OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume VIII/The Letters/Letter 65

Letter LXV.
To Atarbius.
If I continue to insist on the privileges to which my superior age entitles me, and wait for you to take the initiative in communication , and if you, my friend, wish to adhere more persistently to your evil counsel of inaction, what end will there be to our silence? However, where friendship is involved, to be defeated is in my opinion to win, and so I am quite ready to gave you precedence, and retire from the contest as to which should maintain his own opinion. I have been the first to betake myself to writing, because I know that “charity beareth all things…endureth all things…seeketh not her own” and so “never faileth.” He who subjects himself to his neighbour in love can never be humiliated. I do beg you, then, at all events for the future, show the first and greatest fruit of the Spirit, Love; away with the angry man’s sullenness which you are showing me by your silence, and recover joy in your heart, peace with the brothers who are of one mind with you, and zeal and anxiety for the continued safety of the Churches of the Lord. If I were not to make as strenuous efforts on behalf of the Churches as the opponents of sound doctrine make to subvert and utterly destroy them, you may be quite sure that there is nothing to prevent the truth from being swept away and destroyed by its enemies, and my being involved in the condemnation, for not shewing all possible anxiety for the unity of the Churches, with all zeal and eagerness in mutual unanimity and godly agreement. I exhort you then, drive out of your mind the idea that you need communion with no one else. To cut one’s self off from connexion with the brethren is not the mark of one who is walking by love, nor yet the fulfilling of the commandment of Christ. At the same time I do wish you, with all your good intentions, to take into account that the calamities of the war which are now all round about us may one day be at our own doors, and if we too, like all the rest, have our share of outrage, we shall not find any even to sympathise with us, because in the hour of our prosperity we refused to give our share of sympathy to the wronged.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Placed about 371, or, at all events, according to Maran, before the year 373, when the ill will of Atarbius towards Basil was violently manifested.
* ↑ Atarbius is recognised as bishop of Neocæsarea, partly on the evidence of the Codices Coislinanus and Medicæus, which describe him as of Neocæsarea, partly on a comparison of Letters lxv. and cxxvi., addressed to him, with the circumstances of the unnamed bishop of Neocæsarea referred to in Letter ccx. Moreover (cf. Bp. Lightfoot, D.C.B. i. 179) at the Council of Constantinople he represented the province of Pontus Polemoniacus, of which Neocæsarea was metropolis. On the authority of an allusion in Letter ccx. sec. 4, Atarbius is supposed to be a kinsman of Basil.
* ↑ 1 Cor. xiii. 7 and 8.
* ↑ cf. Gal. v. 22.
* ↑ i.e. the attacks of Valens on the Church.
# Note-Book of Anton Chekhov

1921
This volume consists of notes, themes, and sketches for works which Anton Chekhov intended to write, and are characteristic of the methods of his artistic production. Among his papers was found a series of sheets in a special cover with the inscription: "Themes, thoughts, notes, and fragments." Madame L. O. Knipper-Chekhov, Chekhov's wife, also possesses his note-book, in which he entered separate themes for his future work, quotations which he liked, etc. If he used any material, he used to strike it out in the note-book. The significance which Chekhov attributed to this material may be judged from the fact that he recopied most of it into a special copy book.
* Anton Chekhov's Diary (1896-1903)
* Anton Chekhov's Note-Books (1892-1904)
* Themes, Thoughts, Notes, and Fragments
This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.
# Note from L. Berney to Grace Tully

* related portals: World War II.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
​Miss Tully:
MR. HOPKINS SENT THIS SATURDAY. L. Berney
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Nêne/Part 1/Chapter 20
### CHAPTER XX

SHORTLY before Easter, old man Corbier died. One evening, as he was going to bed, he felt ill. Right away he lost consciousness, and the next morning at cock crow he passed away.
Madeleine took the children to the neighbours at Chestnut Hill and Gideon made the rounds, carrying the news to family, friends and neighbours, all the Dissenters.
The praying women began to come as early as eight o'clock. The first of them came from the nearby hamlets. Then came those from the outlying farmsteads and at last those from Le Coudray who stayed for the wake. The next day there were many of them: from Saint-Ambroise, from Château-Blanc, from all the villages round about wherever there was a family of Dissenters.
As they came into the house they went down on their knees silently, in a circle around the one who recited the prayers. When one of the group rose to go away, another immediately took her place.
The funeral took place on the third day, at Saint-Ambroise, in the Dissenters' burial ground. Prayers—prayers—prayers! Prayers on the way between the flowering hedges; prayers in the gloomy chapel; long prayers at the burial grounds while the coffin was set on the flat stone over the grave of the last priest; prayers again when the coffin was lowered into the grave and the handfuls of earth thrown on it.
Neither Catholics nor Protestants had come, but all the Dissenters' families had sent someone. The poor soul going away alone, without viaticum, should at least have all the prayers of those near him to speed him on his way.
After the burial, Madeleine passed by Chestnut Hill to fetch the children. When she reached the Moulinettes, she found the family gathered there: two brothers-in-law of Michael, his uncle, several cousins and also his parents-in-law with Georgette, his sister-in-law, who had come too, brazenly.
All these people were discussing family affairs; when Madeleine entered, they fell silent, and the looks of some were hostile. So she left her mourning hood and went out into the garden with a troubled heart because, all at once, she had felt herself a stranger. She went to the barn and, passing to the lean-to of the hands, she began to arrange things so that Gideon could come to sleep in the master's room that evening.
As she came back, she saw that Georgette had seated herself on a bench by the doorway, with Jo on her lap. She was playing with him, teasing him, tossing him up and then cradling him in her arms.
Madeleine came up to them, smitten with jealousy. The little tot held out his arms to her, calling: "Nêne! Nêne!" But Georgette said pointedly:
"I'm your Nêne, darling. Kiss your Nêne! You must not call that girl 'Nêne!'"
In a flash Madeleine was upon her, bristling with anger; without a word she tore away the other woman's hands and, holding the baby close to her bosom, she went into the house.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The First Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon IX

Canon IX.
If any presbyters have been advanced without examination, or if upon examination they have made confession of crime, and men acting in violation of the canon have laid hands upon them, notwithstanding their confession, such the canon does not admit; for the Catholic Church requires that [only] which is blameless.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon IX.
Whoever are ordained without examination, shall be deposed if it be found out afterwards that they had been guilty.
Hefele.
The crimes in question are those which were a bar to the priesthood—such as blasphemy, bigamy, heresy, idolatry, magic, etc.—as the Arabic paraphrase of Joseph explains. It is clear that these faults are punishable in the bishop no less than in the priest, and that consequently our canon refers to the bishops as well as to the πρεσβύτεροι in the more restricted sense. These words of the Greek text, “In the case in which any one might be induced, in opposition to the canon, to ordain such persons,” allude to the ninth canon of the Synod of Neocæsarea. It was necessary to pass such ordinances; for even in the fifth century, as the twenty-second letter to Pope Innocent the First testifies, some held that as baptism effaces all former sins, so it takes away all the impedimenta ordinationis which are the results of those sins.
Balsamon.
Some say that as baptism makes the baptized person a new man, so ordination takes away the sins committed before ordination, which opinion does not seem to agree with the canons.
This canon occurs twice in the Corpus Juris Canonici. Decretum Pars I. Dist. xxiv. c. vij., and Dist. lxxxj., c. iv.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The First Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon X

Canon X.
If any who have lapsed have been ordained through the ignorance, or even with the previous knowledge of the ordainers, this shall not prejudice the canon of the Church; for when they are discovered they shall be deposed.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon X.
Whoso had lapsed are to be deposed whether those who ordained and promoted them did so conscious of their guilt or unknowing of it.
Hefele.
The tenth canon differs from the ninth, inasmuch as it concerns only the lapsi and their elevation, not only to the priesthood, but to any other ecclesiastical preferment as well, and requires their deposition. The punishment of a bishop who should consciously perform such an ordination is not mentioned; but it is incontestable that the lapsi could not be ordained, even after having performed penance; for, as the preceding canon states, the Church requires those who were faultless. It is to be observed that the word προχειρίζειν is evidently employed here in the sense of “ordain,” and is used without any distinction from χειρίζειν, whilst in the synodal letter of the Council of Nicæa on the subject of the Meletians, there is a distinction between these two words, and προχειρίζειν is used to signify eligere.
This canon is found in Corpus Juris Canonici. Decretum. Pars I. Dist. lxxxi. c.v.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The First Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon VII

Canon VII.
Since custom and ancient tradition have prevailed that the Bishop of Ælia [i.e., Jerusalem] should be honoured, let him, saving its due dignity to the Metropolis, have the next place of honour.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon VII.
Let the Bishop of Ælia be honoured, the rights of the Metropolis being preserved intact.
There would seem to be a singular fitness in the Holy City Jerusalem holding a very exalted position among the sees of Christendom, and it may appear astonishing that in the earliest times it was only a suffragan see to the great Church of Cæsarea.  It must be remembered, however, that only about seventy years after our Lord’s death the city of Jerusalem was entirely destroyed and ploughed as a field according to the prophet. As a holy city Jerusalem was a thing of the past for long years, and it is only in the beginning of the second century that we find a strong Christian Church growing up in the rapidly increasing city, called no longer Jerusalem, but Ælia Capitolina. Possibly by the end of the second century the idea of the holiness of the site began to lend dignity to the occupant of the see; at all events Eusebius tells us that “at a synod held on the subject of the Easter controversy in the time of Pope Victor, Theophilus of Cæsarea and Narcissus of Jerusalem were presidents.”
It was this feeling of reverence which induced the passing of this seventh canon. It is very hard to determine just what was the “precedence” granted to the Bishop of Ælia, nor is it clear which is the metropolis referred to in the last clause. Most writers, including Hefele, Balsamon, Aristenus and Beveridge consider it to be Cæsarea; while Zonaras thinks Jerusalem to be intended, a view recently adopted and defended by Fuchs; others again suppose it is Antioch that is referred to.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Eusebius: Hist. Eccl. Lib. v., c. 23.
* ↑ Fuchs:  Bib. der Kirchenversammlungen.  Bd. i., S. 399.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The First Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon XI

Canon XI.
Concerning those who have fallen without compulsion, without the spoiling of their property, without danger or the like, as happened during the tyranny of Licinius, the Synod declares that, though they have deserved no clemency, they shall be dealt with mercifully. As many as were communicants, if they heartily repent, shall pass three years among the hearers; for seven years they shall be prostrators; and for two years they shall communicate with the people in prayers, but without oblation.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XI.
As many as fell without necessity, even if therefore undeserving of indulgence, yet some indulgence shall be shown them and they shall be prostrators for twelve years.
On the expression “without oblation” (χωρις προσφορᾶς) see the notes to Ancyra, Canon V. where the matter is treated at some length.
Lambert.
The usual position of the hearers was just inside the church door. But Zonaras (and Balsamon agrees with him), in his comment on this canon, says, “they are ordered for three years to be hearers, or to stand without the church in the narthex.”
I have read “as many as were communicants” (οἱ πιστοὶ) thus following Dr. Routh. Vide his Opuscula. Caranza translates in his Summary of the Councils “if they were faithful” and seems to have read εἰ πιστοὶ, which is much simpler and makes better sense.
Zonaras.
The prostrators stood within the body of the church behind the ambo [i.e. the reading desk] and went out with the catechumens.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/The First Ecumenical Council/Canons/Canon III

Canon III.
The great Synod has stringently forbidden any bishop, presbyter, deacon, or any one of the clergy whatever, to have a subintroducta dwelling with him, except only a mother, or sister, or aunt, or such persons only as are beyond all suspicion.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon III.
No one shall have a woman in his house except his mother, and sister, and persons altogether beyond suspicion.
Justellus.
Who these mulieres subintroductæ were does not sufficiently appear…but they were neither wives nor concubines, but women of some third kind, which the clergy kept with them, not for the sake of offspring or lust, but from the desire, or certainly under the pretence, of piety.
Johnson.
For want of a proper English word to render it by, I translate “to retain any woman in their houses under pretence of her being a disciple to them.”
Van Espen.
Translates: And his sisters and aunts cannot remain unless they be free from all suspicion.
Fuchs in his Bibliothek der kirchenver sammlungen confesses that this canon shews that the practice of clerical celibacy had already spread widely. In connexion with this whole subject of the subintroductæ the text of St. Paul should be carefully considered. 1 Cor. ix. 5.
Hefele.
It is very certain that the canon of Nice forbids such spiritual unions, but the context shows moreover that the Fathers had not these particular cases in view alone; and the expression συνείσακτος should be understood of every woman who is introduced (συνείσακτος) into the house of a clergyman for the purpose of living there. If by the word συνείσακτος was only intended the wife in this spiritual marriage, the Council would not have said, any συνείσακτος, except his mother, etc.; for neither his mother nor his sister could have formed this spiritual union with the cleric. The injunction, then, does net merely forbid the συνείσακτος in the specific sense, but orders that “no woman must live in the house of a cleric, unless she be his mother,” etc.
This canon is found in the Corpus Juris Canonici, Gratian’s Decretum, Pars I., Distinc. XXXII., C. xvj.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/John Cassian/Conferences of John Cassian, Part II/Conference XVII/Chapter 23

Chapter XXIII.
The answer that obstinacy in this decision is unreasonable.
Joseph: There is no doubt that these are the decisions of those monasteries in which the infancy of your renunciation was, as you tell us, trained, as their leaders are accustomed to prefer their own will to their brother’s supper, and most obstinately stick to what they have once intended. But our Elders, to whose faith the signs of Apostolical powers have borne witness, and who have treated everything with judgment and discretion of spirit rather than with stiff obstinacy of mind, have laid down that those men who give in to the infirmities of others, receive much richer fruits than those who persist in their determinations, and have declared that it is a better deed to conceal abstinence, as was said, by this needful and humble lie, rather than to display it with a proud show of truth.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/John Cassian/Conferences of John Cassian, Part II/Conference XVII/Chapter 26

Chapter XXVI.
How saintly men cannot be hard and obstinate.
Nor must we emit the value of that command because even if we have bound ourselves by some oath under the influence of anger or some other passion, (a thing which ought never to be done by a monk) still the case for each side should be weighed by a thorough judgment of the mind, and the course on which we have determined should be compared to that which we are urged to adopt, and we should without hesitation adopt that which on the occurrence of sounder considerations is decided to be the best. For it is better to put our promise on one side than to undergo the loss of something good and more desirable. Finally we never remember that venerable and approved fathers were hard and unyielding in decisions of this sort, but as wax under the influence of heat, so they were modified by reason, and when sounder counsels prevailed, did not hesitate to give in to the better side. But those whom we have seen obstinately clinging to their determinations we have always set down as unreasonable and wanting in judgment.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/John Cassian/Conferences of John Cassian, Part II/Conference XVII/Chapter 3

Chapter III.
My ideas on this subject.
Then I replied: The counsel or rather the authority of the Elder to whom we ought to
refer our anxieties would make a short way out of our difficulties, and whatever is decided by his verdict, may, like a divine and heavenly reply, put an end to all our troubles. And we need not have any doubt of what is given to us by the Lord through the lips of this Elder, both for the sake of his merits and for our own faith. For by His gift believers have often obtained saving counsel from unworthy people, and unbelievers from saints, as the Lord grants this either on account of the merit of those who answer, or on account of the faith of those who ask advice. And so the holy Abbot Germanus caught eagerly at these words as if I had uttered them not of myself but at the prompting of the Lord, and when we had waited a little for the coming of the Elder and the approaching hour of the nocturnal service, after we had welcomed him with the usual greeting and finished reciting the right number of Psalms and prayers, we sat down again as usual on the same mats on which we had settled ourselves to sleep.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/John Cassian/Conferences of John Cassian, Part II/Conference XVII/Chapter 24

Chapter XXIV.
How Abbot Piamun chose to hide his abstinence.
Finally Abbot Piamun after twenty-five years did not hesitate to receive some grapes and wine offered to him by a certain brother, and at once preferred, against his rule, to taste what was brought him rather than to display his abstinence which was a secret from everybody. For if we would also bear in mind what we remember that our Elders always did, who used to conceal the marvels of their own good deeds, and their own acts, which they were obliged to bring forward in Conference for the instruction of the juniors, under cover of other persons, what else can we consider them but an open lie? And O that we too had anything worthy which we could bring forward for stirring up the faith of the juniors! Certainly we should have no scruples in following their fictions of that kind. For it is better under the colour of a figure like that to tell a lie than for the sake of maintaining that unreasonable truthfulness either hide in ill-advised silence what might be edifying to the hearers, or run into the display of an objectionable vanity by telling them truthfully in our own character. And the teacher of the Gentiles clearly teaches us the same lesson by his teaching, as he chose to bring forward the great revelations made to him, under the character of some one else, saying: “I know a man in Christ, whether in the body or out of the body I cannot tell, God knoweth, caught up even unto the third heaven: and I know such a man, that he was caught up into paradise and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for man to utter.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ On Piamun see the note on XVIII. i.
* ↑ 2 Cor. xii. 2–4.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/John Cassian/Conferences of John Cassian, Part II/Conference XVII/Chapter 29

Chapter XXIX.
How we ought to do those things which are to be kept secret.
You must also provide with the same care that if by chance some word has slipped out of your mouth which you want to be a secret, no injunction to secrecy may trouble the hearer. For it will be more likely to be unheeded if it is let pass carelessly and simply, because the brother, whoever he is, will not be tormented with such a temptation to divulge it, as he will take it as something trivial dropped in casual conversation, and as what is for this very reason of less account, because it was not committed to the hearer’s mind with a strict injunction to silence. For even if you bind his faith by exacting an oath from him, you need not doubt that it will very soon be divulged; for a fiercer assault of the devil’s power will be made upon him, both to annoy and betray you, and to make him break his oath as quickly as possible.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/John Cassian/Conferences of John Cassian, Part II/Conference XVII/Chapter 22

Chapter XXII.
An objection, that abstinence ought to be concealed, but that things that have been declined should not be received.
Germanus: In the former instance we think there can be no doubt that it is better for our abstinence to be hidden than for it to be displayed to the inquirers, and in cases of this sort we also admit that a lie is unavoidable. But in the second there is no need for us to tell a lie, first because we can refuse what is offered by the service of a brother in such a way as to bind ourselves in no bond of determination, and next because when we once refuse we can keep our opinion unchanged.