^UlS^W-m^.W1^. p"

ss&jjjgjj^^^

? lfP

YALE
DIVINITY SCHOOL
LIBRARY

Gift of
ROLAND H. BAINTON

CHURCH HISTORY

CHR. WORDSWORTH, D.D.
BISHOP OF LINCOLN

VOL. IV.
CONTINUATION TO THE COUNCIL OF CHAL
CEDON, A.D. 451; AND CONCLUSION

JAMES POTT
12, ASTOR PLACE, NEW YORK
MDCCCLXXXIII
[All rights reserved.]

A CHURCH HISTORY
TO THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON, A.D. 451.
By CHR. WORDSWORTH, D.D.,
BISHOP OF LINCOLN.

VOL. I. — To the Council of Nioea, a.d. 325. Third
Edition. %s. 6d.
VOL. II. — To the Council of Constantinople, a.d.
381. Second Edition, 6s.
VOL. III. — Continuation from a.d. 381. 6s.
VOL. IV. — Continuation to the Council of Chal
cedon, a.d. 451. 6s.
With Index to the Whole Work.

RIVINGTONS,
WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER XIII.
PAGE
S. Augustine's - place in Church History, in reference to Mani-
chasanism — On the Inspiration and Interpretation of the Old
Testament — Controversy with Donatism — On the true cha
racter of the Visible Church — On the Ministerial Commission
— On Church Unity and Church Communion . . . I
CHAPTER XIV.
S. Augustine's place in Church History, with reference to Pela-
gianismj the doctrine of Divine Grace; Human Free-will j
Predestination, Election, Reprobation 16
CHAPTER XV.
Augustine's Correspondence— Epistles on various questions, per
sonal, moral, social, doctrinal, and disciplinarian : and on
ritual and worship  34
CHAPTER XVI.
Other Works of Augustine on various questions of morals, doc
trine, discipline, and ritual ; on Sacraments, Christian Life,
Virginity, Marriage, Divorce, Widowhood, Total Abstinence ;
Funeral rites — His Sermons — Duty to Nonconformists — His
Work " On the City of God "—On Church History—" The
Last Things"  7°
CHAPTER XVII.
Christian Missions — S. Germain of Auxerre ¦ Palladius — Mission
of S. Patrick to Ireland  105

iv Contents.
CHAPTER XVIII.

PAGE

The Eastern Church— S. Chrysostom's place in Church History—
His work at Antioch  119
CHAPTER XIX.
S. Chrysostom's place in Church History — His work at Constanti
nople as Archbishop of that See — His banishment, death,
and character ......... 145
CHAPTER XX.
Nestorianism — S. Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria — Council of Ephe
sus  187
CHAPTER XXI.
Eutychianism — S. Leo, Bishop of Rome— Latrocinium of Ephesus
— Death of Theodosius IL, July 29, a.d. 450 — Accession
of Marcian and Pulcheria  . 235
CHAPTER XXII.
Council of Chalcedon — Conclusion  270

CHAPTER XIII.
.S. Augustine's place in history in reference to Mani-
chceanism — On the Inspiration and Interpretation of
tlte Old Testament — His controversy with Donatism :
On the true character of the Visible Church; On
the Ministerial Commission ,* On Church Unity and
Church Communion.
Augustine has a peculiar place not only on account
of his personal history, but by reason of his work as a
Teacher of the Church, and because of the influence
of his teaching on succeeding generations.
The first heresy with which he had to deal was that
of the Manichaeans, of which he had been a votary for
nine years — from his nineteenth year.
This heresy, an offshoot of Persian dualism, and of
Gnostic systems,1 especially those of Valentinus and
Marcion, asserted the eternal existence of two anta
gonistic principles of good and evil, light and dark
ness;2 in a word, of "two Gods;"3 and the conflict and
commixture of two natures, good and evil ; and the
struggle of the good to be purified from the evil.
1 Manes, its founder, was born in Persia about A. D. 240. See above,
vol. i. p. 371, and vol. ii. pp. 184, 200, 204.
2 See Augustine's description of the Manichaean heresy, de Hseres.
46, vol. viii. p. 5°. and his Works in Vol. vi. of the Benedictine
Edition, and de Agone Christiano, c. 4; Neander, iv. 212—231.
3 Aug. de Moribus Eccl. Cath. 16, " Duo Dii Manichseorum, unus
bonus, unus malus ; Deus bonus fecit mundum, sed non Deus Veteris
Testamenti, quod culpant, sed non intelligunt."
VOL. IV. B

2 Manichceanism.
They affirmed that good souls were from the
nature of the good God, and struggled to be free from
commixture with evil ; and that this struggle was
assisted by those of their own Society, whom they
called the Elect ; who condemned marriage, and the
procreation of children, and the use of wine, and
professed to practise a rigid self-denial. But, says
Augustine, they were guilty of licentious abomina
tions, in order that by certain revolting processes,4
especially by partaking of certain food, they might
absorb evil, and free others from it, and restore
them to the Kingdom of Light. They pretended
that Christ Himself had come on a similar errand of
purification, to deliver souls, but not to redeem bodies,
and that He had no corporeal existence ; and they
consequently denied the Nativity, Circumcision, Temp
tation, the Resurrection of His body and of any other
bodies. They said that His promise to send the Holy
Spirit was fulfilled in Manes their Founder, who was
a supreme, infallible, authority, by whose decrees,
which they possessed, everything was to be judged.
They affirmed with many of the Gnostics that
the God of Moses and of the Old Testament, was
not the good God, but one of the Princes of Dark
ness. They asserted that the origin of sin was not in the
free will of the first Adam, tempted by Satan ; but
ascribed it to the substance of the Evil Principle,
which they said was mingled with every man ; and
that the human body was not the work of the good
God, but of the Co-eternal Evil Principle. They denied
4 See Aug. viii. p. 50, and de Moribus Manichaeorum, vol. ii. p. 1 158,
cap. 19 and 20. As to the exposure of their immoralities, see also
Aug. c. Faust, v. 5.

Augustine's refutation of Manlchceanism — His defence 3
of the Old Testament.
original sin, and asserted that concupiscence in man is
not the frailty and corruption of man's nature origi
nally formed by God, but an independent substance
contrary to good, and existing in man ; and that
every man has two souls, the one good, the other evil,
which are striving within him, and from the latter
of which he is to be liberated by Manichaeanism.
Augustine's resistance to Manichaeanism was more
effectual on account of his intimate acquaintance with
it and its partisans. His refutation of their blasphe
mies, his exposure of their delusions, and his re
velation of their impurities rescued many from them,
and were probably the causes why little is heard of
that heresy after the fifth century.
His refutation of their errors concerning the Holy
Scriptures of the Old Testament, and his defence of
those Scriptures,5 have a value for every age, and for
none more than for the present.
He was the first great Writer of the Western Church
who taught her 6 to look up to the Everlasting Word,
the Son of God, Very God of Very God, as delivering
the Written Word to the World by Moses and the
Prophets, whom He sent ; and as afterwards, when
He became the Incarnate Word, setting His Divine
seal upon the Old Testament, and avouching it in
the eyes of the World by His divine authority.
The appeal to this infallible attestation of Christ to
the Truth and Inspiration of the Old Testament, by
which Augustine refuted the Manichaeans, and estab-
5 Especially in his great work Adversus Faustum Manichseum libri
triginta tres, voL vi. pp. 89 — 205, and Contra Adversarium Legis et
Prophetarum libri duo, vol. vi. pp. 243 — 267.
6 See above, iii. 254, the passage from De Civ. Dei, xi. 2, and com
pare Contra Gaudentium, i. 38, vol. ix. p. 1006, "Legi et Prophetis et
Psalmis Dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis."
B 2

4 Augustine's vindication of the Truth and Inspiration of
the Scriptures.
lished the faith of the Church in its Truth and Inspi
ration on the Rock which is Christ,7 can never cease
to be made ; and when made with power and clear
ness will never fail — if not to convince gainsayers —
at least to satisfy all reasonable minds.
S. Augustine extended this proof to establish also
the Truth, Integrity, and Inspiration of the New
Testament, which the Manichaeans said had been
falsified, and parts of which they rejected.
Christ promised to be ever with His Church, and
to send the Holy Spirit to lead her into all truth.8
Augustine therefore affirmed that the Witness of the
Church to the Inspiration of the New Testament is
virtually the Witness of Christ, and of the Holy Ghost,
Whom He sent ; it is a Divine Witness.
" The Canonical Authority," he says,9 " of the Old
and New Testament has been confirmed from the
times of the Apostles by means of the succession of
Bishops, and the propagation of Churches ; and is
planted aloft on a sublime pre-eminence above all
other writings ; and to it every faithful and devout
intellect will reverently bow." *
This appeal to the external testimony of the
Catholic Church, and virtually to Christ Himself in
His own Body the Church, would, if duly considered,
have preserved Christendom from the dangerous
"¦ Matt. xvi. 18.
8 S. Aug. de Consensu Evangelist, i. cap. ult., " Christ, Who sent
the Prophets before His Coming down from heaven, sent His Apostles
also after His Ascension into it ; He wrote by their hands, and He has
attested the writing by their voice."
9 Contra Faustum, xi. 6.
1 See also ibid, xxxiii. 9, " The authority of Scripture is paramount,
being established from the time of Christ Himself by means of Apostolic
ordinances and successions of Bishops from their days to the present."

Manichceanism overruled for good. 5
error which has prevailed and still prevails in many
religious societies, of referring the question of the
Truth and Inspiration to be decided by the mere
inner consciousness of the individual man (however
valuable in certain cases that may be) ; which cannot
be any argument to any one besides himself, and may
be even to himself a very precarious criterion ; as is
evident from the rejection of one Canonical Book
after another,, by the licentiousness of an arbitrary
subjective Criticism, in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries, till in some cases the whole of the Sacred
Volume has disappeared.2
Under the Providence of God, the Manichaean
heresy, like other heresies which have disturbed the
peace and tried the faith of the Church, was overruled
for her good. It was made an occasion, under the
controlling hand of God working by Augustine, for
establishing the Truth and Inspiration of the Holy
Scripture impugned by that heresy. It was also used
by Him as an opportunity for vindicating the true sense
and scope of Scripture, and for displaying them to
future generations.
St. Paul, by whose teaching, more than by that
of any man, Augustine's mind was disciplined, had
shown that the history of the Church of God in the
Old Testament, from the days of Adam 3 to Moses,4

- The members of the Anglican Church (as compared with the
foreign Protestant communions of the sixteenth century, which, in their
Confessions of faith, such as the Gallican, Helvetic, Belgic, &c, pre
ferred the other method — i.e. the personal inner consciousness — the
effects of which are now visible) — can never be sufficiently thankful
that our English Reformers, who were diligent students of Augustine,
placed the Canon of Scripture on its right foundation, the testimony
of Christ in the Church Universal. See our Sixth Article.
3 Rom. v. 12 — 20; 1 Cor. xv. 22, 45. 4 I Cor. x. 1 — n.

6 Augustine on the Interpretation of the Old Testament.
was a foreshadowing of her history in the New, and
that the veil would never be taken away from the
hearts of the Jews in reading the Old Testament, till
they had learnt to see Christ in it.5
S. Ambrose, to whose preaching at Milan Augus
tine had listened, as he tells us,6 with delight, espe
cially in his sermons on the Old Testament, had
prepared the way7 for the work which Augustine
afterwards performed by a systematic exposition of
it, especially in his writings against the Manichaeans.
" We must look," he says, " for Christ in every part
of the Old Testament ; and when we see Him there,
then we shall understand the Old Testament — but
not till then.8 The New Testament is enfolded in
the Old ; the Old is unfolded in the New.9 The lives
of the Hebrew Patriarchs were prophetical.1 All the
Prophets prophesied of Christ.2 The whole Levitical
Law of Sacrifice was a prophecy of the one Sacrifice
of the Cross.3
5 2 Cor. iii. 13 — 16.
6 Confessions vi. 4, where he mentions with gratitude the entire
change that was wrought in his own mind with regard to the Old
Testament by S. Ambrose's spiritual exposition of it, so that those things
in it, which before "had seemed to him to be puerile and absurd," were
now looked on in a totally different light.
7 See above, pp. 73 — 75.
8 " Omnia fere in Sacdi Scripturi vel de Christo dicta sunt vel
propter Eum (c. Faust, xii. 7). Quicquid dubitationis habet homo in
animo auditis Scripturis, a Christo non recedat ; cum ei fuerit in illis
Christus revelatus, intelligat se intellexisse." Epist. 132 in Ps. 96.
9 Qua^st. 73 in Exod. Qu. 33 in Numeros.
1 Cont. Faust, iv. 1 ; xxii. 24. " At the same time we do not defend
any sins of the Patriarchs, but we defend the Scriptures where they
are recorded. We admire the Divine Mirror, but not all the human
features reflected in it " (c. Faust, xxii. 65).
2 Cont. Faust, xii.
3 Ibid. xx. 18, "As the Sacrifice of the Levitical Law was a pro
phecy, so the Holy Eucharist is a Memorial of Christ's One Sacrifice."

.S. Augustine on the spiritual meaning and on the 7
Christian character of the Old Testament.
" As Adam was, according to St. Paul, the figure of
Christ, so Eve the Bride of Adam, and the 'Mother of all
living,' was the figure of Christ's Bride the Church ; and
as Eve was formed from Adam's side when asleep, so
the Church was formed from the opened side of Christ
sleeping in death on the Cross, by the sacramental
streams of Blood and Water which flowed from it." 4
By such teaching as this 6 Augustine refuted the
cavils of the Manichaeans against the Old Testament.
He showed that those things in it which seemed to
them — and which once had seemed to himself — to be
trivial and frivolous, and even mean, absurd, and
revolting, were designed to be trials of faith and
humility ; and, according to men's dispositions,
would be stumbling-stones of error to some, and be
stepping-stones of faith to others. He raised the
Old Testament in the eyes of the World to a higher
altitude and clearer atmosphere ; he displayed it as
shining with divine radiance from the countenance
of Christ ; and showed that, if rightly read and
understood, it would be seen to have a message from
Him to all nations and ages of the world ; and thus
to be commended by Him to acceptance, with spiritual
and intellectual joy, by the faith of universal Christen
dom. And he delivered a warning from his own

4 Aug. Serm. 5 and 22 ; and on John, Tract. 9 and 11 ; and on
John xix. 34, I John v. 7.
4 For further illustration of this subject, may I be permitted to refer
to the Preface to my Commentary on the Holy Bible, and to the Intro
ductions to the Books of Genesis, Leviticus, Joshua, and the Minor
Prophets? The forgetfulness of S. Augustine's teaching in these
respects has produced a servile, dry, and barren system of Interpretation,
which has characterized many Expositions and Commentaries on the
Old Testament in modem times, and has done much to bring it into
contempt, and to produce Scepticism.

8 On the temper requisite for reading the Scriptures — On
Donatism — Conference under Marcellinus.
experience, which ma y be instructive in modern times,
that Scripture can never be understood by the proud,
nor be received otherwise than by humility. " When
I was young," he says,6 " I approached the Scriptures
with shrewdness of disputation, but not with reveren
tial inquiry. I tried to break open the door of
Scripture by violent assaults. But I found that I shut
it more closely against myself. And why ? Because I
sought with pride, what can only be found by humility."
What the Manichaean Controversy in the hands of
Augustine was with regard to Holy Scripture, that the
Donatistic Controversy was with respect to the Church.
The rise and progress of Donatism have been
already described.7
That Controversy between the Donatists and the
Catholics, which had harassed the African Church
in the days of Constantine, assumed larger propor
tions in those of Honorius, the son of Theodosius.
The principal champion of the Church was Augustine.
He and the other Catholic Bishops sent envoys
to the Emperor Honorius with a request that he
would summon the Bishops of both sides to meet at
Carthage, where each party should choose its own
representatives, to debate the controverted questions
at a Conference. The Emperor acceded to the request ;
and he complied with the desire more readily, because
the Donatists concurred in it.
Honorius addressed a rescript to Fla.vius Marcelli
nus, one of his principal Commissioners in Africa, and
appointed him as Delegate to preside at the Con
ference. Marcellinus was a Catholic, distinguished
6 Serm. 51. Cp. Ps. 93, 103.
7 Above, vol. i. pp. 404 — 410 ; ii. p. 96.

Conference with the Donatist Bishops — Questions at issue. 9
by prudence, diligence, moderation, and equity, which
were evinced by his management of the Conference.
S. Augustine eulogizes him for his love of Holy
Scripture, for his fervent piety, his holiness of life,
his charity, probity, mildness, and affability.8 Indeed,
on account of his zeal for the truth, and of his suffer
ings even unto death in a good cause, he is revered
as a Martyr by the Church.
This Conference of the Bishops met in the summer
of A.D. 41 1, and after three days' patient hearing of the
cause, Marcellinus delivered an elaborate judgment
in favour of the Catholics, which was published
June 26 — eighteen days after the opening of the
Conference.9 The Acts of the Conference were read annually in
the Church of Carthage and Hippo, and other
Churches of Africa ; and as they were found too
prolix for the purpose, S. Augustine undertook to
abridge them, in order to render them more acceptable
to the public.
This Conference did much to heal the Donatistic
Schism, and many Donatist Bishops and their con
gregations returned to the Unity of the Church.
The questions at issue were —
1. Whether a perfectly pure Church is to be looked
for on earth ?
2. Whether sins and errors of Bishops and Priests
vitiate the Ordinations conferred, and the Sacraments
administered, by them ?
3. Whether it is lawful to depart from their com
munion, and set up a rival Church in opposition to
8 See the passages in Tillemont, torn. xiii. pp. 501, 502, 554.
9 Cp. Tillemont, Mem. xiii. 551 ; Fleury, Hist. Eccl. xxii. 25,
c 39-

10 Augustine's answers to those questions — S. Cyprian's error.
them — as was done by Donatist Bishops against Cseci-
lian, Bishop of Carthage, and the Catholics ?
The first question was answered in the negative by
Augustine, appealing to passages in Scripture which
declare the condition of the Church on Earth to be
imperfect and mixed. The Church, while she is in this
world, is typified by the Ark, which contained unclean
as well as clean animals, a Ham as well as a Shem and
a Japhet; * and is described in our Lord's parables as
a field having tares mingled with wheat ; as a thresh
ing-floor having chaff as well as good grain ; and as
a net enclosing bad fish as well as good ; 2 and so she
will continue to the end.
As to the second question there was much greater
difficulty. The Donatists could appeal to the writings
and acts of the great African Bishop and Martyr
S. Cyprian ; to the Councils of African Bishops in
A.D. 255, 256, acting with him, who had affirmed that
heretics were no part of the Church, and that baptism
administered by them was no baptism.3
By parity of reasoning, Csecilian, having been
consecrated (in A.D. 311) by Felix of Aptunga, who,
as they affirmed — but could not prove — had lapsed
in persecution, was no Bishop at all.
Augustine was not dismayed by these allegations.
While he treated the memory of Cyprian with vene
ration, he showed good reason for dissenting from
his opinion,4 which had indeed been condemned by
1 Aug. c. Faust, x 15.
2 Ibid. viii. 14, 13 ; in Joann. Tract. 12 and 61; de Fide, 5; in
Ps. 8 and 55 ; Epist. 108.
3 See above, vol. i pp. 315, 316 ; and cp. Hooker, III. i. 9, and
V. Ixii. 6 — 9.
4 Aug. de Bapt. i. 18 ; iii. 3, 4 ; iv. 6 ; v. t6, 25 ; Serin. 37 ; in
Petilian. c. 14.

Augustine on the errors of the Donatists appealing to 1 1
Cyprian — His opposition to Rome.
Bishops of Rome, and by subsequent Councils of the
Church.6 He affirmed that Ordinations conferred,
and Sacraments administered, by Bishops and Priests
derive their validity from Christ, Who appointed and
instituted those Ordinations and Sacraments, and not
from those who confer and administer them ; and
that their validity is not vitiated by errors and sins of
those persons ; and that while men ought to avoid
their errors, and not partake in their sins, they may not
refuse — but ought thankfully to receive — the good gifts
of Christ, which are dispensed by their hands ; and
that to set up a rival communion against them — as the
Donatists did against the Catholics — on the plea that
they were infected by spiritual contagion derived from
Caecilian and Felix of Aptunga, was to be guilty of
the sin of Schism ; and that, though it was not to be
denied, that grace might be dispensed by means of
Donatist Bishops and Priests, yet such grace was not
profitable to them and their adherents,6 because nothing
profits without charity (i Cor. xiii. i, 2), and because
no one can be rightly said to have charity who
tears asunder the unity of Christ's Body which is
the Church.7
It is not to be supposed, that Augustine, in his zeal
for the maintenance of Christian Unity and Church
Communion, would have contravened any commands
of Scripture or of the Church Universal in doctrine
or discipline. The African Bishops with him resisted
5 Jerome u. Lucifer, p. 303, " Illi ipsi Episcopi, qui rebaptizandos
haereticos cum eo statuerant, ad antiquam consuetudinem revoluti novum
emisere decretum." Cp. Concil. Arelat. can. 8 ; Concil. Nicaen. can. 19.
6 In Joann. Tract. 6 and 14 ; Epist. 89; c. Donat. i. 18 ; iv. 21 ;
c. Crescon. ii. 12 ; c. Petil. 15.
"* " Non habent Dei caritatem, qui non diligunt Ecclesife unitatem,"
c. Donat. iii. 21.

12 Questions of doctrine and discipline solved by Augustine ;
his solutions applicable lo later controversies.
Zosimus, Bishop of Rome, when he favoured Pela-
gianism ; B and they opposed Popes Zosimus and
Cselestine when they promoted the appeal of the
African Priest Apiarius, who had been excommuni
cated by Bishops of Carthage.9
They communicated with the Church of Rome as
far as she was a Church of Christ, but would not
communicate with her in any error contrary to His
Word. By such teaching and acts as these, Augustine
solved difficult and critical questions, which have never
ceased to disturb the minds of some, from his days to
our own ; and which under the guidance of his example
were happily determined by the best divines of the
Church of England at the Reformation in the sixteenth
century, and by their successors in the seventeenth •
and which deserve careful consideration at the present
day. Is the ministerial commission of Bishops and
Priests of the Church of England vitiated by trans
mission through Bishops and Priests of the Church
of Rome ? If it is not vitiated thereby, then it is a
schismatical act to separate from the Church of
England. But if it is not vitiated, then the question
arises, Was the Church of England justified in her
separation from the Church of Rome at the Reforma
tion, and is she justified in persisting in that
separation ?
And if she was justified in separation from Rome,
are not other religious bodies in England justified
8 Aug. t. Epist. Petil. ii. 3 ; de Pecc. Orig. c. 8. Zos. Epist. 3,12.
Cassian, Coll. u. 10.
9 Aug. Epist. 262. Tillemont, xiii. § 292. Cone. Carth. iii. 47.
Fleury, xxiv. 6, 10, 11, 24, 35.

Augustine's solutions applied to modern controversies. 13
in separating from her ? What right has she, who is
separated from Rome, to regard those religious
bodies, which are divided from her, as guilty of
schism ? Her Reformers, it is alleged by Noncon
formists, set up a new Church of England at the
Reformation. Why should she complain that others
imitate her example, and set up new churches in
opposition to herself?
These questions are important, and deserve calm
and careful consideration. They were virtually an
swered by anticipation by Augustine in his contro
versy with the Donatists ; and his answers have a
value for the Church which it is not possible to
exaggerate. Her Unity, and consequently her effi
ciency for the work of Christ, depend upon a right
reply to these inquiries.
The answers suggested by Augustine are these : The
commission of Bishops and Priests of the Church of
England is not vitiated by having been transmitted
through Bishops of the Church of Rome ; it does not
come from her, but from Christ and His Apostles ;
and it is no more vitiated by transmission through
her, than the commission of Caecilian, Bishop of
Carthage, and his successors was vitiated by being
transmitted through Felix of Aptunga, supposing him
to have lapsed in persecution ; or than the baptism of
thousands in Africa was vitiated by being adminis
tered by some Clergy who had lapsed into Arianism
after the Council of Rimini.1
But was it not then a schismatical act on the part
of the Church of England to separate from the
Church of Rome at the Reformation ? And if it was
1 See above, p. 167, the argument of S. Jerome against the Luci-
ferians.

14 Answers suggested by S. Augustine.
not a schismatical act on her part to do so, why may
not any man, or any set of men, separate from the
Church of England, and set up an antagonistic religion
and a rival communion in her Dioceses and Parishes ?
The answer which Augustine gave by anticipation
to this question was, — You may not communicate
with Rome in any error of doctrine or discipline, as
we did not communicate with her, but resisted her in
her encouragement of Pelagianism, and in her un-
canonical reception of the appeal of Apiarius from
the judgment of his own Diocesan and Metropolitan.
But no Church may voluntarily separate herself from
another Church in what is sound in doctrine and
regular in discipline.
This is the lesson which our greatest divines, such
as Richard Hooker2 and Bishop Sanderson,3 learnt
from Augustine.
How, then, did the Church of England become
separate from Rome ? Not by any voluntary act on
2 See Hooker, III. i. 10 ; also Hooker, V. lxviii. 6—9, " With
Rome we dare not communicate concerning sundry gross and grievous
abominations ; yet touching those main parts of Christian doctrine
wherein they constantly still persist, we gladly acknowledge them to be
of the family of Jesus Christ ; that is, on account of the gifts which
they have from Christ, we acknowledge them to be a Church, and so
far as we lawfully may, we hold fellowship with them."
3 Bp. Sanderson, Serm.xi. § 9, vol. i. p. 278, " The Bishops of Rome,
by obtruding their own inventions, both in faith and manners, under
pain of damnation, became the authors and are the continuers of the
widest schism that ever was in the Church of Christ." But yet Bp.
Sanderson says (Preface to his Sermons, vol. ii. p. xliii) that "the greatest
promoters of the Roman interest among us are they who, among other
false principles, maintain that the Church of Rome is no true Church."
Rome is not a right Church ; she is a corrupt and erring Church in
many things, but yet in essence she is a Church, by reason of those
gifts of Christ which she still retains. See Abp. Laud against Fisher
p. 105, ed. Oxf. 1839.

The Church of England follows the African Church guided 15
by Augustine.
her part (all voluntary schism is sinful), but because
the Church of Rome " obtruded her errors on all
men, on pain of damnation/' and because Rome
made communion in her errors to be essential to
communion with herself.
If the Church of England imitates Rome in that
respect, — if she enforces heresies on any one as
terms of communion with herself, — then those re
ligious communities, which have separated from the
Church of England, and have set up rival churches, are
justified by the example of her separation from
Rome — but not otherwise.
But the English Reformers did not set up any new
Church at the Reformation. They put forth no new
Creed ; they instituted no new Sacraments ; they
appointed no new orders of Bishops, Priests, and j
Deacons. No; they retained the old, which they!
cleared from sundry corruptions which in the course'
of ages had adhered to it ; and thus they brought it
more nearly to the primitive Church as founded by
Christ Himself. They therefore gave no counte
nance or precedent to any who set up new Churches
of their own making, in opposition to the ancient
Apostolic Catholic Church, planted in England by
the good providence of God.
Such is the answer of the Church of England, pro
fiting by the teaching and example of the African
Church guided by the wisdom of S. Augustine.

CHAPTER XIV.
5. Augustine's place in Church History with regard to
Pelagianism; Divine Grace, Human Free-will ; Elec
tion, Reprobation.
In one of his later Epistles,1 written A.D. 417, Augus
tine says, " Some persons (i.e. Pelagians) who cannot
dive into the inscrutable reasons, for which God
makes one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour,
out of that mass of Adam, which has utterly fallen
into condemnation from sin, are bold enough to say
that Infants are the cause of their own sins ; and that
by their own free-will they deserve either punish
ment or grace ; whereas the Apostle says that all are
born from one man to condemnation ; 2 and if they
are born anew, it is not by their own merit, but by
God's mercy and grace."
He then adds, " Whenever the grace of mercy is
bestowed on any one, it is by no merit of his own ; and
when punishment is inflicted on another, he has no
reason to complain ; for he receives that which is
rightly due to sin, since the one man (Adam) in whom
all sinned, is justly punished in every one of those
who sinned in him."
The opinion, therefore, of Augustine was, that since
the fall of Adam human nature is a corrupt mass
1 Epist. 186. 2 Rom. v. 16.

Augustine on Election and Reprobation : On unbaptized 1 7
children.
liable to God's wrath and punishment ; and that while
He in His mercy chooses some out of that corrupt
mass by an eternal decree of predestination to eternal
life, He leaves others subject to eternal damnation
by reason of their being in that mass of corruption
derived from Adam's sin.3
And again4 he asks, — quoting St. Paul's words,5
" I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy," —
"What did St. Paul mean by this, but that out of
that mass of the first Man, to which death is justly
due, it is only of God's mercy that anyone is chosen ?
So there is no injusticein God if others are left in it.
The one, who is guilty, is justified and rewarded by
God's free grace ; the other who is equally guilty is
punished, without any injustice on the part of God
Who punishes."
And again he says, " The whole mass is liable to
death, because ' by one man's sin death entered into
the world,6 and passed upon all men because all
sinned ' in him ; and there is no injustice in God.
His judgments are unsearchable, and His ways past
finding out." 7 Why He has mercy on some and not
on others, we do not know ; " but we are sure that
whether God acts in mercy or by punishment, He acts
justly, and deals with all according to their deserts."
He also defends this doctrine on the ground that
by God's dispensation some are baptized, and others
not; and that this is not so by any fault of their own ;
and he affirms that they who are not baptized can
not be supposed to be saved, but are liable to future
punishment.9 3 Cp. Enchiridion, c. 98. 4 Epist. 186. 5 Rom. ix. 15.
6 Rom. v. 12. 7 Rom. xi. 23.
8 Cont. duas Epist. Pelag. iv. 16. 9 Epist. 186, n. 28, 30.
VOL. IV. C

18 Christ alone without sin — On universal redemption —
On Grace and Free-will.
He even extends this statement to the non-
recipients of the Holy Communion, which he declares
to be necessary for infants.1 All men except One —
namely, Jesus Christ2 — were conceived and born in sin.
No one, he says, is regenerate, or capable of sal
vation, without baptism.3 By baptism all are regene
rate ; but God gives the gift of perseverance to a certain
number whom He has predestinated from Eternity,
and withholds it from the rest, for reasons known to
Himself alone."
Augustine found himself constrained by such pro
positions as these to force a strained gloss upon St.
Paul's words, "God willeth all men to be saved"
(i Tim. ii. 4), and to interpret them 5 as meaning
that all men who are saved will only be saved by
God's will ; and he says " that grace is not given to
all,6 and that to whom it is denied, it is denied by the
just judgment of God."
He also seems to explain away Free-will, by saying
that the will is only free when it is not swayed by con
cupiscence, and when it is under the absolute dominion
of divine Grace.7
At the same time he frankly confesses, that the
whole question of Grace and Free-will is "a very
difficult one, and intelligible only by few."8 He
1 Quoting John vi. 49, 50, 54. See also Epist. 187, n. 20, 25, and
Contra duas Epist. Pelag. i. 40 ; iv. 4.
2 Epist. 187, n. 31. Augustine does not except the Virgin Mary:
cp. c. Julian, vi. p. 2101, "Maria de carnali concupiscentia nata est;"
and so ibid. v. p. 1133, and De Pecc. Meritis, ii. 24.
3 Epist. 187, n. 26—29, 31—34, and Epist. 215.
4 De Dono Perseverantise, 21, 28, 29; de Correptione et Gratia, u. 28.
5 Epist. 217, " Omnes qui salvi hunt nisi Ipso volente non fmnt."
Cp. Enchirid. c. 97-103 ; de Civ. Dei, xxii. 1, 2 ; c. Julian, iv. 8.
6 EPist* 2I7. n- 16. 7 De Correptione et Gratia, 42.
s Epist. 214, 215.

On God's Grace and man's Free-will. 1 9
asserts plainly that all men are to be judged
according to their works ; 9 and he asks pertinently,
" If there is no such thing as God's Grace, how can
God save the world ? and if there is no such thing
as human Free-will, how can God judge the world ? "*
At the same time he interposes a warning against the
supposition that man's Free-will is inherent in his
nature, or is given to man for any merit of his own,
or is other than a free gift of God's Grace.2
Such maxims as the following3 occur in his
writings : — " God's Grace prevents (goes before) men
in order that they may will ; and follows them when
willing, in order that they may not will in vain."
" When God rewards your deeds, He crowns His own
gifts." " Whatever you do well, is a proof of what
you owe to God." " Prayer is a gift of grace, which
is called Grace because it is given gratis. O my God,
what am I without Thee ? a leader to a precipice.
' O God, give me what Thou commandest, and then
command me what Thou wilt.' If we wish to defend
our own Free-will, let us not impugn God's Grace, by
which our will is free. Man does not force facts to
be facts, by remembering them ; and God does not
force events to be events, by foreseeing them. Good
men are sure that those who persevere will be re
warded, but they are not sure that they themselves
will persevere."
After all, in one of his last letters, written only three
years before his death, to some who remonstrated

9 Epist. 214. : Ibid. 2 Epist. 216.
3 These were collected by Prosper Aquitanus, and may be seen in
the Second Part of the Tenth Volume of the Benedictine Edition of
Augustine's Works, pp. 2562—2619 (ed. Paris, 1838), with references
to the passages where they occur.
C 2

20 Practical application of his teaching on Grace ana
Free-will.
against his theory, as tending to engender either pre
sumption or despair ; and to take away from the
Clergy the duty of preaching to the people on their
moral responsibilities, and on their obligation to work
out their own salvation ; and to discourage the laity
from listening to such appeals, he gives this wise
counsel : 4 "My dearest friends, whoever says, ' My
will is sufficient to enable me to do good works,'
swerves to the right hand ; but, on the other side,
they who think that a virtuous life is to be relin
quished, when they hear the grace of God so preached
as to suggest that it makes men's evil wills to be
good, and keeps them such ; and who therefore say,
' Let us do evil that good may come,' they swerve to
the left hand. Do not ye swerve either to the right hand
or to the left ; that is, do not so assert man's free
will as to attribute good works to it without God's
grace, nor so defend God's grace, as to presume upon
it, and to love evil works. May God's grace keep you
from this ! Remember the Apostle's words (Rom.
vi. 1,2),' Shall we continue in sin that grace may
abound ? God forbid. How shall we, who are dead to
sin, live any longer therein ? ' That man is ungrateful
to God for the gift of His grace, who lives in sin by
reason of that grace through which he is dead to
sin." On the whole, Augustine's teaching on Predestina
tion, so far as Reprobation is concerned, seems to
have been rather that of speculation than of prac
tice. In his Sermons that are extant, about four
hundred in number, to say nothing of his many
homilies on the Psalms and St. John, there is not, I
think, one, in which that theory is introduced, or in
4 Epist. 215.

Augustine on St. Paul's teaching. 2 1
which his hearers are regarded as otherwise than
beloved of God, and as designed by Him for eternal
salvation through Christ.6
Augustine fixed his eyes intently on the ninth
chapter of the Epistle to the Romans,6 in which St.
Paul declares the Omnipotence and Omniscience of
God • but he does not seem to have duly considered
the scope and design of that Epistle, which7 was
to show the universal sinfulness of Mankind,8 and the
consequent universal need of a Redeemer, and the
Universality of Redemption provided for Mankind
by God in Christ. Especially he does not appear to
have duly considered the statements in the fifth
chapter, which he read in an inadequate Latin trans
lation ; 9 and in which St. Paul represents God's love
to man in Christ, and the Universality of Redemption
wrought for man by Christ, the Second Adam,, as
the antithesis and remedy for the corruption inherited
by all men from the first Adam ; a statement con-

5 In one of his latest works, " De Praedestinatione sanctorum," he
gives cautions as to the preaching of Predestination. Cp. Neander, iv.
394, 395-
6 St. Paul's statements in Rom. ix. were occasioned by a considera
tion of the cause of the rejection of the Jews ; and at the end of that
chapter it is expressly said by the Apostle (v. 32) that this was caused
by their own sin in seeking for righteousness not by faith, but by works ;
and it is also declared by St. Paul {v. 33) that " whosoever believeth on
Him (Christ) shall not be ashamed." Consequently in that chapter,
which has been made the stronghold of Calvinism, there is no coun
tenance given by St. Paul to the doctrine of absolute Reprobation ; and
(as Bp. Pearson has well remarked in his Minor Works, i. 25) that
chapter was never quoted by any Father of the early Church in favour
of Predestination.
7 As it has been the Author's endeavour to show in the Introduc
tion to that Epistle in his edition of the Greek Testament.
8 Cp. Bp. Sanderson on Predestination, Works, iii. 304 — 306, ed.
Jacobson. 9 See above, vol. iii. p. 288, with Bentley's remarks.

22 Was Augustine's teaching defective ?
firmed in other places by the Apostle, as when
he says that God willeth all men to be saved} and
delivered His Son up for us all, 2 Who gave Himself a
ransom for all,3 and tasted death for every man;4 and,
"as by the offence of Adam judgment came upon all
men to condemnation, so by the righteousness of
Christ the free gift came upon all men unto justifi
cation of life." 5 And our Lord Himself declares, that
" it is not the will of your heavenly Father that one of
these little ones should perish." 6
Augustine also does not seem to have given suffi
cient weight to the declarations in Scripture, which
assert man's freedom of will to choose life, — " I have
set before thee good and evil, life and death ; therefore
choose life," 7 — and which affirm that man's destruction
is no act of God's will, but of man's own choice, — " As
I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the
death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his
way and live. Why will ye die, O house of Israel ? " 8
" O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself." 9
In his laudable endeavour to assert the need and
efficacy of divine Grace, and the attributes of God,
S. Augustine does not appear to have adequately con
sidered that God willed man to be a free agent, and
that man's Will is a gift of God, and that his Reason
also and Conscience are God's gifts ; and that to deny
man's co-operating agency in the work of his sal
vation is a disparagement of God Himself, Whose
creature man is, and Who has willed man's will to be
free ; and has implanted in him reason and conscience,
and has given him His own Son to redeem him, and
1 I Tim. ii. 4. 2 Rom. viii. 32. 3 1 Tim. ii. 6.
4 Heb. ii. 9. s Rom_ v_ j8_ 6 Matt_ xv.;i l4
7 Deut. xxx. 15, 19. 8 Ezek. xxxiii. 11. 9 Hos. xiii. 9.

Hooker's judgment upon it. 23
His Holy Spirit to sanctify him, and His Holy Word
to guide him, and His Holy Sacraments to regenerate
and strengthen him.
Augustine had been a victim of the Manichaean
heresy for nine years ; and it is probable that he
was driven by an excess of reaction to the extreme
length of opposition to it.1
In dealing with this difficult question, it is satisfac
tory to be able to refer to the judgment of others,
and especially of one, who, among the divines raised
up by God in His goodness to the Church of
England, seems most worthy to be compared to
Augustine — Richard Hooker.
In a treatise which he wrote at the close of his life
on Predestination and on kindred points, and which,
having been lost for more than two centuries, has
been recovered 2 and published for the first time
in our own day,3 Hooker describes the heresy of
Pelagius. He points out his abuse of the word
grace, and shows * that God's primary will is the sal
vation of all men ; and that He willed all men to have
free will ; and that thence, per accidens, came a power
in man to do evil as well as good, and so evil came
into the world,5 and consequently punishment, justly
due to sin ; and degrees of punishment proportioned
to degrees of wickedness.
" But lest only wrath and justice should take effect,
' See his comparison of Pelagianism and Manichaeanism in his Second
Book against Julian, Bishop of Eclanum.
2 By Archdeacon Cotton and Dr. Elrington in the Dublin Library.
See Keble's Hooker, i. p. xvii, and ii. p. 683, ed. Oxford, 1836.
3 By Mr. Keble in his edition of Hooker's Works, Oxford, 1836.
4 Hooker, vol. ii. p. 716.
5 P. 720. Cp. Bishop Butler on the Origin of Evil, consequent on
the Freedom of man's will • Analogy, Part i. chap. v.

24 Hooker on Augustine's teaching.
and love and mercy be without exercise, by reason of
sin, God did not suffer His preparations for man's
eternal life to be thus frustrated.
" He bestoweth now eternal life as His own free
and undeserved gift ; together also with that general
inheritance and lot of eternal life, great variety of
rewards proportioned to the very degrees of those
labours which to perform He by His grace enableth."
"The evil of sin is within the compass of His pre
science, but not of His predestination; the evil of
punishment is within the compass of His fore-deter
mining will, but by occasion of precedent sin. Punish
ment is no desired end to God's will, but a consequence
of man's sin."
"God's prescience foresees all things that will be, but
forcesnothing to be.6 Hethat willeth t\\zend (viz. man's
eternal happiness) must also will the means by which
we are brought to it. And our fall in Adam being
presupposed, the means which serve as causes effectual
by their own worth to procure us eternal life are only
the merits of Jesus Christ. God being desirous of all
men's salvation hath in token thereof, for their sakes
whom He loved, bestowed His beloved Son. The
wicked, at the day of doom, will never be able to allege
for their excuse that He which offered Himself to save
some did exclude the rest. He paid the ransom for
the whole world. On Him ' the iniquities of all were
laid.' And as St. Peter7 plainly witnesseth, He
bought them which deny Him, and which perish be
cause they deny Him. He tasted death for every man!'*
Hooker then inquires, — Why all are not saved,
6 Cp. Bp. Sanderson's Works, iii. 394, "All events are foreseen of
God, but His prescience does not lay any necessity at all upon any
event." ? 2 Pet. ii. 1. « Heb. ii. 9.

Hooker on Pelagianism. 25
if God wills all to be saved, and if Christ died to
save all ? He replies that it comes from man's sin,
and that God'has not decreed to condemn any one
without foresight of sin as a cause. The place of
Judas was "locus suus" the place he had made for
himself.9 Devils were not ordained of God for hell
fire ; but hell fire for them (Matt. xxv. 41). " Repro
bation presupposeth foreseen sin as a most just cause.
thereof." He then speaks of Augustine's part in the Pelagian
controversy. " When Pelagius, to the utter overthrow
of soundness in Christian belief, had denied that
man is born in original sin, and taught that every
man hath in himself the power to accomplish his
own salvation,1 S. Augustine, to repress so intolera
ble pride and presumption against God, was drawn
by degrees from the consideration of what man doeth
by way of duty towards God to the contemplation of
that which God did by way of secret decree and
purpose concerning man, before the foundations of
the world were made.
"Augustine's opinion was at the first? that God,
foreseeing those who would believe and those who
would not, did, for their belief's sake, choose the one
sort, and reject the other for their incredulity ; that
unto them, whose belief He foresaw, the grace of
well-doing was also fore-ordained, the rest forsaken,
left, and given over to be hardened in their impiety ;
that faith was the cause of all men's election.3
9 Actsii. 45. x Cp. Aug. de Libera Arbitrio, i. 10, 13; iii. 16, 17.
2 Exposit. §§ 60, 62, ad Rom. ix., and in his treatise de Libero Arbi
trio, and Hilary's Epist. to Aug. Epist. 226.
3 Might not this statement have been qualified by saying that, in
Augustine's view, the merits of Christ are the only cause of any man's
salvation, but that man's faith is a necessary condition of it ?

2 6 Hooker on Augustine's change of opinion — and on the
alarm thus caused in the Western Church.
" But the error of Pelagius," says Hooker, " gave
Augustine occasion to retract this sentence,4 which
maketh faith to prevent grace, and the election of
God to follow on the foresight of our virtue."
" Augustine's latter judgment, therefore, was that
the whole body of mankind, in the view of God's
eternal knowledge, lay universally polluted with sin,
worthy of condemnation and death ; that over this
mass of corruption there passed two acts of the
will of God ; an act of favour and grace choosing
part to be made partakers of everlasting glory ; and
an act of justice forsaking the rest and adjudging
them to endless perdition ; that the number of the
elect is definitely known, and cannot be increased or
diminished ; as for others on whom such grace is
not bestowed, there is justly assigned to them the lot
of eternal condemnation.5
" The publication of these things, never before de
scended into, troubled exceedingly the minds of
many. For a time they rested silent, as if some
thunder from heaven had astonished them, till at
length a part of the Clergy of Marseilles in France,
and sundry others,6 began to doubt as to that Grace
and Predestination which S. Augustine, the glory
of those times, had delivered. As to Predestination,
they questioned, whether certain persons are abso
lutely ordained to life, or whether every man living
4 Aug. Retract, i. 23, de Prsedest. Sanct. c. 3.
5 Aug. de Nat. et Grat. c. 5; contra Julian, v. 6; de Corrept. et Grat.
c. 7 and c. 13.
6 Especially some of the monastery of Adrumetum, in the Byzacene
Province of Africa, to satisfy whom Augustine wrote his treatises de
Libero Arbitrio and de Correptione et Gratia in torn. *. of the Bene
dictine Edition of his works ; and see his Epistles to Valentinus,
Epist. 214 and 215.

The controversy thus produced — but not ended in 2 7
Augustine's lifetime.
be not capable of it ; and whether any man's predesti
nation be so necessary but that he may perish,
neglecting the means whereby salvation must be
obtained, and may neglect the means if he will."
Prosper (Aquitanus) and Hilary,7 both devoted to
Augustine, and being alarmed by the teaching of the
Semipelagians at Marseilles " under Cassian, who not
only rejected the heresy of Pelagius, but the doctrine
of Augustine also,9 so far as to maintain that man's
will precedes the act of God's special grace, and that
the destiny. of infants dying in infancy depends on
God's foreknowledge of what they would have be
come if they had lived, put various questions to him
the year before his death ; '.(I quote Hooker's words,
p. 732) viz. " whether they could maintain that —
" (1 ) Grace doth begin, continue, and finish the work
of man's salvation, without taking awayman's free-will?
" (2) How they could deliver the doctrine of Pre
destination, so that neither the Fathers be rejected,
nor exhortations to godliness be less regarded, as
things unnecessary for them who are ordained to life,
and unprofitable for them who are not ?
" This gave occasion to the writing of many trea
tises,2 whereby some were marvellously well pleased ;
others waxed fiercer, and bolder to contradict.
" Not long after the rising of these flames, S. Au-

7 Not (as some have said) the Bishop of Aries. See the Benedictine
Editors, torn. x. Prsef. sect. 29, p. 171.
8 The arguments of the monks of Marseilles, by way of exception to
the Augustinian theory, may be seen in the Benedictine Edition, ibid.
p. 174. 9 See Neander, iv. 392.1
1 Epist. 224 and 225.
2 E.g. ,Augustine's treatise de Prasdestinatione sanctorum, and de
Dono Perseverantiaa ; and his second reply to Julian, which he did not
live to finish.

28 Augustine's tendencies and temptations — their
consequences.
gustine dieth (Aug. 28, A.D. 430), without any equal in
the Church from that day to this."
S. Augustine is rightly called " Doctor Gratiae ;"
he was — especially in his conversion — a miracle of
divine grace ; and he was providentially raised up to
rescue the Church from the Pelagian heresy, which
would have destroyed Grace, and which proudly at
tempted to dethrone God, and to deify man. No
wonder then, that, in the heat of controversy against
so deadly a disease, he should have been tempted to
forget the legitimate claims and functions of the
human Will as constituted by God Himself ; 3 and to
resolve everything in man into the plenitude of the
attributes of God.
He had boldly ventured into a new province
of Theology, and he had penetrated almost alone with
adventurous enterprise into intricate questions never
explored before ; for Jerome and others had been
content to impugn Pelagianism without engaging
in the problems of Predestination. He was in
flamed with an ardent love of God, and with fervent
desire to vindicate His attributes, and to exercise
all the logical powers of his vigorous intellect by
diving into the deepest abysses of His truth. Thus
he strained himself to arrive at systematic exacti
tude, where it was not to be had ; 4 and incurred a
danger, that of immoderate philosophizing, which
is the snare of noble minds. And he was taken
3 One of the allegations of the Pelagians against Augustine and his
adherents was, " These Manichaeans (as they call us) assert that by the
sin of Adam all free will has been lost, and no one is able to live well,
but all are forced by their carnal nature to sin." Aug. contra duas
Epist. Pelag. i. 4.
4 This is well pointed out by Dr. Mozley in his work on the
Augustinian doctrine of Predestination, pp. 146, 147; cp. 318.

The Author of the book "de Vocatione Gentium " — 29
Fulgentius.
away by death, before any Synod had pronounced an
authoritative judgment on these questions.
Happily for Christendom three persons were raised up
after him who prepared the way for synodical decisions.
One was the author of the book " de Vocatione
Gentium," 5 supposed by some 6 to be' Leo the Great,
when a deacon. " God (he says) wills all men to be
saved (i. 12, ii. 1) * the Church prays for all that they
may be saved. Christ died for all (ii. 16). God's
judgments are inscrutable ; our knowledge is very
imperfect ; we do not know, why grace is given to
some, not to others ; but we must hold firmly to the
conviction, that God does everything justly and
wisely. Nothing is due to human merit (ii. 14).
The consent of the will is due to divine grace (ii. 27).
No one is lost who does not deserve to perish " (ii. 33).
Another writer also distinguished by moderation
and wisdom was Fulgentius, Bishop of Ruspe" in Nu-
midia, born about A.D. 468, who was learned in Greek
as well as Latin, and is said to have known all Homer
by heart. He wrote against Semipelagianism,7 and
in defence of Augustine, so however as to avoid
6 Specially lauded as that "good writer," that "learned writer,"
that " wise writer," by Dr. Isaac Barrow, in his four admirable Sermons
on the doctrine of Universal Redemption. See there, pp. 367, 368,
392, 448, 465, vol. iii. Barrow's Works, Oxf. 1818 ; to which if the
reader will add the papers of Bp. Sanderson and Dr. Hammond on
Predestination and Election, in the fifth volume, pp. 253—335, of
Sanderson's Works, edited by Bp. Jacobson, Oxf. 1854 ; Bp. Pearson's
Two Lectures on Predestination, Minor Works, ed. Churton, i. 243 —
267; and Playfere's excellent work, "Appello Evangelium," espe
cially (pp. 38—42, 334—349, Lond. 1651), he will probably have
as much satisfaction as can ever be attained by the human mind, in its
present condition, oh such questions as these.
6 As Quesnel. See Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 432.
7 Especially de Duplici Praedestinatione, Cave, p. 494. Migne's
Patrolog. vol. lxv.

30 Fulgentius — Ccesarius — Council of Orange.
the extreme rigour of his system ; and he severely con
demned those who imagined that God predestined
any one to sin, and to death the wages of sin, and
who understood predestination otherwise than in
the election of those to eternal happiness who were
good by the help of God's grace, and in the reproba
tion of those who were sinners by their own choice.
The third was Caesarius,8 born A.D. 469, Bishop of
Aries, A.D. 502, who wrote on Grace and Free-will
against Faustus, a moderate Semipelagian, a monk of
Lerins, who in a.d. 454 became Bishop of Rhegium or
Riez in France. The work of Caesarius afforded ma
terial for the deliberations and decisions of a Synod
which set at rest the questions which had been dis-
r cussed with so much vehemence and acrimony for
more than a hundred years. This was the Council
of Orange, held in the summer of A.D. 529.9
This Council maintained the Augustinian doctrine
against Pelagius, and showed its reverence for his
memory by quoting his words as the basis of its
decrees,1 twenty-five in number.
In those Canons it asserted the universality of ori
ginal sin ; and the sovereign power of divine Grace, not
merely helping us when we have prayed for it, but dis
posing and enabling us to pray ; and going before any
expression of our will to be cleansed from sin ; and
cleansing us in baptism without the concurrence of any
natural power in ourselves ; and the source of all good
in us, whether in will, thought, or deed ; and the sole
efficient motive to our attainment of eternal life ; and
as always necessary to all, though born again in bap-
8 Cave, p. 492, and Migne's Patrolog. vol. lxvii.
9 See Hefele, Concilien, ii. 724. Mansi, Concilia, viii. 720.
1 See the passages in Hefele, ii. 726 — 737.

Council of Orange on Grace and Free-will : Council 31
of Valence.
tism and sanctified thereby ; and since all that men
have, is the gift of God, His grace is the fountain of all
the offerings they make to Him.
It asserted that God loves in us what we are by
His grace, not by our own merit ; and that the will of
man, being corrupted by sin in Adam, cannot be
repaired but by the Sacrament of Baptism.
It affirmed that the Justification of man is not
from anything natural or legal, but solely from the
Death of Christ, Who died to fulfil the Law, and to
restore the nature of man, which had been ruined by
Adam's fall.
It declared that Man's love to God is a gift of God.
God, Who loved us when we did not love Him, gives
to us the gift by which we love Him.
To these decrees the Council added certain salutary
cautions against the abuse of the foregoing propo
sitions ; as follows —
All men, after they have received God's grace in
Baptism, are enabled, by God working with them, to
fulfil what is necessary for the salvation of their souls.
It is in no wise our belief, that any one is pre- 1
destined by God to evil ; and if any persons hold such
a wicked opinion, we pronounce anathema on them
with the utmost detestation.
To these decrees of the Council of Orange may be
added the declaration of the Synod of Valence : 2 —
" We do most firmly believe, that all the multitude of
the faithful, being regenerated by Water and the Holy
Spirit, and thereby truly incorporated into the Church,
and baptized into the death of Christ, according to the
doctrine of the Apostle, are washed by His Blood
2 A.D. 855, Can. 5, Labbe, Concil. viii. 137. Hefele, Concilien, iv.
194.

32 End of the Controversy.
from their sins. In the Sacraments of the Church
there is nothing empty, vain, or illusory ; but all in
them is thoroughly real and true, and is supported on
the foundation of its own truth and sincerity."
On the whole, therefore, we see that the truths, for
which Augustine had striven so long and so nobly
against Pelagianism, were firmly established by the
Spirit of God, speaking in decrees which were pro
mulgated by Synods of the Church, and were received
by the body of the faithful ; and that these truths were
guarded from abuse,3 so that they might not be occa
sions of reckless presumption on the one hand, or of
despondency on the other. Augustine himself, if he
had been present at those Synods, would probably
have acquiesced in their decisions.
These Councils proceeded on the principle, that
men ought to be content with those revelations
of Holy Scripture, in which God declares the absolute
8 They were abused in the Calvinistic system, where it is said that
Almighty God created some "for the purpose of being eternally con
demned " (Calvin, Institut. iii. ; xxiii. 6 ; xxiv. 12), and that they are
doomed from their mother's womb to inevitable destruction. These
opinions found their way into the Lambeth Articles (a.d. 1595), which
were resisted by Queen Elizabeth, and refuted by Bishop Andrewes and
Bishop Overall ; and though they were favoured by some at the Hampton
Court Conference in 1603, they were rejected by the Bishops ; but they
were accepted by the Church of Ireland in A.D.1615, and were retained by
it till A.D. 1634, when Archbishop Bramhall and Earl Strafford prevailed
on the Convocation of that Church to adopt the Articles of the Church
of England. And eventually Archbishop Ussher, who had accepted the
Lambeth Articles, declared himself to have come round to Dr. Overall's
opinions. Elrington, Life of Ussher, pp. 291 — 295. Waterland on
Arian Subscription, ii. 377—380. Dr. Overall's opinions were—
I. God wills all to be saved, and Christ died for all.
2. In all good things Divine Grace operates first, and, in the next
place, Human Free-will, being informed and actuated by Grace.
Human Will is a handmaid — but a free one — to Divine Grace, and
ought so to work as not to receive the grace of God in vain.

Practical inferences from the Pelagian Controversy. 33
Sovereignty of His own power, the unerring rectitude
of His justice, the all-searching fulness of His know
ledge, the all-embracing amplitude of His love, the
universal efficacy of Christ's sacrifice for sin, and of
the redemption wrought by Him for man ; and the
energizing power of the Spirit in the Sacraments
instituted by Christ for the conveyance of the
virtue of His Sacrifice to the souls of men. God
'also in Holy Scripture proclaims His will and
desire that all men may be saved ; and declares the
freedom of man's will to choose eternal life, and to
eschew death.' God also delivers therein a salutary
warning, that, for the exercise of man's humility,
there are inscrutable mysteries in the scheme of
redemption, and in the Working of God's grace, which
cannot be gazed upon by human eyes, or penetrated
by the most piercing intellect,4 even of an Augustine ;
and that it best becomes us to rest thankful for
what we know, and diligently to profit thereby, and
meekly to adore Him Who hides these mysteries from
us, and to wait patiently for the time, when we, who
" now see through a glass darkly, shall see face to
face, and know even as we are known " (1 Cor. xiii.
12). 3. Grace operates in an undefinable manner, and does not force any
man by natural and irresistible necessity to any particular act.
4. Justifying Grace is not consistent with deadly sin, before actual
repentance. 5. After grace received, men may fall away and perish.
6. Believers, although truly regenerate, are not under a certainty of
salvation ; but they who are solidly rooted in faith and love, may have a
sure hope of salvation.
On the Lambeth Articles, and the opinions of Bishops Andrewes and
Overall (Regius Professor at Cambridge) upon them, see the work of
Dr. John Ellis, Defence of the Thirty -nine Articles, London, 1700.
4 Cp. Bp. Sanderson, iii. 328.
VOL. IV. D

CHAPTER XV.
On S. Augustine's Epistles.
AUGUSTINE was concerned in the most important
proceedings of the Western Church in his age, and
consequently (as has been well observed *) his Letters
not only comprise the incidents of his private life, but
embrace almost the whole history of the Western
Church in his time.
What has been already said of Jerome's letters may
be applied in a certain sense — partly restricted, and
partly enlarged — to those of his great contemporary
the Bishop of Hippo. Happily we possess in both
instances a series of Epistles, co-extensive almost with
their lives.
The Author of the present work can only hope to
present some specimens of them to the reader, who will
probably be induced to supply the deficiencies of the
selection by referring to the entire Correspondence.
The first letter which shall be quoted 2 is that in
which, on his Ordination to the Priesthood early
in A.D. 371, Augustine asks Valerius, Bishop of
1 By the Benedictine Editors of Augustine's Works, in their Preface
to the Second Volume, containing his Epistles.
2 Epist. 21. In these extracts I have endeavoured to give the sense,
not a literal translation of all the words, which would have greatly
exceeded the limits of this History.

Augustine's Epistles — His letter on his Ordination to 35
the Priesthood.
Hippo, to allow him a season for retirement, that he
may give himself to the study of God's Word, and
to prayer, before entering on the duties of a Priest.
" Nothing," he says, " is more popular than the office
of a Bishop, Priest, or Deacon, who does his work in
a perfunctory manner, and with flattery of men ; but
in the sight of God nothing is more miserable, sad, and
worthy of condemnation. Nothing in this world is
more difficult, laborious, or dangerous than such a
life; but nothingin God's eye's is more blessed, provided
we serve in His warfare as our Commander bids us
to do. I am wholly unequal to the work ; how can
I sit at the helm and steer the ship, who have not
yet learnt to handle the oar ?
"I must therefore endeavour first of all to heal
myself, by prayers and tears and study of the Scrip
tures, that I may be able to heal others. , Let me
therefore have a respite for such preparation, at
least till Easter."
In the following letter he addresses the Bishop of
Carthage, and entreats him to put an end to the revels
at wakes 3 in Churchyards at the tombs of martyrs.
He complains of the love of worldly praise, which
actuates many of the Priesthood ; and adds that he
endeavours to restrain this desire by study of God's
Word, and by referring all things to His Glory.
In the next letter he writes in friendly terms to a
Donatist Bishop ; and in it he. dwells on the sin and
misery of wilful schism, which rends the seamless
robe of Christ, and which showed itself among the
Donatists by rebaptizing some who had been bap
tized in the communion of the Church.
In the year 394 or 395 he began his correspond-
3 Cp. Epist. 29.
D 2

36 Augustine on his Consecration to the Episcopate —
His letter on Ritual.
ence— which has already been described4 — with
S. Jerome on the rebuke of St. Peter by St. Paul.
In a letter written A.D. 396 to Paullinus 5 and
Therasia his wife, at Nola, he describes his own Con
secration as Coadjutor to Valerius, Bishop of Hippo.
This consecration took place just before Christmas,
A.D. 396 ; and was afterwards discovered by him to
be irregular, as a contravention of the Canon 6 of the
Council of Nicaea, which forbids two Bishops to occupy
at once the same see. Paullinus sent a congratula
tory letter to Romanianus of Hippo on this event, and
enclosed some elegant Latin Elegiacs addressed to a
friend Licentius, of which the following is the last
couplet : —
' ' Vive, precor, sed vive Deo ; nam vivere mundo
Mortis opus ; viva est vivere Vita Deo."
The 36th Epistle,7 addressed to Casulanus, de
serves the careful consideration of all who desire to
understand the true principles on which ritualistic dis
putes may be determined. Casulanus asked whether
it was right to fast on a Saturday ? Augustine lays
down this rule, which had indeed been already pro
pounded by Irenaeus,8 Ambrose, and Jerome : 9 "In
those things, concerning which no rule is given in
Holy Scripture, the customs of the Church of God,
or the ordinances of our ancestors, are to be regarded
by us as laws regulating our practice."
4 See above, vol. iii. pp. 219—230.
5 Afterwards Bishop of Nola in Campania. See above, vol. iii. p. 211.
6 Canon 8. See Possid. Vit. Aug. c. 8.
7 See also the Epistle to Januarius, Epist. 54, on a similar subject.
8 See above, vol. i. p. 418 (on the diversity of time as to the keeping
of Easter), the saying of Irenaeus (in Euseb. v. 2), "Variety of Cere
monies in different Churches is like a commendatory Epistle of their
Unity in the faith." '¦> See above, vol. iii. p. 216.

Augustine on ritual diversity ; on his own health. 37
The Church of Rome fasted on Saturday ; and a
certain Roman had tried to persuade the world that
this custom must be universally observed, as coming
from St. Peter. This Augustine denies. In other
Churches, where the Apostles and Apostolic men
had taught, no such custom prevailed ; and rightly.
Let each Church keep to its own usages.1 , He then
states the essential difference between articles of
Faith and Ritual practices. " Let there be one and the
same Faith throughout the Church Universal ¦ albeit
this Unity of Faith is observed together with diver
sities of Ritual, by which that which is one and the
same in Faith is by no means impaired or hindered.
The King's daughter is all glorious within.2 This is
her essential Unity of doctrine. But she is " brought
to the King in raiment of needlework" (Psalm xiv. 1 5).
This is her embroidered variety of Ritual."
Holy Scripture commands all men to fast ; but it
leaves the time and manner of fasting to be deter
mined by particular Churches at their own discretion.
Augustine praises the saying of Ambrose to his
mother Monica on this subject : "At Rome I fast
on a Saturday, because it is the custom there to do so.
But at Milan I do not fast on Saturday, because it is
not the custom to do so. I do at Rome what they do
at Rome, and I do at Milan what they do at Milan."
In Epistle 38 he mentions his own bad state of
health,3 which disabled him from walking, sitting,
or standing. But he is resigned to God, and asks for
his friends' prayers.
In Epistle 41 he congratulates Aurelius, Bishop
1 Cp. above, iii. 78. 2 Ps. xiv. 13, 14.
3 In Letter 59 he describes himself as "valde indispositum." Does
our English word " indisposed" come from this Latinism ?

38 On imperfections in the Visible Church.
of Carthage, on the excellent sermons preached by
Priests in his presence, and also on his condescen
sion " in encouraging them to preach before him • and
he asks for copies of those Sermons.
From the 43rd letter it appears that the Primacy
in Africa was migratory.5 He complains of the
violence of the Donatists, especially the Circum-
cellions, and of their persistent renewal of the charges
against Caecilian, Bishop of Carthage, which had been
refuted in the days of Constantine.6
He says that a Church does not cease to be a
Church by reason of evil men or evil ministers in it.
Judas was allowed by the Lord Himself to receive the
communion with His disciples ; 7 and the sacrament
was not vitiated, and they were not contaminated, by
his reception of it.
In Epistle 47 he considers the case of a man
killing a robber to save his own life ; and whether
a man who is starving may eat meats offered to idols.8
He thinks that a policeman or other public func
tionary may do the former act, but doubts whether
private persons are authorized to do more than ward
off the assailant. As to the latter, meats known and
declared to have been offered to idols are not to be
eaten (1 Cor. viii. 1 — 10; x. 19, 28).
In Epistle 53 he enumerates the successions of
4 Till that time it was not usual in Africa for Priests to preach in the
presence of Bishops. Bingham, ii. 3. 4.
5 As now in Scotland and New Zealand.
6 See above, vol. i. pp. 404 — 406.
7 He makes the same assertion elsewhere, e.g. Epist. 92, where he
says the good are not to be forsaken on account of the bad, but the bad
are to be tolerated on account of the good.
8 Cp. Augustine de Libera Arbilrio, i. 5, 13 ; Ambrose de Officiis,
iii. 4; Cyprian, Epist. 56, 57, which are quoted by the Benedictine
Editor ; Bp. Sanderson on Conscience, ii. 18.

On the Succession of Roman Bishops — On Ritual varieties. 39
Bishops of Rome from Peter to Anastasius, then
Bishop of that See ; and says that none of them was
a Donatist ; and argues against the Donatists from
their having set up a Church without any lawful
succession of Bishops.
To the 54th letter, addressed to Januarius, the
same remarks may be applied, which have been
made on that to Casulanus. It is an excellent treatise
on ritualistic varieties in different Churches, as con
trasted with the essential oneness of all Churches in
the true Faith.
" Our Lord Jesus Christ, whose yoke is easy, and
whose burden is light (Matt. xi. 30), did not impose
on His Church a heavy burden of Ceremonies, like
that of the Levitical Law, but He joined together the
society of the new people of God by means of Sacra
ments, very few in number, and very easy to be
observed, namely, by Baptism in the name of the
Blessed Trinity, and by the Communion of His own
Body and Blood ; and if there is any other thing which
is enjoined in Holy Scripture, save and except the
ordinances of the Levitical Law in the five Books of
Moses. Whatsoever else we observe is not practised
from written enactment, but by tradition ; and those
things which are received throughout the whole world,
we may understand to be so retained, because they
were enjoined and enacted by the Apostles them
selves, or by General Councils, the authority of which
is most salutary in the Church ; such as the anniver
sary solemnities of our Lord's Passion and Resurrec
tion and Ascension, and of the Coming of the Holy
Ghost ; and if there is any other thing which is
observed everywhere by the Universal Church.
" Other things are variously observed in different

40 On Evening Communion — On fasting Communion — ¦
On changes in Ritual.
places, such as a Fast on Saturday, which is kept
in some places and not in others ; and such also as
daily Communion in some places, and Communion on
Saturday and Sunday in others ; and other like things,
the observance or non-observance of which is perfectly
free, and varies in different places. There is no
better rule for the grave and prudent Christian,
than to do what he sees to be done in the Church
where he lives. Whatsoever cannot be shown to be
contrary to the faith or to good morals, is to be
regarded as indifferent, and to be observed on account
of communion with the persons among whom we
dwell." He then repeats the anecdote, related above,9 con
cerning S. Ambrose.
He dilates on the question of daily Commu
nion, and explains the reason why he had given the
advice just described concerning it ; and says, " Let
every man do what he finds to be done in the Church
wherein he lives."
There may, he says, be changes made in customs
wherever what is observed is contrary to faith or good
manners. He illustrates this by the change made as
to Evening Communion. Clear it is, that the Com
munion was instituted after supper.1 In St. Paul's
time the Communion was received after supper.3
And yet shall any one blame the Universal Church,
where the Holy Communion is always received by
those who are fasting ? s and he states the reason for
the change.
" But there is one day in the year when it is not
9 P. 36. ' Matt. xxvi. 20, 21, 26. 2 1 Cor. xi. 20, 34.
3 In some Churches in Egypt it was received in the evening.
Fleury, xxvi. 47.

On fasting Communion — On the meaning of particular 4 1
numbers in Scripture — On abstinence.
received fasting, namely, the day on which the Com
munion was instituted ; it is not so received generally,
though it is in some places, and this seems prefer
able ; but we do not force any one to eat before that
day's celebration, nor do we dare forbid him to
do so."
Here we may remark, that when a Church, deeming
actual Communion to be necessary, and that the
Eucharist is the crowning act of Worship, and that
early communion, not being numerously attended,
ought not to be the only Eucharistic provision for
her people, has so ordered her services that the
Communion is commonly administered at noon, it
seems that Augustine, who declares it to be " no small
scandal to fast on the Lord's day,"4 and who commands
every one to observe the practice of the Church in
which he lives, would not have advised any to enforce
fasting as a pre-requisite for Communion.
In the following letter to the same person he intro
duces some interesting remarks on the mystical
meaning of numbers, especially the numbers three
and seven, and the number eight, in Scripture ; and the
numbers ten and forty. He states the reasons for
the observance of the Lord's Day, and of Easter and
Pentecost ; and for the non-observance of the practice
of feet-washing on Maundy Thursday, according to
Christ's example on that day. Men, he repeats, ought
to conform to the ritual usages of their own Church.
He censures the multiplication of unedifying cere
monies, and condemns those who abstain from eating
meat as if it were an evil thing; and refers to
1 Tim. iv. 1 — 5, and Titus i. 16.
4 Epist. 36, "Si quis die dominico jejunandum putaverit, non parvo
scandalo erit Ecclesiae."

42 On the present life— Donatism — Monks — On graces '
in schismatics.
In Epistle $6 he says that the present life is death
when compared with the true life, which is eternal in
Christ. In Epistle 58 he commends a landowner, Pamma-
chius, for rescuing his Numidian tenants from the
Donatistic Schism, and for bringing them into the
Unity of the Church.
In Epistle 60 he says that " a good Monk rarely
makes a good Clergyman," and (in Epistle 79) that "the
best and worst men are found in Monasteries."
In Epistle 61 he says the Holy Orders of Clergy
who come to the Church from Donatism are to be
recognized as valid ; and such Clergymen are to be
assured that those gifts and graces which they had
while they were in schism, but which were not then
profitable to them or others because they were not
combined with charity without which nothing profits
(1 Cor. xiii. 1 — 3), — and no one can be said to have
Charity if he does not preserve Unity — will begin to
be profitable, when they come to the Unity of the
Church. In the 65th letter he states to the Primate of
Numidia his reasons for declining to institute a.
criminous clerk to a benefice.
In the 77th he explains the causes why he had not
consented to erase the name of a Priest named
Boniface, who had been accused, but not judicially
convicted, from the list of the Clergy of his Diocese.
The 78th is a Pastoral Letter to the Clergy and
Laity of his Diocese. Boniface had accused a monk
called Spes (who was a candidate for ordination) of a
heinous crime ; Spes retorted the charge on his
accuser. No sufficient evidence was forthcoming on
either side to show which of the two was the delin-

Trial by ordeal — 'Clerical scandals — On coercive legislation. 4 3
quent ; resort was therefore had to a judgment by
ordeal at the tomb of the martyr S. Felix of Nola.
Augustine relates, in the letter where he mentions
this appeal, that when he was at Milan a thief had
been convicted, and forced to confess, by the awe-
inspiring influences of a similar spot where Martyrs
were buried.
He laments the popular appetite for clerical scandals,
and he implores the faithful Laity, who connived
at, and condoned, moral delinquencies among them
selves, not to form a harsh judgment of the clerical
body from the irregularities of some members of it.
It seems that evil consequences soon arose from
the decretal of Pope Siricius,5 requiring the Clergy
to abstain from the lawful use of marriage. The
frequent repetitions of Canons of Councils against
Clerical incontinencybear testimony to the same effect.
From the 84th letter it appears that the Latin lan
guage was then generally spoken in Africa, and that
the old Punic dialect was becoming obsolete.6
The Donatists, he says in Epistle 89, appeal from
the Ecclesiastical authorities to the Emperor ; he cen
sures their effrontery in setting themselves up against
the whole Christian world ; and justifies the enactment
ai imperial laws against them, and the infliction of
punishment on them on account of their turbulence ; '
and says that they have no right to say that they are
persecuted, and to claim the honour of being Martyrs ;
for it is not " poena, sed causa, quae facit Martyrem."
s A.D. 385. See above, vol. iii. pp. 98 — 113.
6 See Confess, i. 14. Augustine, when a child, lisped in Latin. In
Sermon 167 he explains a Punic proverb to his congregation.
7 His principle was, " Religio cogi non debet ; sed mores pessimi
legibus puniendi."

44 On pagan festivals — Cicero's ' ' De Republicd " — Chris
tian consolation to mourners — The Vision of God.
In Epistle 91 he writes to a heathen Magistrate,
Nectarius, and describes the licentious enormities of
Paganism in Africa, and the necessity of suppressing
heathen festivals as outrages against morality. At the
same time he intercedes for individual delinquents,
and expresses a desire that the laws may be so put in
force as to restrain licentiousness and vice, rather
than to inflict corporal penalties on the offenders. It
appears from this Epistle that Cicero's treatise " de
Republica " was then extant ; of which some portions "
have been recovered in our own age from a Palim
psest " which exists in the Vatican Library ; and in
which, singularly enough, Augustine himself, in his
exposition on the Psalms, has supplanted Cicero.
In the 92nd Epistle he comforts a sorrowing
widow on the death of her husband, and encourages
her with the hope of personal recognition of him, and
of eternal union with him in Christ in another life.
" Do not," he says, " consider yourself as desolate,
since you have Christ present with you in your heart by
faith, and do not ' sorrow as those who have no hope.'
They who have migrated from us to another world
are not lost by us,1 but are gone before us ¦ and we
hope that we too shall come to that better life where
they are now, and where they will be more known
to us, and therefore more dear to us, and where we
shall love them for ever without any fear of separation."
He endeavours to describe what the true vision of
God will be, and of our friends in God. We shall see
8 By Cardinal Angelo Mai, 1823, who thinks that Augustine derived
the design of his " De Civitate Dei " from Cicero's " De Republica."
A noble passage of it is quoted by Augustine de Civ. Dei, ii. 21.
9 Cod. VMDCCLVII.
1 "Non amisimus, sed praemisimus" — from S. Cyprian. See his
beautiful address to Christian mourners, quoted above, vol. i. p. 341.

Thanks for a tunic from a mourner. 45
God clearly hereafter in proportion as we are like
Him in this world (1 John iii. 2) ; and we shall not see
Him in proportion as we are not like Him here.
Augustine exhorts to holiness of life as a neces
sary qualification for the beatific vision of God, and
fruition of His presence in heaven (Heb. xii. 14).
We may here refer to another letter (263), where
he consoles a Christian virgin, who had sent him
a tunic, which she had woven for her brother, a
deacon, just taken away by death, and which he had
never worn, but which she asked Augustine to wear
for his sake. He did so ; and as soon as he had put
it on, he wrote that letter to her. "Sursum sit cor,"
(he says) " et sicci erunt oculi j" and he reminds her
of that glorious robe with which her dear brother will
be clothed at the Resurrection.
In the 93rd Epistle he again justifies the severe
measures of the civil authority against the Donatists,
if those measures are executed with the animus of
correcting them, and not with vindictive feelings
against them. He says that he has changed his mind
on this subject. Formerly he was opposed to any such
measures, but he now saw the good effects of them.
" Not every one who spares the erring is their friend,
nor every one who chastens them is their foe. The
wounds of a friend are better than the kisses of an
enemy." 2 " Melius est cum severitate diligere, quam
cum lenitate decipere." The surgeon who chains a
lunatic, or rouses a lethargic patient, is troublesome to
both, but loves both. Who loves us more than God ?
Yet He not only teaches us by sweetness, but also
by salutary fear.
He replies to the plea of the Donatists that they were
2 Prov* xxvii. 6.

46 On Coercive Legislation.
suffering persecution. No * they themselves are the
persecutors, and the Church is persecuted by them.
Hagar and Ishmael, when sent away by the Patriarch,
might have said that they were persecuted by
Abraham and Sarah ; but St. Paul answers this alle
gation when he says that they were the persecutors
by " mocking " Sarah and Isaac (Gen. xxi. 9). "He
that was born after the flesh (Ishmael) persecuted*
him that was born after the Spirit (Isaac) (Gal. iv. 29).
So it is now "
Augustine also justifies the decree of Nebuchad
nezzar against blasphemy of the God of Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego (Dan. iii. 29), and defends
the imperial laws against the idolatrous sacrifices and
other ceremonies of the heathen, and argues that the
Psalmist commands Kings to use their royal autho
rity, as Kings, for the support and advancement of
Christ's religion (Ps. ii. 10, 11). "Let Kings (he says)
serve Christ by enacting Laws for Christ."
He adds that many Donatists have expressed their
thankfulness for the exercise of that healthful disci
pline which has led them to renounce their errors,4
and to return to the Church ; and asserts that it is
not so much a question concerning coercion, as con
cerning the quality of that to which a man is brought
by it ; and he examines the objection that the secular
power, if exercised on the side of the Church, may be
invoked by heretics against it. The Church, he .says, is
tried by persecution, but also triumphs over it, and by it.
He replies to the objection 5 of the Donatists, ap
pealing to the greatest of the Fathers of the African
Church, S. Cyprian, who did not acknowledge baptism
3 See also Epist. 185, p. 970. 4 Cp. also Epist. 97.
5 Cp. Epist. 108, where th's objection is examined.

Cyprian not to be set against Scripture — On the error 47
of rebaptization.
by heretics, and rebaptized those who had been bap
tized by them. The Donatists therefore alleged that
they had Cyprian on their side.6 " No human autho
rity," he replies, " is to be set against Holy Scripture.
Cyprian was not inspired ; Scripture is inspired. And
Scripture is against rebaptization. No man, however
great and holy in the Church, can contravene the law
and custom of the Church, which is also against
rebaptization. Either Cyprian revoked his error, or
he covered it with a veil of love (1 Pet. iv. 8) ; for he
did not enforce it on any, and did not break the unity
of the Church ; and finally he wiped away his fault
by his blood, gloriously shed in martyrdom." 7
" You say that our Baptism is no Baptism, because it
is ministered by evil men. We reply that the baptism
we minister is not ours, but Christ's ; and that Paul
baptized those who had been baptized by John the
Baptist (Acts xix. 5), because the baptism which John
administered was not Christ's, but John's. But no one
ever baptized those again who had been baptized by
Judas ; and yet it cannot be said that Judas was
preferred to John, but the baptism of Christ, even
administered by Judas, was preferable to John's
baptism, though ministered by John himself.8
"You Donatists are with us in many things : you
are with us in the Creed, in the Sacraments of the
Lord ; but you are not with us in the bond of unity
and peace. Come to us, and be joined with us, and
then those things which you have, will begin to profit
you, — but not till then.
" We do not invoke any law against you in a vin
dictive spirit, but in love."
6 See above, p. 10. ? Epist. 108.
8 Cp. Aug. in Joann. Tract. 5, and Hooker, V. xxviii. 1.

48 On Persecution, and Toleration— On Angelic life
on earth — On Holy Scripture.
This Letter is an important one, as bearing on the
relations of Church and State, and on Toleration.
It has been sometimes appealed to as an apology
for Persecution. Whatever may be said as to some
of its arguments, it must be borne in mind that
Augustine has condemned all capital punishment when
inflicted on the plea of zeal for religion.9
He also gave as his deliberate opinion, that "no
one is to be forced to religious belief, but that immoral
acts (such as the outrages committed by some of the
fanatical Donatists called Circumcellions) are to be
restrained by law." -
He returns to the subject in the 105th Epistle,
which also deserves careful perusal ; and at still
greater length in the 186th.
The 95 th Epistle, addressed to Paullinus and The-
rasia, who had written to him on the future employ
ments of heaven, on the heavenly bodies of risen
saints, and on the Angelic life, is an interesting essay
on the heavenly life on earth, as a daily preparation
for the eternal life of heaven. He describes how
hard it is to live and move in human Society, so that
" the soul may not be clogged with a weight of dusty
or miry affections dragging it down from heavenward
aspirations ;" and he describes the difficulty of leading
an Evangelical life so as to die an Evangelical
death." The divine oracles of Scripture itself, he says, are
rather groped for, than grasped, by us ; 2 we busy our
selves with curious disquisitions about them, rather
than hold fast their true sense in our hearts.
" We sin by flattering our friends when we ought to
9 See Epist. ioo. 1 Contra Literas Petiliani Don. ii. 14 — 19, 96.
2 " Divina eloquia palpantur potius, quam tractantur, a nobis."

On the body after Resurrection — On Baptism — On 49
Sponsors — The Church the universal God-parent.
reprove them ; and we sin when we try to refute those
who reprove us, rather than to profit by their reproof.
We sin by our petty jealousies and party strifes.
Oh ! that some one would give me " the wings of a
dove, that I might flee away and be at rest ! "
(Ps. Iv. 6.)
He asserts the reality and identity of the human
body after the resurrection, and says that it will be
endued with new powers, and be exempt from carnal
appetites, and that therefore it is called " a spiritual
body" in Scripture3 (1 Cor. xv. 44). He does not
venture to decide whether Angels have bodies or
no. The 98th Epistle, to Boniface, a Bishop, is a treatise
on Baptism. He affirms that all Infants are born in
sin by reason of their descent from Adam, and that all
are regenerate, or new-born, in Baptism by reason of
their incorporation thereby into Christ. The virtue
of Baptism is irrespective of the faith of their Parents.
Every Baptism (by water, and in the name of the
Trinity), by whomsoever administered, is the Baptism
of Christ. Children are offered to God in Baptism by
sponsors or others; as by holy Virgins, who take up
outcast children and bring them to baptism. But
they are not offered so much by those persons who
offer them, as by the whole Society of the faithful, the
Church herself,4 the Spouse of Christ, the Mother of all,
who is the universal God-parent, and who acts by those
3 Cp. Epist. 102, where this subject is enlarged upon.
4 This is also clearly expressed in his 186th Sermon : " Their holy
Mother the Church lends to Infants the feet of others that they may
come to Baptism, and the heart of others that they may believe, and
the tongue of others that they may confess the faith." See the whole

VOL. IV.

50 On the answers in Baptism — On the One Sacrifice —
The Sacrifice of the Altar ; what it is ?
who offer children to God in Baptism.5 He explains
also how by the mouth of those who offer it for bap
tism, an Infant can make a confession of faith, and
promise to lead a holy life.
In this Epistle, Augustine declares that Christ
suffered once for all ; and that in the Sacrament of the
Holy Eucharist there is no continuation or repetition
of that one Sacrifice, although in popular language
we speak of the " Sacrifice of the Altar ;" and the
virtue of the One Sacrifice is imparted by it. " If
Sacraments (he says) did not bear a resemblance to
those things of which they are Sacraments, they
would not be Sacraments."6
In the 99th Epistle he comforts a noble lady
(Italica) in the calamities which Rome was then
suffering when besieged by Alaric (A.D. 408). Such
afflictions are sent by God to wean us from the world,
and to prepare us for Himself.
In Letter 101 to Memorius, a Bishop, the father of
Julianus (Augustine's Pelagian adversary),7 he says,
" Hebraeam linguam ignoro."
5 This would be Augustine's answer to those in our own day who
have been baptized in dissent, and have not had any sponsors, and then
feel a scruple against answering the Bishop's question at Confirmation.
The baptism administered by a dissenter is not the baptism of his
Dissent. Dissent, as such, cannot administer any sacrament. Sacra
ments belong to the Church : they are the dowry given by the Bride
groom to the Bride. Baptism administered by schismatics is com
pared by Augustine to rivers of Paradise flowing outside of Paradise.
The person who offers a. child for Christ's baptism is virtually its
sponsor, and is the instrument of His Spouse the Church.
6 And in his books against Faustus (xx. 18) he says, " In the holy
oblation and participation of the Body of Christ, Christians celebrate the
memory of the Sacrifice that has been accomplished by Him (peracti
sacrificii memoriam celebrant).
7 See Mercator in Lib. Subnotat. c. 4.

On the Resurrection-body — On the lateness of Christianity 5 1
— On heathen sacrifices — On alleged changes in God.
In Epistle 102 he answers some questions sub
mitted to him by a Priest called Deogratias —
1 . On the Universal Resurrection ; which will take
place "in the twinkling of an eye" (1 Cor. xv.52). This
will be a great marvel ; but the world is full of marvels.
Miracles are only things which are not within the
compass of our limited experience. All things are
possible with God. To Him nothing is miraculous.
Our resurrection-bodies will be real and identical, but
will be endued with new faculties, and not be subject
to their present needs or passions.
2. On the lateness of the appearance of Christianity
in the World. All who believed in Christ to come
(such as Patriarchs and Prophets) will be saved by
His Coming. Perhaps in mercy He did not reveal
Himself to many, because He knew that they would
not have received Him if He had done so.
3. He says that the sacrifices of the Heathen were
not culpable as sacrifices, but as offered to those who
were not fit objects of worship. The change of divine
ordinances under the Law and the Gospel was not
due to any change in God, but to the change of times
and seasons, to which God — Who is one, and is all-
wise and unchangeable — adapts all His dispensations.
This is also stated in Epistle 138, in answer to some
who charged God with inconsistency, fickleness, and
love of novelty, on account of the change of the ordi
nances of the Law for the Sacraments of the Gospel.
God never changes ; but we change, and we need
various treatment. There are many things new in
time; but there is nothing new with God, Who is the
Creator of all times and seasons, and possesses all
things from Eternity, and dispenses them to men
according to their proper times and seasons.
E 2

52 On everlasting punishment— Jonah in the whale's belly —
The imperfect condition of the Church on earth.
4. On Everlasting Punishments. There may be
degrees of intensity in what is eternal in time. If a
man has desired in this world to have an eternal
fruition of sin, he may expect, in another world,
eternal suffering of that which is the revealed conse
quence of sin. But in everlasting punishment there
may be an infinite variety of degrees, according to
the diversities of sin.8
5. He examines Porphyry's objection to the
miracle of Jonah in the whale's belly. " Porphyry
laughs at this ; but if we feared the laughter of
pagans, we should not believe in the resurrection of
Christ. And are we not to believe (he asks) that the
three children at Babylon walked unhurt in the fire ?
Let the heathen laugh ; they who disbelieve these
miracles are dwindling away, while we see the fulfilment
of the prophecies which are delivered in our Scrip
tures, in which these miracles are recorded." He
then refers to Jonah as a type of Christ ; and appeals
to Christ's testimony to the history of Jonah (Matt.
xii. 39, 40) ; and offers some remarks on the spi
ritual and figurative significance of Jonah's his
tory. From Epistle 104 it appears that Augustine kept
copies of his letters.
In Epistle 105 he repeats the statement that the
Church now is in a mixed and imperfect state.
It is like the Ark, where were clean and unclean
animals ;9 a threshing-floor, in which chaff and good
grain lie mingled together ¦ a field, containing wheat
and tares growing together till the harvest ; a net, in
which good fish and bad are enclosed, till the net is
drawn to the shore. We communicate with erring and
3 "Tempusaequale, non sequalis asperitas." 3 Cp. Epist. 108.

Augustine does not love pratse— On the present distress — 53
On secularism — On right aims of life : and of studies.
sinful men, and we try to improve them ; but we must
not communicate with them in their errors or sins.
In Epistle no, to a Bishop Severus, he shrinks
from the praise with which he had honoured him, and
prays to be spared it for the future ; and also to be
relieved from the heavy burden of continual letter-
writing, in order that he may have leisure for his
theological works.
' In the 1 1 ith Epistle he consoles a Priest, Victo-
rianus, on the miserable calamities which the Church
was suffering in Italy and Spain, from the incursions
of the barbarians, and especially on the outrages of
holy women by their violence. Almost the whole of
the Roman world, he says, is now severely afflicted.
We need the chastening hand of God. He has fore
told these things. God interfered to save Daniel at
Babylon, and to save the Maccabees in the persecution
under Antiochus Epiphanes, and thus showed His
divine power and love. And if He does not now
deliver us from temporal death, it is not because He
cannot, or because He does not love us. He merci
fully takes away many to Himself. There can be no
violation of the chastity of a pure soul.
The 1 1 8th Epistle, to Dioscorus, a student of phi
losophy, is an Essay on the true end and aims of
intellectual studies and pursuits ; on the vanity of
mere secular knowledge ; on the misery of what the
world calls happiness, and on the right aims and true
purposes of life.
The eye of the mind often suffers from a spiritual
ophthalmia, and is inflamed by worldly pride and
vainglory, so that the pupil of the eye cannot discern
the beauty of Truth. What is the use of a life which
is like the course of a voyager sailing down from one

54 True Wisdom and Genuine Philosophy — On Reason
and Faith.
river into another, — from the Mincius into the Po,
and so on and on, and never coming to a shore of
peace ? Those studies which lead to no good end,
or evaporate in human praise and in worldly glory,
would have been despised even by wise heathens,
such as Themistocles, who was laughed at as ill-
educated, because he could not play on the harp.
" True, I cannot fiddle (he said), but I can make a small
city (Athens) into a great one." He passes in review1
the various sects of heathen Antiquity, the Stoics,
Epicureans, Platonists, and the new Platonists, such
as Plotinus, to the last of which he gives the palm
because they placed the chief good in the contempla
tion of God. But all these lacked that which is in
dispensable to true knowledge, namely, humility —
humility as taught by Christ, both by precept and
example. All other Philosophies are now passing
away, and the Platonists, who approached most nearly
to Christianity, would show their wisdom if they would
bow their necks meekly beneath the sceptre of the
King of Kings.
Christianity is the only true Philosophy.2
In all our good deeds let us beware of pride. And
as the Orator Demosthenes, who was asked what was
necessary to make an eloquent man, replied three
times, "Action — Action — Action,"— so, my dear Dios-
corus, when you ask what is needed for discovering
truth, I answer, " Humility — Humility— Humility."
In the 120th Epistle, to Consentius, he discusses
the relative value of Reason and Faith in matters of
1 P. 511.
2 In another place, with an untranslatable play of words, quite
Augustinian, he says, "Philosophi, sine Deo, non sunt periti, sed
perituri."

On Faith and Reason — On Prayer. 55
religion. Do not suppose that we disparage Reason.
We could not have faith if we had not reasonable
souls. It is reasonable, that in certain things which
reason cannot grasp, faith should precede reason.
In order that the mind may be clarified, the heart
must be purified.
But we ought, as St. Peter exhorts us, to be able to
give a reason of our faith and hope (1 Pet. iii. 15).
We do not reject Arianism and other heresies con
cerning the Trinity, because they are grounded on
reason ; no, but because they are grounded on false
reason.3 If they were founded on sound reason, they
would not be heresies. Faith is the eye of the soul.
God gives that eye to the soul, which prays, and which
studies the Scriptures,4 which teach us to believe. The
true organ by which Christ Himself is to be touched
is faith. This He taught by His words to Mary
Magdalene,5 " Touch Me not, for I am not yet
ascended." Christ is to be touched after His Ascen
sion ; and how ? by the hand of Faith, which sees
what is unseen, and grasps what is impalpable.
The following Epistles refer mainly to the Dona-
tistic and Pelagian Controversies, which have already
come under review.
The 130th Epistle is to a rich widow, Proba, on the
duty of Prayer, and on the true spirit and manner of
Prayer. God always hears the prayers of His people,
but often denies their petitions — in love. The peti-
3 Compare Hooker's excellent remarks on Reason and Philosophy
in relation to Faith, III. viii. 1 — 16.
4 Which Scriptures can be shown by reason to he the word of God.
See Barrow "On the truth and divinity of the Christian religion,"
vol. ii. p. 189, ed. 1683 ; Bp. Butler, Analogy, Part ii. c. 3.
5 John xx. 17. Cp. the exposition of that passage by Augustine in
his Commentary on St. John.

56 " Deliver us from evil" — On the depths of Scripture.
tion of the Lord's Prayer,6 " Libera nos a malo," is
explained by him to mean Evil generally, not " the
Evil one " only. Anna in the Gospel is a model of
true widowhood.
To a friend, Volusianus, who had lauded him
for his knowledge of the Scriptures, he replies
(Ep. 137), "Such is the depth of the Scriptures, that
I should be advancing daily in the knowledge of
them, if I continued from childhood to decrepit old
age in an earnest endeavour to understand them, with
a stronger intellect than I possess, and with abun
dance of leisure, and indefatigable labour. What is
necessary for salvation is not difficult to attain in
them ; but when we have acquired that faith without
which there can be no holy living, there remain in
Scripture so many things which are shadowed over by
the foliage of such profound mysteries, and there is
such a depth of wisdom which is enveloped both in
the words and things which ought to be apprehended
in them, that even in the oldest, acutest, and most
ardent students of Scripture this is found to be true,
that ' Where a man has ended, there he has only
begun' (Ecclus. xviii. 7)."
He illustrates this from the Mystery of the Incar
nation ; and speaking of the one Person and two
Natures of Christ,7 he uses words which seem to have
been the groundwork of portions of the Athanasian
Creed : "Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead,
and inferior to the Father as touching His Flesh."
He says that in order to grasp these mysteries we
6 P. 582.
7 P. 604. Cp. Epist. 238, and the passages from Augustine quoted
by Waterland on the Athanasian Creed, vol. iv. chap. ix. pp. 269—281,
ed. Oxf. 1823. More will be said on this subject hereafter, chap, xxii."

Reasons for Faith in Christianity. 57
must be humble, and must have faith. " Faith opens
the door of- the intellect ; Unbelief shuts it." He
gives the following reasons for faith in Christian mys
teries : the preparations of the world for many hundreds
of years for the revelation of them ; the sacrifices of
the Patriarchal and Levitical dispensations ; the pro
phecies of the Old Testament. Christ fulfilled the
Hebrew prophecies. All Hebrew History preached
Christ. The descent of the Holy Ghost ; the diffu
sion of His Church throughout the World, according
to His promise, — all these things preach the truth
of the Gospel. The destruction of the Temple and
of the City of Jerusalem (which was foretold by Christ),
and the dispersion of the Jews, who are scattered
throughout the World to be witnesses of Christ,8
preach the truth of the Scriptures in which the
Christian mysteries are contained.9
The Jews carry everywhere * the books of the
Old Testament ; from these books in the hands of
our enemies the Jews (and here is our proof that we
have not tampered with those books) we prove the
truth of the Gospel ; and even by their rejection of it
we prove the truth of those books ; for their rejection
of the Gospel is predicted in them (Isa. liii. 1 — 2).
He then states the arguments a posteriori in favour
of Christianity ; the inestimable blessings which accrue
8 This Epistle of Augustine, or portions of it, and some other of his
Epistles and writings, might, if translated into English, form a valuable
addition to the series of Tracts of the " Society for Promoting Christian
Knowledge," and other similar societies, on Christian Evidences and
Christian Doctrine.
9 Cp. de Civitate Dei, xviii. 46.
1 On this important characteristic and providential function of the
Jewish nation, by means of its dispersion, see also Aug. on Ps. 40 . and
56; and c. Faust, xii. 13; de Unit. Eccl. c. 16.

58 On Christian Paradoxes.
to nations, families, and individuals from a belief in
the doctrines, and from the practice of the virtues,
which are taught by it.
In the 130th Epistle, to his excellent friend Count
Marcellinus, who had presided as Commissioner of
the Emperor Honorius at the Conference with the
Donatists, he explains the reason why God, Who is
Unchangeable,2 had superseded the Levitical Law by
the Gospel ; and discusses the Christian Paradoxes
(as they are called) in the Sermon on the Mount
(Matt. v. 39 — 41), and how they are to be understood.
They are not, he says, to be regarded as utterly con
demnatory of War, but as hortatory to a spirit of
peace, and as cautionary against revenge. He shows
the practical utility of Christianity to Kings, King
doms, and Commonwealths ; and declares that the
ruin of Rome was caused, even by the testimony of her
own writers, such as Sallust and Juvenal in two noble
passages which he quotes, by the failure of the moral
virtues which her Philosophy could not enable her to
retain, but which are placed on the surest grounds,
and are confirmed with the highest sanctions, by
Christianity. The Cross of Christ is the only safe
guard of the Crown of Kings.
The 146th Epistle, written about A.D. 413, is re
markable as addressed to Pelagius, and as inscribed
to him as "domino dilectissimo et desideratissimo
fratri." Such was Pelagius then, in the eyes of
Augustine ; the winning fascination of his manners,
and the attractive sanctity of his life, are well
known, and made his heresy a severer trial to the
Church. The 147th Epistle is on the beatific Vision of God,
2 See above, p. 51.

On the Bible as distinguished from all other books. 59
which is only to be attained by purity of heart and
holiness of life.
In the 147th and 148th Epistles he quotes extracts
from Athanasius, Ambrose, Gregory Nazianzen, and
Jerome, as men " most learned in the Scriptures ;" and
he adds (p. 747), " Although these are celebrated
Catholic writers, yet we ought not to regard their
writings as we do the Canonical Scriptures, so as never
to dissent from them. Such is my view of the writings
of others, and such is the view which I desire others
to have of mine " (see above, vol. iii. p. 222).
In Epistle 149, to Paullinus, he examines the diffi
cult passage in St. Paul's Epistle to the Colossians
(ii. 18 — 23). This is one of the few places where he
refers to the Greek text, and to various readings in
it. Epistle 151 is on the treacherous assassination of
Count Marcellinus, and on the greatness of his cha
racter as a Christian nobleman, both in soundness of
faith and virtuousness of life. Marcellinus seems to
have fallen a victim to the vindictive spirit of the
Donatists against him.
In this Epistle (151) he complains of old age and
bodily infirmities ; he was then only sixty, and says that
he was obliged to decline some active occupations at
Carthage, in order that, if it be God's will, he may be
of some use to posterity by his writings.
Epistles 152 and 153 represent an important func
tion of the Episcopal office — a function faithfully dis
charged by the greatest Bishops of the Church, such
as S. Ambrose, S. Martin, S. Augustine, and S. Chry-
sostom — that of interceding with secular powers for
mercy to criminals.
There is a beautiful letter (Epist. 155) on "the

60 On "the happy life" — On Marriage and Virginity.
happy life " (vita beata) ; which can only be enjoyed
by union and communion with God. He also asserts
that there can be no true happiness and greatness
in Civil Governments, except by revealed religion.
" Non enim aliunde beata civitas, aliunde homo ;
cum aliud civitas non sit quam concors hominum
multitude'' He had dwelt on the true happiness of man in his
treatise " on the Manners of the Catholic Church,"
where he shows that all cardinal virtues may be re
solved into, and summed up in, Love of God,3 Who is
the Chief Good of the soul ; and he repeats the same
statement. By loving Him, we attain to God, " non
pedibus, sed moribus ; faciunt bonos mores boni
amores." " Good loves make good lives."
In Epistle 157 are some important remarks on the
lawfulness of Divorce for fornication and for infidelity
(p. 830), on which he wrote a separate treatise." It
contains severe strictures on the one-sidedness of
those who could not praise Virginity without dis
paraging Marriage,5 and who thus censured God who
3 De Moribus Eccl. Cath. u. 25, " Temperance is Love, reserving
itself wholly to Him who is loved ; Fortitude is Love, enduring all
things on account of that which is loved; Justice is Love, which serves
Him, and therefore rules rightly ; Prudence is Love, discerning those
things by which it is helped, from those things by which it is hindered, in its
course toward Him." Andhesays, "This is true Love, when God is loved
for His own sake ;" and, " Blessed is he, O God, who loves his friend in
Thee, and who loves his enemy for Thy sake." This is the sum and
substance of Augustinian Ethics — Love : Love of God for His own sake,
and Love of man in God, and for God.
4 De Adulterinis Conjugiis ; and may I refer to my notes on
Matt. xix. 29, I Cor. vii. 12, 15, for other authorities on this subject.
5 On which he wrote the Treatises mentioned below, "deBono
Conjugali," "de Sancta Virginitate," and " de Sancti Viduitate," in
which his large-hearted charity and clear-sighted wisdom, as contrasted
with some of his contemporaries, are conspicuous. In Epist. 262 he

On disembodied spirits — On infants dying unbaptized 61
— The origin of the soul.
instituted Marriage, and condemned the Scriptures
which commend it. By way of illustration, in Epistle
158, written by a Bishop Evodius, and in Epistle 159,
the reply of Augustine to it, we have a beautiful
portrait of the character of the son of a Priest taken
away in the prime of life ; and some interesting re
marks on the appearances of disembodied spirits after
death, and a clear assertion of the existence and ac
tivity of the soul in the intermediate state, between
death and the resurrection of the body.
Several of the following Epistles (165, 166) deal
with the various opinions " on the origin of the soul,"
which was connected with the Pelagian Controversy.
Jerome had modestly referred some of his friends to
Augustine for a solution of it. Augustine replies in
reverential words to Jerome, " Doce me ut doceam,"
but does not venture to pronounce confidently upon
it. He says that every one is conceived and born
in sin, and needs the Sacrament of regeneration ; and
he thinks that infants dying unbaptized are subject
to some punishment.6 He inclines, therefore, to the
opinion of traduciamism.1
In Epistle 169 he speaks of Christ (not Peter) as
the Rock of the Church (Matt. xvi. 1 8). And this was
his final opinion on that subject.8
There is an excellent letter (Epistle 189) to Count
gives a sharp rebuke to a lady who, on a plea of holiness and charity, had
.without her husband's knowledge made a vow of continency, and had
given away her goods in alms to monks, and dressed herself as a widow.
6 See pp. 875, '885, 888, 892, 962 ; Epist. 184, where he says of
infants dying unbaptized that " since they did not add actual sin to
original sin, potest dici in ilia eorum damnatione minima poena, non
tamen nulla." But compare Hooker, V. Ix. 6.
7 See also Epist. 180 and 202 " on the origin of the soul."
8 Retract, i. 21.

62 On the lawfulness of War — The Christian soldier's life.
Boniface, a Christian soldier, on the lawfulness of
War, and on the dignity of the soldier's profession, if
he is also a soldier of Christ. " Do not imagine that
no one can please God, who serves in the camp.
David was a soldier, and yet was ' the man after
God's own heart.' Remember the Centurion of the
Gospel, of whom Christ said, ' I have not found so
great faith, no, not in Israel' (Matt. viii. 8 — 10). Re
member Cornelius the Centurion, the firstfruits of the
Gentiles (Acts x. 4 — 8). John the Baptist did not
tell the soldiers to quit the camp, but to live well in it
(Luke iii. 14). Every one has his own gift. Some
fight for God by prayer, others by arms. But when
you buckle on your armour, remember Whose you are.
Your strength, and courage, and life are from God.
War is a thing of necessity ; Peace a thing of desire.
You do not seek for Peace, in order to make War ;
but you seek for Peace by War. ' Blessed are the
peacemakers ; for they shall be called the children
of. God ' (Matt. v. 9). Be chaste, faithful to your
wife ; be sober, be frugal. Shame it is, to conquer
man, and to be conquered by lust. Shame it is, to
overcome by the sword, and to be overcome by
wine. If you gain wealth by war, lay it up as treasure
in heaven. This letter may be a looking-glass to
you. Study the Scriptures, and whatever you learn in
them to help you to a good life, try to acquire it by
practice and by prayer. Thank God for the good
you have, and pray for what you have not. Pray, I
say, to Him, ' Who is the Father of Lights, from
Whom cometh every good and perfect gift (James
i. 17)." This letter was written in the heat of the
Pelagian Controversy, and shows that Augustine's

On the End of the World — A man's death-day is his 63
judgment-day — Prayers for the dead : and Purgatory.
theory on predestination did not affect his practical
teaching.9 Two wise letters "on the End of the World" ("deFine
Sseculi," Epist. 197, 199) are addressed to Hesychius,
Bishop of Salona in Dalmatia, who had been led by a
study of the Prophetical Scriptures to believe that the
End of the World was at hand ; and may be commended
to the consideration of the students of Prophecy.
In one of them * there is a clear statement of his
opinion, that the day of a man's death is virtually
the day of judgment to him. In whatever condition
a man is on his death-bed, such will he be at the
judgment-seat of Christ.
Such a statement as this to a brother Bishop may
be taken as a declaration of Augustine's opinion on
the inefficacy of prayers for the dead to alter a
man's condition in the sight of God ; and also as to
the doctrine of Purgatory. No one (he says) can
foretell, when the End will come, and he quotes
Acts i. 7. God has designedly left us in uncertainty
as to the Last day of the World, and as to the last
day of our own lives, in order that on every day we
may be ready for them. He discusses the question
of Daniel's weeks, and the Coming of Antichrist ;
and gives a warning against hasty interpretations
of prophecies, lest, when those interpretations are
refuted by time, men should cease to have any
belief i*n prophecy at all. He is sure that the Advent
of Christ will be preceded by a severe Persecution of
the Church. But as to the precise times and seasons
9 See above, pp. 19, 20.
1 Epist. 199, p. 1 1 14, "In quo quemque invenerit suus novissimus
dies, in hoc eum comprehendet mundi novissimus dies, quoniam qualis
iu die isto quisque moritur, talis in die illo judicabitur."

64 On Suiciae — un the Kesurrecnon-ooay — i^oaajuwr xusrwps.
of future events, the best wisdom is to be silent ; and
the best knowledge is to profess ignorance ; and to
believe that all the prophecies of Scripture will be
fulfilled in God's own time, and to leave to Him the
time of their fulfilment, which will be the proof of
their truth.
The 204th Epistle is on the sin of Suicide. Heathens
praise suicide. Some defenders of suicide appealed
to the example of Razis in 2 Mace. xiv. 46 ; but
this is a Jewish example, and is no rule for us Chris
tians. He again returns 2 to the question of the nature of
human bodies after the Resurrection from the dead.
They will be real and identical, but will be endued
with new powers ; and he refers to examples of
bodies gifted, even in this life, with new faculties,
such as the bodies of the three children walking in
the fire (Dan. iii.) ; s and he refers to the preserva
tion of the clothes and shoes of the Israelites in the
wilderness for forty years ; * if the mere integuments
of bodies could be preserved by God, surely the bodies
themselves may be raised. But the chief proof is in
the reality and identity of the risen body of Christ.5
He affirms that in everlasting happiness and glory
there will be differences of degrees of both, as also
in everlasting punishment.6
From the 209th Epistle it appears that Augustine,
feeling himself unequal to the labour of personal
Episcopal cure of that district, had provided for him
self a " Bishop Suffragan " for Fussala, which was
2 See above, pp. 49, 51.
3 Compare St. Peter walking on the water, Matt. xiv. 28, 29.
4 Deut. viii. 4 ; xxix. 5. Neh. ix. 21.
6 Luke xxiv. 39. John xx. 20, 27. 6 See above, p. 52.

Augustine's "Bishop-Suffragan " on divsion of Dioceses. 65
Directions for a Sisterhood.
only forty miles from Hippo. The choice of the
Bishop was not a happy one. The person whom
Augustine had designated for the office declined at
the eleventh hour to be consecrated, when the aged
Primate of Numidia was present for the Consecration ;
and Augustine, to spare him the trouble of another
journey, presented to him Antony, a monk, having
been trained under Augustine's eye, who desired that
he might be consecrated. Antony, after his con
secration, caused scandal by a vicious life, and Augus
tine revoked his commission. Antony appealed to
the Bishop of Rome, Caelestine.7 Augustine wrote to
Cselestine to implore him not to receive the appeal ;
and he was so much vexed by disappointment, that he
thought of resigning his see, on account of old age
and mental distress. Caelestine, however, paid no
attention to Antony's petition ; and Augustine ad
ministered the affairs of Fussala to the end of his
life (Epist. 224).
This history is important, as showing what Augus
tine's opinion would be as to the subdivision of Dioceses
and the multiplication of Bishops, when the spiritual
needs of a population require it. The Church of
Africa had declared its judgment synodically on this
point. " If a population increases, and the people
desire to have a Bishop of their own, they are to be
provided with one, with the consent of the Diocesan." 8
In Epistle 2 1 1 he has to deal with a Sisterhood,
in which some disorders had arisen, especially by
insubordination to the Mother Superior, and he
there delivers rules for their life ; for their prayers ;
for their fasting ; for their dress ; for community of
7 Compare the case of Apiarius, above, p. 12.
8 Cone. Carth. ii. 5. Bruns, Concil. p. 1 19.
VOL. IV. F

66 Directions to a Sisterhood — Augustine's Commissary
and successor — Courageous reproof.
possessions ; for their manual work. They were bound
by a vow of Virginity,9 but were sheltered by seclu
sion against temptation to break it. We miss
any directions to visit the sick and needy, or to
instruct the ignorant. Perhaps these works would
have interfered with their life of privacy. They are
exhorted to show reverent obedience to their Chap
lain, and also to their Mother Superior, who is to
refer to the Bishop all matters which exceed her own
powers of control. She also is to serve by love.
They are to read once a week these rules which Augus^
tine has given them.
The 213th letter contains a full account of the
nomination and election of Eraclius, a Priest, who
was to be consecrated after Augustine's death, and
to succeed him in the see ; and in the interim to
act as his Commissary in such things as a Priest
could perform.
The 220th letter is characteristic of Augustine's
boldness in reproving persons in high station within
his jurisdiction.1 It is addressed to Count Boniface,2
who had broken a vow of celibacy and had married
a wife, and, notwithstanding the warnings of Augus
tine,3 was guilty of unchastity ; and though as a
Count of the Empire he had a public charge to
repress the inroads and outrages of the barbarians^
was living in luxury and licence.4 " Hear my advice
9 In Epist. 254 there is a caution against premature pledges of Vir
ginity. On this subject see above, vol. iii. 137—139.
1 Compare a similar rebuke to a powerful Officer, Romulus, Epist.247,
and Epist. 259 to a wealthy Widower and libertine.
2 See above, p. 62, Epist. 189.
3 Epist. 189. Above, p. 62.
4 This Count Boniface invited the Vandals into Africa in self-defence,
being beguiled into rebellion by the treacherous Aetius, the officer of

Bold rebuke — On "flight in persecution '' — Augustine's 67
own practice.
to you. If you are a brave soldier, conquer your
lusts ; be penitent for your sins. Earthly honours
and worldly riches soon pass away. Immortal
honour and everlasting riches are given only to the
virtuous. Endeavour to gain these. Give alms,
pray constantly, give yourself to fasting so far as
you can without harm to your health. Use the good
things of this life so that great good may come
from your use of them."
When the Vandals were threatening to overrun
Africa, Honoratus, Bishop of Thiava, consulted Au
gustine whether it was lawful for him to fly from his
Episcopal See for safety. Augustine discusses this ques
tion in the 228th Epistle. He quotes our Lord's words,5
"When they persecute you in one city, flee to another,"
and examines under what circumstances they are
applicable, and refers to the example of Athanasius.6
It is remarkable that he does not allude to the retire
ment of S. Cyprian in time of persecution,7 nor to
the case of S. Polycarp.8 The rule he gives is, that
a Bishop's or Priest's personal considerations are to
give way to regard for God's glory and the good of
the Church, especially of that part of it which is com
mitted to his care. " Think of the good Shepherd Who
laid down His life for the sheep ; and Who says, ' The
hireling fleeth when he seeth the wolf coming, because
he careth not for the sheep' (John x. 13). Imitate
Christ ; care for the sheep, and act accordingly."
Augustine acted on his own advice. Soon after-
Valentinian III. He repented of his disloyalty, and was besieged in
Hippo by Genseric, a.d. 430, and was killed in Italy by Aetius, a.d. 432.
5 Matt. x. 23. May I refer to my note there on this subject ?
6 See above, vol. ii. p. 126.
7 Nor to Tertullian, de Fuga in Persecutione, p. 689, ed. Rigalt.
8 See above, vol. i. p. 16.
F 2

68 Siege of Hippo — His humility — On his Confessions.
wards his own Episcopal City, Hippo, was besieged
by the Vandals ; he remained at his post, and took
care of his flock, and died during the siege.9
One of the Epistles1 (the date of which is not
known) is a pleasing instance of Augustine's con
descension and courtesy. Writing to a young lady
named Florentina, probably of noble family, who had
asked him for direction in her studies in sacred lite
rature, he addressed her in terms of reverential affec
tion ;2 and while he readily offers his " small services "3
for her guidance, he speaks in language of deep
humility of his own inability to teach, except by the
aid of the Holy Spirit given to earnest prayer.
The last Epistle (Epist. 231) of Augustine (as far as
we know) was addressed to a nobleman, Count
Darius, who had requested him to send him a copy
of his Confessions, and to pray for him.
Augustine complies with his request, and sends him
the Confessions, and tells him that he will there see
what he had been, and what he owed, not to himself,
but to God. " I was lost, but He found me, and
restored me to Himself. And when you there see
what I am, pray for me that I may not faint, but be
perfected. Pray for me, O my son, pray. And not only
thou, but all thine, who have learnt of thee to love
me, pray ye for me. You will find in the Scriptures
that the Apostles desired their spiritual children to
pray for them. In these evil and troublesome times
pray that we may lead quiet and peaceable lives in
all godliness and honesty (1 Tim. ii. 2).
9 See above, iii. p. 290, and Dr. Newman's translation of parts of this
Epistle, with remarks on it, in his " Church of the Fathers " (Augustine
and the Vandals), pp. 216 — 224. 1 Epist. 266.
2 "Domina eximia, meritoque honorabilis in Christo, ac suscipienda
filia;" and "reverentia tua." 3 " Meam operulam. "

Augustine's death. 69
" I have sent you the book you asked for, and I have
sent some books that you did not ask for. I receive
most thankfully your gift, in which you have conferred
a benefit on my health, and have made an offering to
my library, that my books may be multiplied or re
paired. May God reward you here and hereafter."
Shortly after these words were written, Hippo
was besieged (as has been already said) 4 by the Van
dals. Augustine died in the siege on Aug. 28,
A.D. 430, in the seventy-sixth year of his age.
4 See above, vol. iii. pp. 290, 291.

CHAPTER XVI.
Other Works of S. Augustine — Ethical, doctrinal,
practical, and expository.
One of Augustine's earlier works, which contains the
sum and substance of his ethical teaching, is that
which is entitled On tlie Morals of the Catholic Church
as contrasted with the Morals of the Manichceans. He
lays down as a fundamental principle 1 that true hap
piness consists in the enjoyment of the chief good.
Virtue is that which ennobles the soul ; and that
which produces Virtue is the contemplation of God,
and, obedience to Him, grounded on Love of Him.
This love is engendered by the Spirit in the heart, in
communion with Christ and His Church by means of
the Sacraments, and of the Holy Scriptures. All
virtues (Temperance, Fortitude,. Justice, and Pru
dence) are resolved into the Love of God, and of
Man in God, and are contained in it. This Love
burns up sin, and cleanses the heart. At the close of
this book he apostrophizes the Catholic Church : " O
thou Church Catholic, the true Mother of Christians,
1 Tom. i. p. n 15, ed. Bened. It would be an interesting study to
compare this work of S. Augustine with that of Cicero " de Officiis,"
whose fundamental principle is that man's duty and happiness consists
in following Nature. This principle is elevated, spiritualized, and
Christianized by Augustine.

On the Catholic Church, the fountain of love and happi- 7 1
ness — On temperance and total abstinence.
thou preachest to us God, Whose presence and fruition
is Life, as the only object of our pure and holy
worship. Thou commandest us not to adore any
creature, and bindest all together in a perfect bond
of love, and providest all medicine for sick souls.
Thou trainest every age — childhood, youth, old age
— according to their various needs. Thou makest
wives to be subject to their husbands, not for the
gratification of lust, but for the propagation of an
offspring of holy and faithful children, and for the
happiness of families. Thou makest husbands to be
lords of their wives not for tyranny over the weaker
sex, but in the laws of heartfelt love. Thou makest
children dutiful to parents, and parents affectionate
to children ; and joinest brother to brother in a closer
bond than that of blood. Thou makest servants
faithful to their masters, not in the necessity of sub
jection, but in the delight of doing their duty. Thou
makest masters kind to their servants, and more
ready to help than coerce them, in the consideration
of the most High God, their common Lord and
Master. Thou bindest together citizens with citizens,
nations with nations, by a remembrance of their first
parents, not merely in society, but in brotherhood.
Thou teachest Kings to rule justly, and subjects to
obey loyally ; in a word, thou teachest all men to
love one another, and to hurt no one."
Some of Augustine's remarks in this work on
temperance and total abstinence may be interesting in
the present day. " With us, no one who eateth de-
spiseth him that eateth not, nor does he, that eateth
not, despise him that eateth.2 Many among us do not
eat flesh, and yet they do not superstitiously think
2 Rom. xiv. 3.

72 On temperance — On the use of wine— On Manichaati
abstinence.
flesh to be unclean ; therefore if they are sick, and
their health so requires it, they eat flesh. Many of
us do not drink wine, and yet they do not think that
wine defileth ; 3 and therefore they order wine to be
given to the sick, if it is needed for their recovery."
And some who refuse wine foolishly,4 are admonished
by them in a brotherly spirit, that they may not be
come weaker by a vain superstition, rather than be
made more holy by it. St. Paul advised his son
in the faith, Timothy, " to use a little wine for his
often infirmities." 5
He says that Christianity is not to be judged by
men's professions of it, but by their practice. " I
know many who adore tombs and pictures, and who
feast luxuriously over the graves of the dead mar
tyrs, and thus bury themselves in the graves of sin ;
and this they call religion. Do not judge of the
Church by them, but by her doctrines and acts."
To the Manichaeans he says (c. 44), "What
madness is that of yours, to think wine to be the
very gall of the powers of evil, and yet to partake of
the juice of grapes ! " This may be noted as a pro
test against those who would distract the Church, and
import Manichaeanism into it, by introducing the un-
fermented " juice of the grape" instead of Wine in the
Holy Eucharist. In the same spirit he asks, " What
is the use of subduing the body by abstinence, if the
mind swells with pride ? what good is it, not to drink
wine, and yet to be intoxicated with passion ? "
His work On True Religion contains remarks on
the moral and social changes which have been
wrought in the world by Christianity, and which no
3 As the Manichaeans did. Cp. de Moribus Manich. u. 27 — 31.
4 I.e. as if it were evil. s j xim. v. 23.

On true Religion — On the use of heresies — On saint- 73
worship — On Christian teaching.
heathen Religion or Philosophy was able to effect.6
He also shows that the different Heresies, against
which men have objected as evidences of the false
hood of Christianity, have in fact been overruled by
God to bring out more clearly its great doctrinal
truths. He asserts, that, if Plato were alive, he would
accept those moral changes, and those spiritual doc
trines, as coming from God. He examines the
respective claims of Reason and Authority; and
declares that it is God's will and method in this life
that the exercise of Authority should prepare the
way for that of Reason.7
At the close of the book he protests against the
worship of Angels or Saints, or of any Creature
(c. 108). "We honour saints and martyrs by imi
tating them. We build no temples to Angels ; they
reject all such honour (Rev. xxii. 9). We ourselves,
if we are holy, are temples of God ; and we worship
Him alone Whose temples we are ; and we believe
that Angels desire that we may join together with
them in the worship of Him, in the contemplation of
Whom their happiness consists."
The four books on Christian Teaching (de Doctrina
Christiana8), coming from one who was a distinguished
Teacher of secular Literature, and Professor of
Rhetoric, before he became a Christian Priest and
Doctor of the Church, will have a special interest for
Teachers of religion.
In the Preface he shows that God's method is
c Cp. Uhlhorn, Kampf des Christenthums, Stuttgart, 1879; and see
above, vol. i. p. 323, chap, xxiii.
7 So the Baconian principle, "Oportet discentem credere ; oportet
edoctum judicare." Authority is a Consul, not a Dictator, and still
less a Tribune of the People. See above, pp. 54, 55.
8 Vol. iii. pp. 13 — 151.

74 God's plan is to teach men by men — The End of Teaching
— Its method — Hozv Scripture teaches.
to teach men by means of other men. Cornelius at
Caesarea, though visited by an Angel from heaven,
was not taught by the Angel, but was commanded by
him to send men to Joppa to fetch a man — St. Peter
— that he might be taught by him (Acts x. 5).
Paul, though called by Christ Himself from heaven,
was not admitted by Christ into the Church, but by
a man, Ananias, who was sent by Christ to baptize
him (Acts ix. 1 1). This method of teaching is adopted
by God in order to unite men — the teachers and the
taught — in brotherly love to each other, and to rescue
men from the proud imagination that they can teach
themselves and save themselves without the ministry
of other men, whom God has appointed to help them
in the way of salvation by the ministry of the Word
and Sacraments.
The End of all true Teaching is the knowledge and
love of the Ever-Blessed Trinity.
For this purpose the heart and mind must be
cleansed by Christ, the Physician of the soul. In
Adam we used immortality ill, that we might die ;
Christ, the Second Adam, used mortality well, that we
might live. He has given the Word and Sacraments
to His Church.which is appointed to minister them as
spiritual medicines to the soul. In order to profit by
these means, we must firmly believe the Holy Scrip
tures to be the inspired Word of God, and must learn
from them to live a life of faith, hope, and charity.
He examines the structure of Scripture ; how it
teaches men by types and prophecies ; and how the
allegorical method of interpretation is to be used
with due regard to historical truth ; and how we
are to learn what is Scripture, namely from Christ's
testimony in the Church to the Canon of Scrip-

On the Canon of Scripture — On its interpretation — On 75
the numbers in Scripture — On the use of Secular learning.
ture ; 9 and how we are to learn its sense. He is
thus led to speak of the Translations of Scripture,
the Septuagint, and the Latin Versions ; ' and he
examines what is the symbolical meaning of the
numbers which recur in Scripture.2
He asserts the great use of secular Learning
(especially of the Platonic Philosophy) for the expo
sition of Scripture. As the Israelites were com
manded by God to spoil the Egyptians, and as, when
they had done so, they consecrated the spoils of
Egypt to God, in the adornment of His Tabernacle
with those spoils, so we must use the gold and jewels
of heathen Literature for the building up, and for
the beautifying, of the Church of Christ.
" How much gold and silver of heathen Egypt did
that most persuasive Teacher and holy Martyr,
Cyprian, use and dedicate to the glory of God ! How
much did others consecrate in the same manner —
such as Lactantius, Victorinus, Optatus, and Hilary ;
to say nothing of those who now live.3 And how
much did innumerable Greek writers. But let us
remember that in this Exodus from the Egypt of
heathen Literature, we must keep the Passover, which
is Christ. We must keep it with the bitter herbs of
repentance, and with faith, hope, and love."
He next speaks of the Rule of Faith, according to
which Holy Scripture is to be expounded. The
obscure places of Scripture are to be made clear by
the plain ones ; the Letter of Scripture is to be spiri
tualized ; and all is to be done with continual refer
ence to the judgment of the Catholic Church in her
teaching and practice. ,
9 See above, pp. 3, 4. 1 See above, vol. iii. 251.
2 See also iii. 51. 3 Such as S. Jerome.

76 On Transubstantiation — On Preaching.
In iii. 14 there is a strong passage against Transub
stantiation ;" the carnal sense is slavery. There may
be many senses of the same text of Scripture (iii. 38).
Regard is to be paid to times and seasons ; the
polygamy of the Patriarchs is no rule for us.5
He refers to the rules of Tichonius the Donatist,
which were of great use against Donatism itself, espe
cially his rule " on the mixed and imperfect condition
of the Church in the present world."
In the fourth book he gives precepts on the lan
guage and style of the Christian Preacher. He defines
what true Eloquence is, and how it is to be obtained.
It is a gift of God. He considers what the true
purpose of Christian Preaching is, and cites specimens
of different styles from Scripture and Christian
Authors, such as Cyprian and Ambrose. He gives
warning against being fascinated by an "insipiens
eloquentia," which is a detestable thing ; the more
attractive it is, the worse it is. If the sermon is
good, and the preacher is known to his people, and
delivers it well, it does not much matter whether
he preaches extempore, or reads it (c. 26). He lays
down these rules. Let not the preacher be a slave
of his words, but let his words serve him (c. 61).
Let us not be in love with words, but let us love
the truth which is contained in words. What is the
use of a golden key, if it cannot unlock a door ?
What is the harm of a wooden key, if it admits into
the house? Above all, let the Preacher do two
things. Let him take good care of his own life. A bad
preacher who lives well is a far better teacher than
one who preaches well and lives ill. How can men
4 See also Sermons 112 and 131.
5 iii. 27. See also c. Faustum, lib. xxii.

On Preaching — Test of its value — Augustine's Sermons. 77
hearken to a preacher who does not hearken to him
self? Next let him pray, before he preaches.6 Let
him pray for himself, and for those to whom he
preaches. He tells a story of himself, going to preach in a
Church in Mauritania against a vicious custom which
prevailed there. " At first the people applauded me ;
therefore I felt that I had made no real impression.
I • changed my tone and style, and they began to
weep; then I was sure that they were penitent, and
that the vicious custom would be abolished ; and I
thanked God — for so it was. Eight years have now
passed, and that custom has not been revived."
This treatise is followed in the Benedictine
edition of Augustine by his work On the Agree
ment of the Evangelists (de Consensu Evange-
listarum), and by exegetical works on the Old and
New Testament ; of which the Exposition of the Psalms,
and of St. John's Gospel, are the most remarkable.
The latter especially is full of profound spiritual inter
pretation.7 » The Sermons 8 of Augustine (contained in the fifth
Volume) are an illustration of his own precepts on
Christian Teaching. Hippo, where most of them were
preached, was probably not a populous or wealthy
place. These sermons therefore differ greatly in style
from the exuberant orations of Christian Preachers in
6 " Ante sit orator, quam dictor.''
7 May I refer as specimens to his expositions of John iv. I, 2, and
John iii. and vi., and of John xx. 17, to which I have been greatly
indebted in my notes on those passages ?
8 Arranged in four classes : —
I. On the Scriptures .
2. On festivals and holy days.
3. On the Saints.
4. On divers topics.

78 Augustine's Sermons — On the duty of the Church to
Nonconformists.
great cities, such as Basil at Caesarea, and Gregory
Nazianzen and Chrysostom at Constantinople. They
are characterized by pointed terseness, transparent
clearness, and graceful simplicity of style ; and at the
same time by soundness and depth of doctrine, and
also by forcible application's of it to practice. If
translated into vigorous idiomatic English, they might
be preached with good effect in our provincial towns,
and to country congregations.9
Augustine preached sitting ; the congregation stood
(Serm. 17). Let me make a few extracts. In
Serm. 22 he shows that the fulfilment of those Scrip
ture prophecies, which have been accomplished, is a
proof that the other prophecies which have not been
accomplished (such as those on Christ's Second
Advent, Resurrection, Universal Judgment, Everlast
ing Rewards and Punishments) will be fulfilled also.
There is no room, he says,10 for change in a man's
state after death.
It appears from Serm. 23 that it was preached ex
tempore ; he refers to a conversation going on in the
church while he was preaching.
Sermons 46 and 47 on Ezekiel xxxiv. are excellent
Pastorals to Preachers and People on their duties, and
on the responsibility of Bishops and Clergy towards
Nonconformists, such as the Donatists in Africa
were, and whom those sermons specially concerned.
The language of the Donatists was, " Why does
Augustine trouble us ? Why does he not let us
9 The following are in "the Library of the Fathers" (Oxford):—
Sermons on the New Testament. Two vols.
Homilies on the Psalms. Six vols.
On the Gospel and First Epistle of St. John. Two vols.
10 See above, p. 63.

Augustine on the duty of the Church to Dissenters. 79
alone ? We are satisfied and happy as we are. We
do not belong to him. He had better look to his own
Church, and leave us to take care of ours. He is
acting foolishly, and is chargeable with usurpation,
and bigotry, by endeavouring to domineer over us."
But Augustine was not moved by such language.
He thought that the Donatists ought to be led to
consider whether they were in a safe condition ; and
for their sake, and the sake of the Church, he longed
to heal the separation between them and her, and
to restore them to her communion, although he
encountered obloquy from them. So he pursued the
work of " troubling " (as it was called), because it was
a work of love. He compared it to the work of a
surgeon, who, while he gives pain, restores health.
He would not trouble them if he did not love them.
Augustine — when preaching these Sermons on the
grand homily of the prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. xxxiv.)
to the Shepherds of Israel (which is a Manual for
Christian Bishops and Pastors), and referring to the
case of the Donatists — thus speaks : " Many sheep
stray from the fold of Christ, and are impatient
with us who endeavour to bring them back to it.
' What (they ask) do you want with us ? Why do
you seek us ? ' My answer is, ' Because you are going
astray, and are in danger of perishing.' ' But (they
reply) I love to stray, I am content to perish, — as you
call it.' ' Do you indeed desire it ? How much better
(I answer) do I desire that you should not perish, but
be saved ! Doubtless I am importunate ; but the
Apostle commands me ' to preach the word, and to
be instant in season and out of season' (2 Tim. iv. 2) ;
and Almighty God condemns all careless pastors who
do not seek the erring ; He says, by the voice of the

80 On the duty of Bishops and Priests to Dissenters.
prophet Ezekiel, ' The diseased have ye not strength
ened, neither have ye healed that which was sick,
neither have ye bound up that which was broken,
neither have ye brought again that which was driven
away, neither have ye sought that which was lost ;
My sheep wandered through all the mountains, and
upon every high hill, yea My flock was scattered upon
the face of the earth, and none did search or seek after
them. Therefore, thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I
am against the Shepherds, and I will require My flock
at their hands' (Ezek. xxxiv. 4 — 10). Yet, further
(says Augustine), I have a commission from Christ,
the Chief Shepherd ; We must all stand before His
judgment-seat (2 Cor. v. 10). You cannot overturn
the tribunal of Christ, and set up that of Donatus in
its place. Therefore I must seek and search for
Christ's sheep, when they are astray ; and though in
the search my path is among thorns, briars, and
brambles, which pierce and wound me, yet I will
gladly do it." And why ? because he loved Christ,
Who said, "Feed My sheep " (John xxi. 16, 17), and
he did it for His sake, in order to bring back to His
fold the sheep for which He shed His blood ; and
for which He prayed that they might all be One as
He and the Father are One (John xvii. 21, 22) ; so
that there might be one Flock and one Shepherd (John
x. 16).
" Besides," he adds, "if I do not endeavour to reclaim
schismatics, but connive at schism, the members of
the Church will imagine that Schism is a harmless
thing, and that it matters little whether they belong
to the Church or no. They will suppose that it is
indifferent whether they resort to this place of worship
or the other. They will say, that if religious divisions

Augustine's appeal to the Donatists — Baptism of adults. 8t
are sinful, and are condemned as such by Almighty
God in Holy Scripture, the Bishops and Pastors of
the Church would endeavour to heal them. But if
the Bishops and Clergy do not endeavour to do so,
the members of the Church will infer that their words
on the sin of schism are idle talk, and that only quar
relsome people ever speak about it ; and thus the
children of the Church will be lost, because Bishops
and Pastors do not care whether schismatics are saved."
Augustine thus speaks (on Ps. xxi. and in other
places) : " You Donatists say to me, ' You have your
sheep, and we have ours. Do not be troublesome to
me and to my sheep, and I will not be troublesome to
you and yours.' No, my dear friends (he answers),
these sheep are not yours nor mine ; but they belong
to Christ. Let His sheep follow Him. Wherever
the Good Shepherd is, there let the flock be. If Christ
is with you, let my sheep, as you call them, go with
you. But no ; you have separated yourselves from
the Church ; and Christ loves unity, and blames divi
sion ; therefore let divisions be healed, and let unity
prevail. Come back to the communion of the Church.
Nothing, says St. Paul, profits without charity _(i Cor.
xiii. i — 3), and no one can be said to have charity
who breaks the unity of the Church."
Let us pass on to other topics in these Sermons.
It appears from them that even adult Candidates
(Competentes) were called Infants at baptism.
It seems that in the African Church the delivery of
the Creed (traditio Symboli) to the Competentes or
Candidates for Baptism took place about fifteen days
before Easter ; and that their rehearsal of it (redditio)
was in the week after the delivery ; and that then they
received the Lord's Prayer (see Sermons 58 and 59).
VOL. IV. G

8 a The Creed and Lord's Prayer — Christ the Rock of the
Church — On family prayer.
Sermons 56, 57, 58, 59, are addressed to the " Com
petentes" or Candidates for Baptism, and are exposi
tions, first of the Creed, secondly of the Lord's
Prayer ; the reason of which order is explained. The
Creed and Lord's Prayer were not to be written, but
to be learnt by heart, and to be repeated orally.1
In these Sermons Augustine, referring to Matt.
xvi. 18, frequently declares that Christ, and not Peter,
is the Rock of the Church. In Sermon 147 he says,
"Veracem Petrum Petra fecerat, Petra enim erat
Christus." In Serm. 149, " Not Peter only, but all the
Apostles received the Keys ;" and so in Serm. 160,
" Petra erat Christus." In Serm. 295, " Christ said,
'I will build My Church upon Myself A Petra
Petrus, sicut a Christo Christianus ;" and he says else
where, " Super Me aedificabo te."
There is a short pithy Sermon on family worship
(Serm. 94). "-Many bishops," he says, "are present
here in the congregation, and I know not why they
will not help me with a Sermon, but ask me to preach
to you ; but I am tired, and cannot. Let me, how
ever, say a few words to the laity, on Christ's words
concerning the slothful servant who hid his Lord's
money (Matt. xxv. 24 — 30). You laymen cannot
preach from this pulpit. But you can preach elsewhere.
Do not be slothful servants. Do not hide your Lord's
money. Put it out to interest. Use your talent well.
Wherever Christ is accused, defend Him ; refute
those who murmur against Him ; correct those who
blaspheme. Use Christ's money so as to gain some
to Him by it. Exercise an Episcopal office in your
own families. Be a Bishop in your own house. A
Bishop is so called because he superintends or over-
1 See Sermons 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 228.

Episcopal duties of Laymen — Life of Martha and of Mary 83
— Prayers for the dead — No prayers for Martyrs.
sees others. Every one who is a Head of a household
ought to oversee it. He ought to look well to the
faith of its inmates, that none of them fall into
heresy ; he ought to see that his wife, his children and
servants, who have been bought by Christ's blood, are
sound in the faith. Do not despise the least among
them. Then you will have used your Lord's money
well ; you will not be like the unprofitable servant,
and will not be condemned with him."
There are two interesting Sermons (103, 104) on
the Mary-life and the Martha-life, if we may so speak
(Luke x. 38 — 42). " Both lives are good in their way •
but the ' much-serving ' of Martha in a family, ought
always to be so ordered, that it may tend to the ' one
thing needful,' namely, to the eternal quietness of Mary
at the fget of Christ in His Kingdom. Martha's work
is ours now ; Mary's life is ours in hope. Let us
do the former well, that we may enjoy the latter full}*.
Work passes ; Love abides. O Martha, thou art now
at sea ; thy sister Mary is safe in port."
In Sermon 159 he says that when the names of
Martyrs are recited at the Altar in the Holy Com
munion, prayers are not offered for them as for others,
and that it would be an injustice to pray for them.
He repeats this in Sermon 285. As for others, in
Sermon 172 he affirms that prayers and oblations
can only be of use to those who have lived holy lives,
and cannot profit those who have died without faith,
and without the reception of the Sacraments ; 2 that
prayers for such persons are vain. Nor can new
merits be acquired for good men by prayers after their
death, for no one can have after death, what he had
not during life ; but the meaning of such prayers is
2 See also his Enchiridion, c. 29.
G 2

84 On the Holy Eucharist — On the happiness of a holy death.
that the faithful departed may receive the con
sequent rewards of their faith on earth.
Sermons 212 to 216 are addresses to those adults 3
who were candidates for baptism (Competentes). In
them he explains the Creed and the Lord's Prayer,
and in 224 — 227 the doctrine of the Sacraments ;
and describes the liturgical order of the Church in
the celebration of the Holy Eucharist. He states
clearly the doctrine of the real presence, but it is
certain from his language here and in other places
that he did not hold and teach the doctrine of tran-
substanliation.* They who were baptized were present at the Com
munion on the evening^ of Thursday before Easter,
and some seem to have received it then ; others were
present, but did not receive it till Easter Day. These
sermons are characterized by terseness and sim
plicity of style ; but Augustine was capable of higher
flights of eloquence. For example, in speaking on
the Anniversary (Natalis) of the Martyrdom of S. Lau
rence (Serm. 203), " What," he exclaims, " can be
more glorious for a man, than to sell all that he
has, and to offer to Christ the most acceptable obla
tion of a holy life, and the pure praise of fervent
devotion ; and to be with Christ hereafter, when He
will come to judge the quick and dead ; and to be
made a co-heir with Him, and a companion of Angels,
' The "Competentes" were called " Infantes" on the day of their
baptism. Serm. 224—227. See above, p. 81.
4 Serm. 227 and 272, " Quod videtur, speciem habet corporalem ;
quod intelligitur, fructum habet spiritualem." Cp. above, p. 50.
5 " Nocte prseteriti participes facti estis ;" and see Serm. 272,
' ' Transacta nocte vidistis " though there is a difficulty as to this Sermon,
for it is entitled " In Die Pentecostes," which would seem to imply that
the Holy Communion was administered on Whitsun Eve.

A holy and happy death— A Bishop's birthday— On 85
Penitence.
and to rejoice with Patriarchs, Prophets, and Apostles
in the fruition of the heavenly inheritance ? What
persecution can crush such hopes as these ? What
torture can conquer them ? The mind, when settled
and stablished by religious meditation, is not shaken
by terrors of the Devil or by menaces of the World.
In persecution, the bodily eye is closed, and heaven
lies open to the view. Antichrist threatens, but
Christ defends. Death is inflicted, but Immortality
ensues. He who dies, is slain by the sword ; the world
is taken away from him, but Paradise is given him.
Temporal life is quenched ; eternal life is restored.
What joy, what delight is his, to close his eyes to
the world, and to open them to God ! "
Augustine observed the Anniversary of his own
Consecration (which was called the birthday of the
Bishop) ; 6 and the feelings of responsibility with which
he regarded his office are described in the 339th and
340th Sermons. " Pray for us," he says, " ut vobis
non tantum prceesse, sed prodesse, delectet."
The 333rd Sermon is one of the many which
show that Augustine as a Preacher did not press on
the people his speculations on election and reproba
tion, but regarded all his hearers as objects of God's
love ; and he exhorts them all so to profit by His
grace, that they may inherit the glory which He has
promised them in Christ.
In the 351st and 352nd Sermons there are some
important remarks on the three kinds of Penitence —
1, before Baptism; 2, daily repentance ; 3, public
repentance for flagrant sins and scandals ; and on re
pelling offenders from Holy Communion.
In these two Sermons on penitential discipline he
6 Natalis Episcopi.

86 On public penitence — On professions of Celibacy.
exhorts heinous sinners to public7 penitential con
fession of sins, with a view to absolution by the Keys
given to the Church by Christ. He deprecates all
false shame in this matter. " What can be more
miserable," he asks, " what more perverse, than for a
man to be not ashamed of a wound which is patent
to all, and yet be ashamed of its bandage ? 8 Let
no one be tempted to despise the medicine of this
healthful penitential discipline, because he sees many
unworthy persons admitted to Holy Communion.
Many are corrected, as Peter was ; many are tolerated,
as Judas was ; and many will not be known till the
Lord comes, because no one accuses them ; and
we cannot repel any except they confess their sins,
or are convicted by a temporal or ecclesiastical Court.
But no sinner ought to despair, rather he ought to
embrace gladly the means of spiritual health offered
in the Church of Christ. Judas might have been
saved with Peter, if he had repented with Peter.
Men often resort to Kings for pardon. But the Keys
of the Church are more sure in their operation than
the hearts of Kings. The latter may open a door
on earth ; the former open the Kingdom of heaven."
The 354th Sermon is addressed to those who had
made a profession of Celibacy. " The married life is
honourable, and has its place in the Kingdom of God.
Single persons have chosen a higher life, but one
peculiarly exposed to spiritual pride. Married per
sons, who are humble, are living a higher life than
single persons who are proud. Agnes the virgin,
7 He does not mention private Confession to a Priest. The state of
Penitential discipline seems to have been the same then in the African
Church as at Constantinople ; on which more will be said ch. xix.
8 "Non de vulnere, sed de ligatura ejus, erubescere."

On Marriage and Virginity-* Augustine's " Clergy- 87
house" — On things unseen.
and Caecilia the wife, are both commemorated as
martyrs. Let the single person not think of the
gift she has, but of what she has not. The devil
will not be condemned hereafter for adultery9 or
fornication, but for pride. The single person who is
proud has no place in the Kingdom of God."
In Sermon 355 he mentions the children of a
Priest. The 356th Sermon is addressed to the people of
Hippo, and presents an interesting picture of the
Clerical body there. They seem to have lived in a
Clergy-house (Ccenobium *), together with the Bishop,
without any separate property. He mentions their
names ; some are priests ; others deacons ; others
are subdeacons ; he asks the people to contribute to
their maintenance and work. " Offer what you will
and of pure good-will ; offer to the common fund,
for the use of all."
Augustine's Sermons are followed 2 by a series of
Essays on subjects of Ethics and Doctrines, which, for
the most part, have already come under review. A
short notice of them may suffice here.
" On belief of those things which we do not. see'.'
Our faith in unseen things is confirmed by the visible
fulfilment of the prophecies contained in those Scrip
tures which reveal to us what is invisible. The Old

9 Were these words of Augustine in Izaak Walton's mind when (in ¦
his Life of Hooker, p. 202, ed. 1807) he describes the temper of some
religious parties in England before the Great Rebellion ? — " I mean not
those sins which are more visible and carnal, as gluttony and drunken
ness (from which the Lord deliver us), but sins of a higher nature,
because more like the devil (who is no glutton, nor can be drunk, and
yet is a devil) — those wickednesses of malice, and revenge, and pride,
and self-conceit, and restlessness, and rebellion.'-
1 See above, iii. p. 290, on his " Clergy -house. " 2 InVolumevi.

88 On the enforcement of celibacy and of abstinence from wine
and flesh — On opposite errors in doctrine and in polity.
Testament, in the hands of the Jews, is a witness to the
truth of what is contained in the New Testament.
The reception of Christianity by the consent of a
great part of Mankind is also a witness to its Truth.
In the treatise on Faith and Works (c. 5) he protests
against the extravagant fanaticism of some who — •
because abstinence from marriage and from flesh and
wine are commendable in certain cases — condemn
marriage, which is God's institution, and proscribe
the use of flesh and wine, which are God's creatures.
He protests also (c. 6), on the one side, against that
latitudinarianism which would subordinate all spiritual
things to the Secular Power ; 3 and, on the other,
against the rigour of the Donatistic sect (c. 7), which
imagined a perfect Church in this world, and which
supposed itself alone to constitute it.
As to justifying Faith, he says that Works follow
the Faith which justifies, but do not precede Justifi
cation, which is by Faith.4
His Enchiridion (or Manual) on Faith, Hope, and
Charity is one of his later works (written A.D. 421).
Its main purpose appears to be to give a sum
mary of his views on Original Sin, Grace, Free-will,
and Predestination, which have been dealt with
already.5 It refutes the Manichaean error as to the
origin of evil from an Eternal Evil principle (c. 11),
and exposes the error of the Academics, who, in order
to avoid error, professed Agnosticism (c. 19).
The work On Catechizing the Ignorant (de Cate-
chizandis rudibus) is addressed to a young Deacon of
3 The principle of Herodianism in ancient times, and of Erastianism
in modern.
4 " Bona opera sequuntur justificatum, non pnecedunt justificandum."
5 Above, pp. 16 — 28.

On Catechizing — On the Blessings of Marriage, Single 89
life, and Widowhood.
Carthage, and may be useful to those who catechize,
or teach in Schools, especially in great towns; and
also to those who conduct " Missions " in populous
cities. It is not, however, confined to the teaching of the
illiterate, but directions are given in it how to deal
with the educated.
It supplies practical hints on the duty of not weary
ing the hearer, but providing him with intellectual
refreshment ; and on instruction in the Life of Christ,
the History of the Church, and in ancient Prophecy
and Christian Doctrine, in a lively and familiar way ;
and on the duty also of inspiring the hearer with a
solemn sense of moral responsibility, by setting before
him the realities of Death, Resurrection, Judgment,
and Eternity.
It gives a striking description of the licentious
character and vicious habits of the population of a
great town like Carthage (c. 25 and c. 48), where
Augustine had spent some years of his early life. This
picture will show, what moral and social difficulties
Augustine and others like him had to contend with
in the moral and religious training of their people.
This Treatise supplies some hints also for the
counteraction of those difficulties by the energy of
the Gospel ; and it fills the reader with admiration for
Cyprian, the Bishop in such a city as Carthage, who,
contended valiantly as a Confessor for Christ, and
suffered joyfully for Him there as a Martyr.
The next Treatises, on Continency, on the Blessings
of Marriage, on Holy Virginity, on the Blessings of
Widowhood, refer to subjects already discussed in
the history of the work of S. Jerome in the Church
(above, ch. vii. pp. 127 — 134). S. Augustine says in his

go Augustine mediates between the two opposite parties
{Jovinian and Jerome).
Retractations? that the heresy of Jovinian (see above,
iii. 135) had injured the Church, but the answers
to it were not unexceptionable, as they gave
occasion to some to say that Celibacy could not
be commended without condemnation of Marriage ;
which was one of the heretical tenets of the Mani
chaeans. Augustine therefore wrote these Treatises to mediate
between the two parties ; he eulogizes holy Virginity,
when voluntarily chosen for love of Christ, and in a
spirit of humility— the best ornament of it, and without
which it is an empty name, and displeasing to God.
He also vindicates Holy Matrimony, instituted by
God in Paradise, and blessed by Him, and beautified
by Christ's presence and first miracle at Cana, and a
figure of His mystical union with His Bride the
Church ; provided that Matrimony is sought for, and
lived in, with such a temper, and for such purposes
and uses (which he specifies, c. 10 — 12, cp. 32) as are
appointed by God and sanctioned by Christ.7
He says that Virginity and Marriage are both
good ; that Virginity, as a state of life,8 is the higher
of the two ; but that the person, who is obedient and
humble, is the better person of the two (c. 28) ; and
that Obedience and Humility are better than Virginity
6 Retract, ii. 22. This Work of Retractations, written about three
years before his death, is not to be regarded so much in the English
sense of the term retractation, as in the sense of revision of certain
passages in his works.
7 In another work (de Genesi ad Literam, ix. 7) he declares that the
good of Marriage is threefold, "fides, proles, sacramentum;" that its
rule is, fruitfulness, and avoidance of fornication. " Hsec est regula
nuptiarum, qua vel naturae decoratur fecunditas vel, regitur pravitas."
8 Augustine also observes (cp. above, iii. 136) that our Lord and
St. Paul also represent Virginity as a gift bestowed by God on some,
and not on others (Matt. xix. II ; I Cor. vii. 7, 17).

On holy Virginity; and its opposites. 91
(c. 29). He says that many who have made pro
fession of Virginity, and have been consecrated
to God,9 are talkative, inquisitive, intemperate, covet- ¦
ous, and proud ; all which are sins of disobedience to
God's commands. "Wherefore (he adds) not only
the obedient person is to be preferred to the disobe
dient, but a more obedient wife is to be preferred to
a less obedient Virgin;" and he exhorts all professed
Virgins to cultivate humility and obedience.
In the treatise on Holy Virginity he says that the
Lord gave no precept for Celibacy ' (c. 14). "Vows of
Virginity are nowhere imposed in Scripture. If a
person has the gift of cohtinency from God, she may
make such a vow to Him ; but let her take heed ; she
may be like those widows of whom St. Paul says
(1 Tim. v. 11 — 13), that they desire to marry (c. 34),
but who fear to do so on account of the shame they
Would incur in the sight of men by breaking their vow,
but who would do better to marry than to burn.
" I do not speak to such Virgins as these, nor to the
covetous, nor to the intemperate, nor to those who
are vain of their dress.2 To such as these I should
speak of chastity, not of humility ; but to all other
professed Virgins this is the warning that I give,
' God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the
humble ' (James iv. 6). Humble married persons
follow the Lamb, if not whithersoever He goeth, yet at
least as far as is in their power, with greater ease than
vainglorious Virgins (c. 52). Therefore, O ye Vir-
9 " Sacras Virgines."
1 " Praeceptum Domini de Virginibus nullum est," and c. 30.
2 Their immodesty is thus described by him :— " Praetumidis um-
bonibus capillorum ; vel tegminibus teneris ut retiola subtusposita
appareant," c. 34. Cp. Jerome's words above, vol. iii. p. 244.

92 On Widowhood — On Marriage after Adultery and
Divorce.
gins of the Lord, walk ye in the path of glory with
the feet of humility. Do not allow your minds to
dwell on your own gifts or merits. Deem others, who
in public esteem are inferior to you, to be better than
yourselves in secret. Be Virgins in the sight of God,
and of His holy Angels, by modesty, meekness, and
purity of heart. Let Him who for your sakes was
nailed to the Cross, be firmly fixed in your hearts."
The frequency of Augustine's exhortations to humi
lity, and warnings against vainglory, in these treatises,
appear to show that panegyrics of Celibacy as a
higher spiritual life, and the consequent contemptuous
disdain of Marriage, had done much mischief to those
who had made profession of Virginity, and had brought
much discredit upon it.
In the treatise on the Blessings of Widowhood he
does not condemn second Marriages. Ruth married
twice. But for the most part, the state of Anna in the
Gospel is preferable. A Widow who gives herself to
Christ is as pleasing to Him as if she were devoted
to Him " integritate virginali."
The two books on Marriage after Adultery (de
Conjugiis adulterinis) do not seem to have satisfied
Augustine himself. The question, he says, is " a most
difficult and intricate one ;" 3 and he doubts whether
he has given a right solution of it. A wife, who has
been divorced for adultery, does not (he thinks) cease
to be the wife of him who has put her away (c. 13).
He allows a man to put away an unbelieving wife
(c. 14, 19), though it is not expedient to do so (c. 16,
23), and it is not lawful for him to marry another
3 Retract, ii. 57, "Ad perfectionem hujus rei non me pervenisse
sentio." In the work itself (i. 32) it is called " qusestio obscurissima et
implicatissima."

On Lying — On doing evil that good may come. 93
(c. 31) ; and he advises reconciliation in both cases4
(ii. 5, 10, 12).
His admirable treatise against Lying (de Mendacio),'
addressed to Consentius, was written A.D. 420, and
was intended by him to supersede his earlier work
on Lying, written in A.D. 395. He refutes the notion
of the Priscillianists, who said that they might lie to
escape detection and punishment, and to expose the
frauds of some Catholics, who professed themselves
Priscillianists in order to entrap them.
He lays down this golden rule of moral practice 5
(c. 18) : " Though it be of great importance, what the
cause, end, or intention of an act is, yet no act, which
is clearly sinful, is ever to be done on the plea of any
cause, or for any end, or with any intention, however
good." He discusses the various cases quoted from Scrip
ture ; e.g. the cases in the histories of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob ; Lot and his daughters at Sodom ; the
cases of the Hebrew midwives, and of David, in the Old
Testament ; and in the New, the supposed compromise
and collusion between St. Peter and St. Paul at An
tioch ; 6 and other like instances, where acts of dupli
city and other sins are said to have been committed
by holy men with a good intention, and to have been
approved by God.
Some sayings and acts also of Christ, which have
been alleged in favour of simulation or dissimulation,
are examined by him.
4 Cp. above, p. 60. Might I be allowed to refer to other authorities
on this subject, quoted in my notes on Matt. v. 32 ; xix. 7—9 ; I Cor.
vii. 10 — 12 ; and in my two Sermons on Divorce?
5 A rule much commended by Bishop Sanderson in the second of his
Lectures on Conscience (sect. 5), The Plea of Good fntention,which is air-
excellent sequel to the treatise of Augustine. 6 See above, vol. iii. 22 1 .

94 On the manual labour of Monks-^Abuses of Monasticism
— On Spiritualism.
This Treatise is a protest against those " pious
frauds " which have brought discredit and damage on
the cause of the Gospel, and have created prejudice
against it, from the days of Augustine to our own
times. His Essay on the Work ofMonks{Ae OpereMonacho-
rum) was addressed to Aurelius, Bishop of Carthage,
A.D. 400, and is a severe censure on those Monks
who declined manual labour on pretence of devoting
themselves to works of piety. Augustine says that
the Apostles "had power to forbear working" (1 Cor.
ix. 6), because they laboured in preaching the Gospel ;
but even St. Paul, the greatest preacher of all,
laboured with his own hands. How much more
ought they to do so, who cannot offer any such plea
for exemption. He draws a grotesque picture (in the
style of S. Jerome) of long-haired itinerant monks,
strolling vagrants, mendicants, and relic-mongers,
" offering for sale limbs of martyrs (if indeed they were
martyrs) ; and hucksters of fringes and phylacteries ;
who pretended that their relatives lived in some far-
off land ; and begged alms of the faithful to help them
on their journey to them ; and importuned them for
assistance to bear the charges of a lucrative poverty,
or to pay them the fees of a simulated sanctity.
Thus, by their hypocrisy, the monastic name and
profession are brought into contempt."
Augustine entreats the Bishop of Carthage to
reform these abuses.
The work on Consulting Demons (de Divinatione
Dsemonum), written A.D. 406 and 411, will have an
interest for some who deal with the phenomena of
Spiritualism in modern times. Augustine does not
deny that there may be some supernatural agency —

Spiritualism — On reverential care of the bodies of the dead. 95
such as divination by oracles, sorcery, and witch
craft, and as dealing with familiar spirits. There
is, he thinks, much imposture in such things ; but
God may allow some future events to be predicted,
and some secrets to be revealed, by Evil Spirits (e.g.
the Egyptian god Serapis foretold his own destruc
tion, c. 11),' even for the sake of punishing those
who resort to them, instead of worshipping the Only
True God. But such things ought never to be prac
tised by any Christian man.
On reverential Care for the Dead (de Cura. pro Mor-
tuis gerendi). This ' treatise was addressed to
Paullinus, Bishop of Nola (A.D. 421), who was cele
brated for his veneration of the Martyr S. Felix,
whose tomb at that place was visited by pilgrims,
and was renowned for miracles which were believed
to be worked there.8
Paullinus had inquired of Augustine, whether it was
profitable for a man to be buried in a sacred place —
such as the cemetery where S. Felix was interred —
and whether prayers were availing for persons after
their death.
'Augustine deals with the latter question first. He
quotes St. Paul (2 Cor. v. 10), declaring that all must
stand before the judgment-seat of Christ, to receive
a recompense for the deeds done here in the body,
whether good or bad. He thence concludes that we
must do good works before death, if they are to profit
7 That persons who deal with familiar spirits and practise de-
monology may by supernatural agency sometimes work wonders and
learn secrets, by God's permission, is clear from the signs wrought by
the magicians of Egypt, by the witch at Endor, and by the damsel with
" a spirit of divination " at Philippi ; and from what our Lord and St.
Paul pre-announce concerning the "signs and wonders" of the latter days
(Matt. xxiv. 24 ; Mark xiii. 22 ; 2 Thess. ii. 9). 8 See above, p. 43,

96 Prayers for the dead — Christian burial.
us after death ; and not to look for any help from
what is done after death, when we are to receive the
fruit of our works done in this life. And yet if men
have lived well in this life, something, he thinks, may
be done by the survivors to improve their condition
after it. But he says that they who have lived ill
cannot be profited by any such aids ; and that
others have lived so well as not to need them.9
But since we cannot discern those who are good, it
may be well to pray for all who have been regene
rated.1 He refers to 2 Mace. xii. 43 in support of
these suppositions ; 2 and appeals to the custom of the
Church, observing " a commendation of the dead."
As to any benefit derivable from the place where a
man is buried, he says a Christian is not hurt by not
being buried at all. The Martyrs at Vienne and
Lyons, whose bodies were burnt and their ashes cast
into the Rhone,4 were not injured thereby. And yet
Christian burial is a laudable practice. He certainly
would not have approved of cremation.
9 He thought it an insult to pray for Martyrs, see above p. 83.
Chrysostom took a different view, Horn. 21 in Act. Apost, where he
says that the Eucharistic oblation is for all, even for Martyrs. Cp.
Neander, iii. 454. The statement of Epiphanius (Hser. p. 911) is a
singular one : ' ' We make a commemoration of the righteous and of
sinners, for whom we pray that they may obtain mercy from God. We
pray for the righteous, for our fathers, patriarchs, and Apostles, Evan
gelists and Martyrs, and Confessors and Bishops, and Hermits and
Clergy, in order that we may distinguish our Lord Jesus from them, by
paying Him a peculiar honour." On the whole, it appears that
there was no consensus of teaching among the Fathers of the Church
in the fourth and fifth centuries on the subject of prayers for the dead.
The earlier Fathers say nothing or little about it.
1 Cap. 22. Cp. de Civ. Dei, xxi. 24.
2 On which see above, iii. 148. Augustine imagined erroneously
that this book was a part of Canonical Scripture ; and this supposition
affected his arguments, and those of others, on the practice.
3 See above, vol. i. p. 176.

On funeral rites. 97
" The reverential observance of funeral obsequies is
rather a consolation of the living than a help to the
dead. The beggar Lazarus was borne by Angels
into Abraham's bosom, and was more glorious than
Dives, who had a marble mausoleum, while he himself
was in torment. The man 'who has no funeral
urn is canopied by the sky.'4 And yet no one
ought to disregard the bodies of the dead, especially
of the faithful, which have been used by the Holy
Spirit as His own? vessels and instruments during
their lives. If we revere the ring of a dear parent,
how much more his body ? Tobias is praised by an
Angel for his care in burying the dead (Tob. ii. 9 ;
xii. 12). Our Lord praises a holy woman in the
Gospel (Mary of Bethany) for her pious thought for
His own burial (Matt. xxvi. 7 — 13).
" Funeral rites are also witnesses of belief in the
Resurrection of the Body. The Patriarchs were
inspired by the Holy Ghost to express this faith by
the care they took for the burial of their own bodies,
and the bodies of others."
He thinks that it may be of use to be buried near
a Martyr, in order that by such burial the dead may
be commended to the Martyr's prayers.5 At the
same time he does not suppose that the dead know
what is done on earth, while it is being done (c. 18) ;

4 " Ccelo tegitur, qui non habet urnam;" words of Lucan (Pharsal.
vii. 819) concerning those Romans who fell at Pharsalia, and whose
bodies Cassar forbade to be buried or burnt.
5 At the same time Augustine strongly repudiates the notion that the
Church paid any worship to the Martyrs, or to any one but God. See
c. Faustum, xx. 21, "Nee colimus nee colendum docemus nisi unum
Deum. Nulli martyrum, sed Ipsi Deo martyrum, quamvis inmemoriis
martyrum, constituimus altaria." The whole chapter is instructive.
Cp. de Civitate Dei, xxii. 10.
VOL. IV. H

98 Difficult questions propounded to Augustine.
but is of opinion that they may perhaps learn some
thing from the souls of the departed which go from
earth to the place where they are.
In reading such an Essay as this, we may perhaps
be tempted to' regret, that, inasmuch as Augustine
was regarded as an Oracle by the Western Church,
questions were often put to him which were hardly
capable of solution, but which he was requested to
solve. Augustine wished to show sympathy with Paul
linus, who dwelt at Nola, in order to be near the
tomb of S. Felix, and annually wrote verses in
his honour. But Augustine was hardly satisfied
with his own attempts to answer his questions. And
it might perhaps have been best, to recognize the
limits which God Himself has placed to our know
ledge of the unseen World, and to. be content with
what He Himself has been pleased to reveal con
cerning it in His Written Word, and to say with
Augustine himself, " What God wills us not to know,
let us be content not to know ;" and, " It is better
to doubt about what is hidden, than to contend about
what is uncertain." 6
The remark already made on Augustine's theories
on Predestination may be applied to his speculations
on such subjects as these. They do not seem to
have entered into his practical teaching. In his
Sermons he does not encourage his hearers to rely
on the prayers of survivors for help after death,
nor to think that they can change the judgment of
God on the works done in the body, for which men
must render an account to Him at the Great Day ;
6 "Quodcunque Dominus nos nescire voluerit, libenter nesciamus,"
and, "Melius dubitarede occultis, quam litigare de incertis."

His work " On the City of God." 99
or that there is any other preparation for a happy
death, and a blessed Resurrection, and a glorious
Immortality, than that of a holy life.
The last of Augustine's writings, to which reference
will be here made, is his. great work, — in twenty-two
books, — On the City of God. It was begun in
A.D. 413, and not completed until A.D. 426, four
years before his death. It is addressed to a noble
man, his friend Count Marcellinus,7 the Commissioner
of the Emperor Honorius in the Conference with the
Donatists, and was occasioned by the capture of Rome
by the Goths, A.D. 410, and by the allegations of the
Pagans (to which Marcellinus requested an answer)
that the fall of Rome, and the other calamities of the
Roman Empire, were due to the anger of the heathens
gods for the neglect of their worship, and for the
acceptance of Christianity in its place.8 The Impe
rial laws, they said, have suppressed Paganism ; and
therefore the Gods, who have been insulted by those
laws, have given up Rome to be captured, and
the Empire to be ravaged by Goths and other
barbarians. This book is therefore entitled Contra Paganos.
It may be regarded as Augustine's final utterance
to the world. It is historical, and prophetical. It
reaches backward to the Creation ; and forward to
the last Persecution, and to Christ's Second Advent,
and the General Resurrection, and Universal Judg
ment, and Eternity.
Its opening words, the most glorious City of God ( Glo-
riosissimam Civitatem Dei),are a key-note to the whole.
The Church (he says), which is the City of God, was
founded by Him at the beginning ; and has continued
7 See Prolog., and cp. Epist. 136, 137. 8 Retract, ii. 43.
H 2

i oo What Church History is — Conflict between two Powers,
of two Cities.
since that time, under different dispensations, the
Patriarchal, the Levitical, the Prophetical, the Chris
tian ; and it will continue to exist till it will be
consummated and glorified for ever in the infinite
peace, felicity, and splendour of the heavenly
Jerusalem, in the presence and palace of its King, bur
Lord Jesus Christ. Then indeed it will be recog
nized by all as " the most glorious City of God."
Side by side with the City of God stands its rival
and enemy the " City of the World." The History of
the Church is a history of the struggles of the City
of God against the City of the World ; it is a record
of the persecutions it has to suffer from the malice of
that City, and of its King, the Prince of the Powers
of Darkness ; sometimes by open violence, such as
in the times of Antiochus Epiphanes, and in the first
three centuries after Christ, and such as will rage
against it in the days of Antichrist, the days just
before Christ's Second Coming, the time of which
is uncertain ; sometimes by subtlety and craft, espe
cially by Heresies impugning the true Faith.
But by the power of Christ, overruling these op
positions for good, and eliciting good from them,
violent Persecutions have produced the glory of
Martyrdoms, which have won many converts to the
Church. Some of the noblest martyrdoms (Augus
tine thinks) will be produced by the last great Per
secution, which will usher in Christ's Advent in glory.9
Heretics also have stimulated the orthodox
Teachers of the Truth,1 to examine their opinions, and
to test them by Holy Scripture, and to refute them ;
and thus the Faith has been confirmed with ad-
9 Cp. de Civ. Dei, xviii. 52, 53, and xx. 8.
1 De Civ. Dei, xvi. 2 ; xviii. 5.

Evils overruled for good — Eternal Future of the Church 101
— On Church History.
ditional strength by means of heresies, and has been
manifested in brighter clearness to the World.
The malice and craft of the Devil have thus been
made ministerial to the divine glory, and to the
victories of Christ and the Church.
The City of God upon earth is like a pilgrim and
sojourner in a strange land ; but she will be triumphant
hereafter for ever in her heavenly home.
This work of Augustine has a special interest and
value, as showing how, in his opinion, Church History
ought to be written. The History of the Church is,
in his view, the history of the greatest Kingdom upon
earth ; it is the history of the Kingdom which will
survive all worldly Kingdoms, and exist for Eternity.
The history of the Church is the manifestation of the
working of two antagonistic Powers, Christ and the
Evil One ; it is a narrative of the fulfilment of
Christ's prophecies that the Enemy will be ever en
deavouring to destroy " the beloved City," 2 but that
the Gates of Hell — that is, all successive assaults of
hostile forces issuing forth from the citadel of Satan
— will not prevail against His Church,3 built on
Himself, the Christ — that is, the Prophet, Priest, and
King — and also Very God and Very Man, Blessed
for ever ; but will be made subservient for good, and
eventually issue in the complete subjugation of the
Enemy, and in the consummation of the victory of
Christ, and glory of His Church.
Augustine shows in this book that such calamities
as had overtaken the city of Rome and the Roman
Empire, were indeed chastisements inflicted by God on
those whose hearts and homes were in the City of this
world ; but that no disruptions of earthly Empires,
2 Rev. xx. 9. 3 Matt. xvi. 18.

102 Inferences from the history of the Church in national
disruptions — Analysis of the Work.
and no dissolutions of worldly dynasties are punish
ments to the Christian ; " that they are glorious
triumphs to the good ; and that generally they are
followed, even on earth, by some new powers of ex
pansion given to the Church for the reception of other
Nations into her fold, such as the barbarous races
which invaded the Roman Empire ; and that they are
blessings to her,, as lifting up her eyes and her affections
from the perishable things of earth to her own
imperishable Kingdom in heaven.
In this respect this last work of Augustine is a
Manual of comfort and instruction to the Christian in
times of national confusion like the present, and in
the breaking up of national institutions.
One of its distinguishing characteristics, as com
pared with other works of Augustine, is the wonderful
richness of erudition displayed in it.5
The first Ten books of this work are against
Heathenism ; the last Twelve are a defence of Chris
tianity. In the former he displays the immoralities
of the Heathen religion, and proves from its own
writers (such as Sallust and Cicero) that God had
rewarded Rome as long as it was virtuous,6 and that
its decay was due to its vices ; 7 and that if Chris
tianity had been allowed to exercise its legitimate
influence on it, these would have been corrected ;s and
that the mightiest heathen Empires were only
" magna latrocinia."9 Still the Empires of this world
4 i. 10.
6 In the Benedictine Edition it is illustrated by two learned Com
mentaries : one by Ludovicus Vives, a Spaniard, a favourite of
Catharine of Arragon, and Fellow of Corpus Christi College,
Cambridge, who dedicated it to Henry VIII. ; the other by Leonardus
Coquseus, an Augustinian Monk of Orleans in the seventeenth century.
6 v. 15, 16. 7 ii. 18, 21 ¦ cp. Epist. 138. 8 ii. 28. 9 iv. 4.

On the Millennium ; on Elias , on the conversion of 103
the Jews ; on Antichrist.
were God's instruments, and He overruled their acts
for His own glory.1
He notes it as a marvellous interference of God's
good providence that Rome was not captured by the
enormous host of the savage heathen king Rhada-
gaisus in A.D. 405, who was slain at Faesulae, but by
the Christian conqueror Alaric.2 He says that men
make great mistakes in their notions of the greatness
of Empires. The true greatness of a Sovereign, and
the true prosperity of a Realm, consist in serving God,3
and in advancing His Kingdom ; he illustrates this
by the history of the Roman Emperors Constantine
and Theodosius.4
In the last three books of this work he deals with
the doctrine of a Millennium? to which I have already
referred.6 His opinion is that the thousand years in
the Apocalypse7 are a round number, signifying
the whole time from Christ's first Advent to the
Coming of Antichrist. He comments on the time
of the last persecution under Antichrist ; 8 and the
prophecy of St. Paul on the " Man of Sin " 9 (2 Thess.
ii. 3) ; and the Conversion of the Jews,1 and the Coming
of Elias,2 and the future Resurrection and Judgment,
and on Everlasting Punishment,3 and makes some
strictures on Origen's opinions upon that subject.4
1 v. 21, 22. r' v. 23. 3 v. 24.
4 v. 25, 26. These chapters will well repay perusal.
5 xx. 6 — 10. 6 Vol. i. p. 305.
7 Rev. xx. 3. For the reasons of this opinion, and the authorities
for it, may I be allowed to refer to my notes on Rev. xx. ?
8 xx. 8 and 13. 9 xx. 19. " xx. 29.
2 I have remarked elsewhere (note on Mal. iv. 5) that the ancient
Fathers were influenced, in their belief in a personal reappearance of
Elias, by* the translation of the Hebrew in the Septuagint and in some
Latin Versions. Augustine quotes "Eliam Thesbiten." s xx. II, 12.
4 xx. 17, 23 ; and see the notes in the Benedictine Edition, p. 1019.

104 Perfection of Infants — Future Resurrection — Universal
Judgment — Everlasting bliss and glory in the Vision of God.
He thinks that Infants will be perfected in heaven ;5
and describes the future Resurrection, and the glory and
beauty of the bodies of the Saints, and the perfect feli
city of their souls, after it ; 6 and the degrees of glory 7
in everlasting happiness in the eternal Sabbath of the
Vision of God,8 without any temptation or possibility
of sin. " That will be our Sabbath, which will have
no Evening, but will be merged in the Octave of an
Everlasting Lord's Day ; consecrated by the Resur
rection of Christ, and bringing with it eternal rest of
body and soul. There we shall repose and contem
plate ; there we shall contemplate and love ; there we
shall love God, and praise Him. This will be our
endless End. And what End can we more desire, than
to come to that Kingdom which will have no end ? "
a xxii. 14. See on Isa. lxv. 20.
" xxii. 5, 15, 17, 19, 21, 24. The 22nd and 23rd Chapters of the
Twenty-second Book contain a marvellous description of the various
miseries of this life, consequent on sin, from which there is no deliverance
but by the grace of Christ. In the 24th Chapter of that Book is a singular
record of the practice of Vivisection. * ' xxii. 30. 8 xxii. 29, 30.
* Cp. Celsus de Medicina, Praef. p. 1 1,

CHAPTER XVII.
Christian Missions to the West — 5. Germain of Auxerre
— Mission of Palladius and S. Patrick to Ireland.
Among the benefits arising from the invasion of the
barbarian tribes of the north, and from the capture of
Rome by the Goths, was the impulse it gave to
Christian Missions.
Before that time, scarcely any example can be
adduced of any effort made by the Church of Rome to
extend Christianity by missionary enterprise. Roman
Society was absorbed in the voluptuous selfishness of
a corrupt civilization ; and when it was stunned by
the peals of thunder, and dazzled by the glare of
lightnings, flashing from the storm of barbarians
sweeping down upon it from the north, and was
awakened by that terrible hurricane from its lethargy of
self-indulgence, its energies spent themselves at first
rather in sending forth votaries of monastic asceticism,
than bands of Christian Evangelists.
The calamities which befell Rome had at length the
effect of chastening it by moral discipline, and of ex
citing its sympathy for those foreign races with which
it was brought into contact.
In A.D. 429, the year before the death of Augustine,
Pope Caelestine sent Germanus, Bishop of Auxerre,
and Lupus, Bishop of Troyes, into Britain to recover
the inhabitants from the heresy of their countryman

106 Palladius — Mission of S. Patrick.
Pelagius1 to the Catholic faith. Probably this mission
was undertaken on the invitation of orthodox Bishops
of Britain, who needed their help. Germanus and
Lupus were successful in their efforts, and they went
to St. Albans in order to visit the tomb of Britain's
proto-martyr,2 and to return thanks to God for His
blessing on their work.
In the year after S. Augustine's death, Pope
Caelestine consecrated Palladius, probably a deacon of
Gaul, who had been instrumental in the mission of
Germanus, and sent him as a Missionary Bishop to
Ireland,3 which seems also- to have been infected by
the Pelagian heresy.4 But his mission was of short
duration. For reasons' which are not recorded, he
quitted Ireland, and soon afterwards died.6
S. Patrick was the Apostle of Ireland.6 He is said
by some to have come to that country as a Mis
sionary Bishop the year after Palladius left it. The
1 Prosper Aquitan. Chron. apud RonoalL i. 655.
2 See above, vol. i. pp. 384—386. Britain had preachers of Chris
tianity from Apostolic times. Euseb. Dem. Evang. iii. 5. Vit. Const.
iii. 18, 19. Cp. Chrys. vi. p. 635 ; viii. p. in, ed. Savile. There <vere
three British Bishops at the Council of Aries, A.D. 314. Concil.
Labbe, i. 1430.
3 " Ad Scotos in Christo credentes," Prosper Aquitan. Chron. I.e.
Bede, Hist. Eccl. i. 13. Some Historians (e.g. Fleury, xxv. 18) suppose
this to have been a mission to the Scotch. But the words Scotia and Scoti
designated Ireland and the Irish till the twelfth century. See below,
p. 109. On Palladius, see Dr. Todd's S. Patrick, pp. 270—276.
4 Bede, i. 13, 17, with the notes of Smith and Hussey.
8 Nennius, Hist. Brit, apud Gale, Script, xv. p. 94. Bp. Lloyd,
Ancient Christ, pp. 55 — 57.
6 Gallandius, Proleg. de S. Patricio : "Patricium i Deo ad Hiber-
norum conversionem vocatum circa annum 431; post innumeros labores
in eo munere apostolico perficiendo e vivis excessisse anno 491.
Hiberni Patricio debent quod patria sua facta sit Sanctorum insula,
et litterarum scientiarumque gymnasium." On the year of his mission,
see Todd, p. 394, who places it in a.d. 439 or 440.

5. Patrick's autobiography in his " Confession." 107
Mission of S. Patrick is one of the most interesting
in Church History, and, happily, we possess trust
worthy documents for ascertaining its character.
The principal of these records is the work com
posed by himself, in his old age, and addressed to the
people of Ireland, and entitled his Confession.7 This
title is not intended to convey the meaning generally
expressed by that word ; the Confession of S. Patrick
is not to be compared with the Confessions of S. Au
gustine, and other similar works ; but it is to be re
garded as a Profession of Faith set forth by him, and
as a Memoir of his own ministry and life. It is
written in Latin, in a simple and homely, rude
and rugged style, as the Author modestly avows.
But this does not detract from its value. Its lan
guage reminds the reader that the Author was not
tutored in schools of human learning ; and it is an
artless record of the sufferings he endured, and of the
labours he performed in the cause of the Gospel, and
the spirit of zeal and courage with which he toiled in
7 Contained in Patricii Opuscula (sc. Confession Epist. ad Coroti-
cum, Synodi duse, &o.), ed. Jac. Warseus, Lond. 1658; Dublin, ed..
J. L. Villanueva, 1835 * Gallandii Bibl. Patr. Vet. vol. a. pp. 159 —
182; Migne, Patrologia, torn. liii. p. 802.
In Yeowell's Chronicles, Appendix iv. p. 173, is a translation of
S. Patrick's Confession, and in Sir W. Betham's Antiq. Researches,
Part ii. Dr. Todd's work, " S. Patrick,. Apostle of Ireland," Dublin,
1864, is of primary importance.
Gallandii Prolegomen. de S. Patricio. Bibl. Vet. Patr. torn, x.,
" Sancti Patricii res gestas Probus, Jocelinus, aliique medii sevi scrip-
tores litteris consignarunt, quorum auctoritas haud firmo talo consistit.
" At ex beati Antistitis Confessione et Epistola ad Coroticum com-
plura eruet lector ad ejus acta probe dignoscenda, quibus alibi firmiora
frustra quseret. "
Tillemont, Hist, Eccl. vol. xvi. p. 782, " Ne voyant rien de certain
dans les vies de Saint Patrice, nous aimons mieux nous contenter d'un
ecrit qu'on appelle sa Confession, qu'on croit estre de lui-meme, et qui
veritablement en est digne."

108 His birth, early life, captivity — Slave Trade.
the work of Christ, in an almost barbarous country,
for sixty years.
S. Patrick was not an Irishman.8 His baptismal
name" Succath, seems to be of Teutonic or Celtic
origin. He mentions the place of his birth by its
Latin appellation.1 Archbishop Ussher 2 supposes
that it was Kirkpatrick in Scotland, between Dum
barton and Glasgow, on the banks of the Clyde. It
is indeed generally allowed that S. Patrick was born
either in Scotland or in France.3 It seems more
probable that he was a native <of Scotland. In
S. Patrick's age, the Slave Trade was carried on in
these countries. He relates, that when he was only
sixteen years old, he was captured by Pirates, and
sold into a foreign land. The country to which he
was carried was the north of Ireland. He also
mentions, that4 many thousands of his countrymen
8 Cardinal Baronius ad An. 431 and 491, makes S. Patrick a native
of Ireland, deceived probably by the expression in the Martyrology,
" In Hibernii"; Natalis S. Patricii." See Martyrol. Christ Church,
Dublin, p. 96, xvi. Kal. April.: "Natalis Sancti Patricii Archiepis-
copi Scotorum qui primus eosdem Scotos de gentilitate ad Christi fidem
convertit .. . . Sicut in Apostolatum barbaricse gentis Scotorum verbo
predicationis per aquam et Spiritum Sanctum ex baptismatis fonte velut
ex matris utero regeneravit, merito ejusdem gentis pater nominatur . . .
Apostolus et predicator in convertenda gente ad fidem constitutus
Episcopus, baptizando, unguendo, chrismatizando, et Episcopos, Pres-
byteros Diaconosque ceterosque gradus Ecclesia; ordinando, perfectus."
9 Schcenemann, Bibl. Hist. Patr. torn. ii. p. 846, ' ' Patricius natione
Britannus, nomine patrio Succath, natus in oppido Nemthur, hodie
Kirkpatrick, inter fretum Dumbrittonae et urbem Glasguensem sito circa
annum 371, patre Calpurnio diacono, Potiti presbyteri filio."
1 ' ' Bonaven Tabernije. "
2 See also Ware's Bishops, p. 5.
3 In c. 19 of his " Confessio," he appears to distinguish between
France and his native land : ' ' Pergens in Britannias et libentissime
paratus eram quasi ad patriam et parentes, non id solum sed eram usque
Gallias, visitare fratres."
4 In the Confessio, c. i., he says that he was captured and brought to

Slave Trade — Ireland called Scotia — His parentage 109
— .S. Ninian.
were seized and taken with him. If we consider how
small the vessels of that age were, we cannot suppose
that, if these many thousand slaves had been captured
in France, the Pirates should have chosen to carry
their cumbrous freight by so long and circuitous a
voyage as to the north of Ireland ; but to no place
were they more likely to have carried them than to
the north of Ireland, if they had captured them in
Scotland. Scotland, which afterwards received so
much of Christian illumination from Ireland, and
even derived its name Scotland from that island (for
Ireland was the primitive Scotia? and was commonly
called by that name till the twelfth century), seems to
have given S. Patrick — the Apostle of Ireland — to
that country.
Patrick was the son of Christian Parents. His
father was a Deacon, his grandfather a Priest.6
Scotland had received the tidings of the Gospel by
means of Ninian, who is said to have been the son of
a British Chief, and to have been trained at Rome,
and to have visited S. Martin at Tours, and to have
fixed his see at Galloway, and to have built a Church
there called (as some say) Candida Casa, and to have
called it by the name of S. Martin, and to have died
A.D. 432/
Patrick was a slave of a heathen master, in a wild
Ireland " cum tot millibus hominum, quia a Deo recessimus et sacer-
dotibus nostris non obedientes fuimus."
5 Bromton. Io. p. 1071, "Erat Hibernia jam olim Britannise con-
corporata ... p. 1072 dicta est etiam Scotia a Scotis earn habitantibus
priusquam ad aliam Scotiam Britannicam devenerant." Dr. Todd
(S. Patrick, p. 41) says, " till the twelfth century." Ussher, Antiq.
cxvi., "Scotia appellationem Hibernia retinuit ad seculum usque
decimiim." 6 See below, pp. 114, 1 1.5.
7 See Bede, iii. 4, and Life of Ninian by Aelred, circ. A.D. 1150.

no Patrick a slave in Ireland.
country, among savage tribes, and was sent to feed
sheep. He draws an affecting picture of his own
condition at that time. " Often (he says 8) in wintry
nights, I wandered as a shepherd on the mountains of
Ireland. I was drenched by rains, and chilled by
dews and frost." But in his solitary hours he had
communings with God, and in the school offriendless-
ness and affliction, and under the influence of the sky
and stars, the truths of Revelation, which had been
planted by his parents in his mind, but had lain dor
mant there, awoke within him. " Often 8 I slept on
the hills and in the forests, and rose before dawn to
pray." Thus his life was spent till his twenty-third
year. He then escaped from captivity, and returned
to his native land. But he would not remain there.
With a noble spirit of Christian forgiveness and self-
sacrifice, he returned good for evil, and forsook the
joys of home, in order to preach 4he Gospel, where
he had been an exile and a slave.
After some years of religious preparation,9 he re-
8 Confess, c. 6.
9 See the testimony of Fiech the Bard (concerning whom may be
consulted O'Connor, Proleg. ad Scr. Hibern. i. p. cxv, who places him
circ. a.d. 540). Ware calls Fiech Bishop of.Sletty (in Queen's County),
near Carlow, and contemporary with S. Patrick. See Ware's Bishops,
p. 3, and Bishop Nicholson's Library, p. 50.
Fiech says of Patrick —
" Profectus est 'trans Alpes omnes
Et mansit apud Germanum," &c.
which has been thus Englished —
" He traversed the whole of Albion,
He crossed the Sea,
And he took up his abode with Germanus,
Far away to the South of Armorica
Among the isles of the Tuscan Sea ;
There he abode, as I declare,

S. Patrick not sent by Rome to Ireland. 1 1 1
ceived the Orders of Deacon, Priest, and Bishop ;
and before A.D. 440 he returned to Ireland, where
he spent the rest of his life — some say, sixty years.
During that time, he traversed he greater part of the
country, preaching the Gospel, baptizing, planting
Churches, and ordaining Bishops, Priests, and Dea
cons. Almighty God blessed his labours with an
abundant harvest ; he never quitted the field, and,
full of labour and of years, and like a reaper with his
sheaves around him, he fell asleep in Christ.
It is a striking fact that our celebrated Saxon
Church Historian, Bede, who was born in the seventh
century (A.D. 672), and records in his History the
mission of Palladius to Ireland, and often refers to
the affairs of the Irish Church, never mentions in it
the name of S. Patrick.
If S. Patrick had been sent from Rome, Bede (as is
asserted by many Romanist writers), who had access
to the Roman archives, and who records the mission
of Palladius, and was one of the most learned men of
his age, must have known the fact, and would have
communicated it to the world. Full of zeal for
Rome, as she then was, he would not have failed to
do honour to the glorious career of S. Patrick ; he

He studied the Canons with Germanus,
Thus it is that the Churches testify ;
To the land of Erin he returned."
The original of this Hymn, in Irish, is inserted in Colgan's Trias
Thaumaturga, and Dr. Todd, p. 314, who, however, thinks that these
statements refer rather to Palladius.
The Cotton MS. ascribed to the ninth century by Dr. O'Connor, and
which Ussher supposes to be earlier, records that " Germanus and
Lupus nurtured and ordained S. Patrick, and made him the chief
Bishop of their school among the British Irish. "

ii2 The ancient Church of Ireland not dependent on Rome.
would have dwelt with delight on the exploits of the
Apostle of Ireland, if the Apostle of Ireland had been
an emissary of Rome.
This silence is probably to be accounted for from
the fact that the Church of Ireland * in the age of Bede
concurred with the ancient Church of Britain z in re-
1 Gieseler, Eccl. Hist. § 126, " The union was close between the
British and Irish churches : they retained many old arrangements.
"That the Britons acknowledged no ecclesiastical power of the Pope
over them is proved by their opposition to the Roman regulations, an
opposition which continued in Ireland down to the twelfth century."
See also Lappenberg's Hist. i. p. 134, "The points of difference
between the Roman and British Churches (established probably on the
oldest direct tradition from Judea) were, the time of celebrating Easter,
the form of tonsure, the administration of baptism, the ecclesiastical
benediction of matrimony, the manner of ordination, but above all, the
refusal to acknowledge the supremacy of the Pope. "
2 Bede, xi. 2, " Non enim paschse Dominicum diem suo tempore
observabant (Brittonum Episcopi) .... sed et alia plurima
unitati ecclesiasticae contraria faciebant." Ibid. Augustine (from Rome)
says to the British Bishops, " In multis nostra consuetudini contraria
geritis, et tamen si in tribus his mihi obtemperare vultis, ut pascha suo
tempore celebretis, ut ministerium baptizandi, quo Deo renascimur,
juxta morem sanctse Romanse et Apostolicse Ecclesise compleatis, ut
genti Anglorum una nobiscum verbum Domini prsedicetis, caetera quae
agitis, quamvis moribus nostris contraria, sequanimiter cuncta tolerabimus.
At illi (sc. Brittonum Episcopi) nil horum se facturos, neque ilium pro
Archiepiscopo habituros esse, respond ebant."
Neander, Church Hist. vol. iii. sect. I, p. 164, " If Patrick came
to Ireland as a deputy from Rome, it might have been expected that in
the Irish Church a certain sense of dependence would always have been
preserved towards the mother Church at Rome. But we find, on the
contrary, in the Irish Church afterwards, a spirit of Church freedom
similar to that shown by the ancient British Church, which struggled
against the yoke of Romish ordinances."
"We find subsequently among the Irish, a much greater agreement
with the ancient British than with Roman Ecclesiastical usages. This
goes to prove that the origin of the Irish Church was independent of Rome.
"Again, no indication of his connexion with the Roman Church is
to be found in S. Patrick's Confession; rather everything seems to
favour the supposition that he was ordained Bishop in Britain itself, in
his forty-fifth year." Cp. Todd's S. Patrick, pp. 377, 387, 399.

The ancient Irish Church independent of Rome ; and 113
resisted it.
sistingthe growing encroachments of the Roman See ;
and Bede was prepossessed in favour of Rome, and
viewed with coldness the independence of the Church
of Ireland in his own age.
We need not inquire, whether there was not
too much vehemence and impatience in the con
duct of some of the Irish Ecclesiastics towards Rome
at that time ; as, assuredly, there was too much of
haughtiness in her bearing towards them. But it is
necessary to state the fact of the disputes between
them, and to note the side to which Bede leaned.
Bede, ii. 4, relates that Laurence; the successor of Augustine at
Canterbury, wrote as follows to the Bishops of Ireland.: —
" Dominis carissimis fratribus Episcopis vel abbatibus per universam
Scotiam . . . Antequam cognosceremus hanc insulam quse Brit-
tannia nuncupatur, credentes quod juxta morem universalis Ecclesise
ingrederentur in magna reverentia sanctitatis tarn. Brittonas quam Scottos
(the Irish) vpnerati sumus."
Hence it is clear that before the end of the sixth century (the date oi
Augustine's mission), the Ecclesiastics of Rome knew very little either
of the British or Irish Churches ; and that neither of them were then
dependent on Rome. "Sed cognoscentes Brittonas, Scottos (i.e. the
Irish) meliores putavimus." Even then, after that mission into Britain,
Laurentius and the other Romish missionaries had still to learn what was
the character of the Church of Ireland. And the result of their inves
tigation is declared as follows : " Scottos, per Daganum Episcopum in
hanc insulam (Brittanniam) et Columbanum abbatem in Galliis venien-
tem, nihil discrepare a Brittonibus in eorum conversatiohe didicimus.
Nam Daganus Episcopus ad nos veniens non solum cibum nobiscum sed
nee in eodem hospitio quo vescebamur sumere voluit."
Therefore (says Bede), Laurentius wrote a letter as above to the
Bishops of Ireland, to bring them into communion with them (literas
quibus eos in unitate catholic! confirmare satagit). But, adds Bede,
"quantum heec agendo profecerit adhuc prcesentia tempora declarant,''
i. e. the estrangement remained to the eighth century. With regard to the
Britons he says, ii. 20, ' ' Usque hodie moris est Brittonum fidem religio-
nemque Anglorum pro nihilo habere, neque in aliquo eis magis communi-
care quam paganis." And again, ad A.D. 731, he says, " Brittones
maxima ex parte gentem Anglorum et totius catholicae ecclesiae statum
pascha impugnant"
VOL. IV. I

114 Why Bede does not mention S. Patrick.
This being the case, it may well be supposed, that
while Bede was too honest a man to detract from the
credit of, Ireland's Apostle, and to tarnish the glory
of S. Patrick, yet he would not make any effort to
eulogize one who had founded a Church which
showed itself resolved not to admit the claims of
Rome, modest as those claims were in comparison
with what she advanced in a later age.
Hence we may explain the fact, that the name of
S. Patrick is never mentioned in the Church History
of Bede.
Here an important consideration must be added.
If S. Patrick had been dependent on Rome, — if he
had recognized anything like the Supremacy which
she afterwards claimed, it is certain that his name
would not have been omitted by Bede. Few names
would have occurred more frequently in Bede's his
tory than his. Bede there gives full reports of the
differences and debates between the Romish and
Irish Clergy in the interval of time between S. Pa
trick's age and his own. And if Bede could have
said, — if the Romish Clergy could have said, in their
altercations with the Irish Clergy, — that S- Patrick
was an emissary from Rome, — if they could have
shown that he was obsequious to Rome, and deferred
humbly to her, it cannot be imagined that they would
never have urged this argument against the Irish
Clergy, who strenuously opposed Rome.
Let us now revert to S. Patrick's account of himself,
in his Confession.
He there says that his father was a Deacon, and
his grandfather a Priest3 — a proof that the Celibacy,
3 S. Patricii Confessio, i. "Ego Patricius peccator, rusticissimus et

On clerical celibacy — S. Patrick's ordinations in Ireland 115
— His profession of faith.
which two Popes of Rome, Siricius and Innocent,*1
had then enforced on her Clergy, was no part of
Ecclesiastical discipline in the country of Ireland's
Apostle. With regard to Church Government, S. Patrick was
a Bishop, and ordained Priests and Deacons.6 He
acknowledged these three orders of Ministers in the
Church, and he mentions no others. As to his doc
trine, at the beginning of his work he inserts his own
minimus omnium fidelium, patrem habui Calpurnium diaconem, filium
quondam Potiti presbyteri, qui fuit in vico Bonaven Tabernise ; villulara
Enon prope habuit, ubi capturam dedi. Annorum eram tuncfere sedecim,
Deum verum ignorabam, et Hiberionem (i.e. Ireland. See Wesseling,
Antonini Itin. p. 509) in captivitatem adductus sum."
* See above, vol. iii. pp. 98 — 103.
6 Patricii Confessio, c. 16. He mentions his labours in Ireland " ut
clerici ubique illis ordinarentur ad plebem nuper venientem ad creduli-
tatem (i.e. fidem);" again, c. 17, "ut ubique essent clerici qui bap-
tizarent." C. 18, " Unde Hiberionae, qui nunquam notitiam Deihabuerunt,»a/w
facta est plebs Domini ? "
C. 12, " Ordinavit Dominus clericos per modicitatem meam." S. Pa
trick therefore performed the office of a Bishop : and he says, Epist.
ad Coroticum, c. 1, " Ego Patricius peccator indoctus scilicet Hiberione
constitutum me episcopum esse fateor. Inter barbaros habito proselytus
et profuga . . . pro quibus tradidi patriam et parentes."
Patricii Epist. ad Coroticum, c. 3, " In stfpremis temporibus
Hiberione optime et benigne plantata atque instructa erat lege Dei,
favente Deo." This Epistle is commonly inscribed to Coroticus, a
heathen Cambro-Britannic chief (probably of Glamorganshire) who had
carried away many Christians captive, but it ought rather to be called a
consolatory address to those who were persecuted by him.
See also Synodus Episcoporum Patricii, Auxilii, Isernini : " Gratias
agimus Deo Patri, et Filio et Spiritui Sancto. Presbyteris et diaconi-
bus et omni clero Patricius, Auxilius et Iserninus episcopi, salutem. "
Wilkins, Concil. i. p. 2, and Dr. Todd's S. Patrick, p. 485.
Synod. Episcop. Patricii, &c. 30, "Episcopus quilibet, qui de suSin
alteram progte&itux parochiam nee ordinare prassumat, nisi permissionem
acceperit ab eo qui in suo principatu est." This canon intimates the
existence of Diocesan Episcopacy in Ireland in the age of S. Patrick .
See also Canon 34.
I 2

n6 5. Patrick's Creed— His Epistle to Coroticus.
profession of Faith.6 It bears a striking resemblance
to the Nicene Creed, and is as follows : —
"There is no other God" (he declares) "besides
God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ, Whom we
confess to have been from everlasting with the Father,
and Who was begotten before all things, and by
Whom all things were made, visible and invisible,
and Who was made man, and overcame death, and
ascended into heaven to the Father. And God gave
unto Him all power over every name in heaven and
in earth, and under the earth, that every tongue
should confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord and God.7
We believe in Him, and expect that He will come
again to judge the quick and dead, and will render
to every man according to his works ; and He has
poured out upon us abundantly the gift of the Holy
Ghost, the pledge of immortality, Who maketh us
to believe and obey, and to be sons of God the
Father, and to be fellow-heirs of Christ Whom we
confess ; and we adore One God in the Trinity of the
Sacred Name."
In his Epistle to Coroticus, a barbarous British
chief (c. 9, 10), he comforts the Christians who were
6 Patricii Confessio, ii. "Non est alius Deus prseter Deum Patrem,
ingenitum sine principio, a Quo est omne principium, et Hujus Filium
Jesum Christum Quem cum Patre scilicet fuisse semper testamur, ante
originem sseculi spiritualiter apud Patrem, inenarrabiliter ingenitum ante
omne principium ; et per Ipsum facta sunt visibilia et invisibilia, homi-
nem factum, devicta morte in caelos ad Patrem receptum. Et dedit Illi
omnem potestatem super omne nomen caelestium et terrestrium et in-
fernorum ut omnis lingua confiteatur quia Dominus et Deus est Jesus
Christus (Phil. ii. io, 1 1) ; Quem credimus, et expectamus adventum
Ipsius ; mox futurus judex vivorum et mortuorum, Qui reddet unicuique
secundum facta sua ; et infudit nobis abunde Spiritus Sancti donum et
pignus immortalitatis, Qui facit credentes et obedientes ut sint filii De
Patris et cohseredes Christi, Quem confitemur, et adoramus unum Deum
in Trinitate Sacri Nominis." s* Phil. ii. io, II.

Appeal to S. Patrick. 117
maltreated by him, with an assurance that all who
suffer for Christ will pass at death into Paradise, and
will rise hereafter and reign in glory with Apostles
and Prophets and Martyrs in the Kingdom of Christ.
He says, " We confess One God and One Baptism,"
and ends his Epistle with an ascription to the Blessed
Trinity. S. Patrick's Confession is an autobiographical me
moir of his ministerial career; and S.Patrick is ac
knowledged to have been the Apostle of Ireland. To
S. Patrick, then, an appeal may be made in *a spirit of
Christian love, for a solution of the questions which
have agitated that unhappy country for many cen
turies. What is the true Church? What is the
ancient Church of Ireland ? S. Patrick tells us in his
Creed, what, in his judgment, the true Church is. He
has set down its faith there.
If S. Patrick had been sent to Ireland from
Rome, if he had been consecrated at Rome, if he
had been dependent upon Rome, and had supposed
that Ireland was subject, temporally or spiritually, to
the Roman See, he would have intimated in his Con
fession that this was the case. The Roman Catholic
Bishops of Ireland now call themselves " Bishops by
the Grace of God and the Apostolic See," meaning the
See of Rome. S. Patrick, the first Bishop of Ireland,
would have done the same. But let us refer to his
life. He mentions the Clergy of Ireland ; he men
tions the Clergy of Britain ; he mentions the Clergy of
France ; but he never mentions the Clergy of Rome.
The words Roman Bishop, Roman See, are not once
found there. The name of Rome does not occur
in his work. We may leave it to candid inquirers
to draw the logical inferences from these facts.

1 1 8 Missionary work of Rome.
Let not, however, the merits of Rome in the work
of Evangelization be disparaged. After her recovery
from her capture by the Goths, she was animated by
a new spirit of missionary enterprise. Pope Caeles-
tine's zeal for the spiritual welfare of Britain and
Ireland are not to be forgotten. If Leo the Great
was the Author (as some suppose) of the book " On
the Calling of all Nations," 8 which proclaimed in clear
language that God desires all men to be saved, and
that Christ died for all, and ithat consequently it is
the duty of the Church to pray for the heathen, and
to evangelize them, he gave a fresh impulse to the
zeal of those whose hearts glowed with fervent desire
for the salvation of the myriads of foreign races which
were then flowing from the north. And England will
never cease to commemorate with gratitude the mission
of Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury,
sent from Rome at the end of the sixth century by
Pope Gregory the Great.
Let us now turn our eyes from the Western Church
to the East.
8 "De Vocatione omnium Gentium," in Leo's Works, pp. I — 35, ed.
Quesnel, Lugdun. 1700.

CHAPTER XVIII.
The Eastern Church — 5. Chrysostom's place in Church
History ; his wor"k at Antioch.
THE history of the Church is represented, in certaiin
respects, by the history of her great men. The
providential care which watched over her, and enabled
her to contend against the powers of Evil, and not only
to overcome them, but to make them ministerial to
good, is traceable in their lives.
In the fourth and fifth centuries we see remarkable
illustrations of this truth. The Divine Founder of the
Church had promised1 to build her upon Himself,
confessed to be Very God as well as Very Man, and
also acknowledged to be the Christ — her Prophet, or
Teacher, her Priest, and her King.
1 Matt. xvi. 1 8. It may be well for readers of Church History to
remember that this Divine promise contains three distinct propositions : —
(l) enunciated by our Lord Himself, viz. His Manhood. " Whom
say men that I the Son of Man am ? " and
(2) His Messiahship ; and
(3) His Godhead, declared in St. Peter's answer to our Lord's
question, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God"
Being thus confessed, He is the Rock of the Church (cp. I Cor. iii. n),
which the Powers of darkness will never cease to assail, as long as the
world lasts, but against which they will never prevail.

120 Great Teachers of the Church — their various achievements
for the Faith.
Champions of these doctrines were raised up and
preserved in a marvellous manner.
The Episcopate of Athanasius at Alexandria
was continued forty-seven years, amid innumerable
dangers, to defend the truth of Christ's Godhead
against Arianism, and the reality of the Incarnation
against Apollinarius. Basil was elevated to the
See of Caesarea to contend for the Deity of Christ
against the Emperor of the East, Valens. Gregory
Nazianzen restored the faith at Constantinople after
its banishment for many years. Ambrose was raised
up, almost by supernatural inspiration, from the chair
of the civil magistracy to the Episcopal throne of
Milan, to fight the same battle against the Emperor
of the West, Valentinian the Younger, and his
mother Justina.
Augustine was sent from Carthage to Rome, and
afterwards from Rome to Milan, by God's providence,
acting by the instrumentality of a powerful enemy
of Christianity, Symmachus, and was thus brought
within the influence of Ambrose, and was caught by
him in the net of the Gospel, and came back to his
own country, Africa, to become the Teacher of the
West. The doctrines of the two Natures, the divine and
human, united but not confused in the One Person of
the Eternal Son of God, were established, as we shall
see, by the Spirit of God in the Church, acting
by Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria, against Nestorius,
Archbishop of Constantinople, at the Council of
Ephesus (A.D. 431), and by Leo the Great against
Eutyches at the Council of Chalcedon (a.d. 451).
Jerome — happily for him and for the Church — was
removed from the splendours of Rome, and from the

'The Spiritual mosaic of Church history — One desideratum. 121
steps of the Papal throne, to the quiet retirement of
Bethlehem, where he did a work which no one else in
Christendom was qualified at that time to do, in
communicating to the Western Church the authentic
sense of the inspired originals of the Scriptures, in
which those doctrines are revealed.
Thus the history of the Church was — if we may so
sav — like a beautiful tesselated work, in which the
lives of her Saints were set, as fair and precious stones
and jewels with different colours, each in its proper
place, to form a symmetrical and harmonious whole.
But in this spiritual -irokviroiicikia, or variegated
mosaic of Christian gifts and graces, one thing was
still wanting. The Eternal Godhead, the Verity of
the Manhood, united to the Godhead in the Person of
Christ, were fully displayed to the World in the fourth
and fifth centuries. But something more — which had
been implied in St. Peter's answer to our Lord's
question — was still required ; namely, a clear mani
festation — in great Cities — of Christ, the great Prophet
or Teacher, Priest and King, who should come into
the World.
Something indeed had been done in this respect by
great Christian Orators, such as Basil at Caesarea,
Ambrose at Milan, Gregory Nazianzen at Constanti
nople. But they were theologians rather than homi-
lists ; their Preaching, for the most part, was dogmatic
rather than practical ; it dwelt more on Christian
verities in the abstract, than on their application to
the ordinary duties of daily life. Augustine was
a wise Teacher of Christian duty, but his sphere as a
Preacher was limited to congregations in provincial
towns ; and he did not aspire to lofty flights of eloquence.
We hear of no great Preacher at Rome before Pope

122 The desideratum supplied by Chrysostom — His early life.
Leo the First, in the middle of the fifth century, and
he was an imitator of Augustine.
A person was raised up to supply the desideratum.
This was S. John Chrysostom.
S. Chrysostom was the greatest Preacher of Christ to
Ancient Christendom ; he is the pattern of Preachers
and Missionaries in great Towns. He discharged his
work as such in two of the greatest Cities of the East
— for about twelve years at Antioch, the capital of
Syria, and for six at Constantinople, the seat of the
Eastern Empire.
We may trace the hand of God in the life of Chry
sostom, as in that of the other great men who have
been mentioned.
He was born A.D. 347 at Antioch, probably the
same year as S. Jerome. He was, like Augustine,
the son 2 of a holy mother, Anthusa, who, after the
death of her husband Secundus, an imperial officer in
the army of the East, watched tenderly over him.
He became the pupil of the celebrated Sophist and
Rhetorician Libanius, and was prepared in a school
of heathen eloquence to become a Preacher of the
Gospel. God's hand was there. Heathenism, ac
cording to the well-known simile, was like the Eagle
wounded by an arrow feathered by its own plumage ;
and Libanius, being asked who was to succeed him
2 The life of Chrysostom was written by his contemporary Palladius
in the form of a Dialogue, which is contained in tom. xiii. (see Praef.
p. x) of the Benedictine Edition of Chrysostom's Works (ed. Mont-
faucon, Paris, 1738), pp. 1 — 89, where is also an elaborate life, com
piled by the Editor himself, pp. 91 — 175. This, with the life written
by Tillemont (Memoires, tom. xi.), and by Neander, Berlin, 1 858, and
that by the Rev. W. R. W. Stephens, Lond. 1872, and the valuable
article by Canon Venables in Wace's Dictionary of Scripture Bio
graphy, i. pp. 518—534, will supply all the details that can be desired.

His preparation for Preaching. 123
in his professorship, said, "John " (such was the name
by which he was known in his lifetime; the title
Chrysostom, or golden mouth? was added by a grateful
and admiring posterity) — "John should have been my
successor, if he had not been stolen from us by the
Christians." There was a remarkable dispensation in this pre
paration for his work of preaching at Antioch.
S. Augustine, .the Teacher of the Christian Faith, was
sent by Symmachus, the Champion of Heathenism, to
Milan ; so, after his twelve years' Presbyterate at
Antioch, Chrysostom, the Preacher of Christian
Ethics to the Capital of the East, was carried to it by
one of the courtly favourites, the profligate and
rapacious Eunuch, Eutropius.
Like Cyprian, Ambrose, and Augustine, Chrysos
tom had the benefit of being trained for preaching by
practice as an Advocate at the bar. But he was
scandalized by the arts to which the lawyers of the
day resorted; and he wished — like Jerome — to devote
himself to a solitary life, of which he was deeply
enamoured. When he was intending to leave the City and retire
into monastic seclusion, his mother — he tells us 4— <¦
took him by the hand one day, and led him with her
into her own bedroom, and earnestly entreated him
not to leave her in her widowhood and old age. She
made him sit by her side on the bed, in which she had
given him birth, and burst into tears, and spoke to
8 He was called xPva°vs tV yXurrav by one of his successors,
Proclus, after a.d. 437 (Galland. Bibl. Patr. ix. 681). The surname
Chrysostom is said (by Gieseler, § 84) to have been first used by Joannes
Moschus about A.D. 630.
4 De Sacerdotio, i. p. 10, ed. Hughes, Cant. 1710.

124 His mother's words to him — A " reader " at Antioch ;
a monk ; a hermit.
him of his father, and of her own love to him. " At
your father's death, I was distracted by many house
hold cares and difficulties, but nothing could induce
me to exchange my solitude for a second marriage.
I was resolved by the help of God to pass through
a fiery furnace of desolate widowhood, and to live for
thee, in whom I saw a living image of my lost
husband. Even when thou wast an infant, thou wast
to me a comfort and a joy. I have preserved carefully
for thee all thy patrimony ; whatever has been
spent for thee has come out of my own dowry. I do
not say this to reproach thee ; but in return for all
this care of thee I make one petition to thee, that
thou wouldest not plunge me in the sorrow of a second
widowhood, and awaken the slumbering sorrows of my
first loss. They who are young may hope to reach old
age, but I am old, and have nothing now to wait for
but death. When, therefore, thou hast buried me in the
earth, and laid my bones beside thy father's bones,
then go and travel to some far-off land, and do what
seemeth thee best ; there will then be none alive to
hinder thee. But as long as we still breathe, bear
with me, I pray thee, my dear son,, dwell with me, and
leave me not. Offend not God by harming thy mother,
who has never done any harm to thee."
Chrysostom was moved by this touching appeal,
and deferred the fulfilment of his wish till his mother's
death ; and in the mean time he officiated as a
" reader " in the Church at Antioch.
After her decease he retired to the mountains near
Antioch, and spent four years in a monastery, and
two as a hermit. In this seclusion he profited much
by study of the Scriptures, meditation, self-examina
tion, and prayer. His spiritual life was deepened ; and

His return to Antioch — His work " On the Priesthood." 125
when he was constrained by the fortunate visitation
of sickness to emerge from his retirement in A.D. 381,
and to return to Antioch, he was qualified to under
take the work of the Christian ministry. While^
passing through a five years' diaconate,6 to which he
was ordained by Meletius, he wrote his dialogue
" On the Priesthood" 6 This title requires explanation.
It is true that the author speaks much of the danger,
difficulty, and dignity of the priestly office, but only as
involved in thatof ^Bishop; and perhaps the title might
better be rendered On the Episcopate. Chrysostom de
scribes in it his fear of being made a Bishop — as some
Deacons of extraordinary promise were.7
In this dialogue he attempts to justify himself to a
friend, Basil (who was under a similar apprehension),
for having eluded the danger which Basil incurred,
being induced to expect the companionship of Chry
sostom in his own consecration to the Episcopate.
This dialogue between Chrysostom and his friend
Basil overflows with the exuberant luxuriance of
youthful eloquence ; and the subtle apology for pious
frauds" (so different from the straightforward frank
ness of Augustine 9) savours rather of the chicanery
of the law-courts of Antioch, or the sophistical school
of Libanius, through which the author had passed,
than of the unadulterated purity of the Gospel, and
it would probably have not been approved by Chry
sostom in his later years.
The work, however, is interesting as showing his
opinions on Christian doctrine, and on the Christian
Priesthood. 3 Socr. vi. 3. 6 ircpl UpaaivQS.
1 E.g. Athanasius. See Montfaucon's Chrysost. xiii. p. 361.
" Lib. i. 9. 9 Above, p. 93. Cp. Neander, pp. 94—96.

126 On the dangers of the priestly office; duties of a Bishop.
He declares its dignity, as being instituted by
Christ Himself in His love of the souls for which He
died ; and as having a commission from Him Who
said, " Feed My sheep." He asserts it to be more
honourable than any earthly office, and full of diffi
culty and danger.1 He describes its duties in the
work of binding and loosing 2 — in the ministry of
the Sacraments, the instruments of regeneration and
sanctification — for eternal life. Even St. Paul
trembled, he says, at such functions as these. The
Priest is often tempted to vainglory (p. 383);
sometimes to indolence and lethargy (p. 389) ; some
times to impatience and anger (p. 390). Corporal
asceticism is easy, but spiritual discipline is hard
(389, 593). He complains that Bishops are often
chosen for unworthy motives ; either from considera
tions of rank, of family, or of wealth ; or from
party motives ; and that a man ought rather to
shun that dignity than to court it.
Many Bishops, he adds, were slaves of women who
possessed court-influence."
A Bishop, he says, is censured if he is lax ; he is
condemned if he is severe ; if he truckles to tem
poral power, he is denounced as a coward (395).
" What kind of man must he be " (he asks, and he
afterwards felt the force of the question by per
sonal experience at Constantinople), " who has to do
battle against all these storms, and to overrule all
for good ? He must be grave, but not arrogant ; he
must be revered, and yet mild ; he must be able
to govern, and yet willing to communicate his
authority to others ; he must never be swayed by
1 Lib. ii. 1 — 4. 2 Lib. iii. 5, 6, ed. Montfaucon, tom. i.
3 P. 392. 4 Cp. Neander, p. 105,

Office of a Bishop ; his qualifications — On Sermons. 127
bribery or flattery ; he must be courteous and humble,
and yet energetic ; he must be valiant, and yet
meek and gentle ; he must be proof against worldly
allurements, and resolved to act with all authority,
and to promote worthy men, though all resist their
advancement ; and he must be determined to reject
the unworthy, though all conspire to force them upon
him.6 In a word, he must have a single eye to the
edification of the Church of God."
A Bishop has also the care of Widows and Virgins,
and of their affairs ; and he has judicial duties to per
form in the decision of causes, and is distracted by
numberless cares.
In addition to this, a Bishop ought to be eloquent.
Now that miracles have ceased, such as were wrought
by a Paul or a Stephen,6 he must have intellectual gifts,
logical power, literary and theological attainments,
and be able to refute the Heathen and the Jews,
and all the "heresies of the Evil One^such as
those of the Manichaeans, Valentinians, Marcionites,
Arians, and Sabellians." In a word, he ought to have
the rhetorical and argumentative faculties of St. Paul
whose character and writings he portrays (p. 415).
In the fifth book he describes the labour ne
cessary in the preparation of Sermons. " People
come to Church as to a Theatre, to criticize and be
entertained, not to be reproved or exhorted. A man
who preaches other people's sermons is denounced as
5 He dwells on the sin of ordaining unworthy candidates in iv. 2,
p. 405.
0 P. 408. On the cessation of Miracles see also Homil. 23 in Matt. ,
and in Psalm 143, and tom. iii. 276. But these statements must be
modified by what he says on Psalm 101, and by what he says of the
miracles at the tomb of the martyr Babylas, ii. p. 536 sqq. See above,
vol. iii. pp. 155, 156.

128 On Preachers — The Priest standing at the Holy Table.
a plagiary. A preacher ought not to court applause,
but to be able to gain it. He describes the confusion
of a Preacher of an extempore sermon suddenly
breaking down (p. 416). A Preacher ought not to
despise any one : he ought to be studious and learned ;
not to disparage the opinions of his audience, and yet
to be above them, and lead them ; and never to preach
for the praise of men, but for the glory of God.
Few (he says) are born with a gift of eloquence, and
they who are, will soon fail, if they do not improve
it by study. People expect more from a preacher
celebrated for oratory than from another man, and
are more apt to be disappointed by him, because they
come to church to sit as judges of the Preacher,
rather than to profit by what is preached (417).
A Bishop is responsible for the sins of the people.7
APriest and a Bishop are in more peril than a Monk.
A Priest is appointed to plead with God for men, and
ought to be more saintly. " Contemplate him stand
ing at the holy Table, invoking the Holy Ghost, and
offering the tremendous sacrifice, and handling the
Body and Blood of the Lord. What purity and
piety are required of him ! What ought to be the
hands that offer such things as those, and the tongue
that utters such words ! How holy ought to be the
soul which receives the Divine Spirit! Angels stand
at his side, and ' heavenly Powers cry aloud,' and
fill the place around the Altar. I have heard of
persons who have had visions of these things."
"When you see8 the Lord Himself sacrificed9 and
7 vi. 1, 2, 3.
8 These paragraphs, beginning " When you see," are inserted here
from p. 382.
9 The reader may remember that Chrysostom carefully guards him-

The Priest's office and character — Chrysostom at Antioch. 129
lying there, and the Priest standing at the sacrifice and
praying over it, and the receivers participating in that
blood " (literally, " when you see them reddened by
it "), "do you suppose yourself to be any longer among
men upon earth ? Are you not then transported to
heaven ? Are you not released from all carnal
thoughts ? Do you not gaze with a pure and disem
bodied spirit on heaven ? O wondrous privilege ! O
marvellous love of God ! He Who sits, above with the
Father is embraced with the hands of men, and He-
gives Himself to be received by them. But this is
done with the eye of Faith."
" The Priest's soul ought to be as light enlightening
the world, and he ought to go forth from the hea
venly presence to converse with men, with the high
and lowly, with the married and unmarried. He
ought to be a monk in holiness, and a man of the
world in practical wisdom."
The dialogue closes with mutual assurances of love.
Chrysostom acted in the spirit of these sentiments
when he was ordained Priest (A.D. 386) by Flavian,
the successor of Meletius at Antioch,1 which contained
above 200,000 souls,2 and where he preached to large
congregations during a ministry of twelve years.
He was consecrated to the See of Constantinople
in A.D. 398, and occupied it for six years.
self against being supposed to teach that the One Sacrifice of Calvary is
repeated or continued in the Holy Eucharist. See his words on
Heb. a. 9, "We do not offer another sacrifice, but we make a com
memoration of a sacrifice ;" and also in his letter to Caesarius he
condemns the notion of any carnal presence in it, by the Transubstantia-
tion of the Elements. More will be said on this in the following
chapter. See below, pp. 176, 177.
1 See above, vol. ii. p. 326.
2 Chrys. Horn, in Ignat. ii. pp. 592 sqq.
VOL. IV. K

130 Chrysostom as a Preacher — Sources of his power and
success — His homilies on St. Matthew.
The power of Chrysostom's preaching arose from
its being grounded on consummate knowledge of
Holy Scripture. He did not always preach extem
pore,3 and rarely without careful preparation. He
usually preached from an ambon, not from the steps
of the sacrarium ; and generally twice a week, some
times oftener. His sermons were often interrupted
by applause, which he attempted to check.4 " When
I am applauded in the Church," he says, " I go home
with a heavy heart ; I weep and say to myself, " Per
haps thy vanity has lost some souls, and thou hast
spent thyself for nought.' " 6
His homilies on St. Matthew, delivered at Antioch,
are among the bestspecimensof hishomiletical powers.6
First comes the Exposition of the sacred words. The
interpretations of them are sound, sober, and spiritual,
not degenerating into the servile literalism of the
rationalizing school, such as was, in some degree,
sanctioned by his instructor Diodorus, afterwards
Bishop of Tarsus, and found favour with Theodore of
Mopsuestia ; and which, with low views of inspiration,
made the human element to predominate, and gave
an impulse to Pelagianism,7 and to Nestorianism.
But, on the other hand, the eloquence of Chrysostom
never roamed into those wild extravagances of
fantastic allegories, which blemished the homilies of
Origen, and undermined the historical foundation of
Holy Scripture itself.8
3 Montfaucon, tom. xiii. pp. 99, 126. Neander, p. 112.
4 See on Acts, Horn. 31, and on Matt. Horn. 17, and Tom. v. p. 29 ;
and as to the custom of applauding in Churches, see above, vol. ii.
pp. 14, 15. 6 Horn. 30 in Acta Apost.
6 Cp. Montfaucon, tom. xiii. p. 127. See below, pp. 139, 140.
7 Neander, Life of Chrysostom, p. 34.
8 Chrysostom, like Augustine, did not neglect the figurative system of

Chrysostom as a Preacher in a great City ; to the upper 131
classes.
On this solid exegetical basis Chrysostom built a
superstructure of sound moral teaching, which did
not expend itself in vague generalities, but applied
itself with wonderful vivacity and vigour to deal with
popular errors and vices of the day. Events of public
interest, the cares and occupations, the recreations and
amusements, of social and domestic life, have a place
in the cosmical panorama which is surveyed by the
Preacher from the pulpit. The Court, its splendours,
its follies, and its vices ; the magnificent costume of
the Emperor in his golden car of state ; its purple
curtains, and precious stones ; the royal cortege
and equipage, and armed cavalcade ; 3 the brilliant
costume of the courtiers — all these are displayed to the
audience, and moral lessons are drawn from them.
The wealth of the princely palaces, their furniture,
statues, and pictures ; the costly attire of their in
mates ; the retinues of fair slaves in brilliant attire ;
the luxury of their banquets ; the musical concerts
with which they were enchanted ; the aromatic per
fumes with which they were refreshed — these are not
forgotten.1 In a word, the brilliant magnificence and
sumptuous voluptuousness of the scenes he describes
are such as might be supposed fo be drawn from an
Arabian seraglio, or from a Persian Paradise.
These were pictures of the nobler and wealthier
classes ; but the humbler and poorer were not for
gotten by him.

interpretation, but made a sober use of it. See, for example, tom. iii.
p. 283. Cp. Neander, Life of Chrysostom, pp. 29—34, and Water-
land, Preface to Scripture Vindicated, vi. pp. 18 — ;20.
9 See i. 117 ; iii. 17 ; iv. 447 ; vi. 295. See Montfaucon, xiii. p. 192,
who cites these passages.
1 Tom. vii. 533. Montfaucon, xiii. pp. 192, 193.
K 2

132 Chrysostom as a Preacher to the middle classes and
the poor.
The vast multitude of his hearers were entertained
by other delights in those two great capitals. The
immense hippodrome, the frenzied excitement of
the rival partisans at the race-course, which lay
open to thousands of spectators from the roofs of
the neighbouring houses ; 2 the athletic and gym
nastic games in the arena ; the sensual allurements of
the theatre,3 and the dissolute scenes there enacted,
by which the virtue of many was corrupted, and the
happiness of many fond parents was destroyed, were
not beyond the range of the Preacher's view, but were
pressed into his service ; even the rope-dancers,
jugglers, conjurors, fortune-tellers, buffoons in the
streets, mingled with grave philosophers, with long
beard, staff, and cloak, were grouped together in his
homiletical sketches ; the mountebanks, tossing up
knives in rapid succession into the air, and catching
them by the handle ; or balancing poles on their fore
heads, and setting little children to wrestle on the tops
of them 4 — all these gave occasions for enlarging on
the wonderful pains which men take to acquire mean
arts for amusing others, and for their applause, and
for gaining a little money in this world ; and the skill
they display in those arts is contrasted with the
carelessness of most men, and their indifference and
lack of zeal to please God, and to win His approval,
and for their own everlasting salvation.
The marvellous fulness of Chrysostom's scriptural
knowledge, and his extraordinary dexterity in apply
ing it, made it almost seem as if the Author of Scrip
ture Himself was addressing those vast multitudes
whom the preacher earnestly desired to save. And
the fervour of his imagination, the liveliness of his
2 Chrys. xiii. p. 193, Montf. 3 vii. pp. 422—780. 4 ii. p. 332.

Chrysostom's moral, spiritual, and intellectual gifts as a 133
Preacher.
fancy, and the dramatic versatility of his style, in which
he engaged his hearers in dialogues with himself in
a rapid interchange of questions and answers between
them and the preacher, gave an extraordinary charm
to his discourses, which they who perhaps saw them
selves portrayed by them, and felt themselves re
proved by them, would neither be willing to resent,
nor able to resist.5
But it was not only by such qualities as these that
the eloquence of Chrysostom commended itself to the
people of Antioch and Constantinople ; it was by its
practical good sense, and overflow of Christian love.
It has been said by one ' who has done excellent
service to Chrysostom's memory, that while, among
the Fathers of the Church, Augustine represents most
fully the spirit of St. Paul, S. Chrysostom dis
plays that of St. John — by exuberance of Christian
Charity. But Chrysostom manifested not only the
contemplative love of St. John, but the practical
energy of St. Peter. Both these characteristics were
fruits of divine grace in a naturally fervid tempera
ment, and of his own position as a preacher to thou-

5 The words of the Benedictine Editor (tom. i. Praef.) on the cha
racter of Chrysostom's eloquence may be added here : — " Whether pre
viously prepared or unprepared, he was always master of his subject,
and exercised a wonderful power of persuasion, with a never-failing flow
of words, and infinite felicity of invention and succession of imagery.
He understood the hearts of his people, and delighted them with things
by which many are displeased. He brought tears from their eyes at
will ; he reproved and corrected their vices, and confirmed their faith ;
he refuted Jews and heretics, and was frequently interrupted by the
rapturous applause of his hearers, and gained for himself the title of the
Preacher with the mouth of gold." See also Bingham, Antiquities, xiv. 4,
and Dupin, there quoted, on the eloquence of Chrysostom.
6 Neander, Life of Chrysostom, p. 6. Cp. Neander, Church History,
iv. 477—488, and iii. 171, 304, 359, 374, 375.

1 34 His view of Christianity in its relation to Society.
sands of immortal souls in two of the greatest cities
of the world.
His own spiritual temperament was in favour of
Monasticism 7 and Celibacy,8 and he is eloquent in
praise of both. But experience of life in populous
cities led him to qualify his earlier language in both
these respects.9 He deplores the fact that Chris
tianity was supposed by some to have divided human
life into two distinct societies, one the religious life
for celibates and monks,1 the other the secular life
for the rest of mankind, who were supposed to be
exempt from religious obligations. He took a nobler
view. Christianity was the salt to season, and the
leaven to leaven, the whole of human society. He
is earnest in his exhortations to Parents to encourage
their sons to marry.2 He entertained, as we have
seen, a high estimate of the dignity of the Christian
Priesthood, and of the holiness of the Christian
Church ¦ and he is urgent in his exhortations to con
stant attendance at public worship in the Church,
and to frequent Communion.3 But he earnestly
exhorts every man to assert for himself the dignity,
and to discharge faithfully the duties, of a Christian
Priest in his own family ; so that every house "
of the city may become a Church, not indeed by
7 In one of his earlier works he compared a Monk to a King (i. 116),
and gave the preference to the former. See his reply to those who
censure Monasticism, i. 45, 46.
s See his Work de Virginitate, i. 268.
9 Neander, Life of Chrysostom, pp. 59—63, 71.
1 See iii. 278, 286, 353, and in Heb. vii. and 1 Cor. vi., the passages
quoted by Neander, Life, p. 63.
2 See his Sermons on Marriage, iii. 193, 211—228, on 1 Cor. vii. 2 ;
iii. 297, 382, 383. 3 Neander, Life, p. 320.
4 De Cruce et Latrone, ii. 404 ; de Anna, iv. § 6 ; iv. 738, ed. Montf. ;
and Neander, Life of Chrys., pp. 62, 63, 207, 208, 209, 211, 332.

His view of domestic and personal religion — On daily 135
reading of Scripture.
the ministry of the Sacraments in it, but by daily
domestic worship, and daily reading of the Scrip
tures5 by the Master of it, even though a man of
business. Yes, and because he is a man of business,
he ought to consecrate it to God, and pray for a
blessing on it, together with his wife and children
and servants. In all these appeals his motive power
was Love. And while he lays great stress on the
regular' use of all the divinely appointed means of
grace — Prayer, private, domestic, and public, Holy
Scripture, and Sacraments, and on the duties of Alms
giving and Fasting — he represents all these as vain,
if done with outward formalism, and not from a vital
spring of faith working by love, in the discharge of
the common duties of piety and charity in daily life;6
The following is a specimen of his frequent exhor
tations to constant study of the Scriptures : — "I exhort.
and will never cease to exhort you, not only to listen
diligently to what you hear in Church, but also to
give yourselves constantly to the reading of the Scrip
tures. Let no one put me off with the idle excuse, ' I *
am busy with mercantile affairs, I am engaged in trade;
it is not for such people as I am to read the Bible, but
for those who have bidden adieu to the world.' O
man, what words are these! It is not for you to read the
Bible, because you are busy ! Why, your business is the
very reason why you, above all men, ought to read it.
You, who are tossed about with worldly cares, have
special need of its help. You will receive deadly
wounds from the devil, unless you have the spiritual
5 i. 737, and Homil. 29 in Genes., and iii. 304. Neander, Life, pp. 205,
211, 219, 221. Chrysostom is specially eloquent and emphatic on the
duty of every one to study daily the Scriptures, which he describes as
the divine medicines for all diseases of the soul.
6 See Neander, pp. 310, 320, 327, 347.

136 Antioch — its spiritual associations .
armour which only the Bible can give. No one can
be saved without it. Artisans have their tools, and
they have them always at hand, their hammers, their
anvil, their tongs. Your tools are in the Bible ; you
cannot work without it. Do not tell me that the Bible
is hard to be understood ; it was mercifully ordered
by the Holy Ghost, that it should be written by pub
licans and fishermen, in order that it might be com
posed in a simple style intelligible by all, in all things
necessary for salvation." 7
He refers to the example of the Ethiopian Trea
surer reading the Bible in his chariot .(Acts viii. 28).
No time or place isunfit for the study of God's Word.8
There was much in Chrysostom's position at Antioch
which gave a powerful influence to his spiritual energy.
Antioch was the well-spring of missionary life to the
Gentile world. There Paul and Barnabas had been
ordained to the Apostleship of the heathen.9 There
the disciples were first called Christians.1 There St.
Peter probably,'and S. Ignatius2 certainly, the dis
ciple of St. John and Martyr, had presided over the
Church as Bishop. There was the grave of the holy
martyr Babylas, celebrated in the history of Julian.3
The most memorable event during Chrysostom's
1 Homil. 3, in Luke xvi. , de Lazaro. A long Catena of passages from
Chrysostom's work on the indispensable duty of continual study of the
Bible by all classes of society, in private and in families, may be seen
in Archbishop Ussher's valuable Treatise de Sacris Vemaculis, Lond.
1690, pp. 33 — 50. Cp. Lardner's Credibility, Works, vol. ii. pp. 609,
610, for an English translation of some of these.
8 iv. 351. 9 Acts xiii. 1 — 3. ' Acts xi. 26.
2 The authority of Chrysostom in favour of the Seven Ignatian
Epistles has been successfully appealed to by Bp. Pearson, Vindic.
Ignat. cap. ii. pt. 2, p. 205. Chrysostom delivered a homily upon
Ignatius, 'ii. 592.
3 Above, vol. ii. p. 15. Chrysostom delivered a homily on his
memory, vol. ii. p. 536.

Riot at Antioch — Chrysostom's sermons " On the 137
Statues."
ministry at Antioch was a riot, caused by the levy
of excessive taxation on the City by the Emperor
Theodosius, in A.D. 387, for the defrayal of the ex
penses of the celebration of the fifth year of his elder
son Arcadius, and of his own tenth year, and of the
war against the usurper Maximus in the West.
The populace vented its fury by tearing down the
statues of the Emperor, and even of his beloved wife,
now no longer living, Flaccilla, and by dragging them
in contumely through the streets.
The sedition was quelled by the Prefect of the City,
who sent intelligence of the outrage to Theodosius ;
and the rage of the citizens was succeeded by panic
alarms, and by forebodings of the severe punishment
by which it would be avenged.
During that interval of suspense Chrysostom de
livered twenty-one Sermons, entitled "On the Statues,"*
in the second year after his ordination as priest.
They are interesting specimens of the practical
manner in which he made use of public events for the
improvement of his hearers in Christian morality.
The City was stunned by dread of the Emperor's
wrath. News was brought from Constantinople that
Theodosius had threatened to disfranchise Antioch,
and to transfer the honour of the metropolis to Lao-
dicea, and even to reduce the city to ashes. Many,
who had never come to the church before, now
flocked to it,6 and expressed their sorrow by tears, and
in special litanies.6
Chrysostom endeavoured to raise their minds up
ward, from dread of the Emperor's wrath, to an
4 Eis robs arBptdvTas. They are contained in the Second Volume of
the Benedictine Edition. 5 Horn. iv. vi. xvii.
6 Sozomen, vii. 23.

138 Panic at Antioch — Chrysostom's Sermons.
apprehension of God's righteous anger for their sins,
and to meditations on the future eternal punishment
which they would incur, unless they repented and
amended their lives. The sins with which he spe
cially deals, are blasphemy, swearing, self-indulgence,
unmercifulness to the poor • and he encourages them,
if they repent, to have faith in God's providence
and mercy, which would deliver the faithful and
obedient from death eternal.
But he warned them that fasting and tears will
be of no avail without holiness of life.
In the third homily he mentions that Flavian, their
Bishop, had left Antioch on a journey to the Emperor,
in order to intercede for the City, although he was
old and infirm, and it was winter, and his only
sister was lying on her death-bed.
It appears that many of the rioters were summoned
before the tribunal of the imperial Magistrates at
Antioch,7 and were scourged and tortured ; and that
many of the citizens had fled in alarm from the city
to the mountains. Many rumours were current, which
announced terrible calamities to those who remained
in it, and almost the whole population was preparing
to leave it. Chrysostom encouraged them to remain,
and to put their trust in God. He preached to them
concerning Paul in prison,8 and on his greater joy
and glory in suffering tribulation for Christ than in
working miracles.
The seventeenth of these homilies was preached
when the two Commissioners, Ellebutius and Caesa-
rius, despatched by the Emperor, had arrived. The
city was disfranchised, the halls of commerce, public
baths, and theatres were closed, and many of the
1 See Horn. xiii. " Horn. xvi.

Theodosius, appeased by Flavian, relents — Homilies on 139
St. Matthew.
ringleaders were cast into prison, and the names of
many others were publicly posted up in tables
of proscription. Chrysostom comforted them with
the assurance that they had not suffered loss by ex
clusion from the theatres ; and that the true dignity
of Antioch consisted, not in being the metropolis of
Syria, but in being the City where the disciples
were first called Christians,9 and which had sent relief
in a famine to the Saints at Jerusalem.1
In the twenty -first homily the aspect of affairs was
changed ; the storm had blown over, and clear sky
appeared. The Bishop of Antioch, Flavian, had
returned from Constantinople. He had made a
pathetic appeal to the Emperor ; 2 and after humbly
imploring his clemency, had reminded him of his own
future account to the Judge of all, Who said, " If ye
forgive, ye shall be forgiven." 3 Theodosius was
passionate, but placable. He granted the Bishop's
petition, and spared the City. Happy would it have
been for Theodosius, if the sedition of Thessalonica
had afterwards ended in the same way as the riot
at Antioch ; and that he had then had at his side a
Flavian instead of a Rufinus, when he was about to
give orders for the terrible massacre in Thessalonica.
Flavian returned to his people in the early spring, and
spent a joyful Easter with them.
The ninety homilies on St. Matthew were delivered
by Chrysostom at Antioch.4 Thomas Aquinas said
that he had rather have composed those homilies than

9 Horn. xvii. 7 Acts xi. 28, 29.
2 Sozomen, vii. 23. 3 Luke vi. 37.
4 They fill the Seventh Volume of the Benedictine Edition. An
excellent separate critical edition of them has been published by Dr.
Field, three vols., Camb. 1837.

140 Chrysostom, the. fountain of Biblical exposition to the East.
have been master of Paris.5 As has been already
observed, the Preacher generally began with an ex
position of the sacred text; and he then devoted the
rest of his discourse to a practical application of it.
The Benedictine editor of his works does not scruple
to say 6 that there is no book extant, which contains
so many precepts of Christian morality as these
homilies on St. Matthew. In none of his composi
tions did Chrysostom display such varied powers of
invention, eloquence, and sagacity in the formation of
moral character, and in the eradication of vice, and
in directions for the guidance of Christian households.
The eighty-eight homilies on St. John,7 delivered
also at Antioch, are rather a running Commentary
on the Gospel, than an elaborate adaptation of it to
ethical uses.
He also delivered at Antioch his homilies on the
Epistles to the Romans,8 the Corinthians,9 the Gala-
tians,1 the Ephesians,3 to Timothy,3 to Titus,4 and
on the Acts of the Apostles.5
By such works Chrysostom not only spoke to his
own age, in his own words, but he ministered a sup
ply of spiritual life which has flowed in the expository
teaching of the Eastern Church to the present day.
All succeeding Greek Expositors (such as Theophy-
lact, Euthymius, CEcumenius, and the framers of
Catenas, as they are called) drank at this well-spring.
Chrysostom was to the East what Augustine was to
the West — the Fountain of Scriptural Exposition.
5 Papir. Masson de Rom. Pontif. lib. vi. 6 xiii. p. 128.
1 Tom. viii. 8 Tom. ix. 9 Tom. x.
1 Tom. x. p. 655. 3 Tom. xi. 3 Tom- xi_ p- j4g_
4 Tom. xi. p. 728.
5 Tom. ix. But the greater part of these were delivered at Constanti
nople (xiii. p. 138), as were the homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Specimens of his oratory : the dispersion of the Jews a 141
proof of the truth of Christianity .
At Antioch also he delivered his homilies on some
books of the Old Testament — on Genesis, sixty-six
in number,6 and on the Psalms,7 and on portions of
Isaiah ; 8 but these were written before his ordination
to the Priesthood.9
It is almost impossible to give to the reader an
adequate conception of the characteristics of Chry
sostom's homiletical powers in an English transla
tion ; so much of their excellence being derived from
the peculiar grace and richness of his language, and
from those delicate idiomatic niceties in Greek which
can hardly be reproduced in another tongue.
Let me however be pardoned for one or two at
tempts. The following is from a homily on the
eighth Psalm. He is proving that the dispersion of
the Jews is an argument in favour of Christianity.1
" The Jews formerly dwelt in one country, but
are now dispersed through all. If you ask the reason
of this, none can be given but that they crucified
Christ. Formerly they were sometimes carried cap
tive to one land, as to Babylon, and for a few years.
But now their exile is interminable. And if you ask
them, Why they crucified Christ ? they will answer,
Because He was an impostor and a juggler. Yes,
but you Jews ought therefore to have been honoured
for your zeal, and your territory to have been enlarged,
for doing an act well-pleasing to God. For he who
destroys impostors and jugglers takes away enemies
of God ; and he who takes away God's enemies is
entitled to honour. Phinehas, who destroyed a harlot,
received the reward of an everlasting priesthood from
God for his zeal. You ought to have received a greater
'• Tom. iv. 7 Tom. v. and vi. 8 Tom. vi.
9 Tillemont, xi. 90. Montf. xiii. 127. 1 Tom. v. p. 77.

142 His inferences from the present condition of the Jews.
recompense for destroying a false prophet. And yet
you are now homeless outcasts and vagabonds in all
nations. And why ? Because you have killed your
Protector and Benefactor, the Teacher of the Truth.
If He had been a deceiver, and if He, Who declared
Himself to be God, had not been God ; if He, Who
claimed for Himself God's glory, had claimed that
which was not His due, then you, by destroying Him,
would have been more illustrious than Phinehas and
Samuel, who showed their zeal for God's honour, and
in defence of His law.
"You, who are now free from idolatry, are suffer
ing far more severe punishment, than when you were
guilty of that sin, and than when you sacrificed your
sons and daughters to false gods. And there seems
to be no end of your miseries ; you are exiles
and wanderers by sea and by land, having no
home; bereft of your country and priesthood, and
driven far from what you once enjoyed. You are now
execrated by all, and persecuted by all. Formerly
when you were guilty of sin, there was some respite of
your punishment. When you were worshippers of
Baal-peor, when you adored the golden calf, and
sacrificed your children to idols, and committed these
abominations though God was then with you in signs
and wonders, yet you were pardoned and spared. God
gave you Moses and the Prophets, in Egypt and at
Babylon, to console you. But now, when you do not
see the Red Sea divided before your eyes, and the
flinty rock gushing out with water, and when you are
more virtuous in other respects than your fathers were,
you have no Prophets to comfort you, and you are
chastised more severely than they ever were. And
yet if Christ were a deceiver, you are now entitled to

Other specimens — Sermons from birds ; sparrows and dogs. 143
special praise for zeal in putting Him to death. And
God, Who is infinitely just, has ever dealt with you
according to your deserts. Is it not therefore clear,
that you have committed a sin far more heinous
than any committed by your forefathers ? And what
sin is that ? The Crucifixion of Christ. Repent of
that sin, and you will be pardoned — but not till then!'
The following2 may serve as specimens of his
manner in availing himself of trivial, every-day objects
as illustrations of Christian truths, and, as occasions
for spiritual instruction : —
" Why are we encompassed by snares in this world ?
Why ? because we are like birds, and ought to fly aloft
if we wish to escape them. The Devil is a fowler,
and tries to ensnare us ; but if we soar upward in a
spiritual life, we shall be safe. And by flying upward
we shall have a true estimate of earthly things, just as
when we mount a hill, and look down on the city, the
buildings seem small, and the men in the streets like
ants ; so by heavenly cogitations you will be freed
from doting on worldly honour and wealth, and will
dwell on the things of Eternity." 3
" You say that you are exempt from this or that.
vice. Very well ; but perhaps you are guilty of some
other sin. Are you then safe ? No. The sparrow
which is caught in a snare has its wings at liberty,
but its foot is held fast in the springe, and the freedom
of its wings does it no good. It is a doomed bird ;
and you are like it." 4
" You would be very much offended if any one were
2 I have had the pleasure and benefit of reading a MS. lecture on
Chrysostom by my dear brother the Bishop of St. Andrews. This and
the two following extracts are abridged from that lecture.
3 ii. 182. 4 ix. 234.

144 Lessons from dogs.
to call you dog. Yes. But believe me, there are many
among you who take more care of their hounds than
of their souls. They do not allow their dogs to be
over-fed, lest their scent or speed should suffer from
surfeiting; they train them to be sober, temperate,
philosophical, and almost Christian. The well-trained
dog, when he has caught his prey, though he may be
almost starved, will not touch a bit of it, but brings
it to his master. Will you learn wisdom from your
dog? Govern your appetites,5 as you train your
dog. Be as obedient to your heavenly Master as your
dog is to you." 5 ix. 294.

CHAPTER XIX.
The Eastern Church — 5. Chrysostom's place in Church
History ; his work at Constantinople as Archbishop
of that see ; his banishment, death, and character.
On Sept. 17, a.d. 397, the Archiepiscopal throne of
Constantinople became vacant by the death of Nec
tarius, who had succeeded Gregory Nazianzen in A.D.
38 1.1 There were many candidates for the vacant
see ; 2 but the faithful members of the Church earnestly
entreated the Emperor Arcadius to nominate a person
who would not consult his own interest, but promote
the welfare of the flock.
The choice of the clergy and people, it is asserted
by Socrates and Sozomen,3 fell upon Chrysostom, and
the Emperor, they say, approved the selection ; but the
actual appointment was made in a remarkable manner.
The avaricious, haughty, hypocritical, and cruel
Rufinus had been assassinated by Gainas the Goth,
the ally of Stilicho,4 on Nov. 27, A.D. 395, and had been
succeeded by his rival in power, and more than his
equal in iniquity, the Eunuch Eutropius.5
1 Above, vol. ii. p. 330. 2 Pallad. Vit. Chrys. p. 42.
3 Socr. vi. 2. Soz. viii. 2.
* Gibbon, vol. v. chap. xxix. p. 155.
5 Ibid. chap. xxix. p. 160, and chap, xxxii. pp. 375 — 391.
VOL. IV. L

146 Chrysostom Archbishop of Constantinople — Contrast
of Constantinople and Rome.
Eutropius had gained the favour of the Court by
extricating Arcadius from a proposed matrimonial
connexion with the daughter of Rufinus,6 and by com
mending to his affections Eudoxia, who was the
daughter of Bauto, a General of the Franks in the ser
vice of Rome, and who was distinguished by beauty,
intelligence, and passionate impetuosity, and acquired
an absolute control and command over the mind
and acts of her imperial consort, Arcadius.
Eutropius had been occasionally among the hearers
of Chrysostom, and, to his great credit, commended
him to Arcadius ; and in order to effect his removal
from Antioch, which would have been vehemently
opposed by the people, and to ensure his elevation to
the See of Constantinople, persuaded the Emperor to
send a despatch to the Governor of Syria, with in
structions to convey him to the imperial city.7 He
effected this by an artifice ; by which he decoyed
Chrysostom from Antioch, and then transported him
to Constantinople.
Notwithstanding the strenuous opposition of the
Patriarch of Alexandria, Theophilus,8 Chrysostom was
consecrated and enthroned, Feb. 26, A.D. 398.
Constantinople was at this time, if we may so speak,
at the antipodes of Rome in the spiritual world.
At Rome the Western Emperor was almost a
cypher ; at Constantinople the Eastern Emperor
was almost everything. In the same year as Chry
sostom was raised to the archiepiscopal throne in
the Capital of the Eastern Empire, Anastasius was
raised to the Roman Pontificate. Anastasius issued
6 Gibbon, vol. v. chap. xxix. p. 147.
7 Pallad. Vit. Chrys. c. 5. Socr. vi. 2. Soz. viii. 2. Theodoret,
?• 27. 8 Sozomen, viii. 2.

Comparison of Rome and Constantinople — Providential 147
advancement of Chrysostom — His predecessor Nectarius.
his edicts far and wide in the West, as Siricius had
done before him, and few cared to gainsay them.
But the Patriarch of Constantinople was in a very
different position. His see was comparatively a new
one. It was regarded with special jealousy by the
Patriarch of Alexandria, Theophilus, who had at
tempted to resist the consecration of Chrysostom,
and to place a Priest of his own Church, Isidore, in
the vacant room of Nectarius,9 and was forced by
Eutropius to join in consecrating Chrysostom, whom
he afterwards pursued with unrelenting acrimony.
In a word, while the Pope was hardly less than
Sovereign at Rome, the Eastern Emperor claimed to
be more than Patriarch of Constantinople.
We may recognize the working of divine Providence
in the elevation and consecration of such a person as
John Chrysostom at Constantinople, by the agency of
the Eunuch Eutropius governing his master Arcadius.
It brought out in bold prominence and vigorous
energy the inner spiritual life of the Church of Christ
as independent of the support, and as antagonistic to
the usurpations, of the secular power. It led, in a
word, to a courageous protest from the most eloquent
of Christian Fathers against what in later times is
commonly known as the Erastian policy.
Chrysostom's position had been rendered still more
difficult by the character and administration of his
predecessor, Nectarius.
Nectarius, like S. Ambrose, had been raised to the
Episcopate from the ranks of the Laity.1 But this was
the'only thing in which he bore any resemblance to
the valiant Bishop of Milan. He owed his elevation
to the will of the Emperor ; and he carried his ob-
'' Socr. vi. 2. ' Above, vol. ii. p. 330.
L 2

148 Abolition of the office of Penitentiary by Nectarius —
On Penitential Discipline.
sequiousness to such a degree of adulation of power,
that his imperial patron complained of his servility,
and declared that he had never known any Bishop
but Ambrose,2 by whom, when guilty of a heinous
sin, he was resisted and rebuked, and whom he thanked
for his loyalty and courage.
Under such an Archbishop, Church discipline lan
guished. The abolition by him of the office of the
Penitentiary 8 Priest at Constantinople, in consequence
2 Above, vol. iii. p. 5j, where he is contrasted with Nectarius.
3 See Socr. v. 19, who deplores the change, and Soz. vii. 16, who
laments the laxity of the times. As to the Penitential Discipline of the
ancient Church, see Hooker, VI. iv., who traces its history down to the
time of Chrysostom's Episcopate : —
Public Confession is recommended to penitents by Tertullian * and
by Cyprian -|- and S . Ambrose,.! with a view of obtaining the benefit oi
the prayers of the Church. In the third century, as it seems, § in order to
obviate the scandals that arose " from the multitude of public penitents,"
the Greek Church appointed some one Presbyter to be a Penitentiary in
each church to receive voluntary Confessions in -private, with a view to
public penance, if requisite, and consequent absolution by the Bishop.
This office was abolished by Nectarius, Patriarch of Constantinople, in
the latter part of the fourth century, || and the successor of Nectarius,
S. Chrysostom, in several places jrives as his counsel to penitents to
confess their sins to God; but disclaims any intention or desire of
making them confess to man. At that time, Confession of secret sins to
God alone was the practice of the Church. Public offenders were put
to public penance, butthe-Confession of secret sins was left to the dis
cretion and conscience of those -who committed them. **
If private Confession and private Absolution (however desirable and
requisite in certain cases) were, as some allege, necessary to the spiritual
* Tertullian de Pcenitent. c. 9 and c. 10. Bingham, Book XVII.
chap. iii.
t S. Cyprian de Lapsis, c. 14.
X S. Ambrose de Pcenitentii, ii. 7, " Quid vereris apud bonum
Dominum tuas iniquitates fateri?" and ii. 10, "Fleat pro te Mater
Ecclesia ; amat Christus ut pro uno multi rogent. "
§ See Mr. Keble on Hooker, VI. iv. 9.
|| Socrates, H. E. v. 19. Sozomen, vii. 16. Cp. Hooker, VI. iv.
** Marshall, p. 44. Bingham, Book XV. chap. viii. sec. 6.

Nectarius and Chrysostom— Abbot and Laud. 149
of the scandals to which it gave rise, seems to have
been produced by a feeling which (in Augustine's
words) is ashamed of the bandage of a wound, while it
cares little for the wound itself.
It is not surprising that the vices of the Eastern
Court and Aristocracy had reached a.dangerous height
under so feeble a Sovereign as Arcadius, so profligate
a Minister as Eutropius, and so lax a Bishop as Nec
tarius. The moral condition of the Clergy and Laity at
Constantinople after the Episcopate of Nectarius,
lasting for sixteen years, called for keen vigilance
and energetic correction from his successor ; it was
also a serious hindrance to the successful exercise of
that discipline, which was urgently required by it.
The stern and uncompromising inflexibility, the rigid
asceticism, the heroic courage, ardent enthusiasm, and
vehement impetuosity of the new Archbishop dis
qualified him in a certain sense for the task which was
before him. Chrysostom, succeeding Nectarius, was
like a foreshadowing of what the Church of England
saw in the seventeenth century, when William Laud
(in A.D: 1633) followed George Abbot in the Archi
episcopal See of Canterbury. Chrysostom was a
martyr to the cause of Church discipline.4
health of the soul, it must be acknowledged that the Church of God
was in a state of spiritual sickness from the time of the Apostles for
1200 years ; it was not till a.d. 1215, that private Confession was made
obligatory by the Church of Rome, ft and then only once a year.
4 "That temper in the Archbishop (Abbot)," says Clarendon (i. 88),
"whose house was a sanctuary to the most eminent of the factious
party, left his successor a very difficult work to do, to reform and reduce
++ At the Fourth Lateran Council, Canon 21, Concil. ed. Labbe, xi.
p. 172. Private Confession was not enforced in the twelfth cen
tury, see Gratian, in Jus Canonicum, Dist. de Pcenitentijl, c. 79.

150 The Empress Eudoxia — The Earthquake — Chrysostom's
Sermon.
At first, things went on smoothly. The Empress
Eudoxia joined the love of worldly pomp and pleasure
with a fondness for the excitement of a splendid
religious ritual ; and the new Archbishop was not
unwilling to encourage her pious zeal.
In the first year of Chrysostom's Episcopate a
terrible Earthquake shook the imperial city, and pro
duced general consternation. Many quitted it in alarm.
Some supposed that the end of the World was at hand.5
The Empress was inspired with religious awe, and
invited the Archbishop to join her in a penitential
and intercessory service, and in a sacred procession
from the " great Church " of the City to the " Marty-
rium " or Church of St. Thomas, nine miles from Con
stantinople, and in the reverential transportation of
relics of Martyrs to that place, and to preach to the
people on the occasion. Chrysostom was also fired
with religious enthusiasm, which burst forth from his
lips with all the Asiatic fervour of an extemporaneous
and ecstatic address.6 "What shall I say? What shall
I speak ? I exult, I am mad ; 7 but such madness is
better than wisdom. I am wafted aloft and in
toxicated with spiritual rapture. What shall I say ?
a Church into order that had been so long neglected, and that was filled
by many weak and more wilful Churchmen."
5 Augustine, de Urbis Excidio (vol. vi. p. 105 1 ), mentions a similar
alarm produced by terrific phenomena at Constantinople, A.D. 396,
which led to a similar demonstration. As to the expectation of the
End of the World, see Chrys. xiii. 191.
6 This and some other Sermons of Chrysostom were discovered
(some say in a monastery of Mount Athos ; others assert, in the Isle of
Patmos) after the publication of the Editions of Sir Henry Savile
and Morell, and are contained in vol. xii. of the Benedictine Edition.
See there also vol. xiii. p. 232.
7 The utterance of these words was afterwards made one of the
charges against Chrysostom ; see below, p. 173.

On reverence for Martyrs — On Miracles — The Emperor 151
Arcadius.
What shall I first describe ? The virtue of the
Martyrs, the alacrity and zeal of the Empress,8 the
concourse of Princes, the fury of the Evil one, the
discomfiture of fiends, the triumph of the Church, the
miracles of the Crucified, the glory of the Father, the
grace of the Holy Spirit ? "
He does not exhort to pray to the Martyrs, but
expresses a hope that they will join in the prayers of
the people for the Empress, that she may have the
blessing of children and of children's children.
In this oration he shows his reverence for the mortal
remains of Martyrs ; and in a homily at Antioch he
mentioned Miracles as frequently wrought 'by the
holy Martyrs," especially at their tombs.9 He had no
doubt that the interposition which put a stop to the
rebuilding of the Temple at Jerusalem by the Emperor
Julian was miraculous.1 But, as has been before ob
served,2 in other places he speaks of miracles as having
ceased.3 An explanation has been already offered of
this seeming discrepancy.
But to return to the procession.
The next day the Emperor Arcadius came with a
splendid retinue. He laid aside his diadem"; and his
body-guard, having deposited their shields and spears,
joined with him in paying their devotions.4 After they
had retired, Chrysostom again addressed the people,
and told them not to pray to the Martyrs, but to
emulate them ; to imitate their courage, zeal, faith,
8 Tom. xii. 331. » ii. 555. Cp. ii. 93, 645 ; xiii. 182.
1 v. 271 ; vii. 47. See above, vol. ii. p. 173.
'' Above, vol. iii. p. 156.
3 i. 464; iii. 64, 65, 76; iv. 411 ; vii. 375 ; viii. 134, 427 ; ix. iooj
x. 257 ; xi. 387, 591 ; and see Lardner's Credibility, ii. 616, 617,
where these passages are translated into English.
4 "<"¦ P- 335 * xi"- P- '35-

152 Eutropius flees for sanctuary to Chrysostom : his Sermon.
and disdain of all earthly things, and their ardent
desire for the things of Eternity. " We have not now,
as. they had, to encounter flames or wild beasts. But
we have flames within us ; we have wild beasts in our
hearts — lust, anger, envy, and other evil passions. Let
us wage war against them, that we may attain eternal
glory, by the mercy and grace of our Lord Jesus
Christ, through Whom and with Whom be glory to the
Father, with the Holy Spirit, now and for evermore."
In January, A.D. 399, Eutropius the Eunuch, then
High Chamberlain and Consul, who had been instru
mental in raising Chrysostom to the See of Constan
tinople,5 fell from his high eminence as rapidly as he
had risen to it.6
He incurred the charge of an insult to the Empress ;
and was sacrificed to the menaces of a rebel Ostro
goth, Tribigild, who demanded his life. Having fled
to Chrysostom for protection, and to the Church for
right of sanctuary (which he himself had proscribed
by means of an imperial edict), he was at first banished
to Cyprus, and afterwards thence recalled, and exe
cuted at Chalcedon.
These events gave occasion to one of Chrysostom's
most eloquent, and almost unpremeditated, discourses
on the vanity of all human greatness, and on the insta
bility of all earthly things ; which were illustrated 7
by the presence of the humbled favourite, crouching
beneath the altar in the Church, and supplicating for
protection from the indignation of his imperial Mas
ter, whom formerly he had ruled ; and having no
friend and protector left but the Bishop, who resisted
5 See above, p. 146.
6 Gibbon, vol. v. chap. xxix. p. 147, and chap, xxxii. pp. 375, 390.
1 Tom. iii. pp. 379—386.

Chrysostom's Sermon on Eutropius : on the Emperor 153
Theodosius.
the imperial demands by sheltering the suppliant in
the asylum of the Church, and who appealed to the
pity of the people in behalf of fallen greatness.
" Vanity of Vanities ! all is Vanity. Where now is
the pride of state, the pomp of office and luxury of
him who was lately lord of all ? Where the plaudits
of the City, the acclamations of the Games, the adu
lation of the spectators ? All, all are gone. A sud
den blast has swept off the leaves of the tree, which
is bare and stricken to the roots. All that earthly
grandeur has vanished like a dream. The shadow
has flitted away ; the bubble has burst. ' Vanity of
Vanities ! all is Vanity.' Let these words be inscribed
on our houses, in our markets, on the walls and
gates of our City."
He then appeals to Eutropius,and reminds him of his
own former exhortations, which had been treated with
scorn. " Thy friends who flattered thee have forsaken
thee, but the Church whom thou treatedst as an enemy
opens wide her arms to receive thee in her bosom."
"Do not think that I would reproach him or exult
over him (said the preacher, turning to the people).
No ; God forbid ! I look on him with compassion
and sorrow, and I invoke your sympathy for him, and
would persuade you by his example to cast away your
own love of earthly things') and to long and to labour
for those which are eternal ; and to learn a lesson of
forgiveness of injuries from God and His Church, and
to act in the spirit of Christ , Who prayed for His
murderers, ' Father, forgive them ; for they know not
what they do.' "
In January, A.D. 399, he preached on the festival of
Theodosius, probably Jan. 1 7, four years after his death.
The preacher showed his independence by proposing

154 On the Emperor Theodosius ; his victories — Zeal of
Eudoxia.
that great Emperor as a model for his son Arcadius,8
in the following words : —
"We are debtors to the blessed Theodosius, not
because he was an Emperor, but because he was a good
man ; we are debtors to him, not because he wore the
purple, but because he was clothed with Christ, and
with the panoply of spiritual arms — the breastplate of
righteousness, and was shod with the preparation of
the gospel of peace (Eph. vi. 15), and wore the helmet
of salvation, and wielded the sword of the Spirit.
" With these weapons he routed two tyrants — Maxi-
mus and Eugenius — the one without toil or bloodshed ;
the other by his prowess and his prayers.9 When the
two armies had engaged, and his own troops were
flying before the enemy, he leapt from his horse, and
laid his shield down on the ground, and knelt on his
knees and prayed to God for help. The plain became
a church ; his weapons were tears and prayers. Then
a tempest arose ; the winds blew furiously, and flung
the weapons of the enemy back upon themselves ;
some of their troops, who had breathed out fire
and slaughter against him, turned round and hailed
him Emperor, and delivered their leader bound into
his hands. Thus Theodosius was glorified, not only
by his victory, but by the manner of it. He conquered
by faith. Do not therefore suppose that he is dead ;
no, he is not dead, but sleepeth. For Christ says, 'He
that believeth on Me, though he were dead, yet shall
Tie live ; and he that liveth and believeth on Me shall
never die' (John xi. 25, 26)."
The Empress Eudoxia was zealous in promoting the
Catholic cause against Arianism, and helped the
Archbishop of Constantinople to check its progress
8 Tom. xii. 350 ; xiii. 235. 9 See above, vol. iii. pp. 62, 63.-

Chrysostom's championship for the Faith : his zeal 155
against Novatianism.
by means similar to those which had been adopted at
Milan by Ambrose — the singing of hymns ' written for
the purpose of instructing the people in the true faith.
Under the auspices of the Empress, Processions were
formed, which traversed the streets at midnight,
bearing silver Crosses and wax tapers, and excited the
devotion of the people.2
We shall see that Chrysostom contended nobly —
like his great predecessor Gregory Nazianzen at Con
stantinople — for the Catholic Faith against Arianism ;
especially in his struggle, which will hereafter be
related, against Gainas.
He also was strenuous in his efforts against the stern
sectarianism of the Novatians ; '" indeed, in his eager
desire for the conversion of those who were living in
sin, he incurred the charge of running into the con
trary extreme by such bold utterances as these:
" Thou hast sinned ten thousand times. Come to me,
and I will absolve thee." " No one (he says) is exempt
from sin for a single day ; but all who are truly
penitent will be received by Christ, if they come to the
Church " (he does not enjoin private confession) " and
mourn for their sins, and give alms, and relieve the
poor, and forgive their enemies, and own themselves
unprofitable servants."4 Perhaps also, though he
was a zealous champion of divine Grace; and boldly
asserted the absolute need of the regenerating and
sanctifying gifts of the Holy Spirit, he may, in his
character of a great ethical Teacher, and as an eloquent
1 Socr. vi. 8. Soz. viii. 8. Above, vol. iii. pp. 40, 80.
2 Socr. and Soz. ibid., where they give a history of antiphonal
smging in the Church since the times of Ignatius at Antioch, who (says
Socrates) learnt it in a Vision of Angels.
3 Tom. xiii. 133; and as to his resistance to other heresies, see ibid.
pp. 184—190. 4 Tom. xii. 335.

156 Chrysostom' s work of moral reform among the Clergy
— Virgins and Widows.
advocate of religious practice, have seemed sometimes
to approach the verge of Pelagian exaggerations of
the power of the human will. " We are virtuous or
wicked, not by nature, but by our own purpose.5 If
we will, we can shake off our sin.6 Satan cannot force
us to do evil ; nor will God force us to do good ; He
will not be served by slaves, but freely ; our salva
tion or our destruction depends on ourselves." 7
At the same time, he no less distinctly affirms that
" we cannot resist the slightest temptation without
divine help ; and that we cannot do the least good
without God's grace ; 8 God wills all men to be saved,
and gives grace freely to all ; " 9 and in one of his last
letters he expressed his antipathy to P'elagianism.1
Chrysostom did not come to Constantinople to
dazzle the eyes of the people by the splendour of reli
gious spectacles, nor to gain popular applause by
rhetorical effusions, but to do a serious work of internal
religious reformation.
He began with the Clergy. The enforcement on them
of abstinence from the natural use of Marriage was
bringing forth its fruits. Professed Virgins lived with
some of them under the name of sisters ; and even some
Virgins had received Clergymen to dwell with them
in the name of brothers. Chrysostom inveighed vehe
mently against these scandals,2 and thus incurred the
enmity of both.
He next addressed himself to the Widows of the
Church, some of whom, while professing sanctity, led
5 i. 83. Cp. x. 13. • i. 467 ; iii. 264 ; iv. 124.
7 i' 37^ ; ii. 320, 729 ' "«• 281. Some of these passages are quoted
and translated by Lardner, Credibility, ii. 618. Cp. Montfaucon, xiii.
179- 8 iii- 35 ; iv. 241, 569.
9 i- 21, 748 ; ii. 45 ; iv. 448 j v. 297 ; viii. 333 ; ix. 522.
1 iii. 577. 2 Pallad. Vit. p. 45. Cp. Chrys. i. p. 248.

Division of the Church into parties — Financial reforms 157
— Almsgiving — Reform of Monks.
luxurious lives. He censured them publicly, not
without severe animadversions on their immodest dress,
and on their attempts to conceal their age by specious
artifices ; and exhorted them to repent, or to marry
again, and not to bring discredit on the Church.3
Parties were formed on both sides. Noble and
opulent Widows were the leaders of the persecution
which afterwards broke out against him.4 Others, like
the illustrious and saintly Olympias, who afterwards
greatly comforted him by her liberality in his adversity,
were no less eager in his defence.
He also practised severe economy, and introduced
financial reforms in the administration of the revenues
of the Episcopate, and in the domestic economy of the
Episcopal palace ; and devoted the surplus thence
obtained to the foundation and endowment of Hos
pitals and Asylums for strangers.5
Among other necessary reforms, he did not fail to raise
his voice against degenerate Monks. There were two
classes of monastic brethren at Constantinople ; some
who were patterns of piety, and were employed by him
in missionary work among the Goths and Phoenicians ;
others who were indolent vagabonds and mendicant
impostors,6 and led dissolute lives, and brought con
tempt on their profession.7
He would not win the favour of the people of the
great City by flattery. On April 6, in the season of
Lent, and in the second year of his Episcopate,8 there
was a torrent of continual rain, and an alarm of a
general inundation. Penitential supplications and
3 Pallad.Vit. Chrys. p. 47. 4 Ibid. p. 14.
5 Ibid. p. 46. 6 Horn. 11 in Heb. tom. xii. pp. 117, 119.
7 Horn. 15 in Epist. ad Heb.
3 Tom. xiii. p. 134 ; tom. vi. p. 272.

158 Social Reforms — Call to repentance at Easter.
intercessory prayers were offered by him and his flock
in the Church of the Apostles. When Good Friday
came, there was a grand race in the Hippodrome ;
and on Easter Even the Theatres were open, and on
those days the Church was comparatively empty.
Chrysostom preached on Easter Day to the people,
who had come to the Church from the spectacles of
the preceding days.
" Is this to be borne patiently ? " he exclaimed. " I
appeal to you in the words of Almighty God to the
Hebrew nation, ' O my people, what have I done unto
thee ? and wherein have I wearied thee ?' (Micah vi. 3.)
' What iniquity have your fathers found in Me, that they
have gone far from me?' (Jer. ii. 5.) Is this, I say,
to be borne ? After so much teaching in successive
sermons, some of you have left us for the hippodrome,
others have gone to revel in bacchanalian orgies, and
here I sit down and mourn. Thou hast shown no
reverence for that holy day, in which the symbols of
our salvation are consummated. Even on Good
Friday, when thy Lord was being crucified, and Para
dise was opened, and the curse abolished, and sin
effaced, and the ancient war of ages was ended, and
God was reconciled to man ; aye, on that very day when
men ought to fast and confess their sins, and join in
prayer and thanksgiving for the blessings poured out
upon the world, then it was that thou didst leave the
Church, and the spiritual sacrifice, and the assembly of
thy brethren ; then it was that thou wert led captive
by the devil to those worldly spectacles. Is this, I
repeat, to be borne ? How can we hope to appease
the wrath of God ? For three days we had a deluge
of rain, sweeping everything before it, and snatching
the food from the mouths of the farmers, and laying

The Hippodrome and Theatre, at Constantinople. 159
prostrate their ripe crops ; and then Litanies went up
to heaven, and all the population streamed like a
winter's torrent to the Church of the Apostles. And
yet, after the short interval of a day, thou didst allow
thy soul to be carried away captive by vicious
passions ; and not content with the phrenzy of the
Circus, thou didst rush on the next day (being Easter
Even) to the Theatre ; running from the smoke into
the fire. Old men disgraced their hoar hairs ; young
men cast their youth headlong down a precipice;
fathers led their own sons to those gulfs of iniquity."
Chrysostom then describes the licentious scenes and
spectacles of the Theatre at Constantinople, especially
the impure songs and lascivious dances and gestures
of the harlot actresses.
"Can any one walk on coals," he exclaims, "and not
be burnt ? Can any one take . fire into his bosom,
and not scorch his clothes ? (Prov. vi. 26, 27.) So is
he who goeth after a strange woman. You have com
mitted adultery in your heart. In your impure
thoughts you have brought an adulteress into the
company of your own wife. From such things as
these come divorces and confusions in families ;
weariness of your own wives and children and servants,
and of your home. Yes, in your thoughts you have
had a harlot in your house. And how with these
lustful thoughts can you enter the Church and touch
that holy table ? While I am thus speaking, I see
some of you beating your foreheads, and I thank you
for this sign of your sorrow, and of your sympathy
with the wounds of your brethren.
" But you must do more than this. Do not tell me
that only a few of them are lost.
" Did not the Good Shepherd leave the ninety and

160 . Warnings of being repelled from Communion.
nine in the wilderness to seek the one ? Think of the
worth of each single soul. Each single soul is precious
in the sight of God and of Christ. For its sake
God made the world ; and furnished it, and gave Laws
to it, and worked many miracles. For its sake He
spared not His only-begotten Son. For every soul
Christ shed His blood. Think what a price was paid
for each, and haste and spare no pains to bring that
one lost soul back to the fold.
" But if you are remiss, I at least must be zealous ;
and I will use the power which God has given us for
edification, and not for destruction. If any one after
this warning falls away to the theatrical pestilence,
I will not administer to him the holy mysteries, or
suffer him to approach that holy table. I will sepa
rate him as a diseased sheep from the flock. I have
tried gentler means. A year has passed away since I
first came to this City, and I have never ceased to
exhort you on this matter. But remember, though we
have power both to bind and to loose, I do not
desire to cut off our brethren from the Church, but
I do desire to wipe off this reproach from it. Jews
and Gentiles now scoff at us for winking at sins. But
when we have corrected them, they will admire the
Church, and revere her laws." He then quotes St.
Paul's words in 2 Thess. iii. 14, 15 ; and adds, "As for
myself, I must mourn till this is done, although I
may be irksome to you, in order that I may be able
to stand before the dreadful Tribunal of the Judge.
Would to God, therefore, that the diseased may return
to us, and that they who are whole may be strength
ened, and that ye may attain eternal salvation, and
that we may rejoice together, and God be glorified,
now and for evermore. Amen."

Chrysostom a champion of Catholicity against Arianism 161
in Gainas.
But Chrysostom had other difficulties to encounter,
which demanded all his courage.
The despotic but servile Court of Constantinople
trembled before the leaders of the Goths, who under
the Emperor Valens had first been- suppliants, then
became colonists of the Empire, and afterwards were
its conquerors at Adrianople.9 Alaric, first a soldier
under Theodosius, then a generalissimo under Arca
dius, spread consternation in the East and West by
the desolation of Greece and capture of Rome. And
some few years before that time, the capital of the
East was menaced by the rebel Tribigild, to whom it
sacrificed the chamberlain Eutropius, and his more
formidable ally Gainas.
Arcadius in A.D. 400 preserved his throne by an
obsequious surrender to the demands of Gainas, who
was made Master-General of the Roman armies, and
filled Constantinople with his troops, and distributed
honours among his dependants with imperial autho
rity.1 Gainas imagined that the Archbishop would yield
to him with the same easy pliancy as the Emperor
of the East had done. But he found that Chry
sostom was not an Arcadius, but an Ambrose.2
Gainas asked that a Church of Constantinople should
be surrendered to him and his Arian followers. He
pleaded his services to the Crown, and claimed a
recognition of them. But Chrysostom told him plainly
that he had received an ample recompense, and
9 Above, vol. ii. pp. 270 — 273.
1 Socr. vi. 4 — 6. Soz. viii. 4. Theodoret, v. 32, 33. Zosim. v. 18.
Gibbon, chap, xxxii.
* On Ambrose's refusal to give up a Church of Milan to the Arians,
see above, vol. iii. pp. 35—38.
VOL. IV. M

162 Courageous answer of Chrysostom to Gainas and Arca
dius : his missionary zeal — On the spread of the Gospel.
that acts of allegiance to the Throne could not be
rewarded by profanation of the Church. He implored
Arcadius, as defender of the faith, and as son of
Theodosius, who had withstood heresy, not to betray
his trust ; and he added, " I will never consent that
they who glorify Christ as God shall be driven from a
Church to make room for those who blaspheme Him."
Gainas soon revealed himself in his true light ;
he broke out into open rebellion, and was slain by
Uldin,3 King of the Huns, who allowed Arcadius to
celebrate the triumph which he himself had won.
But Chrysostom was not content with endeavouring
to check the Arian heresy of the Goths ; he earnestly
desired to win the Goths themselves to the true faith.
He sent Missionaries to them ; 4 and encouraged those
who were orthodox among them to join with him in
the services of the Church. In the Church of St. Paul
at Constantinople some Goths were invited by him to
read the Lessons and to preach, and he thence took
occasion to address the people in the language of
eloquent congratulation on the spread of the Gospel.6
" The Wise men," he said, " were brought by a star
from the East to the cradle of Christ, and offered
frankincense to Him as God, gold to Him as King,
and myrrh to Him as Man, by which they fore
told His death and burial. And now Scythians,
Thracians, Sarmatians, Moors, and Indians have
embraced Christianity; the Scriptures have been
translated into their tongues, and the Church of Christ

3 Zosim. v. 22.
4 Theodoret, v. 30, who also describes the work of Chrysostom's
missionaries, who evangelized Phoenicia, and converted many from
idolatry. 5 See Chrys. Homil. 8 in tom. xii. pp. 371, 372, 379.

His zeal for Church-building in country places — Appeal 163
to Landowners and Capitalists.
has extended her arms to the distant shores of the
Ocean, and has enclosed the British Isles in the net
of the Gospel."
The country Villages in the province of Constanti
nople were ill provided with Churches and Preachers.6
Chrysostom extended his care from the City to them,
and appealed to Capitalists and landed Proprietors
to provide Churches and Pastors on their estates. One
of his Sermons at Constantinople deals with this
subject,7 and may serve as a specimen of an appeal
for building Churches and Chapels in the fourth
century, and will be read with pleasure in the nine
teenth. It supplies interesting information as to the
manner in which Churches arose throughout Christen
dom — not by public subsidies, as heathen temples,8
but by the Christian liberality of the Nobility and
Gentry as Landlords.
Taking for his text Acts viii. 25, " And they, when
they had testified and preached the Word of the Lord,
returned to Jerusalem, and preached the Gospel in
many villages of the Samaritans," he says, " We, too,
my brethren, ought to go forth on such journeys as
these ; and why do I speak of journeys ? Many are
Proprietors of whole villages and hamlets, and yet
take no thought concerning them. The erection of
Baths upon their estates, the improvement of their
rents, the construction of Mansions, and other build
ings, upon their demesnes, these are the objects which
engross their care ; but the culture of souls employs it
not. My friend, if you behold your land beset with
thorns, you root them up and burn them. Them you
6 See Bingham, xiv. 4. 9, and the passages quoted from Chrysostom
by him. 7 Horn, on Acts viii. 25, tom. ix. 149.
8 Horat. 2 Od. xv. 18, 19, 20 ; 3 Od. vi. 2.
M 2

164 Exhortation to Church-building on Estates— Its rewards.
destroy to rid your soil of the evil ; but when you
behold the souls of your labourers beset with thorns,
and yet do not eradicate them, tell me, do you
not tremble at the thought of your own Landlord,
Jesus Christ, Who will hereafter demand an account
of them at your hands ?
" Tell me, Is it not the duty of believers to build
Churches, to endow them for the maintenance of a
Pastor, to help one another, and to labour above
all, that every man may belong to Christ ? And
how can your labourers become Christ's, if they see
you to be careless of their salvation ? You cannot
work miracles, and so convert them to Christ. Convert
them, then, by the means in your power. Convert
them by your charity. Convert them by your watchful
ness over them, by mildness, by reproof, by all other
means you can.
"Men will build Markets and Baths, but not
Churches ; indeed they will erect anything rather
than Churches. Wherefore I exhort, I entreat, I
supplicate ; nay, rather, I promulgate a law, that
no one should be seen possessing an Estate without
a Church. Maintain a Pastor, maintain a Deacon, and
a sacred choir ; love your Church as a bride, or as a
betrothed, or as a daughter given in marriage ; bestow
a dowry upon it : so your Estate will overflow with
blessings. "What benefits will not be there ? Say, is it a small
thing that your wine-vats will be blessed ? Is it a
small thing that God will be the first to partake of all
the produce of your land, and receive the firstfruits of
your substance ? This will conduce to the peace of
your labourers ; your Pastor will be revered : this
will contribute to the security of your Estate. In your

Blessings of Church-building. 165
Church will be perpetual orisons ; through your means
there will be hymns and eucharists, and the' holy
oblation every Sunday. What a glorious monument
will this be ! Let others build splendid tombs for them
selves, that they may be famous after their death, but
let your monument be a Church.
" Consider also, I pray you, this, that you who have
erected a sanctuary of God, will enjoy your reward
upon earth even till the Coming of Christ.
" If an earthly Prince had commanded you to erect
a house that he might lodge there, would you not
have done it ? But the fabric of a Church is the
royal Palace of Christ. Think not of the cost, but
consider the gain. Your labourers cultivate your soil :
do you in return cultivate their souls. They bring
corn into your garner : do you lead them up to
heaven. He, who is the first to begin a good work,
is the author of all its fruits. Thus all who are
catechized in your Church and in the neighbouring
hamlets will owe it to you. Though Baths render
our labourers more effeminate, though Taverns make
them more licentious, yet, for display, men build
these upon their estates. The wake and the fair
teach them immodesty. But a Church produces the
reverse of this. How beautiful it is to see a peasant
stricken in years, with grey hairs, walking in the like
ness of Abraham, with his loins girt, labouring with
his hands in the works of husbandry! What is more
beautiful than such an Estate as this ? Here virtue
blooms, hence riot flies ; here neither intemperance
nor debauchery is found ; they are banished far away.
Here is no vainglory. Goodwill shines more brightly
here through the simplicity of rural manners. What
a blessed thing it is to go in and out of a House of

1 66 Spiritual and Social Privileges of Church-building.
God, and to know that you have built it ; to recline
on your couch, and after your bodily recreation to
repair to evening and morning Prayer ; to have the
Priest with you at your table, to converse with him,
to receive his benediction, and to behold others resort
ing to the Church. This is the fortress, this the
safeguard of your Estate ; this is the field concerning
which the Patriarch said, ' The smell of a field which
the Lord hath blessed.' 9
"Again : if the country is delightful for its quiet, and
for its freedom from cares, even without such bless
ings as these ; how lovely will it be when it enjoys
them ! Possessing a Church, it becomes like the Para
dise of God. There is no clamour, no confusion, no
enmity, no heresy. All are friends, all united in the
same doctrines. Its tranquillity leads you to divine
philosophy, and from that philosophy the Priest will
lead you further, and will gently administer spiritual
medicine to your soul. Here, in the city, whatever
we preach in the Church the Market drives from
the minds of our hearers ; but there, whatever you
hear in God's house will remain fixed in your mind.
By means of the Preacher you will become a different
man from what you are here ; he will be the protector
of your labourers, he will guard them by his presence
and by his discipline.
" To speak again of blessings. It is a happy thing
for you, that the Priest resorts to the Church, with all
quietness, to present himself to God, and to offer
prayers for the village day by day, and for you the
owner of it. Say, is it a small thing that your name
is recorded for ever in the sacred commemorations,
and that daily supplications are made for the hamlet
0 Gen. xxvii. 27.

Blessings of a Church in a village. 167
to God ? ¦ How profitable is this in other respects !
You have poor neighbours, and they may have guar
dians ; but none of these may think the poor man
worthy to come to you ; but he will, perhaps,
invite the Priest to his table (who will plead with
you for the poor). Your village will be free from
evil suspicions ; no one will accuse, or even suspect
it of homicides or of thefts ; the villagers will also
enjoy consolation in sickness and in death ; their
friendships and visits to each other will not be like
those of the world ; their social meetings will be
more joyful than those at wakes and fairs : they
themselves, and even their magistrates, will become
more revered by means of their pastor. You know
that Jerusalem of old was more honoured than all
other cities, not for itself, but for its piety ; for where
God is revered, there no evil is ; but where He is not
revered, there is nothing good. You will thus be
safe, both with God and man.
" Therefore, I exhort you, be not remiss, but under
take the work, not negligently, but zealously. If he
who brings what is precious out of what is vile,1 is
as the mouth of God, how many divine favours will
he enjoy, who benefits and retrieves so many
souls, both present and to come, even till the Advent
of Christ? Build therefore a fortress against the
devil ; such is a Church. Thence let your labourers
go forth to their work ; let them first lift up their
hands to God in prayer, and then let them repair to
their labour. Thus will they be blessed with strength
of body; thus will their husbandry be fruitful, and
all evil will be far away. Until you have felt this in
1 Jer. xv. 19, from the Septuagint Version.

168 " Feed My Sheep" — Blessedness of zeal for the salvation
of souls.
reality, I cannot place before you in words the pleasure
you will thence derive.
" Think not then of the work as if it brought no
profit ; if you thus think of it, engage not in it :
nay, if you think not of it as bringing you more profit
than all the rest of your estate, enter not upon it.
Commence it not, if you do not believe that it will
conduce more to your safety than all other means. But,
indeed, what harvest can be compared with the bring
ing of the souls of men to the threshing-floor of
heaven ? Alas, alas ! that you should not know what
wealth it is, to gain souls. Hear what Christ says to
Peter, ' If thou lovest Me, feed My sheep/ If you had
seen the sheep or horses of a king without fold or
stable, and exposed to danger, and had yourself
built for them a fold and stable, and set one over them
to tend them, would not the king have requited you ?
But now, when you enfold the flock of Christ, and set
a shepherd over His sheep, do you fear that you will
not receive a great reward ? What do I say ? If he
who offends one of Christ's little ones is threatened
with severe punishment (Matt, xviii. 6), shall he be lost
who saves many ? Of what sin will he be afterwards
guilty ? and if he commits sin, the Lord blots it
out.2 Learn the reward of him who preserves, by
the punishment of him who offends. If the salva
tion of a single soul were not an object of the
tenderest solicitude to God, its destruction would
never have provoked Him to such fierce anger.
2 The reading is % k&c ixoi {ap.apr'mv) ovk i£a\el<pei avriv ; which is
translated in the Benedictine version " nonne peccatum delebit illud ? "
The reading of the passage is doubtful ; perhaps it should be kUv
%XV> OKC (i.e. 'O Kipios) Qateltpei air^v, and I have so rendered it.
Cp. Esai. xliii. 25, 'Eyi> dpi d 'EHAAEI$nN rets avo/ilas Kal tbs
'AMAPTIA"*- a 0x1. Esai. xliv. 22. Ps. li. 9. Acts iii. 19. Jer. xviii. 23,
26 KTPIE ras 'AMAPTIA2 avrav ^ 'EHAAEI*lrHI*S.

On public Worship — Liturgy of S. Chrysostom: his 169
Episcopal jurisdiction.
" Therefore, dear friends, let us engage in this
spiritual work ; and let every one who enters upon it
invite me to join him, and I will co-operate with him.
And in cases where there are three proprietors, let
them do it by joint contributions ; and where there
is one proprietor only, he will excite all his neigh
bours to imitate him. Only be zealous, I exhort you,
to speed this work, that pleasing God in all things we
may come to His eternal joys, through the grace and
love of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the
Father and the Holy Ghost be all glory, power, and
honour, now and for ever, to all generations. Amen."
After this sermon on Churches, let us turn to the
divine Worship celebrated in them.
The Liturgy of S. Chrysostom, as it is now com
monly called, is that generally used throughout the
year in the East.3 But it is doubtful whether it can
be, even in part, ascribed to him. It appears to be
grounded on that of S. Basil. There are many
passages in Chrysostom's works which describe the
order of the public service of the Church,4 but as
these are derived from writings composed before he
came to Constantinople, they can hardly be accepted
as representing the use of that Church.
Chrysostom extended his Episcopal care from the
Bosphorus to Ephesus and Caesarea in Cappadocia.
His precedence in dignity next to the Bishop of Rome
had been settled in A.D. 381 by the Council of
Constantinople (can. 3). But the extent of his juris
diction was not so clearly defined. The political
pre-eminence of Constantinople gave a spiritual
3 On this Liturgy, see the authorities quoted above, vol. ii. p. 278,
and Mr. C. E. Hammond's Liturgies, Oxford, 1878, pp. xlvii— xlix,
82 — 131, and Palmer's Origines Liturgies, p. 77.
4 They are collected by Montfaucon, tom. xiii. p. 183.

170 Chrysostom's Archiepiscopal Visitation : his vigorous
reforms.
influence5 to its Patriarch, which was not very
acceptable to the Primates of more ancient Sees, and
to the Metropolitans of more ancient Provinces ;6
and it was not established by any Canon of the
Church before the Council of Chalcedon A.D. 451.
At the close of A.D. 400, Chrysostom held a Visita
tion at Ephesus, leaving his flock at Constantinople
under the charge of a celebrated preacher, Severian,
Bishop of Gabala, and of an Archdeacon, Serapion,
in whom he had great confidence. Serapion was
obnoxious to Severian, whom he charged with the
design of supplanting the absent Archbishop; and
by his violent conduct and intemperate language
against clergy and laity, he exasperated them
against himself and against Chrysostom.7
Chrysostom summoned Antoninus, the Bishop of
Ephesus, before him, on a charge of simony ; he and
some Bishops with him were condemned and deposed
for simoniacal practices.
On the death of Antoninus, Chrysostom consecrated
a Bishop for Ephesus, and also in the place of some
other Bishops whom he deposed s — about thirteen in
number. These vigorous measures of Church discipline
excited rancorous irritation against him, which
strengthened the hands of his enemies.
A storm was now gathering. I will not tax the
patience of the reader with minute details 9 of the petty
5 Cp. Theodoret, v. 28, who says that Chrysostom exercised authority
not only over Thrace, which contained six provinces, but over Asia and
Pontus, each of which had eleven.
6 See Bingham, ii. 17. 10 ; Gieseler, Church Hist. § 93.
1 Socr. vi. II. Soz. viii. 9, 10. 3 Socr. vi. 15.
9 They may be seen in the authors quoted above. See also Fleury,
Ch. Hist. xxi. 1, 2, 3, 11.

Theophilus of Alexandria stirs up a persecution against 171
Chrysostom : enlists Epiphanius in it.
and paltry jealousy and vindictive acrimony of Theo
philus, Patriarch of Alexandria, who took the lead
in the persecution against Chrysostom. These per
sonal quarrels hardly belong to Church history, for
which they have little significance, except as showing,
what is unhappily too notorious, that persons in high
places in the Church may sometimes be swayed and
enslaved by evil passions, which the Gospel of Christ,
Whose Ministers they are, teaches to control and
subdue. A brief summary may suffice. The name and
tenets of Origen — which have already come before
us as shibboleths of party warfare — were made
the occasions of strife. Four monks of Nitria, who
were called from their stature the "tall brothers,"
were charged by Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria,
with Origenistic heresies, and fled, with fifty others,
first to Palestine, and thence to Constantinople, where
they were hospitably entertained by Chrysostom, but
not admitted to communion by him, and where they
hoped for protection against the persecution which
had been stirred up against them in their own
country. Theophilus was enraged with this reception of the
fugitives ; and stimulated Epiphanius, the venerable
Bishop of Cyprus,1 to join in his opposition to Chry
sostom, on the plea of imperilled orthodoxy, for
which he was very zealous. Epiphanius was induced
to undertake a voyage to Constantinople, where the
Archbishop treated him with due respect, but could
not obtain any reciprocal recognition on his part. In
course of time, however, Epiphanius, having received
a satisfactory explanation from " the four brothers,"
1 Sozomen, viii. 14, 15.

172 Synod " of the Oak " against Chrysostom — Charges
against him.
left Constantinople, and died on his voyage homeward
nearly a hundred years old, in A.D. 401.
The "four brothers" appealed to the Emperor
Arcadius, who summoned Theophilus to Constanti
nople. But instead of accepting the attitude of one
who is accused, he assumed that of an accuser.
Attended with many Bishops from Egypt, and being
supported by the Empress Eudoxia, who had been
alienated from the Archbishop,2 and by Severian, Chry
sostom's treacherous deputy, and by some criminous
clerks whom Chrysostom had deprived, Theophilus
cited the Archbishop to appear before a Synod held
at a place called The Oak, near Chalcedon, on the
Eastern side of the Bosphorus.
A series of charges was exhibited against him,
twenty-nine in number ;3 and though the impeachment
of Chrysostom for favouring the Origenistic heresies
was ostensibly the cause of the convention, yet in
the arraignment against him no mention was made of
that 'accusation.
The Synod consisted of forty-five Bishops (some
authorities say only thirty-six), of whom twenty-
nine were from Egypt. Among them was Severian
of Gabala, Acacius of Bercea, Antiochus of Ptolemais,
Cyrenius of Chalcedon, friends of Theophilus, and
enemies of Chrysostom.
The charges are too frivolous to be specified. They
referred principally to alleged habits of personal
haughtiness, such as dining alone4 (25), having a
8 The reasons for this estrangement of Eudoxia from Chrysostom
are given indifferent terms by different writers. Socr. vi. 15. Sozo-
men, viii. 16. It appears that notes were taken of his Sermons, and
were carried to the Empress, and were interpreted into personal reflec
tions on herself. 3 In Photius, Cod. lix. Socr. vi. 15.
4 His biographer Palladius (tom. xiii. p. 40) thinks it right to vindi-

Charges against Chrysostom — His protest. 173
specially reserved bath (23), or of violence and im
patience (1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 10, 19, 20, 21, 27), or malversa
tion of Episcopal or Ecclesiastical property (3, 4, 16,
17), or of ritual irregularities (10, 13, 14,24, 28).6
On the other side Chrysostom was supported by
forty Bishops.6 He declined to appear before the
Synod, and protested against its authority. It was not,
he said, fit that a Bishop like Theophilus, who resided
in Egypt,7 and who himself was accused, should come
and sit in judgment on the Archbishop of Con
stantinople. The Synod proceeded to examine the twenty-nine
charges, and dismissed twenty-five of them as frivolous
or not proved, but admitted eleven others. One con
cerned Epiphanius, and the favour shown by Chrysos
tom, notwithstanding his remonstrance, to the Ori-
genizing monks of Egypt. Others cited some of
Chrysostom's enthusiastic utterances ; 8 others referred
cate Chrysostom from such charges as these. His infirm health (he
says) needed a peculiar diet ; he could only drink a little wine, and
that of a particular quality ; he was often too much occupied to eat
before sunset. He wished to economize his Episcopal revenues for the
sake of the poor. He shrank from the levity and clatter of great dinner
parties, and from causing offence by invitations partially given or
received. Such are the apologies offered for Chrysostom.
Our English Primate at the close of the seventeenth century,
Tillotson, regarded dinner-parties and pubhc entertainments as part of
his own moral discipline, and as necessary incidents of his station.
The Archbishop's reflections on the " penalty of being contented, for
the sake of the public, to deny himself so much as to sit down every
day to a feast, and to eat continually in a crowd, " are as wise as they
are charitable. See Birch's Life of Tillotson, pp. 258 — 263, London,
1753- 5 ,On these accusations, see the explanatory comments of Neander,
Life of Chrysostom, ii. 152—160.
6 Pallad. c. 8. 7 Ibid.
8 ipu, paivopat. " If thou sinnest ten thousand times, come and be
healed." Cp. Socr. vi. 21. See above, p. 150, and p. 155.

174 The sentence of the Synod on Chrysostom: his first exile
and return.
to his unlawful assumption of jurisdiction at Ephesus,
and to his arbitrary deposition of Bishops.
After twelve sessions the Synod made a report to
the Emperor, in which they stated that the Arch
bishop had been deposed by them, and also that he
was guilty of sedition ; that he had called the Empress
a Jezebel ; and they prayed the Emperor that Chry
sostom might be banished by the secular authority
for high treason.9
Accordingly the Archbishop was conveyed to
Prasnetum, near Nicomedia, in Bithynia. Chrysostom
thanked God, and said, " The Lord gave ; the Lord hath
taken away ; Blessed be the name of the Lord." * The
people of Constantinople rose in insurrection, and
clamoured for his return.2 An Earthquake added to
the consternation of the palace. The Empress
Eudoxia, who had stirred up the persecution against
him, now prayed Arcadius that he might be recalled,
and sent a special messenger to implore him to return.3
He did so amid the plaudits of the City. His
accuser, Theophilus, embarked at midnight, and set
sail for Alexandria.
But the cloud returned after rain. A silver statue
of the Empress was erected on a column of porphyry
near the Church of S. Sophia, and was dedicated under
the auspices of the prefect of the city — a Manichaean
— with wild exultations and frantic dances, and licen
tious revelry, and, it seems, with Pagan adoration.4
Chrysostom gave vent to his feelings in his sermons,
which were represented to Eudoxia as libellous anim-
» Pallad. c. 8.
2 Socr. vi. 13. Sozomen, viii. 15.
3 Theodoret, v. 34. Chrys. iii. 429.
* Neander, Life of Chrysostom, ii. 176.

The persecution against him is renewed: his second 175
banishment.
adversions on herself. When he heard of the exas
peration caused by these reports, and of the menaces
they evoked from her, he is said 5 to have exclaimed
in public, " Again Herodias rages ; again she dances,
and asks for the head of John in a charger." 6 He
was also censured in another Synod, A.D. 404,
as having infringed the twelfth Canon of Antioch —
which had been enacted by an Arianizing Council
against Athanasius.' He was condemned and ban
ished a second time ; and the See was declared to
be vacant ; and Arsacius, eighty years of age, brother
of Chrysostom's predecessor Nectarius, was elevated
to it.8 After a year he died, Nov. 11, A.D. 405, and
was succeeded by Atticus, A.D. 406.
Chrysostom was conveyed to Cucuzus on Mount
Taurus in Lesser Armenia, on the confines of Cilicia ;
and after seventy days' journey arrived at the place of
his destination in the autumn of A.D. 404. Here he
was courteously entertained by Adelphius the Bishop ;
and there he continued for a year ; he comforted him
self with religious meditation and prayer, and study of
the Scriptures, and with affectionate intercourse by-
letter with his faithful friend Olympias, bound more
closely to himself by adversity. He consoled her and
himself by writing two treatises : " No one can be
hurt by any one but by himself," 9 and " To those who
are scandalized by persecution."1
B By Socr. vi. 18. Soz. viii. 20.
6 The sermon which begins with these words is rejected as spurious
by Montfaucon, xiii. 151, and by Tillemont, xi. 603. The Archbishop
knew the Gospels better, than to confound the mother with the daugh
ter, and to represent Herodias as dancing before Herod.
7 Above, vol. ii. p. 81.
8 Socr. vi. 19. Soz. viii. 23. Pallad. c. IO. ° iii. 444.
1 iii. 465.

176 His letters to Olympias in his exile — Letter to Ccesarius.
" There is only one thing, O Olympias (he says
in one of his letters to her 2), to be feared in this
world, namely, Sin. Nothing else is terrible. Nothing
else can affect that life — which is the only true life —
life eternal. And therefore St. Paul sums up all with
saying, ' The things that are seen are temporal ; the
things that are not seen are eternal ' (2 Cor. iv. 18)."
By his cheerfulness in banishment, Chrysostom
proved the living power of the Gospel which he had
preached ; and gave practical evidence of the truth of
Christianity, as contrasted with the Philosophy and
Literature of Paganism, which had vented themselves
in such querulous elegiac dirges as were composed
by the Roman Poet, Ovid, banished to the same coun
try, and in such piteous wailings as those of the
Stoic, Seneca, in his solitary exile in Corsica.
He thought more of others than himself. He sent
alms to the poor, and ransomed many captives from
among the Isaurians, and stimulated Missions in
Phoenicia, Cilicia, Persia, and to the Goths.8 Writing to
Olympias,4 he refers to the death of " the great Bishop
Unilas, whom he had consecrated for Gothia," and
says that the King of the Goths had written to him to
request that another Bishop might be sent in his place.
During this banishment he wrote a letter to a monk
Csesarius ' against the heresy of the Apollinarians.
2 Epist. I. 3 Cp. Neander, Life, ii. 208. 4 Epist. 14.
5 This Epistle was published by M. Bigot, Paris, 1680, and reprinted
in England by Dr. William Wake (afterwards Bishop of Lincoln and
Archbishop of Canterbury), London, 1686. See p. 146 as to the
genuineness of it. Cardinal Newman, in his edition of the Rev.
William Palmer's '* Notes of a Visit to the Russian Church " (Lond.
1882), p. 89, says that it "is ascribed to Chrysostom on the authority
of S. John Damascene, Anastasius, and Nicephorus," but that it is
rejected by " Le Quien and Montfaucon, men of critical minds, which
the ancients were not."

Chrysostom on the real presence in the Holy Eucharist : ijj
his correspondence with the Bishop of Rome.
In that Epistle are the following words, which show,
that while Chrysostom recognized a real spiritual pre
sence in the Holy Eucharist, he did not hold the
doctrine of the Transubstantiation of the elements : —
" In the Eucharist,"3 before the Bread is consecrated,
we call it Bread; but when the grace of God has con
secrated it by the Priest, it is no longer called Bread,
but it is esteemed worthy to be called the Lord's
Body, although the Nature of Bread still remains
in it."
The same doctrine was taught by Chrysostom's
friend Theodoret,7 arguing against the Eutychian
heresy. " In the Holy Eucharist, after Consecration of
the elements, we receive the Body and Blood of Christ ;
but yet, after the Consecration, the mystic symbols
do not lose their real nature ; they remain in their
former substance, and figure and form, and are visible
and tangible as they were before ; but we believe them
to be what they have become by Consecration. But
the symbol is not only called Body, but also Bread of
Life."8 Chrysostom represented to Innocent, Bishop of
Rome, the condition of the Church of Constantinople
and his own. Many letters passed between them. Inno
cent sent two letters to Theophilus of Alexandria, in
which he strongly censured his proceedings, and in
vited him to a Council. He also replied to Chrysos
tom in A.D. 404, and exhorted him to endure his
afflictions with patience; and in the following year he
wrote to console the Clergy and people of Constanti-
11 P. 137, ed. Wake.
1 Theodoret, Eranistes, tom. iv. Dialog, ii. Inconfusus, p. 126, ed.
Schulze, Hal. 1722. Cp. Gelasius, below, chap. xxi.
8 Cp. Bishop Pearson on the Creed, Art. iii., p. 163, note.
VOL. IV. N

178 Pope Innocent's letters — Hailstorm — Death of the
Empress Eudoxia — Other calamities.
nople. He disapproved the appointment of a suc
cessor to Chrysostom ; and appealed to the Western
Emperor, Honorius, in his favour ; and in A.D. 406
wrote to Arcadius on his behalf; and lastly, in A.D.
407, he wrote to Chrysostom another consolatory
letter, exhorting him to Christian resignation.9 But
no effective movement was made by the Bishop of
Rome or by the Western Emperor to procure Chry
sostom's restoration to the See of Constantinople.
If an Appeal to Rome could ever be justified, and
ought to have been successful, it was certainly in the
case of Chrysostom.1 But the Bishop of Rome did
not then suppose that he possessed any jurisdiction
in such a matter, and the Eastern Church ignored- his
right to interfere. Chrysostom's name was erased
from the diptychs of the Eastern Churches ; and was
absent from them till A.D. 420 at Constantinople, and
later at Alexandria. Rome, while she retained it in
her own, was not able to restore it to them.
On Friday, Sept. 30, A.D. 404, a terrible hailstorm
burst over Constantinople ; and on the Thursday
following the Empress Eudoxia died,2 after a prema
ture deliverance of a still-born child. Cyrinus, Bishop
of Chalcedon, one of the ringleaders in Chrysostom's
persecution, died also. Other calamities occurred,
which, according to Sozomen and Palladius,3 were
interpreted as signs of the divine displeasure against
his enemies. But they did not relent ; they obtained
a rescript from Arcadius that he might be relegated
9 Sozomen, viii. 26. The other letters of Innocent are contained in
the life of Palladius, and in the collections of Coustant and Mansi.
See Jaffe, Regesta Pontificum, pp. 23, 24, ed. Berolin. 185 1.
1 Cp. Barrow on the Pope's Supremacy, Works, vol. vi. p. 428.
2 Socr. vi. 19 ; viii. 27.
* Sozom. viii. 27, pp. 62, 88.

His enemies do not relent — His last days ; and death — 179
Honours paid to Chrysostom after it.
to a greater distance from Constantinople, and he
was ordered to be conveyed, by a three months'
journey, to Pityus on the Black Sea. But he did
not reach the place of his destination. When he
had arrived at Comana 4 in Pontus, at the foot of the
Antitaurus, he was so much exhausted by the glaring
and scorching sun, and by the fatigues of the journey,
that he could proceed no further, and was carried to
the oratory of S. Basiliscus, who had been Bishop of
Comana, and suffered martyrdom under Maximin.
He requested that he might be attired in white
raiment ; he then received the Holy Communion, and
offered up prayers, which he closed with the words,
" Glory to God for all things. Amen ;" and so fell
asleep in Christ, Sept. 14, A.D. 407, in the fifty-second
year and eighth month of his age, the third year
and third month of his banishment, and nine years,
six months, and sixteen days after his consecration
to the See of Constantinople.
Chrysostom's name never ceased to be held in
reverence by the Western Church ; but it was not till
A.D. 415 that it was restored to any of the diptychs
of the East. This was done by Alexander, Bishop of
Antioch, who healed the schism 5 in his own Episcopal
city, and who thus conferred a benefit on both the
Churches — Antioch and Constantinople — which had
been associated with the history of Chrysostom.
In the year 437, Proclus, a successor of Chrysostom,
persuaded the Emperor, Theodosius the Younger, son
of Arcadius, to order the mortal remains of the
great Archbishop to be brought from Comana to
Constantinople.6 They reached the city on Jan. 27,
4 Now Gumenek. 6 Theodoret, v. 35. • Ibid. v. 36.
N 2

180 Chrysostom's mortal remains received at Constantinople
by the Emperor — Review of his character and history.
A.D. 438, and were received with universal joy after
thirty-four years from his first deposition ; and the
Emperor, reverently touching the bier, and lifting up
his voice and eyes to heaven, breathed forth a prayer
that the sins of his father and mother, Arcadius and
Eudoxia, in persecuting the greatest Bishop who ever
sat on the Patriarchal throne of Constantinople, might
be forgiven.
Different opinions were entertained in ancient times
as to some points in Chrysostom's character and
work ; but all agreed that he stood unrivalled as an
eloquent and fearless Preacher, having a heart fired
with zeal and love for Christ, and for immortal souls,
which He died to save ; and endowed with a mar
vellous knowledge of Holy Scripture, and with no
less marvellous ability to bring it home to the hearts
of those to whom he preached, for the correction of
prevalent vices, and for the improvement of all classes
in Christian doctrine and practice, and for diffusing a
knowledge and love of the Gospel, and of the duties
which it inculcates on all persons and on families,
and for promoting and perfecting the work of the
Holy Spirit in their hearts. In these respects his
example may be commended to those who are com
missioned to do the work of Evangelists in an age
and country like our own, when rural populations
are gravitating to great towns, and when towns are
assuming a paramount importance in relation to
politics and religion, and when the stimulants to vice
are becoming more energetic.
The two ancient Church-historians, Socrates and
Sozomen, who lived at Constantinople in the next
age to Chrysostom,7 while agreeing in admiration of
7 Socrates ends his history a.d. 439 ; Sozomen concludes his a.d. 423.

Differences of opinions with regard to Chrysostom : 181
Socrates and Sozomen— His character.
his eloquence, and of his courage and sincerity, formed
different estimates of his character in other respects.
. Socrates, an advocate by profession, while he gives
him full credit for rectitude of intention, and blameless
integrity, censures him in the following words :8 — " He
was prone to asperity, on account of his rigid asceti
cism.9 As one of his earliest friends used to say, he
was more inclined to passion than to reverence for
others ; and on account of his strictness of life, he
did not guard himself against contingencies, but ex
posed himself to attacks by his openness ; he was ex
cessively free-spoken to all ; he strove in his teaching
to amend the lives of all ; but to those who did
not know him well he seemed too arrogant.1 And
when he became a Bishop, he was haughty and severe
He intended to bring it down to a.d. 439. See his dedication to the
Emperor Theodosius the Younger. Both were continuators of Eusebius.
8 Socr. vi. 3, 4, 5, and cp. vi. 21, where he says, " I am surprised
that, while he preached sobriety (owppoabvifli) so much in his sermons,
he practised it so little in his speech."
9 Literally his " zeal for oa$poabvi\," a more general word than
soberness. 1 We may compare the character of Archbishop Laud, as drawn
by Lord Clarendon in his " History of the Great Rebellion," i. 90 ; ii.
572. It might almost have been written for Chrysostom.
" He was a man of great parts and very exemplary virtues, alloyed and
discredited by some unpopular natural infirmities ; the greatest of which
was — besides a hasty sharp way of expressing himself— that he believed
innocence of heart and integrity of manners to be a guard strong enough
to secure any man in his voyage through this world, in what company
soever he travelled, and through what ways soever he was to pass. He
had great courage and resolution ; and being most assured in himself
that he proposed no end in all his actions and designs but what was
pious and just, he never studied the easiest ways to those ends. He did
court persons too little ; nor cared to make his designs appear as candid
as they were, by showing them in any other dress than their own
natural beauty, though perhaps in too rough a manner ; and did not
consider what men said, or were like to say, of him. If faults or vices
were to be discovered, let the persons be who they would, that were
guilty of them, they were sure to find no connivance or favour from him. "

1 82 Eloquent Orators, and good Bishops.
to those below him, especially in his attempts to cor
rect the lives of the Clergy. Hence he incurred the
enmity of many. He was also exasperated against
them by his deacon Serapion, who estranged many
from him ; and the Bishops, whom he ejected from
their sees, were loud in their complaints against
him. He had no companions in his meals, and never
accepted invitations to dinner.2 His weak health was
pleaded as an excuse ; but such things made him
many enemies. He was unsparing in public censure
of the vices of Princes and Nobles, who were greatly
irritated against him."
Such is the language of Socrates. On the other
hand, Sozomen is unqualified in his praise ; which is
more remarkable, because Sozomen dedicated his
history to the Emperor Theodosius the Younger, the
son of the imperial persecutors of Chrysostom, Arca
dius and Eudoxia.
Chrysostom was a great Preacher ; but great
Preachers do not always make the best Bishops, any
more than the most eloquent advocates make the best
Judges. This proposition had been exemplified in
the victories and reverses of one of his greatest pre
decessors at Constantinople, the fervid Catholic orator
Gregory Nazianzen.3 It was soon again to be dis
played in the disastrous Episcopate of one of his
celebrated successors, the eloquent rationalist and
heresiarch, Nestorius.4 In some respects Chrysostom's
infirmities in the Episcopate at Constantinople are
traceable to his successes as a Preacher at Antioch.
In his twelve years at Antioch, he was the greatest
2 The latter habit is recorded of S. Ambrose, who however freely
invited others to dinner. Paullin. Vit. Ambros. pp. 6, 8. Possid. in
Vit. Aug. c. 27. 3 See above, vol. ii. pp. 314 — 329.
4 See below, p. 191.

His successes at Antioch not the best preparation for his 183
work al Constantinople : His difficulties there.
Ecclesiastical Orator of Christendom. During that
time he exercised a sovereign sway from the pulpit
over the minds and passions of the people, who
flocked to the church in crowds to hear him, crushing
one another in the way, and greeting his effusions of
oratory with plaudits of admiration ; so that he was
obliged often to remind them that sermons were not
plays, and that the church was not a theatre.5 He
was in that respect like him" quem mirabantur Athenas
Torrentem, et pleni moderantem fraena theatri." 6
At that time he was happily exempt from adminis
trative cares. He was also under the guidance of
a wise Bishop, Flavian, and was not called upon to
exercise jurisdiction over others.
His oratorical autocracy at Antioch was not a good
preparation for his Archiepiscopate at Constantinople.
That position was hedged around by difficulties, and
encompassed with pitfalls. The Emperor and Empress,
despots over others, were slaves of haughty, unscrupu
lous favourites, and resented any correction from the
moral Teacher who thought of no other lord but his
heavenly Master, and of no other ends but God's
glory and the salvation of souls. The nobles and
ladies of the imperial Court scorned his rebukes ; they
had lived at ease under the mild sway of the venerable
and polite Archbishop, Nectarius. Why should they
be disturbed in their peaceful slumbers by the spiri
tual thunders of his youthful successor ?
The powerful Patriarch of Alexandria, Theophilus,
was on the watch to precipitate his fall ; and those
5 Cp. Neander, Chrysostom, pp. 119, 120, 195.
6 Juvenal, *. 28.

1 84 His difficulties ; and encouragements — Causes of his
disasters.
who ought to have supported him, such as Severian
his deputy, and Serapion his archdeacon, hastened it,
the one by his open enmity, the other by his rash
advocacy. The Bishops, whom he had deposed for
simony, the Clergy, Monks, and professed Virgins and
Widows whom he rebuked for immodesty of dress
and convicted of immorality of life, resisted him.
The authority of Epiphanius, the most venerable
Bishop of Christendom, was invoked against him.
He had indeed moral supports, in the love and
admiration of the people, in the friendship of some
grave Bishops and Clergy, and in the affectionate
reverence of such holy, devout, and loving women as
Olympias, and above all in the testimony of a good
conscience before God. And it is by no means certain
that any one, of even less fervid temperament, and
more patient endurance, and more equally balanced
judgment, than Chrysostom, could, if animated with
the same ardent zeal for the divine glory, and for
the spiritual edification of his flock, have succeeded in
the difficult task which he undertook to perform.
Still we may venture to say, with profound vene
ration for this great man, that the history of his
Episcopate teaches clearly this lesson to the Church.
If his reforms had been undertaken, as Ignatius pro
bably, and as Cyprian certainly, would have under
taken and conducted them, by deliberations in a Dio
cesan Synod ; and if they had been accepted by the
concurrent suffrages of the Clergy, and consentient
voice of the Laity, they would have had a better
prospect of being cordially received and successfully
executed, than they could have, when promulged, as
they were, by the isolated authority of the Bishop,
dictating them from his Patriarchal throne.

Practical inferences from his Episcopate — The success 185
of his, so-called, failure.
But after all it may be hoped, that few, who have
considered the history of those times, will be disposed
to concur in the verdict of some in modern days, who,
weighing spiritual things in the balance of political
Expediency, have, disparaged the Episcopate of
Chrysostom as a mistake, and have even condemned
it as a failure. Such " mistakes and failures," as they
are called by some, are more beneficial to the Church
than the ingenious compromises of a vacillating
policy, which may win ephemeral triumphs, but prepare
the way for her dissolution. The worst temporary
defeats of Faith are far. more noble than the World's
most brilliant victories..
Chrysostom's Episcopate had the merit of showing
that the Church of Christ is distinct from the World,
and cannot consent to be absorbed into it ; but
must take a position of its own, as a witness for
Christ and His Word,, in antagonism to the spirit of
the World, though embodied and personified in the
persons and powers of Princes and Courtiers, and of a
time-serving and pusillanimous Prelacy..
In the great Capital of the; East he declared boldly
that the Church of Christ has inalienable franchises
and laws, which are paramount to all earthly domi
nation. Even by his three years' banishment these
truths were made more manifest. They were displayed
from East to West ; from, the Black Sea to the Tiber.
Chrysostom was more glorious in his exile7 at Cucu-
zus than he had ever been in his palace at Constanti
nople. And a grateful Posterity will place itself at
his bier by the side of Theodosius the Younger and
his sister Pulcheria, the future Empress of the East,
welcoming with penitential thankfulness the mortal
"* Soz. viii. 27.

1 86 Posthumous honours to Chrysostom.
remains of S. John Chrysostom from the inhospitable
shores of the Euxine, and consigning them with royal
honours to their peaceful resting-place, among his
archiepiscopal predecessors, in his Metropolitan
Church on the banks of the Bosphorus.

CHAPTER XX.
Nestorianism — S. Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria —
Council of Ephesus, A.D. 431.
In the prophetical vision of the Apocalypse, by
which the Divine Head of the Church revealed her
history from His own first Advent to the Day of Doom,1
He displayed Himself as a Conqueror, with a bow
in His hand, riding on a white horse — a horse radiant
as light2 — on which He ever continues to ride even to
the end ; 3 and as going forth " conquering and to
conquer." He Himself is ever the same, unchanged and
unchangeable. But He is also there revealed as being
opposed by the Enemy of the Church, shifting his
position and appearance successively, in various
methods of attack.
The first form of antagonism to Christ and the
Church was by Persecution. This had been revealed
in that prophecy concerning the Adversary, riding on
a horse red like fire? and bearing a drawn sword in
his hand.
But Persecution served to multiply the harvest of
the Church, the seed of which was the blood of her
Martyrs. The Adversary therefore descended from
1 Rev. vi. 1 — 17.
2 Kevicbs, connected with lux — candidus. Compare Psalm xiv.
4 — 6; Zech. ix. 13, 14. 3 Rev. xix. 19 — 22
4 irvjjpbs, Rev. vi. 4.

1 88 Prophetical view of Church History — Persecution
followed by Heresy — Heresies on the Incarnation.
the red horse and mounted another, also opposed to
the horse of light by its colour, which was black. He
now appeared as a man of equity and peace ; he held
a Balance in his hand ; but he was still the same
Enemy as before, in an altered form ; and a Voice
was heard from the four Living Creatures (the four
Gospels), which revealed his true character, and
described his work, and forbade the execution of his
purpose. The Balance was a specious semblance of
reason and justice, assumed in order to deceive ; and
the consequent scarcity of true doctrine, and the com
parative plenty of what is false, was expressed by the
words "a measure of wheat for a denarius,5 and three
measures of barley 6 for a denarius ;" and the divine
Voice prohibited the execution of the evil which he
desired to do : " See that thou hurt not the oil and
wine " — that is, the means of spiritual grace.
This was the second form of hostility to the Church.
The Adversary, having failed to destroy her by Per
secution, endeavoured to deprave her by Heresy.
The principal forms of heresy, by which he attempted
to injure her, were Arianism, Apollinarianism, and
Manichaeanism. These have come before us already.
The words in the prophecy are remarkably appropriate
to the heresy — which we are now about to consider —
Nestorianism. Nestorianism assailed the mystery of mysteries, the
Incarnation of the Eternal. Son of God. " Great is
the Mystery of godliness, God 7 manifest in the flesh."
5 A day's wages. Matt. xx. 2.
6 As to barley, a figure of deterioration, see on Rev. vi. 6.
7 I Tim. iii. 16. It is immaterial whether we read debs or bs here :
the relative bs (supposing it to be accepted) would refer to the word
God in the preceding verse.

Rise of Nestorianism. 189
" Behold, the Virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and
shall call His name Emmanuel, God with us," 8 God in
our nature. " The Word was made flesh, and dwelt
in us." 9 The Victory which overcomes the World is
Faith l — not Reason. An d the strength of Faith is tried
by things in which Reason is weak. Supernatural
Mysteries, revealed in Scripture (which can be proved
by Reason to be God's Word, and therefore unerring),
are " more true than plain ;" 2 and heresies, by which
men wrest them aside from revelation, to suit their
own fancies, are found, by examination, to be " more
plain than true," and fraught with great danger.
The ineffable Mystery of the Incarnation, far
transcending all powers of human intelligence, was
assailed by the Nestorian heresy. It endeavoured to
take that Mystery out of the scales of Holy Scripture
in God's hand, Who alone can weigh it, and Who had
placed it there, and to put it into the " deceitful
balance " 3 of human Reason,4 and to apply to it the
syllogisms of the Schools.
The question for the Church to consider was —
whether the Mystery of the Incarnation was to be
adored reverently as virep \6yov, i.e. above reason, or to
be analyzed critically, as Kara \6<yov, i.e. according to
reason. Nestorianism was an offspring of the rationalizing
school of Antioch, the school of Diodorus of Tarsus,
and Theodore of Mopsuestia, The former adopted a
8 Isa. vii. 14. Matt. i. 23. 9 John i. 14.
1 1 John v. 4, 5. 2 Hooker, V. Iii. 1.
3 Hos. xii. 7.
4 "Let us not employ" (says Augustine de Baptism, u. Donatist.
ii. 6) "the deceitful balance of our own wills and opinions ; but let us
use the divine balance of the Holy Scriptures, and let us weigh
doctrines in it, or rather let us not ourselves weigh them, but let us
receive them as they are weighed out for us by the hand of God."

190 Theodore of Mopsuestia.
servile literalism in his expositions of Holy Scripture.5
" He disparaged," says Leontius,6 " the glory of the
Holy Scriptures, which are inspired by the Holy Ghost,
and he treated them in a low and degrading style ;
interpreting the Psalms in a Judaizing spirit, and
applying them not to Christ, but to Hezekiah or
Zerubbabel. He rejected some books of the Bible,
such as the Epistle of James and the other Catholic
Epistles, and the two books of Chronicles and Ezra."
Theodore of Mopsuestia regarded Man as a God
upon earth, and as created free in order that he might
receive a full development of intelligence by the know
ledge of evil, and by conquest over it ; and when
Adam failed of his mission, and sin had come into
the world by the Fall, and a New Man was necessary
to restore humanity to its place in Creation, then
(according to Theodore7) the Eternal Word, having
foreseen that Christ would by the freedom of His
Will attain to a moral primacy, and become a noble
example to Humanity in its conflicts with evil, asso
ciated Him in a companionship of amity with Him
self8 from the time of His Conception in the womb
of the Virgin Mary, and raised Him from the dead,
and exalted Him to heavenly places.
Theodore, being a strenuous asserter of the power

5 Socr. vi. 3> */''**•'? Ttp ypdppaTL irpoGexw, ras Beatpias avT&p inrpe-
Tt&pzvos. 6 Leontius in Galland. Bibl. Patr. xii. 686.
1 On Theodore of Mopsuestia as a precursor of Nestorius, see the
paper in the Church Quarterly Review, No. 1, pp. 130 — 134. The
writer of it quotes a passage where Theodore seems to say that God
caused man to sin, and that death is not a consequence of sin, p. 134.
In other places Theodore appears to assert that Christ merited His asso
ciation with the Logos by a gradual course of virtue (see in Tille
mont, xiv. 302).
8 Cp. Dorner on the Person of Christ, Vol. i. Div. ii.

History of Nestorius — His elevation to the See of 191
Constantinople.
of the human Will, underrated the need of divine
Grace. In a work of which some fragments remain,9
he spoke in contemptuous terms of S. Jerome's writings
against Pelagianism ; he was, in fact, a favourer of
Pelagius, and a forerunner of Nestorius, who, in some
respects, encouraged the Pelagian heresy.
Tarsus and Mopsuestia were not far from Antioch,
and Diodorus, Theodore, and Nestorius were con
nected with it. Nestorius was born at Germanicia,
to the north of that city, but was educated at Antioch,
and then dwelt in a monastery near it, whence he
returned to Antioch, and was ordained to the priest
hood, and attracted admiration by the dignity of his
deportment, the grace of his eloquence, and the
austerity and holiness of his life.
When- the See of Constantinople became vacant, on
Dec. 24, A.D. 427, by the death of Sisinnius, Nestorius
was appointed by the Emperor to the vacant throne,
and was consecrated on April 10, A.D. 428.
His appointment was hailed with general satisfac
tion in the East and West. It was supposed by some
that Constantinople would have in Nestorius a second
Chrysostom. But his natural gifts, and the popu
larity which he gained by them, were a strong tempta
tion to him. He relied on the fluency of his eloquence,
which had charmed his Syrian audience ; and in a
spirit of self-conceit he was satisfied with shallow
sciolism in theology, and did not care to improve
his knowledge by the study of the works of authors
wiser and more learned than himself.1
9 See Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 387 ; Tillemont, xiv. 303 ; Marius Mer-
cator, i. p. 97 ; Gieseler, § 87. He is characterized by Photius
(Cod. 38) as &xaP's ¦"*¦' 4ijSi*f, and as alien from the truth in many
things (Cod. 177). 1 Socr. vii. 29—34.

192 Nestorius at Constantinople : a persecutor ; His heresy.
He professed zeal for orthodoxy ; and in his first
sermon preached before the Emperor he said to him,
" Give me the earth purified from heretics, and I will
give you heaven in return. Subdue the heretics with
me, and I will subdue the Persians with you." Some
of the audience, says the historian,2 were pleased ;
others, who judged of men by their speeches, perceived
in him levity of mind, and a passionate and vain
glorious temper. And so it proved. On the fifth
day after his consecration he attacked the Church of
the Arians, who therefore set it on fire ; and from this
and other acts he gained the name of " firebrand," or
rather, of " conflagration." 3 He persecuted the Nova-
tians, Quartodecimans, and Macedonians ; * and per
suaded the Emperor to take away their churches ;
and soon after his consecration a severe law was
enacted by Theodosius against all forms of heresy
by name — except the Pelagian.5 But his own false
doctrine soon revealed itself. He was opposed
to Arianism, and asserted the Godhead of the
Son consubstantial with the Father ; he condemned
Apollinarlanism, which denied that Christ had a
human soul, and merged His human flesh in the
Godhead ; he also confessed the divinity of the
Holy Ghost. But he applied the rationalizing philo
sophy of Theodore to the mystery of the Incarnation.
He contended that the Human nature, derived from
the Virgin Mary, could not be united with the
Nature of God, in the divine Person of the Son of
God. " I cannot (said Nestorius) worship a God
Who has been born, dead, and buried.6 A woman
2 Socr. vii. 29. 3 irvpitaid. 4 Socr. vii. 31.
5 Cod. Theodos. xvi. 5, 65, May 30, 428.
6 Although the Catholic Fathers had used such expressions as niBy

Nestorius on the title Theotocos, or Mother of God. 193
could only be the mother of a man bearing the same
nature as herself.7 To say, that God had been born
was paganism, and would make Mary a goddess, a
mother of a god. A creature could not be said to
give birth to the uncreated ; and a woman, born in
time, could not bear one who is older than herself,
even from Eternity." Consequently Nestorius could
not bring himself to acknowledge the Blessed Virgin
to be Theotocos, or Mother of God.
Indeed he patronized one of his presbyters, Anas
tasius, who said in one of his sermons, " Let no one
call Mary Theotocos ;" 8 and he encouraged Dorotheus,
who ventured to declare in his presence,9 " If any
one calls her by that name, let him be anathema."
His ignorance of theology, and his confident reliance
on his own reason, were evident from the assertion
in his letter to Pope Caelestine,1 in A.D. 429, that the
word Theotocos had not been applied to the Blessed
Virgin by the Catholic Fathers ; and that the
Fathers at Nicaea had only said that Jesus Christ, and
not the Son of God, was incarnate of the Blessed
Virgin ; whereas the Nicene Creed declares that He
Who is " God of God, Very God of Very God," was
conceived and born of her. And the testimonies 2 of
8eov, e.g. Ignat. ad Ephes. c. 1, ad Rom. t. 6 ; Athan. u. Epict. n. 10,
eGTavpupivov Beov.
7 For extracts from the Sermons of Nestorius to this effect, see
Gieseler, § 88. s Socr. vii. 32.
9 Concil. Eph. i. c. 10. 1 Ibid. t. 16.
2 Testimonies to the use of the word theotocos by the Ante-Nicene and
Nicene Fathers may be seen in Euseb. Vit. Const, iii. 43 ; Didymus de
Trin. i. 31 ; Athanas. iii. u. 14, 33 ; Dionys. Alex, ad Paul. Samosat.
p. 276 ; Respons. ad Quaest. 5 ; and many others quoted by Cyril in his
letter to the Princesses, Cone. Eph. i. c. 4, 9, 10 ; and Bishop Pearson
on the Creed, Art. iii. p. 177 ; Gieseler, Church Hist, § 88 ; Canon
Bright, Church Hist. p. 312. And see above, vol. ii. p. 168, where it is
VOL. IV. O

194 Ancient use of the term Theotocos — The doctrine of
Holy Scripture on the Incarnation.
Ante-Nicene and Nicene Fathers were conclusive as
to the use of that title, and as to his unsoundness in
rejecting it. The Church historian Socrates, who
wrote while Nestorius was still living,3 states that the
people of Constantinople were distracted by what he
calls his " frigid loquacity." 4
In the rationalistic system of Nestorius, disparaging
the doctrine of Holy Scripture, as interpreted by the
Primitive Church, we may recognize the wiles of the
Enemy, as revealed in the Apocalypse, tempting
man to weigh the mystery of the Incarnation, with a
semblance of equity and fairness, in the scales of human
Reason, instead of listening with the ear of Faith to
Divine Revelation. On account of the perfect union
of the two Natures— the divine and human — in the
Person of Christ, Scripture ascribes to Him such
sufferings as God, in His Godhead, could not suffer,
but which the God-man suffered for the sake of
men, whose nature He wears. Accordingly the
Apostle said, " Feed the Church of God, which He
hath purchased with His ojvn blood;" 5 and again, " The
Princes of this world crucified the Lord of glory;" 6 and
for a like reason, because Man is joined indissolubly
to God in the divine Person of Christ, Our Lord
Himself, when on earth, speaks of" the Son of Man
as being in heaven, where He was before." 7
Instead of this Scriptural statement of the doctrine
of the Incarnation, Nestorius fed his hearers with the
shown that Julian himself is a witness to the use of this title by the
Ancient Church ; and yet Gibbon (Hist. vol. viii. ch. xlviii. p. 285)
eulogizes Nestorius for his resistance to what Gibbon calls " a rash
and recent title."
3 Socr. vii. 34. 4 tyvxpoKoyia.
5 Acts xx. 28. 8 I Cor. ii. 8.
7 John vi. 62. Cp. Hooker, V. liii. 3, 4.

Heresy of Nestorius — He favoured Pelagianism. 1 95
husks of such teaching as this, — that the Divine Word,
the Eternal Son of the Father, the Second Person of
the Ever-Blessed Trinity, had condescended to enter
into a near relationship 8 with a human Person, Christ
Jesus, the Son of Mary, and to ally Himself to that
Person by a gracious complacency ; 3 . and to attach
Himself to that Person by a bond1 of amity ; and to
dwell in that Person as God dwells in a temple;
and to clothe Himself with that Person as a man puts
on a garment ; and to use that Person as an instru
ment;* and that therefore a certain equality of
.honour3 may be accorded to that Person. But to
call the Son of Mary by a divine Name ; and to
call her " Mother of God," — this, he said, would be
creature-worship and idolatry ; it would be to honour
the robe instead of the Wearer ; to revere the instru
ment instead of the Agent ; and to adore the temple
instead of God.4
It has been supposed with good reason, that Nes
torius concurred in many respects with Pelagius ; 5 and
indeed, when Julian and other Pelagian Bishops were
deposed in the West, and resorted to him at Con
stantinople, they found friendly sympathy and a
cordial welcome there ; and he interceded for them
with Pope Caelestine. He did not agree with them in
their repugnance to the doctrine of original sin ; he
preached against their tenets in that respect ; but he
was in accord with them as to divine grace, as a th ing
8 Or association, koto ax^iv, or Kara oidBuriv.
9 evboKia. 1 ffvvdtpeia. - 6pyavop. 3 icroripia.
4 See Concil. Eph. Mansi, iv. 1 198; v. 762; and the first and second
Sermons of Nestorius, translated by Marius Mercator.
5 On the connexion of Nestorius with Pelagianism (which was
favoured by the teaching of his master Theodore), see Cassian de
Incarn. Christi adv. Nestorium, v. I, and Gieselei, § 88.
O 2

196 The questions at issue in the Nestorian Controversy —
Peril of the Faith and of the doctrine of Divine Grace.
communicated from without, by precept and example,
rather than as a vital energy dwelling in the heart, and
sanctifying the whole man, in body, soul, and spirit.
Let us consider carefully, what was at stake.
Some have regarded the question at issue as merely
a question of words. Persons, who look with pity and
disdain at the struggle of Athanasius, during the forty-
seven years of his Episcopate, for the doctrine involved
in the word homoousios, will doubtless dismiss at once
with commiseration or superciliousness the con
troversy of the Church for the crucial 6 term theotocos,
which sums up the Truth which she then strove to
maintain. But others will take a different view ; and will
listen reverently to the solemn tones of the divine
voice speaking to the Patriarch of Constantinople in
the language of stern prohibition, " See thou hurt not
the oil and wine."
The " oil and wine " of divine Grace were then in
great danger. Christ, the good Samaritan, had poured
the oil and wine7 of divine Grace into Universal
Humanity, which the Priesthood and Law had not
been able to heal, and which was lying in the road
of the world, wounded and bleeding.
But Nestorianism, with its own errors superadded
to Pelagian sympathies, had no such divine power,
6 As Dr. Newman (in his note on Fleury, xxvii. 35) calls BeorSKos.
This word was, so to speak, the " Ithuriel's spear " (see Milton,
Paradise Lost, iv. 810) which by its touch revealed the Evil One
lurking in Nestorianism ; as homoousios revealed him in Arianism ;
and as Kotvuv'ia 28 lapdrwi/ revealed him in Eutychianism, which left
no tSuipm-a to the two Natures, but merged them into one, after the
Incarnation. 7 Luke x. 34. In the Seven-branched Candlestick — the type of the
Church (in' Zech. iv. 2— 1 1 ) — it is the oil from Christ, Who gives light
to the Candlestick, and enables it to illuminate the World.

Danger to the doctrines of Justification and Sanctification. 197
and no such embassy of love, and no such ministry of.
Grace, for suffering Manhood. If all that the Son of
God did, when He came down from heaven, was to
associate Himself with a particular person, then what
ever good might have been done to that one Person,
no benefit would have accrued to universal humanity.
If the Blood shed on the Cross was only the blood of
a man dear to God, then it would have done no
more for the redemption of the World, and for a pro
pitiation and atonement for the sins of Mankind, and
for its justification with God, than the effusion of the
blood of a Peter or a Paul ; and it could not be said
that the Name by which Christ is to be called is
the " Lord our Righteousness." 8
The infinite virtue of the Blood shed on the Cross
is due to the fact, which Holy Scripture teaches,
that it was the Blood of God.9
If, again, only a special person was raised from the
dead, and ascended into heaven, being carried thither
by the Divine Logos, associating that person with
Himself, then it could not be said that " we have risen
with Christ," * and that we " have been made to sit in
heavenly places with Him." 2
If also that, which, by the operation of the Holy
Ghost, was assumed by the Divine Word in the Womb
of the Blessed Virgin, was only a person already
existing, and not the seminal essence of human Nature,
which began to exist at the very moment that it was
assumed, then it was not human Nature that was
sanctified by the Incarnation, but only some particular
person taken out of Mankind, by a partial eclecticism
and privileged by a special prerogative.
8 Jer. xxiii. 6. 9 Acts xx. 28.
1 Col. ii. 12 ; iii. 1. s Eph. ii. 6.

198 How Nestorianism affects the doctrine of the Sacraments.
But the Truth, which Scripture declares as a fruit
of the Divine Son's Incarnation, Passion, and Re
surrection, is that Christ "is made of God to us
righteousness, and redemption, and sanctification." 3
If, again, He who died on the Cross of Calvary had
not been God as well as Man, then the Holy Sacra
ments, by which the virtue of His Incarnation and
Passion are imparted to men, and which were sym
bolized by the streams of Blood and Water flowing
from His pierced side at His death, could not be, as
they are, the fountains and well-springs of new and
heavenly life to the soul, and the. divine restoratives of
that Life when marred by human infirmity, and the
pledges of a blessed Resurrection and a glorious
Immortality by union and communion with Him,
Very God and Very Man, Who is the Resurrection
and the Life.4

3 1 Cor. i. 30. Cp. Hooker, V. Iii. — liv. 6. These chapters of
Hooker's work deserve careful study in connexion with Nestorianism.
4 Such considerations as these, with regard to doctrine and practice,
are developed by S. Cyril in his letter On the right Faith to the Emperor
Theodosius (tom. v. part ii.), and in his treatise addressed "to the
Princesses," the Emperor's sisters — Pulcheria, Arcadia, and Marina —
tom. v. part ii. (which are well summarized by Canon Bright, Art. on
Cyril, in Diet. Biog. i. 765) ; and see Hooker (V. Iii. 3), who says,
" The one point of Christian belief, the infinite worth of the Son of God,
is the very ground of all things believed concerning life and salvation by
that which Christ either did or suffered as Man in our behalf." See
also Hooker, V. liv. 6, " God hath deified our nature, by making it His
own inseparable habitation, and thus has given to it hopes full of
immortality." With regard to the error of Nestorius, as affecting the doctrine of the
Holy Eucharist, Cyril says (v. pt. ii. p. 378), " Let them tell us what
Body it is, which is food to the flocks of Christ, and by what streams
they are refreshed. If it is the Blood of.Him Who is God, then is
the Son of God not only God, but the Word Incarnate. If it is the
flesh of Christ which is meat, and His blood which is drink (John
vi. 55) ; and if He is mere man, and if it is the flesh and blood of a

How Nestorianism undermined the foundation of human 199
duty.
It has been said indeed,6 that Nestorianism had an
ethical value, which was lacking in the theology of
Cyril and the Alexandrine School, in that the former,
founding itself on the freedom of man's will, and on
his personal responsibility and perfectibility, suggested
reasons for moral action, that were wanting in the
system of the latter, which resolved the doctrine of
the Incarnation into a mystery and a miracle of Divine
Love and Power.
But here again there is a substitution of human
reason for divine revelation.
Nestorianism not only destroyed the foundation of
faith, but of duty. Divine revelation represents the
"mystery and miracle of the Incarnation" as the
strongest motive for human love and for moral action.
It is the foundation of love ,to God the Father, " Who
so loved the world as to give His only-begotten Son "
to die for us. It is the foundation of love to the Son
of God, Who took our Nature that He might die for
us, and Who laid down His life for us that we might
live for ever. It is the foundation of love of man to
man, as his brother and fellow-member in Christ. It
is the foundation of all hope of a glorious resurrection
and a blessed immortality. Union with God in Christ
is the fountain and well-spring of holiness of life ; it is
a divine appeal from Him to man to be " holy as He
is holy," 6 and to perfect holiness in His fear.7 " Know
ye not that ye are not your own, but bought with a
price,8 even with the blood of Christ ?" Your bodies are

mere man, how is it that we teach that it avails to eternal life ? A
mere body is not the source of life to those who receive it." See
also vol. iv. p. 365.
5 Even by Dorner, vol. i. Div. ii. p. 73. 6 1 Pet. i. 16.
7 2 Cor. vii. I. 8 1 Cor. vi. 20.

200 The doctrine of the Incarnation the foundation of faith
and practice.
members of Christ.9 Shall I take the member of
Christ, and make it the member of a harlot ? Know
ye not thatyour bodies are temples of the Holy Ghost ?
and whosoever defileth the temple of God, him will
God destroy;1 but he that hath this "hope in Him
(i.e. in Christ) purifieth himself, as He is pure." 2
These considerations are derived from " the miracle
and mystery of the Incarnation," and are applied in
Holy Scripture as constraining motives to moral prac
tice. And the assurance is added, that this practice
is assisted by divine grace, even by the indwelling
and working of the Holy Ghost, consequent on the
Incarnation ; and that there is thereby perfect remis
sion of sins to the faithful. " If we walk in the light,
as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with
another, and the blood of Jesus Christ, His Son,
cleanseth us from all sin." s
Therefore the doctrine of the Incarnation is the
foundation of Christian Morals, as well as of Christian
Faith and Christian Hope ; and though this Mystery
is inscrutable to man's Reason, yet it enables man's
Reason to accept the doctrines which describe God's
relations to himself, and his own duty to God. The
Mystery of the Incarnation is like the mid-day Sun
in the heavens ; it is too dazzling for man's eye to
gaze upon ; but it illumines the World in which we
live, and all around us would be dark without it.
It has been truly observed,4 that the peculiar tem
perament and bias of the Antiochene School of exe
getical and dogmatic Theology were favourable to
Arianism ; and it is no less true, that they were con-
9 I Cor. vi. 15. "¦ 1 Cor. iii. 16, 17.
2 I John iii. 3. 3 1 John i. 7.
4 See Newman's Arians, chap. i.

The School of Antioch ; contrasted with Alexandria — 201
Athanasius and Cyril, Patriarchs of Alexandria.
duciveto the growth and development of Nestorianism.
It is remarkable also, that in both cases the poison
of heresy, which was diffused from Antioch, was coun
teracted by an antidote from Alexandria.
Arianism was checked by Athanasius ; and Nes
torius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, encountered
a strenuous opponent in Cyril,5 a successor of
Athanasius in the Patriarchal throne of Alexandria.
Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, died on Oct. 12,
412, having occupied that see for twenty- seven years,
and was succeeded, after a sharply contested election,6
by his sister's son Cyril, who was enthroned in three
days after his uncle's death.
He began his Episcopate by shutting up the
churches of the Novatians. In A.D. 415 he was pro
voked by an attack of the Jews upon one of his
presbyters, Hierax — who was seized and scourged by
Orestes the Governor — and by subsequent insults on
their part, to make an assault upon their synagogues,
and to expel them from the city.7
0 For the life of Cyril, see Tillemont, vol. xiv. pp. 267 — 671, and the
Article on Cyril in Wace's Dictionary of Christian Biography, i. pp. 763
— 773, which is worthy to be coupled with the Article on Athanasius
by the same writer — Canon Bright — in that work. The labours of the
Benedictines did not extend to S. Cyril ; the best edition of his works
is that of Canon John Aubert, Paris, 1658, in six volumes folio, which
probably would not have been the case, if Mr. Philip E. Pusey had been
spared to continue and complete his critical revision of them. The
following volumes of Cyril's Works were published by him : —
Vols. I. and IL, the Commentaries upon the twelve Minor Prophets.
Vols. III., IV., V., the Commentary on St. John.
Vol. VI., Libri v. contra Nestorium, Explanatio xii. Capitum,
Defensiones xii. Capitum, Scholia de Incarnatione Unigeniti.
Vol. VII., Part i., the De Recta Fide Tres Tractatus, Quod Unus est
Christus, Dialogus Apologeticus, and some few of the Homilies.
6 Socr. vii. 7. 7 Ibid. vii. 13.

202 Religious riot at Alexandria — Hypatia.
The Governor appealed to the Emperor. Cyril en
deavoured in vain to appease him.8 In the mean
time about 500 monks from Nitria, who were ever
ready to vindicate what they regarded as the cause
of orthodoxy, by violent outrages of furious fanati
cism, invaded the city, and assaulted and wounded
the Governor, Orestes, who was rescued by the people,
and who by their help seized one of the monks,
Ammonius, who died under his tortures. The body
of Ammonius was carried by Cyril to the Church, and
he was lauded by him as thaumasios* (admirable),
and as a martyr to the faith.
The popular riot did not stop there. The beauti
ful, modest, chaste, learned, and eloquent Hypatia
fell a victim to it. She was the daughter of Theon
the philosopher, and was distinguished by knowledge
of geometry, and eclipsed all contemporary teachers
by her lectures on the philosophy of the new Platonic
School ; while to many persons, such as her friend
and scholar Synesius, afterwards Bishop of Ptole-
mais,1 who called her his " mother, sister, and in
structress," her lecture-room was like a vestibule to
the Church.2 Hypatia possessed much influence
with the Governor of Alexandria, Orestes, and was
suspected by some Christians of prejudicing him
against their Bishop, and was regarded with antipathy
by them as thwarting the progress of the Gospel by
her persuasive advocacy of heathen philosophy.
A mob of wild and brutal fanatics, led by Peter,
one of the readers of the Church, and swelled pro-
8 Socr. vii. 14. 9 Ibid.
1 See Neander, i. 47 ; iv. 9. Gieseler, i. 323 ; ii. 23.
2 See the interesting work of M. Chastel, Destruction du Paganisme
dans FEmpire d'Orient, pp. 244 — 276.

Murder of Hypatia— Its effects on Cyril: his character. 203
bably by tumultuous parabolani? waylaid her coming
in her carriage from her lecture-room, and tore her
from it, and with fiendish phrenzy hurried her to the
Church called Caesareum, where they murdered her,
and lacerated her body, and burnt her bones to ashes
at a place called Cenaron.4
This deed, says the historian Socrates,5 brought
great discredit on Cyril,6 and on the Church of Alex
andria. It was perpetrated in March, in the season
of Lent, in the fourth year of his Episcopate,
A.D. 415.
It was noted also as a sign of Cyril's temper, that
though the name of Chrysostom had been restored
to the diptychs of the Churches of Constantinople
and Antioch, A.D. 415, he clung so tenaciously to the
enmity he had inherited from his uncle Theophilus,
that he declined to place that name in the diptychs
of Alexandria before the year A.D. 417. By its.
3 A guild so called from exposing themselves (irapafidWeffBai : see
note on Philippians ii. 30) to danger in attending the sick and burying
the dead. Tillemont, xiv. 276. Gibbon, vol. viii. chap, xlvii. p. 278.
At first they were very useful, and received honourable privileges ;
which, however, they abused by taking part in popular outrages,
so that they were placed under restraint by imperial enactments. Cod.
Theod. xvi. 5, 42 j modified ibid. xvi. 15, 43.
4 Socr. vii. 15. The English reader will be familiar with the descrip
tion of this outrage in Gibbon, vol. viii. chap, xlvii. p. 281, and in the
Rev. Charles Kingsley's " Hypatia," chap. xxix. p. 361. In p. 368 he
gives Cyril's supposed comments upon it. Gibbon says ' ' that the murder
of Hypatia has, imprinted an indelible stain on the character and religion
of Cyril;" and so Stanley, Eastern Church, p. 293. The evidence
is weighed impartially in Canon Bright's article on Cyril in Wace's Diet.
i. p. 764. 5 Socr. vii. 15.
6 Damascius, quoted by Valesius (on Socr. vii. 15), imputes much
blame to Cyril in this matter, but his testimony is disputed by Du Pin,
quoted by Reading ; and Tillemont, xiv. 275, supposes Damascius,
who lived about 130 years after the event, to have written under pagan
influence.

204 Cyril's Expository works — On " Worship in spirit and
in truth."
restoration, the Church of Alexandria was again in
communion with Rome.7
For some years Cyril lived and laboured in peace.
Besides the Paschal Epistles, which as Bishop of
Alexandria he issued every year, he composed elabo
rate expository works on the Old and New Testament.
His work on Adoration in Spirit and Truth? in seven
teen books, in the form of Dialogues between Cyril
and Palladius, is assigned to this period. His Gla-
phyra * also (i.e. beautiful and polished things, like
fair pictures or jewels) collected from the Word of
God, belong to this period.
In the former of these works he describes the
condition of Man, consequent on the Fall, and his
restoration by Christ, the Second Adam ; and de
clares that there is no waj* of justification and sancti -
fication for Mankind but by Christ. He dwells on
the moral virtues, such as fortitude, faith, and charity,
which owe their existence and energy to Man's union
with Christ.
He proceeds to speak of the Levitical dispensation
as preparatory to Christ ; and of the necessity of
true Worship, which sees and adores Christ in that
dispensation ; and which contemplates Him and His
Church, foreshadowed in the Tabernacle in the Wil
derness, and in the Levitical Priesthood and Ritual.
He declares also the necessity of purity of heart, and
holiness of life, in order that the worshipper may be
acceptable to God.
The concluding book of this work is an exposition
of the Christian significance of the Hebrew Fes
tivals. 7 Tillemont, xiv. 281 — 283. 8 Vol. i. pt. i. pp. 1 — 632.
9 Vol. i. pt. ii. pp. 1—432.

Cyril's Glaphyra. 205
The other work, the Glaphyra, opens with the
proposition, that " the mystery of Christ is signified
in all the writings of Moses." This is illustrated in
a spiritual Commentary on the Creation, and on the
history of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel ; of Noah
and the Ark ; of Abraham and Melchizedek ; of
Isaac and Rebecca ; of Jacob, and Joseph and his
brethren ; of the twelve Patriarchs ; of Moses ; of the
Exodus, and Wanderings in the Wilderness ; the
Manna ; the smitten Rock ; the Brazen Serpent ;
the twelve Spies ; the acts of Joshua ; the twelve
Stones taken out of Jordan.
These works of Cyril have never received the atten
tion which they richly deserve. They possess very
great value, as unfolding the inner sense of the Penta
teuch, and the true meaning of the Levitical Law.
To this period belong his Commentaries on Isaiah,
and the Minor Prophets ; * which unfold the Christian
significance of Hebrew prophecy with the eloquence
of an Origen, chastened with the sober judgment of a
Chrysostom.2 Cyril also composed expositions of St.
Matthew, St. Luke,3 and St. John.
Cyril's reputation as a Controversialist has obscured
his fame as an Expositor ; and in reading his po
lemical works, which are characterized by vehemence,
and sometimes by acrimony, his critics seem to
forget that he edified the Church of his own and suc-
1 Cp. Tillemont, xiv. pp. 671— 673.
3 I feel bound to acknowledge my great obligations to Cyril, in com
menting on the Pentateuch. Aiid all who are familiar with Dr.
Pusey^ great work on the " Minor Prophets " know how much its
learned and revered Author profited by the expository teaching of the
Patriarch of Alexandria.
3 Lately translated from the Syriac by the Very Rev. the Dean of
Canterbury, 1859.

206 Cyril's opposition to Nestorianism : Causes of.
ceeding ages by his doctrinal and practical exposi
tions of both Testaments.
The hostility of Cyril to Nestorianism has been
ascribed by some 4 to personal animosity and jealousy
of the See of Constantinople. But this appears to
be an unfair imputation. They who have examined
his expository works, and his treatise on the Incar
nation, which is appended to his work on the
Trinity, written before the elevation of Nestorius
to the Patriarchate of Constantinople, will acknow
ledge that a collision between him and Nestorius
was inevitable. It was impossible for Cyril to remain
silent, when he saw that the fundamental doctrine of
the Christian faith was assailed by the Archbishop
of the Capital of the East ; and it was equally im
possible for one of his ardent zeal, indomitable
courage, and inflexible constancy, to bate a jot in his
endeavours to contend for that doctrine even to the
death. " I am resolved," he said, " to give myself no
rest, and to suffer all things for the Faith of Christ." 5
And again, " If it were only the loss of my estate,6 1
would willingly sacrifice it to gain my brother Nes
torius ; but since it is a question of Faith, and since
a scandal has been given to the Churches, necessity
is laid upon us to speak out. God has entrusted to
us the preaching of its mysteries, and if we were silent,
then at the Great Day the errors of those who make
4 So Gibbon, chap, xlvii.; and even Dr. Neander, iv. 151 — 153, who
imputes the worst motives to Cyril. Not so Dorner, who says, p. 55,
"It is clear that the Patriarch of Alexandria was not moved by envy
or ambition of power to oppose the School of Antioch ;'' and he shows
that such opposition was inevitable, even if Nestorius had been the
dearest personal friend of Cyril.
5 Cyril ap. Mercat. pt. ii. p. 56.
6 Cyril, Concil. Eph. pt. i. c. 11.

Two important documents. 207
shipwreck of the Faith will be on our heads. I dis
regard his injuries and calumnies, and would gladly
forget them ; let the soundness of Faith be main-
. tained, and no one will be a surer friend to Nestorius
than myself. I speak it in the presence of God, and
my heart's desire is that he may be filled with glory
in Christ."
Among the controversial communications between
Cyril and Nestorius, two deserve special notice, as
stating clearly the questions at issue between them,
and being the groundwork of the action of the third
General Council of the Church, that of Ephesus, in
A.D. 431.
In Feb. A.D. 430, Cyril wrote thus to Nestorius 7
on the mystery of the Incarnation : — "We must ac
knowledge two generations in Christ: first, the eternal
generation, whereby He was begotten by His Father ;
secondly, the generation in time, whereby He was
born of His mother. When we assert that He suf
fered and rose again, we do not mean to say that
God the Word suffered in His divine nature, for God
is incapable of suffering ; but because the Body suf
fered, which was His, we say that He Himself suffered.
So also we assert that He died, although the Divine
Word in His own nature is immortal, and is the Very
Life. But because His own real Body suffered death,
we affirm that He Himself died for us. And we
attribute Resurrection to Him, because His flesh was
raised from the dead. We do not say 8 that we adore
the Man together with the Word, lest that phrase
'togetkex with' should suggest the notion of non-
identity ; but we adore Him as One and the Same
Person, because the Body which was assumed by the
7 Concil. Eph. pt. i. c. 8. 8 As the Nestorians did.

208 Cyrils statement of the true doctrine.
Word is in no respect external to the Word, or to be
separated from the Word. ... In this sense the Fathers
ventured to call the Holy Virgin the Mother of God,
not that the nature of the Word, or His divinity, re
ceived a beginning of existence from her, but because
in her was formed, and animated with a reasonable
soul, that Sacred Body, to which the Word united
himself in hypostasis"
Cyril explained9 the meaning of the word hypostasis,
as used by him here, by saying that " the union of the
two natures was effected by the second Hypostasis (or
Person x) of the Trinity in itself, and essentially, but
without confusion." On another occasion2 also he
speaks clearly of the two natures as united, at the
Incarnation, in the one hypostasis or Person of Christ ;
and again he says,3 " We see that the two natures
came together by an indissoluble union, without con
fusion, and without any change of one to the other.
Flesh is flesh, and is not God, albeit it has become
in Christ the flesh of God."
He refers also to the Holy Eucharist, as deriving
9 Cyril de Trin. p. 24, at end of vol. vi.
1 The Catholic Fathers — being persuaded by Athanasius — recognized
the word hypostasis as applicable to the substance of the three Persons
of the Trinity, and also to each Person separately ; provided that the
sense was clearly defined in which that word hypostasis was used (see
above, vol. ii. p. 222). And when we come to consider the relation of
Athanasius and Cyril to the Eutychian Controversy, we shall see reason
for believing that the word (piais (or nature) was used in a double sense,
viz. to designate the nature of God and the nature of Man separately,
and also the real union of both in the one Person of Christ. Indeed we
are continually reminded of the inadequacy of all human language to
describe divine mysteries, unless the sense in which it is used is clearly
defined. '¦* In the Synodal Confession of the Council of Alexandria, a.d. 430,
Cone. Eph. pt. i. u. 26.
3 Cyril ad Successum, Epist. p. 137, tom. v. pt. ii. ed. 1638.

Letter of Nestorius to Cyril. 209
its virtue from this Union,4 " We are sanctified at
the Holy Eucharist, when we partake of the sacred
Flesh and precious Blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ,
which we do not receive as common flesh — God for
bid ! — nor as the flesh of a Man sanctified and joined
to the Word 5 by a union of dignity, or of one in whom
the Deity dwells ; but as really life-giving, and as the
flesh of One united with the Word. He Who, as God,
is Life in His own nature, became One with His flesh,
and gave to it a quickening virtue. Else how could
the flesh of a man be life-giving in its nature ? "
The second important document is the reply of
Nestorius to that letter of Cyril.6
Nestorius does not, in explicit terms, deny the
junction of the two natures in one Person ; but he does
not recognize a real and essential union,7 but only a
connexion.8 He asserts that "the Blessed Virgin is not
to be called Mother of God, but only Mother of Christ ;
because, although the Body of Christ was the Temple
of the Divinity, yet the properties of birth, suffering,
and death cannot be ascribed to Divinity without
falling into the errors of the Heathen, or of Apolli-
narius or Arius."
But Cyril had clearly stated, that though by reason of
the unity of the Godhead with the Manhood in Christ
it might be truly said that theDivineWord suffered.and
died, and purchased the Church with His own Blood,
yet he altogether repudiated the notion (which indeed
in his letter to his Clergy he had stigmatized as
absurd 9) that Christ suffered and died in His Godhead.
4 Concil. Eph. pt. i. c. 26. 5 As Nestorius held and taught.
6 Concil. Eph. pt. i. c. 9. Mar. Mercat. p. 57.
7 evutriv. s avvdfyeiav.
9 Concil. Eph. pt. i. c. 12, " No one has ever said anything so
VOL. IV. P

210 Ccelestine agrees with Cyril — References to Ambrose
and Augustine on the true doctrine.
Caelestine, Bishop of Rome, having received a letter
from Cyril informing, him of the controversy in the
East, summoned a Council in August, A.D. 430, and
stated the orthodox doctrine of the Western Fathers
upon it. Especially he referred1 to the celebrated
Hymn of S. Ambrose for Christmas Day, in which
are the words —
" Come, Thou Redeemer of the Nations ;
Make manifest the Virgin's Childbirth ;
Let every age admire it ;
Such Childbirth befits God." 2
Caelestine pertinently added, " How well do these
words of Ambrose agree with the language of our
brother Cyril, when he calls Mary the Mother of God ;
and with our own belief that He Whom the Virgin
brought forth by the aid of Omnipotence was Very
God." Augustine also had expressed himself in the
same terms as Ambrose, when he said,3 " Man was
assumed into unity with the Person of God the
Word, Who remained unchangeably in His own divine
Nature. As in a man the soul and body make one
person, so in Christ the Word and Man are one Per
son. And as, for instance, a man is not called a phi
losopher, except by reason of his soul, and yet we say
a philosopher died, although his death happened to him
absurd;" but they (the Nestorians), he adds, "make a conjunction
only of two Persons"
1 Frag. Arnob. c. Serap. p. 218, ap. Baluz. Coll. Nov. p. 379.
2 " Veni, Redemptor gentium ;
Ostende partum Virginis ;
Miretur omne sseculum ;
Talis decet partus Deum."
3 Augustine, Epist. 169 ad Evodium, and Epist. 137 ad Volusian.,
and Enchir. ad Laurent, c. 34, 36.

The Council of Rome condemns Nestorius — Ccelestine's 211
manifesto — John of Antioch remonstrates with Nestorius.
according to his body, and not according to that by
which he is a philosopher ; so Christ is God, and yet
it is rightly said that God was crucified, although this
happened to Him according to the flesh, and not
according to, that nature in which. He is the Lord of
Glory. He was manifested as Mediator between God
and Man in such sort as to join both Natures in the
unity of His Person."
The Council of Rome condemned Nestorius ; and
Pope Caelestine in a letter to Cyril declared his entire
concurrence in his opinions. And in circular letters
addressed to Nestorius and his Clergy, and to John
Patriarch of Antioch, and to Juvenal Patriarch of
Jerusalem, and to others, Caelestine declared that
if Nestorius did not within ten days after he had
received the admonition from Rome renounce his false
doctrine, and promise to confess the faith "of the
Church of Rome and of all Christendom, he would be
excommunicated and deposed.
John, Bishop of Antioch,4 endeavoured to recover
Nestorius from his errors, and exhorted him, "in
speaking of the Lord's Incarnation, to use the appro
priate term (theotocos) employed by many of the
Fathers, which expresses truly His birth of the Vir
gin, and which none of the doctors of the Church ever
declined ;" and that cannot be rejected without dan
gerous and antiscriptural error, which would imply
that it was not God who became incarnate, and made
Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the
form of a servant.5 To this friendly expostulation
Nestorius sent a refusal.6
Cyril proceede*d to hold a Council at Alexandria,
4 Concil. Eph. pt. i. c. 21. 5 Phil. ii. 6—8.
6 Baluz. p. 688.
P 2

212 'Council of Alexandria — Cyril's Synodical Epistle —
His " anathematisms " — Rejoinder of Nestorius.
in the name of which he put forth a Synodal letter
containing the Nicene Creed, and an exposition of the
doctrine of the Incarnation in accordance with it. He
appended to it " twelve anathematisms " against those
who held the errors which are condemned in them.
They may be summed up in the following abstract : 7 —
They declare that Christ is God, inasmuch as
Scripture teaches, that it was the Word Who was
made flesh, and consequently that the Blessed Virgin
is Mother of God ; and that the Union of the Word
with flesh was hypostatic (or personal) ; that it was not
a mere union of dignity or ethical union, but an hy
postatic unity ; that the things predicated of Christ in
the Gospels are not to be attributed to two persons or
hypostases, but to the Word begotten of the Father ;
that the human Nature in the Person of Christ has a
claim to honour and worship, and is associated with
the Divine in power and operation ; and that the
Divine is united with the Human, and is effective in
the work of Propitiatory Sacrifice and Satisfaction for
Sin, and of Redemption and Sanctification, and of
vivification of the Body.
These " anathematisms " (it is to be remembered)
were not personal : the name of Nestorius does not
occur in them. They were expressed in an hypothe
tical form ; that is to say, if any one holds the errors
condemned in them, let him be anathema.
They were met by Nestorius with an equal number
of anathematisms on his side.
The Emperor, Theodosius the Younger, now re
solved to convoke a General Council 8 to settle this
7 See Garner in his edition of Marius Mercator, Paris, 1673, pt. ii.
P- 339> and apud Galland. Bibl. Patr. viii. 615, &c.
8 For the History and Acts of the Council of Ephesus, see Socr. vii.

The Emperor, Theodosius the Younger, summons a 213
Council of the Church — Sermon oj Nestorius.
controversy. The summons to it was issued on
Nov. 19, A.D. 430, in the name of the Emperor of the
East, Theodosius the Second, and of Valentinian the
Third, son of Placidia, daughter of Theodosius the
Great and Constantius.
Metropolitans of each Province were required to
meet at Ephesus before Whitsunday, A.D. 431, and to
bring with them such number of Bishops as they
thought necessary.
S. Augustine was the only Bishop of the West
who was invited by name. The Emperor sent a special
messenger to request his attendance ; but he had
received a summons to a more peaceful world before
the imperial envoy arrived at Carthage, which was at
Easter, A.D. 431.
On Sunday, Nov. 30, A.D. 430, four Bishops, who
were deputies of Cyril and of the Council of Alex
andria,9 arrived at the Cathedral Church of Constanti
nople, and delivered their Synodal letter.
On the following Saturday, Dec. 6, Nestorius
preached to the people a Sermon,1 in which he in
veighed against Cyril, whom he called " the Egyptian ;"
and whom he accused of influencing the Court by
bribes. In that Sermon he said that the "Lord of all took our
nature as a garment never to be put off, and with
out this robe He does nothing, and will do nothing."
Nestorius disclaimed the error of Paul of Samosata,
who made Christ to be a mere man ; and disavowed
the heresy of Photinus, who did not acknowledge
the Word to have been eternal. He acknowledged
34; Labbe, Concilia, iii. 2 — 1206 ; Mansi, Concilia, iv. 577, 1 109, &c,
and v. to p. 1046 ; Harduin, i. 1535 sqq.; Hefele, Concilien, ii. 178 sqq.
9 Concil. Eph. Act. i. p. 503. » In Mercat. Serm. 12, pt. ii. p. 84.

214 Cyril's anathematisms not approved by John of Antioch ;
or Theodoret — The character and works of Theodoret.
the two Natures, and one Divine Son ; but he did
not own an essential union of the two, but only such
a conjunction as subsists between Christ and the
Church.2 The " anathematisms " of the Council of Alexandria
under Cyril were not altogether approved by John,
Patriarch of Antioch, nor by Theodoret, the learned
and pious Bishop of Cyrus in Syria Euphratensis
(to which he was consecrated A.D. 420), who had
shown a fervent zeal for Christian missions in his
Diocese,3 and who imitated Basil and Chrysostom in
munificent works of piety and charity.
Theodoret, like many other great Teachers of the
ancient Church — such as Gregory Nazianzen, Basil,
Gregory Nyssen, Chrysostom, and Augustine — was
the son of a holy mother ; and received the name
Theodoret — given by God — in answer to his mother's
prayer, after a barrenness of thirteen years. At seven
years of age he was sent to school in the monastery
of Eutropius near Antioch ; and at Antioch he was a
hearer of Theodore of Mopsuestia and of Chrysostom ;
he was also a friend of Nestorius and of John after
wards Patriarch of Antioch.
He did good service by his excellent Commentaries
on the Old and New Testament, written in a terse
and perspicuous style;4 and by his History of the
Church,6 composed A.D. 450, a continuation of
that of Eusebius till the year 427 ; and by his Era-
nistes? in four books, written A.D. 446, on the Incar-

2 Mercator, pt. ii. p. 117.
3 See the details in Fleury, xxv. 30.
4 Much commended by Photius, Cod. 46, and 203.
5 Also lauded by Photius, Cod. 31.
" I. e. one who makes an ipavos or picnic out of divers errors. This

Theodoret' s character and acts — Council of Ephesus. 215
nation of Christ against the principal heresies con
cerning that doctrine, especially against the nascent
heresy of Eutyches ; and also by his history of
heresies, in five books, written in A.D. 453. He died
about A.D. 457.
Theodoret belonged to the Antiochene school of
theology, and he thought that the articles of Cyril
and of the Council of Alexandria did not clearly
distinguish the two Natures of Christ, and might be
construed to favour Apollinarianism ; but in his anim
adversions on those articles, Theodoret himself seemed
to approach to the verge of Nestorianism.
Eventually, however, when those articles were
cleared up by Cyril, Theodoret concurred with him in
his doctrine, though for a time he declined to condemn
Nestorius, which, however, finally he did ; and in his
letter to Dioscorus of Alexandria, he said, " If any
one denies that the holy Virgin is the Mother of God,
or divides the Only-begotten Son into two, let him
be deprived of the hope that is in Christ." 7
The Council of Ephesus met in St. Mary's Church
on Monday, June 22,. A.D. 431. On the throne in the
centre was placed a copy of the Gospels, signifying
the presence of Christ.8
At the first Session 158 Bishops were present, ranged
in two lines on the opposite sides of the Church. Cyril
presided, as highest in rank. Nestorius had been
work was also called iro\ip.op(pos or multiform. It is by some rendered
a Mendicant, i. e. a vagrant who gathers scraps by street-begging from
door to door.
" In a.d. 451, at the Council of Chalcedon, his words were (Concil.
iv. pp. 622 — 624), " Anathema to Nestorius, and to all who refuse to
call the Virgin Mary Mother of God, and to all who divide the Only-
begotten Son into two Sons."
8 Cyr. Epist. ad Theod. Concil. iii. p. 1043, ed. Labbe.

216 Council of Ephesus — Nestorius refuses to appear ;
is condemned by the Council.
invited three times to the Council by a deputation of
Bishops from it, but persistently refused to appear.
The Nicene Creed was recited; and after it the
second Letter of Cyril to Nestorius.9 Then Cyril
asked for the opinion of the Bishops. Juvenal of
Jerusalem was the first to pronounce judgment.
Then 125 Bishops in succession gave their opinions,
and expressed their assent to that letter, as in
accordance with the Nicene Creed. The other Bishops
generally signified their concurrence with it.
The letter of Nestorius, already mentioned, was then
called for and read. Juvenal of Jerusalem again
took the lead, and condemned it as inconsistent with
the Nicene Creed ; and pronounced anathema on all
who held the doctrine contained in it. The other
Bishops expressed their sentiments to the same
effect. Sentence of condemnation was then pronounced
against him by the Council. In the preamble they
said that Nestorius, when invited to the Council, had re
fused to appear ; and that they had been constrained to
examine the doctrines put forth by him in his letters
and other writings and sermons preached at Ephesus,
and duly attested. In one of these he had said, " I
cannot call him God who was only a child of two or
three months old ; therefore I am clear from your
blood, and will not hereafter come among you."
They then declared that in accordance with the
Canons of the Church, and with the letter of their most
holy father and brother-minister' Caelestine, Bishop
of the Roman Church, they had, after many tears,
concurred in the sorrowful sentence, to the effect that
Our Lord Jesus Christ, Whom he has blasphemed,
9 Above, p. 210. l avWeiTovpyov.

Promulgation of the decree ; its reception by the people 217
—John of Antioch arrives at Ephesus.
pronounces by this holy Synod that he is deprived of
his Episcopal dignity, and is excluded from the assem
blies of the Church.
This sentence was subscribed by Cyril, Juvenal, and
all the Bishops present, 198 in number: others after
wards gave their adhesion to it.
The Session ended in the evening of June 22.
The announcement of the decree, declaring the
Eternal Godhead of the Son of Mary, was received
with rapturous acclamations of joy by the people of
Ephesus — a striking contrast to the tumultuous adora
tion of an idol, about 375 years before, in the same
city : "Great is Diana of the Ephesians." 2
On the following day, a deputation was sent to
Nestorius, with the intelligence of the result. They
also sent a letter to the Emperor, with a report of
their proceedings ; and requested him to give effect
to them by his royal authority.
But the Council was not allowed to remain without
a protest against its acts.
John, Patriarch of Antioch,3 had not been able to
reach Ephesus in time for the opening of the Synod,
and did not arrive till the fifth day after the deposi
tion of Nestorius.
The Bishops had waited for sixteen days beyond
the time fixed for the commencement of their pro
ceedings by the Emperor, who had declared that
those who did not then present themselves should be
censured as contumacious ; and many Bishops who
2 Acts xix. 34. Ephesus was specially associated with the history of
the Blessed Virgin, because her mortal remains, and those of the beloved
disciple who took her to his home (John xix. 27), were supposed to
rest in peace there (Concil. iii. p. 573). The legend of the "As-
sumption " is much later than the Council of Ephesus. Tillemont, i.
pp. 467—477. 3 Socr. vii. 34.

218 Counter-sentences; deposition of Cyril ; and of John of
Antioch— Canons of the Council: against any new Creed.
came from a distance were much embarrassed by the
delay ; some were suffering from sickness, some had
died. Candidian, steward of the imperial household, and
a friend of Nestorius, sided with John of Antioch,
who assembled a conclave of his adherents, and pro
ceeded to pronounce a counter-sentence of deposi
tion on Cyril, and Memnon, Bishop of Ephesus, who
appealed to the Emperor. Cyril was imprisoned, and
thanked God that he was allowed to suffer for Christ.4
And John of Antioch himself was cited and excom
municated by the Council, who reported to the
Emperor what they had done.
Theodosius sent his Treasurer, Count John, as his
Commissioner to Ephesus.
In the mean time the Council decreed, on July 22,
in consequence of the imposition of a Nestorian
Creed — probably framed by Theodore of Mopsuestia —
on some converts to Christianity, that no different
Creed* from that of Nicaea should be proposed, in
such cases, to candidates for baptism.6
In the next Session, July 31, on an Appeal from
three Bishops of Cyprus against a claim set up by
the Bishop of Antioch to hold ordinations in that
island, it was decreed " by the Holy Synod, that, inas
much as public disorders, which bring greater damage^
4 Concil. iii. 772, where is an honourable tribute to his sufferings.
5 eTepa TrtffTis.
6 See the remarks of the Greek Canonists — Balsamon, Zonaras, and
Aristsenus — on this decree in Beveridge's Synodicon, ii. 103 ; and Hefele's
comments upon it, Concilien, ii. 206 ; and Canon Bright's Notes on the
Councils, pp. 116, 117, which are a sufficient reply to Dean Stanley's
allegations (Eastern Church, p. 177) that the adoption of the Con-
stantinopolitan Creed at Chalcedon, and of the Athanasian Creed in
the West, were infractions of this Canon of Ephesus.

"Jus Cyprium " — Canons of the Council of Ephesus. 219
require stronger remedies, if no ancient Custom has
prevailed for the Bishop of Antioch to ordain in
Cyprus (as the depositions testify there has not), the
Bishops of the Churches of Cyprus shall exercise
that right inviolably without molestation ; and the
same rule shall be observed in all other Dioceses and
Provinces, lest the Canons of the holy Fathers be
infringed, and under the plea of Sacerdocy the pride
of power should creep in, and we should lose the
liberty which Jesus Christ, the Redeemer of all men,
has purchased with His own blood." 7
Six Canons s were also passed in that Session.
(1) Against Metropolitans who might be recusants
against the Council of Ephesus, or revolt from their
subscriptions in it, and be favourers of the schisma
tical Conclave (of John of Antioch), or of Caelestius,
i.e. of Pelagianism.
(2) Against dissentient Bishops, adherents of the
schismatical Conclave.
(3) For the restoration of Clergy suspended by
Nestorius for orthodoxy.
(4) For the deposition of Clergy who adhere to
Nestorius or Caelestius.
(5) For the validity of Church censures which
Nestorius might have attempted to annul.
(6) Against defamers or opposers of the Synod's
authority. 7 Labbe, Concilia, iii. 802. This "jus Cyprium,'' as it is called,
has been rightly pleaded by Anglican divines (see Theophilus Angli-
canus, part ii. chap, iii.) against Roman usurpations in this country.
8 Mansi, iv. 1466. Labbe, Cone. iii. 104. Bruns, i. 25. Hefele,
ii. 209. The valuable commentaries of the Greek Canonists — Balsamon,
Zonaras, and Aristaenus — on these Canons may be seen in Beveridge's
Synodicon, ii. pp. 99 — no; and Canon Bright's Notes on the Canons,
pp. 109 — 122, may be consulted with regard to them.

220 Remonstrances and Counter-remonstrances — Proceedings
at Constantinople — The see of Nestorius.
Count John, on his arrival at Ephesus, announced
that the Emperor — who was not well informed as to
the state of affairs — had assented to the deposition
of the heads of both parties, Cyril and Memnon on
one side, and Nestorius on the other ; and Count
John placed them under arrest. This announcement
was received with remonstrances and counter-remon
strances. Especially the Clergy of Constantinople,
the city of Nestorius himself, were strenuous in sup
port of the faith,9 and in their opposition to his heresy.
An aged Archimandrite, Dalmatius, said that he
had heard a voice from heaven commanding him to
leave his monastery after forty-eight years, and to
repair to Constantinople, and to ask for an audience
from the Emperor. A procession was formed of
Monks from different monasteries, with their Archi
mandrites at their head, and marched to the palace
in two companies, singing antiphonal hymns. The
Archimandrites entered the palace, and received a
reply from the Emperor, which Dalmatius announced
to the people assembled in the largest church of
Constantinople. He assured them that the Emperor
approved the sentence of the Council of Ephesus ;
not (added Dalmatius) from any persuasion of mine,
but because he cleaves to the faith of his fathers.
" Whom will you follow ? " he asked. " Six thousand
Bishops (for so many as that number were repre
sented by their Metropolitans in the Council), or one
unhappy man ? " " You have said well," replied the
Emperor ; " pray for me. " " I am sure that he will follow
God and the Council ; pray for him and for us." The
9 Cp. Socr. vii. 34, who says that "all the Clergy of Constantinople
with one voice anathematized him, and supported Cyril." Cp. Concil.
iii. p. 778.

The Emperor ratifies the sentence of the Council — Cyril's 221
return to Alexandria — Last days of Nestorius.
people exclaimed with one voice, "Anathema to
Nestorius." The Emperor commanded eight representatives of
each party to attend him at Chalcedon. Cyril and
Memnon were under arrest. Nestorius was permitted
to retire to his monastery near Antioch. John of An
tioch and Theodoret appeared on behalf of Nestorius.
Juvenal of Jerusalem, six other Bishops, and Philip the
legate of Rome, were the deputies of the Catholic side.
The Emperor gave five audiences to the deputies,
but did not enter into the question of doctrine
(indeed the Catholic deputies declined to argue it x) ,
but simply accepted the decrees of the Council of
Ephesus. Accordingly the Emperor, having heard
both sides, ratified the Synodical sentence of deposi
tion on Nestorius, and commanded the Catholic
Bishops to come to Constantinople for the ordination
of a Bishop in his place; and on Oct. 25, A.D. 431,
Maximian, who had been educated at Rome, was
consecrated to that see.2
Cyril returned to Alexandria, where he was
received with great joy, on Oct. 30, A.D. 431.
Memnon was confirmed in the See of Ephesus. Nes
torius passed four years in his monastery near
Antioch ; 3 thence he was banished to the Southern
Oasis 4 in Upper Egypt, where he wrote a defence of
his opinions ; and being there disturbed by some
marauders, he wandered from place to place, and died
about A.D. 439.
1 Cp. Fleury, xxvi. 10. 3 Socr. vii. 35, 37.
3 Evagr. i. 7. Tillemont, xiv. 610, 611.
4 The most southern of the four verdant spots (like emerald isles in
the sandy desert) which bore the name of Oasis, and about three days'
journey from the confines of Nubia. Michaelis, quoted by Gibbon,
vol. viii. ch. xlvii. p. 298, in his narrative of the last days of Nestorius.

222 The Emperor's exhortation to peace — Reconciliation
of the contending parties.
The Emperor earnestly exhorted both parties to
live in peace.6 This exhortation was not fruitless.
In pursuance of the Emperor's order, John of Antioch
himself made a friendly overture to Cyril by the
mediation of Paul, Bishop of Emesa.6
Cyril on his side had intimated in a letter to
Acacius of Bercea,7 that he was ready, in the love
of God and respect for the Emperor, to forget all, and
forgive all, as brethren. But he insisted on the main
tenance of the sentence against Nestorius ; nothing
beyond this (he said) is required to restore peace ; and
he explained his opinions and " anathematisms " in
a way to give satisfaction to Acacius and to John of
Antioch, and even to Theodoret.
Paul brought to Cyril an affectionate letter from
the Patriarch of Antioch, in which, while expressing
his regret for the publication of the " twelve anathe
matisms " by Cyril (which however, he adds, had been
subsequently explained by him), he earnestly entreated
him to labour with him for peace, and to put a stop to
mutual denunciations of brethren and of priests against
one another. He also communicated to Cyril a for
mula 8 in the following words : —
" We confess our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of
God, the Only-begotten, perfect God and perfect Man,
of a reasonable soul and body ; begotten of the Father
before the worlds as to His Godhead. And we confess
the same Lord, begotten of the Virgin Mary as to
His Manhood in these last days for us and for our
salvation ; of one substance with the Father as to His
5 Collect. Baluz. p. 656. 6 Concil. Eph. pt. iii. c. 28.
7 Baluz. c. 56. Fleury, xxvi. 18.
8 Hefele, Concilien, ii. 262, gives the original, which is in Mansi,
v. 303; Harduin, i. 1 703.

Formula of concord— Joy at Alexandria on Christmas 223
Day.
Godhead, and of one substance with us as to His
Manhood ; since an union 9 of two Natures has been
made ; wherefore we confess One Christ, One Son,
One Lord ; and according to this signification of the
inconfused union we confess the holy Virgin to be
Mother of God,1 forasmuch as the Word was Incar
nate, and made Man in her; and forasmuch as He
united with Himself, from the moment of His concep
tion, the temple He received from her. But we know
that theologians have used communicatively some
words of the Evangelists and Apostles concerning
our Lord, as spoken of one Person, and have distin
guished other words as spoken of two Natures ; and
that they deliver to us the more divine words as
referring to Christ's Godhead, and the humbler words
as relating to His Manhood."
Cyril readily accepted this formula ; and Paul of
Emesa, on his side, as the representative of John of
Antioch,2 declared in writing that " he assented to the
deposition of Nestorius, and to the consecration of
Maximian in his room as Bishop of Constantinople ;
and that he anathematized the impieties taught by
Nestorius, and embraced communion with Cyril on
the terms of the above formula. By this act (he
added) we put an end to the troubles which have
arisen, and we restore tranquillity to the Church."
Paul3 was then conducted to the Church of Alexan
dria, where he preached to the people in the presence
of Cyril. It was Christmas Day, A.D. 432. He began
his sermon with the Angelic hymn, " Peace on Earth ;"
he then said, " Mary, Mother of God, brought forth
Emmanuel ;" and he proceeded to condemn the oppo-
9 tvaats. l BcotSkov. 2 Concil. Eph. pt. iii. t. 28.
3 Concil. Eph. pt. iii. t. 31, and c. 32.

224 Cyril's " Eulogice " (benedictions) or presents.
site error. On hearing these words, the people were
transported with joy, and expressed their delight with
enthusiasm. The only point now to be secured was the adhesion
of John of Antioch and of his allies to the sentence of
condemnation pronounced against Nestorius.
To effect this purpose, Cyril endeavoured to exert
influence on the Court of Constantinople. He wrote
to Pulcheria, the sister of the Emperor, and to some
officers of the Palace, and ladies of the Court ; and
he accompanied his letter with presents.4
As to the recipients of these gifts, it is not credita
ble to them to have been supposed to be impressible
by such solicitations ; at the same time the customs
of Oriental Courts, and of the Greek Empire in the
days of the younger Theodosius, are not to be judged
by the stricter maxims of a better age.5
With regard to the share of the Patriarch of Alex
andria in this transaction, we may adopt the words
of a candid and judicious historian. "S. Cyril," says
Tillemont,6 " was a holy man, but all his actions were
not holy ; and the most holy persons have need to fear

4 Literally eb\oyias, blessings ; a word used for gifts in the Septua
gint and in the New Testament. See the passages quoted below in
the note in p. 245, on the election of Flavian, Archbishop of Con
stantinople, and on the irritation of the Chamberlain Chrysaphius, who
was disconcerted by the stiffness of the Archbishop in not sending him
the conventional evXoyias. As to the history of Cyril's overtures, see
Concil. Labbe, iii. 908 ; Mansi, v. 987 ; and Hefele's remarks, ii. 264;
and Fleury, xxvi. 20 ; and Gibbon, vol. viii. ch. xlvii, pp. 295, 296.
5 The practice of negotiating by means of presents is as old as Hesiod,
who says, Aw pa Beobs ir€lBet, Sap' alSoiovs JSa<ri\TJas (frag. 87); and
even as the patriarchal age (Gen. xxxiii. n ; xliii. n); and probably
many instances of it might be cited from authentic records of our
Indian diplomacy. Cp. Hefele, Concil. ii. pp. 246, 266.
6 Tillemont, xiv. 541.

Cyril's character — Peace restored. 225
the temptation which allures men to think that all
methods are legitimate for the attainment of holy
ends. The children of the light ought to use only the
armour of light. Justice is to be maintained by just
means. If we are to receive a crown of glory from
God, we must fight for God with the weapons of God,
and not with those of the world, which He does not
approve. We cannot hope for success from our own
arms. His blessing alone it is which is all-powerful,
and we cannot expect to have it, if we attempt to
serve Him by what is unworthy of His name."
John of Antioch did not reject Cyril's pacific over
tures. He wrote a letter,7 in which he declared that
for the good of the Church, and in compliance with
the commands of the Emperor, he had sent Paul of
Emesa to arrange terms of peace, and to deliver in
his name the formula of faith which had been agreed
upon, and which has already been quoted.8
As to Nestorius, he added, that "in order to
establish universal peace, and to remove all cause of
scandal from the Church," he and his friends " had
agreed to consider Nestorius as deposed from his
see, and to anathematize the profane novelties of the
doctrine broached by him ; and to approve the ordi
nation of Maximian in his room. We are in commu
nion," he added, "with all the Bishops throughout
the World, who hold and teach the pure orthodox
faith." Cyril received this letter with joy, and on April 23,
A.D. 433, he ordered it to be read in the Church of
Alexandria, together with his own reply to it, which
was accepted cordially by the Patriarch of Antioch,
and was communicated by him to the Bishops of the
7 Concil. Eph. pt. iii. c. 30, p. 1094, ed. Labbe. 8 Above, p. 222.
VOL. IV. Q

226 Union of the Churches — Cyril's death — Retrospect.
East. John also wrote to Pope Sixtus, and to Maxi
mian, Bishop of Constantinople, in the same terms as
he had written to Cyril.
Many Bishops came to Rome to celebrate the anni
versary of the Pope's consecration, and were assem
bled together with a large congregation in St. Peter's
Church on Sept. 17, A.D. 433, when the joyful intel
ligence arrived.
Pope Sixtus wrote congratulatory letters to the
Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch on their union,
and on the restoration of peace to the Church.
Thus the Patriarchs of all the greatest Sees of
C hristendom — Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria,
Antioch, and Jerusalem — were joined together in
rejecting the heresy of Nestorius, and in the profes
sion of the true faith, as declared by the Council of
Ephesus. Cyril, having lived to see this happy consum
mation, departed in peace at Alexandria in June,
A.D. 444, in the thirty-second year of his Epis
copate. In a retrospect of the Nestorian Controversy, we
may revert to the question addressed by our blessed
Lord to one whom Sixtus regarded as his Apostolic
predecessor at Rome — St. Peter, — " Whom say ye that
I, the Son of Man, am ? " " Thou," answered Peter,
" art the Christ, the Son of the living God." 9
Jesus Christ — confessed to be Very God and Very
Man — was declared by Himself to be the Rock of the
Church ; and the confession of this doctrine was
blessed by Him as inspired by His Father in heaven.
This doctrine was impugned by Nestorius, Patri
arch of Constantinople, the Capital of the Eastern
Empire. He had been welcomed to that see by the
9 Matt. xvi. 18.

Review of the Nestorian Controversy — Prepossessions 227
in favour of Nestorius.
voice of Christendom. He enjoyed the favour of the
Court of Constantinople. The amiable piety of the
Emperor Theodosius the Younger was not combined
with mental vigour. His sisters for a time seem
to have patronized Nestorius, whose purity of life,
exemplary self-denial, and ascetic austerity, com
mended him to general esteem. He possessed many
natural gifts for winning popular applause. His
noble presence, graceful deportment, clear and sono
rous voice, fluent and polished eloquence, fascinated
the multitude. His wonderful faculty of seeming to
make divine mysteries easy to popular comprehen
sion by a specious logic and persuasive rhetoric, exer
cised a subtle influence over many by tempting them
to imagine that they understood the profoundest
secrets of divine wisdom, which the greatest Doctors
of the Church had represented as above the reach of
human intelligence. He had other powerful allies. He
had been a friend of Chrysostom, their own beloved
Patriarch. He was intimate with John, Patriarch of
Antioch ; and he reckoned among his friends such men
as Theodoret and other great Teachers of that cele
brated School of Theology. He professed zeal for the
Catholic Faith. He had commenced his Episcopate
with endeavours to exterminate Apollinarianism,
Macedonianism, and Arianism. No one could sus
pect him ofbeingalatitudinarian. And while he clung
tenaciously to his own dogmas, he overreached his
opponents by seeming concessions to theirs.
The doctrine of the Incarnation was then in danger
of being lost to the Church.
But it pleased God to raise up a champion of the
Faith, a successor of Athanasius in the See of Alex
andria. Q 2

228 Prejudices against Cyril.
In some respects Cyril was not well qualified for
the work. The Episcopate of his immediate prede
cessor, his uncle Theophilus, had left an unfavourable
impression on the Church. The accession of Nestorius
to the Patriarchal throne of Constantinople had been
hailed with universal joy, but Cyril was placed on
that of Alexandria with much difficulty after a con
tested election.
The earlier events of his Episcopate created a strong
prejudice against him. His struggle with Orestes
the Governor of Alexandria, his conflict with the
Jews, his eulogy of a fanatical rebel ; above all, the
savage murder of the virgin-saint of Platonism, Hypa
tia,1 had brought obloquy upon him.
It is true that when Nestorianism appeared, some
thirteen years had elapsed since these unhappy out
rages ; and Cyril had done much to overcome the
prejudice against his person and office by labouring
peaceably and diligently among his flock as a learned
and wise Teacher of Christian faith and practice,
especially by his admirable expositions of the Penta
teuch and of the Prophets.
Nestorius had many adherents, but Cyril was
almost alone. The Court of Constantinople was
against him. The powerful Patriarch of Antioch was
against him. The learned Theodoret was against him.
The remembrance of his uncle's conspiracy against the
great Patriarch of Constantinople, Chrysostom, made
it seem to many that his antagonism to Nestorius,
a successor of Chrysostom, sprang from an hereditary
jealousy of the See of Constantinople, and was due
to personal enmity rather than to religious conviction.
But still, if there had not been a Cyril at Alexan-
1 a.d. 415. For the history see above, pp. 202 — 205.

Cyril's services to the Faith — Qualities needed for 229
appreciating them.
dria, and if Cyril had not been inflamed with that
ardent zeal, which even in the noblest minds is rarely
free from passionate admixtures of human infirmity,
it is probable that Jerome's words on the triumph
of Arianism after the Council of Rimini in the fourth
century,2 might have been applicable to an equally
deadly heresy in the fifth : " The World would have
been astounded, and have wondered to find itself
Nestorian." The character of Cyril has been portrayed in un
favourable colours by most writers of Church history
in the last and present centuries.3
It may, however, be doubted, whether we who live
now are duly qualified to form a just estimate of him,
and of those who were prevailed upon by his inde
fatigable energy to act with him, at the Council of
Ephesus, and before it.
They were combatants in a great battle for the
Faith ; we reap the fruits of their victory. Their
passions were excited ; every nerve was strained by
a keen sense of the greatness of the danger, and of
the sacredness of the cause, and of the disasters of
defeat, and of the glorious results of victory.
But in modern times, there seems to be an impa
tience of clear statements and definitions of dogmatic
truth, and of bold protests against deadly error ; and
consequently there is a lack of that critical faculty
which appreciates the characters and acts of those who
contended for theFaith in the fourth and fifth centuries.

2 See above, vol. ii. p. 21. "Obstupuit Orbis et Arianum se esse
factum miratus est."
3 Beginning with Gibbon, vol. viii. chap, xlvii. pp. 276 — 299. Canon
Bright, in his Church History, and in his article in Wace's Dictionary,
is a striking and almost solitary exception.

230 Modern impatience of dogmatic statements, and
minatory warnings.
" The palate of Faith is necessary," says Augus
tine,4 " to taste the sweetness of the divine honey of
Truth ;" and also, it may be added, to reject the deadly
poison of Heresy.
The strong denunciations of the Ephesine Council
against the errors of Nestorius are regarded by many
as no less intolerant than the " anathematisms " of
Cyril, which were not personal, but hypothetical.
But this charge of intolerance would probably extend
itself, if it ventured to do so, to our Lord's words, " He
that believeth not shall be damned ;" ' and to His eight
woes against false Teachers ; and to His divine warning
that He will say to those on the left hand at the
Great Day, " Depart from Me, ye cursed, into ever
lasting fire;"6 and to St. Paul's words, "If any man love
not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema ;" 7
and, " If any man, or an angel from heaven, preach to
you any other Gospel, let him be accursed ;" 8 and
to the warning voice of the beloved disciple, " If any
man bring not this doctrine" — the doctrine of Christ —
" receive him not into your house, neither bid him God
speed ; for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker
of his evil deeds ;"9 and to his utterance concerning the
heretic Cerinthus ; ' and to the answer of his scholar
Polycarp to the heretic Marcion.2 These and other like
sayings, such as the warnings in the Athanasian Creed,
although uttered in a spirit of Christian love, which
(as Augustine says) "terrifies, because it fears,"'
and which imitates the Apostle,4 who said, " Knowing
the terrors of the Lord, we persuade men" — all these
4 Aug. in Ps. 96. 5 Mark xvi. 16. 6 Matt. xxv. 41.
7 1 Cor. xvi. 22. » Gal. i. 8. 9 2 John 10, 11.
1 Above, vol. i. p. 226. 2 Ibid. p. 161.
3 Aug. in Ps. 63. * 2 Cor. v. 11.

Heresy of Silence — Contrast of modern and ancient 2 3 1
opinions.
seem now to be proscribed by many as obsolete, and to
be censured as uncharitable. But such utterances as
these rang as an alarum in the ears of S. Cyril, and
of the Council of Ephesus, and produced those de
nunciations which were not designed to destroy, but
to save. If such anathemas were ebullitions of
vindictive animosity (which God knows), let those
who uttered them be condemned. But there may
be deadly heresy in silence,6 — when men in authority
ought to speak, — and the Judge of all may punish
such silence more severely at the Great Day than any
language of those who have vehemently denounced
errors, subverting the Faith which He has revealed.
However this may be, the sentences of Augustine "
are worthy of remembrance: "If you love your friends,
do not love their sins." " Let no one love the erring
so as to love his errors, nor so hate his errors, as not
to love the erring." And, " It is better to love men
with severity, than to deceive them by flattery." And,
" As there is a Mercy which punishes, so also there
is a Cruelty which spares."
Such remarks as these seemed requisite, in justice
to the Church herself, and to the memory of Cyril,
who, almost alone, fought the battle of the faith ; and
to whom, under God, the Church owes the maintenance
of the true doctrine of the Incarnation ; but who has
been censured in recent times with virulent vitupera
tion by popular writers, who see only the smoke of
passion in religious zeal, without caring to discern the
fire of faith and flame of love which produced it.
In former days, other persons, who had better
s See Isa. lvi. 10 ; Ezek. iii. 18 ; xiii. 10—14 > xxxiii. 8.
6 Aug. Serm. 49; de Civ. Dei, xiv. 6 ; and Epist. ad Vincent., and
Epist. ad Macedon.

232 Ancient judgments on Cyril — That of Calestine, Bishop
of Rome.
opportunities of forming a correct opinion, took a
different view of Cyril's character. Acacius of Meli-
tene7 called him "the wise helmsman who feared not
the violence of the winds, nor the danger of the storm."
Maximian of Constantinople said,8 that he had con
quered the Evil One by his patience, and that he
had despised all sufferings in the cause of the faith.
Some, as the free-spoken Isidore of Pelusium (Epist.
324) charged him with the fault of too much readiness
to concede for the sake of peace. Even Theodoret,
his enemy, paid homage to Cyril.9
The fourth General Council, that of Chalcedon in
a.d. 451 (seven years after his death), appealed to his
authority as its standard of sound doctrine.1 " We
believe as Cyril did ;" " The memory of Cyril is
immortal," were watchwords of that Council.
But perhaps there could not have been a more im
partial Judge of the parties in this struggle than the
Bishop of Rome, who was free from Western preju
dices and prepossessions. Caelestine was a calm
spectator of the controversy ; and in a review of it, it
may be well to enumerate his letters as indicative of
his bearing with regard to it, and also as a summary
of the history.
In A.D. 428 he wrote2 to congratulate Nestorius
on his elevation to the throne of Constantinople. In
430 he held a Synod at Rome to examine his doc
trine. After careful inquiry, that doctrine was con-

7 Concil. iii. 983. s Ibid. 1061.
9 Theodoret, Epist. ad Dioscorum. The sermon in which Theodoret
is said to have vilified Cyril after his death (Cone. v. p. 508) can hardly
be genuine. Cp. Canon Bright in Wace's Diet. i. p. 855.
1 Concil. iv. 141, 367, 370.
2 Coustant, Epist. Rom. Pont. 1115.

Judgment of Ccelestine and Sixtus. 233
demned in it ; and he addressed letters to Cyril, to
John of Antioch, and to Nestorius, and to the Clergy
and people of Constantinople, to notify that sen
tence.3 In A.D. 431, Pope Caelestine desired Cyril to re
ceive Nestorius to communion, if he renounced his
error.4 In the same year he advised certain Bishops
to be guided by Cyril ; ° and he entreated the Em
peror 6 to restrain " turbulent novelties."
On March 15, A.D. 432, he wrote to the Council of
Ephesus to congratulate them on the removal of
Nestorius from his see, and on the appointment of
Maximian in his place.7
On the same day he wrote three letters to the
Emperor Theodosius to thank him for his action in
both those respects ; " and to Maximian, the new
Patriarch of Constantinople, to congratulate him ¦ and
to the Clergy and people of Constantinople to the
same effect.
This was his last utterance on the subject. His
successor, Sixtus the Third, wrote on July 31, eulo
gizing Cyril for his clemency to those friends of
Nestorius who returned to the true faith, and desiring
that John of Antioch may be received into commu
nion on the same terms.9 On Sept. 17, A.D. 433, he
wrote to Cyril to express his joy on receiving his
letter, which announced that John of Antioch had
returned to communion with him ; and on the same
day he wrote also to John of Antioch to congratulate
him on that happy event.1
The Bishops of Rome did not suppose Cyril to
3 Coustant, 1025, 1097, 1101, 1107, 1131. 4 Ibid. 1292.
5 Ibid. 1152, 1155. 6 Ibid. 1163. 7 Ibid. 1196.
8 Ibid. 1203. 9 Ibid. 1231. *¦ Ibid. 1254, 1258.

234' Calm after storm.
have been actuated by any unworthy motives in this
controversy. Doubtless there was a demonstration of vehement
passion on both sides. But, in the storm of those
emotions, there was an inner calm of spiritual life
and work. The power of God was made perfect in
man's weakness. The Emperor Theodosius has
been disparaged by historians for intellectual feeble
ness, but he was instrumental in controlling stronger
minds, and in tranquillizing the agitation of exaspe
rated disputants, and in disposing them to peace.
And when some of the wise and eloquent of this world
faltered in the faith, it found a resting-place in the
hearts of the People, and sounded forth from their
mouths. It declared itself in the enthusiastic accla
mations of the City of Ephesus at the announcement
of the decree of the Council ; and in the Church of
Nestorius himself, when the Emperor had given a
favourable audience to Dalmatius, the champion of
the Faith.
Thus, under the guidance of her Lord, Who had
promised to be always with her, the Vessel of the
Church, which had been tossed by waves, and buffeted
by winds, and seemed to be in danger of shipwreck,
was piloted through the storm, and was safely
anchored at last in the harbour of Truth and Peace.

CHAPTER XXI.
Eutychianism — 5. Leo, Bishop of Rome — Latrocinium
of Ephesus — Death of Theodosius II, July 29, 450 —
Accession of Marcian and Pulcheria.
The history of the Church attests, that the true doc
trine revealed in Holy Scripture concerning the
Blessed Trinity and the Incarnation of the Son of
God has been perverted into an occasion of heresy ;
and that there never has been a heresy which, under
the controlling power of God, has not been overruled
for the further confirmation and elucidation of the
faith. For wise purposes, God deemed it better to educe
good out of evil, than not to permit evil to arise.1
As it is with physical death, so it is with spiritual.
Without physical death, which was due to Satan and
to sin, the Church would not have had the glory of
Martyrdoms, and the consequent victories of Faith ;
and without spiritual death, due to Heresies which
God allowed to exist, the Christian Faith would not
have triumphed by repressing them, and have shone
so brightly through the world.
1 Augustine de Fide et Caritate, c. 27 ; de Trin. xiii. 16 ; and he
says (in Ps. 130), " Nescit Diabolus, cum ssevit, quanta bona de ipso
fiant."

236 Eutychianism a reaction against Nestorianism.
Our Lord's words, " I and the Father are One," 2
and " He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father," 3
were abused in favour of Sabellianism and Noe-
tianism ; but both those heresies were carefully exa
mined and successfully refuted by Catholic Teachers
of the Church, such as Dionysius of Alexandria, and
Hippolytus, appealing to Holy Scripture ; and by
their means the true faith in the Holy Trinity was
established on a solid foundation.
The saying of our Lord,4 " My Father is greater
than I," was quoted in defence of Arianism ; but that
misuse of His saying, and other like perversions, ex
cited the Guardians and Champions of the Faith,
such as Athanasius and Hilary, to "compare spiritual
things with spiritual," 5 and to elicit and exhibit the
true sense of Scripture, and the testimony of primitive
Antiquity ; and thus the doctrine of the Godhead of
Christ was more fully manifested to the World.
In like manner, the Truth, which the Catholic Church
declared in opposition to Nestorius, who taught rightly
that in God and Man are two Natures, but who
wrongly inferred therefrom, that in Christ those two
Natures can by no conjunction make one Person,
was perverted by Eutyches, who taught rightly
against Nestorius that those two Natures were united
in one Person. It was made by him an occasion for
an erroneous denial of the continuance of the dif
ference of those Natures after that Union in the
Incarnation. Arius had denied the divine homoousion
or consubstantiality of the Son with the Father.
Eutyches would not acknowledge the human homoou
sion or consubstantiality of God the Son with us
2 John x. 30. 3 John xiv. 9.
4 John xiv. 28. 5 1 Cor. ii. 13.

Errors made to be occasions for establishing the Truth — 237
The four great heresies on the Incarnation.
men by the Incarnation ; but he affirmed that the
Manhood was absorbed into the Godhead in Christ.
But Christ had promised His own perpetual pre
sence to His Church, and had declared that He would
send the Holy Spirit to teach her all things,6 to lead
her into all truth,7 and that the power of the Evil One
should never prevail against her.8 He fulfilled those
promises by enabling her to overcome error, and to
make it an occasion for the establishment of the
Truth. This He did by means of those first Four
General Councils whose declarations of Christian doc
trine have been received by the Holy Spirit dwelling
in the Catholic Church, which is " the Pillar and
Ground of the Truth," 9 and " the Spouse and Body
of Christ," 1 to which those promises were made.
"There are four things," says Richard Hooker,2
"which concur to make complete the whole state of
our Lord Jesus Christ ; (1) His Deity ; (2) His Man
hood ; (3) the Conjunction of both ; and (4) the dis
tinction of the one from the other, being joined in
one. " Four principal heresies there are, which have in
these things withstood the truth; (1) that of the
Arians, by bending themselves against the Deity of
Christ; (2) that of Apollinarians, by maiming and
misinterpreting that which belongeth to His human
nature;3 (3) that of Nestorius, by rending Christ
asunder, and dividing Him into two Persons ; (4) that
of the followers of Eutyches, by confounding in His
0 John xiv. 26. ' John xvi. 13. 8 Matt. xvi. 18.
9 1 Tim. iii. 5. ' Eph. v. 25. Col. i. 18, 24.
2 Hooker, V. liv. 10. I have ventured to insert some figures and one
or two words in this quotation.
3 By denying that Christ had a human, reasonable soul.

238 The Four antidotes to the Four heresies.
Person those Natures which they ought to dis
tinguish. " Against these heresies there have been Four most
famous ancient General Councils ; (1) the Council of
Nice ; (2) the Council of Constantinople against Apol-
linarius ; (3) the Council of Ephesus against Nestorius ;
(4) against Eutychians, the Council of Chalcedon.
" In four words, akr\65><i (truly), Tekeax; (perfectly or
completely), aStaip£rto<i (indivisibly) , aa-vy^vTw; (dis
tinctly or inconfusedly), the first being applied to His
being truly God ; the second to His being perfectly
or completely Man ; the third to His being of both
One ; and the fourth to His still continuing in that
one Both ; we may fully, by way of abridgment, com
prise whatsoever Catholic Antiquity hath at large
handled, either in declaration of Christian belief, or
in refutation of the foresaid heresies."
Thus, while the Evil One has used good ill, and has
made Truth to be an occasion of error, God has used
evil well, and has overruled error for the triumph of
Truth. As S. Augustine and other Fathers say, " The Evil
One concocts poison from God's honey ; but Christ,
the Divine Samson, overcame the Evil One, and
extracted honey from the carcase of the slain Lion.4
The Creeds of the Church are honey drawn forth from
the carcase of Heresy.
4 Judges xiv. 9. May I refer to the patristic authorities in the
notes in my Commentary on that history, as to the triumphs of Christ
in the Church over the power of the Evil One — the Lion (1 Pet. v. 8) ?
See also the notes on Numbers xvi. 38, and Augustine de Vera
Religione, c. 6, " Ecclesia Catholica utitur haereticis ad probationem
doctrinas suae ;" and de Civ. Dei, xvi. 2, " Multa ad fidem catholicam
pertinentia, dum hasreticorum callida inquietudine agitantur, — ut adver-
sus eos defendi possent, et considerantur diligentius, et intelliguntur
clarius, et instantius pradicantur."

Flavian Archbishop of Constantinople— Eutyches. 239
Proclus, the orthodox and peace-loving Archbishop
of Constantinople, died on Oct. 24, A.D. 447, and was
succeeded by Flavian, a presbyter and treasurer of
that Church, who was not unlike his predecessor in
character. Eutyches, a Priest, and Archimandrite or Abbot of
a large monastery near Constantinople, who had been
an ally of Cyril in his opposition to Nestorius, was
accused by Eusebius, Bishop of Dorylaeum in Phrygia,
a former associate with him in the same cause.
The charge brought by Eusebius against Eutyches,
before Flavian and a local Council,5 which met in the
principal Church at Constantinople on Nov. 8, 448,
was that he acknowledged but one Nature in Christ
after the Incarnation.6
. For a long time Eutyches persisted in refusing to
leave his monastery, and to appear before the Synod ;
and it was not till Nov. 22, at the seventh Session of
the Council, that he presented himself at it.
Flavian asked him whether he confessed Jesus
Christ,7 the Only Son of God, to be consubstantial
with the Father as to His Godhead, and consubstantial
with His mother as to His Manhood. Eutyches
answered that up to that time he had not allowed
himself to speculate on Christ's nature,3 and confessed
that he had never owned Him to be consubstantial
with us ; at the same time he acknowledged that
Christ had not brought His body from heaven, and
that the Virgin was of the same substance as we are,
and that our God was incarnate of her.
He seemed to be ready to adopt the judgment of
the Synod. " Since you now say so, I altogether
5 aivoSos ivSripovo-a. 6 Concil. ed. Labbe, tom. iv. 191, 192.
7 P. 225. 6 (pvatoKoytiv.

240 Vacillations of Eutyches : his heresy.
agree ;" and again addressing Flavian, " I never said
so before, but since your holiness says so, and since
you allow me and teach me to say so, I say so."
Flavian and the Council would not accept these ad
missions, as not being sincere, and because at the same
time Eutyches said, that "inasmuch as he asserted
the body of Christ to be the body of God, and was not
accustomed to say that the body of God is the body
of a man, and that it is human, and that the Lord
was incarnate of the Virgin, therefore he had never
owned the Son to be consubstantial with us." " I
confess," he said, " that He was of two natures before
the union ; but after the union I confess but one
nature."9 He had not found it clearly taught in Scrip
ture (he said) that Christ had two natures after the
Union ; and he appealed to some Fathers, especially
to Athanasius ' and Cyril, who, he alleged, had taught
that though He was of two Natures before the Union,
yet after the Union and Incarnation He was no longer
of two natures, but one.
This assertion of Eutyches, appealing to Athana
sius and Cyril in favour of his own tenets, is impor
tant, inasmuch as this was precisely the ground
which was afterwards taken by those who deposed
Flavian. And even at the present day some learned
writers have charged Cyril and Athanasius with a
leaning to Eutychianism, because they sometimes
speak of one nature in Christ.2
It has been replied by some (as the Benedictine
9 P. 228. ' See above, p. 208.
2 So Gieseler, §88and §89, referring to Athanas. de Incarn. Verb. ii. 1,
pia <p io- is A6yov ffca'apKupevov, referred to by Cyril ad Monachos, p. 9,
and ad Acac. p. 115, and de Recta Fide, § 9, Epist. ad Eulog. vi. 133 ;
and so Neander (iv. 140), and Dorner (Vol. i. Division ii. pp. 56 and 57)
concurs with Gieseler in this allegation.

Athanasius not predisposed to Eutychianism. 241
Editors) that the work ascribed to Athanasius by
Eutyches is spurious, and it is regarded as doubtful
by Tillemont.8
But, as it is quoted by Cyril, it appears to be a
genuine work.4 The true answer appears to be, that
the sense of the word <pv<n<s, or nature, was not at
first distinctly determined, any more than was that
of the word viroaTao-i<s 5 (hypostasis), and it needed clear
definitions to declare the meaning in which it was
used. Sometimes it was employed in the sense of
Person.6 It is quite impossible that Athanasius and Cyril,
who declare so distinctly and emphatically the
duality of the Natures in Christ (Very God and Very
Man), should have used the term fiia fyvats (one nature)
in contradiction of that duality.
But it is quite possible that they may have used the
word <pv<ri<; (in the poverty of human language) to
express the perfect union 7 of the two Natures in Him,
in contradiction to Arianism ;8 and that Cyril especially
may have so used it, who seems to have thought
¦irpoatoTrov too weak a term in opposition to the Nes-
torian relation or conjunction?
3 viii. 715. 4 See Newman on Fleury, xxviii. 8.
5 See above, p. 208.
6 Indeed S.Cyril, tom. vi. p. 209, says, "11 tov A6yov tpi<ris, fr/ow
imoffTaais. 7 evao-is (pviriK-fi. * See Hooker, V. liii. 4.
9 o-x«r'S or <rviid<peia. As above remarked, the words xmtaTaais and
wp6auTrov were used sometimes as convertible terms ; and for the purpose
above mentioned, the word (piais was sometimes used for xmiaToaK
Seethe excellent note of Newman on Fleury, xxviii. 8, and Hefele, Con-
cilien, ii. 143, and Canon Bright, History, pp. 355, 356, and his article
in Wace's Dictionary, i. pp. 765, 766, 770, who well says that Cyril re
garded that term (pia <pb<ris) as guarding the truth of the personal union,
and as synonymous with " one person " or " one hypostasis." Cyril, in
his first letter to Successus (p. 135), says that " the Union atthe Incar-
VOL. IV. R

242 .S. Leo's testimony — Synod under Flavian at Con
stantinople.
It is observable that S. Leo the Great, the great
champion of the Church against Eutychianism, in
his letter to the Emperor Leo,1 appeals to Athanasius
and Cyril as among his own authorities against the
Eutychian heresy, and as maintaining two distinct
natures, unconfused, in the one Person of Christ.
The words he quotes from S. Cyril are,2 " We must
not divide Jesus Christ into Man separate from God,
but must maintain that there is One Jesus Christ,
having in Himself two Natures, but not confused."
And again, " The Divine Nature is joined to the
Human in Christ, but without change or confusion."
At the same time, it is certain that before the Council
of Chalcedon, A.D. 45 1, the language of many of the
Fathers on the continuance of the two natures, incon
fused and unchanged, after the Incarnation, was not
so precise as it would have been, if they had written
after the question had been thoroughly examined
at that Council.
Let us return to the history of the Synod.
Flavian endeavoured to mitigate the eagerness of the
accusers of Eutyches, and entreated them to be merci
ful ; and assured Eutyches of a friendly and fatherly
reception, if he would renounce his errors. At length,
however, Flavian, having made manyattempts to bring
Eutyches to acknowledge that the two Natures — thd
nature of God and of Man — remain indissolubly united,
nation was effected by the concurrence of the two Natures, and that
after this union we never divide them, but say ' the one incarnate nature
of God the Word;'" and he adds, "There are two natures united,
but Christ is one ;" and he illustrates this by the union of body and
soul in man; and in a second letter (p. 141) he says, "The union is
without any confusion or mixture, since the divine nature is immutable,
and human nature remains entire in Christ."
1 Epist. 134, ed. Quesnel, p. 350. 2 p. 353,

Eutyches is condemned by it — His appeal to Leo of Rome, 243
and to Dioscorus of Alexandria.
but without any change or confusion, in the One
Person of Christ after the Incarnation, and having
expressed deep sorrow for his persistency in error,
proceeded- to pronounce judicial sentence of excom
munication and deprivation upon him. This sentence
was subscribed by thirty-two Bishops, twenty-three
Abbots, of whom eighteen were Priests, one Deacon,
and four laymen.
Eutyches made no protest publicly to Flavian
and the Council against this sentence ; but on
quitting the Church he whisp ered 3 to one of the
laymen present — the patrician Florentius — that he
appealed from it to a Council of Rome, and of
Egypt (Alexandria), and of Jerusalem. He said
nothing of Antioch ; Dpmnus, who had succeeded
John of Antioch, not being favourable to him, or to
Dioscorus,4 Patriarch of Alexandria.
Eutyches hoped to have Leo, the Bishop Of Rome,
on his side; in this he was disappointed. He reckoned
confidently on the support of Dioscorus, Patriarch of
Alexandria, and of Juvenal of Jerusalem, and in this
anticipation he was correct.
Probably Eutyches had not expected or desired to
become famous as a leader of a party. He had not
3 irpdtas.
4 The name of Dioscorus (son of Zeus or Jove) seems a strange one for
a Christian. May it not, however, have been a favourite name at
Alexandria on account of its connexion with the great Apostle of the
Gentiles, St. Paul, who was carried from Malta to Italy in a ship of
Alexandria, " whose sign was Dioscuri " (the twin sons of Zeus, Castor
and Pollux) ? Acts xxviii. 1 1. Perhaps also Dioscorus may have been
a twin; like Didymus (or twin), famous at Alexandria as Master of the
Catechetical School, and teacher of S. Jerome, by whom, being blind,
he was called "videns meus," " my seer," on account of his inward light.
The name of the Alexandrian Patriarch is generally written " Dios-
carus " by German scholars, and Diosccrus by English and French
authors ; it is Aioaxopos in the Councils.
R 2 '

244 Character of Eutyches.
the intellectual or spiritual pride of an heresiarch. His
language to Flavian at the Council was that of a man
who hardly knows what his real opinions are,6 and
he seemed ready to adopt those of others with
blind submission, not because he was convinced, but
from unwillingness or inability to examine them, or to
dispute about their sentiments or his own. He was
seventy years of age, and had lived in retirement as
Abbot of his monastery above thirty years. For the
most part the Monks with whom he dwelt were more
remarkable for pious and even fanatical zeal than
for any intellectual qualities. He does not seem to
have been a man of learning, eloquence, or logical
acumen ; and he appears to have honestly thought that
he was bound to recede as far as possible from the
dangerous heresy of Nestorius, and that the farther
he departed from it, the safer he would be. He
probably imagined, that in asserting not only the
union of the two Natures in Christ, but their oneness
at and after the Incarnation, he was maintaini ng the
doctrine of Athanasius and Cyril, with which as a
whole (carefully guarded and clearly expounded by
them, as it was, in terms which conveyed their real
opinions) he was very imperfectly acquainted. He
may perhaps also have persuaded himself that the
divine and human Natures, though separate in the
abstract, are yet one in the concrete, as parts of one
divine nature ; and that without supposing the
humanity to be wanting in Christ by reason of being
changed into the divine nature, or absorbed into it, he
might properly maintain that when two natures from
the same origin were joined together, they must take
3 On the character and opinions of Eutyches, see Newman on Fleury,
xxviii. 6, where he is well contrasted with Nestorius.

Influence of Chrysaphius the chamberlain at Constanti- 245
nople — Eulogice : his antipathy to the Archbishop.
their name from that which is pre-eminent, and which,
as it were, possesses the other, and is not possessed
by it.9
Eutyches was probably little more than an instru
ment in the hands of others, especially of Dioscorus of
Alexandria, and of the Court party at Constantinople,
where the Emperor and Empress Eudocia were for a
time estranged from his sister, the energetic Pulcheria,7
who retired for a time from the Palace.
The Emperor and Empress were under the dominion
of the arrogant and avaricious Chamberlain, Chrysa
phius, who was a godson of Eutyches, and had a
special antipathy to Flavian, because he resisted the
covetous demands8 which he made upon him as
5 Cp. Newman's note on Fleury, xxviii. 6, and Dorner, vol. i. div. ii.
pp. 115 — 119, who appears to justify Monophysitism by considerations
of this kind.
7 Tillemont, xv. 447. Fleury, xxvii. 12.
8 This demand of Chrysaphius for what, by a specious euphemism,
were called eulogia or benedictions, but were in fact presents,* was
made in the name of the Emperor; and the rejection of the demand by
Flavian — who is said to have taken the word eulogia in its literal sense,
and to have sent to the avaricious Chamberlain, who expected an offer
ing of gold, some white bread which had received his benediction at
the Holy Eucharist — was resented by Chrysaphius, and was represented
by him to the Emperor as an affront to the Crown. Flavian was sup
ported by Pulcheria ; and Chrysaphius, by means of the Empress
Eudocia, persuaded Theodosius to demand of Flavian to consecrate
Pulcheria a deaconess, and hoped thus to remove her from affairs of
state. This artifice was eluded by Flavian, who incurred further dis
pleasure from Chrysaphius and his master on this account, and Pulcheria
retired for a time from the Court. Theoph. Chronog. 85. Fleury,
xxvii. 12. Tillemont doubts this statement, xv. 447, 892. He thinks
that Eudocia had quitted Constantinople for Jerusalem before this time.
This mention of eulogia (on which see Neander, iv. 224) throws
some light on the act of Cyril narrated above. See p. 224.
* The word euXoyia, literally a blessing, is used in the Septuagint for
gift. Gen. xxiii. 11. 1 Sam. xxv. 27 ; xxx. 26. Cp. 2 Cor. ix. 6.

246 Chrysaphius combines with Dioscorus against Flavian :
his critical position — Pope Leo I.
Archbishop on his accession to the see. Chrysaphius
promised his aid to Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexan
dria, if he would support him in patronizing Eutyches,
and in opposing Flavian.
Eutyches soon afterwards vanished from the scene,9
and other more important personages, especially
Dioscorus, succeeded to his place.
The position of the Archbishop was critical.
Eutyches appealed to Dioscorus for help. The
Emperor Theodosius supported his appeal. The
Bishop of Rome, Pope Leo I., was prepossessed in
his favour, and wrote an expostulatory letter to
Flavian on Feb. 18, A.D. 449, in which he expressed a
doubt whether Eutyches had been justly condemned,
and he declared his surprise that Flavian had not
communicated the circumstances of the case to him
self. Pope Leo I., commonly called the Great, may be
regarded as the Cyril of the West. He had the same
strength of will, undaunted courage, and indomitable
perseverance ; and was superior to him in practical
wisdom and political sagacity.1 He was not equal to
him in rich exuberance of matter and style, and in
breadth and depth of theological learning, as an
expositor of Holy Scripture, but he stands forth con-
9 What we hear of Eutyches after this time is comparatively un
important. He did indeed write a letter to Pope Leo (Synod. Baluz.
t. 222), in which he said that he held the faith of the holy fathers,
especially Athanasius, who rejected the term two natures ; and that he
was ready to submit to his judgment. He was afterwards acquitted
by the " Conciliabulum " of Ephesus ; but he was anathematized by
Anatolius, the successor of Flavian, and was condemned by the Council
of Chalcedon, at which he did not appear ; and he is not heard of after
the year 454. Tillemont, xv. 723.
1 On Leo's character and acts see Neander, iv. 234 — 236, 239, 242,
and the excellent work of the Rev. Charles Gore.

Character and works of Leo : On the Cup in the Holy 247
Eucharist.
spicuously among Western Bishops as the first great
Preacher in the Roman Church.2 His sermons are
remarkable for soundness of doctrine expressed with
vigour and terseness of language, and are worthy to
be compared with the homilies of Augustine.
The letter which he afterwards wrote to Flavian on
the errors of Eutyches, and which, as we shalVsee,
exercised so much influence in the Eutychian Contro
versy, is one of the noblest specimens of a dogmatic
homily in the Latin language.
If also the Treatise " on the Calling of all Nations ''
was, as some suppose,3 written by him, he may be said
to have done much to rescue the teaching of Augus
tine on Predestination from the unhappy conse
quences to which it was carried by some who followed
him. Leo was strenuous in his endeavours to eradicate the
Manichaean heresy, by his sermons and by his acts.
He told his hearers 4 that the Manichaeans insinuated
themselves into their congregations, but that they
might be discovered by the following test : they were
willing to receive the Body of our Lord in the Holy
Eucharist, but not the Blood, because they abhorred
wine. This is a memorable statement, as showing that
there was no such thing as a denial of the Cup to the

2 Sozomen says that in his own time no Bishop preached in the
Churches at Rome ; on which assertion see Fleury, xxvi. 48, with
Dr. Newman's note, p. 217.
3 As Quesnel, the Editor of Leo's works, Lugdun. 1700, in p. 1, and
Dissert, num. 11, "qui Leoni asseritur hoc opusculum." Neander
adopts that opinion, iii. 226, but speaks more doubtfully in iv. 404. In
the latter place he ascribes it to a student of Leo's works.
4 Sermon iv. in Quadrag. t. 5.

248 On Communion in both kinds — Against Transub
stantiation — Leo's aspirations and claims.
Laity in the Church of Rome at that time,6 and also
as indicating that there was no belief then in that
Church that the wine had ceased to exist in the
Sacrament after Consecration. In a word, there was
no such doctrine as that of Transubstantiation in the
Church of Rome in the fifth century, any more than
that there was then any such practice as Half-Com
munion. The former fact, as we shall see, was made still
further manifest by arguments used in the Eutychian
Controversy. Leo also resembled Cyril in his strenuous en
deavours for the extension and aggrandizement of
his own Patriarchal power. His Pontificate was a
memorable era in the history of the Roman Papacy.
He had doubtless persuaded himself that as successor
of St. Peter he had inherited certain privileges from
that Apostle, derived from Christ Himself. The
opinion that Peter was the Rock of the Church, and
was declared so to be by our Lord Himself,7 and the
notion that whatever was given to St. Peter personally

5 Dr. Newman, in his note on Fleury's History, xxvi. 54, commenting
on this sermon of Leo, says that "another Pope, Gelasius (A.D. 492 — 6),
speaks on this point in much the same terms as those used by S. Leo.
See Gratian de Consecrat. Dist. ii. c. 12, where he calls the division
of the Sacrament ' a great sacrilege.' Communion in both kinds (said
Dr. Newman there, p. 232, in the year 1844) was universal in the
ancient Church, and so it continued for a thousand years."
6 See Neander, iii. 226, and Gieseler, vol. i. § 94, p. 444.
7 Matt. xvi. 18. This notion seems to be at variance with the general
scope of the whole passage (as is shown in my notes upon it), and with
the words of Augustine in Joann. Tract. 124, " Super hanc Petram,
quam confessus es, sedificabo Ecclesiam Meam. Petra erat Christus,
super quod fundamentum etiam ipse sedificatus est Petrus," and other
passages quoted by Gieseler, § 94, i. pp. 441 — 444, and cp. above,
pp. II — 14, and p. 82.

Leo's claims — Political state of Rome. 249
had descended to Bishops of Rome as his successors,
had in the fifth century8 been made the vantage-
ground for claims which were either unknown to, or
resisted by, the Churches of earlier times, and were not
allowed to pass unchallenged for many centuries.
Cyprian had opposed the pretensions of Rome to
receive appeals from Africa, and in this opposition he
was followed by Augustine and the Church of Africa,
in the Pontificates of Boniface and Caelestine, in the
case of the African presbyter Apiarius ; and the
African Church had given no heed to the judgment
of Pope Zosimus in the Pelagian Controversy.9
Leo stretched the claims of the Roman See beyond
any of his predecessors. He had strong temptations
to do so. The opportunity was favourable. The
Eastern Patriarchs were wasting their strength in
conflicts with one another. Alexandria was jealous of
Antioch, and still more of the recently founded Patri
archal throne of . Constantinople. This feeling had
displayed itself in the struggle of Theophilus against
Chrysostom. The See of Constantinople itself was
subject to the Imperial power, swayed by Court-
favourites who were lords of the Emperor himself.
But the Roman Bishop had no rival Patriarch
to dispute his claims. He ruled alone in the West.
The Western Emperor was a stranger at Rome ; the
imperial splendours of the, Palatine Hill had floated
away to the Vatican. The Western Emperor did
not claim to be a rival of the Patriarch at Rome,

3 See the proofs of this in Leo's letter to Anatolius of Constanti
nople, Epist. 78, and in his action by his legates at Chalcedon ; and cp.
Neander, iii. 225.
3 The authorities may be seen in Gieseler, § 94, pp. 448 — 450, and
Neander, iii. 232, 233.

250 Attitude of Western Emperor to the Bishop of Rome —
Leo's letters to Dioscorus.
but co-operated with him as his friend and ally, as
was seen in the legislative acts of Valentinian III.,1
which favoured the claims of his see, and prepared
the way for the subjection of Western Potentates to
the throne of the Roman Pontiff.
The Eastern Patriarchs themselves ministered to
his aggrandizement not only by their intestine strifes,
but by invoking his help to appease them.
Leo gave occasion to the struggle with Dios
corus, the newly elected successor of S. Cyril at
Alexandria in A.D. 445, by writing to him on July 21
of that year, and by dictating rules of discipline2 to
that Patriarch and his Church, and by expressing his
expectation that in ceremonial matters Alexandria
would conform to Rome, inasmuch as Mark, the
disciple of Peter, had founded the Church of Alexan
dria, and it was to be presumed that he had delivered
the same rules to that Church as St. Peter had given to
that of Rome.3
1 Valentinian III., in A.D. 445, passed a law in these words : " The
primacy of the Apostolic See having been established by the merit of
the Apostle Peter, by the dignity of the city of Rome, and by the
authority of a holy Synod (a questionable assertion if Sardica is meant ;
see above, vol. ii. pp. 92— 94 for its limitations: and much more if
Nicaea is intended ; see vol. i. p. 455), no pretended power shall arrogate
to itself anything against the authority of that see ; for it is not possible
that peace can be preserve d universally, except when the whole Church
acknowledges its ruler ;" and resistance to the Pope was to be regarded
as an offence against the State. Novell. Theod. tit. 24. On this law
Tillemont observes, tom. xv. 441, that Leo obtained it from Valenti
nian when at Rome (June 6, A.D. 445), and that it was "too favourable
to the power of his see, and not creditable to his piety ;" and (xv. 83)
he says "that in the opinion of those who know anything of the dis
cipline of the Church, this law will do little honour to him (Leo) whom
it praises, and as little hurt to him (Hilary) whom it condemns."
2 Leo, Epist. Opp. i. 628. Mansi, v. 1240.
3 This is a remarkable assertion. Among other peculiarities, some
Churches under the Bishop of Alexandria administered the Holy Com-

Pope Leo's designs — His noble stand against heresy. 251
Leo had also already asserted his authority in Gaul by
restoring a Bishop of that province, Celidonius, to his
see, on the ground of his own primacy, which he was
endeavouring to exalt to an universal supremacy,4
and in defiance of the law of the Church, which sub
jected Bishops to the jurisdiction of their own Metro
politans. He humbled Hilary,5 the saintly Bishop of
Aries,6 who protested in vain against that usurpation.7
But these aggressive acts of Leo, like the infirmities
of temper in Cyril, must not tempt us to forget the
services of either to the Christian Church in times
of emergency.
The same courage which animated the Bishop of
Rome to encounter without alarm the hostile rage of
Attila and Genseric, prompted him to contend valiantly
against heresy for the true Faith.
If any one should be disposed to imagine that the
questions involved in the Eutychian Controversy were
mere questions of words, and that they did not affect
the foundations of Christian faith and practice,7 let
him be invited to read the letter ° of Leo, Bishop of
Rome, to Flavian on that controversy.9

munion in the Evening. See Fleury, xxvi. 48, p. 216, on the diversities
of practice in Churches, and Dr. Newman's note there.
4 See Leo, Epist. 9, 10, where he says that "he who thinks himself
called upon to challenge the primacy of the Apostle Peter will find him
self altogether unable to impair that dignity ; but being puffed up by
his own spiritual pride, will plunge himself into hell."
4 See Vita S. Hilar, c. 16, 17, in Quesnel's edition of Leo's Works,
i- 743- 6 See Newman on Fleury, xxvii. 6, p. 245, " S. Hilary might well
complain when Celidonius was received at Rome as a communicant,
contrary to the canons, and when S. Leo set aside the sentence of a
judicial Synod on one lawfully tried and convicted."
7 As is well shown by Neander, iv. 217.
8 It may be seen in Leonis Opera, ed. Quesnel, i. 242, ed. Ballerin.

252 Leo's dogmatic Epistle on the Incarnation against
Eutychianism.
He says * that Eutyches was one of those, who, in
the contemplation of divine mysteries,2 " do not appeal
to the voices of Prophets, and the writings of Apostles,
or the authority of Gospels, but to their own selves ;
and become teachers of error, because they will not
consent to be disciples of the Truth. No one can have
acquired any knowledge of the Old and New Testa
ment, who (as is the case with Eutyches) does not
comprehend even the rudiments of the Creed.
" That Creed, which is professed by ¦ the mouth
of all those throughout the world who are to be
regenerated in Baptism, has not yet been received into
the heart of him (Eutyches) who is now stricken in
years. " The whole body of the faithful profess in the
Creed that they believe in God the Father Almighty,
and in His only-begotten Son Jesus Christ our Lord,
Who was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin
i. 801 — 838 ; Mansi, Concil.'v. 1366 ; Harduin, ii. 290 ; Hefele, Con-
cilien, ii. 353.
9 To this letter of Pope Leo may be added his Sermons on the
Nativity pp. 70 — 87) ; his Letter, in A. D. 458 (seven years after the
Council of Chalcedon), to the Emperor Leo (Epist. 134, ed. Quesnel, i.
p. 346 ; cp. ibid. ii. 182) ; and also the Eranistes (or Scrap-gatherer) of
Theodoret, which exhibits the doctrinal and moral results of the
Eutychian heresy. See Neander, iv. 218. Cp. p. 233 for Neander's
character of Theodoret, whom he greatly admires, and Dorner on the
Person of Christ, vol. i. div. ii. p. 81.
1 There is a summary of Leo's Epistle (Epistoladogmatica) to Flavian
in Dorner on the Person of Christ, vol. i. div. ii. pp. 86 — 89: "Leo
says clearly (and this constitutes his merit), that the fundamental truth
of Christianity is sacrificed quite as much by the curtailment of the
Humanity of Christ as by a curtailment of His Divinity. He displays
also great Ecclesiastical tact in the manner in which he describes
Nestorianism and Eutychianism as two opposite rocks, on each of
which alike a correct doctrine of the Incarnation must suffer ship
wreck." 2 Leo, Epist. ad Flavian, c. 1.

Leo's dogmatic Epistle on the Incarnation against 253
Eutychianism.
Mary. By these three sentences all the devices of
heretics are destroyed. For since God is confessed
to be Almighty and Father, His Son is shown to be
co-eternal with Him ; and in no respect to differ from
the Father, inasmuch as He is declared to be God of
God, Almighty of Almighty, Co-eternal of Eternal,
neither later in time, nor less in power, nor unlike in
glory, nor divided in substance ; and the same Only-
begotten Co-eternal Son of Eternal Father is declared
in the Creed to have been born of the Holy Spirit
and Virgin Mary. This temporal Birth detracted
nothing from His Divine and Eternal Nativity, and
added nothing to it, but concentrated all its energy 3
in the reparation of fallen Man, in order that it
might overcome death, and destroy the devil, who
had the power of death. We should not have been
able to overcome the Author of Sin and Death,
unless He, whom neither Sin could sully, nor Death
could hold, had taken our nature, and made it His
own." Leo proceeds to quote certain texts of Scripture,4
and to apply them. " The properties of each of the
two Natures being preserved unimpaired, while they
coalesced into One Person, humility was assumed by
majesty, weakness by strength, mortality by Eter
nity ; and for the purpose of paying the debt of our
condition, a Nature, which was inviolable, united itself
to a nature that was capable of suffering, in order
that, as was requisite for our cure, One and the Same
Mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus,5
8 " Totam se impendit."
4 Matt. i. 1. Rom. i. 1. Gen. xii. 3; xxiii 18. Isa. vii. 14;
ix. 6. Luke i. 35. John i. 14. Gal. iii. 16.
8 1 Tim. ii. 5.

2 54 I-eo on the distinctness of the two Natures united in
the one Person of Christ.
might be able to die by His Manhood, while not
subject to death by His Godhead. He -Who is Very
God was born in the entire nature of Very Man,
being perfect in His own attributes, and entire also
in ours, so far as they belonged to us by our creation
before the fall, the evil of which He came to repair ;
for though He partook of our weaknesses, He had
no portion in our sins. Each of the two Natures
retains its own properties without any loss ; and as
the form of God did not take away in Christ the
form of a servant,6 so the form of a servant did not
impair the form of God."
Leo shows that the acts of Christ on earth proved
the distinctness of the two Natures in His one
Person. " Hunger, thirst, weariness, sleep, belong to
Him as Man ; to feed five thousand with five loaves,
to walk on the sea, to calm the storm — these are
His works as God. To weep for Lazarus, and to
raise him from the dead, are not acts of the same
nature ; to hang on the Cross, and yet to change
day into night ; to shake the elements, and open the
gates of heaven to the penitent thief, do not apper
tain to one nature only. As God, Christ said, ' The
Father and I are one ' 7 (one substance) ; but as Man,
He said, ' The Father is greater than I.' " 8
Leo guards himself against the Nestorian heresy
by showing that in the conjunction of these two dis
tinct and unconfused Natures in Christ there is only
One Person, the Person of the Divine Word, the
Eternal Son of Co-eternal Father.
He concludes by expressing his surprise that Euty
ches had not been more severely rebuked by his
Judges for blasphemy, since " it is no less impious to
8 Phil. ii. 6, 7. ? John x. 30. « John xiv. 28.

Leo's exhortation to Flavian of Constantinople. 255
say that the Son of God existed in two Natures before
the Incarnation, than to assert that He existed only
in one Nature after it."
"We therefore exhort you, our very dear bro
ther" (he is writing to Flavian, Archbishop of Con
stantinople), " that, if by God's mercy the cause of
Eutyches is brought to a happy conclusion, his
ignorance may be purged of this error. The Acts
of your Council show that he began well, when he
professed his readiness to accept opinions which he
had not held before, and to conform to the faith from
which he has been estranged. But when he would
not condemn the impious doctrine, you perceived
that he persisted in his misbelief, and that he had in
curred a sentence of condemnation. If he is sorry
for his error, and if he at length acknowledges that
your Episcopal Authority has proceeded rightly
against him, and if he condemns his former error by
voice or in writing, your mercy to him will not be
blameable ; for our Lord, the Good Shepherd, Who
laid down His life for the sheep, and Who came not
to destroy men's lives, but to save them, wills us to
be imitators of His compassion. The true Faith is
defended with most benefit when the opposite errors
are condemned by those who have been deceived by
them." Leo adds that he has sent as his legates and
deputies to conduct the whole affair with faithfulness
and piety, Julius, Bishop (of Cos) ; Renatus, a Priest
of the title of the Church of S. Clement (of Rome) ;
and the deacon Hilarus ; and has associated with
them Dulcitius as their notary.
From such statements as these, it is clear that the
heresy of Eutyches — like that of Nestorius9 — was
9 See above, pp. 208 — 217.

256 Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist : how affected by
Eutychianism.
made ministerial to the advancement of the true faith
by clear expositions of it; and also to the inculcation
of Christian duties, consequent on the adequate re
ception of that faith.
This remark may be extended also to Christian
Worship, especially the Holy Sacraments.
The divine virtue communicated to the faithful in
the reception of the Holy Eucharist has been already
seen to be connected with the true faith in oppo
sition to the heresy of Nestorius. The Body and
Blood taken and received by the faithful in that
Sacrament possess divine power and efficacy by
reason of their being the Body and Blood of Him
Who is Very God (above, pp. 198 — 209).
This was argued by the Fathers against Nestorius.
And in opposition to Eutyches, Leo contended for the
real presence in that Sacrament, by declaring as a
consequence of the verity of Christ's Human Nature
remaining unimpaired and distinct after the Incar
nation, that we do indeed really and truly partake
of His flesh and blood in the Holy Eucharist,1 and
that we are, as it were, transfigured into it.2
At the same time the heresy of Eutyches has had
the effect of making it clear, that though the ancient
Church held the doctrine of the real presence of
Christ,- Very God and Very Man, in these Eucharistic
mysteries, in an ineffable manner, it did not hold, but
rejected, the doctrine of Transubstantiation.
1 "In illamystica distributione spiritalis alimonise hoc impertitur,
hoc sumitur, ut accipientes virtutem ccelestis cibi in carnem ipsius Qui
caro nostra facta est transeamus ; . . . ut nee infantium Unguis Veritas
corporis et sanguinis Christi inter communionis Sacramenta taceatur "
cap. 2, Epist. 59, to the Clergy and People of Constantinople. Compare
Epist. 50, to the Greek and Gallic Bishops.
2 Cp. Hooker, V. lxvii. 11.

The Mystery of the Incarnation ; illustrated by the 257
Mystery of the Eucharist — Against Transubstantiation.
In fact, the Fathers illustrated the Mystery of what
was done in the Incarnation, by a comparison of it
with the Mystery of what takes place in the conse
cration of the Holy Eucharist. They affirmed that
" as the transformation 3 of the sacramental elements
does not make them to cease to be of the same
nature as they were before" (or cease to be really
bread and wine) ; " so the human Nature of Christ,
joined to the divine, loses not the nature of humanity,
but continues with the divinity as a substance distinct
in itself."4
The letter of Leo to Flavian is dated June 13,
A.D. 449 ; and on the same day he despatched seven
other letters, one to the Emperor Theodosius,5 in
which he mentioned the names of the legates he had
sent to the future Council summoned to examine
into the case of Eutyches ; another to the Emperor's
sister Pulcheria,6 urging her to endeavour to eradicate
the heresy of Eutyches ; another to her 7 to explain
why he himself did not come to the Council ; another
to some Archimandrites at Constantinople,8 in order
• 3 ptraaToixtiutris.
4 This is evident from the arguments of Theodoret, Eranistes, Dia
log, ii. tom. iv. pp. 125, 126, ed. Schulze, 1772, "from whence," says
Bishop Pearson (Art. iii. p. 162), "it is observable that the Church
in those days held no such doctrine as Transubstantiation." Cp. Hooker,
V. lxvii. II, quoting the same passage.
The same illustration as is used by Theodoret is also employed by
the author of the Treatise " de Duabus Naturis in Christo," supposed by
some to be Pope Gelasius. Bibl. Patr. v. p. 671, " Sacramenta quse
sumimus corporis et sanguinis Christi divina res est, propter quod per
eadem divinse efficimur consortes naturae, et tamen esse non desinit sub
stantia panis et vini."
5 Mansi, v. 1391.
6 Ibid. 1396. It is doubtful whether it reached her ; it has been sup
posed by some to have been intercepted by Dioscorus. Tillemont, xv.
543. ' 7 Ibid. 1401. 3 Ibid. 1406.
VOL. IV. S

258 Letters of Pope Leo.
to refute the heresy of Eutyches, and to assure them
that, if he renounces it, he will be treated with
clemency; another to the Council summoned to meet
at Ephesus, in which he protests against the heresy
of Eutyches,9 and nominates to them by commission
his legates, who " are to be his deputies in the holy
Synod, and to settle by suffrages, in common with
it, what may be pleasing to the Lord ;" another to
Julian his legate,1 in which he praises his faith, and
instructs him how to deal with the case of Eutyches.
The seventh letter is to the same Julian,2 in which
he more fully expounds the errors of Eutyches.
It is remarkable that Leo, who contended so
strenuously for his own prerogatives, derived from
Christ's words to Peter, whose successor he professed
to be, and who in virtue of that succession claimed to
have all that our Lord was supposed by him to have
given to St. Peter, should have taken so much pains
to enlist temporal influences in his aid. But Leo was
a statesman 3 as well as a Bishop, and was ready to
act in either character, as seemed expedient.
It appears from some of these letters, especially
from one to Pulcheria, that Leo did not desire that
another Council should be called, to settle a matter
of faith, which he considered as already established.
But happily for the Church, the question was not
allowed to rest where it did. The Eutychian heresy
could not have been suppressed by merely such an
insignificant assembly as the local Synod of Con
stantinople in which Flavian had presided. And
though the Faith was now about to receive a rude
shock at Ephesus, yet even that was eventually
9 Mansi, v. 1409. 1 Ibid. 141 3. 2 ib'cL 141 5.
3 Cp. Darner's remarks on Leo, vol. i. div. ii. pp. 90, 91.

Powerful influences exerted on behalf of Eutyches. 259
beneficial, as preparing the way for its full and final
establishment in the General Council of Chalcedon.
For a time Leo's efforts seemed to be fruitless. His
letters to Pulcheria, sister of the Emperor, if they
ever reached her, could be of little avail, as her
brother was prejudiced against her by the Chamber
lain of his court, Chrysaphius.
The letter to Theodosius himself could have no
effect. Charitable allowances ought to be made for
one who was misled by persons of high station and
influence in the Church, by whom he had been in
duced to imagine that they, who were asserting the
two Natures in Christ, were in fact reviving the heresy
of two Persons ; and that Flavian was a follower
of his predecessor Nestorius, whose heresy the Em
peror himself had condemned ; and that Flavian and
his adherents were endeavouring to frustrate the
Emperor's own work, which had gained him so much
applause, in suppressing Nestorianism at Ephesus.
In this opinion he was strengthened by Chrysa
phius the enemy of Flavian, and by the friend of
Chrysaphius, Dioscorus, the Patriarch of Alexandria,
who made much use of the popular plea in favour
of Eutyches, that the two great predecessors of Dios
corus in the See of Alexandria, Athanasius and Cyril,
had asserted that there was only "one nature of
the Word after the Incarnation ;" 4 and therefore
Dioscorus affirmed that Eutyches and his supporters
were, in fact, fighting the battle of the Faith, and
were zealous for the memory of those great doctors
of the Church, against the adherents of Nestorius.5
4 See above, p. 240.
5 Even in the eighteenth century the historian of the Decline and
Fall of the Roman Empire (Gibbon, vol. viii. chap, xlvii. p. 301) did
S 2

260 Inclinations and acts of Theodosius in favour of
Eutyches.
Probably for these reasons Theodosius had chosen
Ephesus as the place for" the future Council. He
hoped that its local associations might be favour
able to the cause he had at heart ; and that the
spirit which had animated the Great Ephesine Coun
cil in the condemnation of Nestorius might inspire
the minds of those who were to meet there, and
might induce them to rescind the judicial sentence
pronounced on Eutyches by the successor of Nestorius,
Flavian ; and he hoped to find another Cyril in Cyril's
successor Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, whom
he appointed to preside at the Council.6
It met at Ephesus on Aug. 8, A.D. 449, and it
sat in the same Church, the Church of St. Mary,
where Nestorius had been condemned by the General
Council eighteen years before.
That this was the Emperor's view of the matter
appears from his words addressed to Dioscorus on
May 15 preceding:7 "We have heard that many
Archimandrites of the East, with the orthodox Laity,
contend against some Bishops " (i.e. such Bishops as
Flavian and Leo), " who are said to be Nestorians."
The Emperor ordered that Barsamas, the Syrian
monk, and other representatives of the Archiman-

not scruple to impute Eutychianism to Cyril, and to say that "Dios
corus and the unconstrained voice of the fathers " (at the Latrocinium of
Ephesus ; see below, p. 263) ' ' accepted the faith of Cyril, and con
demned the heresy of the two natures ;" and again (p. 305) he calls
Eutychianism " the faith of Cyril."
6 The number of the Bishops present in this Council is not certain. At
the beginning of the Council there seem to have been 135 (including
delegates) ; some accounts raise the number even to 360. See Hefele,
ii. 369. There appear to have been 135 at the close ; ibid. 379. Others
speak of 150 Bishops as present at some of the Sessions.
7 Labbe, Concil, iv. 103

The Emperor favourable to Eutyches — Turbulence of 261
the Ephesine Latrocinium.
drites of the East (who were favourers of Eutyches),
should have places and votes in the Synod ; and in
a letter to Juvenal, Patriarch of Jerusalem, who had
taken a leading part in condemning Nestorius, he
expressed a desire that he would co-operate with
Dioscorus, the President designate of the Council, in
maintaining the cause of orthodoxy ; in other words,
in absolving Eutyches from the censure of Flavian.
Two imperial Commissioners were appointed to
attend the Council, and to superintend its proceed
ings. Eutyches also was present.
St. Paul, in his first Epistle to Timothy, Bishop of
Ephesus, enumerates the qualifications requisite for
the Episcopal office ; and he there uses an expression,
which he repeats in similar instructions to Titus, the
Bishop of Crete. The Apostle's language, which
sounds strange to modern ears, is very significant,
as revealing an element in the Greek-Asiatic cha
racter, with which the Church had to contend, and
which required much skill and power to control and
mollify. " A Bishop," he says, " must be not self-
willed, not soon angry, no striker'' 8
The Apostle had some anticipations of the turbu
lence of such Ecclesiastical assemblies as that which
met in the year 449 in that City where Timothy was
placed by him as Bishop.
That Council of Ephesus gained for itself by its
proceedings the ignominious name of Latrocinium?
8 I Tim. iii. 3. Titus i. 6.
9 Latrocinium, a title given it by Pope Leo (Epist. 95, ed. Ballerin. ;
Epist. 75 in Quesnel); in Greek aivoSos Kptrrpudi. See Hefele, Con-
cilien, ii. 386J; Neander, iv. 236. Leo's words are, " Ephesino non
judicio, sed latrocinio ;" his principal charge against it being the savage
cruelty (ssevitia) with which it enforced heresy.
Leo seems to have borrowed this term from Augustine, de Civ: Dei,

262 The Latrocinium of Ephesus.
By English writers it is generally called the "Robbers'
Synod!' But this term hardly expresses its true
character : it was not by acts of robbery, but by out
rages of turbulent violence and savage cruelty, that
it obtained the name of Latrocinium} Perhaps it
might better be called the " Ruffian Synod," or the
Brigandage of Ephesus.2
In addition to the Monks admitted to the Synod,
there was a large number of soldiers,3 and tumultuous
parabolani? who were ready to act at the beck of the
Patriarch of Alexandria, and had signalized them
selves in the earlier days of Cyril by their furious
attack on the Governor Orestes, and by the murder of
Hypatia.
iv. 4, " Remota justitia quid sunt regna, nisi magna latrocinia, quia
latrocinia quid sunt, nisi parva regna ? "
1 "Ut jugulent homines surgunt de nocte latrones," says Horace
( I Epist. ii. 32), describing their character ; and the word Ajjo-t")? in the
Gospels and Josephus, which corresponds to toro, represents the character
of the brigands, bandits, and assassins (sicarii, or cut-throats) who in
fested Judaea and Jerusalem in its latter days, and played so conspicuous
a part in its turbulent and sanguinary insurrections. Our Translators of
the Gospels have had some difficulty in finding an equivalent to it in the
history of the penitent Ajjo-t^f. Barabbas, a. a?jo-t})s (John xviii. 40),
who was preferred by the people to Christ was the antithesis of our Lord,
not so much as a robber, but as a man who took away life (he had
"committed murder in the insurrection," Mark xv. 7), and is con
trasted with Him Who laid down His own life in order to give life to
all. As St. Peter says (Acts hi. 14), " Ye have killed the Prince of life,
and desired a murderer to be granted to you." The Church was changed
by the Latrocinium of Ephesus from a House of Prayer to a o-iri)Kaiov
Apo-rSy. "Righteousness lodged in it, but behold murderers" (Isa. i. 21).
It will be seen in the foregoing note that it was not for acts of robbery,
but of violence and cruelty (sasvitia), that Leo was led to fix the name
"Latrocinium" on the pseudo-Synod of Ephesus, see below, p. 265.
2 The history of the Latrocinium may be seen in Tillemont, xv. 551
— 583 ; Fleury, xxvii. 39—41 ; Hefele's Concilien, ii. 368 — 386 ; Canon
Bright's article on Dioscorus, in Wace's Diet. i. 866.
3 As to the soldiers, see Concil. Labbe, iv. 113, 140, 251, 382.
4 On these parabolani, see above, p. 203.

Defence of Eutyches— Partiality of Dioscorus, the Presi- 263
dent — Leo's letter not read.
Eutyches was invited to make his defence. He
made an attack upon Flavian, and professed his
adhesion to the Creed of Nicaea, and his repugnance
to Apollinarius, to Nestorius, and to all heretics ;
but he evaded the question as to his own tenets on
the Nature of Christ after the Incarnation.
Eutyches was admitted to the Council, but Euse
bius of Dbrylaeum, his accuser, was not allowed to
be present, although Flavian demanded his reception.
When Hilarus, the legate of Leo, required that the
Pope's letter to Flavian should be read, this request
was eluded by Dioscorus ; and in fact the Epistle of
Leo was never heard by the Council.
The Acts of the local Council of Constantinople,
held Nov. 8, 448, were read, and in the reading of
those Acts the charges made in writing by Eusebius
against Eutyches were rehearsed. On the mention of
Cyril's name in those Acts,5 the Council endeavoured
to identify itself with him.
" The memory of Cyril is eternal," exclaimed many
of the Bishops. " Dioscorus and Cyril profess one
and the same faith. Cursed be he who adds to it, or
takes away from it." One of the Bishops, Eustathius
of Berytus,6 did not scruple to affirm that Cyril had
maintained that we ought " not to say two Natures,
but one Incarnate nature of the Word ; and that this
was the doctrine of Athanasius." When they had
reached the passage in the Acts of the Synod of
Constantinople, which recorded that Eusebius of
Dorylaeum had pressed Eutyches to confess two
natures in Christ after the Incarnation, and to declare
that Christ, as to His flesh, is consubstantial with us,
some of the Bishops vociferated, " Take him away,
5 Concil. Labbe, iv. 151. 6 iv. 174.

2 64 Conduct of Dioscorus — Acquittal of Eutyches —
Condemnation of Flavian.
burn Eusebius ; let him be burnt alive ; let him be
torn in two ; as he has divided (the natures), so let
him be divided."
Dioscorus, the President, did not hesitate to swell
the cry with his own voice,7 " Can you bear such lan
guage as this, which speaks of two natures after the
Incarnation ? " The Bishops replied, " Anathema to
him who thus speaks. If any one says two natures,
let him be anathema."
Thus the Faith was imperilled by those who ought
to have maintained it. The Church was about to see
at Ephesus a second Rimini.
The President Dioscorus put the question, " Which
faith do you approve ? that of Eutyches, or Eusebius?"
" That of Eutyches " was the answer. " Eusebius °
is impious."
Dioscorus then invited the Bishops to deliver their
opinions severally. Juvenal of Jerusalem, who had
been first to condemn Nestorius, now took the lead
in absolving Eutyches, and voted for his restoration.
Even Domnus of Antioch, who had subscribed his
condemnation, recanted. The other Bishops assented.
It does not appear whether the Pope's legates voted
at all. The Monks were unanimous in his favour.
Dioscorus, the President, confirmed the votes of the
Council. But he was not content with the absolu
tion of Eutyches ; he demanded of the Council
the condemnation of Flavian, Patriarch of Constan
tinople, who had pronounced sentence on Eutyches ;
and of Eusebius, Bishop of Dorylaeum, who had been
his accuser.
Flavian, who was present, protested against this
proposal. He appealed from the Council as incom-
7 Concil. iv. 224. 8 Which means pious.

Violence and panic in the Synod. 265
petent to pronounce judgment upon him.9 The
sentence was also resisted by the legates of Leo.
Hilarus, the Roman deacon, said in Latin, " Con-
tradicitur." Dioscorus the President, Juvenal of Jerusalem, and
the other Bishops voted for the deposition of Flavian
and Eusebius, on the ground that they had altered
the faith of Nicaea and Ephesus.
Dioscorus rose from his throne, and was pro
ceeding to pronounce sentence upon them, when one
of the Bishops,1 Onesiphorus of Iconium, sprang for
ward with some other Bishops, and clasped his knees,
and implored him to pause. He refused to do so,
and invoked the help of the civil officers. " Where
are the Counts ? " he exclaimed. At these words the
Proconsul entered. At the same time a furious band of
monks and soldiers, with clubs, swords, and chains,
rushed into the church. Night was rapidly coming
on. The Bishops were terrified by their violence and
threats, and exhausted by the length of the Session.2
Some of them put their names to a blank piece of
paper, and signified their assent to the proposal of
Dioscorus. Others declined to do so. Some of
them were banished ; others were deposed.3 Dorrinus
himself, Patriarch of Antioch, was afterwards deprived
of his see by Dioscorus.4 The Roman legate
Hilarus5 escaped with difficulty, and returned to
9 Whether he appealed to a General Council, or to the Bishop of
Rome, or to both, is not clear, and is a question keenly debated by
Canonists. See Hefele, ii. 378, 379. Leo himself seems to say (Epist.
43 and 44) that Flavian appealed to a Council. 1 Concil. iv. 253.
2 It does not clearly appear whether the Sessions extended over
several days, or were concluded in one. Hefele, ii. 369.
3 Evagr. i. 10. 4 Nicephor. xiv. 47.
5 What became of Julius is not ' certain, but he is also said to have

266 Temporary shipwreck of the Faith — Death of Flavian —
Triumph and fate of Dioscorus.
report the issue of the Council of Ephesus to the
Bishop of Rome, and to tell him the heavy tidings
that the Church of St. Mary, the principal " House
of prayer " in that city, had been made a air^Xaiov
Xrjarwv 6 by a Patriarch of Alexandria, supported by
the Emperor of the East. Theodosius issued an edict
confirming the sentence of the Synod, and was so
much deceived by Dioscorus that he prohibited any
one who taught the heresy of Nestorius and Flavian
from being raised to the Episcopate.7
Flavian and Eusebius were imprisoned. Flavian
was afterwards banished, and soon died ; from the
effect of wounds inflicted by some of the monks,8 insti
gated by Dioscorus. Anatolius, a friend of Dioscorus,9
was placed in the See of Constantinople.
Dioscorus, elated by success, proceeded, with ten of
his suffragans, to excommunicate Pope Leo.1
The Bishops returned to their homes, many of them
to weep in silence (like those who had been entrapped
at Rimini) over the fault which they had committed
through fear, and for which they afterwards expressed
their bitter sorrow and anguish of heart, at the
Council of Chalcedon 2 in A.D. 45 1.
Dioscorus did not long enjoy his triumph. He who
had deposed Flavian at Ephesus, was, as we shall see,

returned to Rome. Renatus was not present at the Council. Hefele,
ii. 387, 388.
6 Matt. xxi. 13. 7 Concil. iv. p. 863.
8 Evagr. ii. 2. Niceph. xiv. 47. Zonaras, xiii. p. 44. Concil. iv.
1413. Prosper, Chron. p. 670.
9 Liberat. c. 12. 1 Concil. iv. 398.
2 The details of their remorse, and of their subsequent confessions at
Chalcedon, and of the violence used, and the bribery resorted to at the
Latrocinium, and of the opinion of ancient writers on its proceedings,
may be seen in Hefele, ii. 379.

Fate of Chrysaphius — History of Eudocia — Death of 267
the Emperor Theodosius — Accession of Pulcheria.
soon afterwards deposed, and was banished to Gangra,
where he died in A.D. 454. Chrysaphius the Cham
berlain met with an earlier fate ; he was disgraced
and put to death in the year after the Latrocinium
of Ephesus.3
Eudocia the Empress was estranged from her hus
band, and quitted him on the plea of a vow of sanc
tity 4 for Jerusalem, where for a time she continued to
favour the partisans of Eutychianism, but was even
tually brought back to the Church and to its commu
nion by Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, who had re
pented of his fault, and she died there in the year 460.
But the principal incident in this wonderful revo
lution of events was the death of the Emperor Theo
dosius. As he was riding near Constantinople, he
was thrown from his horse into the river Lycus ; his
spine was hurt by the fall, and he died on July 29,
A.D. 450, in the fiftieth year of his age, and in the
forty-third of his reign.
Thus the chief power in the East passed into
the hands of his sister Pulcheria, who had been
associated with him in the Empire, under the title of
Augusta, since A.D. 415. Leo had addressed letters to
her,5 congratulating her on her loyalty to the faith,
and exhorting her to vindicate and maintain it, and
to promote the convocation of a General Council for
that purpose.6
According to the Roman Law, the sceptre of neither
3 Marcellin. Chron. a.d. 450. Nicephor. xiv. 49. It is not clear
whether this was before or after the death of Theodosius. Tillemont,
xv. 610, compared with Gibbon, vol. vi. ch. xxxiv. p. 84. Hefele, ii. 395.
4 Tillemont, xv. 524, 756, 781, 892. Gibbon, vol. v. ch. xxxii. p. 424.
5 March 17 and July 16, a.d. 450. Mansi, vi. 64, 86.
6 He afterwards changed his mind as to that point, on account of the
disturbed state of Italy from the incursion of Attila and the Huns, and

268 Pulcheria associates Marcian with herself in the throne
— Restoration of Catholic Bishops.
the East nor of the West could be swayed by a
Woman alone. Marcian, a brave soldier of Illyricum,
distinguished for his generosity, integrity, and ortho
doxy, was raised by Pulcheria to the imperial throne,
Aug, 24, 450, and was associated with her as her Con
sort ; but so that her religious profession of virginity
was not affected by the union.
He began his reign with a law against those who
fell away from the Catholic Church to the heresy of
Eutyches or Apollinarius,7 and with a decree against
idolatrous sacrifices, and against the re-opening of
heathen temples.
Anatolius, Flavian's successor in the patriarchal
throne of Constantinople, condemned the heresy
of Eutyches in a Council of Bishops, Priests, and
Archimandrites in that city, in July, 450. Fla
vian's body was brought by Pulcheria to Constan
tinople,8 and was honourably interred in the Church of
the Apostles among the mortal remains of his pre
decessors in the see.
Bishops who had been exiled after the Council
of Ephesus in 449 were restored to their sees,
Theodoret of Cyrus being among them.9 Eusebius,
Bishop of Dorylaeum, who had acted as the accuser of
Eutyches, and had been imprisoned after that Council,
and then fled for refuge to Rome, was commended to
Pulcheria by Leo in a letter dated April 13, 451, and
was restored to his see after the Council of Chalcedon
in that year.
for other reasons. See his letters, April 23 and June 9, A.D. 451.
Mansi, vi. 112, 114, and Hefele, ii. 400. But the Council of Chalcedon
had been already summoned before the latter Epistle was written.
7 Cod. Justin, i. tit. 5.
, See Leo's Epistle to her, dated April 13, A.D. 451. Mansi, vi. 105.
9 Theodoret, Epist. 138 — 140.

General Councils ; by what authority were they sum- 269
monedl — Council of Chalcedon.
It is now asserted by Romish divines, and has
been affirmed by them for three centuries, that the
General Councils of the Church were convened by
Bishops of Rome, and that no Council ought to be
named General, unless it is summoned by him.
But the fact is, that none of the General Councils of
the ancient Church were convoked by the Bishop of
Rome.1 And with regard to the fourth General
Council, that of Chalcedon, it was convened by the
Emperor Marcian, independently of the Pope, if not
in opposition to his wishes. Happily for the Church,
the authority of the Emperor, acting on the opinion
of Eastern Bishops, prevailed over that of the Pope.2
The summons for the Council was issued in the
name of both Emperors, Valentinian and Marcian,
and was dated at Constantinople on May 17, A.D. 451.
In it the Emperor announced his intention to be
present in person at the Council. The summons was
addressed to Anatolius, Patriarch of Constantinople,
and to the other Patriarchs and Exarchs, requiring
them to meet at Nicaea on Sept. 1 ; but when they had
assembled there, Marcian adjourned the Council to
Chalcedon, as being more accessible from Constan
tinople, on the other shore of the Bosphorus.
1 For the proofs of this, see Bishop Andrewes, Tortura Torti, p. 165,
ed. 1629, quoted in Theophilus Anglicanus, part iii. chap. vi.
2 Arendt (Leo de Gr. p. 264), quoted by Hefele, ii. 402, is of opi
nion that the summons for a Council, issued by the Emperor on May 17,
A.D. 451, was anterior to the arrival of Leo's letter dissuading it, dated
April 23. Leo, in his letter to Marcian, dated June 24, A.D. 451, and
to Anatolius of Constantinople, June 26, expressed his surprise that the
Synod had been called so soon, contrary to his wishes.

CHAPTER XXII.
Council of Chalcedon — Conclusion.
The Ecclesiastical Historian Evagrius * seems to
have found refreshment, amid the conflicts of the
Church, in contemplating and delineating the natural
beauties of the scenery of Chalcedon and its neigh
bourhood. He has drawn a picturesque landscape
of the Church of S. Euphemiaj the place of the
Council's assembly, situated on rising ground, gently
sloping downward to the sea, distant from it about a
quarter of a mile, and commanding a fair prospect
of meadow-land and corn-fields, diversified with trees,
and looking westward to the noble palaces and
churches of the Capital of the East on the other
side of the Bosphorus.
The Church, in which the Synod was appointed to
meet, was approached — as usual with ancient Churches
— through a rectangular atrium surrounded by arcades,
and leading to the Basilica, which had a nave sup
ported by columns ; beyond the nave was a tholus, or
circular building, surmounted by a dome resting on
pillars, and surrounded by a gallery. On the east
1 Evagr. Hist. ii. 3.

Council of Chalcedon . 271
side of the dome was the chancel, containing the
tomb of the saint and martyr Euphemia.
The total number of Bishops present at this
Council ! was 630. It varied at different stages of the
proceedings. Among them the legates of Pope
Leo, Paschasinus and Lucentius, Bishops, and Boni
face, a Priest, held the chief place ; next came
Anatolius, Patriarch of Constantinople, followed by
Dioscorus of Alexandria, Maximus of Antioch, and
Juvenal of Jerusalem. Nineteen officers of the
Eastern Empire were present, and were seated in the
middle of the assembly, facing the altar, but at a con
siderable distance from it. The Bishops were ranged
in two opposite rows. On the left of the officers
the Papal Legates held the first place ; then Anato
lius of Constantinople, Maximus of Antioch, Tha-
lassius of Caesarea, Stephen of Ephesus, and the other
Bishops belonging to the Dioceses of the East, of
Pontus, Asia, and Thrace. First on the right of the
officers were Dioscorus of Alexandria, Juvenal of
Jerusalem, Quintillius of Heraclea in Macedonia
(representing Anastasius of Thessalonica), Peter of
Corinth, .and the Bishops of Egypt, Palestine, and
Illyricum. The Four Gospels were placed in the centre, repre
senting the presence of Christ ; as had been done in
the General Council of Ephesus.

2 For the original documents and other authorities concerning the
Council of Chalcedon, see Labbe, Concilia, vol. iv. 94 ; Mansi, Cone.
vi. and vii. ; Harduin, Cone, ii.; Evagrius, Histor. Eccl. ii. 2, 4, 18 ;
Liberatus, Breviarium in Galland. xii. 142 ; Beveridge, Synod, i. in and
notes, ii. 108; Fleury, xxviii. 1 — 31, to whom I am much indebted;
Tillemont, xv. 628 ; Quesnel in Ballerini's edition of Leo's Works, ii.
501 ; Arendt, Papst Leo der Grosse, 267 — 322 ; Dorner, vol. i. div. ii.
p. 92 ; Neander, iv. 239 ; Gieseler, i. 404 ; Hefele, ii. 410.

272 Council of Chalcedon.
The Council was opened on Oct. 8, 45 1, and was
continued to Nov. 1 inclusive, in the same year ; and
held sixteen sessions.3
The Papal legates began with a protest against the
presence of Dioscorus as a judge, whereas he was an
accused party. This protest was received, and he
was commanded by the Magistrates to withdraw
from his place, and to take a seat in the midst of the
assembly. Eusebius of Dorylaeum rose to impeach Dioscorus
as guilty of acts of violence against Flavian and him
self. This accusation led to the reading of the Acts
of the Latrocinium of Ephesus, in which a letter
from the Emperor was inserted, forbidding the
presence of Theodoret.
Theodoret, having been now restored to his see, was
ordered by the Magistrates to enter, and take his place
in the assembly. His entrance produced much excite
ment in the Council, some vehemently denouncing
him, while he was cordially welcomed by others. The
Magistrates interfered, and order was restored.
The reading of the Acts of the " Latrocinium " was
continued, from which it appeared that other Bishops
had been associated with Dioscorus by the Emperor
for examining the case of Eutyches against Flavian
in that Council.
Dioscorus took advantage of this act of associa
tion, and alleged that not he alone, but the whole
Council, was responsible for what was done in it.
Many Bishops, members of the Latrocinium, re
monstrated, and earnestly protested that they had
been forced by menaces and violence to yield to the
will of Dioscorus, and to pronounce sentence against
3 Cp. Hefele, ii. 411, 412.

Recantation of the Bishops — Statement of Dioscorus. 273
Flavian. " We all erred " (exclaimed the Bishops of
the Eastern Dioceses, with voices of sorrow, three
times) ; " we all erred, and we all ask for pardon for
what we did."
It was also urged as a charge against Dioscorus,
that he did not allow the letter of Pope Leo to
Flavian (his dogmatic Epistle against Eutychianism,
and in support of Flavian) to be read at the Council.
Much discussion arose on the question whether
Flavian's doctrine was or was not contrary to that of
Cyril, and on the question whether or no Christ
could be said to have two Natures after the Incarna
tion. It was affirmed by the majority present that
Flavian's doctrine was in harmony with that of Cyril,4
and that he was unjustly condemned. Even Juvenal,
Bishop of Jerusalem, and some of the Egyptian
Bishops who had acquitted Eutyches and condemned
Flavian, concurred in that opinion. To this it was
replied by Dioscorus, that Flavian had been deposed
for maintaining two Natures after the union ; and he
contended that this opinion was contrary to the doc
trine of Athanasius and Cyril,5 who had taught that
we are not to speak of two natures after the union,
but of one incarnate nature of the Word. " If I am
condemned (added Dioscorus), I am condemned with
the Fathers of the Church."6
This sentence of Dioscorus serves to bring out, in
clear light, the necessity and benefit of the Council
of Chalcedon.
With all his failings of temper, he seems to have
acted with perfect good faith, in a conscientious per-
4 Labbe, Concil. iv. 170, 179. s See above, pp. 240, 241.
6 Labbe, Concil. iv. 182.
VOL. IV. T

274 Language of Athanasius and Cyril— did it favour
Eutychianism ?
suasion that he was maintaining the doctrine of his
two great predecessors, Athanasius and Cyril ; and
that it was his duty therefore to resist and condemn
Flavian, and to persuade the Emperor Theodosius,
and to induce the Bishops of the Church, to support
him in that condemnation.
As we have already seen, some isolated expressions
of Cyril, and even some of Athanasius,7 put forth at
a time when the dogmatic terminology of the Church,
especially as to the word r/>t5o*ts (nature), was not
exactly defined, might not unfairly be construed in
favour of that view ; especially by one who earnestly
desired to guard the Church against the doctrine of
Nestorius, and who did not clearly see that to main
tain two Natures in Christ after the Incarnation, was
a very different thing from the Nestorian heresy,
dividing the Son into two Persons ; and that to assert
a confusion of Natures after the Incarnation, so that
the Manhood lost its true properties, and was merged
in the Godhead, was to subvert the doctrine of
His Person, and to deny the truth of His Passion,
and to destroy the foundation of belief in the re
demption, justification, and sanctification of Man by
" God manifest in the flesh."
The history of Dioscorus is instructive. He was
animated by zeal against Nestorius, and for Athana
sius and Cyril. But his zeal was not guided by reason,
nor informed by knowledge, but blinded by passion.
He fixed his attention on one or two passages of
Athanasius and Cyril, which ought to have been con
strued with, and regulated by, that teaching, taken as
a whole, in which the doctrine of the two Natures was
clearly taught, as was shown in the Council of Chalce-
7 See above, pp. 240, 241, 242.

Character and acts of Dioscorus : evil overruled for 275
good — Acts of Chalcedon.
don ; and he endeavoured to enforce his own
notions of their doctrine by acts of physical violence,
such as Athanasius would have vehemently con
demned. These considerations prove the need of the Council
of Chalcedon to settle those questions. Happily for
the Church, Dioscorus was made an instrument,
under God's Providence, in settling them by that
Council. After the above-mentioned interpellation of Dios
corus, the reading of the Acts of the " Latrocinium "
was continued, which gave ample evidence8 of the
violence of its President, Dioscorus, in forcing the
Bishops to subscribe the condemnation of Flavian.
Those Acts having been read, the Imperial Com
missioners arose, and said,9 that it had appeared from
the avowal of many, who had taken part in the " Con-
ciliabulum " of Ephesus, that Flavian and Eusebius
were unjustly deposed ; and that it was therefore right
that Dioscorus and others, who had taken the lead in
that act of injustice, should be deposed also.
In the second Session, Oct. 10, after the reading of
the Creed of Nicaea and Constantinople, which was
received by the Bishops with acclamation, a Greek
translation was read of Leo's dogmatic exposition in
his letter to Flavian.
Some exceptions were taken by several Bishops to
certain paragraphs in that letter, where the doctrine
of the continuance of the two Natures (distinct and
not confused) after the Incarnation, was expressed.
But it was shown that similar phrases had been used
by S. Cyril;1 and the letter of Leo was generally
approved and accepted. " Peter has spoken by Leo ;
8 Labbe, Concil. iv. 252. 9 Ibid. 322. ' Ibid. 367, 368.
T 2

276 Adhesion of the Council to the letter of Leo — Condemna
tion of Dioscorus.
the Apostle taught thus : the doctrine of Leo is holy
and true ; Cyril taught thus. May Cyril's memory be
eternal. The doctrine of Leo and Cyril is the same.
Why was not Leo's letter read at Ephesus ? Dios
corus withheld it."
The reading of Leo's letter was followed by the
recital of those passages from the Fathers (Hilary,
Ambrose, Augustine, Gregory Nazianzen, Chrysos
tom, Cyril), which he had appended to his letter.2
The question being put to the vote by the Com
missioners, the Bishops signified their cordial assent
to the letter of Leo.
In the third Session, Oct. 13, sundry charges were
brought against Dioscorus for moral offences, as well
as for his conduct at Ephesus.
He was not present in the Synod, and when sum
moned he refused to appear. He was therefore
condemned for contumacy, and for having received
into communion Eutyches, deposed by his Bishop
Flavian ; and for his violent acts at Ephesus ; and for
not permitting Leo's letter to be read ; and for ex
communicating the Pope. " Wherefore," said the
Papal Legates, " the most holy Archbishop of Rome,
Leo, through us and this Council, with the Apostle
Peter, who is the rock 3 and groundwork of the Church
and of the orthodox faith, deprives him of his epis
copal dignity, and of all sacerdotal ministry."
Anatolius of Constantinople, Maximus of Antioch,
Stephen of Ephesus, and 193 Bishops concurred in this
2 Labbe, Concil. iv. 357, 361, 369 ; and compare Leo's letter to the
Emperor Leo, with a similar catena appended, i. 349 — 354, where are
four passages from Cyril.
3 This is the language of the Pope by his legates. On this assertion
see above, pp. 248, 249.

Declaration of Faith. 277
sentence ; which was communicated to Dioscorus,
and to the Clergy of Alexandria who were then at
Chalcedon, and to the Emperors of the East and West,
and to the Empress Pulcheria.
In the fourth Session, Oct. 17, the Council accepted
the Letter of Leo as agreeing with the Creed
of Nicaea and Constantinople. They also passed a
resolution for the restoration of the five Bishops who
had been deposed for taking the lead in abetting the
acts of Dioscorus at the Latrocinium, but had now
subscribed to the decrees of Chalcedon. These were
Juvenal of Jerusalem, Thalassius of Caesarea, Euse
bius of Ancyra, Basil of Seleucia, and Eustathius of
Berytus. This act was communicated to the Emperor, who
left the matter to the discretion of the Council, which
invited those Bishops to join their assembly.
In the fifth Session, Oct. 22, the Council proceeded
to consider the question of Faith. The Emperor gave
directions that a Committee of the Council should
be formed to prepare the draft of a Declaration to be
submitted to the Synod on this subject.
The Committee 4 consisted of Anatolius, Patriarch
of Constantinople, the four legates of Leo, with six
Bishops of the East, three of Pontus, three of Asia,
three of Thrace, and three of Illyricum.
The Bishops chosen beside Anatolius were Maximus
of Antioch, Juvenal of Jerusalem, Thalassius of Cae
sarea (in Cappadocia), Eusebius of Ancyra, Quintillius
Atticus and Sozon of Illyricum, Diogenes of Cyzicus,
Leontius of Magnesia, Florentius of Sardis, Eusebius
of Dorylaeum, Theodorus of Tarsus, Cyrus of Ana-
zarbus, Constantine of Bosra, Theodorus of Claudio-
4 Labbe, Concil. iv. 560.

278 Declaration of Doctrine at Chalcedon.
polis in Isauria, and Francion, Sebastian and Basil,
Bishops of Thrace.
They retired into the Oratory of the Church, being
escorted by the Magistrates ; who, after their delibe
rations, returned and announced the result. It was
read to the Council by the Archdeacon of Constan
tinople, Aetius ; and having been submitted to the
Synod, was accepted by it with hearty acclamation.5
" This is the faith of the fathers ; this is the faith of
the Apostles. We all follow it."
This declaration of doctrine began with a recitalof the
Creed of Nicaea and Constantinople,6 and proceeded to
say that the Creed of Nicaea and Constantinople would
have sufficed, if novel terms had not been invented by
enemies of the faith, some of whom (the Nestorians)
depraved the mystery of the Incarnation ' by refusing
to the Virgin the title of theotocos ; while others (the
Eutychians) introduced a confusion of the Natures of
Christ, and taught that there is but one Nature of the
flesh and Godhead, and that the divine nature in the
Son of God was subject to suffering. " Therefore this
holy Council declares that the faith of the 318 Fathers
of Nicaea is inviolable, and confirms the doctrine of
the 150 Fathers of Constantinople on the substance of
the Holy Ghost."
" In order also to refute those who would deprave
the mystery of the Incarnation, this Council receives
the Synodical letters of Cyril to Nestorius and to
5 Labbe, Concil. iv. 564 — 568. Cp. Evagr. ii. 4.
' The additions to the Nicene Creed which were made at Constanti
nople were therefore, it appears, generally received as of equal authority
with the Nicene ; and no exception was taken by the Council of Chalce
don to such acceptance, as if it were at variance with the Ephesine
Canon. See above, p. 218.
7 ohco-jopias pvar'fipiov.

Declaration of Faith on the Person of Christ, and the 279
doctrine of the Incarnation.
the Easterns ; and joins with these the letter of the
most holy Archbishop Leo against the error of Euty
ches, as agreeing with the confession of Peter, and as
serving equally to destroy error and to establish the
truth. " This Synod opposes itself to those who endeavour
to divide the Mystery of the Incarnation into two
Sons ; and it excommunicates those who presume to
say that the Godhead of the Son was liable to suffer
ing ; and resists those who imagine a commixture or
confusion in the two Natures of Christ ; and it rejects
those who erroneously say that the form of a servant
taken by Him from us was pre-existent in a heavenly
form, or in some other ; and it anathematizes those
who fabulously talk of two Natures of our Lord before
His incarnation, and who feign that He had only
one Nature after it.
"Following, therefore, the holy Fathers,8 we all
declare with one voice that we are bound to acknow
ledge one and the same our Lord Jesus Christ, perfect
in Godhead and perfect in Manhood, Very God and
Very Man, of a reasonable soul and body ; of one
substance with the Father as touching His Godhead,
and of one substance with us as touching His Man
hood ; in all things like unto us, sin only excepted ;
begotten of the Father before all worlds, as to His
Godhead ; and also, for our sake and for our salvation,
born in these last days, as to His Manhood, of the
Virgin Mary, Mother of God ; One and the Same
Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, acknowledged in
two Natures? without confusion,1 change, division, or
8 Labbe; Concil. iv. 568.
9 All the Latin copies have in duabus naturis; and Evagrius has, ii. 4,
iv Bio <pv<reo-i, and this appears to be the true reading. See Tillemont,

280 The Declaration of Faith at Chalcedon.
separation ; the difference of the Natures being in no
wise impaired by the union, but, on the contrary,
the property of either Nature being preserved, and
coalescing into one Person and one hypostasis ; not
parted or divided into two Persons, but One and
the Same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, our
Lord Jesus Christ.
" These things being thus defined by us with all
accuracy and diligence, this Holy and CEcumenical
Synod decrees that no one shall be allowed to propose
any different faith, or write, compose, or conceive,
or teach others to do so ; and it declares that those
who venture so to do, or to propound any different
Creed to those who desire to come from Heathenism
or Judaism, or any Heresy whatsoever, if they are
Bishops or' Clerics, they are to be degraded from
their office, and if they are Monks or Laity, to be
anathematized." The Council having accepted this Declaration with
out a dissentient voice, the Commissioners announced
that a report of the proceedings of the Synod would
be made to the Emperor.
An Address2 to the Emperor Marcian was then drawn
up by the Synod. It stated that a champion of the
faith had been raised up in the person of the Bishop
xv. pp. 681, 919 ; Dr. Newman on Fleury, xxviii. 21, p. 373; Neander,
iv. 244 ; Gieseler, i. § 89, 406, 408 ; and the numerous authorities
quoted by Hefele, Concilien, ii. 470. Dorner"s arguments for e« Siio
tpicreav (vol. i. div. ii. p. 411) seem hardly valid ; but he truly says
that the reading does not affect the sense, which is clear from other
passages in the Declaration.
1 aavyxoTtas, arpcwTtos, aSiatperus, axoipi&Tais.
2 TTpoanpuvnriitbs h6yos or Allocution. Whether this was presented in
writing, or delivered orally in the following Session, when Marcian and
Pulcheria were present, does not clearly appear. See Hefele, Concilien,
"• 472, 473-

Speech of the Emperor Marcian to the Council. 281
of Rome ; that the Council would have been quite
content with the Nicene Creed ; but that in conse
quence of the innovations of heretics they had been
constrained to guard the ancient Faith by additional
declarations of primitive truth. Leo, they added,
had only taught in his Epistle what the Church of
their Fathers had taught, and had made no alteration
in it ; and they confirmed this statement by quotations
from the Fathers, Athanasius, Basil, Gregory Na
zianzen, Ambrose, Chrysostom, Cyril, and others.3
The Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, with a large
retinue of attendants, were present at the Sixth
Session, Oct. 25. He addressed the Council in a
Latin speech, which was translated by an interpreter
into Greek. He assured the Council that his only
wish in convoking the Council was to preserve the
purity of the faith, which had been impaired by the
covetousness and ill-directed zeal of some.4 The true
doctrine concerning the mystery of the Incarnation
had been taught by the Nicene Fathers, and was
contained in Leo's letter to Flavian. He had come
to the Council in person, as Constantine come to
Nicaea; not for any ostentation of power/ but for the
confirmation of the truth. He exhorted the Fathers
of the Council to cleave to the old Faith, and to teach
it to others.
The speech of the Emperor was received with
applause ; and Aetius, Archdeacon of Constantinople,
delivered to him the Declaration of doctrine which
had been agreed upon by the Synod in the previous
Session.5 3 Mansi, vii. 455 — 474. Harduin, ii. 643 — 654.
4 Especially Chrysaphius and Dioscorus.
s Labbe, Concil. iv. 605 — 609.

282 Acclamations — The Emperor on Canons, and on royal
decrees : on Monasteries.
The Emperor asked whether they were unanimous
in accepting it. The reply was in the affirmative.
The Emperor replied that, inasmuch as the Catholic
faith had been declared by the Synod, he would take
care that it should not be gainsaid by tumultuous
oppositions. The Council joined in acclamations :
" Long live the King ; long live the Queen ; you have
raised up the fallen Churches, and have confirmed
the faith. May God preserve your kingdom."
Three articles were then proposed to the Synod by
the Emperor, who deemed it better, he said, that
they should be enjoined by Canons of the Church
than be enforced by Imperial Decrees.
One concerned the building of Monasteries and the
multiplication of Monks, some of whom, he said,
under pretence of piety disturbed the peace of the
Church and Empire. No Monastery was to be
allowed to be built without the consent of the Bishop
of the Diocese, and of the Proprietor of the soil. All
monks were to be under the jurisdiction of the Bishop,
and to live quiet and peaceable lives, and give them
selves to religious exercises, and not to meddle in
the affairs of Church or State (see below, p. 287).
They are not to receive slaves into their Monas
teries without the consent of their Master.
The next article was against secular or regular
Clergy engaging in trade.
The third was against the abandonment of a Cure
by a Clergyman, and against his admission to any
other benefice by a Bishop, without the consent of
the Clergyman's diocesan.6
After these three articles had been accepted by
the Council, the Bishops prayed to be released from
r Labbe, Concil. iv. 612.

. Restoration of Theodoret, condemning Nestorius. 283
further attendance, and to be allowed to return to
their Dioceses.
The Council had shown its charitable consideration
for some Bishops who had acknowledged their fault
in taking the lead with Dioscorus in the condemna
tion of Flavian, and it proceeded in its eighth Session,
Oct. 26, A.D. 451, to extend its compassion to a
different person, one who had been once a friend of
Nestorius, and was distinguished by piety, learning,
moderation, and sufferings, — Theodoret, Bishop of
Cyrus. They restored him to communion, on con
dition of his condemning Nestorius.7 After some
demur he said, " Anathema to Nestorius, and to all
who refuse to call the Virgin Mary Mother of God,
and who divide the Only-begotten Son into two Sons;
As I have subscribed the declaration of faith, and
the letter of the most holy Archbishop Leo, so I
believe. And now that I have said this, God bless
you." The condition on which Theodoret was received
may seem to have been a hard one. But the Council
of Chalcedon was under the necessity of disabusing
many of the notion studiously propagated by the
Eutychians, that in condemning Eutyches they had
censured Cyril, and had condoned Nestorius. They
were constrained to refute the objection that in
maintaining the doctrine of two Natures they had
fallen into the error of two Persons. Therefore while
they honoured the memory of Flavian, and censured
Eutyches, they also condemned Nestorius ; in a word,
they steered a middle course between the Scylla of
the one, and the Charybdis of the other. Theodoret,
having been notoriously a friend of Nestorius and
7 Labbe, Concil. iv. 622.

284 Canons of Chalcedon — On Simony.
adversary of Cyril, could hardly be received publicly
by the Council without a declaration of antagonism
to the former, and of adhesion to the latter.
On the following day, the tenth Session,8 Oct. 27,
they performed an act of justice to Ibas, Bishop of
Edessa, who had been accused of Nestorianism by
his Clergy, and unjustly condemned at the Latroci
nium of Ephesus ; he now subscribed the Letter of
Leo,9 and was received as orthodox by the Council.
The eleventh to the fourteenth Sessions were taken
up by local matters of minor importance.
The fifteenth Session was held on the 31st of Octo
ber. The Imperial Commissioners and Papal legates
were not present. At this Session * twenty-eight
Canons were passed.2
The following is a short summary of them : —
Canon 1 re-enacts the Canons of former Councils, which were
contained in a recognized Code 3 of the Eastern Church at that
time. Canon 2 is against Simony in the collation or reception of
Holy Orders, and also against other promotions for money.
8 Labbe, Concil. iv. 633. '¦> Ibid. 681.
1 See the authorities for this in Hefele, Concilien, ii. 5°3- On the
other hand it is maintained by Baluzius ap. Mansi, vii. 658, and by the
Ballerini in their edition of Leo, ii. 503, 514, from Evagrius, ii. 18, that
the first twenty-seven Canons were passed after the seventh Session, in
pursuance of the Emperor's suggestion as to his three Articles, and that
only the twenty-eighth Canon was passed in the fifteenth Session. It
seems more probable that the Canons were reserved for the final work
of the Synod.
2 On these Canons, which are given in Labbe's Concilia, iv. 756,
and in the other collections of the Acts of Councils, and in the Manual
of Bruns, i. 25—33, see Hefele, Concilien, ii. 505—563 ; Canon Bright
on the Canons of the first four General Councils, Oxford, 1882, pp. 123
— 210. Especially the comments of the Greek Canonists— Balsamon,
Zonaras, and Aristamus — in Beveridge's Synodicon, vol. i. n 1 — 149,
and Beveridge's own notes, ii. 107—125, deserve careful attention.
3 See Hefele, p. 505 ; Bright, p. 124; Newman, Fleury, p. 392.

On Simony. 285
The decree begins with condemning Simoniacal collations of
holy Orders, and then proceeds to speak of preferment to benefices
in the Church, and says, that " if any Bishop, for the sake of
money, shall have promoted any treasurer, or advocate, or
sacrist, or any ecclesiastical persons, with a view to sordid lucre,
he shall be in danger of deposition ; and no one who shall have
been so ordained or promoted shall derive any benefit from the
ordination or promotion which has been purchased, but be
removed from the dignity or cure which he has obtained by
money. And if any one can be proved to have negotiated as
an agent in such base traffic, if he is a clergyman, let him be
degraded, but if a layman, let him be anathematized."
As this is the most important Canon of the Ancient Church
concerning Simony, which has been, and is, one of the worst
plague-spots of some Christian Churches, it seems requisite to
dwell a little longer upon it.
Simony 4 is so called from Simon Magus, who offered money
to the Apostles at Samaria, in order to obtain from them the
power of giving the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands,6 and
to whom St. Peter replied, " Thy money perish with thee,
because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased
with money."
It is sometimes said, that inasmuch as what Simon Magus
attempted to do was to purchase a spiritual gift for money,
therefore it is not Simony to buy an ecclesiastical benefice to
which temporal revenues are annexed.
But first, it is true that what Simon tried to buy was a
spiritual gift, but he valued this gift not for any spiritual grace
that it bestowed, but for the temporal advantage that would

1 On Simony see Launoy de Simonia, Opera, ii. pt. ii. pp. 45 1 — 563 ;
Van Espen de Simonia circa beneficia, Jus Eccles. Univ. pars ii. tit.
xxx., and his separate treatise, De Simonia, ibid. tom. ii. p. 185, Colon.
1748; Bishop Gibson's Codex, p. 799; Bishop Stillingfleet, in his
treatise on Bonds of Resignation, Lond. 1 702 ; Thomassinus de Bene
fices, tom. vii. p. 443, and tom. a. p. 225 ; the treatise of Suarez de
Simonia in Migne's Theol. Cursus Completus, vol. xvi. p. 322 ; Dr.
Phillimore's Judgment in the Dean of York's case in Burn's Eccl. Law,
ed. Lond. 1842, iii. 607 ; and Sir R. Phillimore's Eccl. Law, pp. mo
— 1147, Lond. 1873. 5 Acts viii. 18, 23.

286 On Simony ; and Church Patronage.
accrue from it to himself—whether in secular profit, or worldly
fame, or both.
Secondly, it is said by some, that what is bought in the pur
chase of a living is the temporal benefice, and not the sacred
office. But this is hardly correct. The benefice is annexed to the
office, not the office to the benefice ; and the benefice exists on
account of the office, and not the office on account of the benefice.
The office is the principal thing ; the benefice is an accessory to
it. What is bought is the cure of souls ; for he who buys a living,
or for whom a living is bought, cannot touch the temporalities
before he has been admitted to the cure of souls. He must first
come to the Bishop for Institution, by which the Chief Pastor
of a Diocese admits a Clergyman to a cure of souls in it. Insti
tution is a pre-requisite to Induction. Induction is performed
by another person, the Archdeacon ; and by it the clergyman,
having first been instituted to the cure of souls, and to the
ministry of the Word of God and of the Sacraments by the
Bishop, is afterwards put into corporal possession of the tem
poralities of the benefice.
Therefore, what is bought (not indeed the only thing that is
bought) is the admission to the Cure of Souls and the Ministry
of the Sacraments ; for if that were not first procured, there
would be no claim to the revenues of the benefice. Therefore
the purchase of a benefice by a clergyman, or by any one acting
on his behalf, is the purchase of spiritual things, which is
Simony. The Church of England is explicit in her declarations on this
subject. The opinions of our English Reformers may be seen in the
Injunctions published by King Edward VI., in 1547, and Queen
Elizabeth, in 1 559, where it is said that " to avoid the detestable
sin of Simony, and because the buying and selling of Benefices
is execrable before God, therefore all such persons as buy any
Benefices shall be deprived of such Benefices, and be made
unable at any time after to receive any other spiritual promotion.''
And among the Canons of 1603, Canon 40 was specially
framed " for the avoidance of the detestable sin of Simony, and
because the buying of Ecclesiastical functions and livings is
execrable before God."
In the Canons of 1 571, framed under Archbishop Parker, and

On Simofiy — On spiritual persons engaging in trade. 287
subscribed by the Bishops of both Provinces, is the following de
cree concerning Church Patronage and Simony.6— -"The Bishop
shall earnestly exhort Patrons of benefices to consider the needs
of the Church, and to have ever before their eyes the Last Day
and the Judgment and Tribunal of God ; and, therefore, not to
present any one to an ecclesiastical office except such persons
as by learning, discretion, piety, probity, and blamelessness of
life are qualified to discharge so weighty a function ; and that
they do nothing in this matter, otherwise than with integrity,
honesty, and sincerity. And let the Bishop warn them that he
will use all fair and lawful means to discover the truth therein.
And if he should find, either at the time of presentation, or after
it, that any corrupt proceeding or Simoniacal traffic has been
resorted to, in any manner whatsoever, however clandestinely,
either directly or indirectly, either by the Patron himself or by
others, with a view to the procuring of any money or price, or
any commodity, or any portion of the revenues, let him adver
tise the Patron that he is resolved to make a public proclama
tion of the fact, not only in his Cathedral Church, but also in
other places, to the disgrace and eternal infamy of the Patron ;
and that he is further determined to remove the Presbyter,
whom he has so nefariously presented, not only from the benefice
which he has dishonestly entered, but from all ministrations in
the Diocese." Such was the language of the Church of England
at the Reformation, concerning Church Patronage and Simony.
Now to return to the Canons of Chalcedon.
Canon 3. —Against spiritual persons engaging in trade.
Canon 4.?— Against the building of Monasteries without leave
from the Bishop and proprietor of the soil ; and against roving
Monks meddling with affairs of Church and State ; they are to
be subject to the jurisdiction of their Diocesan.
Canon 5. — Against Bishops and Clergy wandering from one
city to another.
Canon 6. — Against ordinations of Priests or Deacons without
a title. Canon 7. — Against Priests or Monks forsaking their spiritual
calling for military s or civil life.
6 In Cardwell's Synodalia, i. p. 129. 7 See above, p. 282.
8 So Hefele, ii. 511. Canon Bright, p. 148, thinks that arparda

288 Canons : on Jurisdiction ; on Appeals ; Pluralities ; Com
mendatory Letters ; on Metropolitans ; Marriage of Clergy.
Canon 8. — Clergymen in hospitals ° (asylums) and monasteries
are not to be restive, but to be subject to the jurisdiction of their
Diocesan. Canon 9. — For the settling of disputes among the Clergy by
reference to the arbitration of their Diocesan, without recurrence
to the civil Courts. If a Clergyman has a suit against a Bishop,
it is to be settled by the Synod of the Province. For regulation
of the order of Appeals : If a Bishop or Clergyman has a dispute
with a Metropolitan, it is to go before the Exarch of the Dice-
.cesis (SioLktjo-is, a group of provinces), or " the (patriarchal)
throne of the royal city Constantinople."
Canon 10. — Against unauthorized clerical changes of cures;
and against Pluralities. A clergyman may not have two cures
in two cities at a time ; and if he has left his first cure from
•covetous, ambitious, or vainglorious motives, he is to be remanded
to his first cure ; and if he has been transferred from one cure to
another, he is not to interfere in the affairs or religious founda
tions of his former cure.
Canon 11. — Indigent persons who need help, are, after exami
nation, to travel with ecclesiastical letters of peace only, but not
with letters commendatory, which are to be reserved for persons
of approved reputation.
Canon 12. — Provinces are not to be divided into two by means
of solicitations at Court, in such sort that two Metropolitans exist
in the same province. Whatever Cities have been already raised
to the title of metropolitical cities by royal letters, they and their
Bishop are to continue to enjoy the dignity of the name, but
the jurisdiction is to be reserved to the true Metropolitical city.
Canon 13. — No strange Clergyman or Reader is to officiate
in another city without letters commendatory from his Dio
cesan. Canon 14. — In some provinces Readers and Chanters of the
Church are allowed to marry ; but they may not marry an
here means "not military employment as such, but the public service
in general."
9 irTwx&a mean more than Hospitals for the sick, or poor-houses :
it signifies such capacious and noble foundations as that of Basil at
Csesarea (see above, vol. ii. pp. 256, 257), or of Chrysostom at Con
stantinople (above, p. 157).
1 They, and also Priests and Deacons, were allowed to marry before
ordination. See above, vol. iii. pp. 103 — 107.

On Deaconesses ; Virgins ; Monks ; Dioceses ; Parishes ; 289
Synods.
heretical wife ; and if they have done so, and have had children
by her, who have been baptized by heretics, they are to bring
them to be received into the communion of the Catholic Church ;
and if they have not been baptized, they may not take them to
heretics for baptism ; and they are not to contract marriage with
a Jewess or heathen woman, unless the proposed wife promise to
conform to the true faith.
Canon 15. — No woman is to be ordained a Deaconess before
forty years of age, and after careful probation ; and if she
marries after she has been ordained, and after she has served
for some time as a Deaconess, she is to be under a ban, together
with her husband.
Canon 16. — Virgins who have professed self-dedication to
God — and Monks — may not marry ; if they do, they are to be put
out of communion ; but we leave their cases to be dealt with by
the charitable consideration of their Diocesan.
Canon 17. — Rural Parishes or Villages " are to remain subject
to the jurisdiction of their own Bishop, especially if he can
show an undisturbed possession for a prescription of thirty years.
But if within that term any dispute has arisen, the matter is to be
referred to the Synod of the Province ; and if any one has been
injured by his own Metropolitan, let the appeal (as before pro
vided) be to the Exarch of the Dicecesis, or to the (Patriarchal)
throne of Constantinople. If any change has been made, or
shall hereafter be made, by Imperial Laws, let the arrangement
of the Ecclesiastical Parish be adjusted to the order of the Civil
arrangement. Canon 18. — Against libellous charges concocted 3 by cabals 4
and conspiracies ; these are not only against the law of man, but
of God. Any clergymen or monks who band together in brew
ing 5 accusations against a Bishop or a brother Clergyman are to
be deposed.
Canon 19. — We hear that in some Provinces the regular
Synods of Bishops prescribed by the Canons are not held.
2 iyxwpiovs. The word x^Pa is an ecclesiastical, and indeed an
evangelical, term for a village. Luke xxi. 21.
3 Such as those against Ibas of Edessa, and even against the great
Athanasius. 4 (ppaTpias, clans, degenerating into factions.
5 Tvpeiovres, literally churning into cheese.
VOL. IV. U

290 Synods — Residence of Clergy — Monasteries — Hpiscopat
revenues.
Provincial Synods are to be held twice a year for the setting in
order any matter that may be emergent. Bishops who are in
good health, and have no reasonable excuse for absence, are to
be rebuked fraternally for non-appearance.
Canon 20. — No Bishop is~to receive a clergyman from another
diocese, unless such clergyman has been driven from his own cure
by necessity."
Canon 21. — No Clergyman or Layman who brings an accusa
tion against his Bishop is to be received at once, and without
proof, unless his own reputation has been duly examined and
attested. Canon 22. — No Clergyman may seize on a Bishop's private
property after his death.7
Canon 23. — We have heard that some Clergymen and Monks,
without any commission from their Bishop^ or even though
excommunicated by him, go to the royal city Constantinople,
and spend a long time there, and disturb the Church there, and
subvert " the houses of some. Such persons are first to receive
' a monition from the Advocate of the most holy Church to quit
the City ; and if they persist in remaining there, they are to be
forcibly expelled by him, and to return home.
Canon 24. — The Monasteries which have once been conse
crated with the consent of the Bishops are to remain such, and
are not to become secular dwellings.
Canon 25. — Consecrations of Bishops are not to be deferred
by Metropolitans beyond three months after the vacancy of the
see. Canon 26. — Every Bishop shall have a Steward (QJconomus)
of Church property, chosen from the clerical body, and
administering the revenues under the Bishop's direction ; but
he is not to undertake the management of it himself.9 This is
to secure witnesses as to the administration of the goods of the
Church, and to prevent them from being dissipated, and also to
avoid scandal.
'• E.g. by an incursion of barbarians.
7 So as to mix it up with what belonged to the See, which appertained
to the Church. 3 Titus i. 11.
9 The case of S. Ambrose employing his brother Satyrus in that
capacity, and devolving all his cares upon him, will occur to the
reader. ' See above, vol. iii. 17.

The 28th Canon of Chalcedon on the Sees of Rome 291
and Constantinople.
Canon 27. — All persons guilty of abduction of women, even
under promise of marriage, or who are accomplices in such
abductions, are, if clergymen, to be deposed ; if laymen, to be
placed under a ban.
The next Canon, the 28th, gave rise to much con
troversy, after it had been enacted by the Synod.
It runs thus : — " We follow in all respects the decrees
of the holy Fathers, and we recognize the Canon '
just read to us of the 150 Fathers much beloved of
God (i.e. of the Council of Constantinople), and we
make the same decree as they did concerning the
privileges 2 of the most holy Church of Constantinople,
which is New Rome. For our Fathers (i.e. in the
6th Canon of Nicaea) have justly assigned its privileges
to the throne of Old Rome on account of the imperial
dignity of that City ; and the 150 Fathers (at Con
stantinople), being moved by the same consideration,
adjudged the equality of privileges 2 to the most holy
throne of New Rome, rightly judging that the
City which is honoured with the Sovereignty and
Senate, and which enjoys the parity of privileges
with the ancient Imperial Rome, should be glorified
also, as Rome is, in ecclesiastical affairs, being next
after her ; provided that only the Metropolitans of
Pontus, and of the Dicecesis 3 of Asia and of Thrace,
and besides them the Bishops in the barbarous places
1 I.e. the 3rd Canon of the Council of Constantinople (A.D. 381), which
gave the precedence of honour (ra irpeo73e?a ttjs tint's) " to the Bishop
of Constantinople next after the Bishop of Rome, because Constanti
nople is New Rome." See above, vol. ii. p. 338.
2 ra irpeo-jSeio, the privileges of precedence. Observe the article to
in both these passages. The word itptafiiia, rendered privileges, im
plies specially precedence, primacy, or pre-eminence ; it is * word
expressing dignity rather than jurisdiction.
3 Wherever the word Dicecesis is used in this translation, it is to be
understood in its widest sense as comprehending several Provinces.
U 2

292 Grounds of 28th Canon on the Sees of Rome and
Constantinople.
of the said Diceceses, shall be ordained by the
aforesaid most holy Throne of the most holy Church
of Constantinople— that is to say, that each Metro
politan of the Diceceses aforesaid, together with the
Bishops of his Province, should ordain the Bishops
of that Province, as is ordered by the holy Canons ;
and that the Metropolitans themselves of the Diceceses
aforesaid should be ordained by the Archbishop of
Constantinople, with the concurrence of the votes taken
according to usage, and presented to him." *
This 28th Canon is an important one.
It was grounded on the 3rd Canon of the General
Council of Constantinople, which decreed that the
Bishop of Constantinople, because it is New Rome,
should have precedence of honour next after the Bishop
of Rome.
It affirmed that the precedence of the Bishop of
Rome was based on the fact of its being the ancient
Capital of the Roman Empire.
It ignored the claims of the Bishop of Rome to
primacy on the pleas, alleged by him, of the gift of
Christ to Peter, and of the succession of the Bishops
of Rome to that Apostle.
It asserted that the Bishop of Constantinople was
entitled to an equal primacy of honour (in the East),
on account of that City being honoured with the resi
dence of the Emperor and of the Senate.
- It affirmed that Ecclesiastical dignity should be
adapted to Temporal eminence.
It assigned to the Archbishop of Constantinople
4 Two other Canons (29th and 30th) are ascribed by some to the
Council of Chalcedon, but they are not found in the Greek or Latin
Collections of Canons.

Roman Protests against the 2%th Canon of Chalcedon — 293
Reply of the Council.
not only the primacy of honour next to Rome, but
gave him also Patriarchal jurisdiction.5
Such are the facts of the case.
The Legates of Pope Leo were hot present when
this 28th Canon was accepted by the Council in the
fifteenth Session. Probably they purposely absented
themselves, on the surmise that such a proposal
would be made, and that they might be outvoted
in the Synod * and they reserved themselves for the
next and last Session, the sixteenth, on Nov. 1, at
which they remonstrated against it.6
To this protest it was replied by the Archdeacon
of Constantinople, Aetius, in the name of the Church
of that City, that the Legates had been requested to
be present, and had been informed that matters
would be proposed concerning that Church ; but that
they had declined to attend, on the plea that they had
not received any instructions on that matter. He
added that the Canon had been proposed and enacted
in a regular manner, and that it had been subscribed
voluntarily by 192 Bishops without any dictation.
The Bishops assented unanimously to this reply of the
Archdeacon. The Roman Legates desired that either the Canon
should be abrogated, or that their protest against this
degradation of the Roman See should be entered in
the Acts.
The Imperial Commissioners declared that the
Canon was duly enacted, which preserved the primacy -
5 This jurisdiction had not been given by the 3rd Canon of Con
stantinople, but it grew up naturally by degrees, and was an accepted
fact at the time of the Council of Chalcedon. See Dr. Newman on
Fleury, xxviii. 34, p. 406.
6 Concil. Labbe, iv. 792, 796.
7 TCt TrpuTeia, Kal rfyv ifcaiperov ripApi.

294 Letter from the Council to Leo.
and precedence of honour to the Archbishop of Old
Rome, but that the Archbishop of Constantinople
ought to enjoy the same precedence of honour,8 and
should have (with some modifications 9) the Patri
archal jurisdiction assigned to him by the Council.
The Bishops of the Council adhered to their reso
lution,1 and addressed a respectful letter to Pope Leo
after the session was over. They thanked him for
his services to the Faith ; and they reminded him of
what had been done in the Council of Constantinople
in A.D. 381 ; and while they said that his legates had
resisted the 28th Canon, doubtless in order that he
himself might have the grace of proposing it in a
spirit of kindness to his brother of Constantinople;
they asked him to confirm it with his suffrage.
Pope Leo, however, confirmed the remonstrances of
his legates. He wrote three letters on May 22 2 in
A.D. 452 to congratulate the Emperor, Pulcheria, and
the Archbishop of Constantinople, Anatolius, on the
maintenance of the true faith in the Council, and on
the condemnation of the heresy of Eutyches.
But in those three letters, and in a fourth to the
Bishop of Cos, he censured what he called the ambi
tion and usurpation of Anatolius ; and charged him
with having subverted the decree of Nicaea with
regard to the dignity of the Churches,3 and with hay
ing exalted himself above the Patriarchal Sees of
Antioch and Alexandria.
8 tS>v avrui/ irpefffitltov ttjs rtpris.
" Which are summarized by Hefele, ii. 543, and in Canon Bright's
notes, p. 200.
1 Concil. pp. 836, 837. Cp. Hefele, ii. 545, 546.
2 Mansi, vi. 187, 195, 198, 207. Tillemont, xv. 727. Cp. Hefele,
ii. 549 — 554, and Neander, iii. 226.
3 Canon 6. See above, vol. i. p. 455.

The 28th Canon generally received in the East — 295
Inferences from the controversy upon it.
He wrote others to the same effect in the following
year, A.D. 453."
The result however was, that the 28th Canon of
Chalcedon in a short time was generally received in
the Eastern Church, and has remained an integral
part of its Ecclesiastical Law to the present time.*
In conclusion we may say, that much as, in some
respects, the difference is to be regretted which existed
between Leo of Rome and his brother of Constanti
nople and the Eastern Bishops, with regard to the
28th Canon of Chalcedon, yet, in other respects, it
may be regarded with thankfulness, as conveying
instruction on important matters of doctrine and
discipline, and as conducive to the edification and
welfare of the Church.
First, it shows clearly that the notion of an universal
and absolute Supremacy — such as is now claimed by
the See of Rome, and is made by her a fundamental
— indeed, the fundamental — doctrine of her system,
and even of Christianity itself6 — was wholly alien to
the mind both of the Western and Eastern Church.
Pope Leo himself did not claim it. His contention
against the Council of Chalcedon and the Bishop of
Constantinople was, that they had presumed to set
aside the decrees of Nicaea by that Canon.
4 March 21. Mansi, vi, 221, 225.
6 See the remarks of the Greek Canonists — Zonaras, Balsamon, and
Aristsenus — in Beveridge's Synodicon, i. J45 — 147 ; and Tillemont, xv.
729, 730, " Ce Canon subsista et fut execute malgre l'opposition de
S. Leon et de ses successeurs ;" and Canon Bright on the Canons,
pp. 203, 204.
c Cardinal Bellarmine de Pontifice asks, p. 189 (tom. i. ed. 16 15),
"De qua re agitur cum de primatu Pontificis agitur?" and his answer
is, "Brevissime dicam, de summa rei Christianae."

296 Leo's appeal to Niccea — Remarks upon it.
The Nicene decrees on the subject are contained
in the 6th Canon of that Council, and are as
follows : 7 —
" Let the primitive customs prevail ; let the Bishop
of Alexandria have authority over all in Egypt, Libya,
and Pentapolis, inasmuch as a similar usage exists
with regard to the Bishop of Rome, and also at Antioch.
Likewise in the other provinces let their own pre
cedence be preserved to the Churches."
What the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome then
was, is stated by Rufinus ; it was exercised over the
suburbicarian churches, i.e. the churches near the
urbs, or city, of Rome.8
Leo appealed to that Canon; he grounded his own
claims upon it ; and he charged the Bishop of Con
stantinople with ambitious usurpation, because he
had been a principal party at Chalcedon in framing
the 28th Canon, which raised his See to an equality
with that of Rome, so as to be next after it, and so
as to be above the Churches of Alexandria and
Antioch. But this had been done previously by another
Council, the Second General Council, that of Con
stantinople9 in A.D. 381.
That Council had given a primacy to Constantinople
next to Rome, and had done so on the ground that
it was New Rome ; and the Bishops of Rome had
acquiesced in that assignment.
The Bishop of Constantinople had likewise already
exercised a great part of the jurisdiction which was
specified in that Canon ; and it was clearly competent
for a General Council to modify territorial boundaries
7 See above, vol. i. p. 454. 8 See ibid.
3 Canon 3. See above, vol. ii. p. 338.

Inferences from the 28th Canon of Chalcedon. 297
of Dioceses and Provinces, and also to alter the order
of precedence of Bishops after due deliberation, and
with the consent of those whose rights were involved
in such modifications. Besides, there was a strong
desire in the East to abate the presumption of Rome.
Rome herself (by the haughty bearing of the Legates
at the Council) may have been the cause * of the
Canon which she opposed so strongly.
The 28th Canon of Chalcedon was a corollary to
the 3rd of Constantinople. And if the Eastern Bishops
acquiesced, as they did, in the elevation of the See
of Constantinople, on account of the imperial dignity
of that City, above Alexandria and Antioch, this was
a matter which the Bishop of Rome might well have
left to be settled by those whom it concerned.
But it would be well for Christendom, if Bishops
of Rome had followed the example of Leo the Great
in one respect, and been content with that jurisdiction
which was assigned to them by that Council to which
he appealed, the first General Council of the Church,
the Council of Nicaea, A.D. 325.
The Nicene maxim, enunciated in that Canon, was,
" Let the primitive customs prevail." Let Rome be
content with that Canon ; and the schism will cease
which has rent Christendom for so many centuries.
Secondly, and a fortiori, it is evident that the
Eastern Church had no notion of any such Supremacy
over the See of Rome as it now claims.
It never could have ventured to frame and pro-
mulge the 3rd Canon of Constantinople, and the
28th Canon of Chalcedon, if it had ever dreamt of
such a Supremacy. And those Canons, when framed
and promulged by those Councils, would never have
1 Such is the opinion of Tillemont, xv. 710.

298 On Bishops as Patriarchs and Metropolitans.
been received, as they have been, and are, to this day,
by the whole of Eastern Christendom.2
Thirdly, while the proceedings at Chalcedon are
a practical refutation of the erroneous theory of Papal
Supremacy, they are also a clear illustration of the
true doctrine of the divine institution of Episcopacy.
From such Canons as the 3rd -of Constantinople
and the 28th of Chalcedon, it has been shown by
some of our best divines,3 and others, that the applica
tion of the divinely constituted order and power of
Bishops, in performing Episcopal functions within
certain territorial limits — such as Dioceses, Provinces,
and Patriarchates — is of human institution, and is
subject to modification by the Church, acting in
Synods together with Imperial and other civil powers
when the Church is allied to the State ; and that
the rank of Bishops as to precedence maybe changed ;
but that no earthly authority can in any way alter or
affect the order and power of Bishops, which is de
rived from Christ Himself. All Bishops, as Bishops,
are equal. As S.Jerome says, whether a man be Bishop
of Rome, or of one of the smallest towns of the
Roman Empire, makes no difference as to the essence
of his Episcopal order and power ; " because all are
2 Bishop Beveridge (Synodicon, ii. 124) says, " It is evident from
this Canon that the ancients attributed so much honour to the See of
Rome, not because it was the See of Peter, nor because its Bishop was
Vicar of Christ, but only because it was the Imperial City — 5m rb fsaoi-
\eveiv t$}v ir6\iv tKsivt\v"
3 As Archbishop Bramhall, i. 177 ; ii. 186, ed. Oxf. 1842 ; Dr.
Isaac Barrow on the Pope's Supremacy, p. 171, London, 1683 ;
Hammond on Schism, i. 520 ; Bingham, ii. 14 ; xvii. 5 ; De Marca de
Concordia, vi.
4 " Ubicumque est Episcopus, sive Romae, sive Eugubii, ejusdem est
meriti, ejusdem sacerdotii ; potentia divitiarum et paupertatis humilitas
sublimiorem vel inferiorem Episcopum non facit," Jerome ad Evag.
Epist. 85.

On Bishops, as Bishops — Difference as to discipline ; 299
Unity in doctrine — Gregory the Great.
equally successors of the Apostles, and derive their
authority as Bishops, through the Apostles, from
Christ.6 The Councils of Constantinople and of Chalcedon
altered the precedence, and changed the territorial
limits of the jurisdiction, of Bishops. But no ancient
Council ever dreamt of making any change in the
Order and power of Bishops as to those spiritual
functions which they perform in the Church of God.
Indeed, in the Council of Chalcedon it was stated,
that to degrade a Bishop to the rank of a Presbyter
is sacrilege.6 Fourthly, this difference between Leo and the
Eastern Bishops as to a question of discipline brings
out in clearer light their unity in Christian doctrine.
The Church of Christ is indebted to Leo for his
exposition of the true Faith in his letter to Flavian.
That exposition was accepted by the Council of
Chalcedon, which framed a declaration of its own on
the same doctrines. Both these were promulged by
the Council ; and the decree which promulged them
was cordially accepted by Leo, and by the Western
and Eastern Churches.
One of Leo's most illustrious successors, Gregory
the Great, in the sixth century declared that he re
ceived and observed the dogmatic decrees of the first
four General Councils (Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephe
sus, and Chalcedon) with entire veneration, devo
tion, and approval. The Four Gospels 7 were placed
5 Jerome, ibid., "Omnes Episcopi Apostolorum successores sunt."
Cp. Barrow on the Pope's Supremacy, pp. 149, 151.
6 Canon 29, not strictly a Canon, but a transcript from the Acts
of the Council in its fourth Session. See Hefele, ii. 537, who calls it
"a recognized rule of the Church." Cp. Beveridge, Synod, ii. 125.
7 Gregor. Magn. ii. pp. 515, 632, ed. Bened. Paris, 1705, "Sicut

300 The doctrine of the Incarnation, declared in the Four
General Councils ; summed up in the Athanasian Creed.
on a throne in the Councils of the Church, and visibly
betokened Christ's presence in them ; 8 and He who
had promised that presence to His Church, and the
guidance of the Holy Spirit, spake in those decrees
which were received by the consent of the Universal
Church, which is His Body and Spouse, and the Pillar
and Ground of the Truth.9
The doctrine of the Incarnation of the Eternal Son
of God, as declared in the Creed and dogmatic de
crees put forth by those four General Councils, is
summed up and clearly expressed in the Hymn Qui-
cunque Vult, or Confession of our Christian Faith
commonly called the Creed of Athanasius,1 which
quatuor Evangelii libros, sic quatuor Concilia suscipere et venerari me
fateor, tota devotione complector, integerrima approbatione custodio. "
8 See above, pp. 215 and 271.
9 Eph. i. 23; v. 32. Col. i. 18, 24. I Tim. iii. 15.
1 The Athanasian Creed (as it is called) is commended by Richard
Hooker (V. xiii. 12, 13) as the strongest safeguard against all heresies
affecting the doctrines of the Trinity and of the Incarnation, and by
Dr. Waterland ("On the Athanasian Creed," vol. iv. 305) as the best
exposition of those doctrines, and by Martin Luther as the ' ' bulwark of
the Apostles' Creed," and by Richard Baxter as "the best explication
he ever read of the doctrine of the Trinity " (Method of Theology,
pp. I — 3 ; Works, ii. p. 132).
Some writers (as Waterland, " History of the Athanasian Creed,"
and the Rev. G. D. W. Ommanney in their learned treatises upon that
Creed) have assigned to the Athanasian Creed a date prior to the
Council of Chalcedon. But if that Creed had been then in use, it would
certainly have been quoted by Western writers, such as S. Leo, on the
Eutychian Controversy.
The clear statements of doctrine in the Athanasian Creed (on the
Trinity and Incarnation) are to be reckoned among the gains of the Church
from the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon. But this Confession of
faith, though posterior to the Council of Chalcedon, must also, I con
ceive, be regarded as earlier than the end of the eighth century, when
the heresy of Adoptionism arose, which was another form of Nesto
rianism,* and would certainly have been noticed in that Creed.
* See Gieseler, ii. 280, div. i. part ii. chap. iii.

The Athanasian Creed ; its probable origin and date. 301
is like a song2 of thanksgiving chanted by the
If the Canon of Autun, which commanded the Clergy to recite the
Athanasian Creed (Labbe's Concilia, vi. 536), was enacted at the Council
held there about A.t). 670 (as is supposed by some, e.g. Waterland,
Athanasian Creed, chap, ii., and many others cited by him ; and see
Ommariney, p. 1 10), there is evidence of its being well known in France
iu the seventh century.
If I might venture to offer a conjecture as to its date, it would be as
follows : —
This Creed, if we may so speak, is an antagonistic one. Its language
is, " It is necessary to hold the Catholic Faith" and the consequences
of not holding it are stated in very strong terms ; and at the close it says,
" This is the Catholic Faith ; which except a man believe faithfully, he
cannot be saved."
The Athanasian Creed is not like the utterance of any single person,
however eminent in the Church, but it speaks with authority.
Those, its two peculiarities — its antagonistic and its authoritative
character — seem to suggest a connexion with a remarkable era in the
history of the Western Church.
At the close of the sixth century a whole Nation, the Visigoths ol"
Spain and part of Gaul, with their King at their head, in a Council at
which he was present with his Queen and about seventy Bishops,
pubhcly renounced Arianism, which the Goths had professed and en
forced, far and wide, for more than two centuries, and they heartily
embraced and zealously propagated the faith of Athanasius.
This was done at Toledo, in the year 589, in the third Council held
there by their good and great King Recared I. (Labbe, Concilia, v.
p. 998), and was one of the most glorious reformations witnessed
by Christendom ; and it is eloquently described as such by Cardinal
Baronius (Annales ad A.D. 589, tom. vii. p. 787 ; cp. Fleury, xxxiv.
55, 56 ; Hefele, Concilien, iii. p. 48).
King Recared I. was called the " Catholic King" because he re
nounced the Arian heresy and accepted the Catholic Faith, as held by
Athanasius, and persuaded his. people to do so. " Before all things it
is necessary to hold the Catholic Faith. This is the Catholic Faith ; which
except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved." These emphatic
words of the Athanasian Creed would come forth with peculiar signifi
cance and with authoritative sanction from such a King, at such a time,
and under such circumstances.
2 The Quicunque Vult, sung daily in some Western Churches, and
at great festivals in others, is contained in the Symbolical books of
other churches, and also in Prayer-books of the East, as in the Greek
Horoloeium Mag"um, Venice, 1868, p. 495.

302 The Athanasian Creed.
Church universal for her victories over heresy at
Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon.
The King opened that Council with a noble speech to the Bishops, in
which he declared his faith. " It is a sign of salvation (he said) to
think (sentire) of the Trinity in Unity, and Unity in Trinity." Com
pare the Athanasian Creed : " ita de Trinitate sentiat." He acknow-
. ledged all the dogmatic definitions of the first four General Councils
(Labbe, v. pp. 999 — 1006). The Council joined with him in this
acknowledgment, and in condemning the heresy of Arius, and all who
do not receive the decrees of those four Councils ; and the King gave
directions that this faith should be committed to writing, and be heard
from the mouth of Bishops and others in the Church (p. 1000).
In the 1st Canon of this Council (p. 1009) a fidei sanctce Catholictz
Expositio is mentioned. Perhaps the Athanasian Creed may have been
the result of these deliberations.
When we proceed from the Third Council of Toledo, A.D. 589, to
the Fourth Council held there in A.D. 633, and examine its Acts (Labbe,
v. 1703; Bruns, p. 221), we there see in the opening words of the
Council a Confession of Faith which bears a striking resemblance
to the Athanasian Creed. This was observed long since by Waterland
(on the Athanasian Creed, chap. vi. p. 221), who says, "The Fourth
Council of Toledo cites a considerable portion of this Creed, adopting
it into their Confession. Baronius is positive that they took their ex
pressions from this Creed. " And similar remarks are made by Gieseler
(ii. 279), who also says, " We should seek for the origin of this Creed in
Spain." Some of these expressions may be mentioned. " We confess
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be of One Godhead and Substance ;
we believe the Trinity in a diversity of Persons, acknowledging the Unity
in Divinity (qu. in Trinity?), neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing
the Substance. We confess the Father, made of none, and begotten of
none ; the Son, not made, but begotten of the Father; the Holy Spirit,
not created nor begotten, but proceeding from the Father and the Son.
We confess Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the sub
stance of the Father before the Worlds, incarnate of the Holy Ghost,
and the holy Virgin Mary, the glorious Mother of God ; her only Son ;
equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father
as touching His Manhood ; having in His one Person the properties of
two Natures ; God and Man ; not two, but one Person in two Natures ;
Who suffered and died for our salvation ; descended into hell, and rose
again, and ascended into heaven, and will come again to judge the quick
and dead; and we who have been cleansed by His blood, and have
obtained remission of sins, shall be raised by Him at the last day in
our bodies ; some, according to their good deeds, to inherit everlasting

Its probable origin in Spain. 303
" The right faith is, that we believe and confess that
life; and others, according to their sins, to incur everlasting punish
ment. This is the Faith of the Catholic Church, which whosoever shall
have kept faithfully, shall inherit everlasting life."
A sixth Council was held at Toledo, a.d. 638 (Labbe, v. 1741 ;
Bruns, 250), which expressed itself in similar terms, also coinciding
with those of the Athanasian Creed. * ' In this Trinity there is Unity of
Substance, so as not to be less in any one Person than in another. The
Son of God is perfect God and perfect Man ; equal to the Father in the
form of God, and in the form of a servant inferior to the Father ;" and
at the close of the Confession are words similar to those of the Athana
sian Creed. The eighth Council of Toledo, A.D. 653, refers to the first
four General Councils, and accepts their dogmatic decrees ; and the
eleventh Council of Tbledo, A.D. 675, put forth what may be called a
large Exposition of the Athanasian Creed (Labbe, vi. 542). " The Father
Eternal; the Son Eternal. The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy
Ghost is God ; the Father Almighty, the Son Almighty, the Holy Ghost
Almighty. Every Person by Himself is God, and all the Three Persons
are one God ; and in this Trinity there is none greater or less than the
other; none is before or after the other. The Son is perfect God and per
fect Man, having two Natures in One Person ; equal to the Father as God,
and inferior to the Father as Man. He died, for us, and rose again, and
ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God, and will
come again to raise us up in our bodies, to give to every man according
to his works. This is the confession of our faith, by which all heresies
are destroyed." Similarly the Fourteenth Council of Toledo, A.D. 684
(Labbe, vi. 1282), and the Sixteenth Council. A.D: 693 (Labbe, vi. 1332),
use the words of the Athanasian Creed. " The Father is God Almighty,
the Son is God Almighty, the Holy Ghost is God Almighty; and yet not
three Gods, or three Almighties, but one God. The Father is of none ; the
Son is begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost proceeds from both. In the
mystery of this Trinity none is before or after other." Many more
coincidences occur in it. Indeed, the Confession of Faith by this latter
Council is only an enlargement of the Athanasian Creed.
Most of these Councils of Toledo put forth also strong warnings to
those who do not hold the Catholic Faith. Another connecting link
between these Spanish confessions of faith, in the Councils of Toledo,
and the Athanasian Creed, is that in them and in the Creed the Holy
Ghost is asserted to proceed from the Son as well as from the Father.
A Confession of Faith, containing this article so expressed, can hardly
have been earlier than the end of the sixth century. The Churches of
Spain and Gaul seem to have been the first to insert the Filioque in the
Nicseno-Constantinopolitan Creed (cp. Pearson on the Creed, Art. viii.
note). 1

304 The Athanasian Creed ; its true name.
our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and
Man; God, of the substance of the Father, begotten
before the Worlds ; and Man, of the substance of His
mother, born in the world ;
Perfect God, and Perfect Man, of a reasonable soul
and human flesh subsisting ;
Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and
inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood ;
Who, although He be God and Man, yet He is not
two, but One Christ ;
One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh,
but by taking of the Manhood into God ;
One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but
by Unity of Person." 3
The Son of God — thus confessed by the Church —

If this conjecture be well founded, that the Athanasian Creed owed
its origin to the zeal of the Goths in Spain, when converted from
Arianism in the sixth century, it would be an interesting fact to observe,
that the Gothic Nation, which was perverted by the Emperor Valens
(see above, vol. ii. p. '271) from Catholicism to Arianism in the fourth
century, and which professed and propagated that heresy for more than
two centuries, should have been made an instrument in God's hands in
putting forth a Confession in which the Catholic Faith has sounded forth
in the Churches of the West for more than a thousand years.
Let me add in conclusion, that the objection of some to the Quicunque
Vult, that it was put forth by its composers under an assumed name, that
of Athanasius, and that it is in fact a forgery, is grounded on a mistaken
notion. It was not put forth originally as a Symbolum or Creed. It
never bore that name in ancient times ; but its ancient title* was Fides
Catholica Sancti Athanasii (see Ommanney, p. 403), and all that was
meant by that title was that they who used it professed the same faith
as the great doctor of the Church, Athanasius, in opposition to the
heresy of Arius. And this was specially true in Spain at the end of the
sixth century, when the King and Nation publicly abjured Arianism, and
embraced the Catholic Faith of Athanasius.
3 The Greek translation of the Creed has & irdvTws, ov avyxvaei
<p*vffeaiv, ahK* trwcret inroordffewv (qu. viroordo-eois ? ).

Retrospect of the Past : Prospect of the Future. 305
is the Rock on which she is built, and the gates of hell
will never prevail against her.
The Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon added
nothing to the words of the Nicaeno-Constantino-
politan Creed ; but by their dogmatic decrees they
guarded the doctrine of the Incarnation as declared
therein, and provided safeguards against all future
assaults upon it.
Holy Scripture has revealed, that the History of the
Church would record a succession of conflicts between
good and evil, and of triumphs of good over evil after
severe struggles.
It foretells also that the sharpest conflict — the cli
max and consummation of all — is reserved for the last ;
and that this conflict will be followed by a glorious
Victory, the consequences of which will extend to
Eternity.4 The History of the Church from the first Advent
of Christ to the Council of Chalcedon in the middle
of the fifth century has already unfolded to our view a
series of conflicts and conquests ; and they who read
the signs of the times, and meditate on the prophetic
revelations of Holy Scripture, will probably feel a
strong persuasion that the final conflict of the Church
with the World will be for the maintenance of that
doctrine which was declared by her in those four
General Councils, the doctrine of the Incarnation,
which will receive its full attestation from the Son of
God Himself, when He will appear in His glorified
humanity, and will raise the dead from their graves,
' 4 I have endeavoured to develope these assertions in an historical
summary of events in pp. xxiv — xxvii of my Introduction to the Minor
Prophets. VOL. IV. X

306 Signs of the Times — Hopes for the future.
and will pronounce upon all their final sentence of
bliss or woe.

We live among falling Institutions ; the foun
dations of social and national fabrics are tottering ;
ancient dynasties are passing away ; the sounds of
disruption are heard like the crashes of vast masses
broken off from the rock, and going down to the
chasm below.
But amid this wreck of States and Empires, and
amid the hurricane of popular revolutions, the faithful
will remain unshaken, with the Scriptures in their
hands, and with the history of the Church laid open
to their eyes. They will remember Christ's promises
to His Church, to be always with her even to the end,
and to send to her the Holy Spirit to abide with her
for ever. " Heaven and Earth will pass away, but His
words will not pass away." 5 " Jesus Christ is the
same yesterday, to-day, and for ever." 6 The Scrip
tures will remain unchanged and unchangeable ;
the Creeds of the Church will remain ; her Apostolic
Ministry will remain ; the Church will continue to
preach His Word, and to dispense His Sacraments
unto the end of Time.
In the overflow of ungodliness she will see a warning
of the near approach of her Lord ; and in all her
struggles for the faith in His Incarnation, she will find
comfort in the remembrance that in the darkest days
of her history He never failed to raise up able cham
pions for its defence— Athanasius, Gregory Nazi
anzen, Basil, Ambrose, Augustine", Cyril, and Leo —
and that He perfected strength out of weakness, and
overruled evil for good, and evoked good out of evil ;
8 Matt. xxiv. 35. 6 Heb. xiii. 8.

Final and Universal Victory of Christ. 307
and that amid all the storms of human passion in
Churches, Councils, and Courts, He has ever been
enthroned in calm Majesty above the waterflood.
And she will derive strength from the assurance that
He will appear again with power and great glory to
quell the surging tide of Antichristianism, which lifts
up its proud waves against Him, and that He will put
all things under His feet.
IC XC NIKA/
' I.e. '\t\aavs Xpurrbs vi/c*" {Jesus Christ conquers), a common inscrip
tion in Greek Churches. Compare John xvi. 33, "In the world ye
shall have tribulation, but be of good cheer, I have overcome the
World;" Rev. vi. 2, "He went forth conquering, and to conquer."
Cp. Rev. xix. 11 — 16.

INDEX.

In this Index the Arabic numbers which have NO Roman number prefixed to
them refer to the First Volume. For example, 204 refers to page 204 in the
First Volume.

Abbot, Abp., and Abp. Laud, iv. 149.
Abstinence, iv. 41, 71.
Abyssinia, Church of, ii. 43.
Adrianople, battle of, ii. 272.
yEons (see Valentinus), 204.
Agnosticism, 210.
Alaric the Goth takes Rome, iii. 266.
Alban, S., Martyrdom of, 384.
 Cathedral of, 386.
Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, 423.
 his treatment of Arius, 434.
 Arius' Letter to him, 438.
 refutes Arianism, 443.
 states the true Faith, 444.
Alexandria, Birthplace of Theological
Science, 250.
 (see Clement, Cyril, Diony
sius, Dioscorus).
 Council at, 447.
 Library of, iii. 10.
Almsgiving, S. Cyprian's Treatise on,
346.
 S. Jerome on, iii. 245.
Ambrose, S., Bishop of Milan, and
Valentinian, ii. 212.
 Parentage and life of, iii. 17.
 and Symmachus, iii. 23, 28.
 and Arianism, iii. 35.
 before the Imperial Consis
tory, iii. 38.
 Church of, at Milan, iii. 44.
and Theodosius, iii. 48, 51,

54. °3-
50.

on Royal Supremacy, iii.
on the death of Valentinian

IL, iii. 58.
 death of, iii. 65.

Ambrose, S., Writings of, iii. 69.
the Hymn-writer of the

West, iii. So.
 on Marriage, iii. 133.
Ambrosian Ritual, iii. 78.
Ambrosius, Patron of Origen, 270.
America, Church of, Pref. ix.
Amrnianus Marcellinus, on Roman
Bishops, iii. 88.
Amphilochius, ii. 203.
Anastasia, Church of, ii. 301.
Ancyra, Council of, 411.
Angels, a name for Bishops, 44.
 Epistles to the seven, 43.
 Worship of, ii. 199.
Anicetus, 160, 161.
Ante-Nicene Councils, Inferences from,
388.
Anthony, S., The Hermit, and Atha
nasius, 431, 434.
Anthusa, mother of Chrysostom, iv. 124.
Antichrist, described by S. Irenaeus,
231.
Antinous, divinized by Hadrian, 149.
Antioch, Council of, 397 ; ii. 79> 85.
 condemns Paul of

Samosata, 400.
 Schism at, ii. 324.
Riot at, iv. 137.

Antiochus Epiphanes, compared with
the Emperor Julian, ii. 158.
Antipope, Novatian the first, 311.
Antoninus Pius, The Emperor, 149.
Apocrypha, how distinguished from
Canonical Books, ii. 203; iii. 255.
Apollinarianism, ii. 321.
Apollonius, compared by Hierocles1
with Jesus Christ, .w**.

310

Index.

Apologists, Christian : Tertullian, 93,
124.
¦  Justin Martyr,
105, 150.

109.

154.

 Minucius Felix,
 Origen,H4,2i3.
 Melito, 154.
 Athenagoras,-
 Miltiades, 154.
 Apollinarius,
 raised up to
maintain the true Faith, 465.
Apostles, Commission to the, 5.
 Christ and the Holy Spirit
acting in and by, 9.
sometimes called Presbyters,

154.

47-
Apostolic Preaching, The first, 34.
 Succession, 44, 224,231, 247.
 :  Canons and Constitutions' (so
called), 413, 416.
Appeals to Rome, ii. 329; iv. 178.
Aquileia, Council of, iii. 19.
Arian Controversy not a frivolous dis
pute, 430.
Arianism, first appearance of, 419.
 has much that is specious in
it, 422.
 Doctrine of the Sacraments
imperilled by, 429.
 as represented by Arius, 434.
 its contradictions, 445.
 and inconsistencies, 446.
 heresies consequent on, ii. 8.
Imperial edict in favour of,

m. 37.
Ariminum, Council of, ii. 19, 133.
Arius, account of, 419.
 has many friends in high station,
420.
 how dealt with by Alexander,
434-
 doctrinal statement of, 436, 437.
 Letter to Alexander, 438.
 moral disqualifications of, 441.
 is banished to Illyria, 459.
 recalled by Constantine, ii. 49.
 received to communion at J eru-
salem, ii. 60.
 invited to Constantinople, ii. 64.
¦  death of, ii. 65.

Aries, Council of, 467, 466.
Artemon, Errors of, 288.
Athanasian Creed, iv. 301 — 304.
Athanasius, S., 424.
 and Constantine, 425.
 on the Incarnation, 426.
on the Atonement and

Redemption, 428.
 and S. Anthony, 431.
 takes a leading part at
Nicene Council, 451.
— Episcopate of, ii. 24 —

28.
 Banishment of, ii. 33.
 Consecration of, ii. 42.
 Missionary work of, ii.
refuses to receive Arius
to communion, ii. 50.
is condemned and de-

43-

posed, ii. 59.

62.

banished to Treves, ii.
restored by Constan
tine II., ii. 70. Gregory is sent to dis

place, ii. 75.

11.91.

105, 108.

Council of Sardica and,
returns to Alexandria, ii.
Writings of, ii. 218.
 death of, ii. 23, 225.
Athletes, The true, 266.
Atonement, Athanasius on the, 427,
428.
Attalus of Pergamos, Martyrdom of,
173-
Augustan Age, Poets of the, 20.
Augustine, S., Bishop of Hippo, ii.
164; iii. 280 — 291 ; iv. I — 104.
 and the Donatists, 317.
 on Porphyry, 366.
ocie an advocate, after

wards an opponent, of Manichasan-
ism, 372.
— ¦¦  and S. Anthony, 4321
(see note).

Jerome's teaching recti
fied by, iii. 136, 190.
correspondence with S.

Jerome, iii. 219.
— on the fall of Rome, iii.

269.

Index.

3"

Augustine, S., influence of his Mother,
iii. 280.
 early history, iii. 282.
 and St. Paul, iii. 2S4.
 Confessions, iv. 68.
 his Conversion, iii. 286.
 his Epistles, iv. 34.
 Treatises, iv. 70.
 Sermons, iv. 77.
— death of his Mother, iii.

289.

99-

on "City of God," iv.

- death of, iii. 291 ; iv. 69.
Aurelius, Marcus, The Emperor, 154.
Auxentius, ii. 207.
Babylon, The literal, 36.
Baldwin, Francis, 109.
Baptism, Sacrament of Holy, 52 ; iv.
49-
 Types of, 53.
 Tertullian on, 55.
 Lay, 56, 403-
 Infant, 57.
 Ancient Doctrine on, 62.
Homily of S. Hippolytus on,

300.

315-315-
408.

97-

111. 79.

views of S. Cyprian on, 313,
• and of Stephen, Bp. of Rome,
Heretical, declared valid, 317,
— Canons on, 413 ; ii. 198.
— Decretal of Siricius on, iii.

in will, Efficacy of, iii. 59.
of Adults, iv. 81.
1 on the Ritual of, ii. 284, 285 ;

190.

S. Basil on, ii. 259.
¦ S. Gregory on, ii. 306, 317.
S. Jerome on, iii. 166, 187,

Basil, S., Letters to Athanasius and
Valens. ii. 224, 225, 229.
 History of, ii. 233 — 276.
 Birth of, ii. 233.
 Ordination ol as Priest, ii. 236.
 Charitable works of, ii. 237.
 Liturgy of, ii. 237, 278, 282.
 ¦ is elected Bishop of Caesarea
in Cappadocia, ii. 239.

Basil, S., on Marriage, ii. 244, 262.
on frequent Communion, ii.

261.

 on secular studies, ii. 265.
 —  last days at Caesarea, ii. 275.
Basilides, a contemporary of Saturninus,
195-
 Heresy of, 258.
Bethesda, Pool of, illustrative of Bap
tism, 53.
Bethlehem, Jerome's Life and Studies
at, iii. 124, 217, 250.
Paula's foundations a,t, iii.

236.
Bible, Holy, Versions of, iii. 202.
Biblias, Martyrdom of, 174.
Biblical Studies, Jerome on, iii. 199.
Bishops, Catalogue of Primitive, 44.'-
 Successors of the Apostles, 47.
 Institution of Order of, 48.
 sometimes called Presbyters,

 Delinquent, to be judged in
their own Provinces, 50.
Canons concerning, 403, 408,

411, 413-456-
 on Appeals to, ii. 82.
 Marriage of, iii. 106.
 S. Jerome on, iii. 175.
 Coadjutor, iv. 64.
as Patriarchs, iv. 29

Blandina, a Christian Slave, Martyr
dom of, 173, 382.
Body, Resurrection of the, 103, 23 1; iv..
'49, 51, 64.
"Brothers, The Four," iv. 171.
Burial, Christian, iv. 96.

Cascilianus, Bishop of Carthage, 404.
 his Consecration declared

valid, 406.
Caelestine, Pope, iv. 106, 211, 232.
Caesarius, brother of Gregory Nazian
zen, ii. 164.
Cainites, 192.
Callistus, Bishop of Rome, 289.
Calvinism, some tenets of, anticipated
by Valentinus, 207.
Canon of Scripture, ii. 197, 200, 205,
219, 246 ; iii. 254 ; iv. 75.
Canons and Constitutions, The Apos
tolic, 413.
 of Councils, Remarks on, 417.

312

Index.

Captives, Christian treatment of, 349.
Carpocrates, The Gnostic, 191, 251.
Carthage, Synods of, 315.
Casaubon, Isaac, Letter to Cardinal
Perron, iii. 109.
Catacombs, iii. 94.
Celibacy, S. Clement on, 260.
 1  why prevalent amongst the
Romans, 329.
 and Marriage, ii. 284, 285;
iii. 98, 131. enforcement of, on Clergy, iii.

106 (see Siricius)
Celsus, Origen's arguments against, 114.
Ceremonial Law, true view of, iii.
223, 228.
Cerinthus refuted by St. John, 189,
226.
Chalcedon, Council of, iv. 270 — 297.
Childlessness amongst the Romans,
329-
Children, Education of, iii. 218, 247.
Chorepiscopi, ii. 82.
Christ and Moses, 6.
Christian Assemblies, description of, 99.
 Home, A, S. Clement on,

Christianity, Change wrought in Do
mestic Society by, 330.
Practical working of, as

contrasted with Heathenism, 343,
35°-
" Christianos ad Leonem," 101.
Christians, Charges against the, 92.
Loyalty of the, 98, 376.

Chrysostom, S., iv. 122.
 at Antioch, iv. 125.
on the Priesthood, iv.

332-

325-

— Life, ii. 289.
— Morals, Pliny's testimony to,
— Soldiers, 377.
Christian, Portrait of a, 106.
Christianity, Lateness of appearance of,
32, 324; iv. 51.
 Popular objections against,

False charges against, 92.
Apologies for (see note),

94-

Rapid growth and fruits of,
95 ; ]"• 273, 275.
contrasted with Heathen

ism, 98.
 Replies of, against Hea
thenism, 112.
 Evidences for, 1 19 ; iv. 57,
141.
 Pliny's description of, 123.
 Valentinus on, 207.
Defenders of, against here-

125.
 on "the Statues," iv. 137.
 his Preaching, iv. 130 —
160.
 his Episcopate at Con
stantinople, iv. 146 — 186.
on Transubstantiation, iv.

177.

his exile, death, and
character, iv. 173 — 186.
Church, Christ's promise to the, 2.
Christ the Rock of, 2, 7 ; iv.

82, 248.
 Mixed condition of the, 2, 3.
Christ's prophecies concerning,

3-
 Holy Spirit given to build up
the, 6, 463.
 Character and office of the, 7.
 Future conflicts and final glory
of the, Preface xi — xiv, 10, 467; iv.
306.
 Earthly Empires preparatory
to the, 12.
•  Hebrew and Greek Institutions
preparatory to the, 14.
Greece and Rome ministerial

to the, 16.
 Assemblies, 64, 100.
Hostile Assaults on, overruled

sy, -2-13.

the only true gnosis, 261.
Evidences for, from Chris

tians' lives, 324.

for good, 69, 87, 191, 339, 366, 375,
386.
 Persecutions against the, 70,
77, 82, 123.
 the true Interpreter of Holy
Scripture, 243.
 ContrastofHeresyandthe,249.
 one only from the beginning,
Pref. xi — xiv, 256.
English Reformers did not set

up a new, 321.
 The whole cannot fail, any part
may, 389.

Index.

3i3

Church, Blessings from the work of
Christ and the Holy Spirit in the,
396.
 — Struggle of the, with Arianism,
419.
 Discipline, Canons on, 454.
 Government, Episcopal, 462.
 History, how to be written,
Pref. xi — xv, and Vol. iv. 101, 305.
 Retrospect of, 463.
 Uses of, 322.
what it is, ii. 344.

and State, S. Hilary on, ii. 210.
and World, ii. 2.
at Rome, temptations of, iii. 87.
Expansion of the, iii. 275.
Government, Ancient form of,
Life and work of the, ii. 343.
 Mixed character of the Visible,
iii. 168; iv. 38, 52 (see Donatism).
— ' — Quiet influence of the, ii. 277.
 Territorial division of the, ii.

111. 44.

240.

of Ireland, iv. 113, 117
Building, iv. 163.

Churches and Ministers, Tertullian on,
245.
 Apostolic Appeal to, 248.
 new, ii. 45 ; iv. 163.
—  pictures and images in, iii. 161.
Cicero, 20, 22.
 de Republica, iv. 44.
Cirtha, Council of, 401.
Civil Power, Obedience to, inculcated
by Christianity, 375.
Civilians, Christian, their relations to
heathen Princes, 379.
Classical Studies, ii. 265 ; iii. 1 19, 234.
Claudian on the battle of Aquileia, iii.
63-
Claudius, Martyrdom of, 383.
Clement, S., Presbyter of Alexandria,
251 — 261.
—  Defence of the Church
against Gnosticism, 213, 255.
 Head of Theological
School, 252.
 Hortatory Address to the
heathen, 254.
 Hymn of, 255-
 Stromata of, 256.
Inferences as to Heresy,

256.

Clement, S., on the duty of Martyrdom,
259-
 on marriage, abstinence,
and temperance, 260, 267.
on true and false Gnosis,

261.

 anticipates Hooker, 262.
 -on Justification, 263.
 ¦  on the true Gnostic, 265.
 Daily Life of Christian
Gnostic — an Athlete — a Temple,
266, 267.

on the Christian's conduct
towards others, and union with God,
268.
Clement, S., Bishop of Rome, 82.
 Epistle of, 84.
Clementine Liturgy, ii. 279 — 281.
Clementines, The, 29, 202, 212.
Cleomenes, Disciple of Noetus, 146.
Clergy, Celibacy of the, 457 ; ii 244 (see
Celibacy and Siricius).
Clerical Office, Ambrose on, iii. 76.
 Life, Jerome on, iii. 203, 241.
Ccenobia, ii. 234.
Colluthus condemned by Council of
Alexandria, 447.
Colosseum at Rome, Martyrdom of
S. Ignatius in, 146.
 Origin of name, 147.
Communion, Holy (see Eucharist), 57-
Confirmation, Institution of, 66.
 Ambrose on, iii. 79.
Jerome on, iii. 166.

Conjugal unfaithfulness, 328.
Constans, Emperor, supports Athana
sius, ii. 78.
 Julius appeals to,
ii. 87.
 his death, ii. no.
Constantia, recommends Arius to her
brother Constantine, 420.
Constantine, Mother of, ii. 46—48.
 Arch of, 147.
 his Vision of theCross,357.
 and Cyrus compared, 360.
 Appeals to, 407, 409.
 and Arius, 420.
 summons an GEcumenical

Council, 447.
 attends the Nicene Coun

cil, 450.

his Address to those as

sembled, 451.

3M

Index.

Constantine, a supporter of those who
plead for the term homoousios , 452.
promulgates the true Faith,

458.

phyry, 459.

59, 61.

compares Arius to Por-
)¦ banishes Arius, 459.
Athanasius appeals to, ii.
sickness, baptism, and

death, ii. 67. Sons of, ii. 69.

Constantine II., restores Athanasius, ii.
70.
 death of, 11. 74. •
Constantinople, Alexander Bishop of,
ii. 64.
 becomes a. fortress of

Faith, ii. 344.

at, ii. 300.
296. pire to, ii. 4.

33i-

tics of, ii. 323.

Bishop at, ii. 339.

Gregory of Nazianzus
Religious distress of, ii.
Transfer of seat of Em-
Council of, ii. 314, 319.
— characteris-
— no Western

— S.Ambrose
remonstrates against, iii. 18.
Constantius, Letter of Athanasius to, ii.

 temporary change in his
conduct towards, ii. 101.
 character of, ii. in.
 victories of, ii. 113.
 influence of Valens over, ii.

115.

Council, General, What constitutes a,
391 ; ii. 342.
  Examples of, 392.
Christian Emperors

had the right of convening, 462.
Councils, Ante-Nicene, of Jerusalem,
35.388- A . .
 Antioch,

119.

at Aries and Milan, ii. n8,
attacks Athanasius, ii. 125.
vacillation of, ii. 132.
Baptism and death of, ii.

139-
Controversies of the third century in
structive to us, 319.
 ¦ Theological, at Rome,
287, 322.
Cornelius, Bishop of Rome, on the
Novatian Schism, 314.
Coroticus, St. Patrick on, iv. 116.

396, 400.

Elvira, 402.

411.

rea, 412.

•Cirtha,40i,
- Eliberis or
- Rome, 405.
¦ Aries, 407.
Ancyra,
¦ Neo-Caesa-
- Nicaea, 448.

434, 447-

79-

 Post-Nicene, in Trullo (or
"Quinisext), 416.
 of Laodicsea, 41 6.
 Alex andria,
 Antioch, ii.
 Aquileia,
 Ariminum,
 Carthage,
 Constanti-
 Gangra, ii.
 Sardica, ii.

hi. 19.

*>¦ 133-

ii. 96.

nople, ii. 314.

243-

iv. 212 — 219.

iv. 270 — 297.

3°-

Tyre, ii. 55.
Ephesus,
- Chalcedon,
- Orange, iv.
Valence,

iv. 31.
Councils of Toledo, iv. 301 .
Councils, General, remarks on, 388.
Ante-Nicene, Inferences from,

388.

head in, 388.

review of the, 396.
No one supreme infallible

Index.

315

Councils, Priests and Deacons at, 397.
Creed, The Ancient, as declared by S.
Irenaeus, 218.
 by Tertullian, 240.
 by Gregory Thau-
maturgus, 283.
The Nicene, stated to have been

framed by Hosius, 448.
 subscribed by the
Bishops, 453.
 the Church's de
claration of Faith, 468.
¦  The Constantinopolitan, ii. 342.
— ¦  main
tained by West as well as East, ii.
89.
 The Athanasian, iv. 301 -
3°4-
Creeds, The Christian imperishable,
513-
 declare the True Faith, 395.
Crescens, Attack on Justin Martyr, 156.
Cross, Invention of, ii. 48.
 Luminous, at Jerusalem, ii. 115.
Cup, denial of, in Eucharist, iv. 247,
248.
Cyprian, S. , on Montanism, 312.
 inadequacy of his opinions on
heretical Baptism, 313, 315.
¦  S. Jerome on, iii. 168.
 S. Augustine on, 318.
 convenes Synods, 315.
 on care of the Sick, 335.
the effects of his own conver

sion to Christianity, 336, 350.
contrasts Christianity with

Heathenism, 337.
 on the lapsed, and on the
Martyrs, 338.
moral reasons for Persecution,

339-

¦ on plagues and death, 340.
—5  comfort in death to the
Christian, 341.
 yearnings for the life to come,
342.

Example of, 346.
 on Almsgiving and the Offer
tory, 346.
 on Christian captives, 349.
 his Martyrdom, 317, 351.
Cyril of Jerusalem, ii. 130.
 on the effects of the
Gospel, ii. 143.

Cyril of Jerusalem, Liturgy of Jerusa
lem described by, ii. 283, 284.
restored to Jerusa

lem, ii. 341.
Cyril of Alexandria, his life, writings,
work, death, and character, iv. 201 —
234-
Damasus, Pope, contested election of,
ii. 216.
 is consulted by Theo
dosius, ii. 313.

320.

on Apollinarianism, ii.
Council of Aquileia in
favour of, iii. 20. encourages S. Jerome,

m. 93.

death of, iii.

Daughter, S. Jerome on the education
of a, iii. 218, 247.
Deacons, Canons concerning, 403, 408,
411,456.
Dead, Prayers for, ii. 279, 286 ; iii. 109,
142, 151, 152 ; iv. 96.
Death of Christians, the beginning of
life, 341.
Decian Persecution, 354.
Decretal, The first Roman, iii. 97, 113.
Demetrius, Bishop of Alexandria, inter
course with Origen, 269, 271.
Development, Theory of, a character
istic of Gnosticism, 223. unknown to

S. Irenaeus and Tertullian, 239 (note).
Diaconate, The, 49.
Diocesan Episcopacy, 50.
Diocletian, Persecution under, 363, 466.
Diognetus, Epistle to, 105.
Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, his
arguments against Sabellianism, 304.
 view of the Millennium, 305.
 on Novatianism, 314.
 a peace-maker, 316.
 on a Pestilence, 343.
death of, 397.

Dionysius, Bishop of Rome, 304.
Dioscorus of Alexandria, iv. 250, 259 —
276.
Discipline, Canons concerning Church,
402, 454.
Disestablishment of Church, Pref. vi —
viii.
Dissenters, Duty to, iv. 78.

316

Index.

Divinization, Man's, 108.
Divisions, Religious, overruled for good,
394-
Divorce, 328 ; ii. 260; iv. 92.
 decrees concerning, 403, 409.
Doctrine, Christian, 364.
 The reception of a, by the
whole Church, proves its Truth, 390.
Dogma, impatience of, iv. 230, 301.
Domitian, The Emperor, 82, 85.
Donatism, Rise of, 404.
 History of, ii. 96.
 Hooker on, 321 ; iv. 8, 42,
81.
Donatists, Canons concerning, 408.
Dualism and Emanations, 202.
East, schism between, and West, ii. 99.
Easter, Decree of Council of Nicaea on
keeping of, 454.
Ebionites or Nazarenes, origin of name,
198.
Elchasaites, The, 202.
Eliberis or Elvira, Council of, 402 ; iii.
162.
Emanations, Theory of, 203.
Emperors and Apostles, 87.
Empires, The four great, 12.
Encratites, The, 198.
England, Church of, warnings for, 319.
Ephesus, Council of, iv. 212 — 219.
 Latrocinium, iv. 261 — -266.
Epicureanism, 17.
Epiphanes, Son of Carpocrates, 198.
Epiphanius, on the Schism at Antioch,
ii. 263.
 against John of Jerusalem,
iii. 173.
Episcopacy, S. Ignatius on, 133.
 S. Jerome on, iii. 195.
 Diocesan, First example of,
35-
 Divine Institution of, 462.
 Primitive witness to, 43.
 Witness of Councils to, 388.
 Witness of Council of Ni
caea to, 461.
Episcopal Elections, principles with
regard to, 50.
Erastianism, repugnant to the principles
of the Council of Nicaea, 462.
Error, Variations and Evanescence of,
214.
 What is the Essence of? 240.

Error, "The Teacher's Error is the
People's trial," 317.
Eucharist, The Holy, 57, 59, 152.
 Oblation in, 60.
 Primitive teach

ing on the, 62, 135, 229.
 S. Irenaeus' view

of, 228.

pation of, ii. 26.

nion, iv. 40.

iv. 160.

—288; in. 79.

frequent partici-
in Evening, iv. 40.
Fasting Commu-
Repelling from,
Ritualof, ii. 285
Doctrine of, iv.
84 (see Sacraments and Incarnation).
Eudoxia, iv. 150 154, 178.
Eugenius, The Emperor, iii. 61.
Eulogise (gifts), iv. 224, 245.
Eunapius, iii. 5-
Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, 420, 435.
 refutes Porphyry, 370.
 »  replies to Hierocles, 374.
 favours Arius, 423, 438.
delivers the opening address

at the Council of Nicaea, 451.
 subscribes to the Nicene
Creed, 454.
 rebuked by Potammon, ii. 55-
death and character of, ii. 73'

Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia, 420,
485.
 approves Arius' Epistle, 438.
 subscribes Nicene Creed,

454-

49.

ii. 72.

banished by Constantine, 459.
• .recalled by Constantine, ii.
• translated to Constantinople,

death of, ii. 83.
Eusebius of Samosata, ii. 258.
Eustathius of Antioch, ii. 53.
 successors of, ii. 54.
Eustathius of Sebaste, ii. 242.
Eustochium, daughter of Paula, Jerome's
letters to, iii. 199, 206.
 death of, iii. 247.
Eutropius, The Eunuch, iv. 145, 152.
Eutyches and Eutychianism, iv. 235 —
280.

Index.

3i7

Eve, type of the Church, Pref. xi, 3.
Evil, The root of,' 194.
 whence is it ? 199.
 overruled for good, 366.
Fabiola, death of, iii. 234.
Faith, Articles of the, 364.
 The True, declared by the Church
in her Creeds, 395.
 unaltered and unalter
able, 469.
Faith and Gnosis, The relations of,
255, 277-
Fasting, Jerome on, iii. 244.
Fathers, Jerome on, iii. 212, 234.
Felicitas, Martyrdom of, 177.
Filioque, on, ii. 334.
Firmilian, Bishop of Caesarea, 316, 397.
Flaccilla, The Empress, iii. 3.
Flavian of Antioch, ii. 326, 341 ; iv.
138.
Flavian of Constantinople, iv. 239—
264.
Flavianus, his Vision of Cyprian, 383.
Fulgentius, iv. 29.
Future State, Valentinus on the, 208.
Gainas, iv. 161.
Gallus, Son of Julius, ii. 69.
Gangra, Council of, ii. 243.
General Council, Why is the Council
of Constantinople so called ? ii. 342.
Gentile Philosophy, a preparation for
Christianity, 261
George of Cappadocia, Is he the. S.
George of England ? ii. 169.
Germanus, iv. 105.
Gervasius, S., Discovery of his remains,
iii. 41.
Gibbon and Orosius, iii. 275.
Gladiatorial Shows, described, by S.
Cyprian, 336.
Gnosis, Meaning of the word, 181.
 The true, 182.
 The Church has genuine, 230.
 its connexion with faith, 264.
Gnostic Notions of Redemption and
'Matter, 185.
Gnosticism, Origin of, 180, 183.
 not yet obsolete, 186, 210.
 Schools of, 187.
 Moral results of, 208.
 Christian Defences against,
213.

Gnostics, Few of their writings remain,
212.
 immorality of, 221.
The true, 261, 265.

Godhead of Christ, 107, 120, 364.
Gospels, The four, S. Irenaeus testifies
to, 226. 1.
Goths, invasions of, ii. 43 ; iii. 238, 259.
 appeal to Valens, iii. 2.
Grace, Christ the Source of Sacramen
tal, 54.
 Sacramental, consequences of
lack of, ii. 9.
and Free-will, Jerome on, iii.

186.
Gratian, death of, iii. 22.
Greek Empire, The, a preparation for
Christianity, 15.
Gregory, S. , Bishop of Nyssa, comments
on the Creed of Gregory Thauma-
turgus, 284.
Gregory Thaumaturgus, a pupil of
Origen, 274.
 Bishop of
Neo-Caesarea, 283.
<  his profes
sion of Faith, 283.
Gregory of Cappadocia displaces
Athanasius, ii. 75-
 death of, ii.

Gregory of Nazianzus, ii. 234, 297.
 his Father, ii.

239-

298.

 his Mother, ii.
 sets out for Con
stantinople, ii. 300.
 the Theologian, ii. 308, 310,
 and Theodo

sius, ii. 315-

forrhs of, ii. 316.

Episcopal Re-
his Election to
Constantinople confirmed, ii. 324.
unjust allega

tions against, ii. 327.
 *  .  Resignation of,
ii- 33°-
Hadrian, The Emperor, 88, 148.
Heathen, S. Hippolytus' Address to the,
302.
 Missions to, iii. 10.

•i8

Index.

Heathenism and Christianity contrast
ed, 324, 337 5 "i- 61, 261.
 - pleas for, 112.
Helena, mother of Constantine, ii. 46.
 wife of Julian, ii. 147.
Helvidius, heresy of, iii. 1 30.
Heraclas, Bishop of Alexandria, 272.
Heresies, Summary of early, 221.
Heresy, S. Ignatius on, 136.
 foretold in the Apocalypse, 179.
 Rise and growth of, 179.
 refuted by St. John and his
Scholars, 180.
 • Meaning of the word, 181.
 Sinfulness of, 228.
 foretold, 239.
 Moral- depravity of, 239.
derived from Heathen Philoso

phy, 240.
 Novelty of, 246, 247, 256.
 S. Hippolytus on, 295, 301.
 Hooker's observations on, 296.
overruled for good, 296, 464.

Hermas, Shepherd of, 85
Hermit, S. Anthony the, 430.
Hesiod, ii. 266.
Hexapla and Tetrapla, compiled by
Origen, 271.
Hierocles, account of his writings, 373.
Hippolytus, S., Vindication of Chris
tianity, 213.  Scholar of S. Irenaeus,

285.

tue, 286.

Bishop of Portus, 285.
Discovery of his Sta-
his " Refutation of all

Heresies," 286, 295.
- Providential position

of, 292.

Unity," 294.

• on Holy Scripture, 293.
¦ on the " Trinity in
¦ on the Two Natures of

Christ, 295, 298.
 on the Person of Christ,

297.

on Baptism, 300.
 against the denial of
Christ's Divinity, 301.
¦ Address to the Hea

then, 302.

dentius' Hymn, 306.

¦ Martyrdom of— Pru-

Hippolytus, S., his Tomb and Statue,
307-
 tendencies to Nova-

tianism, 308, 312.
Holy Baptism (see Baptism and Sacra
ments).
 Communion (see Communion,
Eucharist, Sacraments) .
 Ghost, on procession of, ii. 334 —
336
 Land, Jerome's description of, iii.
211.
Home, The Christian, described by S.
Clement, 332.
Homer, S. Basil on, ii. 266.
Homoousios, The Term, 399, 452.
 necessity of maintaining, ii. 6.
Hooker, Richard, on Heresy, 296.
and S. Augustine on Donatism

and Novatianism, 321.
 on Church authority, 417.
 on the Arian controversy, 445.
• against rebaptization, and how

Rome is a Church, iii. 121.
- on the difference between Eastern

and Western temperament iii. 128.
on Prayers for the dead, iii. 151.

Horace, 25, 26, 57, 326.
Hosius, Bishop of Cordova, 402, 422.
advises Constantine to sum

mon an Oecumenical Council, 447.
 said to have taken the lead in
the Nicene Council, and to have
framed the Nicene Creed, 448.
 assailed by Constantius, ii.
 is banished, ii. 125.
fall of, ii. 17, 128.

123-

Hospital, S. Basil's, ii. 256.
Hospitals and Fabiola, iii. 234.
Hostels for strangers, S. Jerome on, iii.
217.
Hymns of S. Ambrose, iii. 40, 73, 80.
Hypatia, iv. 202.
Hypostasis, Judgment of Athanasius on,
ii. 222.
Ignatius, S., Martyrdom of, 126, 146.
 arraigned before Trajan,
128.
 Journey from Antioch to
Smyrna, 129.
 Epistles of, 131.
 Letter to Polycarp, 140.
 Epistle to the Romans, 141.

Index.

3*9

Ignatius, S., on his Martyrdom, 143.
 — "Life in Death." 144.
 Longings for future life,
145-
 goes from Portus Roma-
nus to Rome, 146.
-— his martyrdom there, 147.

Images, Veneration of, iii. 163.
Incarnation, Reasons for, 107.
 affirmed by S. Ignatius,
136.

on, 426.

denied by Marcion, 201.
affirmed by S. Irenaeus, 226.
Treatise of S. Athanasius
True doctrine on, 428.
 effects of doctrine, ii. 288.
 Gregory Nazianzen's Ser
mons on, ii. 317.
true doctrine of,anditsrela-

Irenaeus, S., on the faith of the Pro
phets, 231.
 Resurrection of
the Body, 231. - Second Adam—
• " Last Things,''
Intermediate

Christ, 231.

232.

State, 232.

Conclusion of his work,

tion to the Sacraments, iv. 194 — 214.
Infallibility, Papal, refuted by anticipa
tion by S. Hippolytus, 307 ; and by
Nicene Council, 459, 460.
 Roman claims to, iii. 231.
Infant Baptism, iii. 190 (see Baptism).
Infanticide, 329.
Infidelity, Assaults of, 366.
Innocent, Pope, Appeal to, iv. 178.
Intermediate State, Irenaeus on, 233.
Ireland, anciently called Scotia, iv.
109.
 Ancient Church of, iv.m — 117.
Irenaeus, S., Bishop of Lyons, 213.
 Reminiscences of S. Poly-,
carp, 215.

233-
Ischyras, ii. 51.
James, St., Bishop of Jerusalem, 35.
Jerome, S., Birth and early life, iii. 116.
 Scholar of Gregory Nazian
zen, ii. 310.
 — encouraged by Pope Da-
masus, 93.

215.

Refutation of heresies,
his character and work,
Statement of Ancient
Catholic Creed, 219.
 Deviations from it de-

216.

scribed by, 220.
on the Four Gospels,

226.

 prophecies con
cerning Christ, 227.
 sinfulness of
Heresy and Schism, 228.
 Holy Eucharist,

229.

Holy Scriptures

and Christian Ministry, 230.

¦ his place in Church His
tory, iii. 114.
¦ influence with Roman

ladies, iii. 122.
• remonstrances against his

teaching, iii. 135.
¦ admissions as to the Mar

riage of Priestsi iii. 144.
— on reverence for Martyrs,
Controversial works of :

iii. 158.

the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed
Virgin ; on Virginity and Marriage ; on
Vows of Virginity ; Prayers for the
dead ; Veneration of Martyrs' and
relics ; Miracles, iii. 127 — 165.
and Rufinus on Origen's

writings, iii. 172, 176.
• and Theophilus of Alex

andria, iii. 174.
¦ review of his own life, iii.

186, 200.

ni. 209.

• Letters of, iii. 194.
¦ on the troubles of the times,
¦ correspondence with S.
Augustine, iii. 219.
 Epistles of, iii. 233.
• on the study of the Bible,

iii. 213, 249 — 256.
 on the fall of Rome, ii.

 on Origen, iii. 277.
Jerusalem, Council of, 35, 388.

320

Index.

Jerusalem, the Mother Church of the
World, 35.
 Destruction of, 81, 149.
Jews, Dispersion of the, favourable to
Christianity, 13 ; iv. 141.
 expelled from Jerusalem by
Hadrian, 149.
John, St., Completed the Apostolic
teaching, 40.
 is a Martyr in will, 86.
 and Cerinthus, 189, 226.
John of Antioch, iv. 211, 217, 222.
Judaism, The true nature of, 71, 75-
 Uses of the controversy with,
76.
Julian, The Emperor, ii. 69, 145.
 early influences,
ii. 147.

11. 147.

tainments, ii. 151.
ganism, ii. 153.

his wife Helena,
his gifts and at-
his love of Pa-
his apostasy, ii.
marches against
Constantius, ii. 139.
 Behef in Oracles
and Divination, ii. 157-
 Edicts against
Christian Professors, ii. 1 59.
attempts to popu-

22, 154.

larize Paganism, ii. 162.
 ¦  writes
Christianity, ii. 167.

against

nasius, ii. 171.

persecutes Atha-
attempts to re
build the Temple at Jerusalem, ii.
172. campaign in Per

sia, ii. 176.

bed, ii. 179.

defeat and death-
review of his

character and acts, ii. 180 — 185.
Juliana assists Origen, 271, 273.
Julius, Bishop of Rome, supports Atha
nasius, ii. 78.
 and Council of

Antioch, ii. 85, 87.

Judgment of,

on the Synod of Tyre, ii. 85.

Julius, Bishop of Rome, appeals to Con
stans, ii. 87. on appeals to

(as Bishop of Rome), ii. 92.
• death of, ii. 117.

Jus Cyprium, iv. 219.
Justification, ground of, iii. 223.
Justin Martyr, 29.
 on the Old Testament,

73-

Apology of, 150,

155-

 Dialogue with Trypho,
Martyrdom of, 156.

Justina, The Arian Empress, Mother of
Valentinian II. (see Ambrose), iii.
23, 35-
Juvenal, 23.
Labarum, The, 359.
Lactantius' account of Hierocles, 373.
 on the Vision of Constantine,

357- , r , ..
Laodicaea, Council of, 416; 11. 227.
"Last Things," S. Irenaeus on the, 232.
Latin Language, its inadequacy, iii.
288.
"Latter Days," Pref. xiii — xv, II,
468 ; ii. 40, 347 ; iv. 305—307.
Laurence, Archdeacon of Rome, 306.
on the Treasures of the

Church, 348.
Martyrdom of, 349, 383.

Lay Baptism, 56, 403.
Leo, Pope, his character, writings,
claims, and acts, iv. 246 — 296.
Libanius, iii. J.
Liberius, Bishop of Rome, succeeds
Julius, ii. 117. his com-

stantius, ii. 121.

ments on the lapse of Vincent of
Capua, ii. 118.
 - --   resists Con-
is banished,
lapse of, ii.
recovery
death of,

11. 123.

128.

and reply of, ii. 215.

ii. 216.
Literature, Greek and Roman, pre
paratory to Christianity, 26.

Index.

321

Liturgy, S. Basil's, ii. 237, 278, 282.
 S. Chrysostom's, ii. 278; iv. 169.
— — - of Jerusalem, S. Cyril on the,
ii. 283.

the Clementine, ii. 279.
 use of a Scriptural and Catholic,
ii. 277.
Lord's Day, Primitive observance of,
62, 64, 152, 404.
 Supper (see Eucharist and Holy
Communion).
Loyalty inculcated by Christianity, 375.
Lucian, 27 ; the Voltaire of the second
century, 396.
Lucifer of Caghari banished, ii. 121.
Luciferian Schism, ii. 170 ; iii. 120,
167.
Lucretius, 21.

Maccabees, Heroism of the, 31.
 S. Gregory Nazianzen on,
ii. 30.
Macedonian Heresy, ii. 89, 331.
Macrostich, ii. 89.
Magic, 28 ; ii. 213.
Majorinus, the Donatist Bishop of
Carthage, 317, 405.
Manes promotes Scepticism, 371.
Manicheism, 198, 372 ; iv. I, 72.
Marcella, iii. 90, 242.
Marcellinus, Count, iv. 8.
Marcian, Emperor, iv. 267, 280.
Marcion, The heretic, 161, 198, 225,
259.
 and Rational
ism, 199.

 has many fol
lowers now, 201.
Marcus Aurelius, The Emperor, 154.
 Persecution under, 172.
Marriage, St. Paul's doctrine on, iii. 100,
134, '88.
¦ reprobated by Marcion, 201,

260.

- S. Clement's rules concerning,
 under the Romans, 325.
 a Christian, described, 331.
 with Wife's Sister forbidden,
402 ; ii. 245, 260.
 Canons concerning, 403, 411,
413 ; ii. 243.
 S. Basil on, ii. 260.
 S. Jerome on, iii. 132.

Marriage and Celibacy, iii. 239 ; iv.
60, 86, 89, 90, 1 15, 134.
 of Clergy (see Celibacy).
Martin, S., iii. 46.
Martyrdom, The duty of, 259.
joy in, 383.

Martyrs, Hopes and joys of the, 138.
The, not worshipped, 169.

 ashes cast into the Rhone,
176.
 benefits derived from the
sufferings of the, 375.
 The, transfigured by suffer
ing, 381.
" Martyrs," officiousness of some,
338. reverence for, iii. 158; iv.

151.

Prayers for, iv. 83.

Maximus the Cynic undermines Gre
gory, ii. 311.
 Canons against, ii. 338.
Melania and Rufinus, iii. 91, 172.
Meletius of Antioch, ii. 322, 325.
Menander, a disciple of Simon Magus,
189.
Methodius' reply to Porphyry, 370.
Milan, Arian Council of, ii. 119.
Millennium, Judgment of the Church
on the, 305 ; iv. 103.
Ministry, Constitution of the Christian,
42.
Minor Orders, convenient, not neces
sary, 49.
Minucius Felix, Dialogue of, 109.
Miracles, Testimonies to, iii. 42, 155'.
Missions, St. Paul's Method of, 36.
Christian, ii. 44 ; iv. 105, 109,

162, 176.
Mixed Chalice, Primitive use of, 63.
Monasticism, 431.
 Rise of, in West, ii. 77.
 S. Jerome on, iii. 117,

240.
Monks destroyers of Temples, iii. 5.
 different characters of, iii. •

241 ; iv. 42, 94, 134, 157.
Montanus, The Heresy of, 234.
 Jerome on,

VOL. IV.

m. 200.
Mortmain, Laws on, iii. 92.
Mourners, Comfort to, iv. 44 (see Cy
prian) .
Mursa, battle of, ii. 114. Y

322

Index.

Natural Religion, Gregory Nazianzen
on, ii. 305.
Nectarius, his election to the See of
Constantinople, ii. 331, 341.
 Ambrose contrasted with, iii.
53-
Neo-Caesarea, Council of, 412.
Nepotian, a pattern of a young Priest,
iii. 203 — 207.
Nero, The Emperor, 81.
 Persecution under, 77.
Nestorianism condemned by anticipa
tion, ii. 221.
Nestorius and Nestorianism, iv. 189—
.234-
Nicaea, Council of, summoned by Con
stantine, 447.
 Eminent Bishops
present at it, 448.

¦ Hosius of Corduba
said to have taken the lead in it, 448.
a Novatian Bishop

invited to it, 449.

some Laymen ad
mitted to it, 449.
 Arius declares his

opinions in the preliminary confer
ences, 450. — Opening of the Coun

cil, 450.

Constantine attends
it, 450.
 Eusebius of Caesarea
delivers the opening address, 451.
¦ followed by Eusta

thius and the Emperor, 451
- framing of the Creed,

453, 466.

Bishops, 466.
Easter, 454.

subscribed by the
on the keeping of
enacts Canons on

Church Discipline, 454.
Synodical letter to

the Churches, 458.
 '  why memorable, 459.
Claims of Papacy

disproved by, 460 ; iv. 296.
 Facts presented by,

461.

from, 467.
Ninian, S., iv. 78.

¦ Lessons to be learnt

Nobility, Roman, demoralization of„ iii.
86.
Noetus, The Patripassian, 289.
 S. Hippolytus' Homily against,
297.
Novatian, Presbyter of the Roman
Church, 310.
 the first Antipope, 311.
 — Novatian Baptism and Orders
declared to be valid, 317, 321.
Novatianism, Rise and Progress of,
309 ; iv. 155.
 Pleas for, 310.
 S. Cyprian on, 312.
Hooker on, 321.

Novatians, Canons concerning the, 455.
Novelty of Error, 246, 247, 256.
Numbers in Scripture, meaning of, 6 ;
iv. 41, 65.
Obedience and Submission, 375, 379.
Oblation in Holy Eucharist, 60.
Offertory, The Weekly, Primitive Insti
tution of, 65, 347.
Officials, Christian, their relations to
heathen Princes, 379.
Old Testament (see Testament and
Scriptures).
Olympias, iv. 165, 176.
Onesimus, St. Paul's treatment of, 333.
Ophites, The, 192.
Oracles, Porphyry's Book on, 368,
369-
 responses of, ii. 177.
Orange, Council of, iv. 3.
Orders of the Ministry, The Three, 50 ;
iii. 168.
Ordination, Presbyterian, 42, 45, 447 ;
iii. 39, 51.
Origen, against Celsus, 114.
 on Faith and Philosophy, 116.
 on Moral and Physical Evil and
Divine Grace, 118.
 Theology of, 121 ; iii. 176.
 Defence of Christianity, 213.
 his travels and training, 270.
 Studies and Ordination of, 271.
 controversies concerning, 272.
 life and writings of, 273.
 his system of teaching, 274.
 on the consecration of secular
learning, 275.
 method of S criptural interpreta
tion, 276.

Index.

323

Origen, allegorical licence of, 277.
 on faith and facts, 278.
 on the Logos, 278.
 on the Son of God, 279.
 on Future Punishment, 121,
280.
 his temper and life, 281.
1 and Tertullian, 282.
 his Theology inadequate, 29 1.
¦  Jerome on, 176 — 179-g
Original Sin, Jerome on, iii. 1 8.
Orosius, iii. 272, 274.

Paganism, destruction of, in East,iii. 5.
 Julian's attempt to popular
ize, ii. 44.
Palladius, iv. 106.
Pantheism and Fatalism, 196.
Papacy, Novelty of the, 462.
Papal Supremacy (see Roman).
Paphnutius on Clerical celibacy, 457.
Paradise, ii. 299.
Pastoral Epistles, St. Paul's, 40, 42.
Paul of Samosata, heresy of, 396, 398.
Paul's, St., Method of Missions, 36.
 Plan of Epistles, 37.
 Martyrdom of, 79.
- his dispute with St. Peter,

iii. 226.

¦ on Marriage, iii. 134, iS

Paula and Jerome, iii. 91, 198, 210.
 her Monasteries at Bethlehem,
iii. 236. - her death, iii. 235.

Paullinus of Nola, Jerome's letter to,
iii. 212.
Pausanias, 27.
Pelagianism, Jerome on, iii. r8l.
 ¦ Augustine on, iv. 16, 25
— 32-
Penitential Discipline, iv. 85, 148.
Pentecost, The Church built up at, 7,
463-
Perpetua, S., Martyrdom of, 177-
Persecution first from the Jews, 70.
 and its fruits, 87.
-under "Good Emperors,"

89.

464

- moral reason for, 339.
- General, Edict for a, 356.
-Benefits from, 375, 380,
- on Flight in, iv. 67.

Persecutions under Nero, 77.
 Domitian, 82.
 Trajan, 123.
 Marcus Aurelius,

154, I7i-

177, 352-

35i, 355-

376.

¦ Septimius Severus,
¦ Maximinus, 353.
- Decius, 354, 382.
-Valerian, 316, 348,
-Diocletian,356, 363,
- Aurelian, 401.
Summary of, from A.D.

180 to Council of Nicaea, 352.
•in Gaul, 171.

Persia, Missions to, ii. 44.
Pestilence, Dionysius of Alexandria on
a, 343-
Peter, St., his plan of preaching, 35.
 Martyrdom of, 79.
 Martyrdom of his wife, 79.
 Second Epistle, Genuineness'
of, 189.
Philosophy, Moral failure of, 18.
 The genuine and false con.
trasted, 261.
 Imperfection of Gentile
systems of, 274.
Photinus, ii. 113.
Pictures in Churches, iii. 162.
Pilgrimages, ii. 261.
Plagues and Pestilences, uses of, 340.
Pleroma of .(Eons, 205.
Pliny the Elder, 22.
 the Younger, Letters to Trajan,
122, 325.
Plutarch's searchings after truth, 27,
28.
Polybius, 19.'
Polycarp, S., Bishop of Smyrna, 157.
 his Epistle to the Phi-
lippians, 158. ¦ collects the Epistles of S .

Ignatius, 1 59.
 :  Episcopate of, 160.
 Martyrdom of, 161, 382.
 in Prayer, 165.
 before the Proconsul,

166.

¦ his Birthday, 170.

Polygamy, not encouraged by the
Greeks and Romans, 326.
2

324

Index.

Pontius, Deacon and Biographer of S.
Cyprian, 345.
Porphyry, 366.
 on Scripture — on Oracles,
369-
 on Christianity, 370.
 Practical refutations of, 371-
 on the contention of St.
Paul and St. Peter, iii. 227.
Pothinus, Bishop of Lyons, Martyrdom
of, 174.
Praxeas, The Patripassian, 290.
Prayer and Praise, S. Clement's Hymn
of, 254
 Family, iv. 32.
Prayers for the Dead (see Dead, Prayers
for, and Jerome).
Preaching, its power in the Church,
ii. n ; iv. 121, 127, 131, 140.
Presbyter, sometimes called Episcopus,
46.
 Also a Bishop sometimes
called Presbyter, 47, 48.
Presbyterian Ordinations, 42, 45, 447 ;
iii. 39, 51.
Presbyterianism, ii. 39.
Priesthood, Foundation of the, 48.
 On the necessity of, iii. 16
(see Ignatius).
Priests, Christian, Canons concerning,
403,411, 412.
 Dress of, iii. 188.
 Marriage of, ii. 244 ; iii. 98,
102, 144 (see Celibacy).
Primacy coupled with Consultation, 47.
Priscillianists, Lessons from the history
of, ii. 318 ; iii. 45.
Private Judgment, Abuse of, by Here
tics, 256.
Probation, Man's Moral, 32.
Prophets, Faith of the, 231.
Protasius, iii. 41.
Provinces, Ecclesiastical, and Patriar
chates, 50 ; ii. 240 ; iv. 298. ,
Prudentius, Hymns of, 306, 312.
Psalmody, Canons on, ii. 200.
Pulcheria, iv. 267, 281.
Punishment, Everlasting, iv. 52.
Puritans, Hooker's Reply to the, 320.

Quinisext Council (in Trullo), 416 ; on
Priests' Marriage, iii. 104.
Quintilian, 23.

Real Presence, in Holy Communion,
58.
Redemption and Matter, Gnostic no
tions of, 185.
Reformation, Where was the Anglican
Church before the? 319.
Relics, iii. 158 (see Jerome).
Resurrection, Christ's Acts and Sayings
after His, 4. (see also Body, Resurrec

tion of the).
Retrospect and Reflections, 364 ; iv. 305.
Rewards and Punishments, Future,
153-
Rings, Christian, described by S. Cle
ment, 332.
Ritual, On variety in, 418; iii. 216;
iv. 36, 39.
Rock of the Church, 2, 7 (see Church).
Roman Empire. Why the Christians
prayed for it, 99.
 Religion, Failure of the, 21.
Roads preparations for Chris

tianity, 15, 447.
Supremacy, :S. Cyprian on the,

316.

not recognized by
Tertullian, 248.
 nor by Primitive
Catholic Church, 85, 142, 388, 406.
disproved by Coun

cil of Nicaea, 460.
 Army, Demoralization of the,
iii. 86.

 Empire, Causes of the fall of
the, iii. 210, 263.
Ladies, S.Jerome on influences

over, 111. 244.
 Legislation, Changes in, favour
able to the Church, iii. 89.
Rome, Church of, S. Irenaeus' Refer
ence to, 224 (see note).
 Council of, 405.
Appeal from, to Constantine,

407.

Dogmatic dilemma at, 288.
 Lack of Theological Science at,
290; iii. 84.
Recovery of Church of, from

heresy, 306.
Succession of Bishops in

Church of, 224.
and Constantinople contrasted,

iii. 4 ; iv. 146.

Index.

3«S

Rome, S. Jerome at, iii. 122.
 On the fall of, iii. 238, 243, 247,
257, 263.
 Luxury and demoralization of
Clergy and Laity, ii. 216, 217 : iii.
83—88. "
¦  Prophecies concerning, iii. 267.
— — — Religious women at, iii. 242.
 Rise and growth of spiritual
power of, iii. 278 ; iv. 249.
Royal Supremacy, ii. 317, 318 ; iii.
49, 67-
Rufinus (see Melania and Jerome).
 on Origen, iii. 172, 176.
 death of, iii. 181.
Rule of Faith (see Creed).

Sabbath, The weekly, a preparation for
Christianity, 14.
Sabellianism, Rise of, 303.
Sacraments, The Christian, 51.
 Necessity of the, 52.
 Their relation to the In
carnation, iv. 198 — 208, 256.
¦  Types of the, 54.
¦ — Doctrine of the, imperilled
by Arianism, 429 ; by Nestorianism,
iv. 198 ; by Eutychianism, iv. 256.
¦ — S. Ambrose on, iii. 78.
— S. Cyril of Jerusalem on,

ii. 283.
Sacrifice, The Eucharistic, 59, 229.
Salvian, iii. 270.
Samosata, Paul of, the Socinus of the
third century, 396, 398.
 condemned by the Council of
Antioch, 400.
Sanctus, a Deacon of Vienne, Martyr
dom of, 173, 382.
Sardica, Council of, ii. 89, 94.
Satan tempts men to worship him, 192.
Saturninus, a follower of Simon Magus,
194.'
Scaliger, Joseph, on records of Martyr
dom, 381.
Schism, Wilful, declared sinful by S.
Irenaeus, 227.
Science and Philosophy, to be pressed
into the service of the Church, 274.
Scripture, Holy, Marcion's criticisms
on, 200.
 The Church the True
Interpreter of, 230, 243.

Scripture, Holy, garbled by Heretics,
244, 257, 293.
 Tertullian on appeals
to, 243.
 Origen on, 275.
 ¦  S. Augustine, as an
expositor of, 275 (see note).
Inspiration of, an

Article of Faith, 364.
 ¦  Study of, iv. 4, 48, 56,
59, 74, 135, 140.
Secular Power, Obedience to the, taught
by Christianity, 375, 379.
Secundus, an adherent of Arius, 459.
Septuagint, Origin of the, 15.
Serapis, destruction of Temple of, iii.
8.
Serpent Worship, encouraged by the
Gnostics, 193,
Sethiani, The, 193.
Sick, Care of the, by Christians, 334.
 Treatise of S. Cy
prian on, 335.
Siderius, Ordination of, ii. 222.
Siloam, Pool of, Typical of Baptism, 53.
Simon Magus, The Gnostic, 187.
Simony, iv. 284 — 287.
Sin, Deadly, 327.
Siricius, his Decretal on enforced Cleri
cal continency, iii. 97 — III.
Sirmium, Council of, ii. 113.
Sisterhoods, iv. 65.
Sisters of Charity, iii. 196.
Slave Trade, iv. 108.
Slaves, Christian regard for, 334.
Society, Attempts of Julius and Augus
tus to reform, 326.
How Christianity undertook

to reform it, 330.
Soldiers, Christian, iv. 62.
Martyrdoms of, 376.

Sophia, S., Church of, ii. 315, 329.
Sorcery, Canons on, ii. 199.
Soul, origin of, iv. 61.
Spiritualism condemned as Montanism,
236 ; iv. 94.
Sponsors, iv. 49.
Stephen, Bishop of Rome, Acts of, 315.
Stoic, Portrait of the, 154.
Stoicism fatal to faith, 17.
Submission and Obedience, 375, 379.
Succession (see Apostolic).
Suffering, The glory of, 102.
Suicide, iv. 64.

326

Index.

Sunday, Primitive observance of, 62,
64, 152, 404.
Superiors, Duties to Heathen, 379.
Superstitious Customs, growth of, iii.
12.
Supremacy, Roman, not acknowledged
by the Catholic Church, 248 (see
note), 316 (and see Roman).
Symeon, Bishop of Jerusalem, Martyr
dom of, 126.
Symmachus, iii. 2.
Tacitus, 22.
Tatian, The Gnostic, 197.
"Teacher's error, the people's trial,"
317-
Temperance and Total Abstinence, iv.
7L
Temples, destruction of, iii. 5.
Territorial divisions of Empire and
Church, ii. 240.
Tertullian on Baptism, 55.
 Address to the Jews, 74-
 Apology of, 93.
 on Christian Evidences, 96.
 "ad Scapulam," 103.
-^— ^— on Trajan's rescript, 125.
 becomes a Montanist, 235.
 Writings of, 237.
 :  Creed of, 241.
 on appeals to Holy Scripture,
243-
¦ on the Essence of truth and
error, 246.
¦  Appeal to Apostolic Churches,
248.
¦  on religious divisions, 250.
¦¦ and Origen compared, 280.
Testament, Old, Christianity in the, 72,
464.
' Marcion on the, 201.
 Spiritual and typical
character of, 276 5 iv. 3, 204, 205

Theodosius, Laws of, ii. 313, 317.
and Council of Constanti-

New, Marcion on the, 201.
Testaments, One God in both, 224.
Thaumaturgy, 28.
Theod — divination concerning Valens,
ii. 214.
Theodoret, iv. 214, 283.
Theodosius (see Ambrose, Thessalonica,
Flaccilla, Chrysostom).
 associated as Emperor with
Gratian, ii. 295 ; iii. 1.
¦  is Baptized, ii. 312.

nople, ii. 314, 340.
 Imperial policy of, iii. 2.
¦ spares Antioch, iv. 137-

153-

• defeats Maximus, iii. 47.
 his faith, victory at Aquileia,
and death, iii. 60—64.
and S. Ambrose, iii. 49,

51, 54, 63, 276.
Theodosius the Younger, iv. 212, 222,
234-
Theodotus, Errors of, 288.
Theological Talk, ii. 203.
Theonas, an adherent of Arius, 459.
Theophilus of Alexandria and Origen-
ism, iii. 174.
 his character

and acts, iv. 171, 174.
Theotocos, iv. 193, 207, 212.
Theraputae, Communities of the, 31.
Thessalonica, Massacre at, iii.. 52.
Timothy, Bishop of Ephesus, 42.
Titus, Bishop of Crete, 42.
Toleration, Edicts of, 357, 361.
Tradition, uncertainty of Oral, 222.
 Apostolic, 224.
Traditores, origin of term, 365, 409.
 elect a Bishop to Cirtha, 401 .
Trajan, Column of, 88, 126.
 is consulted by Pliny, 122.
 Rescript of, 124.
 Ignatius is brought before, 127.
Transubstantiation, Doctrine of, un
known to the Fathers, 61 ; iv. 76,
176, 257.
Trent Canon of Scripture, ii. 220.
Trullo, Council in, 416 ; iii. 104.
Truth, Unity and permanence of the,
245-
 What is the Essence of ? 246.
 Priority of, 247.
Assaults against the, overruled

for good, Pref. pp. xii, xiii, chaps, vii.,
viii., xxvi.
Trypho, Dialogue of Justin Martyr
with, 155.
Tyre, Council of, ii. 55.
Ulphilas, ii. 43.
Unbaptized persons, iii. 59 ; iv. 17.
Unitarianism, Two forms of, at Rome,
289.

Index.

327

Unitarianism, Homilies of S. Hippo<
lytus against, 297, 301.
Unity and Antiquity the Essence of
Truth, 246.
 Church, S. Ignatius on, 133.
Valence, Council of, iv. 31.
Valens, Bishop of Mursa, ii. 115.
Valens, Emperor of the West, ii. 205.
¦ divination concerning, ii. 214.
 persecution under, ii. 23, 229.
 character of, ii. 230.
 and S. Basil, ii. 253.
 death of, ii. 273.
Valentinian, The Emperor, supports
Auxentius, ii. 205.
Valentinian the Younger and S. Am
brose, iii. 33, 58, 60.
Valentinianism, 210.
described by S. Ire

naeus, 216.

S. Cle

ment, 258.
Valentinus, System of, 203, 208.
 on Christianity, 207.
Valerius, Bishop of Saragossa, 402.
Varro, 19, 22.
Vatican Council, not a General one, 392.
Vestals, iii. 22, 26, 31.
Vices consecrated by Heathenism, 328.
Victorinus, good Confession of, ii. 164 ;
iii. 284.
Victory, Altar and Statue of, iii. 21, 24.
Vigilantius, iii. 143.
Vincent of Capua, Plot against, ii. 100.
 Lapse of, ii. 118.
Vincentius Lirinensis on Tertullian and
Origen, 282.
Virgil, 24.
Virgin, The Blessed, Worship of, iii. 13.

Virgin, The Blessed, Perpetual Vir
ginity of, iii. 130 (see Jerome).
¦  :  =  called Theotocos
(see Theotocos).
Virginity, Christian, iii. 137, 196, 244,
246 ; iv. 60, 86—90, 115, 134, 156.
Visitations, Uses to be made of
Divine, 340.
Vows of Virginity, ii. 260; iii. 132 — 140.
Vulgate Version, Meaning of the term,
iii. 253.
War, iv. 62.
Whittingham, Bishop, of Maryland,
iii. 109, note.
Widowhood, iv. 89.
 Jerome on, iii. 211.
Widows, iii. 197.
Wife's Sister, Marriage with deceased,
forbidden by Council of Elvira, 403.
S. Basil on, ii. 245, 262.

Womanhood, Condition of, in Greece
and at Rome, 21, 327.
Consecration of Chris

tian, ii. 289.

relation of Early Teach

ers to, ii. 291, 292.
the end of, iv. 44.

Women, Arian, ii. 6.
 and the Church, ii. 291.
World's, The, needs and longings, 31.
Worship, Holy Communion an essen
tial part of Christian, 65.
Xystus, Bishop of Rome, 316.
Zenobia, Queen, favours Paul of Sa
mosata, 399, 401.
Zephyrinus, Bishop of Rome, 286,
287, 290, 291, 306.

THE END.

LONDON :
printed by gilbert and rivington, umited,
st. John's square.

A New Edition of
THE HOLY BIBLE,
With Introductions and Notes by
CHRISTOPHER WORDSWORTH, D.D., Bishop of Lincoln.

THE OLD TESTAMENT,
In the Authorized Version, with Introductions, Notes, and Index.

In Parts.

In Volumes.

PART
£ s.
d.
VOL
£ s.
d.
I. Genesis and Exodus
o 14
0
I.
The Pentateuch . 1 5
0
II. Leviticus, Numbers,
Deuteronomy .
O 12
0
II.
Joshua to Samuel 0 15
0
III. Joshua, Judges, Ruth .
O 9
0
IV. Books of Samuel .
O 7
0
III.
Kings to Esther 0 15
0
V. Kings, Chronicles, Ezra,
Nehemiah, Esther .
0 15
0
IV.
Job to Song of Solomon . 1 5
0
VI. Book of Job .
O 7
0
VII. Psalms .
O II
0
V.
Isaiah to Ezekiel . .15
0
VIII. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes,
Song of Solomon
O 9
0
VI.
Daniel, Minor Prophets,
IX. Isaiah .
0 IO
0
and Index . . 0 15
0
X. Jeremiah, Lamenta
tions, Ezekiel
0 16
0
XI. Daniel .
0 5
0
XII. Minor Prophets .
0 9
0
Index ....
0 2
0
0
£6 6
£6 0
0
THE GREEK TESTAMENT,
With Introductions, Notes, and Index, by
CHRISTOPHER WORDSWORTH, D.D., Bishop of Lincoln.
In Parts.
PART
/,
X.
d.
I.
Gospels .
0
6
0
11.
Acts of the Apostles
0
8
0
111.
St Paul's Epistles .
1
T
0
IV.
General Epistles, Apoca
lypse, Index
0
16
0
£3
3
0
In Volumes.
VOL. £ ». d.
I. Gospels and Acts of the
Apostles .130
II. Epistles, Apocalypse, and
Index . 1 17 o
£30°
Any Part, or any Volume, may be had separately.
RIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.
MISCELLANIES,
LITERARY AND RELIGIOUS.
By CHR. WORDSWORTH, D.D.
BISHOP OF LINCOLN.
Being Selections from his Works.
3. Vols. Price 36^.

Content*!.
Vol. I. — Pompeian Inscriptions — Athens and Attica — Notes in
Greece — Notes in France — Notes at Paris — Amiens and St. Theudosia :
Story of her Canonization — Notes in Italy, and at Rome— The Court
of Rome and Kingdom of Italy : Its ill-advised policy : Offer from
a Cardinal — Alexander Lycurgus — Archbishop Longley : Greek and
Latin Translation of the Letter of the Lambeth Conference, made by
the Archbishop's request, 1867 — The Vatican Council : Answer to
Pius IX. — Whether the Babylon of the Apocalypse is the Church of
Rome — The Old Catholics at Cologne — Erasmus.
Vol. II. — On the Inspiration and On the Interpretation of the Bible
— The Revision of the Authorized Version — The New Lectionary
— Table of Proper Psalms and Lessons — The Book of Common Prayer
— The Holy Sacraments — Infant Baptism — Holy Communion — Non-
communicating Attendance — Confirmation — Confession — Ascension
Day and Rogation Days — Day of Intercession — Special Forms of
Prayer: Bishop of Truro— Church Music — On Hymns; The Holy
Year, &c. — Religious Faith and Worship in Art — Cemeteries ; Crema
tion and Burial— On the Intermediate State of the Soul.
Vol. III. — Religion in Science : Newtonian System — Classical
Studies; Theocritus: Horace: Augustan Legislation — "Ethica et
Spiritualia"— Moral and Spiritual Maxims— The Spread of Infidelity
— Destiny and Decline of Mohammedanism — Bishop Sanderson —
Ecclesiastical Legislation and Jurisdiction — Diocesan Synods — Church
Patronage and Simony — Clerical Non-residence — Marriage and Divorce
— Marriage with a Deceased Wife's Sister— Clerical Celibacy— Sister
hoods and Vows— English Cathedrals : Statutes of Lincoln Cathedral
— Mission at Lincoln, 1876 — Pastoral to Wesleyan Methodists— Burials
Question — Labour and Capital — Capital Punishment — Continuity of
the Church of England : St. Hugh, Bishop of Lincoln — Welcome to
the Church of America — Brasenose and Lincoln Colleges : Letter to
Oxford Commissioners — Greek and Latin Translation of the Letter of
the Hundred Bishops at the Lambeth Conference, made by Archbishop
Tait's request, 1878— Letter to the Archbishop of Cyprus.

RIVINGTONS
WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON

PUBLICATIONS BY
CHR. WORDSWORTH, D.D.,
BISHOP OF LINCOLN.

GREEK AND LATIN TRANSLATION (made at Arch
bishop Longley's request) OF THE EPISCOPAL PASTORAL
OF THE LAMBETH CONFERENCE, 1867.
GREEK AND LATIN TRANSLATION (made at Arch
bishop Tait's desire) OF THE PASTORAL OF THE LAM
BETH CONFERENCE, 1878.
THEOCRITUS. With MSS. Collations. 2nd Edition.
1877.
S. HIPPOLYTUS AND THE CHURCH OF ROME.
With MSS. Collations and Translation of part of the IXth
Book of the Refutation of Heresies. 2nd Edition.
LETTERS TO M. GONDON ON THE DESTRUC
TIVE CHARACTER OF THE CHURCH OF ROME.
With Sequel. 3rd Edition.
GREECE, DESCRIPTION OF. 6th Edition.
ATHENS AND ATTICA. 3rd Edition.
TOUR IN ITALY. 2 Vols. 2nd Edition.
GRAFFITI DISCOVERED AT POMPEII.
DIARY IN FRANCE. 2nd Edition.
THEOPHILUS ANGLIC ANUS. 10th Edition.
HOLY YEAR— Original Hymns. 6th Edition.
MISCELLANIES, LITERARY AND RELIGIOUS. 3
Vols. 8vo. ; being Extracts from the Author's Works.
HISTORY OF THE CHURCH OF IRELAND. 2nd
Edition.
ETHICA ET SPIRITUALIA * Extracts from the Fathers
and Others. 2nd Edition.
ADDRESSES at the Five Triennial VISITATIONS of the
Diocese of Lincoln.

wmmim*'''

;:&

^ytfjcfmnmtnfinriihixixi

^-^^ittt&^ii&eixmaii^ii&tii&tol^w

rt^mftWiiiWfflffl