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

LXV. To the General Zeno.
To be smitten by human ills is the common lot of all men; to endure them bravely and rise superior to their attack is no longer common. The former is of human nature; the latter depends upon resolution. It is on this account that we wonder how the philosophers resolved on the noblest course of life and conquered their calamities by wisdom. And philosophy is produced by our reason’s power, which rules our passions and is not led to and fro by them. Now one of human ills is grief, and it is this which we exhort your excellency to overcome, and it will not be difficult for you to rise victorious over this feeling, if you consider human nature, and take to heart the uselessness of sorrow. For what gain will it be to the departed that we should wail and lament? When, however, we reflect upon the common birth, the long years of intercourse, the splendid service in the field, and the far-famed achievements, let us reflect that he who was adorned by them was a man subject to the law of death; that moreover all things are ordained by God, who guides the affairs of men in accordance with His sacred knowledge of what will be for their good. Thus have I written so far as the limits of a letter would allow me, beseeching your eminence for all our sakes to preserve your health, which is wont to be maintained by cheerfulness and ruined by despondency. Wherefore in my care for the advantage of us all I have penned this letter.

## Footnotes

* ↑ cf. Ep. LXXI. Zeno was consul in 448. Nothing is known of his brother.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Letters/Letter 71

LXXI. To Zeno, General and Consul.
Your fortitude rouses universal admiration, tempered as it is by gentleness and meekness, and exhibited to your household in kindliness, to your foes in boldness. These qualities indicate an admirable general. In a soldier’s character the main ornament is bravery, but in a commander prudence takes precedence of bravery; after these come self-control and fairness, whereby a wealth of virtue is gathered. Such wealth is the reward of the soul which reaches after good, and with its eyes fixed on the sweetness of the fruit, deems the toil right pleasant. For to virtue’s athletes the God of all, like some great giver of games, has offered prizes, some in this life, and some in that life beyond which has no end. Those in this present life your excellency has already enjoyed, and you have achieved the highest honour. Be it also the lot of your greatness to obtain too those abiding and perpetual blessings, and to receive not only the consul’s robe, but also the garment that is indescribable and divine. Of all them that understand the greatness of that gift this is the common petition.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Zeno was Consul in 448. cf. Ep. LXV.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book I/Chapter 5

Chapter V.—Proof that God is one and not many.
We have, then, adequately demonstrated that there is a God, and that His essence is incomprehensible. But that God is one and not many is no matter of doubt to those who believe in the Holy Scriptures. For the Lord says in the beginning of the Law: I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt. Thou shalt have no other Gods before Me. And again He says, Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord. And in Isaiah the prophet we read, For I am the first God and I am the last, and beside Me there is no God. Before Me there was not any God, nor after Me will there be any God, and beside Me there is no God. And the Lord, too, in the holy gospels speaketh these words to His Father, And this is life eternal, that they may know Thee the only true God. But with those that do not believe in the Holy Scriptures we will reason thus.
The Deity is perfect, and without blemish in goodness, and wisdom, and power, without beginning, without end, everlasting, uncircumscribed, and in short, perfect in all things. Should we say, then, that there are many Gods, we must recognise difference among the many. For if there is no difference among them, they are one rather than many. But if there is difference among them, what becomes of the perfectness? For that which comes short of perfection, whether it be in goodness, or power, or wisdom, or time, or place, could not be God. But it is this very identity in all respects that shews that the Deity is one and not many.
Again, if there are many Gods, how can one maintain that God is uncircumscribed? For where the one would be, the other could not be.
Further, how could the world be governed by many and saved from dissolution and destruction, while strife is seen to rage between the rulers? For difference introduces strife. And if any one should say that each rules over a part, what of that which established this order and gave to each his particular realm? For this would the rather be God. Therefore, God is one, perfect, uncircumscribed, maker of the universe, and its preserver and governor, exceeding and preceding all perfection.
Moreover, it is a natural necessity that duality should originate in unity.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Various reading, but that He is one.
* ↑ Exod. xx. 2, 3.
* ↑ Deut. vi. 4.
* ↑ Isai. xliii. 10.
* ↑ St. John xvii. 3.
* ↑ See Thomas Aquin. I. quæst. 11, Art. 4; also cf. Book iv., c. 21 beneath. The question of the unity of the Deity is similarly dealt with by those of the Fathers who wrote against the Marcionites and the Manichæans, and by Athenagoras.
* ↑ Or, infinite; ἀπερίγραπτον.
* ↑ Infr. lib. iv. c. 21.
* ↑ Greg. Nyss., Prol. Catech.
* ↑ Greg. Naz., Orat. 35.
* ↑ Cf. Dionys., De div. nom., c. 5, 13.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book II
## Contents

* Chapter 1
* Chapter 2
* Chapter 3
* Chapter 4
* Chapter 5
* Chapter 6
* Chapter 7
* Chapter 8
* Chapter 9
* Chapter 10
* Chapter 11
* Chapter 12
* Chapter 13
* Chapter 14
* Chapter 15
* Chapter 16
* Chapter 17
* Chapter 18
* Chapter 19
* Chapter 20
* Chapter 21
* Chapter 22
* Chapter 23
* Chapter 24
* Chapter 25
* Chapter 26
* Chapter 27
* Chapter 28
* Chapter 29
* Chapter 30
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IX/John of Damascus/An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith/Book I/Chapter 6

Chapter VI.—Concerning the Word and the Son of God: a reasoned proof.
So then this one and only God is not Wordless. And possessing the Word, He will have it not as without a subsistence, nor as having had a beginning, nor as destined to cease to be. For there never was a time when God was not Word: but He ever possesses His own Word, begotten of Himself, not, as our word is, without a subsistence and dissolving into air, but having a subsistence in Him and life and perfection, not proceeding out of Himself but ever existing within Himself. For where could it be, if it were to go outside Him? For inasmuch as our nature is perishable and easily dissolved, our word is also without subsistence. But since God is everlasting and perfect, He will have His Word subsistent in Him, and everlasting and living, and possessed of all the attributes of the Begetter. For just as our word, proceeding as it does out of the mind, is neither wholly identical with the mind nor utterly diverse from it (for so far as it proceeds out of the mind it is different from it, while so far as it reveals the mind, it is no longer absolutely diverse from the mind, but being one in nature with the mind, it is yet to the subject diverse from it), so in the same manner also the Word of God in its independent subsistence is differentiated from Him from Whom it derives its subsistence: but inasmuch as it displays in itself the same attributes as are seen in God, it is of the same nature as God. For just as absolute perfection is contemplated in the Father, so also is it contemplated in the Word that is begotten of Him.

## Footnotes

* ↑ ἄλογον; without Word, or, without Reason.
* ↑ Greg. Nyss., Catech., c. 1.
* ↑ In R. 2427 is added, ‘Who is the Son.’
* ↑ διῄρηται, i.e. distinguished from the Father. Objection is taken to the use of such a verb as suggestive of division. It is often employed, however, by Greg. Naz. (e.g. Orat. 34) to express the distinction of persons. In many passages of Gregory and other Fathers the noun διαίρεσις is used to express the distinction of persons. In many passages of Gregory and other Fathers the noun διαίρεσις is used to express the distinction of one thing from another: and in this sense it is opposed both to the Sabellian confusion and the Arian division.
* ↑ Reading ὑπόστασιν. Various reading, ὕπαρξιν, existence.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/Introductory Essay

Introductory Essay on the Manichæan Heresy,
By Albert H. Newman, D.D., LL.D.

## Contents

* Literature
* Philosophical Basis, and Antecedents of Manichaeism
* The Manichaean System
* Relation of Manichaeism to Zoroastrianism
* The Relation of Manichaeism to the Old Babylonian Religion
* The Relation of Manichaeism to Buddhism
* The Relation of Manichaeism to Judaism
* The Relation of Manichaeism to Christianity
* Augustin and the Manichaeans
* Outline of Manichaean History
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/Concerning the Nature of Good/Chapter 8

Chapter 8.—From the Corruption and Destruction of Inferior Things is the Beauty of the Universe.
But the rest of things that are made of nothing, which are assuredly inferior to the rational soul, can be neither blessed nor miserable. But because in proportion to their fashion and appearance are things themselves good, nor could there be good things in a less or the least degree except from God, they are so ordered that the more infirm yield to the firmer, the weaker to the stronger, the more impotent to the more powerful; and so earthly things harmonize with celestial, as being subject to the things that are pre-eminent. But to things falling away, and succeeding, a certain temporal beauty in its kind belongs, so that neither those things that die, or cease to be what they were, degrade or disturb the fashion and appearance and order of the universal creation; as a speech well composed is assuredly beautiful, although in it syllables and all sounds rush past as it were in being born and in dying.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/Concerning the Nature of Good/Title Page

St. AUGUSTIN:
concerning the nature of good,
against the manichæans.
[de natura boni contra manichæos].
circa A.D. 495.
translated by
albert h. newman, d.d., ll.d.,
professor of church history and comparative religion, in toronto baptist (theological) college, toronto, canada.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/Concerning the Nature of Good/Chapter 7

Chapter 7.—The Corruption of Rational Spirits is on the One Hand Voluntary, on the Other Penal.
But to the most excellent creatures, that is, to rational spirits, God has offered this, that if they will not they cannot be corrupted; that is, if they should maintain obedience under the Lord their God, so should they adhere to his incorruptible beauty; but if they do not will to maintain obedience, since willingly they are corrupted in sins, unwillingly they shall be corrupted in punishment, since God is such a good that it is well for no one who deserts Him, and among the things made by God the rational nature is so great a good, that there is no good by which it may be blessed except God. Sinners, therefore, are ordained to punishment; which ordination is punishment for the reason that it is not conformable to their nature, but it is justice because it is conformable to their fault.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/Introductory Essay/Literature

Chapter I.—Literature.

## Contents

* Sources
* Modern Works
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/Concerning the Nature of Good/Chapter 6

Chapter 6.—Nature Which Cannot Be Corrupted is the Highest Good; That Which Can, is Some Good.
But if corruption take away all measure, all form, all order from corruptible things, no nature will remain. And consequently every nature which cannot be corrupted is the highest good, as is God. But every nature that can be corrupted is also itself some good; for corruption cannot injure it, except by taking away from or diminishing that which is good.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/Concerning the Nature of Good/Chapter 9

Chapter 9.—Punishment is Constituted for the Sinning Nature that It May Be Rightly Ordered.
What sort of punishment, and how great, is due to each fault, belongs to Divine judgment, not to human; which punishment assuredly when it is remitted in the case of the converted, there is great goodness on the part of God, and when it is deservedly inflicted, there is no injustice on the part of God; because nature is better ordered by justly smarting under punishment than by rejoicing with impunity in sin; which nature nevertheless, even thus having some measure, form, and order, in whatever extremity there is as yet some good, which things, if they were absolutely taken away, and utterly consumed, there will be accordingly no good, because no nature will remain.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/Concerning the Nature of Good/Preface

Concerning the Nature of Good,
Against the Manichæans.
[De Natura Boni Contra Manichæos.] c. a.d. 405.
In One Book.
Written after the year 404. It is put in the Retractations immediately after the De Actis cum Felice Manichæo, which was written about the end of the year 404. It is one of the most argumentative of the Anti-Manichæan treatises, and so one of the most abstruse and difficult. The lines of argument here pursued have already been employed in part in the earlier treatises. The most interesting portions of the contents of the treatise, and the most damaging to the Manichæans, are the long extracts from Mani’s Thesaurus, and his Fundamental Epistle.—A.H.N.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Manichaean Controversy/Concerning the Nature of Good/Chapter 5

Chapter 5.—The Corrupted Nature of a More Excellent Order Sometimes Better Than an Inferior Nature Even Uncorrupted.
But it may happen, that a certain nature which has been ranked as more excellent by reason of natural measure and form, though corrupt, is even yet better than another incorrupt which has been ranked lower by reason of an inferior natural measure and form: as in the estimation of men, according to the quality which presents itself to view, corrupt gold is assuredly better than incorrupt silver, and corrupt silver than incorrupt lead; so also in more powerful spiritual natures a rational spirit even corrupted through an evil will is better than an irrational though incorrupt, and better is any spirit whatever even corrupt than any body whatever though incorrupt. For better is a nature which, when it is present in a body, furnishes it with life, than that to which life is furnished. But however corrupt may be the spirit of life that has been made, it can furnish life to a body, and hence, though corrupt, it is better than the body though incorrupt.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume III/Doctrinal Treatises of St. Augustin/On the Holy Trinity/Book X/Chapter 2

Chapter 2.—No One at All Loves Things Unknown.
4. No studious person, then, no inquisitive person, loves things he does not know, even while he is urgent with the most vehement desire to know what he does not know. For he either knows already generically what he loves, and longs to know it also in some individual or individuals, which perhaps are praised, but not yet known to him; and he pictures in his mind an imaginary form by which he may be stirred to love. And whence does he picture this, except from those things which he has already known? And yet perhaps he will not love it, if he find that form which was praised to be unlike that other form which was figured and in thought most fully known to his mind. And if he has loved it, he will begin to love it from that time when he learned it; since a little before, that form which was loved was other than that which the mind that formed it had been wont to exhibit to itself. But if he shall find it similar to that form which report had proclaimed, and to be such that he could truly say I was already loving thee; yet certainly not even then did he love a form he did not know, since he had known it in that likeness. Or else we see somewhat in the species of the eternal reason, and therein love it; and when this is manifested in some image of a temporal thing, and we believe the praises of those who have made trial of it, and so love it, then we do not love anything unknown, according to that which we have already sufficiently discussed above. Or else, again, we love something known, and on account of it seek something unknown; and so it is by no means the love of the thing unknown that possesses us, but the love of the thing known, to which we know the unknown thing belongs, so that we know that too which we seek still as unknown; as a little before I said of an unknown word. Or else, again, every one loves the very knowing itself, as no one can fail to know who desires to know anything. For these reasons they seem to love things unknown who wish to know anything which they do not know, and who, on account of their vehement desire of inquiry, cannot be said to be without love. But how different the case really is, and that nothing at all can be loved which is not known, I think I must have persuaded every one who carefully looks upon truth. But since the examples which we have given belong to those who desire to know something which they themselves are not, we must take thought lest perchance some new notion appear, when the mind desires to know itself.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume III/Doctrinal Treatises of St. Augustin/On the Holy Trinity/Book X

Book X.
In which there is shown to be another trinity in the mind of man, and one that appears much more evidently, viz. in his memory, understanding, and will.

## Contents

* Chapter 1
* Chapter 2
* Chapter 3
* Chapter 4
* Chapter 5
* Chapter 6
* Chapter 7
* Chapter 8
* Chapter 9
* Chapter 10
* Chapter 11
* Chapter 12
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume III/Doctrinal Treatises of St. Augustin/On the Holy Trinity/Book X/Chapter 12

Chapter 12.—The Mind is an Image of the Trinity in Its Own Memory, and Understanding, and Will.
19. Are we, then, now to go upward, with whatever strength of purpose we may, to that chiefest and highest essence, of which the human mind is an inadequate image, yet an image? Or are these same three things to be yet more distinctly made plain in the soul, by means of those things which we receive from without, through the bodily sense, wherein the knowledge of corporeal things is impressed upon us in time? Since we found the mind itself to be such in its own memory, and understanding, and will, that since it was understood always to know and always to will itself, it was understood also at the same time always to remember itself, always to understand and love itself, although not always to think of itself as separate from those things which are not itself; and hence its memory of itself, and understanding of itself, are with difficult discerned in it. For in this case, where these two things are very closely conjoined, and one is not preceded by the other by any time at all, it looks as if they were not two things, but one called by two names; and love itself is not so plainly felt to exist when the sense of need does not disclose it, since what is loved is always at hand. And hence these things may be more lucidly set forth, even to men of duller minds, if such topics are treated of as are brought within reach of the mind in time, and happen to it in time; while it remembers what it did not remember before, and sees what it did not see before, and loves what it did not love before. But this discussion demands now another beginning, by reason of the measure of the present book.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Council of Sardica/Canons/Canon XIII

Canon XIII.
(Greek.)
Bishop Hosius said: Be this also the pleasure of all.  If any deacon or presbyter or any of the clergy be excommunicated and take refuge with another bishop who knows him and who is aware that he has been removed from communion by his own bishop, [that other bishop] must not offend against his brother bishop by admitting him to communion. And if any dare to do this, let him know that he must present himself before an assembly of bishops and give account.
All the bishops said: This decision will assure peace at all times and preserve the concord of all.
(Latin.)
Bishop Hosius said: Be this also the pleasure of all.  If a deacon or presbyter or any of the clergy be refused communion by his own bishop and go to another bishop, and he with whom he has taken refuge shall know that he has been repelled by his own bishop, then must he not grant him communion. But if he shall do so, let him know that he must give account before an assembly of bishops.
All said: This decision will preserve peace and maintain concord.
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XIII.
Whoso knowingly admits to communion one excommunicated by his own bishop is not without blame.
This is Canon XVI. of the Latin.
Van Espen.
The present canon agrees with Canon V. of Nice and with Canon IV. of Antioch, on which canons see the notes. The Synod’s approbation of this canon is found in Dionysius, Isidore, and in the Roman Codex apud Hervetus; but it is lacking from Balsamon and Zonaras.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Here begins the Greek text according to Bev., and ends at the asterisk.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XIV/Additional Canons 3/The Council of Sardica/Canons/Canon XIX

Canon XIX.
(Greek.)
Bishop Hosius said: This is the sentence of my mediocrity [i.e., unworthiness]—that, since we ought to be gentle and patient and to be constant in compassion towards all, those who were once advanced to clerical office in the Church by certain of our brethren, if they are not willing to return to the churches to which they were nominated [or, espoused], should for the future not be received, and that neither Eutychianus should continue to vindicate to himself the name of bishop, nor yet that Musæus be accounted a bishop; but that if they should seek for lay communion, it should not be denied them.
All said: Such is our pleasure.
(This canon is wanting in the Latin.)
Notes.
Ancient Epitome of Canons XVIII. and XIX.
A clergyman who does not live in the Church among whose clergy he is enrolled should not be received. Eutychian and Musæus shall not have the name of bishops. But let them be admitted to communion with the laity, if they wish.
Both of these canons are lacking in the Latin.
Hefele.
It is clear that the reason why these two canons do not exist in the Latin text is that they did not apply to the Latin Church and only contained a special rule for Thessalonica.