OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume I/Confessions/Book X/Chapter 24

Chapter XXIV.—He Who Finds Truth, Finds God.
35. Behold how I have enlarged in my memory seeking Thee, O Lord; and out of it have I not found Thee. Nor have I found aught concerning Thee, but what I have retained in memory from the time I learned Thee. For from the time I learned Thee have I never forgotten Thee. For where I found truth, there found I my God, who is the Truth itself, which from the time I learned it have I not forgotten. And thus since the time I learned Thee, Thou abidest in my memory; and there do I find Thee whensoever I call Thee to remembrance, and delight in Thee. These are my holy delights, which Thou hast bestowed upon me in Thy mercy, having respect unto my poverty.

## Footnotes

* ↑ See iv. c. 12, and vii. c. 10, above.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume I/Confessions/Book X/Chapter 26

Chapter XXVI.—God Everywhere Answers Those Who Take Counsel of Him.
37. Where, then, did I find Thee, so as to be able to learn Thee? For Thou wert not in my memory before I learned Thee. Where, then, did I find Thee, so as to be able to learn Thee, but in Thee above me? Place there is none; we go both “backward” and “forward,” and there is no place. Everywhere, O Truth, dost Thou direct all who consult Thee, and dost at once answer all, though they consult Thee on divers things. Clearly dost Thou answer, though all do not with clearness hear. All consult Thee upon whatever they wish, though they hear not always that which they wish. He is Thy best servant who does not so much look to hear that from Thee which he himself wisheth, as to wish that which he heareth from Thee.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Job xxiii. 8.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume I/Confessions/Book X/Chapter 19

Chapter XIX.—What It is to Remember.
28. But how is it when the memory itself loses anything, as it happens when we forget anything and try to recall it? Where finally do we search, but in the memory itself? And there, if perchance one thing be offered for another, we refuse it, until we meet with what we seek; and when we do, we exclaim, “This is it!” which we should not do unless we knew it again, nor should we recognise it unless we remembered it. Assuredly, therefore, we had forgotten it. Or, had not the whole of it slipped our memory, but by the part by which we had hold was the other part sought for; since the memory perceived that it did not revolve together as much as it was accustomed to do, and halting, as if from the mutilation of its old habit, demanded the restoration of that which was wanting. For example, if we see or think of some man known to us, and, having forgotten his name, endeavour to recover it, whatsoever other thing presents itself is not connected with it; because it was not used to be thought of in connection with him, and is consequently rejected, until that is present whereon the knowledge reposes fittingly as its accustomed object. And whence, save from the memory itself, does that present itself? For even when we recognise it as put in mind of it by another, it is thence it comes. For we do not believe it as something new, but, as we recall it, admit what was said to be correct. But if it were entirely blotted out of the mind, we should not, even when put in mind of it, recollect it. For we have not as yet entirely forgotten what we remember that we have forgotten. A lost notion, then, which we have entirely forgotten, we cannot even search for.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume I/Confessions/Book X/Chapter 27

Chapter XXVII.—He Grieves that He Was So Long Without God.
38. Too late did I love Thee, O Fairness, so ancient, and yet so new! Too late did I love Thee! For behold, Thou wert within, and I without, and there did I seek Thee; I, unlovely, rushed heedlessly among the things of beauty Thou madest. Thou wert with me, but I was not with Thee. Those things kept me far from Thee, which, unless they were in Thee, were not. Thou calledst, and criedst aloud, and forcedst open my deafness. Thou didst gleam and shine, and chase away my blindness. Thou didst exhale odours, and I drew in my breath and do pant after Thee. I tasted, and do hunger and thirst. Thou didst touch me, and I burned for Thy peace.

## Footnotes

* ↑ See p. 74, note 1, above.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume I/Confessions/Book X/Chapter 2

Chapter II.—That All Things are Manifest to God. That Confession Unto Him is Not Made by the Words of the Flesh, But of the Soul, and the Cry of Reflection.
2. And from Thee, O Lord, unto whose eyes the depths of man’s conscience are naked, what in me could be hidden though I were unwilling to confess to Thee? For so should I hide Thee from myself, not myself from Thee. But now, because my groaning witnesseth that I am dissatisfied with myself, Thou shinest forth, and satisfiest, and art beloved and desired; that I may blush for myself, and renounce myself, and choose Thee, and may neither please Thee nor myself, except in Thee. To Thee, then, O Lord, am I manifest, whatever I am, and with what fruit I may confess unto Thee I have spoken. Nor do I it with words and sounds of the flesh, but with the words of the soul, and that cry of reflection which Thine ear knoweth. For when I am wicked, to confess to Thee is naught but to be dissatisfied with myself; but when I am truly devout, it is naught but not to attribute it to myself, because Thou, O Lord, dost “bless the righteous;” but first Thou justifiest him “ungodly.” My confession, therefore, O my God, in Thy sight, is made unto Thee silently, and yet not silently. For in noise it is silent, in affection it cries aloud. For neither do I give utterance to anything that is right unto men which Thou hast not heard from me before, nor dost Thou hear anything of the kind from me which Thyself saidst not first unto me.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Heb. iv. 13.
* ↑ Ps. v. 12.
* ↑ Rom. iv. 5.
# Nine Yiddish Writers

Nine Yiddish Writers
Critical Appreciations
By
HARRY ROGOFF
CONTENTS
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The Fourth Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon XXI

Canon XXI.
Clergymen and laymen bringing charges against bishops or clergymen are not to be received loosely and without examination, as accusers, but their own character shall first be investigated.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXI.
A cleric or layman making charges rashly against his bishop shall not be received.
Compare with this canon the VIth Canon of those credited to the First Synod at Constantinople, the second ecumenical.
This canon is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars II., Causa II., Quæst. VII., canon xlix., in Isidore’s first version.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The Fourth Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon XXII

Canon XXII.
It is not lawful for clergymen, after the death of their bishop, to seize what belongs to him, as has been forbidden also by the ancient canons; and those who do so shall be in danger of degradation from their own rank.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXII.
Whoever seizes the goods of his deceased bishop shall be cast forth from his rank.
It is curious that the Greek text which Zonaras and Balsamon produce, and which Hervetus translated, had instead of τοῖς πάλαι κανόσι, τοις παραλαμβάνουσιν . Van Espen thinks that the Greek commentators have tried without success to attach any meaning to these words, accepting the arguments of Bp. Beveridge (which see). The reading adopted in the text does not lack ms. authority, and is the one printed by Justellus in his “Codex of the Canons of the Universal Church.”
This canon is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars II., Causa XII., Quæst. II., canon xliii., in Isidore’s version.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The Fourth Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon XXIII

Canon XXIII.
It has come to the hearing of the holy Synod that certain clergymen and monks, having no authority from their own bishop, and sometimes, indeed, while under sentence of excommunication by him, betake themselves to the imperial Constantinople, and remain there for a long time, raising disturbances and troubling the ecclesiastical state, and turning men’s houses upside down. Therefore the holy Synod has determined that such persons be first notified by the Advocate of the most holy Church of Constantinople to depart from the imperial city; and if they shall shamelessly continue in the same practices, that they shall be expelled by the same Advocate even against their will, and return to their own places.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXIII.
Clerics or monks who spend much time at Constantinople contrary to the will of their bishop, and stir up seditions, shall be cast out of the city.
This canon is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars II., Causa XVI, Quæst. I., canon xvij. but with the last part epitomized, as the Roman correctors point out.

## Footnotes

* ↑ “The City,” that is to say Constantinople.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The Fourth Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon XXV

Canon XXV.
Forasmuch as certain of the metropolitans, as we have heard, neglect the flocks committed to them, and delay the ordinations of bishops the holy Synod has decided that the ordinations of bishops shall take place within three months, unless an inevitable necessity should some time require the term of delay to be prolonged. And if he shall not do this, he shall be liable to ecclesiastical penalties, and the income of the widowed church shall be kept safe by the steward of the same Church.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXV.
Let the ordination of bishops be within three months: necessity however may make the time longer. But if anyone shall ordain counter to this decree, he shall be liable to punishment. The revenue shall remain with the œconomus.
Bright.
The “Steward of the Church” was to “take care of the revenues of the church widowed” by the death of its bishop, who was regarded as representing Him to whom the whole Church was espoused (see Eph. v. 23 ff.). So in the “order of the holy and great church” of St. Sophia, the “Great Steward” is described as “taking the oversight of the widowed church” (Goar, Eucholog., p. 269); so Hincmar says: “Si fuerit defunctus episcopus, ego…visitatorem ipsi viduatæ designabo ecclesiæ; “and the phrase, “viduata per mortem N. nuper episcopi” became common in the West (F. G. Lee, Validity of English Orders, p. 373). The episcopal ring was a symbol of the same idea. So at St. Chrysostom’s restoration Eudoxia claimed to have “given back the bridegroom” (Serm. post redit., iv.). So Bishop Wilson told Queen Caroline that he “would not leave his wife in his old age because she was poor” (Keble’s Life of Wilson, ii., 767); and Peter Mongus, having invaded the Alexandrian see while its legitimate occupant, Timothy Salophaciolus, was alive, was expelled as an “adulterer” (Liberatus, Breviar., xviij.).
This canon is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars I., Dist. LXXV., C. ij.

## Footnotes

* ↑ I think this is the first time I have ever noticed Van Espen to have omitted giving the reference.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The Fourth Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon XVIII

Canon XVIII.
The crime of conspiracy or banding together is utterly prohibited even by the secular law, and much more ought it to be forbidden in the Church of God.  Therefore, if any, whether clergymen or monks, should be detected in conspiring or banding together, or hatching plots against their bishops or fellow-clergy, they shall by all means be deposed from their own rank.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XVIII.
Clerics and Monks, if they shall have dared to hold conventicles and to conspire against the bishop, shall be cast out of their rank.
Bright.
In order to appreciate this canon, we must consider the case of Ibas bishop of Edessa. He had been attached to the Nestorians, but after the reunion between Cyril and John of Antioch had re-entered into communion with Cyril on the ground that Cyril had explained his anathemas (Mansi, vii., 240), or, as he wrote to Maris (in a letter famous as one of the “Three Chapters”) that God had “softened the Egyptian’s heart” (ib., 248). Four of his priests (Samuel, Cyrus, Maras, and Eulegius), stimulated, says Fleury (xxvij. 19) by Uranius bishop of Himeria, accused Ibas of Nestorianism before his patriarch Domnus of Antioch, who held a synod, but, as Samuel and Cyrus failed to appear, pronounced them defaulters and set aside the case (Mansi, vii. 217). They went up to Constantinople, and persuaded Theodosius and archbishop Flavian to appoint a commission for inquiring into the matter.  Two sessions, so to speak, were held by the three prelates thus appointed, one at Berytus the other at Tyre. At Berytus, according to the extant minutes (Mansi, vii., 212 ff.), five new accusers joined the original four, and charges were brought which affected the moral character of Ibas as well as his orthodoxy.  The charge of having used a “blasphemous” speech implying that Christ was but a man deified, was rebutted by a statement signed by some sixty clerics of Edessa, who according to the accusers, had been present when Ibas uttered it. At Tyre the episcopal judges succeeded in making peace, and accusers and accused partook of the communion together (ib., vii., 209). The sequence of these proceedings cannot be thoroughly ascertained, but Hefele (sect. 169) agrees with Tillemont (xv., 474 et seqq.) in dating the trial at Berytus slightly earlier than that at Tyre, and assigning both to the February of 448 or 449. Fleury inverts this order, and thinks that, “notwithstanding the reconciliation” at Tyre, the four accusers renewed their prosecution of Ibas (xxvij. 20); but he has to suppose two applications on their part to Theodosius and Flavian, which seems improbable. “The Council is believed,” says Tillemont (xv., 698), “to have had this case in mind when drawing up the present canon:” and one can hardly help thinking that, on a spot within sight of Constantinople, they must have recalled the protracted sufferings which malignant plotters had inflicted on St. Chrysostom.
This canon is found in part in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars II., Causa XI., Quæst. I., canons xxj. and xxiij.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The Fourth Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon XXVII

Canon XXVII.
The holy Synod has decreed that those who forcibly carry off women under pretence of marriage, and the aiders or abettors of such ravishers, shall be degraded if clergymen, and if laymen be anathematized.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXVII.
If a clergyman elope with a woman, let him be expelled from the Church. If a layman, let him be anathema. The same shall be the lot of any that assist him.
This canon is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars II., Causa XXXVI., Q. II., canon j.
In many old collections this is the last canon of this Council, e.g., Dionysius Exiguus, Isidore, the Prisca, the Greek by John of Antioch, and the Arabic by Joseph Ægyptius. The reader familiar with the subject will have but little difficulty in explaining to his own satisfaction the omission of canon xxviij. in these instances.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume II/City of God/Book XXI/Chapter 20

Chapter 20.—Of Those Who Promise This Indulgence Not to All, But Only to Those Who Have Been Baptized as Catholics, Though Afterwards They Have Broken Out into Many Crimes and Heresies.
There are others still who make this promise not even to all who have received the sacraments of the baptism of Christ and of His body, but only to the catholics, however badly they have lived. For these have eaten the body of Christ, not only sacramentally but really, being incorporated in His body, as the apostle says, “We, being many, are one bread, one body;” so that, though they have afterwards lapsed into some heresy, or even into heathenism and idolatry, yet by virtue of this one thing, that they have received the baptism of Christ, and eaten the body of Christ, in the body of Christ, that is to say, in the catholic Church, they shall not die eternally, but at one time or other obtain eternal life; and all that wickedness of theirs shall not avail to make their punishment
eternal, but only proportionately long and severe.

## Footnotes

* ↑ 1 Cor. x. 17.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume II/City of God/Book XXI/Chapter 17

Chapter 17.—Of Those Who Fancy that No Men Shall Be Punished Eternally.
I must now, I see, enter the lists of amicable controversy with those tender-hearted Christians who decline to believe that any, or that all of those whom the infallibly just Judge may pronounce worthy of the punishment of hell, shall suffer eternally, and who suppose that they shall be delivered after a fixed term of punishment, longer or shorter according to the amount of each man’s sin. In respect of this matter, Origen was even more indulgent; for he believed that even the devil himself and his angels, after suffering those more severe and prolonged pains which their sins deserved, should be delivered from their torments, and associated with the holy angels. But the Church, not without reason, condemned him for this and other errors, especially for his theory of the ceaseless alternation of happiness and misery, and the interminable transitions from the one state to the other at fixed periods of ages; for in this theory he lost even the credit of being merciful, by allotting to the saints real miseries for the expiation of their sins, and false happiness, which brought them no true and secure joy, that is, no fearless assurance of eternal blessedness. Very different, however, is the error we speak of, which is dictated by the tenderness of these Christians who suppose that the sufferings of those who are condemned in the judgment will be temporary, while the blessedness of all who are sooner or later set free will be eternal. Which opinion, if it is good and true because it is merciful, will be so much the better and truer in proportion as it becomes more merciful. Let, then, this fountain of mercy be extended, and flow forth even to the lost angels, and let them also be set free, at least after as many and long ages as seem fit! Why does this stream of mercy flow to all the human race, and dry up as soon as it reaches the angelic? And yet they dare not extend their pity further, and propose the deliverance of the devil himself. Or if any one is bold enough to do so, he does indeed put to shame their charity, but is himself convicted of error that is more unsightly, and a wresting of God’s truth that is more perverse, in proportion as his clemency of sentiment seems to be greater.

## Footnotes

* ↑ On the heresy of Origen, see Epiphanius (Epistola ad Joannem Hierosol.); Jerome (Epistola 61, ad Pammachium); and Augustin (De Hæres, 43). Origen’s opinion was condemned by Anastasius (Jerome, Apologia adv. Ruffinum and Epistola 78, ad Pammachium), and after Augustin’s death by Vigilius and Emperor Justinian, in the Fifth (Œcumenical Council, Nicephorus Callistus, xvii. 27, and the Acts of the Council, iv. 11).—Coquæus.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume II/City of God/Book XXI/Chapter 2

Chapter 2.—Whether It is Possible for Bodies to Last for Ever in Burning Fire.
What, then, can I adduce to convince those who refuse to believe that human bodies, animated and living, can not only survive death, but also last in the torments of everlasting fires? They will not allow us to refer this simply to the power of the Almighty, but demand that we persuade them by some example. If, then, we reply to them, that there are animals which certainly are corruptible, because they are mortal, and which yet live in the midst of flames; and likewise, that in springs of water so hot that no one can put his hand in it with impunity a species of worm is found, which not only lives there, but cannot live elsewhere; they either refuse to believe these facts unless we can show them, or, if we are in circumstances to prove them by ocular demonstration or by adequate testimony, they contend, with the same scepticism, that these facts are not examples of what we seek to prove, inasmuch as these animals do not live for ever, and besides, they live in that
blaze of heat without pain, the element of fire being congenial to their nature, and causing it to thrive and not to suffer,—just as if it were not more incredible that it should thrive than that it should suffer in such circumstances. It is strange that anything should suffer in fire and yet live, but stranger that it should live in fire and not suffer. If, then, the latter be believed, why not also the former?
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume II/City of God/Book XXI/Chapter 21

Chapter 21.—Of Those Who Assert that All Catholics Who Continue in the Faith Even Though by the Depravity of Their Lives They Have Merited Hell Fire, Shall Be Saved on Account of the “Foundation” Of Their Faith.
There are some, too, who found upon the expression of Scripture, “He that endureth to the end shall be saved,” and who promise salvation only to those who continue in the Church catholic; and though such persons have lived badly, yet, say they, they shall be saved as by fire through virtue of the foundation of which the apostle says, “For other foundation hath no man laid than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day of the Lord shall declare it, for it shall be revealed by fire; and each man’s work shall be proved of what sort it is. If any man’s work shall endure which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. But if any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as through fire.” They say, accordingly, that the catholic Christian, no matter what his life be, has Christ as his foundation, while this foundation is not possessed by any heresy which is separated from the unity of His body. And therefore, through virtue of this foundation, even though the catholic Christian by the inconsistency of his life has been as one building up wood, hay, stubble, upon it, they believe that he shall be saved by fire, in other words, that he shall be delivered after tasting the pain of that fire to which the wicked shall be condemned at the last judgment.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. xxiv. 13.
* ↑ 1 Cor. iii. 11–15.