OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Socrates/Book I/Chapter 30

Chapter XXX.—Athanasius is found Innocent of what he was accused; his Accusers take to Flight.
Matters having been brought to this issue with regard to Arsenius, the contrivers of this imposture were reduced to perplexity; and Achab,
who was also called John, one of the principal accusers, having slipped out of court in the tumult, effected his escape. Thus Athanasius cleared himself from this charge, without having recourse to any pleading;
for he was confident that the sight only of Arsenius alive would confound his calumniators.

## Footnotes

* ↑ In Athanasius’ account (Apol. c. Arian. 65) this man’s name is given as ᾽Αρχαφ(Archaph), which is an Egyptian name; its assonance with the biblical ᾽Αχαάβ may have made the latter a current appellation. John was no doubt his monastic name.
* ↑ παραγραφή , legal term; γραφή = ‘indictment,’ παραγραφή = ‘demurrer,’ so used by Isocrates, Demosthenes, &c., of the classical authors.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Socrates/Book I/Chapter 26

Chapter XXVI.—Arius, on being recalled, presents a Recantation to the Emperor, and pretends to accept the Nicene Creed.
They having drawn up a declaration to the following effect, presented it to the emperor. ‘Arius and Euzoïus, to our Most Religious and Pious Lord, the Emperor Constantine.
‘In accordance with the command of your devout piety, sovereign lord, we declare our faith, and before God profess in writing, that we and our adherents believe as follows:
‘We believe in one God the Father Almighty: and in the Lord Jesus Christ his Son, who was begotten
of him before all ages, God the Word through whom all things were made, both those which are in the heavens and those upon the earth; who descended, and became incarnate, and suffered, and rose again, ascended into the heavens, and will again come to judge the living and the dead. [We believe] also in the Holy Spirit, and in the resurrection of the flesh, and in the life of the coming age, and in the kingdom of the heavens, and in one Catholic Church of God, extending from one end of the earth to the other.
‘This faith we have received from the holy gospels, the Lord therein saying to his disciples:
“Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” If we do not so believe and truly receive the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as the whole Catholic Church and the holy Scriptures teach (in which we believe in every respect), God is our judge both now, and in the coming judgment. Wherefore we beseech your piety, most devout emperor, that we who are persons consecrated to the ministry, and holding the faith and sentiments of the church and of the holy Scriptures, may by your pacific and devoted piety be reunited to our mother, the Church, all superfluous questions and disputings being avoided: that so both we and the whole church being at peace, may in common offer our accustomed prayers for your tranquil reign, and on behalf of your whole family.’

## Footnotes

* ↑ The old English translation rendered ‘made’ on the assumption that the Greek was γεγενημένον , not γεγεννημένον . So also Valesius read and translated ‘factum’; but Bright without mentioning any variant reading, gives γεγεννημένον , and we have ventured to translate accordingly.
* ↑ Matt. xxviii. 9.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Socrates/Book I/Chapter 29

Chapter XXIX.—Of Arsenius, and his Hand which was said to have been cut off.
The special providence of God drove Arsenius also to Tyre; for, disregarding the injunctions he had received from the accusers who had bribed him, he went thither disguised to see what would be done. It by some means happened that the servants of Archelaus, the governor of the province, heard some persons at an inn affirm that Arsenius, who was reported to have been murdered, was concealed in the house of one of the citizens. Having heard this and marked the individuals by whom this statement was made, they communicated the information to their master, who causing strict search to be made for the man immediately, discovered and properly secured him; after which he gave notice to Athanasius that he need not be under any alarm, inasmuch as Arsenius was alive and there present. Arsenius on being apprehended, at first denied that he was the person; but Paul, bishop of Tyre, who had formerly known him, established his identity. Divine providence having thus disposed matters, Athanasius was shortly after summoned by the Synod; and as soon as he presented himself, his traducers exhibited the hand, and pressed their charge. He managed the affair with great prudence, for he enquired of those present, as well as of his accusers, who were the persons who knew Arsenius? and several having answered that they knew him, he caused Arsenius to be introduced, having his hands covered by his cloak. Then he again asked them, ‘Is this the person who has lost a hand?’ All were astonished at the unexpectedness of this procedure, except those who knew whence the hand had been cut off; for the rest thought that Arsenius was really deficient of a hand, and expected that the accused would make his defense in some other way. But Athanasius turning back the cloak of Arsenius on one side showed one of the man’s hands; again, while some were supposing that the other hand was wanting, permitting them to remain a short time in doubt afterward he turned back the cloak on the other side and exposed the other hand. Then addressing himself to those present, he said, ‘Arsenius, as you see, is found to have two hands: let my accusers show the place whence the third was cut off.’

## Footnotes

* ↑ A full account of the circumstances narrated in this and the following chapters is given by Athanasius in his Apol. contra Arianos, 65, 71 and 72. Parallel accounts may also be found in Sozom. II. 25; Theodoret, H. E. I. 28; Rufinus, H. E. X. 17; Philostorgius, II. 11.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Socrates/Book IV/Chapter 27

Chapter XXVII.—Of Gregory Thaumaturgus (the Wonder-Worker).
But since from the likeness of the name, and the title of the books attributed to Gregory, persons are liable to confound very different parties, it is important to notice that Gregory of Pontus is a different person. He was a native of Neocæsarea in Pontus, of greater antiquity than the one above referred to, inasmuch as he was a disciple of Origen.
This Gregory’s fame was celebrated at Athens, at Berytus, throughout the entire diocese of Pontus, and I might almost add in the whole world. When he had finished his education in the schools of Athens, he went to Berytus to study civil law, where hearing that Origen expounded the Holy Scriptures at Cæsarea, he quickly proceeded thither; and after his understanding had been opened to perceive the grandeur of these Divine books, bidding adieu to all further cultivation of the Roman laws, he became thenceforth inseparable from Origen, from whom having acquired a knowledge of the true philosophy, he was recalled soon after by his parents and returned to his own country; and there, while still a layman, he performed many miracles, healing the sick, and casting out devils even by his letters, insomuch that the pagans were no less attracted to the faith by his acts, than by his discourses. Pamphilus Martyr mentions this person in the books which he wrote in defence of Origen; to which there is added a commendatory oration of Gregory’s, composed in praise of Origen, when he was under the necessity of leaving him. There were then, to be brief, several Gregories: the first and most ancient was the disciple of Origen; the second was the bishop of Nazianzus; the third was Basil’s brother; and there was another Gregory
whom the Arians constituted bishop during the exile of Athanasius. But enough has been said respecting them.

## Footnotes

* ↑ On Gregory Thaumaturgus in general, see Euseb. H. E. VI. 30.
* ↑ Cf. II. 11.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Socrates/Book IV/Chapter 33

Chapter XXXIII.—The Goths, under the Reign of Valens, embrace Christianity.
The barbarians, dwelling beyond the Danube, called the Goths,
having engaged in a civil war among themselves, were divided into two parties, one of which was headed by Fritigernes, the other by Athanaric. When the latter had obtained an evident advantage over his rival, Fritigernes had recourse to the Romans, and implored their assistance against his adversary. This was reported to the Emperor Valens, and he ordered the troops which were garrisoned in Thrace to assist those barbarians who had appealed to him against their more powerful countrymen; and by means of this subsidy they won a complete victory over Athanaric beyond the Danube, totally routing the enemy. This became the occasion for the conversion of many of the barbarians to the Christian religion:
for Fritigernes, to express his sense of the obligation the emperor had conferred upon him, embraced the religion of his benefactor, and urged those who were under his authority to do the same. Therefore it is that so many of the Goths are even to the present time infected with the errors of Arianism, they having on the occasion preferred to become adherents to that heresy on the emperor’s account. Ulfilas, their bishop at that time, invented the Gothic letters,
and translating the Sacred Scriptures into their own language, undertook to instruct these barbarians in the Divine oracles. And as Ulfilas did not restrict his labors to the subjects of Fritigernes, but extended them to those who acknowledged the sway of Athanaric also, Athanaric regarding this as a violation of the privileges of the religion of his ancestors, subjected those who professed Christianity to severe punishments; so that many of the Arian Goths of that period became martyrs. Arius indeed, failing in his attempt to refute the opinion of Sabellius the Libyan, fell from the true faith, and asserted the Son of God to be ‘a new God’:
but the barbarians embracing Christianity with greater simplicity of mind despised the present life for the faith of Christ. With these remarks we shall close our notice of the Christianized Goths.

## Footnotes

* ↑ The fullest and best ancient authors on the origin and history of the Goths are Procopius of Cæsarea (Historia, IV.–VIII., de Bello Italico adversus Gothos gesto), Jornandes (de Getarum [Gothorum] origine et rebus gestis), and Isidore Hispalensis (Historia Gothorum). On the conversion of the Goths to Christianity, see Neander, Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. II. p. 125–129, and Schaff, Hist. of the Christ. Ch. Vol. III. p. 640, 641.
* ↑ For a slightly differing account of the conversion of the Goths and the labors of Ulfilas, see Philostorgius, II. 5.
* ↑ By selecting from the Greek and Latin alphabets such characters as appeared to him to best suit the sounds of his native language. For a similar invention of an alphabet as a consequence of the introduction of Christianity, compare the Slavonic invented by Cyril and Methodius and a great number of instances in the history of modern missions.
* ↑ Cf. Deut. xxxii. 7.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Socrates/Book IV/Chapter 3

Chapter III.—While Valens persecutes the Orthodox Christians in the East, a Usurper arises at Constantinople named Procopius: and at the Same Time an Earthquake and Inundation take Place and injure Several Cities.
While Valens was thus occupied in Syria, there arose a usurper at Constantinople named Procopius; who having collected a large body of troops in a very short time, meditated an expedition against the emperor. This intelligence created extreme solicitude in the emperor’s mind and checked for a while the persecution he had commenced against all who dared to differ from him in opinion. And while the commotions of a civil war were painfully anticipated, an earthquake occurred which did much damage to many cities. The sea also changed its accustomed boundaries, and overflowed to such an extent in some places, that vessels might sail where roads had previously existed; and it retired so much from other places, that the ground became dry. These events happened in the first consulate of the two emperors.

## Footnotes

* ↑ 365 a.d.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Socrates/Book IV/Chapter 30

Chapter XXX.—Dissension about a Successor to Auxentius, Bishop of Milan. Ambrose, Governor of the Province, going to appease the Tumult, is by General Consent and with the Approval of the Emperor Valentinian elected to the Bishopric of that Church.
About the same time it happened that
another event took place at Milan well worthy of being recorded. On the death of Auxentius, who had been ordained bishop of that church by the Arians, the people again were disturbed respecting the election of a successor; for as some proposed one person, and others favored another, the city was full of contention and uproar. In this state of things the governor of the province, Ambrose by name,
who was also of consular dignity, dreading some catastrophe from the popular excitement, ran into the church in order to quell the disturbance. As he arrived there and the people became quiet, he repressed the irrational fury of the multitude by a long and appropriate address, by urging such motives as they felt to be right, and all present suddenly came to an unanimous agreement, crying out ‘that Ambrose was worthy of the bishopric,’ and demanding his ordination: ‘for by that means only,’ it was alleged, ‘would the peace of the church be secured, and all be reunited in the same faith and judgment.’ And inasmuch as such unanimity among the people appeared to the bishops then present to proceed from some Divine appointment, immediately they laid hands on Ambrose; and having baptized him—for he was then but a catechumen—they were about to invest him with the episcopal office. But although Ambrose willingly received baptism, he with great earnestness refused to be ordained: upon which the bishops referred the matter to the Emperor Valentinian. This prince regarding the universal consent of the people as the work of God, sent word to the bishops to do the will of God by ordaining him; declaring that ‘his choice was by the voice of God rather than by the votes of men.’ Ambrose was therefore ordained; and thus the inhabitants of Milan who were divided among themselves, were once more restored to unity.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Synchronization of the events attending the accession of Damasus and Ambrose, the former in Rome, the latter at Milan, is dependent on Rufinus. Cf. H. E. II. 11. The events of this chapter more properly fall within the time reached by Socrates, i.e. 374 a.d. (see chap. 29, note 1). Hence rightly seven years later than the events of the preceding chapter.
* ↑ A Roman by race, born in 333 a.d., turned to ecclesiastical and literary pursuits in the manner described in this chapter. Cf. Sozom. VI. 24; Theodoret, H. E. IV. 6; Rufinus, H. E. II. 11.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Socrates/Book IV/Chapter 34

Chapter XXXIV.—Admission of the Fugitive Goths into the Roman Territories, which caused the Emperor’s Overthrow, and eventually the Ruin of the Roman Empire.
Not long after the barbarians had entered into a friendly alliance with one another, they were again vanquished by other barbarians, their neighbors, called the Huns; and being driven out of their own country, they fled into the territory of the Romans, offering to be subject to the emperor, and to execute whatever he should command them. When Valens was made acquainted with this, not having the least presentiment of the consequences, he ordered that the suppliants should be received with kindness; in this one instance alone showing himself compassionate. He therefore assigned them certain parts of Thrace for their habitation, deeming himself peculiarly fortunate in this matter: for he calculated that in future he should possess a ready and well-equipped army against all assailants; and hoped that the barbarians would be a more formidable guard to the frontiers of the empire even than the Romans themselves. For this reason he in the future neglected to recruit his army by Roman levies; and despising those veterans who had bravely straggled and subdued his enemies in former wars, he put a pecuniary value on the militia which the inhabitants of the provinces, village by village, had been accustomed to furnish, ordering the collectors of his tribute to demand eighty pieces of gold for every soldier, although he had never before lightened the public burdens. This change was the origin of many disasters to the Roman empire subsequently.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Socrates/Book IV/Chapter 29

Chapter XXIX.—Damasus ordained Bishop of Rome. Sedition and Loss of Life caused by the Rivalry of Ursinus.
While the emperor Valentinian governed in peace, and interfered with no sect, Damasus after Liberius undertook the administration of the bishopric at Rome;
whereupon a great disturbance was caused on the following account.
A certain Ursinus, a deacon of that church, had been nominated among others when the election of a bishop took place; as Damasus
was preferred, this Ursinus, unable to bear the disappointment of his hopes, held schismatic assemblies apart from the church, and even induced certain bishops of little distinction to ordain him in secret. This ordination was made, not in a church,
but in a retired place called the Palace of Sicine, whereupon dissension arose among the people; their disagreement being not about any article of faith or heresy, but simply as to who should be bishop. Hence frequent conflicts arose, insomuch that many lives were sacrificed in this contention; and many of the clergy as well as laity were punished on that account by Maximin, the prefect of the city. Thus was Ursinus obliged to desist from his pretensions at that time, and those who were minded to follow him were reduced to order.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Socrates follows Rufinus here (cf. Rufin. H. E. II. 10; but Jerome, Chronicon, puts the consecration of Damasus as bishop of Rome in the third year of Valentinian’s reign, i.e. in 367. Cf. also Clinton, Fasti Rom. Ann. 367.
* ↑ Am. Marcellinus (Rerum Gestarum, XXVII. 3. 12, 13) says that during the disturbance one hundred and thirty-seven citizens were killed in the course of a single day.
* ↑ Damusus was a Spaniard by race, native of Mantua, patron of Jerome in his biblical researches. Cf. Jerome, ad Damas. Smith & Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog.
* ↑ On the illegality of ordination without a church, see Bingham, Christ. Antiq. IV. 6. 8. Cf. Gregory Nazianz. Carm. de Vita.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Socrates/Book IV/Chapter 32

Chapter XXXII.—The Emperor Valens, appeased by the Oration of Themistius the Philosopher, abates his Persecution of the Christians.
In the meanwhile Valens, making his residence at Antioch, was wholly undisturbed by foreign wars; for the barbarians on every side restrained themselves within their own boundaries. Nevertheless, he himself waged a most cruel war against those who maintained the ‘homoousian’ doctrine, inflicting on them more grievous punishments every day; until the philosopher Themistius by his Appealing Oration
somewhat moderated his severity. In this speech he tells the emperor, ‘That he ought not to be surprised at the difference of judgment on religious questions existing among Christians; inasmuch as that discrepancy was trifling when compared with the multitude of conflicting opinions current among the heathen; for these amount to above three hundred; that dissension indeed was an inevitable consequence of this disagreement; but that God would be the more glorified by a diversity of sentiment, and the greatness of his majesty be more venerated, from the fact of its not being easy to have a knowledge of Him.’ The philosopher having said these and similar things, the emperor became milder, but did not completely give up his wrath; for although he ceased to put ecclesiastics to death, he continued to send them into exile, until this fury of his also was repressed by the following event.

## Footnotes

* ↑ This oration of Themistius is extant in a Latin translation by Dudithius appended to G. Remo’s Themisttii Phil. orationes sex augustales, and entitled, ad Valentem, pro Libertate relligionis. The passage alluded to by Socrates is found in Dudithius as follows: ‘Wherefore, in regard God has removed himself at the greatest distance from our knowledge, and does not humble to the capacity of our understanding; it is a sufficient argument that he does not require one and the same law and rule of religion from all persons, but leaves every man a license and faculty concerning himself, according to his own, not another man’s, liberty and choice. Whence it also happens that a greater admiration of the Deity, and a more religious veneration of his eternal majesty, is engendered in the minds of men. For it usually comes to pass that we loathe and disregard those things which are readily apparent and prostrated to every understanding.’
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume VII/Orations of Gregory Nazianzen
## Contents

* Title Page
* Prolegomena
* Oration 1
* Oration 2
* Oration 3
* Oration 7
* Oration 8
* Oration 12
* Oration 16
* Oration 18
* Oration 21
* Introduction to the Theological Orations
* Oration 27
* Oration 28
* Oration 29
* Oration 30
* Oration 32
* Oration 33
* Oration 34
* Oration 37
* Oration 38
* Oration 39
* Oration 40
* Oration 41
* Oration 42
* Oration 43
* Oration 45
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume VII/Letters of Gregory Nazianzen/Title Page

Select Letters
of
Saint Gregory Nazianzen,
Archbishop of Constantinople.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume V/Dogmatic Treatises/Against Eunomius/Book III
## Contents

* Chapter 1
* Chapter 2
* Chapter 3
* Chapter 4
* Chapter 5
* Chapter 6
* Chapter 7
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Chronological Tables

Chronological Tables to accompany the History and Life of Theodoret.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Dialogues
## Contents

* Prologue
* The Immutable
* The Unconfounded
* The Impassible
* Demonstrations by Syllogisms
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Dialogues/Demonstrations by Syllogisms
## Contents

* I
* II
* III
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret
## Contents

* Title Page
* Translator's Preface
* Chronological Tables
* Prolegomena
* Manuscripts and Editions of Separate Works
* The Anathemas of Cyril in Opposition to Nestorius
* Counter-statements of Theodoret
* Ecclesiastical History
* Dialogues
* Letters
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/John Cassian/Conferences of John Cassian, Part II/Conference XIII/Chapter 4

Chapter IV.
An objection, asking how the Gentiles can be said to have chastity without the grace of God.
Germanus: To this explanation, the excellence of which we cannot hastily disprove, it seems a difficulty that it tends to destroy free will. For as we see that many of the heathen to whom the assistance of Divine grace has certainly not been vouchsafed, are eminent not only in the virtues of frugality and patience, but (which is more remarkable) in that of chastity, how can we think that the freedom of their will is taken captive and that these virtues are granted to them by God’s gift, especially as in following after the wisdom of this world, and in their utter ignorance not only of God’s grace but even of the existence of the true God, as we have known Him by the course of our reading and the teaching of others—they are said to have gained the most perfect purity of chastity by their own efforts and exertions.