OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book IV/Chapter 29

Chapter XXIX.—The Partisans of Acacius again do not remain Quiet, but strive to abolish the Term “Consubstantial,” and to confirm the Heresy of Arius.
The partisans of Acacius
were not able to remain in tranquillity; and they therefore assembled together with a few others in Antioch, and condemned the decrees which they had themselves enacted. They decided to erase the term “similar” from the formulary which had been read at Ariminum and at Constantinople, and affirmed that in all respects, in substance and in will, the Son is dissimilar from the Father, and that He proceeded from what had no previous existence, even as Arius had taught from the commencement. They were joined by the partisans of Aëtius, who had been the first after Arius to venture openly upon the profession of these opinions; hence Aëtius was called atheist, and his approvers, Anomians and Exucontians.
When those who maintained the Nicene doctrines demanded of the Acacians how they could say that the Son is dissimilar from the Father, and that He proceeded out of nothing, when it was affirmed in their own formulary that He is “God of God,” they replied that the Apostle Paul had declared that “All things are of God,”
and that the Son is included in the term “all things”; and that it was in this sense, and in accordance with the Sacred Scriptures, that the expressions in their formulary were to be understood. Such were the equivocations and sophistry to which they had recourse. At length, finding that they could advance no efficient argument to justify themselves in the opinion of those who pressed them on this point, they withdrew from the assembly, after the formulary of Constantinople had been read a second time, and returned to their own cities.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Soc. ii. 45. Soz. and he are much alike, but yet each has independent statements; both evidently draw from the same source. Athan. de Synodis, 31; Ruf. H. E. i. 25.
* ↑ 1 Cor. xi. 12.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book IV/Chapter 26

Chapter XXVI.—Death of Macedonius, Bishop of Constantinople. What Eudoxius said in his Teaching. Eudoxius and Acacius strenuously sought the Abolition of the Formularies of Faith set forth at Nicæa and at Ariminum; Troubles which thence arose in the Churches.
Macedonius,
on his expulsion from the church of Constantinople, retired to one of the suburbs of the city, where he died. Eudoxius took possession of his church in the tenth year of the consulate of Constantius, and the third of Julian, surnamed Cæsar. It is related that, at the dedication of the great church called “Sophia,” when he rose to teach the people, he commenced his discourse with the following proposition: “The Father is impious, the Son is pious”; and that, as these words excited a great commotion among the people, he added, “Be calm; the Father is impious, because he worships no one; the Son is pious, because he worships the Father.” On this explanation, he threw his audience into laughter. Eudoxius and Acacius jointly exerted themselves to the utmost in endeavoring to cause the edicts of the Nicene Council to fall into oblivion. They sent the formulary read at Ariminum with various explanatory additions of their own, to every province of the empire, and procured from the emperor an edict for the banishment of all who should refuse to subscribe to it. But this undertaking, which appeared to them so easy of execution, was the beginning of the greatest calamities, for it excited commotions throughout the empire, and entailed upon the Church in every region a persecution more grievous than those which it had suffered under the pagan emperors.
For if this persecution did not occasion such tortures to the body as the preceding ones, it appeared more grievous to all who reflected aright, on account of its disgraceful nature; for both the persecutors and the persecuted belonged to the Church; and the one was all the more disgraceful in that men of the same religion treated their fellows with a degree of cruelty which the ecclesiastical laws prohibit to be manifested towards enemies and strangers.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Soc. ii. 43; Ruf. H. E. i. 21. Soz. has independent details.
* ↑ Cf. with Ruf. H. E. i. 21.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book IV/Chapter 21

Chapter XXI.—Proceedings of Macedonius in Mantinium. His Removal from his See when he attempted to remove the Coffin of Constantine the Great. Julian was pronounced Cæsar.
About the same time Eleusius wholly demolished the church of the Novatians in Cyzicus.
The inhabitants of other parts of Paphlagonia, and particularly of Mantinium, were subjected to similar persecutions. Macedonius, having been apprised that the majority of these people were followers of Novatus, and that the ecclesiastical power was not of itself sufficiently strong to expel them, persuaded the emperor to send four cohorts against them. For he imagined that men who are unaccustomed to arms would, on the first appearance of soldiers, be seized with terror, and conform to his sentiments. But it happened otherwise, for the people of Mantinium armed themselves with sickles and axes and whatever other weapons chanced to be at hand, and marched against the military. A severe conflict ensued, and many of the Paphlagonians fell, but nearly all the soldiers were slain. Many of the friends of Macedonius blamed him for having occasioned so great a disaster, and the emperor was displeased, and regarded him with less favor than before. Inimical feelings were engendered still more strongly by another occurrence. Macedonius contemplated the removal of the coffin of the Emperor Constantine, as the structure in which it had been concealed was falling into ruin. The people were divided in opinion on this subject: some concurred in the design, and others opposed it, deeming it impious and similar to digging up a grave. Those who maintained the Nicene doctrines were of the latter sentiment, and insisted that no indignity should be offered to the body of Constantine, as that emperor had held the same doctrines as themselves. They were besides, I can readily imagine, eager to oppose the projects of Macedonius. However, without further delay, Macedonius caused the coffin to be conveyed to the same church in which the tomb of Acacius the martyr is placed. The people, divided into two factions, the one approving, the other condemning the deed, rushed upon each other in the same church, and so much carnage ensued that the house of prayer and the adjoining place were filled with blood and slaughtered bodies. The emperor, who was then in the West, was deeply incensed on hearing of this occurrence; and he blamed Macedonius as the cause of the indignity offered to his father, and of the slaughter of the people.
The emperor had determined to visit the East, and held on his way; he conferred the title of Cæsar on his cousin Julian, and sent him to Western Gaul.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Soc. ii. 38; order and detail from Socrates.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Canons of Carthage/Canons/Canon XXX

Canon XXX. (Greek xxxiii.)
Concerning the accused or accuser.
Likewise it seemed good that the accused, or the accusor, if (living in the same place as the accused) he fears some evil may be done him by the tumultuous multitude, may choose for himself a place near by, where the cause may be determined, and where there will be no difficulty in producing the witnesses.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXX.
Accuser or accused may select for himself a safe place if he fears violence.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Found only in Latin.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Canons of Carthage/Canons/Canon XXXIV

Canon XXXIV. (Greek xxxvii.)
That nothing of those things enacted in the Synod of Hippo is to be corrected.
Bishop Epigonius said: In this summary (Breviarium) which was adopted at the Synod of Hippo, we think nothing should be amended, nor anything added thereto except that the day on which the holy Feast of Easter falls should be announced in Synod.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXXIV.
Nothing is to be corrected in the synod of Hippo, nor anything added thereto, except that the time of celebrating Easter should be announced in time of synod.
The first of these introductions is that of the Synod of Hippo in a.d. 393; the next that of Carthage in a.d. 394, and the third that of the same place, held August 28th, a.d. 397.
This canon (number xxxiv. of the code) is the beginning of Canon v. of the last named Synod.
Johnson.
See Canons 51 and 73.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Canons of Carthage/Canons/Canon XXXVII

Canon XXXVII.  (Greek xl.)
It is not lawful to offer anything in the Holy Mysteries except bread and wine mixed with water.
In the sacraments of the body and blood of the Lord nothing else shall be offered than that which the Lord himself ordained, that is to say, bread and wine mixed with water. But let the first-fruits, whether honey or milk, be offered on that one most solemn day, as is wont, in the mystery of the infants. For although they are offered on the altar, let them have nevertheless their own benediction, that they may be distinguished from the sacraments of the Lord’s body and blood; neither let there be offered as first-fruits anything other than grapes and corns.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXXVII.
Let bread and wine mixed with water only be offered.
The text of the Greek here does not exactly agree with the Latin. The Greek reads as follows: “That in the Holy Mysteries nothing else be offered than the body and blood of the Lord, even as the Lord himself delivered, that is bread and wine mixed with water.”
Further down with regard to the first-fruits I have followed the Greek text which seems decidedly preferable, in fact the Latin is so corrupt that Van Espen notes that for the ordinary “offerantur” some mss. read “non offerantur.”
This canon is Canon xxiij. of the Synod of Hippo, a.d. 393.
Johnson.
See Can. Ap. 2 (3).
“The Mystery of Infants” of this Quære, all that I have met with are in the dark as to this matter. Dionysius Exiguus’s Latin is Lac, etc.  The Greek stands thus, ῎Ειτε ·γάλα κ.τ.λ.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Canons of Carthage/Canons/Canon XXVIII

Canon XXVIII. (Greek xxxi.)
Presbyters, deacons, or clerics, who shall think good to carry appeals in their causes across the water shall not at all be admitted to communion.
It also seemed good that presbyters, deacons, and others of the inferior clergy in the causes which they had, if they were dissatisfied with the judgments of their bishops, let the neighbouring bishops with the consent of their own bishop hear them, and let the bishops who have been called in judge between them: but if they think they have cause of appeal from these, they shall not betake themselves to judgments from beyond seas, but to the primates of their own provinces, or else to an universal council, as has also been decreed concerning bishops. But whoso shall think good to carry an appeal across the water shall be received to communion by no one within the boundaries of Africa.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXVIII.
Clerics who have been condemned, if they take exception to the judgment, shall not appeal beyond seas, but to the neighbouring bishops, and to their own; if they do otherwise let them be excommunicated in Africa.
This canon is the same as Canon xvij. of the Synod of Carthage of 418, but it has some words with regard to appeals which that canon does not contain, viz.: “Aut ad universale conciliam, sicut et de episcopis sæpe constitutum est.” This clause, affirming that bishops have often been forbidden to appeal across the water from the decisions of the African bishops, has caused great perplexity as no such decrees are extant. The Ballerini, to avoid this difficulty, and possibly for other reasons, suggest an entirely different meaning to the passage, and suppose that it means that “bishops have often been allowed to appeal to the Universal Council and now this privilege is extended to priests.” But this would seem to be a rather unnatural interpretation and Van Espen in his Commentary shews good reason for adopting the more evident view.
Johnson.
See Can. Afr., 19.
Clearly the See of Rome is here aimed at, as if Carthage were the place designed by Providence to put a stop to the growth of power in Christian Rome, as well as heathen. It is strange, that this canon should be received by the Church of Rome in former ages.

## Footnotes

* ↑ This is not found in the Greek of Beveridge.
* ↑ Ballerini, edit. S. Leon M., Tom. II., p. 966.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Canons of Carthage/Canons/Canon XXXII

Canon XXXII. (Greek xxxv.)
If any poor cleric, no matter what his rank may be, shall acquire any property, it shall be subject to the power of the bishop.
It also seemed good that bishops, presbyters, deacons and any other of the clergy, who when they were ordained had no possessions, and in the time of their episcopate or after they became clerics, shall purchase in their own names lands or any other property, shall be held guilty of the crime of intrenching upon the Lord’s goods, unless, when they are admonished to do so, they place the same at the disposal of the Church. But should anything come to them personally by the liberality of anyone, or by succession from some relative, let them do what they will with it; if, however, they demand it back again, contrary to what they proposed, they shall be judged unworthy of ecclesiastical honour as back-sliders.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXXII.
Whoso after his ordination although he has nothing yet buys a field, shall give it to the Church, unless he got it by succession from a relation or by pure liberality.
In this canon there is difficulty about the meaning of the phrase “quod eorum proposito congruat.” Hardouin suggests that “propositum” is the same as “profession,” or “calling,” and the meaning, were this the case, would be that he must employ it as befits his clerical calling. Van Espen follows Balsamon and Zonaras in understanding it to mean that if he has proposed to employ a part for the Church or for the poor, and changes his mind, he is to be deposed; and this meaning I have followed.

## Footnotes

* ↑ “Of the Church” in Dion. Exig.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Canons of Carthage/Canons/Canon XXXVI

Canon XXXVI. (Greek xxxix.)
That bishops or clergymen are not to be ordained unless they have made all their family Christians.
None shall be ordained bishop, presbyters, or deacons before all the inmates of their houses shall have become Catholic Christians.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXXVI.
He shall not be ordained who hath not made all his household orthodox.
This canon is Canon xvij. of the Synod of Hippo, a.d. 393.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Canons of Carthage/Canons/Canon XXXV

Canon XXXV. (Greek xxxviii.)
That bishops or clergymen should not easily set free their sons.
That bishops or clerics should not easily let their children pass out of their power; unless they were secure of their morals and age, that their own sins may pertain to them.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXXV.
Bishops and clergy shall not set their children free until their morals are established.
This canon is Canon xiij. of the Synod of Hippo a.d. 393.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Canons of Carthage/Canons/Canon XXXI

Canon XXXI. (Greek xxxiv.)
If certain clerics advanced by their own bishops are supercilious, let them not remain whence they are unwilling to come forth.
It also seemed good that whoever of the clergy or of the deacons would not help the bishop in the necessities of the churches, when he wished to lift them to a higher position in his diocese, should no longer be allowed to exercise the functions of that grade from which they were not willing to be removed.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXXI.
Who despises a greater honour shall lose what he hath.
Johnson.
It is most probable that this canon is to be understood of deacons designed by the bishop to be ordained priests, for the deacons, at least in some Churches, were provided of a better maintenance than priests; or it may be understood of inferior clergymen, who were permitted to marry in the degree they were now in, but would not willingly take the order of priest or deacon, because then they were prohibited marriage.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Canons of Carthage/Canons/Canon XXXIX

Canon XXXIX. (Greek xlii.)
That a bishop should not be called the chief of the priests.
That the bishop of the first see shall not be called Prince of the Priests or High Priest (Summus Sacerdos) or any other name of this kind, but only Bishop of the First See.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XXXIX.
The first bishop shall not be called Prince of the Priests nor High Priest but Bishop of the first see.
This canon is Canon xxv. of the Synod of Hippo, a.d. 393.
Johnson.
“The bishop of the Prime See,” i.e., The primate. So Xantippus is called bishop of the Prime. So in Numidia, Nicetius in Mauritania, in the original Latin between Can. 85, and Can. 86, and see Can. 86.
N.B. Justellus on this canon shews, that Tertullian, Optatus, and Augustine, did apply these titles to their own African bishops; and therefore supposes, that the meaning of the canon was to suppress the flame of vain glory, which proceeded from these sparks of lofty titles.

## Footnotes

* ↑ The Greek reads for “bishop,” “a Primate.”
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Preface to the Translation of the Sayings of Xystus

Preface to the Translation of the Sayings of Xystus.
Composed at Aquileia about the year 307 a.d.
(For the questions relating to Xystus see the Prolegomena, p. 412.)
Rufinus to Apronianus, his own friend.
I know that, just as the sheep come gladly when their own shepherd calls them, so in matters of religion men attend most gladly to the admonitions of a teacher who speaks their own language: and therefore, my very dear Apronianus, when that pious lady who is my daughter but now your sister in Christ, had laid her commands on me to compose for her a treatise of such a nature that its understanding should not require any great effort, I translated into Latin in a very open and plain style the work of Xystus, who is said to be the same man who at Rome is called Sixtus, and who gained the glory of being both bishop and martyr. I think that, when she reads this, she will find it expressed with such brevity that a vast meaning is unfolded in each several line, with such power that a sentence only a line long would suffice for a whole life’s training, and yet with such simplicity that one who looked over the shoulder of a girl as she read it might question whether I were not quite weak in intellect. And the whole work is so concise that it would be possible for her never to let go of it. The entire book would hardly be bigger than the finger ring of one of our ancestors. And indeed it seems but right that one who has learnt through the word of God to count as dross the ornaments of the world should now receive at my hands by way of ornament a necklace of the word and of wisdom. For the present let this little book serve for a ring and be kept constantly in the hands: but it will not be long before it will penetrate into the treasure house and be wholly laid up in the heart, and bring forth from its innermost chamber the germs of instruction and of a participation in all good works. I have added further a few choice sayings addressed by a pious father to his son, but all so succinct that the whole of this little work may rightly be called in Greek the Enchiridion or in Latin the Annulus.

## Footnotes

* ↑ A thing held in the hand.
* ↑ A ring.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Preface to Origen's Commentary on Psalms

Rufinus’ Preface to the Translation of Origen’s Commentary on Psalms 36, 37, and 38.
Addressed to Apronianus, either at Rome or at Aquileia, between a.d. 398 and a.d. 407.
The whole exposition of the thirty-sixth, thirty-seventh and thirty-eighth Psalms is ethical in its character, being designed to enforce more correct methods of life; and teaches at one time the way of conversion and repentance, at another that of purification and of progress. I have therefore thought it well to translate it into Latin for you, my dearest son Apronianus, having first arranged it in nine of the short sermons which are called in Greek Homilies, and incorporated it into one whole; and thus this discourse which in all its parts aims at the correction and the advancement of the moral life, is collected into a single volume. My translation will at all events be of use so far as to put the reader without effort in possession of the meaning of the author, which is here fully laid open, and to bring home to him the simplicity of life which he enjoins with clearness of thought and in simple words; and thus the voice of prophecy may reach not men alone but also god-fearing women, and lend subtlety to the minds of the simple. Yet I fear that pious lady, who is my daughter but your sister in Christ, may think that she owes me no thanks for my work if it brings her nothing but puzzling thoughts and thorny questions: for the human body could hardly hold together if divine providence had formed it of bones and muscles alone without blending with them the ease and grace of the softer tissues.

## Footnotes

* ↑ A Roman noble converted by Rufinus and Melania, with the latter of whom he was connected.