρά, vol. i. pp. 524 and 436. - -[58] Ibid. vol. i. p. 80. - -[59] Leont. Byzant. contra Nestor., et Eutych. lib. iii., in Basnage, -Thesaur. monum. i. 592. - -[60] C. 2-5. - -[61] I. c. 8, 9. - -[62] C. 9. - -[63] C. 10. - -[64] Theod. i. c. 11, _in initio_. - -[65] C. 11. - -[66] C. 13. - -[67] C. 14. - -[68] C. 17. - -[69] C. 16 and 19. - -[70] C. 19. - -[71] C. 3. - -[72] C. 5. - -[73] Tillemont maintains that the Theodore to whom the first letter is -addressed must have been a different person from the fellow-student of -Chrysostom and eventual Bishop of Mopsuestia, but he stands alone in -this opinion, and his reasons for it seem inadequate.—Till. xi. note -vi. p. 550. - -[74] Possid. Vit. August. c. iv. - -[75] Sulp. Sever. Vit. St. Martin. lib. i. p. 224. The affectation of -reluctance to be consecrated became a fashion in the Coptic Church. -The patriarch-designate of Alexandria is at this day brought to Cairo, -loaded with chains, as if to prevent his escape.—Stanley, Eastern -Church, lect. vii. p. 226. - -[76] C. 5. This word may refer to the bishops or the people. Ambrose -calls the people his “parentes,” because they had elected him -bishop.—Comment. in Luc. l. viii. c. 17. - -[77] μειράκια; _vide_ note at end of Chapter. - -[78] I. c. 5. - -[79] C. 7. - -[80] C. 6. - -[81] C. 8. - -[82] C. 9. - -[83] The words _priest_ and _bishop_ are employed, in the following -translations and paraphrases, to correspond with ἱερεὺς and ἐπίσκοπος, -which are used in the original without much apparent distinction. -Chrysostom is speaking of the _priesthood generally_, and it is not -easy to say which Order he has in his mind at any given moment. - -[84] II. c. 2. - -[85] III. c. 1, 2, 5. - -[86] III. c. 4. - -[87] III. 5. - -[88] III. 9, 10. - -[89] Lamprid. Vita Alex. Sev. c. 45. Paris edit. - -[90] Cyprian, Epis. 52. - -[91] Ammian. Marcell. lib. xxvii. c. 3. Socrat. lib. iv. c. 29. See a -multitude of evidence carefully collected on this subject in Bingham, -vol. i. b. iv. ch. 2. - -[92] III. 15. - -[93] Comp. in Act. Apost. Hom. iii. 5. “Men now aim at a bishopric like -any secular office. To win glory and honour among men we peril our -salvation.... Consuls and prefects do not enjoy such honour as he who -presides over the Church. Go to court, or to the houses of lords and -ladies, and whom do you find foremost there? no one is put before the -bishop.” - -[94] III. c. 14. - -[95] III. 16. - -[96] III. 17. - -[97] IV. c. 3-5 and c. 9. - -[98] V. c. 1-4. - -[99] V. c. 5. - -[100] V. c. 6, 7. - -[101] V. c. 8. - -[102] VI. c. 1. - -[103] VI. c. 4. - -[104] VI. c. 6-8. - -[105] VI. c. 12. - -[106] VI. c. 13. - -[107] Which is the date assigned by Socrates, vi. 3. - -[108] As stated by Palladius, at least in the Latin translation by -Ambrose Camaldulensis. - -[109] Zosimus, lib. iv. 13-15. Ammian. Marcell. xxix. c. i. - -[110] In Act. Apost. Hom. 38, _in fine_. - -[111] Cyril. Catech. x. n. 19. Athanas. Synopsis. - -[112] Euseb. lib. vi. c. 11. Clemens Alex., Hom., Quis Dives salvetur? - -[113] Vide Epiphan. 69. Hæres. n. i., whence it appears that Laura, or -Labra, was the name of an ecclesiastical district in Alexandria. - -[114] Theod. Lector. II. l. c. col. 102-104. - -[115] Jerome, Ep. 77, 5; Ambrose, de Virgin. i. 10, 11. - -[116] Baron. 398, 49-52; Giesel. I. 251. - -[117] Sozom. iii. 14; Sulp. Severus. - -[118] At Stridon, on the frontiers of Pannonia and Dalmatia. - -[119] Sozom. iii. 14. Palladius, Hist. Lausiaca, 38. - -[120] In Matt. Hom. 8, p. 87. - -[121] The custom of one monk reading the Scriptures aloud during -dinner was first adopted, according to Cassian, in the Cappadocian -monasteries.—Cass. lib. iv. c. 17; Sozom. iii. 14; Jerome’s translation -of the rule. - -[122] But sometimes later. - -[123] Hom. in Matt. 55, vol. vii. p. 545. - -[124] Sozom. iii. 14, 15; Cassian., de Cœnob. Instit. iv. x. 22. - -[125] Cod. Theod. ix. 40. 16. - -[126] _Vide_ Müller de Antiq. Antioch. c. 3. - -[127] Chrysost. in Matt. Hom. 69, vol. vii. p. 652. - -[128] In Matt. Hom. 68, c. 3. When they received the Eucharist, which -they did twice a week, on Sundays and Saturdays, they threw off their -coats of skin, and loosened their girdles.—Sozom. iii. 14. - -[129] In Matt. Hom. 68, c. 3; 69, c. 3; in 1 Tim. Hom. 14, c. 4, 5. - -[130] In Matt. Hom. 72, vol. vii. p. 671. - -[131] In 1 Tim. Hom. 14, c. 5. - -[132] In Joh. Hom. 44, c. 1. - -[133] De Compunct. i. c. 6. - -[134] De Compunct. i. c. 1. - -[135] C. 2. - -[136] C. 3. - -[137] C. 4, 5. - -[138] C. 7. - -[139] C. 8. - -[140] C. 9. - -[141] De Compunct. ii. 1-3. - -[142] C. 5. - -[143] ἔχθρα ἀκήρυκτος, lib. i. c. 5. - -[144] Lib. i. c. 4. - -[145] The word in the decree is “militare,” but this term appears to be -applied to civil duties as well as military. _Vide_ Suicer, _sub v._ -στρατεύειν. The Egyptian monks, however, do seem to have been specially -forced into the army. De Broglie, v. 303; Gibbon, iv.; Milman, History -of Christianity, iii. 47. - -[146] Adv. Oppug. Vitæ Mon., lib. i. c. 1-3. - -[147] C. 4. - -[148] C. 5-7. - -[149] C. 8. - -[150] Lib. ii. c. 1, 2. - -[151] C. 2-5. - -[152] C. 6-10. - -[153] Lib. iii. c. 6. - -[154] Compare similar remarks by Thucydides, book iii., in his account -of the Corcyræan sedition, on the misapplication of names to vices. - -[155] Lib. iii. c. 6, 7. - -[156] C. 8, 9. - -[157] Lib. iii. c. 14, 15. - -[158] C. 18, 19. - -[159] Pallad. Dial. c. v. - -[160] Ad Stag. a Dæm. vex., vol. i. lib. i. c. 1. - -[161] Ibid. lib. ii. c. 1. - -[162] Ad Stag., vol. i. lib. ii. c. 1. - -[163] Ibid. c. 5-9. - -[164] See _ante_, Chapter II. - -[165] See preface to his Orat. xliii. - -[166] The bishops of Egypt and the West generally adhered to Paulinus, -Sozom. vii. 11, till by the united efforts of Chrysostom and Theophilus -the universal acknowledgment of Flavian was obtained in A.D. 398. - -[167] So Jerome, Ep. xxvii. - -[168] Conc. Nic., can. 18. (Hefele, p. 426.) - -[169] Tertull. de Bapt. cxvii. Jerome Dial. contr. Lucif. - -[170] Chrysost. Hom. ii. in 2 Cor. - -[171] Constit. Apost. lib. viii. c. 10. - -[172] Constit. Apost. lib. ii. c. 57. Chrysost. Hom. xxiv. in Act. - -[173] Constit. Apost. lib. ii. c. 31, 32. Cyprian, Ep. xlix. - -[174] Conc. Nic., can. 18. (Hefele, p. 426.) - -[175] Jerome, Epist. lxxxv. ad Evang. - -[176] Chrysost. vol. ii. p. 591. - -[177] Ibid. vol. vii. p. 762. - -[178] Ibid. p. 629. - -[179] Euseb. Vita Const. iii. 50. Chrysost. vol. iii. p. 160 and vol. -xi. p. 78. _Vide_ also Müller de Antiq. Antioch., p. 103. - -[180] This description of Antioch is mainly collected from Müller’s -admirable and exhaustive work on the Antiquities of Antioch, or from -the authorities referred to therein. - -[181] See Socrates vi. 1, and Montfaucon’s preface to “De Sacerdotio.” - -[182] Ad vid. jun. c. 5. - -[183] C. 4. - -[184] Ad vid. jun., c. 3. - -[185] C. 4. Executed in 371 in the reign of Valentinian, Valens, and -Gratian; Ammian. Marcell. xxix. 1, who calls him a Gaul, not, as -Chrysostom, a Sicilian. - -[186] Constans by Magnentius. - -[187] Constantine the younger. - -[188] Jovian. - -[189] Gallus Cæsar by Constantius. The two who died natural deaths were -Constantine the Great and his son Constantius. - -[190] The widow of Jovian, whose son Varronian was deprived of an eye. -See Gibbon, vol. iv. p. 222. - -[191] Doubtful; possibly first wife of Valentinian I., divorced from -him and sent into exile. - -[192] Constantia, wife of Gratian. - -[193] Flacilla, wife of Theodosius. Compare this mournful list of -tragic deaths of sovereigns with the splendid passage in Shakespeare’s -Richard II.:— - -“For Heaven’s sake let’s sit upon the ground, And tell sad stories of -the death of kings,” etc. - - -[194] De Virginitate, c. 15. - -[195] C. 14-22. - -[196] De Virginitate, c. 57. - -[197] τὴν μάλιστα πάντων ἀγαπωμένην, c. 52. - -[198] De Virginitate, c. 52. - -[199] C. 62, 63. - -[200] C. 66, 67. - -[201] De Virginitate, c. 83. - -[202] Gibbon, iv. p. 111. - -[203] Strabo, p. 750. - -[204] As Verus, Pescennius Niger, Macrinus, and Severus -Alexander.—Herodian, ii. 7, 8, v. 2, vi. 7. - -[205] De S. Babyla, c. 14-16. - -[206] Hom. in Matt. vol. vii. p. 762. - -[207] To the establishment of parochial divisions with separate pastors -in Alexandria we have the direct testimony of Epiphanius, Hæres. 69; -Arian. c. 1. In Rome, however, and Constantinople, though the churches -were numerous, the clergy seem to have been more or less connected with -the mother Church.—_Vide_ Bingham, chap. viii. 5, book ix. - -[208] μειρακίσκος εὐτελὴς καὶ ἀπεῤῥιμμένος—applied by rather a strong -rhetorical licence to a man forty years old. - -[209] μηδέπω πρότερον. This seems to prove that he had not preached -during his diaconate. - -[210] Ecclus. xv. 9. - -[211] Hom. xi. in Act. Apost. _in fine_. - -[212] Vol. ii. p. 515. - -[213] C. 3. - -[214] See the Monitum to these Homilies, vol. i. p. 699. - -[215] See Newman’s Arians, chap. i. sect. i. - -[216] Arius, in a letter to Eusebius, addresses him as συλλουκιανιστά, -“fellow Lucianist,” Theod. i. 5. - -[217] I. c. 6, 7. - -[218] C. 3. - -[219] I. c. 4. - -[220] II. c. 3, 4. - -[221] II. c. 4, 5; III. 3, 4, 5, 6. - -[222] IV. 4. - -[223] V. 2, 3. - -[224] VII. c. 3, 4. - -[225] VII. c. 6, 7. - -[226] III. c. 6. - -[227] III. c. 6, _in fine_. - -[228] IV. _in fine_. - -[229] The colours represented the seasons, and according as one or -other was victorious a plentiful harvest or prosperous navigation was -indicated. - -[230] Contra Anom. vii. c. i. - -[231] De Laz. vii. c. 1. - -[232] De Anna, iv. 1. - -[233] De Laz. vii. c. 1. - -[234] It is a treatise, because too long for a homily, though mutilated -of its proper conclusion. It must belong to the first two years of his -priesthood, because it promises a more ample discussion of several -points, which promise we find redeemed in the homilies against the -Jews, and these homilies, again, can be proved, by internal evidence, -to have been delivered not later than A.D. 387. See Montfaucon’s -Monitum, vol. i. pp. 811 and 839. - -[235] C. 1. - -[236] See a singular parallel to this thought in the Emperor Napoleon -I.’s remarks on Christianity: “Table Talk and Opinions of Napoleon I.” - -[237] C. 9. - -[238] C. 9. - -[239] C. 12. - -[240] C. 13. - -[241] C. 2. - -[242] C. 2-5. - -[243] C. 6. - -[244] C. 7. - -[245] C. 3. - -[246] See Perowne, vol. i. _in loco_; Ps. lxxii. 6; and Delitzsch in -Isa. lx. 17. - -[247] Milman’s History of the Jews, vol. ii. book xix. - -[248] Basnage’s Hist. des Juifs, vi. 41. Newman’s Arians, ch. i. sect. -i. - -[249] V. _in fine_; robbers may possibly be used in a figurative sense. - -[250] I. c. 7. They seem early to have claimed medical skill. When -Simon Ben Jochai went to Rome as ambassador, in the reign of Antoninus -Pius, to obtain the abrogation of persecuting edicts, he won the favour -of the Emperor by curing his sick daughter—Milman, ii. 443. - -[251] II. 3; vii. _in initio_; i. c. 3, 4. - -[252] I. c. 6. - -[253] i. c. 7. So the idle youth of Rome turned for amusement into the -Synagogue. Horace, Sat. ix. 69. - -[254] ἐπιγινώσκετε ἀλλήλους. i. 4. This admonition “Discern one -another” was uttered just at the close of the Missa Catechumenorum, -when all but the baptized had to depart. - -[255] Newman’s Arians, ch. i. p. 16. Hefele, pp. 305, 306. - -[256] In Jud. iii. c. 6, iv. c. 4. - -[257] According to Theod. iii. 20, the Jews had ceased to offer -sacrifices by the reign of Julian, and when he inquired the reason, -said, because it was unlawful except on the site of the Temple; and -this was one chief reason why Julian commanded the Temple to be -restored. - -[258] In Jud. v. c. 1. - -[259] Ibid. c. 4-7. - -[260] He punished the captives by cutting off their ears. It is -singular that there is no record of this rebellion in history. - -[261] For a full relation of this singular event, see Milman’s Jews, -book xx. - -[262] Hom. viii. 4, and _in fine_. - -[263] Hom. de Anathemate, delivered soon after the discourses against -the Anomœans. See Monitum, vol. i. 944. - -[264] The former chiefly in the Hom. de Philog. vol. i. 752; the latter -in the Hom. in Nat. Diem Christi, vol. ii. p. 552. - -[265] De Beato Philog. vol. i. p. 753. - -[266] In Nat. Christi, vol. ii. p. 560. - -[267] De Bapt. Christi, c. 4. - -[268] In Kalend. c. 2. - -[269] In Ephes. Hom. vi. c. 4. - -[270] Perhaps that convulsive twitching which we call “quick blood.” - -[271] In Ephes. Hom. xii. c. 3. In Hom. viii. and xii. on 1 Cor. he -rebukes the heathenish ceremonies performed at the birth of a child. -One was, to give it that name which was attached to the candle that -burned longest out of a row of candles. - -[272] He was executed at Carthage in A.D. 376. - -[273] See Gibbon, c. xxvi. xxvii. - -[274] Cod. Theod. xvi. 1, 2. - -[275] Sozom. vii. c. 12; Gibbon, c. xxvii.; De Broglie, “L’Église et -l’Empire,” vi. p. 93. - -[276] Cod. Theod. xvi. v. 7, lib. 1, 2. - -[277] Cod. Theod. xvi. v. 10, lib. 7, 9. Sozomen informs us (vii. 22) -that Eugenius, the usurper, after the death of Valentinian II., was -persuaded by divinations to take up arms. - -[278] Sozomen, vii. 15. Theod. v. 21. - -[279] The most distinguished scholar, and orator, and one of the most -upright statesmen of his time—quæstor, prætor, and proconsul of Africa. - -[280] Fragments of his speeches preserved in Mai’s collection, vol. i. - -[281] Ambrose, Op. vol. ii. Ep. 18. - -[282] Libanius: Pro templis non exscind. The oration was certainly not -spoken before the Emperor, and probably not even sent to him. - -[283] Cod. Theod. xii. 104-115. - -[284] Theodor. v. 19. A funeral oration on her and the infant was -pronounced by Gregory Nyssen, Op. vol. iii. pp. 515, 527, 533. - -[285] Libanius, Or. 12, pp. 391-395. - -[286] Probably the prætorium built in the reign of Constantine for -the Count of the East, who from that time resided in Antioch; _vide_ -Müller, Antiq. Antioch., ii. 16. - -[287] Liban. Or. 12, p. 395, and 21, p. 527. Theod. vii. 20. Sozom. -vii. 23. Zos. iv. 41. - -[288] Chrys. Hom. de Stat. iii. 1; xxi. 1. Zosimus (iv. 41) sends -Libanius also to Constantinople, but this is a palpable error. There is -no trace of his having gone, either in his own Orations or in any other -historian. - -[289] Socrat. vi. 5. The most common practice was for the preacher to -sit, the people to stand. - -[290] Hom. ii. 2. - -[291] iii. 6. - -[292] iii. 1, 2. - -[293] ii. 5. - -[294] iii. 3. - -[295] iii. 4, 5. - -[296] xvi. 6. - -[297] iii. 7. - -[298] xiv. 1. - -[299] v. 7. - -[300] xx. 9. A passage in another homily on this subject is curious, -as proving that just the same jugglers’ feats were performed in -Antioch in the fourth century as at the fairs and races of the present -day:—“Persons pretended it was next to impossible to conquer an -inveterate habit: this was a paltry excuse, perseverance could conquer -any difficulty. To unlearn a habit of swearing could not be more -impossible than to acquire the art of throwing up swords, and catching -them by the handle, or balancing a pole on the forehead with two boys -at the top of it, or dancing on a tightrope.”—Hom. in Dom. Serv. - -[301] iv. 1. - -[302] iv. 2. - -[303] v. 3. τὸ σῶμα τῇ ψυχῇ περίκειται καθάπερ ἱμάτιον. Comp. -Shakespeare: “When we have shuffled off this mortal coil.” - -[304] v. 3. - -[305] ix. 3, 4. - -[306] x. 2, 4. - -[307] xiii. 2. - -[308] xii. 2. - -[309] x. 3. - -[310] xii. 2-4; xiii. 3. Comp. Aristotle’s distinction between -natural and conventional law or justice, Eth. v. 7.1: φυσικόν and -νομικόν δίκαιον. Compare also his description of προαίρεσις as the -ἀρχὴ κινήσεως in b. iii., and of φρόνησις (nearly = Butler’s -“Conscience”) in b. vi. - -[311] Comp. again what Aristotle says of the necessity of _training_ to -improve the _natural_ gifts, b. x. 9, and of the formation of _habits_ -by repeated _acts_. Comp. Chrys. Hom. xiii. 3, with Arist. Eth. ii. 4, -5. - -[312] xiii. 4. - -[313] xvi. 1. - -[314] Liban. Or. 21, in Helleb. and 20, 517. - -[315] Theodor. v. 20. - -[316] xvii. 1, 2. - -[317] Liban. Orat. 20. De Broglie, vi. 150, 151. Chrys. Hom. xvii. 2. - -[318] xvii. 2. The colonnades, especially of the great street which ran -through the city from east to west; the περιπάτους or promenades were -lined by colonnades with seats.—_Vide_ Müller, Antiq. Ant. ii. 12. - -[319] xvii. 2. - -[320] xx. 5, and xviii. _in fine_. - -[321] Liban. Or. 21, p. 536. - -[322] xxi. 1. - -[323] It was the custom to signalise the great festivals by acts of -mercy. “The oil of mercy glistens on the Festivals of the Church,” says -Ambrose, Serm. 14, on Ps. cxviii. 7. Leo the Great also, Serm. 39, -alludes to the custom. But, to prevent any abuse of the practice, it -was enacted by Theodosius in A.D. 384-385, that it should apply only -to those accused of petty offences: the grosser crimes of robbery, -adultery, magic, murder, sacrilege, were to be excepted from claims to -this indulgence. - -[324] xxi. 1-4. - -[325] xxi. 4. - -[326] Hom. i. de Anna, vol. iv. c. 1, where he recapitulates the -arguments which he had used in the Homilies on the Statues. - -[327] Hom. de Anna, i. 1. - -[328] Called κυριακὴ τῆς ἐπισωζομένης, this last word being the name -of Ascension Day among the Cappadocians, possibly because Christ’s -work on earth for man’s redemption was completed by his return into -heaven. (_Vide_ Leo Allatius, quoted in Suicer, Thesaur., _sub verbo_ -“Episozomene,” and Bingham, Antiq. b. xx. sect. 5.) - -[329] Hom. de Stat. xix. 1, vol. ii. - -[330] Euseb. de Vita Constant. lib. iv. - -[331] Chrys. Hom. xl. in Juvent. - -[332] Hom. de Cæmet. et Cruce, vol. ii. c. i. in Ascens. Christi, vol. -ii., and de Sanct. Martyr. vol. ii. p. 705. The Sunday corresponding to -the present Trinity Sunday was kept as a kind of All Saints’ Day. See -Bingham, b. xx. c. 7, sect. 14. - -[333] Aug. Hom. xxvi. Gelas. Decret. in Grabe, vol. i. The word -“legend” is perhaps derived from these Acts of the Saints, which were -to be read—“legenda.” - -[334] Adv. Judæos viii. c. 7. - -[335] Hom. in Juvent. et Maxim. vol. ii. p. 576. - -[336] De Bern. et Prosd. vol. ii. p. 640. - -[337] See the letter in Euseb. lib. iv. c. 15. - -[338] Aug. de Vera Relig. c. 55. - -[339] Aug. contra Faustum, lib. xx. c. 21. - -[340] De Droside, vol. ii. p. 685. - -[341] Flavian caused the remains of some much-revered saints who were -buried beneath the pavement of the church to be taken up, and placed -in another separate grave, because the people were distressed that the -reliques of such venerated personages should repose in the same vaults -with the remains of less saintly, if not heretical, characters.—Hom. in -Ascen. - -[342] De S. Babyla, c. 12. De Stat. i. 2, and viii. 2. Quod Christus -sit Deus, c. 7. De Stat. v. 1. - -[343] In S. Ignat. Mart. c. 4. - -[344] In Juvent. et Maxim. c. 1. - -[345] Hom. in Martyres, vol. ii. p. 663. - -[346] In Sanct. Jul. vol. ii. p. 673. - -[347] Aug. cont. Faustum, lib. xx. c. 21. - -[348] Aug. Confess. lib. vi. 2. Epist. 64, ad Aurel. Conc. Carth. iii. -c. 30. - -[349] Basil. Regul. Major., quæst. 40. - -[350] See Dr. Hessey’s Bampton Lectures, “on Sunday.” - -[351] Whether it was a regular custom for the rustic population to -visit Antioch on this day, or whether it was the first great influx for -trade and legal business after the recent suspension of all business, -does not appear. - -[352] Ambr. Ep. xx. - -[353] Ambr. Ep. xx. p. 854. - -[354] Sozomen, vii. 13. Ruf. ii. 16. - -[355] Ambr. Ep. xxi. Sermo contra Aux. p. 868. - -[356] Ignatius is said to have first introduced antiphonal singing at -Antioch, Flavian and Diodorus to have established it there; Socr. v. 8; -Theod. ii. 19. Basil refers to it as a common practice, but Ambrose is -generally allowed to have introduced it to the Western Church, and on -this occasion. _Vide_ Suicer. - -[357] Aug. Conf. ix. 7, and preceding books. - -[358] Ambr. Ep. xxi. - -[359] Ambr. Ep. xxii. Aug. Conf. ix. 7. - -[360] Ambr. Ep. xl. and xli. - -[361] Cod. Theod. iv. v. 4, lib. 2. De Broglie, vi. 257. - -[362] Sozom. vii. 25. Theod. v. 17. Ambr. Ep. li. De Broglie, vi. 302, -etc. - -[363] Theod. v. 18. De Broglie, vi. 302 _et seq._ - -[364] Sozom. vii. 15. Socr. v. 15. Ambr. Ep. lvi. Theod. v. 23. - -[365] Ambr. de ob. Val. - -[366] Theod. v. 24. Socr. v. 25. Sozom. vii. 24. De Broglie, vi. 8. - -[367] Ambr. Ep. lxi. lxii. - -[368] Socr. v. 26. Sozom. vii. 29. Ambrosii Vita a Paul. scripta, de -obit. Theod. - -[369] Of course I do not forget that the idea and name of Roman Emperor -and Roman Empire lived on for centuries more, but the elevation of -Charles the Great was a revolt against the old order of things. He can -hardly be regarded as a successor of Theodosius so truly as Theodosius -was a successor of Augustus. - -[370] Claud. de Bello Gild. 293. - -[371] Claud. in Ruf. i. v. 137. - -[372] Philostorg. xi. 3. For much assistance in his notices of -Rufinus and Eutropius, the writer must pay his acknowledgments to the -admirable work by Amédée Thierry: “Les trois ministres des fils de -Théodose”—Rufin, Eutrope, Stilicon. - -[373] Gibbon, iii. 67. Zosim. iv. 51. - -[374] Claud. in Ruf. i. v. 220. - -[375] See references in Thierry, p. 19. - -[376] De Laud. Stil. ii. v. 379. - -[377] “Noster Scipiades Stilicho.” De Consulat. Stilic. præf. v. 21. - -[378] Claud. de Nupt. Honor. et Mariæ. - -[379] Zosim. v. 3. - -[380] Symmach. Ep. iv. 15 and 16. - -[381] Possibly alluded to by Chrysostom in Hom. iv. de Penitentia, -c. 2, where he mentions “incursions of enemies” among other recent -calamities. These homilies were probably delivered in A.D. 395. - -[382] Thierry, pp. 35-78. Claud. in Ruf. lib. ii. - -[383] In Eutrop. i. v. 104, 105. - -[384] “Contemptu jam liber erat.”—Claud. in Eutrop. i. v. 132. - -[385] Claud. in Eutrop. i. v. 148, 149. - -[386] Sozom. vii. 22. - -[387] Philostorg. xi. 5. - -[388] Claud. in Eutrop. i. 427, etc.; ii. 97, etc. - -[389] Thierry, pp. 97-126. Zosim. v. 5. Claud. in Eutrop. ii. - -[390] Zosim. v. 8, 9, 12. - -[391] Sozom. viii. 7. - -[392] Claud. in Eutrop. i. 235, etc. - -[393] Synes. de Regno, p. 16. - -[394] Claud. in Eutrop. ii. 95. Thierry, p. 162, etc. - -[395] Socr. vi. 2. - -[396] See Chrysostom’s own remarks in De Sacerdotio, lib. iii., cited -above in Ch. iv., and in Act. Apost. Hom. iii. 5. - -[397] Epist. xxi. ad Valerium. - -[398] Socrat. vi. 2. Sozom. viii. 2. - -[399] Lib. iii. c. 15, 17. - -[400] Pallad. Dial. c. 5. - -[401] Socr. vi. 2. Sozom. viii. 2. Pallad. Dial. - -[402] Socr. vi. 2. Sozom. viii. 2. - -[403] Pallad. Dial. c. 5. - -[404] Sozom. viii. 2. Pallad. Dial. 5. - -[405] Socr. vi. 2. - -[406] Bingham, b. ii. c. 11, sec. 8. - -[407] The title Patriarch is occasionally used in the following pages, -although it does not appear to have been a formally recognised title -till fifty years later. Socrates (A.D. 440 about) uses it (_vide_ -c. 8), but the first occurrence of it in any public document is in -the acts of the Council of Chalcedon, A.D. 451, where it is applied -especially to Leo i. of Rome.—Can. 28. Labbé, vol. iv. - -[408] Hom. xi. in Anom. vol. i. p. 795. - -[409] De Sacerd. lib. vi. c. 6-8, quoted above, p. 53. - -[410] Soc. vi. 3. Sozom. viii. 9. - -[411] Pallad. Dial. c. v. p. 20. - -[412] Lib. xxvii. c. 3. - -[413] Epist. ii. ad Nepotianum. - -[414] Pallad. Dial. c. v. and xii. - -[415] See Hefele, p. 131, and on the date of this synod. - -[416] Stanley, Eastern Church, lecture v. Socr. i. 11. Sozom. i. -23. The truth of the story has been disputed, but apparently on -insufficient grounds. _Vide_ Hefele, p. 436. - -[417] Can. 3. Hefele, p. 379. - -[418] Jerome, Ep. xxii. ad Eustoch. Epiphan. Hær. 63. - -[419] See references in Bingham, b. vi. c. ii. 13. - -[420] Contra eos, etc., vol. i. p. 495. - -[421] Ibid. c. 3, 4. - -[422] Ibid. c. 7. - -[423] Contra eos, etc., c. 9. - -[424] Ibid. c. 10. - -[425] Ibid. c. 10. - -[426] Socr. vi. 4. - -[427] Vol. xii. p. 468. - -[428] Vol. xii. p. 485. - -[429] Contra Lud. et Theat. vol. vi. p. 269, _in fine_. - -[430] Ibid. c. 1. - -[431] Contra Lud. et Theat. c. 2. - -[432] From this and what follows it would appear that communicants went -within the rails to receive, and close to the altar. This was the most -primitive custom. Sometimes the recipients stood; _vide_ passages cited -in Bingham, b. viii. ch. 6, sec. 7. - -[433] Vol. xii. Hom. ix. - -[434] In Coloss. Hom. vii., vol. xi. p. 350. - -[435] Hom. xviii. in Genes., vol. iv. p. 150. - -[436] The use of silk seems from its first introduction into the -Empire to have been regarded as the _ne plus ultra_ of luxury. It -was condemned by Pliny, vi. 20, xi. 21. Elagabalus was the first -_man_ as well as the first Emperor who ventured to wear a material -hitherto confined to female dress. See Gibbon, vol. vii. c. 40, and his -interesting account of the introduction of silk-worms from China to -Constantinople by some Persian monks in the reign of Justinian. - -[437] In Matt. Hom. xlix., vol. vii. p. 501 - -[438] In Psalm. xlviii., vol. v. p. 514. - -[439] Hom. i. de Lazaro, c. 8. - -[440] In Gen. Hom. xli., p. 382. - -[441] In Joan. Hom. lxii., p. 340, and Hom. lxix., p. 380. - -[442] In Act. Apost. p. 147 _et seq._ - -[443] Hom. xx. in Act. Apost. p. 162. This set of fifty-five Homilies -on the Acts of the Apostles, of which much use is made in this chapter, -was delivered in A.D. 400, between Easter and Whitsuntide, in which -interval it was customary to read through the Acts in the Lessons for -the day: _vide_ Bingham, vol. iv. These homilies are among the least -polished of Chrysostom’s productions. Erasmus, who translated them into -Latin, was thoroughly disappointed and out of humour with them, and -even doubts their authenticity. In a letter to Tonstal, Bp. of Durham, -he declares that he could have written better matter himself even when -“ebrius ac stertens.” But most persons familiar with Chrysostom’s -productions will agree with Montfaucon and Savile that these homilies -could have flowed only from that golden vein, though the ore is not -so much refined as usual, and that some passages are in his very best -style. None of his homilies, except those on the Statues and St. -Matthew, contain more curious revelations of the manners and customs of -the age. - -[444] In Act. Apost. pp. 74 and 98. - -[445] In Act. Apost. p. 256. - -[446] See Villari’s Life of Savonarola, b. i. c. 3. - -[447] In Act. Apost. p. 191. - -[448] Hom. in Inscrip. Altaris, i. _in initio_. - -[449] In Act. Apost. pp. 189, 190. - -[450] Vol. xii. Hom. vi. adv. Cath. pp. 143 and 491. - -[451] Vol. xii. Hom. i., “Quod frequenter,” etc. Socrates, vi. 22. If -we may estimate the man from the account by Socrates, his admirer, who -relates a number of his so-called witticisms, the book is no great loss. - -[452] Greg. de Vita sua, pp. 585-1097. Orat. xxii., xxvii., xxxii. - -[453] _Vide_ Gibbon, v. p. 30. - -[454] Socrates, vi. 8. _Vide_ Dean Stanley, Eastern Church, pp. 131, -132, for specimens of these Thalia; _e.g._ one commences, “Where are -those who say that the Three are but one power?” - -[455] Sozom. viii. 3. Socrat. v. 15. - -[456] Epist. xiv. vol. iii. - -[457] Vol. xii. Hom. viii. - -[458] Theod. v. 30. - -[459] Epist. xiv. and ccvii. - -[460] Theod. v. 29. Tillemont, xi. p. 155. - -[461] Marc. Diac. ap. Baron, an. 401, 49. - -[462] Vol. xii. 471. The titles “mother of churches,” “nurse of monks,” -“staff of the poor,” etc., were not bestowed till after his return -from his first exile, vol. iii. p. 446. M. Thierry has erroneously -introduced them into this earlier stage of his life. - -[463] Claud. in Eutrop. lib. i. The pathetic appeal is by Claudian -put into the mouth of an allegorical impersonation of the city. -Claudian was the intimate friend and companion of Stilicho, and may not -improbably have assisted at this audience. He is a valuable guide to -the history of this period, and especially as an indicator of public -opinion on the great events of his day. - -[464] Gibbon, vol. v. p. 361. Claudian, De Consul. Mall. Theod. - -[465] In Eutrop. ii. 39, 136. - -[466] Claud. in Eutrop. ii. 187 _et seq._ - -[467] In Eutrop. ii. 377. - -[468] The above account is taken from Zosimus, lib. v.; Claudian in -Eutrop. ii. Thierry, “Trois Ministres; Eutrope.” - -[469] Zosim. v. 17. - -[470] Claud. in Eutr. ii. 474 and 534, etc. - -[471] Philostorg. xi. 6. Zosim. v. 18. - -[472] Stanley, (Appendix,) “Memorials of Westminster.” - -[473] Cod. Theod. lib. ix. tit. 45. - -[474] Ibid. - -[475] The altar was sometimes called ἄσυλος τράπεζα (Synesius, Ep. -lviii.) - -[476] Claud. Prolog. in Eutrop. ii. 25. Chrysost. in Eutrop., c. 3. -vol. iii. - -[477] Chrysost. in Eutrop. c. 2. - -[478] De Capto Eutrop. vol. iii. - -[479] In Eutrop. i. - -[480] De Capto Eutrop. c. 4. - -[481] In Eutrop. c. 3. - -[482] Socrat. vi. 5. - -[483] In Eutrop. c. 1. - -[484] In Eutrop. c. 2-4. - -[485] Zosimus, v. 18, ἐξαρπάσαντες. - -[486] De Capto Eutrop. c. 1. - -[487] Zosim. v. 18. - -[488] Zosim. v. 18. Cod. Theod. ix. 40, 17. Philostorg. xi. 6. - -[489] Zosim. v. 18. - -[490] Zosim. v. 18. Socrat. vi. 6. Sozom. viii. 4. - -[491] Hom. cum Saturn. et Aurel. vol. iii. - -[492] Socr. vi. 6. Sozom. viii. 4. Theod. v. 31. - -[493] Sozom. viii. 4. Theod. v. 32. - -[494] Nili Mon. Epist. i. 70, 79, 114, 116, 205, 206, 286. - -[495] Sozom. viii. 4. Socr. vi. 6. Theod. v. 32. - -[496] Sozom. viii. 4. Socr. vi. 6. Zosim. v. 19. - -[497] Eunap. Sard. Fragm. 60. Sozom. viii. 4. - -[498] _Vide_ c. 21. - -[499] Sozom. viii. 4. Socr. vi. 6. - -[500] The Alexandrian Chronicle is precise in fixing Dec. 23, A.D. 400, -as the date of his defeat on the Hellespont, and Jan. 3, A.D. 401, -as the day on which his head was brought into Constantinople. This -certainly leaves a very insufficient interval for the events recorded -in Zosimus. - -[501] _Vide_ c. 33. - -[502] Palladius, author of the Dialogue prefixed to Migne’s edition -of Chrysostom’s works. On the debated question whether this Palladius -was the same Bishop of Hellenopolis who wrote the Lausiaca, _vide_ -Tillemont, xi. “Vie de Pallade.” - -[503] There was in fact what might be called a floating synod of this -kind always in existence in Constantinople; the Patriarch being _ex -officio_ President.—Tillemont, xv. 703, 704. - -[504] We are in the summer of A.D. 400, and the capture and death of -Gaïnas occurred in Jan. A.D. 401. - -[505] σοῦ τὴν τιμιότητα; sometimes we have ὁσιότητα, “your Holiness.” - -[506] Pallad. Dial. c. 14 and 15. - -[507] See, on this whole subject, Bingham, viii. 13. 6; and Robertson, -i. pp. 187 and 318, and the authorities there cited. - -[508] Pallad. Dial. c. 14, 15. Sozomen (viii. 6) says that Chrysostom -deposed thirteen bishops of Asia, Lycia, and Phrygia. This is possible, -as the synod may have inquired into other simoniacal cases beyond the -original six. - -[509] Sozom. viii. 6. - -[510] Tillemont, xi. p. 170. - -[511] Labbé, ii. p. 947. It must always be borne in mind that Diocese -was the name of the largest _civil_ division of the Roman Empire. Each -diocese contained several provinces, _e.g._ Thrace, six; Asia, ten; -Pontus, eleven. The whole Empire was divided into thirteen dioceses, -and about one hundred and twenty provinces. The Ecclesiastical -divisions followed more or less the plan of the civil. An archbishop -was bishop of the metropolis of a Province, a Patriarch of one or more -_Dioceses_. - -[512] Can. xxviii.; and Can. ix. Chalced. in Labbé, iv. pp. 769 and 798. - -[513] Comp. Keble, Christian Year, for Easter Day:— - -“Sundays by thee more glorious break, An Easter Day in every week.” - - -[514] Vol. iii. p. 421. - -[515] Socrat. vi. 11. Sozom. viii. 10. - -[516] Vol. iii. p. 424 _et seq._ - -[517] Pallad. Dial. c. 18, pp. 62 and 67. - -[518] Socrat. vi. 4. - -[519] Sozom. viii. c. 9. - -[520] Pallad. Dial. c. 19. - -[521] Greg. Naz. Epp. lvii. lviii. - -[522] Greg. Naz. Ep. lvii. - -[523] Theophilus is said to have fallen down before her and kissed -her knees, an obeisance prompted by avaricious hopes on his part, and -repelled by genuine humility on hers. - -[524] Pallad. Dial. c. 16, 17. Sozom. viii. 9. - -[525] Pallad. Dial. c. 6. Tillemont xiv. p. 219 _seq._: ἐγὼ αὐτῷ ἀρτύω -χύτραν. - -[526] Pallad. Dial. c. 5, 6, 18, 19. - -[527] Jerome in Ruf. lib. ii. c. 5. Ep. xxxi. p. 203. - -[528] Tillemont, xi.: Vie de Theophile. - -[529] Euseb. Hist. vi. 3, 19. - -[530] Jerome declared that Origen had composed more books than most men -would find time to copy.—Epist. xxix. - -[531] The Paschal Letter was a circular addressed to clergy and monks -throughout the diocese soon after the Epiphany; the primary object -was to announce the date of the first day of Lent and of Easter Day, -whence the name; but other matters were, as in the present instance, -frequently introduced. See Tillemont, xi. 462. - -[532] Socrat. vi. 7. Sozom. viii. 11, 12. - -[533] Jerome in Ruf. iii.; and Ep. lxi. - -[534] In Ruf. iii. 33. - -[535] The contest for precedence was eventually decided in favour of -Jerusalem. The see was made a Patriarchate in the reign of Theodosius -II., and its jurisdiction fixed to the three Palestines by the Council -of Chalcedon, A.D. 451. - -[536] Jerome, Ep. xxxviii. - -[537] Jerome, Ep. xxxviii. - -[538] Jerome, Ep. cx. - -[539] Ibid. Ep. xxxviii. and xxxix. - -[540] Jerome, Ep. xxxviii. - -[541] Ibid. - -[542] Pallad. Lausiaca, p. 901. Tillemont, vol. xi. - -[543] Pallad. Dial. c. 6. Other causes of the enmity of Theophilus -are mentioned by Socrates, vi. 9, and Sozomen, viii. 12, but not -incompatible with the account of Palladius. - -[544] Socrat. vi. 7. - -[545] Pasch. Epist. of Theoph. quoted in Tillemont, xi. p. 470. Pallad. -Dial. 6. Sozom. viii. 12. - -[546] Sulpic. Sever. lib. i. c. 3. - -[547] Pallad. Dial. c. 7. - -[548] Sozom. viii. 13. - -[549] Jer. Ep. lxx. - -[550] Jer. Ep. lxxviii. in Ruf. Epp. lxvii. lxxiii. - -[551] Socrat. vi. 9. Sozom. viii. 14. - -[552] Socrat. (vi. c. 13) says that the writings only of Origen, not -the man himself, were condemned. - -[553] Ep. lxxviii. - -[554] Pallad. Dial. c. 8. - -[555] Sozom. viii. 13. Pallad. Dial. c. 8. - -[556] Ep. xvi. - -[557] Socrat. vi. c. 12. - -[558] Socrat. vi 12. Sozom. viii. 14. - -[559] Sozom. viii. 14 and 26. - -[560] Socrat. vi. 14. - -[561] Sozom. viii. 14. - -[562] Sozom. c. 15. - -[563] Socrat. vi. 15. Sozom. viii. 15. - -[564] Socrat. vi. 15. Sozom. viii. 16. - -[565] Pallad. Dial. c. 2 (Epist. of Chrys. to Innocent), and c. 8. - -[566] See Tillemont, vol. xi. ch. 71. - -[567] _Vide_ ante, Ch. XIII. - -[568] So Palladius, c. 8, on the whole the most trustworthy authority. -Photius, Biblioth. (c. 59), says there were forty-five. - -[569] The language is not very clear in this passage, but such is, I -conceive, the drift of it.—c. 8. - -[570] This must have been a slight exaggeration, but the members do -seem to have been mainly Egyptian. - -[571] Pallad. Dial. c. 8. - -[572] Phot. c. 59. Chrys. Ep. 125 ad Cyr., where he indignantly repels -the charge:—“had he done so, might his name be blotted out from the -roll of bishops;” but at the same time he deprecates the treatment of -such an offence (had it been committed) with extreme severity: for had -not our Lord Himself instituted that holy feast, and had not St. Paul -baptized without previously fasting? Chrysostom shrinks in horror from -the supposition of such a gross violation of ecclesiastical rule as -the act in his case would have been, but refuses to place it on the -same footing with the commission of a flagrant moral crime, or direct -disobedience to any command of Christ. There are, however, some doubts -whether this letter is genuine. See _infra_, p. 317, and note. - -[573] Pallad. Dial. 8. Socr. vi. 15. Soz. viii. 17. - -[574] Tillemont, vol. xi. - -[575] It contains the celebrated passage: “Herodias again dances and -demands the head of John;” which recurs as the exordium of another and -spurious homily (vol. viii. p. 485), and also an indignant repudiation -of the offence of administering baptism after eating.—vol. iii. 427. -Socrates, vi. 16. Sozom. viii. 17, 18. - -[576] The authenticity of which has been questioned. The style is -perhaps not quite worthy of Chrysostom; but in one of his sermons after -his return from exile he apparently alludes to some quotations from Job -made in this discourse. - -[577] More strictly speaking, “the Hieron,” “the sacred spot” where -the Argonauts were supposed to have offered sacrifice to Zeus on their -return from Colchis. - -[578] Sozom. viii. 18, 19. Socrat. vi. 16, 17. Zosim. v. 23. - -[579] Theod. v. 34. Chrys. vol. iii. p. 446. - -[580] Socr. vi. 16. Soz. viii. 18. Chrys. Ep. ad Innoc. in Dial. Pall. -p. 10. - -[581] It appears from subsequent events that Theophilus had not yet -actually quitted Constantinople, but he and his partisans had retired -for the time discomfited from the field of active opposition; and -this would justify the language of Chrysostom, who is speaking under -excitement. - -[582] Sermones 1 and 2, post red. ab exsil. vol. iii. - -[583] Socrat. vi. 17. Sozom. viii. 19. - -[584] Ep. ad Innoc. in Pallad. Dial. p. 10. - -[585] As distinguished from the Forum of Constantine, which was -elliptical in shape. - -[586] Cod. Theod. vi. 102. - -[587] The celebrated exordium of a homily supposed to be directed -against Eudoxia—“Again Herodias rages, again she demands the head of -John”—if actually spoken with reference to John the Baptist, may easily -have been represented by the malevolent as aimed at the Empress. But -the whole homily has been pronounced spurious by Savile and Montfaucon, -and on perusal of it their verdict seems reasonable. The discourse -is the production of a thorough misogynist, describing with much -coarseness and acrimony the misery and trouble caused by the wickedness -of women. Most will agree with Savile, that it is “scarcely worth -reading, and quite unworthy emendation.”—Vol. viii. p. 485. - -[588] Pallad. Dial. c. 9. - -[589] Sozom. viii. 20. Socrat. vi. 18. Pallad. Dial. c. 9. - -[590] Pallad. Dial. c. 9. - -[591] Pallad. Dial. c. 9. - -[592] Pallad. Dial. c. 9. Chrysostom (Ep. ad Innoc. vol. iii.) speaks -of more than forty friendly bishops. - -[593] Vol. iii. p. 533. - -[594] Pallad. Dial. c. 9. - -[595] Pallad. Dial. c. 9. Sozom. viii. 21. - -[596] Pallad. Dial. 10. Sozom. viii. 21, 22. Socrat. vi. 18. - -[597] Pallad. Dial. c. 10. - -[598] Pallad. Dial. c. 10. Zosim. v. 24. Sozom. viii. 2. - -[599] Pallad. Dial. c. 11. - -[600] Ep. ad Episcop. vol. iii. pp. 541 and 673. - -[601] C. 11. - -[602] Epist. cxxv. - -[603] Epist. ccxii. - -[604] Sozom. viii. 24. Pallad. Dial. c. 20. - -[605] Epist. ad Olymp. vi. - -[606] Epp. xciv. and civ. - -[607] Pallad. Dial. cc. 1, 2, 3. - -[608] Ep. cxiii. - -[609] Epp. clxviii. clxix. _et aliæ_. - -[610] Pallad. Dial. c. 3. - -[611] Sozom. viii. 26. - -[612] One previous letter we possess in Chrys. vol. iii. p. 539, in -which he expresses his horror at the late outrages in the Church of St. -Sophia, and at the gross violation of justice and law in the recent -so-called trial of Chrysostom. - -[613] Pallad. Dial. c. 4. - -[614] Nilus, 2 Epp. cclxv. and cclxxix. Sozom. viii. 25. - -[615] Pallad. Dial. 20. - -[616] Sozom. viii. 27. Pallad. Dial. 20. - -[617] Ep. ad eos qui scandalizati sunt, c. 19. - -[618] Pallad. Dial. cc. 15 and 16. - -[619] Theod. v. 34. - -[620] Epp. x. xi. - -[621] Ep. xiii. - -[622] Epp. cxx. cxxi. - -[623] Ep. cxxv. _in fine_. - -[624] Ep. ccxxi. - -[625] Ep. viii. - -[626] Ep. xiv. - -[627] Epp. xiii. lxxxiv. - -[628] Ep. cxxv. - -[629] Ep. ccxxxiv. - -[630] Epp. ccxxxiv. ccxxxvi. It is not mentioned in Pliny or Ptolemy, -but appears in the Itinerary of Antonine as Cocusus (pp. 10, 13). -It stood at the confluence of several roads, but apparently not -high-roads, one of which connected Antioch with Asia Minor. - -[631] Ep. cxxv. _in fine_. - -[632] Ep. xiii. - -[633] Epp. xiii. xiv. ccxxxiv. - -[634] Vol. iii. p. 549 _et seq._ - -[635] Ep. ii. c. 10. - -[636] _e.g._ Epp. lxxxviii. lxxxix. _et aliæ_. - -[637] Ep. cxxiv. - -[638] Ep. cxxxii. - -[639] Ep. cxlvii. - -[640] Epp. cxxx. ccxxii. - -[641] Epp. l. li. lxi. _et aliæ_. - -[642] There seems no doubt that Maruthas was an able and active -missionary bishop. Socrates (vii. 8) tells strange stories of his -skill in exposing some tricks of the magi, by which they attempted to -prejudice the Persian king Isdigerdes against Christianity. - -[643] Ep. ccx. - -[644] Ep. ccxii. - -[645] Ep. ccxvii. - -[646] Ep. cciv. - -[647] As appears from an edict dated August 29, addressed to Studius, -Prefect of Constantinople.—Cod. Theod. vol. ii. p. 16. - -[648] Ep. cxiv. - -[649] Tillemont, xi. 274. - -[650] Vol. v. ch. xxxii. - -[651] Ep. vi. - -[652] Epp. cxl. cxlvi. - -[653] Epp. liii. liv. - -[654] Epp. cxxiii. cxxvi. - -[655] Photius, p. 1048. - -[656] Epp. lxi. lxix. cxxvii. cxxxi. - -[657] Ep. clvii. - -[658] Ep. clv. - -[659] Vol. iii. p. 535. - -[660] Ep. cxlix. - -[661] Aug. cont. Jul. p. 370. - -[662] Ep. v. - -[663] Pallad. Dial. pp. 38, 39, who says that they came out of Syria, -Cilicia, and Armenia: but how could this be if it took three months to -convey Chrysostom from Cucusus to Comana? - -[664] Tillemont, xi. 349. - -[665] This is his day in the Calendar of the Eastern and Western Church. - -[666] The Roman martyrology states that the remains of the saint were -afterwards translated to St. Peter’s, Rome, but the statement is not -supported by any trustworthy historical evidence.—Tillemont, xi. 352. - -[667] I must acknowledge my obligations in the composition of -this chapter to the very useful and instructive work of Dr. Th. -Foerster, Berlin, entitled “Chrysostomus in seinem Verhältniss zur -Antiochenischen Schule.”—Gotha, 1869. - -[668] In Rom. Hom. xiii. 2. 1 Cor. Hom. xiii. 3. In Phil. vii. 5. - -[669] Hom. de Stat. xi. 2. - -[670] In Genes. Hom. xxi. 2. - -[671] Ibid. xvi. and xvii. - -[672] In Rom. Hom. xii. 6. - -[673] In Genes. Hom. xx. 3. In 1 Cor. Hom. ii. 2. In Matt. Hom. lix. 1, -2. - -[674] Comp. Jeremy Taylor, “On Original Sin,” ch. vi.: “A man is not -naturally sinful as he is naturally heavy, or upright, naturally apt -to weep and laugh; for these he is always and unavoidably.” Comp. also -Aristot. Eth. ii. c. 1. - -[675] In Matt. Hom. xxviii. 3, and lviii. 3. - -[676] In Heb. Hom. xii. 2 and 3. - -[677] De Fato, Hom. iii.-vi. Comp. Jer. Taylor, Unum Necessar. ch. 6. -sec. 5. - -[678] De Pœnit. Hom. i. 2; et ad Theod. lapsum. - -[679] In Inscrip. Act. ii. 6. - -[680] In Psalm. cxlii. 5. - -[681] In Act. Hom. xli. 4. - -[682] In Matt. xxxii. - -[683] De Sanct. Babyla, vol. ii. - -[684] In Johan. vol. viii. p. 482. - -[685] In Hebr. Hom. v. i. - -[686] Contra Julianum, bk. i. ed. Bened. p. 630; but I have failed to -find the passage in Chrysostom’s works. - -[687] In Rom. Hom. x. 2. - -[688] προτρεπτικὴ οὐ βιαστική in Johan. Hom. xlvii. 4; _et_ in Matt. H. -lxxx. 3. - -[689] In 1 Cor. Hom. vii. 2. In Ephes. Hom. i. 2. In 1 Cor. Hom. ii. 2. - -[690] In Rom. Hom. xvi. cc. 8, 9. - -[691] In Genes. Hom. xlii. c. 1. - -[692] In Johan. Hom. xviii. 3. - -[693] In Heb. Hom. xii. c. 3. - -[694] De Mac. i. 3. - -[695] Ch. VIII. - -[696] In Johan. Hom. iii. 2. - -[697] In Heb. Hom. ii. c. 2. - -[698] In Psal. li. Expos. - -[699] In Heb. Hom. iv. 2, 3. - -[700] In Rom. Hom. xiii. 5. - -[701] In Phil. Hom. vii. c. 3. - -[702] In Heb. Hom. iii., Hom. iv. c. iii. In Philog. Beat. In Johan. -Hom. xlviii. c. i. - -[703] In Matt. Hom. iii.; Expos. in Ps. li.; in 1 Cor. Hom. xxiv. 4. - -[704] De Resur. J. Chr. c. 3. - -[705] De Bapt. Christi, c. 3. - -[706] De Cœmet. et Cruce, i. - -[707] De Cœmet. et Cruce, 3. See also in Ephes. Hom. xx.; and esp. In -Ascens. J. Chr. c. 2. - -[708] De Verb. Apost. vol. iii. p. 276. - -[709] In Johan. Hom. xxxiii. c. 1. - -[710] In Rom. Hom. viii. c. 5. - -[711] In Gen. Hom. v. c. 1. - -[712] In Ephes. Hom. iv. c. 2. - -[713] In Gen. Hom. xxxi. 2. - -[714] De Pœnit. Hom. viii. 2. - -[715] Cont. Anom. vii. 7. - -[716] De Anna, iv. 5. - -[717] Ibid. ii. 2. - -[718] Ad illum. Catech. i. c. 3. - -[719] De Mut. Nom. iv. _in fine_. - -[720] Ad ilium. Catech. i. 3. - -[721] Ibid. ii. 3. - -[722] De Bapt. Chr. c. 3. - -[723] In Gen. Hom. xl. c. 4. - -[724] De Bapt. J. Chr. c. 7. - -[725] De Cœmet. et Cruce, _in fine_, vol. ii. - -[726] De Prod. Jud. vol. ii. Hom. i. c. 6. - -[727] In Eustath. Ant. vol. ii. p. 601. - -[728] In Ep. ad. Hebr. Hom. xvii. c. 3. - -[729] Hom. ii. De Stat. c. 9. - -[730] De Nat. Christi, c. 7. - -[731] De Stat. xi. c. 5. The authenticity of the letter to Cæsarius is -so doubtful that I have not ventured to introduce here the celebrated -passage which it contains on this subject. It will be found in the -Appendix, where the curious history of this letter is related. - -[732] Eirenikon, part i. p. 112. - -[733] De Laz. Hom. iv. 4. - -[734] De Pœnit. Hom. iv. 4. - -[735] De Pœnit. Hom. ix. - -[736] See Dr. Pusey’s history of the cultus and its mischievous -effects, in Parts i. and ii. of the “Eirenikon.” - -[737] In Johan. Hom. xxi. 2; and in Matt. Hom. xliv. 1. - -[738] De Mundi Creat. vi. 10. - -[739] _Vide_ Dr. Pusey, Eiren. i. p. 113: “We could preach whole -volumes of the sermons of St. Augustine or St. Chrysostom to our -people, to their edification and without offence: were a Roman Catholic -preacher to confine himself to their preaching, he would (as it has -been said among themselves) be regarded as ‘indevout towards Mary.’” - -[740] In Ephes. Hom. iii. _in fine_. - -[741] Vol. iii. p. 362. - -[742] I have not thought it expedient to crowd the margin with -references to Chrysostom’s works for every one of the liturgical forms -above mentioned. They may nearly all be consulted in Bingham, book xv., -who has collected them with great care. The fullest passages occur -in vol. ii. p. 345; iii. p. 104; x. pp. 200 and 527; xi. p. 323. The -so-called prayer of St. Chrysostom in our Prayer-Book is found in the -Liturgies of St. Basil and St. Chrysostom, but cannot certainly be -traced to either of those fathers. It was inserted at the end of the -Litany in 1544, and of the Daily Service in 1661. - -[743] Vol. ii. pp. 17, 92, 522, _et passim_. - -[744] Vol vi. 157. - -[745] In Isai. v. 3, and vi. - -[746] Ibid. vii. 6. - -[747] In Is. vii. c. i. - -[748] In Ephes. Hom. x. 1. - -[749] De Verb. Apost. vol. iii. p. 282. - -[750] In Matt. Hom. i. 2. - -[751] In Galat. i. 6. - -[752] In Matt. i. _et_ in Johan. i. - -[753] In Rom. Hom. xxxi. 1. - -[754] In Psalm xliv.; in 1 Cor. Hom. xxix. 1. - -[755] _Vide_ Tillemont, xi. p. 37. - -[756] Socrat. vi. 4. - -[757] Suidas; _vide_ verb. Johannes. - -[758] Cont. Anom. Hom. iv. - -[759] De Sacerdot. iv. 6. - -[760] Adv. Oppugn. Vit. Mon. iii. 2. - -[761] Adv. Oppugn. Vit. Mon. ii. 4. - -[762] De Pœnit. vi. 1. - -[763] De Pœnit. ii. 1. - -[764] In Johan. Hom. ii. 2, and vol. vii. 30. - -[765] Vol. xi. p. 694. - -[766] Vol. ix. p. 407. Comp. Jerome: “Quotusquisque nunc Aristotelem -legit? quanti Platonis vel libros novere, vel nomen? Vix in angulis -otiosi eos senes recolunt; rusticanos vero et piscatores nostros totus -orbis loquitur, universus mundus sonat.”—In Galat. iii. - -[767] Alex. Knox, “Remains,” vol. iii. pp. 75-77. - -[768] Jebb, “Pastoral Discourses,” ii. - -[769] Milner, Hist. ii. p. 302. - -[770] Dante, Parad. xii. 136. - - - - -INDEX. - - - Ablavius, the prefect, grandfather of Olympias, 280. - - Acacius, bishop of Berœa, carries a petition to Rome, 237; - a leader of the faction hostile to Chrysostom, 282; - plots against Chrysostom after his recall, 329; - undertakes the responsibility, with Antiochus, of the archbishop’s - deposition, 332, 339; - bribes Lucius to disperse the people at the Baths, 336; - assists in ordaining Porphyry, 358. - - Acacius of Cæsarea preaches at Antioch, 19. - - Æmilius, a champion of Roman freedom, 242. - - Æmilius, bishop of Beneventum, one of the Italian deputation, 353. - - Aëtius, an extreme Arian, 109. - - Africa, Church of, maintains communion with Theophilus and Chrysostom, - 385. - - African Council, resolution of, wishing for intercourse between Rome - and Alexandria, 385. - - Alaric, a royal Visigoth, 187; - descends into Thrace and ravages the country round Constantinople, - 207; - mock interview with Rufinus, 207; - overruns Greece, 207; - spreads devastation over Peloponnesus, 210; - made commander-in-chief of the forces of the East, 210; - efforts to gain Rome, 359. - - Alexander, governor at Antioch, 11. - - Alexander of Basilinopolis, a friend of Chrysostom, 329. - - Alexander Severus, Emperor, 46. - - Alexander succeeds Porphyry in the see of Antioch, 377; - pays honour to Chrysostom, 388. - - Alexandria, vices of the Christian population of, 11; - tumults at, 30; - products of monks shipped to, 64; - religious riots at, 65; - parochial divisions, 103 _note_; - sedition at, 151; - order restored by Cynegius, 151; - its mixed population, 195; - flight of Theophilus to, 325. - - Alexandrian school, allegorical interpretations of, 28. - - Almsgiving, Chrysostom on the duty of, 228. - - Amantius, chamberlain of Eudoxia, 241. - - Ambrose, archbishop of Milan, 41 _note_; - a layman when consecrated, 56; - converts multitudes of women to celibacy, 61; - sides with Theodosius, 142; - reply to the appeal of Symmachus, 145, 146; - prohibits feasts in the churches, 182; - his character, 187; - before the royal council, 187; - refuses to surrender the Portian Basilica, 187; - will not recognise the edict, 188; - served with an order of banishment, but refuses to depart, 189; - declines the proposal of arbitration, and remains master of the - field, 190; - his triumph, 190; - mission to Maximus, 190; - letter to Theodosius on his commanding the bishop of Callinicum - to restore the Jewish synagogue, 192; - sermon at Milan on the same subject, 192, 193; - the Emperor succumbs, 193; - mission to obtain clemency for the Thessalonians, 195; - withdraws from Milan into the country, 196; - exhorts the Emperor to deep repentance, 196; - refuses Theodosius admittance to the cathedral, 196; - repulses Rufinus the minister, 197; - prescribes penance to the Emperor, 197; - testimony of Theodosius to his nobility of character, 198; - strife with Flavian, 199; - receives the Emperor after his defeat of Arbogastes, 201; - administers the Eucharist to Theodosius, 201; - urges Nectarius to depose Gerontius, 273. - - Ammianus Marcellinus on the luxury of bishops of great cities, 217. - - Ammon, bishop of Laodicea, 266; - a leader of Chrysostom’s enemies, 329. - - Ammonius, a Nitrian monk, baptizes Rufinus, 204; - one of the “tall brethren,” 294; - struck by Theophilus, 295; - interview with Epiphanius, 305; - his death, 316; - prediction of persecution to the Church, 316; - buried at “the Oak,” where he had baptized the minister Rufinus, 316; - Theophilus weeps over his death and eulogises him, 316. - - Anastasius, Pope, anathematises Origen, 296. - - Anathematising denounced by Chrysostom, 133. - - Anchorites, the, 60. - - Ancyra in Phrygia, the summer retreat of Arcadius, 209; - spectacle of the Emperor’s departure to, 211. - - Anomœan doctrine, 110, 111; - Chrysostom’s homilies against, 115-117. - - Anthemius, master of the offices, appealed to, to disperse - the congregation at the Baths, 336; - refuses to interfere, but directs Lucius to exhort the people - to return to the churches, 336; - Chrysostom’s letter to, on his being made prefect and consul, 374. - - Anthropomorphites, or Humanisers, 288; - denounced by John, bishop of Jerusalem, 290; - Theophilus declares himself in their favour, 295. - - Anthusa, mother of Chrysostom, 9; - a widow at twenty, 10; - great love for her son, 10; - abstains from marrying again, 11; - appeals to Chrysostom not to enter into retirement, 25-27. - - Antioch, the birthplace of Chrysostom, 9; - vices of its Christian inhabitants, 11; - Chrysostom resident at, 57; - persecutions at, 57, 58; - St. Jerome at Church of, 61; - monasteries near, 62, 63; - monks in the mountainous heights near, 66; - population of, 89; - description of, 90, 91; - “the great church” at, 91; - character of the inhabitants, 92; - bishop’s relations to the city, 103; - Chrysostom appointed preacher at, 104; - resides here ten years, 107; - the cradle of Arianism, 109; - passion of the people for chariot-races, 118; - influence of the Jews, 126, 127; - character of its population, 137; - its paganism, 137; - sedition at, 150; - proclamation of edict levying the tribute, 151; - sedition at, 150-153; - dejection of the people, 153; - arrival of the commissioners from the Emperor, 165; - the city degraded, 165; - Chrysostom remonstrates against the prevalent discontent, 168, 169; - the city is pardoned, 170; - joy of the people, 170; - excitable feelings of the populace, 215; - Chrysostom’s forcible removal from the city, 215. - - Antioch, Church of, vicissitudes in the, 17-22; - the see in the hands of the Arians for some time, 17; - its Arian bishops, 17-20; - split into three parties, 20; - its three rival bishops, Paulinus, Meletius, and Euzoius, 20; - a fourth added by the Apollinarians, 20; - the people favour Meletius, 21; - the schism finally healed by Chrysostom, 21; - its three sections of Meletians, Eustathians, and Arians, 133. - - Antioch, Council of (A.D. 341), Twelfth Canon of the, 328; - swayed by Arian influence, 329; - its object the harassment of Athanasius, 330; - Chrysostom’s enemies stake their whole issue on its Twelfth Canon, - 330; - question as to its validity, 330; - its Canons pronounced by Innocent invalid, 351. - - Antiochus, bishop of Ptolemais, discourses at Constantinople, 276; - a leader of the faction hostile to Chrysostom, 282; - plots against the archbishop after his recall, 329; - rage at the proposal of Elpidius, 331; - undertakes the responsibility, with Acacius, of Chrysostom’s - deposition, 332, 339; - urges the Emperor to remove him from the city, 339; - assists in ordaining Porphyry, 358. - - Antiochus Epiphanes, 91. - - Antiochus the Great, 126. - - Antiphonal singing, 189 _note_. - - Antoninus, bishop of Ephesus, grave charges against, 266; - flatly denies the charges, 268; - is alarmed when the archbishop proposes to visit Asia Minor, 268; - his interest at court produces opposition to Chrysostom’s - departure, 268; - is reconciled to his accuser, 269; - the farce of the inquiry, 269; - his death, 270. - - Antonius, a reader, made bishop, 56. - - Antony, the Anchorite, 60; - wholesome saying of, 64. - - Apollo, oracle of, at Daphne, 100. - - Apostolical constitutions, 56. - - Applause of the congregation, 118; - sternly repressed, 164. - - Arabianus, bishop, at the assembly at Constantinople, 266. - - Arabissus, a fortified town near Cucusus, 383; - attacked and nearly captured by Isaurians, 383. - - Arbogastes, Valentinian’s general of the forces, 199; - his ambition and treachery, 200; - repulses the first attack of Theodosius, 200; - is overthrown, his army routed, and himself slain, 201; - his children pardoned and baptized, 201. - - Arcadius, son of Theodosius, 150; - Rufinus appointed his guardian, 203; - does not oppose the ambition of Rufinus, 204; - Eutropius gains complete mastery of his feeble mind after the death - of Rufinus, 209; - neglect of his empire, 210; - becomes a mere puppet, 211; - his palaces and pageants, 211; - dismisses Eutropius, 248; - promises Chrysostom to respect his minister’s retreat in the church, - 251; - entreats the troops to refrain from violence towards Eutropius, 251; - misgivings as to beheading his late minister, 255; - yields to the demands of Gaïnas, 259; - ratifies the deposition of Chrysostom by the “Synod of the Oak,” 316; - refuses to attend church on Christmas Day until the archbishop has - cleared himself, 329; - the patriarch’s case pleaded before him, 330, 331; - orders Chrysostom to be removed from the church to his palace, 332; - his alarm, 332; - sends for Acacius and Antiochus, 332; - turns a deaf ear to the entreaty of the forty bishops, 333; - permits a concourse of Christians at Pempton to be dispersed, 337. - - Archelaus invited Socrates to court, 76. - - Arian controversy, the, 17-22. - - Arianism, at Antioch, 109, 110; - Chrysostom’s homilies against, 110-117. - - Arians, the, 50; - their danger to Christianity, 109; - forbidden by Theodosius to hold assemblies, 142; - stronghold of, at Constantinople, in the time of Gregory of Nazianzus, - 235; - molest the peace in Chrysostom’s time, 236. - - Aristides, resistance of, to ambition, 95. - - Arius, probably instructed by Lucian, 109; - his Thalia, 236. - - Arsacius elevated to the see of Constantinople, 344; - his character, 344; - persecution of the Johnites, 344; - his death, 371. - - Ascension Day, Sunday before, 177 _note_. - - Ascetic life, commencement of, 24; - relapse from, 31, 32. - - Asceticism considered the highest form of life, 82. - - Ascetics, youthful association of, 27; - primitive, 59; - called by Eusebius “earnest persons,” and by Clemens Alexandrinus - “more elect than the elect,” 60. - - Asia, Church of, disgraceful state of the, 373. - - Asia Minor, Chrysostom desires to visit, 268; - three delegates appointed to visit, 269; - the Church of, needs a healing hand, 270; - Chrysostom visits, 271; - Theophilus travels through, seeking for disaffected bishops, 306. - - Asterius, count of the East, assists in removing Chrysostom from - Antioch, 215. - - Aterbius, a pilgrim, applies himself to the detection of heresy at - Jerusalem, 288; - denounces John the bishop, Jerome, and Rufinus as Origenists, 289. - - Athanasius, archbishop of Alexandria, obscurity of the early years of, - 9; - return to Alexandria from exile, 20; - consecrated at an early age, 56; - accompanied to Rome by monks, 61; - the Twelfth Canon of the Council of Antioch aimed against, 329. - - Atticus, a presbyter, an opponent of Chrysostom, elected to the see of - Constantinople during the archbishop’s banishment, 283, 356; - obtains imperial rescripts against the clergy and laymen, 356; - the Johnites refuse to hold communion with him, 388; - admits the name of Chrysostom into the diptychs of the Church at - Constantinople, 388. - - Augustine, St., 40; - permits sitting during the reading of the Acts of the Saints, 178; - on the honour due to saints and martyrs, 180; - prohibits feasts in the churches, 182; - traits of earlier life and baptism, 189; - on the discharge of episcopal duties, 212; - eulogium on Chrysostom, 385; - comparison with Chrysostom, 430. - - Aurelian, prætorian prefect, presides over the suit instituted against - Eutropius, 255; - the Empress procures his elevation to the consulship, 256; - his surrender demanded by Gaïnas, 257; - insulted by Gaïnas, and afterwards delivered up, 257. - - Aurelius, bishop of Carthage, 182; - receives a letter from Chrysostom, 385. - - Auxentius, the Arian bishop, 190. - - Avarice, denunciations of, 223, 224. - - - Babylas, the martyr, Chrysostom’s book on, 92; - his remains taken to the grove of Daphne, 101; - removed hence by Julian, but afterwards brought back, 102. - - Basil, bishop of Raphanea, 14; - his friendship with Chrysostom, 14; - his line of life the “true philosophy,” _i.e._ monasticism, 15; - project for a life of seclusion, 27; - reluctance to be made a bishop, 40-42; - remonstrates with Chrysostom, 42; - parting from Chrysostom on his appointment to a bishopric, 54. - - Basil, bishop of Seleucia, 14. - - Basil (the Great), bishop of Cæsarea, 14; - contends against the misconceptions of baptism, 16; - sides with Theodosius, 142; - reprobates trading near the “martyries,” 182; - qualified admiration of Origen’s teachings, 287. - - Basiliscus, bishop of Comana, suffered martyrdom, 386; - story of his appearing to Chrysostom, 387. - - Baths of Constantine, interrupted services carried on at, 334; - people refuse to leave, 336; - scenes of violence at, 336. - - Bautho, father of Eudoxia, 205. - - Benedict, St., 60; - establishment of his monastery, 144. - - Benedictines of Camaldoli, 62. - - Bequests made by codicils renounced by Theodosius, 193. - - Bethlehem, Jerome’s monastic establishment at, 289. - - Bishops, mode of electing, 40, 46, 47; - violence at elections of, 47, 48; - age at which eligible for, 56, 57; - laymen consecrated, 56; - their high social position, 212; - canvassing and bribery at their elections, 213; - luxurious style of living, 217. - - Bithynia, Chrysostom conveyed to, 340. - - Bosporus, the, Chrysostom crosses, to intercede with Gaïnas, 257; - a messenger sent across to seek for Chrysostom, 321; - studded with boats on the patriarch’s return, 322; - “the sea became a city,” 324; - its waters crowded to welcome the reliques of Chrysostom, 388. - - Botheric, governor of Thessalonica, imprisons a favourite charioteer, - 194; - refuses to release him, 195; - is mortally wounded, 195. - - Briso, Eudoxia’s chamberlain, wounded in a street fray, 236; - the bearer to Chrysostom of a letter from the Empress, 321; - intercedes for Chrysostom, 361. - - Brison, bishop of Philippopolis, a leader of Chrysostom’s enemies, 329. - - British Isles, 112; - reached by Christianity, 123; - evangelised, 238. - - - Cæsarea, pre-eminence of the see of, over that of Jerusalem, 292; - Chrysostom arrives at, on his exile, 362; - violent scenes at, 363. - - Cæsarius, Chrysostom’s letter to, 433, 434. - - Cæsarius, commissioner to Antioch, 165; - goes to the Emperor to intercede for the people, 166; - his arrival at Constantinople, 170; - his errand anticipated, 171. - - Cæsarius of Arles made reader at the age of seven, 23. - - Caligula, destruction of Antioch in the reign of, 90. - - Callinicum, 191; - its people destroy a Jewish synagogue, 191; - the bishop commanded to restore the building, 192; - Ambrose objects to this, and Theodosius gives way, 192, 193. - - Camillus, a champion of Roman freedom, 242. - - Capua, council of Western bishops at, 199. - - Carterius superintends the studies of youthful ascetics, 27. - - Carthage, Fourth Council of, 23. - - Cassianus, John, founder of a monastery at Marseilles, 61; - his rules of the cloister, 61; - remains a friend of Chrysostom, 279; - custodian of the church treasury at Constantinople, 342; - flies to Rome, 350. - - Castricia, 257; - an enemy of Chrysostom, 282, 328. - - Catechumens, period of probation for, 15. - - Celibacy of the clergy, Chrysostom on, 95, 96; - canons of the Council of Nice upon, 219; - “the ancient tradition of the Church” concerning, 219. - - Chalcedon, Council of (A.D. 451), 14; - the title of “Patriarch” first appears in its Acts, 216 _note_; - extends the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople, 274; - grants him equal privileges with the Patriarch of Rome, 275; - decides on the precedence of the see of Jerusalem over that of - Cæsarea, 289 _note_. - - Chalcedon, “The Oak” a suburb of, where the synod hostile to - Chrysostom was held, 204; - a church, monastery, and palace built here by Rufinus, 309. - - Character, Eastern and Western, compared, 173. - - Chariot-races censured, 119, 224-226. - - Christian morals, Chrysostom on the state of, 70. - - Christian responsibilities, 231. - - Christian wife, portrait of a, 229. - - Christianity, recognised position of, 10; - partially paganised, 11; - “the philosophy” of, 15, 24; - imperilled by corruption of morals and faith, 107; - its progress, 123; - recognition by the empire, 126; - its humanising influence in a heartless age, 174. - - Christmas, observance of, 134, 136. - - Christmas Day, the Emperors attend divine service in state on, 329. - - Christ’s equality with the Father, 113-116; - zealous defence of His pure divinity, 181, 182. - - Chromatius, bishop of Aquileia, sends a letter by the Italian - deputation, 368; - Chrysostom’s letters to, 334, 335, 384. - - Chrysostom, St. John: Probable date of his birth, 9. - His birthplace Antioch in Syria, 9. - His parents, 9. - Father’s death, 10. - Early training, 12. - Destined for the legal profession, 12. - Attendance at the lectures of Libanius, 12. - Nascent powers of eloquence, 13. - Appellation of Chrysostomos, or the “Golden Mouth,” 13, 427. - Libanius praises his speech in honour of the Emperors, 13. - Commences practice as a lawyer, 13. - Disgust with a secular life, 14. - Study of Holy Scripture, 14. - Early friendship with Basil, bishop of Raphanea, 14. - Forms acquaintance with Meletius, bishop of Antioch, 15. - Delay in his baptism, 15; - alleged cause for the delay, 21, 22. - Baptized by Meletius, 22. - Becomes for a time an enthusiastic ascetic, 22. - His intense piety and love to God, 22. - Ordained reader by Meletius, 23. - Project for retiring into seclusion, 25. - Frustrated by his mother’s entreaties, 25-27. - Letters of exhortation to Theodore, 32-39. - Reluctance to be consecrated a bishop, 40, 41. - His “pious fraud,” 42. - Dissension with Basil, 42, 43. - Books on the priesthood, 40-55. - Reasons for declining a bishopric, 53. - Narrow escape from persecution, 58. - Retirement into a monastery, 58. - Exults at the growth of monasticism in Egypt, 62. - Description of the daily life of the monks, 66, 67. - Admiration for monastic communities, 67. - Treatises composed during monastic life, 69. - Epistle to Demetrius, 70, 71. - Epistle to Stelechius, 71, 72. - Treatise addressed “to the assailants of monastic life,” 73-80. - Becomes an ardent ascetic, 82. - Enters a cave near Antioch, 82. - Breakdown of health, and abandonment of monastic life, 82. - Returns to his home at Antioch, 82. - Epistle to Stagirius, 82-85. - Ordained a deacon by Meletius, 86. - Congenial duties of the diaconate, 89. - Treatise “On Virginity,” 92. - Letter to a young widow, 92-95. - Views on marriage and celibacy, 95-100. - Treatise, “De S. Babyla contra Julianum et Gentiles,” 100-102. - Ordained to the priesthood by Flavian, 103. - - Chrysostom, St. John, as preacher at Antioch: Inaugural discourse - at Antioch, 104-106. - Preaches at Antioch for ten years, 107. - Sermon on bishop Meletius, 108. - Homilies against Arians, 109-115. - Profound acquaintance with Scripture, 116. - All argument based upon Scripture, 117. - Rebukes his hearers for their neglect of the celebration of the - Eucharist, 117; - for applauding his words, 118; - and for their love of the circus, 118-120. - Homilies against Pagans, 121-124. - Occasional defects of interpretation of the Scriptures, 125. - Homilies against Jews and Judaising Christians, 126-133. - Homily against anathematising, 133. - Sermon on Christmas Day, 134, 135. - Indignation at riotous festivity, 136. - Homily on New Year’s Day, 136, 137, 151. - Rebukes gross and senseless superstitions, 137. - Agrees with the Emperor Theodosius, 142. - Immense efforts after the tumult at Antioch, 154. - Encourages the people to hope for clemency, 154. - - Chrysostom, St. John, as preacher at Antioch: Homilies on the statues, - 154-164. - Exhortations to repentance, 156; - on this world’s wealth, 156, 157; - on the method of keeping Lent, 157, 158; - on fasting, 159; - against rash oaths, 159; - on death, 161; - on the signs of a Creator, 162, 163. - Similes from Nature, 163. - Ethical doctrine, 163. - Praise of the hermits for their courage, 166, 167. - Expostulates with the people on their discontent, 169. - Thanksgiving for the pardon of Antioch, 170. - Describes the interview between Flavian and the Emperor, 171-174. - His illness, 177, 184. - Homilies on festivals of saints and martyrs, 177-183. - Belief in the intercessory power of saints, 179. - Exhorts the people to imitate the lives of the martyrs, 180. - Homily on the Sunday before Ascension Day, 184. - Praise of the peasant clergy, 184. - Elected to the see of Constantinople, 214. - Force and fraud employed to remove him from Antioch, 215. - - Chrysostom, St. John, as archbishop of Constantinople: Arrival at - Constantinople, 215. - His consecration as archbishop, 216. - The “sermo enthronisticus,” 216. - Too much the saint of the cloister for his new position, 217. - His unpopular reforms, 218. - Denounces “spiritual sisters,” and implores the clergy to liberate - themselves from these disgraceful connections, 219-221. - Exacts rigorous discipline from the clergy, 222. - Conducts, with the Empress, a torch-light procession on the removal - of some martyrs’ reliques, 222, 223. - Eulogium on the Empress, 223. - Denunciations of avarice, 224. - Censures the people for their attachment to chariot-races, 224, 225. - Denounces fashionable follies, 226-228. - Portrays the character of a Christian wife, 229. - Represents to property holders their duties, 230. - Dilates on Christian responsibilities, 231. - Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles, 231 _note_. - Indignation at the practice of oath-taking, 231, 232. - Censures addiction to the pleasures of the table, 232. - Character of his flock, 233, 234. - Combats the errors of the Novatians and Arians, 235, 236. - Labours to heal the schism at Antioch, 237. - Missionary efforts in Scythia, Syria, and Palestine, 237. - Assigns a church at Constantinople for the Scythians (or Goths), 238. - Endeavours to extirpate paganism, 238, 239. - Affords protection to Eutropius, 250. - Maintains, when taken before the Emperor, the Church’s right of - asylum, 251. - Sermon on the degradation of Eutropius, 252-254. - Intercedes with Gaïnas, 257. - Homily after returning from his intercession, 257, 258. - Contest with Gaïnas, who desired the law prohibiting Arian worship - within the city to be abolished, 280. - Proposes to visit Asia Minor to investigate the charges against - Antoninus, 268. - His visit opposed by the court, 268. - Appoints delegates to proceed to Asia, 269. - Solicited by the clergy of Ephesus to come to them, 270. - Proceeds to Ephesus, and is welcomed by the clergy and seventy - bishops, 271. - Proposes Heracleides as bishop of Ephesus, who is elected, 271. - Holds a synod at Ephesus, and deprives six simoniacal bishops of - their sees, 272. - Returning through Bithynia, he deposes Gerontius, 273. - Extent of his jurisdiction as Patriarch of Constantinople, 274. - Received with demonstrations of joy on his return, 275. - Dismisses Severian from the city, but recalls him by command of the - Empress, 276, 277. - Denounces crimes and follies, and becomes unpopular, 278. - His friends, 279, 280. - Leaders of the hostile faction, 282. - Qualified admiration of Origen’s teaching, 287. - Reception of the Nitrian monks, 298. - Letter to Theophilus, beseeching him to be reconciled with the - fugitives, 298. - Refuses to join in the condemnation of Origen and his writings, 301. - The plots of his enemies, 302. - Farewell to Epiphanius, 319. - Irritates the Empress by a sermon against the follies of fashionable - ladies, 306. - Theophilus refuses his hospitality, and declines all communication, - 307, 308. - Directed by the court to preside at the inquiry at Pera into the - conduct of Theophilus, 308. - Declines to judge him out of his province, 308. - Scene at the palace with his bishops, 310, 311. - Summoned to appear before the “Synod of the Oak,” 311. - Indignation of his bishops, and their reply to Theophilus, 312. - Letter refusing to attend the synod until his declared enemies are - ejected, 312, 313. - Charges laid against him by archdeacon John and Isaac the monk, 313, - 314. - Steadfastly refuses to attend the synod, and appeals to a general - council, 315. - Deposed by the synod, 316. - Deposition ratified by the Emperor, and sentenced to banishment, 317. - Sermon before departing, 317, 319. - Bows to the storm, and surrenders himself, 320. - Embarks, and is conveyed to Hieron, 320. - Removes to Prænetum, opposite Nicomedia, 320. - Receives an abject letter from the Empress, entreating him to return, - 321. - Crosses the Bosporus, and refuses at first to enter Constantinople - until acquitted by a general council, 322. - Urged to enter the city, and consents, 322. - Halts before the Church of the Apostles, but is borne in by the - people, 322. - Compelled to sit on the throne, and pronounce a benediction, 322. - An extempore address, 322, 323. - Sermon after recall, in which he extols the Empress, 324. - Denounces the ceremony at the erection of the image of Eudoxia, 327. - Incurs the resentment of the Empress, 328. - Further plots of his enemies, 328. - Continues to discharge his duties, 331. - Will not cease to officiate unless compelled by force, 332. - Removed from the church to his palace, 332. - Letter to Innocent I. on the disturbances at Constantinople, 334, 335. - His flock, after many trials, broken up, 338. - Attempts made to assassinate him, 338. - Receives the mandate of deposition, 339. - Farewell to his bishops and deaconesses, 339. - Departure from the Church—“the Angel of the Church went out with - him,” 340. - - Chrysostom, St. John, in exile: Conveyed to the Bithynian coasts, 340. - Suspected of incendiarism, and loaded with chains, 342. - Implores the Emperor to be allowed to defend himself and clergy - against the atrocious charges, 342, 343. - Journeys to Nice, 343. - Encourages his suffering friends, 343. - Cheered by the fortitude and loyalty of Olympias, 346, 347. - Persuades Pentadia to remain at Constantinople, to support the - afflicted, 347. - Letter to Constantius, missionary priest, 361. - Travels from Nice to Cæsarea, where fanatical monks besiege the - house in which he is lodged, 362, 363. - Falls ill with fever, 362. - Is removed from Cæsarea to the house of Seleucia, who is menaced by - Pharetrius, 364. - Taken thence, and totters in darkness along the Cappadocian - mountains, 364. - Monks and nuns meet him on the road, and bewail his calamities, 365. - Cucusus, the place of his exile, is reached, 365. - Received with much consideration and kindness, 366. - Letters to Olympias from Cucusus, 367, 372. - Letters to friendly bishops and laymen, to Gemellus, and to - Anthemius, 373, 374. - Receives old friends from Antioch, who come to him for guidance, 374. - Letters to clergy and others, 376. - Influence over the empire in his exile, 377, 378. - Sufferings from the winter cold, 379. - Interest in the mission in Phœnicia, 380. - Letters to Gerontius and Rufinus the Presbyter, 380-382. - Privation, anxiety, and rapid removals, bring on illness, 383. - Letters to the Italian bishops, to Chromatius, to Innocent, and to - Aurelius, 383-385. - Suffers less, and thinks God will restore him to his position in the - Church, 385, 386. - His enemies get him removed to Pityus, in a desolate country, 386. - Arrives at Comana, in Pontus, 386. - Story of the vision of the martyred Basiliscus, 387. - Wishes to remain at the church, but is hurried on by his guards, 387. - Is taken ill, and brought back to the martyry, where he dies after - partaking of the Eucharist, 387. - Honoured after his death, 388. - His reliques brought to Constantinople, and deposited in the Church - of the Apostles, 388, 389. - - Chrysostom, St. John, theological teaching of: Survey of his - theological teaching, 390. - Practical character of his works, 391. - His natural and forcible language, 391. - On the nature of man, 392, 393. - Sin and necessity, 393, 394. - Free-will and grace, 394-396. - God’s will and man’s freedom, 397, 398. - Co-operation of God’s will with man’s, 398. - Divine grace, 399, 400. - Nature of the Godhead, 401, 402. - Manhood and Godhead in Christ, 402-404. - The Redemption, 404-406. - Justification, 406, 407. - Faith and good works, 407, 408. - The efficacy of prayer, 408, 409. - Baptism, 409-412. - The Holy Eucharist, 412-415. - No trace of confession, purgatory, or Mariolatry, 416-418. - No acknowledgment of papal supremacy, 418, 419. - Liturgical forms, 419-421. - Character as a commentator, 421-424. - The New Testament a completion of the Old, 424. - Variations in the Gospel narratives, 424, 425. - Inspiration of the Bible, 425. - Characteristics as a preacher, 425, 426. - Personal appearance, 425, 426. - Preservation of his discourses, 427. - Style of language, 428. - Allusions to Greek classical authors, 428, 429. - Depreciation of Pagan modes and ideas, 429. - Compared with St. Augustine, 430. - His fight in the cause of Christian holiness, 431. - - Church, the, Chrysostom does not rely on the tradition of, 117; - its power and progress, 123, 124; - claims pre-eminence over civil law, 192; - tradition with regard to clerical celibacy, 219; - custom concerning the preaching of strangers, 226; - its stability, 318; - its degradation, 359. - - Claudian, his verses on Stilicho, 205, 208; - his appeal against the consulship of Eutropius, 242; - companion of Stilicho, 242 _note_; - sarcasm aimed at the adulation of the Byzantines, 243; - dramatic account of Tribigild’s meeting with his wife, 244, 245; - his description of Leo, 246. - - Claudius, Antioch shattered in the reign of, 90. - - Clemens Alexandrinus terms ascetics “more elect than the elect,” 60. - - Clergy, the, treatment of, by Constantine and Theodosius, 147; - Jerome on their worldly hospitality, 217; - exempted from curial office by Constantine, 272; - those who were curiales forbidden to be ordained, 272. - - Cœnobia, the, founded by Pachomius, 60. - - Comana, in Pontus, Chrysostom arrives at, 386; - dies at the martyry outside the town, 387. - - Commodus, the Olympic games instituted in the time of, 92, 101. - - Communicants received within the rails and close to the altar, 225 - and _note_. - - Congregation rebuked by Chrysostom, 117; - its applause of Chrysostom’s words, 118; - customary to stand while the preacher sat, 154 _note_. - - Conscience, the law of, 163. - - Constantia, sister of the Emperor, 17. - - Constantine favours the Arians, 17; - deposes the Catholic bishops, 17; - commences building “the great church” of Antioch, 91; - statutes concerning the Jews, 126; - exemptions of the clergy, 147; - his forgiveness of an injury, 171, 172; - right of asylum transferred in his time from Pagan temples to - Christian churches, 249; - exempted the clergy from curial office, 272. - - Constantinople, vices of the Christian population of, 11; - Arian synod at, 18; - tumults at, 30; - St. Jerome at church of, 61; - religious riots at, 65, 66; - division into districts, 103; - passion of the people for chariot-races, 118; - edict of Theodosius, 142; - surrounding country ravaged by Alaric, 207; - competition for its see, 213; - Chrysostom appointed archbishop, 214; - mixture of population, 223; - its forms of error, 234, 235; - stronghold of Arianism in the time of Gregory of Nazianzus, 235; - occupied by Gaïnas and the Goths, 259; - circular to its clergy announcing Chrysostom’s deposition, 316; - the people, enraged at the sentence, guard him against abduction, 317; - the populace demand the restoration of the patriarch, 321; - visited by an earthquake, 321; - sanguinary frays in the streets, 325; - flight of Theophilus from, 325; - shocking tumult at St. Sophia on Easter Eve, 333; - its churches deserted during Chrysostom’s absence, 334; - the interrupted services continued at the Baths, 334; - fresh scenes of violence, 336-338; - fury of the people on discovering the removal of Chrysostom, 341; - the cathedral-church and senate-house burnt down, 341, 342; - visited by destructive hailstorms, 354; - coercion ineffectual in bringing the people to submit to Atticus - and his clergy, 357. - - Constantinople, Council of (A.D. 381), 14; - presided over by Meletius, 21, 86; - project for a general council after, 142; - restricts the jurisdiction of the archbishop of Constantinople, 274; - gave him first rank after the bishop of Rome, 274. - - Constantius, a missionary in Phœnicia, receives a letter from - Chrysostom, 361. - - Constantius, a priest, described by Palladius, 357, 358; - the people of Antioch desire to make him their bishop, 358; - Porphyry procures his banishment, 358; - escapes to Cyprus, 358; - follows Chrysostom into exile, 366. - - Constantius, Emperor, 17; - deposes Stephen, bishop of Antioch, 17; - summons a general council, 18; - orders the creed of Rimini to be signed, 18; - visits Antioch, 19; - finishes “the great church” at Antioch, 91; - statutes concerning the Jews, 126. - - Cornelius, bishop of Rome, 47. - - Crates resists ambition, 95. - - Creator, signs of a, in the universe, 161, 162. - - Crito, 76. - - Cross, honour paid to the, 123. - - Cucusus, a village in the Tauric range, subject to attacks from - Isaurians, 360; - selected by Eudoxia as the place of Chrysostom’s exile, 361; - arrival of the archbishop at, 365; - ravaged by the Isaurians, 382. - - Cynegius, prefect of the East, 143; - enforces the law against informers, 151; - quells the sedition at Alexandria, 151. - - Cyprian on a legitimate ordination, 47; - consecrated bishop when a layman, 56. - - Cyprus, Council of, decree of the, 299. - - Cyriacus, bishop of Synnada, accompanies Chrysostom on board the - vessel, 340; - detained in chains at Bithynia, 342; - taken to Chalcedon, 342; - dismissed, 342; - a fugitive to Rome, 350; - accompanies the Italian deputation, 353; - confined in a Persian fortress, 355; - intercedes for Chrysostom, 361. - - Cyril, successor of Theophilus, reluctant to recognise Chrysostom, 388. - - Cyrinus, bishop of Chalcedon, joins Chrysostom at Bithynia, 271; - denounces the archbishop, 307; - plots against him after his recall, 329; - urges the Emperor to remove Chrysostom from Constantinople, 338, 339; - his death, 307, 354. - - - Damasus contests the see of Rome, 47. - - Damophilus exiled by Theodosius, 142. - - Dante, the position assigned in Paradise to Chrysostom by, 431. - - Daphne, grove of, 92; - description of, 101; - destruction of its temple, 102. - - Deacons, called “Levites of the Christian Church,” 87; - duties of, 88; - their peculiar office in the early Church, 88, 89. - - Death, Chrysostom on, 93, 161. - - Decious, persecution of, 60. - - Demetrius, bishop of Pessina, Chrysostom’s epistle to, 69-71; - denounces the “Synod of the Oak,” and returns to Chrysostom, 315; - accompanies the Italian deputation, 353; - dies of harsh treatment when being conveyed to one of the Egyptian - oases, 355. - - “De Sacerdotio,” Chrysostom’s, 40-46. - - Diocese, meaning of, 274 _note_. - - Diodorus, influence of, upon Chrysostom and Theodore, 27; - founder of a method of Biblical interpretation, 28; - made bishop of Tarsus by Meletius, 28; - attacked by Julian, 28; - commentary on the Old and New Testaments, 28, 29; - his theology, 29-31; - its rationalistic tendency, 30; - writings condemned by the Fifth Œcumenical Council, 31; - rational system of conducting monasteries, 66. - - Diogenes, 95. - - Dionysius, the tyrant of Sicily, 76. - - Dioscorus, a Nitrian monk, one of the “tall brethren,” 294; - made bishop of Hermopolis by Theophilus, 294; - a victim of the rage of Theophilus, 296; - his death, 316. - - Dispensations, teaching of the Old and New, 99. - - Divination, arts of, 143. - - Domitianus, widows and virgins in the care of, 376. - - Domninus blinded to the preparations of Maximus, 191. - - Doxology, Arian form of the, 18. - - - Easter Day, vast crowds attend the church on, 234, 331. - - Easter Eve, a great day for the baptism of converts, 332; - the vigil on, interrupted at St. Sophia, 333. - - Easter kept according to Jewish calculation, 130; - this practice condemned by the Council of Nice, 130; - and denounced by Chrysostom, 130. - - Eastern Church, the, acknowledges Meletius as bishop of Antioch, 20; - the parent of asceticism, 59; - the festival of Christmas in, 134; - favourable to clerical celibacy, 218; - finds the teaching of Origen congenial, 287; - the “Synod of the Oak” a stain upon, 313; - appeals to the Western Church, 335, 348; - not famed for missionary enterprise, 382; - desire to maintain communion with the West, 388. - - Education in monasteries, Chrysostom urges the advantage of, 81. - - Elpidius, a priest, bribes a slave to assassinate Chrysostom, 338. - - Elpidius, bishop of Laodicea, friendly to Chrysostom, 329; - his adroit proposal, 331; - deposed and imprisoned for his attachment to Chrysostom, 377; - the archbishop writes thanking him for his zeal, 377; - restored to his see by Alexander, bishop of Antioch, 377. - - Elvira, synod of, enjoins celibacy of the clergy, 218. - - Emperors, fate of, 94; - half idolatrous homage paid to, 326, 327; - custom of attending church in state on Christmas Day, 329. - - Epaminondas not allured by ambition, 95. - - Ephesus, Chrysostom arrives at, 271; - election of a bishop to the see of, 271; - synod at, 271, 272; - worship of Midas suppressed at, 274; - its see occupied by a monster of iniquity, 357. - - Epiphanius, bishop of Constantia and Cyprus, 289; - visits Jerusalem, and accepts the hospitality of Bishop John, 289; - preaches against the doctrines of Origen, 290; - leaves Jerusalem, and breaks off communion with its bishop, 290, 291; - forcibly ordains Paulinian deacon and priest, 291; - receives an apologetic letter from Theophilus, 299; - goes to Constantinople, irregularly ordains a deacon, and refuses - the hospitality of Chrysostom, 302, 303; - his attempt to enter the church and denounce the writings of Origen - prevented by Serapion, 304; - his prayers implored by the Empress on her son’s behalf, 304; - interview with Ammon and his brethren, 305; - his compunction and departure from Constantinople, 305. - - Essenes, the, 59. - - Eucharist, congregation neglect the celebration of the, 117; - Chrysostom censures irreverent conduct at, 135; - character of some of its partakers, 233. - - Eucharistic elements burned at the pillage of the Nitrian monks, 297; - profaned by soldiers at St. Sophia, 333. - - Eudoxia, 189; - weds Arcadius, 206; - baptized and educated in the Christian faith, 206; - Chrysostom’s eulogium of, at the removal of the remains of some - martyrs, 222, 223; - aims at the fall of Eutropius, and makes an ally of Chrysostom, - 240; - contributes to the support of the churches and the relief of the - poor, 241; - profound jealousy of the power of Eutropius, 248; - relates the minister’s insults to her to Arcadius, 248; - remains mistress of the field after the death of Eutropius, 256; - stands unrivalled in the management of the empire, 263, 264; - gives birth to a male heir to the throne, 264; - proclaimed Empress under the title of Augusta, 264; - commands Chrysostom to recall Severian and admit him to communion, - 276, 277; - becomes the enemy of Chrysostom, 283, 284; - accosted by the Nitrian monks, and promises that the council they - desire shall be convened, 301; - implores the prayers of the monks, 301; - asks the prayers of Epiphanius on her son’s behalf, 304; - terrified by an earthquake, 321; - sends a humble letter to Chrysostom, entreating him to return, 321; - her image placed in front of the cathedral, 327; - ceremony at its erection denounced by Chrysostom, 327; - her fierce resentment, 328; - will not listen to the entreaty of the forty bishops, 333; - receives a solemn warning from Paul, bishop of Crateia, 333; - her death, 354. - - Eudoxius, bishop of Germanicia, seizes the see of Antioch, 18; - made archbishop of Constantinople, 18. - - Eugenius’s children pardoned and baptized, 201. - - Eugraphia, 256; - an enemy of Chrysostom, 283; - her house the rendezvous of the disaffected, 283. - - Eulysius, bishop of Apamea, accompanies Chrysostom on board the vessel, - 340; - detained in chains at Bithynia, 342; - taken to Chalcedon, 342; - dismissed, 342; - a fugitive to Rome, 350; - accompanies the Italian deputation, 353; - imprisoned in Arabia, 355. - - Eunomians forbidden by Theodosius to hold meetings, 142. - - Eunomius, an extreme Arian, 109; - founder of the Eunomian or Anomœan sect, 109. - - Euphronius, Arian bishop of Antioch, 17. - - Eusebius, a deacon, seeks an interview with Innocent I., 348. - - Eusebius, a Nitrian monk, one of the “tall brethren,” 294; - made presbyter by Theophilus, 294. - - Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, instructed by Lucian, 109. - - Eusebius, bishop of Valentinopolis, presents grave charges against - Antoninus, 266; - commits the crime he has denounced, and is reconciled to Antoninus, - 269; - postpones the production of witnesses, 269; - departs for Constantinople, and affects illness, 270; - is excommunicated, 270; - requests to be readmitted to communion with his brethren, 271. - - Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli, goes to Antioch to heal the division, 20. - - Eusebius, of Cæsarea, calls ascetics “earnest persons,” 60; - use of the word “martyry,” 178. - - Eustathius, bishop of Antioch, deposed by Constantine, 17. - - Euthymius, a Nitrian monk, one of the “tall brethren,” 294. - - Eutropius, a reader and Johnite, tortured to the death, 345. - - Eutropius, the chamberlain, 187; - frustrates Rufinus’s scheme for marrying his daughter to Arcadius, - 205; - strange career and rise, 208; - became the adviser of Arcadius, and virtually his master, 209; - tyrannous conduct, 209, 210; - abolishes the right of asylum in the Church, 210; - probably suggested Chrysostom’s election, 214; - scheme for removing Chrysostom from Antioch, 215; - threatens Theophilus for refusing to assist at Chrysostom’s - ordination, 215; - does not find Chrysostom a complaisant servant, 240; - induces the Emperor to make him consul, 241; - adulation of the Byzantines at his inauguration, 243; - indignation in the West, 243; - treats the rebellion of Tribigild as a petty insurrection, and - offers him a bribe, 245; - appoints Leo a commander of the legions, 246; - his arrogance towards the Empress Eudoxia, 248; - degraded by the Emperor, 248; - seeks asylum in the Church, 250; - protected by Chrysostom, 250; - the populace demand his death, 251; - his degradation made the subject of a sermon by Chrysostom, 252-254; - secretly quits the sanctuary, 255; - banished to Cyprus, 255; - accused of treason, recalled from Cyprus to Chalcedon, and there - beheaded, 256. - - Euzoius, an associate of Arius, made bishop of Antioch, 19. - - Evagrius, 28; - recognised by Ambrose as bishop of Antioch, 199; - sudden death, 199. - - Evethius, a priest, companion of Chrysostom in his exile, 364; - takes letters to the Italian bishops from Chrysostom, 383. - - - Fashionable follies censured, 227-229. - - Fasting, Chrysostom on, 157-159. - - Flaccilla, daughter of Eudoxia, 248. - - Flacilla, the Empress, 148; - her humility and gratitude, 148; - influence upon Theodosius, 148; - her death, 148. - - Flavian, bishop of Antioch, 59; - elected by the Meletians, 87; - accused of perjury, 87; - ordains Chrysostom to the priesthood, 103; - Chrysostom’s encomium on, 105, 106; - besought by the people of Antioch to intercede for them after their - rioting, 153; - undertakes the mission of mercy, 153; - Chrysostom is hopeful of his mission, 155; - arrives at Constantinople, and obtains pardon for Antioch, 170; - returns to Antioch in time for the Easter celebration, 170; - reception by the people, 170; - interview with the Emperor, 171-174; - removes the remains of some saints, 181 _note_; - rivalry with Evagrius produces strife with Ambrose, 199; - his death, 357. - - Fravitta, a loyal Goth, defeats Gaïnas in several engagements, 262; - pursuit of the enemy, 262; - made consul, 263. - - - Gaïnas returns with Stilicho’s troops, 207, 208; - is commanded to compass the death of Rufinus, 208; - sympathises with his relative Tribigild, 244; - is retained at Constantinople in command of the city troops, 246; - despatched, after Leo’s defeat, to confront Tribigild, 247; - believes the surrender of Eutropius would cause Tribigild to become - loyal, 247; - disdains to be directed by the Empress and her lady advisers, and - joins his forces with those of Tribigild, 256, 257; - menaces Constantinople, 257; - opens negotiations with the Emperor, and demands the surrender of - three court favourites, 257; - subjects them to insults and a grim practical jest, 257; - interview with the Emperor, 258; - demands to be made consul and commander-in-chief, to which the - Emperor yields, 259; - demands the abolition of the law forbidding Arian worship, 259; - is opposed in this by Chrysostom, who debates the question with - him, 259, 260; - his rapacity, 260; - flight from the city, 272; - declared by royal decree a public enemy, 261; - takes to a life of plunder, 262; - defeated in several engagements by Fravitta, and a large portion - of his army afterwards drowned in crossing the Hellespont, 262; - retreat towards the Danube, 262; - final defeat and death, 263. - - Gallus Cæsar endeavours to reform the licentiousness of Daphne, 101. - - Gaudentius, Count, appointed to suppress paganism, 143. - - Gelasius, Pope, forbade reading the Acts of the Saints, 178. - - Gemellus, Chrysostom’s letter to, 373. - - General Council, Chrysostom is willing to be judged by, 315; - demanded by the people of Constantinople, 317, 320; - summonses issued, 325; - counterfeited, and packed with bishops hostile to Chrysostom, 328; - desired by Innocent, 352; - suggested by Honorius to be held at Thessalonica, 352. - - George of Laodicea discourses at Antioch, 19. - - Germanus, a priest, friend of Chrysostom, 279; - custodian of the church treasury at Constantinople, 342; - goes to Rome, 350. - - Gerontius, archbishop of Nicomedia, 273; - skill in curing diseases, 273; - deposed by Chrysostom, 273; - accompanies Theophilus to Constantinople to oppose Chrysostom, 307. - - Gerontius, a presbyter, anxious to visit Cucusus, 380; - persuaded by Chrysostom to go direct to Phœnicia, 380. - - Gervasius, the martyr, discovery of the remains of, 190. - - Gibbon, his character as an historian, 140; - his admiration of Chrysostom in exile, 378. - - Gluttony censured by Chrysostom, 232. - - God, nature of: Chrysostom on the, 110-112. - - Godhead, Three Persons of the: Chrysostom on the, 110-112. - - Goths, the, 93; - menace the Danubian frontier, 150; - hear the Bible read in their own tongue at Constantinople, 238; - revolt under Tribigild, 244; - defeat the army of Leo, 247; - occupy Constantinople, 259; - numbers perish after the flight of Gaïnas, 262. - - Gratian, the Emperor of the West, 140; - his flight and assassination, 141; - succeeded by his brother Valentinian, 141. - - Grecian legend, 100. - - Greek theology, 391, 392. - - Gregories, the two, 16, 142. - - Gregory of Nazianzus, 86; - made archbishop by Theodosius, 142; - elected to the see of Constantinople when it was - a stronghold of Arianism, 235; - subdued the Arian opposition, 236; - letter on the marriage of Olympias, 280; - sends a poem to Olympias on her duties, 281; - qualified admiration of Origen’s teachings, 287. - - Gregory of Nyssa, funeral oration of, on Meletius, 21; - preaches the sermon at the baptism of Rufinus, 204. - - - Hadrian, 126. - - Heaven and hell, Chrysostom on, 34-36. - - Helladius, bishop of Heraclea, consecrates Gerontius, 273; - a friend of Chrysostom, 279. - - Hellebicus, commissioner to Antioch, 165; - remains at Antioch to keep order, 167; - receives the rescript of pardon for the city, 170; - received everywhere with ovation, 170. - - Heracleides, a deacon, elected to the see of Ephesus, 271; - friend of Chrysostom, 279; - accusations made against him by Theophilus and his partisans, 325; - his friends and Chrysostom protest against the illegality of such - proceedings, 325. - - Heretics, edict of Theodosius against, 142. - - Hermione, Theodore wishes to marry, 31; - Chrysostom’s reference to, 36, 38; - abandoned by Theodore, 39. - - Hermits, intercession of, for the people of Antioch, 166; - Chrysostom’s joy at their courage, 166, 167; - their letter to Theodosius, 167. - - Hesychius, bishop of Parium, withdraws from his appointment as delegate - to Asia, 269. - - Hieron, Chrysostom is conveyed to, 320 and _note_. - - Hilarius introduces Pachomian monasticism into Syria, 60, 61. - - Hilary of Arles charged with ordaining bishops without the people’s - consent, 47. - - Hippodrome, the, 118-120. - - Holy Saturday, vast crowds assemble in the churches on, 331. - - Holy Scripture, Chrysostom’s intimate acquaintance with, 85, 116, 117; - Arians do not deny its authority, 117; - disputes as to its interpretation, 117; - Chrysostom’s occasional defects of interpretation, 125. - - Honorius accompanies his father Theodosius to Rome, 193; - is sent for to Milan by his father, 201; - Stilicho appointed his guardian, 202; - receives a deputation of Romans on the consulship of Eutropius, 242; - gives a favourable reply, and nominates Mallius Theodorus consul, - 243; - convenes an Italian synod to consider the state of the Church at - Constantinople, 352; - suggests to his brother Arcadius a general council to be held at - Thessalonica, 352. - - Hymn of Pachomian monks, 63. - - - Ignatius, effect of the death of, in confirming souls, 181. - - Illyria ravaged by Huns, 354. - - Illyrian provinces occupied by Alaric, 207. - - Infant baptism the ordinary practice of the early Church, 15; - popular reasons for delaying, 15, 16; - the two Gregories, the great Basil, and Chrysostom contend against - its misconceptions, 16. - - Innocent I., bishop of Rome, appealed to by Chrysostom, 334, 335; - is advised by Theophilus to cease communion with Chrysostom, 348; - four bishops bring him Chrysostom’s letter, 348; - decisive letter to Theophilus, 348; - receives another letter from him, on the minutes of the “Synod of - the Oak,” 349; - sends a second letter of reproof to Theophilus, 349; - orders prayers and fasts for the restoration of concord, 349; - letter of condolence to the clergy of Constantinople, 349; - treats the letter of the cabal with disdain, 350; - reply to the letter brought by Germanus, 350, 351; - writes to Chrysostom a letter of encouragement and consolation, - 351, 352; - intercedes with Honorius for the Church of Constantinople, 352; - remains attached to Chrysostom’s cause, 358; - approves of the restoration of Elpidius to his see, 377; - letter from Chrysostom in exile, 384, 385. - - Isaac, a Syrian monk, sent to Antioch to inquire into Chrysostom’s - early life, 284; - brings a list of charges against the archbishop at the “Synod of - the Oak,” 314; - comes to the archbishop with a peremptory message, 315. - - Isaurians ravage Syria and Asia Minor, 354; - Cucusus, the destination of Chrysostom, subject to attacks from, - 360, 361; - ravage the neighbourhood of Cæsarea, 363; - molest the roads round Cucusus, 380; - cause extreme misery to the inhabitants of Cucusus and the - neighbourhood, 382, 383. - - Isidore, abbot of Pelusium, on the discharge of episcopal duties, 212. - - Isidore, presbyter of Alexandria, a candidate for the see of - Constantinople, 213; - the depositary of an awkward secret of Theophilus’s, 213; - carries a petition to Rome, 237; - despatched to Palestine, 292; - some account of his life, 293; - accepts a charitable trust, 293; - refuses to surrender the money to Theophilus, who charges him with - a horrible crime, 294; - is expelled from the priesthood, and flies to the desert of Nitria, - 294. - - Italian deputation to Arcadius, 352; - maltreated, 353; - failure of its mission, 354; - returns home, 354. - - Italian synod convened by Honorius, 352; - result of its deliberations, 352; - memorialise Arcadius on the restoration of Chrysostom, 353. - - - Jealousy of wives and husbands, 97. - Jeremy Taylor quoted, 393 _note_; - as a preacher, 426. - - Jerome quoted, 18; - promotes the advance of monasticism, 61; - sides with Theodosius, 142; - three years’ residence at Rome, 194; - admonition on the worldly hospitality of the clergy, 218; - description of Theophilus of Alexandria, 285; - opinion of Origen’s merits, 288; - repudiates Aterbius’s charge of being an Origenist, 289; - sides with Epiphanius, 291; - strife with John of Jerusalem, 291, 292; - commendation of Theophilus’s letter on Origenistic errors, 300; - styles Chrysostom a parricide, 302. - - Jerusalem the only lawful place for Jewish sacrifices, 130, 131; - see of, 289; - made a patriarchate, its precedence over Cæsarea, 289 _note_. - - Jews, Chrysostom’s opposition to, 50; - danger to Christianity, 107; - Chrysostom’s method of argument against, 121, 124, 125; - homilies against, 126-128; - their character and influence at Antioch, 126, 127; - statutes concerning, 126; - ranged on the Arian side in dissensions, 127; - scenes at their festivals, 127, 128; - increasing influence in Antioch, 128, 129; - Chrysostom’s vehemence against, 129-131; - their sacrifices, 130, 131; - the four Captivities foretold, 131; - revolts under Hadrian and Constantine, 131; - jeer at the tumult at Constantinople, 340. - - John, archdeacon of Constantinople, cherishes malice against - Chrysostom, 313; - brings a list of charges against him at the “Synod of the Oak,” 314. - - John, bishop of Jerusalem, an admirer of Origen, 288; - indignation at the accusation of Aterbius, 289; - his pride wounded, 289; - preaches against the Anthropomorphites, and on the Christian - verities, 290; - places the monasteries of Bethlehem under an interdict, 291; - strife with Jerome, 291, 292. - - John, Count, appointed Comptroller of the Royal Treasury, 256; - his surrender demanded by Gaïnas, 257; - insulted by Gaïnas, and afterwards delivered up, 257. - - John, hermit of the Thebaid, consulted by Theodosius, 200. - - Johnites, followers of Chrysostom, prisons filled with, 338; - persecuted by Arsacius and Optatus, 344, 345. - - Jovinus, Count, commissioned to suppress paganism, 143. - - Judaising Christians, 128-130. - - Julian, Emperor: his efforts to resuscitate paganism, 11; - friend of Libanius, 12; - recalls all the exiled prelates, 20; - his death, 94; - consulted the oracle of Apollo at Daphne, 102; - attempt to rebuild the Temple frustrated, 131; - beheaded two soldiers for being Christians, 179. - - Jupiter, destruction of the temple of, at Apamea, 143. - - Justina, the queen-mother, 187; - her flight to Thessalonica, 191. - - Justinian, 47. - - - Keble, Rev. John, quoted, 275 _note_. - - - Laodicea made the capital of Syria, 165. - - “Laura,” a, or street, 60. - - Law, the profession of, the avenue to distinction, 13. - - Lent, how to keep, 157-159. - - Leo appointed to the command of the troops sent against Tribigild, - 246; - crosses the Bosporus and pursues the enemy to Pamphylia, 246; - want of discipline in his army, 246; - his camp attacked by night, the troops fleeing in disorder, 247; - is drowned in mud, 247. - - Leontius, the eunuch, Arian bishop of Antioch, 17; - tries to conciliate the Catholics, 17; - instructed by Lucian, 109. - - Leontius, bishop of Ancyra, a leader of Chrysostom’s enemies, 329; - utters a palpable lie, 330; - Chrysostom escapes him when journeying into exile, 362. - - “Let us pray,” in our Liturgy, 88. - - Letters to Olympius, remarks on the, 370, 371. - - Libanius the sophist, 12; - an eloquent defender of paganism, 12; - his lectures attended by Chrysostom, 12; - an opponent of Christianity on principle, 73; - elegy over the shrine of Apollo, 102; - apology for paganism, 145; - attachment to antiquity, 145; - invective against the monks, 146; - regrets the destruction of the Pagan temples, 147; - before the commissioners at Antioch, 165; - orations in honour of Theodosius and the commissioners, 166. - - “Love-feast,” 182. - - Lucian, bishop of Antioch, held doctrines afterwards called Arian, 109; - presbyter of Antioch, 109; - teacher of Eusebius, Leontius, and probably Arius, 109; - suffered martyrdom, 387. - - Lucifer of Cagliari at Antioch, 21; - consecrates Paulinus bishop, and increases the confusion, 20, 86, - 199. - - Lucius directed by Anthemius to implore the people to return to the - churches, 336; - harangues the congregation, but with no effect, 336; - is bribed by Acacius, and commits scenes of violence at the Baths, - 336; - waiting with troops to compel Chrysostom’s departure, if need be, - 339. - - - Macedonians forbidden by Theodosius to hold assemblies, 142. - - Macedonius, archbishop of Constantinople, deposed, 18. - - Macedonius the hermit, 166; - his appeal for the people of Antioch, 166. - - Magical arts, decree of Valens against the practisers of, 57, 58. - - Mallius Theodorus nominated consul by Honorius, 243. - - Manes, error of, 113. - - Manichæans, the, 50; - celibacy of, 95; - their danger to Christianity, 107; - forbidden to hold assemblies, 142. - - Marcellina, the example of, converted many women to celibacy, 61. - - Marcellus, bishop, killed, 143. - - Marcia, 256; - an enemy of Chrysostom, 282, 328. - - Marcion, error of, 113. - - Marcionites, 95; - their danger to Christianity, 107. - - Mariamna, Chrysostom arrives at, 322. - - Marriage, Chrysostom on, 95; - how arranged, 96, 97; - its trials and troubles, 97-100. - - Martin, St., bishop of Tours, 40; - founder of religious houses, 61; - followed to his grave by two thousand brethren, 61. - - Martyries, 177, 178; - trading near, 182, 183; - visited by Arcadius and Eudoxia at Easter-tide, 333. - - Martyrs, appeal for assistance to, 132; - churches built to commemorate their death, 177; - their numerous festivals, 178; - Chrysostom’s homilies on, 177-183; - St. Augustine on the honour to be paid to them, 180; - increasing veneration to them in the Church, 181; - discovery of skeletons, and cures effected, 181; - procession conducted by Chrysostom and the Empress, on the removal - of some reliques, 222, 223. - - Maruthas, bishop of Martyropolis, in Persia, an active missionary, - 375 and _note_. - - Maruthas, bishop of Mesopotamia, accidentally causes the death of - Cyrinus, 307. - - Maximian, persecution of, 56. - - Maximin, persecution of, 60. - - Maximus, bishop of Seleucia, adopts a secluded life, 27. - - Maximus the usurper’s progress arrested by Theodosius, 141; - his disloyalty, 190; - passage of the Alps, 191; - defeated by Theodosius, 191; - beheaded, 191. - - Meletius, bishop of Antioch, 15; - translated from Sebaste in Armenia to Antioch, 18; - preaches by command of Constantius on the text, “The Lord possessed - me,” 19; - dissents from the Arians, and is banished to Melitene, 19; - recalled by Julian, 20; - banished again in A.D. 367, and afterwards by the Emperor Valens, - 21, 40; - returns after the death of Valens (A.D. 378), 21; - presided over the Council of Constantinople (A.D. 381), 21; - died during its session, 21; - his funeral oration, 21; - one of his last acts, 86; - Chrysostom’s encomium, 108; - invocation to, 108. - - Milan, astonishment of the people of, at Theodosius’s act of treachery, - 195, 196. - - Milman, Dean, quoted, 127. - - Moduarius, a deacon, a messenger to Chrysostom in exile, 376. - - Monasteries of Bethlehem placed under an interdict by John of - Jerusalem, 291. - - Monasteries, tranquillity of, 80; - education at, 80. - - Monasticism, 53; - rise of, 59; - rule of Pachomius, 60; - introduced into Syria by Hilarion, 60; - promoted in the West by St. Jerome, 61; - Eastern and Western, 64-66; - St. Chrysostom’s admiration for, 67; - contemplative form of, 67, 68; - enemies of, 73; - its necessity, 74, 75; - called “the true philosophy,” 75. - - Monica, the mother of St. Augustine, 189. - - Monk, calm life of the, 53; - powerful influence of the, 77. - - Monks, custom of reading aloud during dinner, 63 _note_; - interfere in political contests, 65; - Eastern and Western monks, 65; - daily life, 66, 67; - reception of the Eucharist, 66 _note_; - persecution of, by Valens, 72, 73; - exempt from love, avarice, etc., 76; - fanatical fury, 143; - Libanius’s invective against, 146. - - Monks of Nitria, 294; - the “tall brethren,” persecuted by Theophilus, 295-297; - they fly to Palestine, and find a new home at Scythopolis, 297; - the malice of their persecutor follows them here, 297; - they embark for Constantinople, and reach that city fifty in number, - 297; - they appeal to Chrysostom, who receives them with kindness, but acts - cautiously, 297, 298; - resolve to appeal to the civil powers, 300; - draw up documents of charges against Theophilus and their accusers, - 301; - accost the Empress, who promises the council they desire shall be - called, 301; - interview with Epiphanius, 304; - Theophilus reconciled with “the tall brethren,” 316. - - Monks, Pachomian, number of, 62; - period of probation, 62; - dress and habits, 63; - division into classes, 64. - - - Nebridius, prefect of Constantinople, husband of Olympias, 280; - his death two years after marriage, 281. - - Nebridius, husband of Salvina, 279. - - Nectarius, bishop of Constantinople, 47; - his subservience to the Emperor, 198; - his death, 212; - had desired to make Arsacius bishop of Tarsus, 344. - - Neocæsarea, Council of (about A.D. 320), 56. - - Nestorius consecrated a bishop when a layman, 56. - - New Year’s Day a riotous festival, 136. - - Nice, Council of (A.D. 325), 17, 56; - the custom of keeping Easter according to Jewish calculation - condemned, 130; - proposal of clerical celibacy defeated by Paphnutius, 219; - prohibition as to unmarried clergy living with women other than - mother, sister, or aunt, 219; - canons of, on ecclesiastical affairs being judged in their own - province, 308, 312, 351. - - Nicolaus, a priest, supplies money and men to the Phœnician mission, - 380. - - Nilus, an anchorite, addresses letters of warning to Arcadius, 354. - - Novatians, pretension of the, to purity of doctrine and life, 235; - refuse readmission of penitents, 235; - incur Chrysostom’s indignation, 235. - - - Oaths, the taking of, excites Chrysostom’s indignation, 231, 232. - - Œcumenical Council, the Fifth (A.D. 553), 31. - - Olympias, the deaconess, friend of Chrysostom, 280; - early life, 280; - married to Nebridius, 280; - death of her husband, 281; - devotes herself to the interests of the Church, 281; - attends to the wants of the Nitrian monks, 298; - Chrysostom’s farewell to, 339, 340; - accused of incendiarism, 346; - conduct before Optatus, 346; - refuses communion with Arsacius, 346; - is fined, and retires to Cyzicus, 346; - intercedes for Chrysostom, 361; - the archbishop’s letters to her from Cucusus, 367-373. - - Olympic games instituted by Commodus at Antioch, 92, 101. - - Optatus, a Pagan, succeeds Studius as prefect at Constantinople, 342; - persecutes Chrysostom’s followers, 342, 345; - fines Olympias, 346. - - Origen, allegorical interpretations of, 28; - his voluminous writings, and the controversy upon his teachings, - 286-288; - the Egyptian Church proud of him, 287. - - Orontes, the, 17, 28, 58, 90, 91, 100, 101. - - Ostrogoths, a colony of, established in Phrygia and Lydia, 140. - - - Pachomius, the Benedict of the East, 60; - his practice of asceticism, 62; - his rule acknowledged by three thousand monks during his lifetime, - and fifty thousand after his death, 62. - - Pagan temples, edict for the destruction of, 238. - - Paganism, Chrysostom’s method of argument and homily against, 121-124; - Theodosius’s laws against, 142, 143; - its hold upon the people, 144; - its apologists, 144, 145; - prevalent in Phœnicia, 238; - not extirpated in the fifth century, 382. - - Pagans, conversion of, 175, 176. - - Palladius, bishop of Hellenopolis, visits the Egyptian monasteries, 64; - his narrative of events, 265 and _note_; - a delegate on the affair of Antoninus, 269; - joins Chrysostom at Bithynia, 271; - on Chrysostom’s consistency, 278; - account of Chrysostom and his bishops before being summoned to “the - Synod of the Oak,” 309-311; - description of Arsacius, 344; - a fugitive to Rome, 350; - accompanies the Italian deputation, 353; - imprisoned near Ethiopia, 355; - description of Constantius the priest, 357, 358. - - Pamphylia, Tribigild awaits Leo at, 246. - - Pansophius, bishop of Pissida, desired to “offer the gifts,” 267. - - Pansophius elected to the see of Nicomedia, 273. - - Paphnutius, an Egyptian monk, defeats the proposal of clerical - celibacy at the Council of Nice, 219. - - Parents, worldliness of, reproved by Chrysostom, 78, 79. - - Paschal letter, the, 288 _note_. - - Paternus, an emissary from the cabal to Innocent, 349. - - Patriarch, the title, 216 and _note_. - - Patricius, the notary, conveys to Chrysostom the mandate of his - deposition, 339. - - Paul, bishop of Crateia, solemnly warns Eudoxia, 333. - - Paul, bishop of Heraclea, deputed to conciliate Eusebius, 267; - joins Chrysostom at Bithynia, 271. - - Paul, bishop of Tibur, interrupted while consecrating Ursicinus, 47. - - Paul of Samosata deposed from the see of Antioch, 109; - his Sabellian doctrines, 109; - originally a sophist, and unfitted to build up a system, 109. - - Paul the Anchorite retires to the Egyptian Thebaid during the - persecution of Decius, 60. - - Paulinian forcibly ordained deacon and priest by Epiphanius, 291. - - Paulinus consecrated bishop by Lucifer of Cagliari, 20; - recognised by Ambrose as bishop of Antioch, 199. - - Peanius praised for his loyal zeal, 377. - - Peasant clergy, Chrysostom’s praise of, 184, 185; - simplicity of their wives, 185. - - Pempton, congregation at, dispersed, 337. - - Pentadia, wife of Timasius, friend of Chrysostom, 280; - the archbishop’s farewell to, 339; - imprisoned, and charged with incendiarism, 347; - protests her innocence and silences her enemies, 347; - is persuaded by Chrysostom to remain at Constantinople, 347. - - Persecution intensifies attachment to the Church, 357. - - Peter, a priest, the bearer of a letter from Theophilus to Innocent, - 349. - - Pharetrius, bishop of Cæsarea, does not greet Chrysostom on his - journey, 362, 363; - his envy of the exile, 363; - menaces Seleucia, at whose house Chrysostom is lodged, 364. - - Philippopolis, Arian Council of, 17. - - “Philosophers” of Antioch, cowardice of, 167; - peasant clergy more than a match for, 184. - - Phœnicia, mission in, 380-382; - Pagan resistance to the mission, 381. - - Phrygia overrun by Tribigild, 245. - - Pityus, on the Euxine, Chrysostom to be removed to, 386. - - Placidia, sister of Honorius, 201. - - Plato, dialogues of, 55; - compared with Dionysius the Tyrant, 76; - Chrysostom on the teaching of, 428, 429. - - Polycarp, bishop, removal of his remains, 179. - - Porphyry, a priest, procures the banishment of Constantius, 358; - imprisons some of the clergy of Antioch, 358; - enters the church, and with closed doors is hurriedly ordained - bishop of Antioch by Acacius, Severian, and Antiochus, 358; - is threatened by the populace, and protected by troops, 358. - - Porphyry, bishop of Gaza, urges the destruction of Pagan temples, 238. - - Preaching, Chrysostom’s remarks on, 51, 52. - - Priesthood, the, Chrysostom’s books on, 40-55; - probable date of writing, 55; - age at which eligible for, 55, 56. - - Priestly office, dignity, difficulty, and danger of, 43-45; - qualifications for, 50. - - Priscillianists, the, ruthlessly persecuted, by Maximus, 190. - - Prisoners, custom of releasing, 172 and _note_. - - Procla, Chrysostom’s farewell to, 339. - - Proclus, friend of Chrysostom, 279; - elevated to the see of Constantinople, 388; - gains the consent of the Emperor to transport Chrysostom’s remains - to the city, 388. - - Procopius, uncle and guardian of Olympias, 280. - - Promotus assassinated by order of Rufinus, 205. - - Property holders, duties of, 230. - - Protasius, discovery of the reliques of, 190. - - Ptolemy Philadelphus deposits the Septuagint in the temple of Serapis, - 128. - - Pulcheria, daughter of Eudoxia, 248. - - Pusey, Dr., quoted, 417, 418. - - - Ravenna, Honorius at, 352; - court of, not powerful enough to enforce the convocation of a - general council, 359. - - Reader in the Church, office of, 23; - ceremony of ordination to, 23. - - Reliques, importance attached to, 382. - - Remigius of Rheims made bishop at the age of twenty-two, 56. - - Repentance, Chrysostom on, 34. - - Rhadagaisus covets Rome, 359. - - Right of asylum in the Church abolished by Eutropius, 210; - transferred from Pagan temples, 249; - sought by Eutropius, 250; - maintained by Chrysostom, 251. - - Rimini, the creed of, 18, 188. - - Roman Catholic countries, abuse of saints’ days in, 183. - - Rome, bishop of, growing tendency of Christendom to appeal to, 335; - no jealousy entertained by Chrysostom of him, 335. - - Rome, contest for the see of, 47; - persecutions at, 58; - St. Jerome at, 61; - division into districts, 103; - love of the people for chariot-races, 118; - triumphal entry of Theodosius, 193; - its mixed population, 195; - deputation of the inhabitants to Stilicho and Honorius against the - consulship of Eutropius, 242; - arrival of fugitives from Constantinople, 350; - efforts of Alaric to conquer, 359. - - Rufinus, a presbyter, sent to Phœnicia to restore peace, 381; - Chrysostom’s letter to, 381, 382. - - Rufinus, minister of Theodosius, 187; - his view of the sedition at Thessalonica, 195; - endeavours to console Theodosius, 197; - seeks an interview with Ambrose, but is repulsed, 197; - appointed guardian to Arcadius, and regent of the East, 203; - some account of his life, 203; - his “accursed thirst” for gain, and his extortions, 204; - display of piety, 204; - builds a monastery and church at “the Oak,” and is baptized therein, - 204; - surrounds himself with a powerful party, 204; - jealousy of Stilicho, 205; - scheme to marry his daughter to Arcadius frustrated, 205; - villanous plot of overrunning the country with Huns, Goths, etc., - 206, 207; - his death just when he had attained the height of his ambition, 208. - - Rufinus, monk of Aquileia, a warm admirer of Origen, 288; - is accused of being an Origenist by Aterbius, and refuses to defend - himself, 288; - sides with Bishop John of Jerusalem, 291. - - - Sabellians, the, 50; - their danger to Christianity, 107. - - Sabiniana, the deaconess, follows Chrysostom into exile, 366. - - Saints’ days, abuse of, 182, 183. - - Saints, the Old Testament, 84, 99; - growth of devotion to, 108; - appeal for assistance to, 132; - their festivals grow numerous, 178; - special days of commemoration, 178; - character of the festivals, 178; - their Acts or Passions, 178 and _note_; - Chrysostom’s belief in their intercessory power, 178; - feeling in the Church in regard to their invocation, 179; - popular faith in the miraculous power of their remains, 180, 181; - pilgrimages to their tombs, 181; - relics removed by Flavian, 181 _note_. - - Salustius, a priest, rebuked by Chrysostom, 345, 376. - - Salvina, daughter of Gildo, friend of Chrysostom, 279; - the archbishop’s farewell to, 339. - - Saracens, the nomadic, 61. - - Sardica, Council of (A.D. 342), 17; - (A.D. 343, 344), 56; - repudiates the Twelfth Canon of the Council of Antioch, 329, 351. - - Saturninus, husband of Castricia: his surrender demanded by Gaïnas, - 257; - insulted by Gaïnas, and afterwards delivered up, 257. - - Savile, Sir Henry: his edition of Chrysostom’s works, 9. - - Savonarola, 3; - character of the people preached to by, 233; - compared with Chrysostom, 426. - - Schism of Antioch, 20, 21. - - Secundus, father of Chrysostom, 9; - his death, 10. - - Seleucia lodges Chrysostom at her house, 364; - is threatened by Pharetrius, 364. - - Seleucus, Count, father of Olympias, 280. - - Septuagint, the, 128. - - Serapion, archdeacon, encourages Chrysostom in his severity towards - the clergy, 222; - his dislike of and discourtesy to Severian, 276; - remains Chrysostom’s friend, 279; - exclamation on the teaching of Theophilus, 288; - summoned before the “Synod of the Oak,” 311; - now bishop of Heraclea, scourged and exiled, 345; - seeks shelter with Gothic monks, 375. - - Serapis, the temple of, Septuagint deposited at, 128; - silver image of, at Alexandria, destroyed, 144. - - Serena, wife of Stilicho, 201. - - Severian, bishop of Gabala, deputed to act for Chrysostom during his - absence, 270; - endeavours to undermine the archbishop’s influence, 275; - his efforts to win admiration, 276; - irritation with Serapion’s discourtesy, 276; - expelled from Constantinople by Chrysostom, but recalled by command - of Eudoxia, 276, 277; - becomes a leader of the faction hostile to Chrysostom, 282; - extols the deposition of the patriarch, 321; - again plotting against him after his recall, 329; - urges the Emperor to remove Chrysostom from the city, 338, 339; - assists in secretly ordaining Porphyry, 358. - - Severus, Emperor Alexander: his admiration of the mode of electing - bishops, 46. - - Shakespeare quoted, 95 _note_, 161 _note_. - - Sicinnius, the Novatian bishop, writes against Chrysostom, 235; - admired by Socrates, 235 _note_. - - Silk, the use of, 227 and _note_. - - Simeon Stylites on his pillar, 61; - a caricature of the anchorite, 65. - - Siricius, Pope, decree of, on celibacy of the clergy, 218. - - Socrates, 76; - invited by Archelaus to court, 76; - resists the allurements of ambition, 95. - - Socrates, historian, terms dedicatory churches “martyries,” 178; - says the treatises of Chrysostom on “spiritual sisters” were - composed during his diaconate, 220; - account of the pursuit of Gaïnas, 263; - stories of Maruthas, 375 _note_. - - Sozomen on the dress of Pachomian monks, 63; - on their industries, 64; - his account of the pursuit of Gaïnas, 263. - - Spiritual agency, 82-84. - - “Spiritual sisters” of priests, 219. - - Stagirius, excessive austerities of, 82; - their effect, 83; - consoled by Chrysostom, 84. - - Stanley, Dean, quoted, 40. - - Stelechius, Chrysostom’s book addressed to, 69, 71. - - Stephen, bishop of Antioch, president of the Arian Council of - Philippopolis, 17; - deposed by the Emperor Constantius, 17. - - Stilicho, 187; - Theodosius commends to him Honorius and the West, 202; - likened by Claudian to Scipio, 205; - Honorius betrothed to his daughter, 205; - advances against Alaric, but is prevented from attacking him by a - message from Constantinople, 207; - sends back his troops under Gaïnas, 207, 208; - again hastens to attack Alaric, but hears that he is - commander-in-chief of the forces of the East, 210; - receives a deputation of Romans on the consulship of Eutropius, 242; - rumours of his march to the East, 247; - efforts to restrain Alaric and Rhadagaisus, 359. - - Strabo’s description of Daphne, 101. - - Superstitions, description of, 137; - rebuked by Chrysostom, 137, 138. - - Swearing, admonition against, 159, 160. - - Symmachus, his apology for paganism, 145; - eloquent appeal for the retention of the statue of Victory, 145; - his character, 145 _note_; - Ambrose’s reply to his appeal, 145, 146; - obtains a professorial chair for St. Augustine, 189; - cordially received by Theodosius, 194. - - Syncletius, bishop of Trajanopolis, a delegate on the affair of - Antoninus, 269. - - “Synod of the Oak,” 309; - Chrysostom summoned to the, 309; - not an Œcumenical Council, 313; - its display of formalities, 313; - the archbishop refuses to attend, and is deposed, 315, 316; - its sentence ratified by the Emperor, 316, 317; - its proceedings declared illegal, 325. - - Syria: Antioch degraded, and Laodicea made its capital, 165; - Theophilus travels through, bringing disaffected bishops to - Constantinople, 306; - overrun by Isaurians, 354. - - Syrus, an old ascetic, 82. - - “Tall brethren” persecuted by Theophilus, 294, 295; - their dwellings pillaged, 295; - fly to Palestine, 297; - thence to Constantinople, 297; - Theophilus is reconciled to them, 316. - - Temple, the only lawful place to offer sacrifices, 131 _note_; - Julian commands its restoration, 131 _note_; - failure to rebuild, 131. - - Tertullian, saying of, 177. - - Thalia, the, of Arius, 236. - - Thebaid, the Egyptian, 60; - Pachomius, a native of the, 62. - - Theodore, bishop of Mopsuestia, 9; - joins an ascetic brotherhood, 27; - returns to a worldly life, 31, 32; - letters of lamentation from Chrysostom, 32-39; - returns again to the brotherhood, 39; - made bishop of Mopsuestia (A.D. 394), 39; - his character, 39. - - Theodore of Tyana, friendly to Chrysostom, 329; - quits Constantinople on seeing the unfair construction of the - council, 329. - - Theodoret’s story of the meeting of Gaïnas and Chrysostom, 263; - on the jurisdiction of Chrysostom, 274; - on idolatry in Phœnicia, 382. - - Theodoras executed, 57, 94. - - Theodosia, sister of Amphilocius, and instructress of Olympias, 280. - - Theodosius I., on amicable terms with Libanius, 12; - his defeats of the Goths, 93; - deservedly called “The Great,” 139; - his services against Scots and Saxons, Moors and Goths, 139; - disgraced, and retires to Spain, 139; - recalled, and made Emperor, 140; - his character, 140; - military achievements, 140, 141; - a Christian, 141; - efforts to establish a uniform type of religion, 141; - his baptism, 141; - solemn declaration of faith, 141; - makes Gregory of Nazianzus bishop, 142; - project for a general council, 142; - edict against heretics, 142; - forbids the practice of divination, 143; - laws against Pagans, 142, 143; - his impartiality, 147, 148; - his wife Flacilla, 148; - choleric temper, 148; - pardons Antioch after the tumult, 170; - interview with Flavian, 171-174; - victory over Maximus, 191; - generosity to his enemies, 191; - commands the bishop of Callinicum to rebuild the Jewish synagogue, - 191; - remonstrance of Ambrose, 191, 192; - the order annulled, 193; - triumphal entry into Rome, 193; - two popular enactments, 193, 194; - abstains from interfering in religious debates, 194; - resentment at the sedition of Thessalonica, 195; - barbarous act of ferocity, 195; - confronted by Ambrose, and refused admittance to the cathedral, 196; - exhorted to deep repentance, 197; - his penance, 197, 198; - forbidden to sit with the clergy during the celebration, 198; - collects a huge force, and solicits the favour of heaven, 200; - arrives near the scene of his former victory, 200; - assaults Arbogastes, but is repulsed, 200; - his vision, 200; - rallies his army, and completely defeats the enemy, 201; - received at Milan with transports of joy, 201; - free pardon granted to the Milanese who had revolted, 201; - his health gives way, 201; - receives the Eucharist at the hands of Ambrose, 201; - beseeches the Western bishops to acknowledge Flavian, 201; - implores the Pagan Roman senators to become Christians, 201, 202; - last appearances in public, 202; - his death, 202; - his law on the right of asylum, 249; - conduct towards Olympias, 281. - - Theodosius II., attacked by an alarming illness, 304; - suppresses the Pagan homage paid to Emperors, 327; - consents to Chrysostom’s reliques being brought to Constantinople, - 388; - implores forgiveness for his parents’ wrongs to the saint, 388. - - Theodosius the elder, 139; - executed at Carthage, 139 _note_; - his statue destroyed by the mob at Antioch, 152. - - Theophilus, a priest, rebuked by Chrysostom, 345, 376. - - Theophilus, archbishop of Alexandria, appointed arbitrator between - Flavian and Evagrius, 199; - pushes the claims of Isidore for the see of Constantinople, 213; - refuses to take part in Chrysostom’s ordination until threatened by - Eutropius, 215; - his opposition is silenced, and he assists in the consecration, - 215, 216; - joins Chrysostom in urging the recognition of Flavian, 237; - behaviour to Olympias, 282 _note_; - becomes the chief of Chrysostom’s foes, 285; - his character, 284, 285; - earnest defender of the teaching of Origen, 287; - made arbitrator between Jerome and John of Jerusalem, 292; - his letter intended for John is delivered to Vinctius, 292; - changes sides, 292, 293; - brings a horrible charge against Isidore, who is ejected from the - ministry, 294; - persecutes the “tall brethren,” 294-297; - his malice follows the Nitrian monks to Palestine, 297; - schemes for the overthrow of Chrysostom, 298, 299; - apologetic letter to Epiphanius, 299; - writes a sharp complaint to Chrysostom, 300; - summoned to Constantinople to defend his conduct towards the Nitrian - monks, 301; - arrival at the city with twenty-eight bishops, 306; - declines the hospitality of Chrysostom, 307; - resides at Pera, in a house of the Emperor’s, 307; - refuses all communication with the archbishop, 308; - his house the resort of the disaffected, 308; - bribes to the city, 308; - draws up a list of accusations against Chrysostom, 309; - holds a synod at “the Oak,” and summons the archbishop to appear, - 309; - after his object is attained, is reconciled to the “tall brethren,” - 316; - arrives at Constantinople with a large retinue, and restores the - worthless clergy, 320, 321; - remains in the city after the recall of Chrysostom, 324, 325; - his flight when summonses were issued for a general council, 325; - excuses himself from attending the council, 325; - invited by Chrysostom’s enemies again to visit Constantinople, 328; - declines, and sends three “pitiful bishops,” 328; - his letter to Pope Innocent received with displeasure, 348; - reproved by Innocent, 348, 349. - - Theotecnus brings to Innocent a letter from twenty-five bishops, 349. - - Theotimus, a Goth, bishop of Tomis, at Constantinople, 266; - a determined opponent of Epiphanius, 303; - called by the Huns “the god of the Christians,” 303; - denounces the unseemly condemnation of the works of Origen, 303. - - Therapeutæ, the, 59. - - Therasius: Chrysostom addresses a letter to the widow of, 93. - - Thermopylæ, pass of, violated by Alaric, 210. - - Thessalonica, sedition at, 195; - its Christian population, 195; - failure of the mission of Ambrose to obtain clemency, 195; - barbarous massacre of 7000 inhabitants, 195. - - Thrace, Flacilla dies at, 148; - overrun by Alaric, 207; - ravaged by Gaïnas, 263; - ravaged by Huns, 354. - - Tiberias, Patriarch of, 126. - - Tiberius restricted the right of asylum, 249. - - Tigrius summoned before the “Synod of the Oak,” 311; - scourged, and put on the rack, 345; - survives, and is banished to Mesopotamia, 345. - - Tillemont’s opinion of Theodore, 39 _note_; - floating synod at Constantinople, 266 _note_. - - Tomis, a market of Goths and Huns, 303. - - Tradition, Chrysostom’s arguments not based on, 117. - - Trajan, Antioch nearly destroyed in the reign of, 90. - - Tranquillus, a friend of Chrysostom, 329. - - Tribigild, the Ostrogoth, solicits promotion for himself and more pay - for his soldiers, 244; - his suit coldly dismissed by the Emperor’s minister, 244; - returns home, and resolves to cast off allegiance to the empire, 245; - overruns Phrygia, and captures some fortified towns, 245; - refuses to treat with Eutropius, 246; - his army retreats to Pamphylia, where he awaits Leo, 246; - swoops down upon his prey at night, scattering Leo’s army, 247; - his forces joined with those of Gaïnas, 257. - - Trinity Sunday, 178 _note_. - - - Uldes, or Uldin, pursues Gaïnas and kills him, 263. - - Ulphilas, preaching of, to the Goths, 382. - - Unilas, a Gothic bishop, appointed by Chrysostom, 237; - dies after a short but active career, 375. - - Ursicinus, consecration of, by Paul, bishop of Tibur, violently - stopped by Damasus, 47. - - - Valens, the Emperor, on amicable terms with Libanius, 12; - favoured the Arians, 21; - expelled bishop Meletius, 40; - his decree against the practisers of magic, 57; - persecution of the monks, 72-75; - destruction by the Goths, 92, 94; - forbids the sacrifice of animals, 143. - - Valentinian, his decree against magicians, 57; - his fate, 94; - territory secured to him by Theodosius, 141; - forbids the sacrifice of animals, 143. - - Valentinian II., 187; - flight to Thessalonica, 191; - accompanies Theodosius to Rome, 193; - in possession of his dominions, 199; - treachery of his general of the forces, Arbogastes, 200; - found strangled, 200. - - Valentinians, a church of, set fire to by fanatics, 191. - - Valentinus, error of, 113. - - Valentinus, entreated to benevolence by Chrysostom, 377. - - Venerius, bishop of Milan, Chrysostom’s letter to, 334, 335; - sends a letter by the Italian deputation, 353. - - Vincentius, presbyter and friend of Jerome, 292. - - Victor Uticensis, 23. - - Victory, news of, proclaimed gratuitously by Theodosius, 194. - - Visigoths, a colony of, established in Thrace, 140. - - - Wealth, Chrysostom on, 156, 157. - - Wesley, John, at Oxford, 27; - as a preacher, 425. - - Western Church, the, acknowledges Paulinus as bishop of Antioch, 20; - favourable to clerical celibacy, 218; - does not fully accept Origen’s teachings, 287; - appealed to by the Eastern Church, 335; - not able to insist on justice to Chrysostom, 349; - breaks off communion with Theophilus and Atticus, 358; - demands the convocation of a general council, 358. - - Western theology, 391, 392. - - Westminster, sanctuary of, 249. - - Women, influence of, on early Christianity, 10, 11; - they baffle Julian and Governor Alexander at Antioch, 11; - Libanius’s letter on, 11; - interference in the election of bishops, 48; - multitudes take vows of celibacy, 61; - degraded position in the East, 96. - - - Zosimus, 153 _note_; - account of the pursuit of Gaïnas, 262, 263. - - -Edinburgh University Press: - -THOMAS AND ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE, PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY. - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Saint John Chrysostom, his Life and -Times, by W. R. W. Stephens - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SAINT JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, LIFE, TIMES *** - -***** This file should be named 53809-0.txt or 53809-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/3/8/0/53809/ - -Produced by Turgut Dincer and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive) - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |