OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Ecclesiastical History/Book I/Chapter 25

Chapter XXV.—An account of the plot formed against the Holy Athanasius.
Alexander, that admirable bishop, who had successfully withstood the blasphemies of Arius, died five months after the council of Nicæa, and was succeeded in the episcopate of the church of Alexandria by Athanasius. Trained from his youth in sacred studies, Athanasius had attracted general admiration in each ecclesiastical office that he filled. He had, at the general council, so defended the doctrines of the apostles, that while he won the approbation of all the champions of the truth, its opponents learned to look on their antagonist as a personal foe and public enemy. He had attended the council as one of the retinue of Alexander, then a very young man, although he was the principal deacon.
When those who had denied the only-begotten Son of God heard that the helm of the Church of Alexandria had been entrusted to his hands knowing as they did by experience his zeal for the truth, they thought that his rule would prove the destruction of their authority. They, therefore, resorted to the following machinations against him. In order to avert suspicion, they bribed some of the adherents of Meletius, who, although deposed by the council of Nicæa, had persevered in exciting commotions in the Thebaid and in the adjacent part of Egypt, and persuaded them to go to the emperor, and to accuse Athanasius of levying a tax upon Egypt, and giving the gold collected to a certain man who was preparing to usurp the imperial power. The emperor being deceived by this story, Athanasius was brought to Constantinople. Upon his arrival he proved that the accusation was false, and had the charge given him by God restored to him. This is shown by a letter from the emperor to the Church of Alexandria of which I shall transcribe only the concluding paragraph.
A Portion of the Letter from the Emperor Constantine to the Alexandrians.
“Believe me, my brethren, the wicked men were unable to effect anything against your bishop. They surely could have had no other design than to waste our time, and to leave themselves no place for repentance in this life. Do you, therefore, help yourselves, and love that which wins your love; and exert all your power in the expulsion of those who wish to destroy your concord. Look unto God, and love one another. I joyfully welcomed Athanasius your bishop; and I have conversed with him as with one whom I know to be a man of God.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ “τοῦ χοροῦ τῶν διακόνων ἡγούμενος.” The youth of Athanasius indicates a variety in the qualifications for the archidiaconate, for he can hardly have been the senior deacon. Cf. Dict. Christian Ant., Art. ‘Archdeacon.’
* ↑ In order to provide στιχάρια or variegated vestments. Ath. Apol. cont. Ar. V. §60. The possibility of such charges indicates the importance of the Patriarchate.
* ↑ Philumenus. Ath. Ap. cont. Ar. V. §60.
* ↑ τὸ φίλτρον τὸ ὑμέτερον. Athanasius (Apol. cont. Ar. V. §62) quotes the phrase as ἡμέτερον, “our love.”
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Ecclesiastical History/Book I/Chapter 30

Chapter XXX.—Will of the blessed Emperor Constantine.
A year and a few months afterwards the emperor was taken ill at Nicomedia, a city of Bithynia, and, knowing the uncertainty of human life, he received the holy rite of baptism, which he had intended to have deferred until he could be baptized in the river Jordan.
He left as heirs of the imperial throne his three sons, Constantine, Constantius, and Constans, the youngest.
He ordered that the great Athanasius should return to Alexandria, and expressed this decision in the presence of Eusebius, who did all he could to dissuade him.

## Footnotes

* ↑ a.d. 337.
* ↑ At the hand of Eusebius of Nicomedia.
* ↑ Vide Pedigree, in the Prolegomena. Constantine II. received Gaul, Britain, Spain, and a part of Africa: Constantius the East, and Constans Illyricum, Italy, and the rest of Africa. In 340 Constans defeated his brother, who was slain near Aquileia, and became master of the West.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Ecclesiastical History/Book I/Chapter 26

Chapter XXVI.—Another plot against Athanasius.
The calumniators of Athanasius, however, did not desist from their attempts. On the contrary, they devised so bold a fiction against him, that it surpassed every invention of the ancient writers of the tragic or comic stage. They again bribed individuals of the same party, and brought them before the emperor, vociferously accusing that champion of virtue of many abominable crimes. The leaders of the party were Eusebius, Theognis, and Theodorus, bishop of Perinthus, a city now called Heraclea. After having accused Athanasius of crimes which they described as too shocking to be tolerated, or even listened to, they persuaded the emperor to convene a council at Cæsarea in Palestine, where Athanasius had many enemies, and to command that his cause should be there tried. The emperor, utterly ignorant of the plot that had been devised, was persuaded by them to give the required order.
But the holy Athanasius, well aware of the malevolence of those who were to try him, refused to appear at the council. This served as a pretext to those who opposed the truth to criminate him still further; and they accused him before the emperor of contumacy and arrogance. Nor were their hopes altogether frustrated; for the emperor, although exceedingly forbearing, became exasperated by their representations, and wrote to him in an angry manner, commanding him to repair to Tyre. Here the council was ordered to assemble, from the suspicion, as I think, that Athanasius had an apprehension of Cæsarea on account of its bishop. The emperor wrote also to the council in a style consistent with his devoted piety. His letter is as follows.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Perinthus, on the Propontis also known as Heraclea, and now Erekli, was once a flourishing town. Theodorus was deposed at Sardica. On his genuine writings, vide Jer. de Vir. Ill. c. 90, and on a Commentary on the Psalter, published in 1643, and attributed to him, vide Dict. Christ. Biog. iv. 934.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Ecclesiastical History/Book I/Chapter 29

Chapter XXIX.—Consecration of the Church of Jerusalem.—Banishment of St. Athanasius.
All the bishops who were present at the council of Tyre, with all others from every quarter, were commanded by the emperor to proceed to Ælia to consecrate the churches which he had there erected. The emperor despatched also a number of officials of the most kindly disposition, remarkable for piety and fidelity, whom he ordered to furnish abundant supplies of provisions, not only to the bishops and their followers, but to the vast multitudes who flocked from all parts to Jerusalem. The holy altar was decorated with imperial hangings and with golden vessels set with gems. When the splendid festival was concluded, each bishop returned to his own diocese. The emperor was highly gratified when informed of the splendour and magnificence of the function, and blessed the Author of all good for having thus granted his petition.
Athanasius having complained of his unjust condemnation, the emperor commanded the bishops against whom this complaint was directed to present themselves at court. Upon their arrival, they desisted from urging any of their former calumnies, because they knew how clearly they could be refuted; but they made it appear that Athanasius had threatened to prevent the exportation of corn. The emperor believed what they said, and banished him to a city of Gaul called Treves. This occurred in the thirtieth year of the emperor’s reign.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Ælia Capitolina, the name given to Jerusalem on its restoration by (Ælius) Hadrianus.
* ↑ Augusta Treverorum, Treveri, Trier, or Treves, on the Moselle, was now the official Capital of Gaul.
* ↑ i.e. a.d. 336.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Ecclesiastical History/Book I/Chapter 31

Chapter XXXI.—Apology for Constantine.
It ought not to excite astonishment that Constantine was so far deceived as to send so many great men into exile: for he believed the assertions of bishops of high fame and reputation, who skilfully concealed their malice. Those who are acquainted with the Sacred Scriptures know that the holy David, although he was a prophet, was deceived; and that too not by a priest, but by one who was a menial, a slave, and a rascal. I mean Ziba, who deluded the king by lies against Mephibosheth, and thus obtained his land. It is not to condemn the prophet that I thus speak; but that I may defend the emperor, by showing the weakness of human nature, and to teach that credit should not be given only to those who advance accusations, even though they may appear worthy of credit; but that the other party ought also to be heard, and that one ear should be left open to the accused.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Our Author is of the same opinion as Sir George Grove, as against Professor Blunt, on the character of Mephibosheth. Dict. Bib. ii. 326.
# Ninety-three/3.5.2

CHAPTER II.
FROM THE STONE DOOR TO THE IRON DOOR.
A whole army in despair over an impossible rescue; four thousand men unable to help three children; such was the situation.
They had no ladder; the ladder sent from Javené had not arrived; the conflagration increased like the opening of a crater; to try to put it out with water from the brook in the ravine, which was almost dry, was ridiculous; it would be like throwing a glass of water on a volcano.
Cimourdain, Guéchamp, and Radoub had gone down into the ravine; Gauvain had gone back into the hall in the second story of la Tourgue, where were the turning stone, the secret way of escape, and the iron door of the library. It was there that l'Imânus had lighted the sulphur match; it was there that the fire had started.
Gauvain had taken twenty sappers with him. The only resource was to break open the iron door. It was fatally closed.
They began by using axes. The axes broke. A sapper said,—
"Steel is like glass against this iron."
The door was made of double sheets of wrought iron, bolted together, each three fingers in thickness.
They took iron bars and tried to pry open the door. The iron bars broke.
"Like matches," said the sapper.
Gauvain, dubious, murmured,—
"Nothing but a cannon-ball could open this door. We should have to bring a cannon up here."
"But how?" said the sapper.
There was a moment of despair. All these powerless arms hung motionless. Dumb, conquered, dismayed, these men were considering the horrible immovable door.
​A red reflection passed underneath. The fire was increasing behind it.
The frightful corpse of l'Imânus was there, ominously victorious.
A few minutes more, perhaps, and everything would give way.
What was to be done? there was no more hope.
Gauvain in exasperation cried, with his eye fixed on the turning stone in the wall and on the exit left open by the fugitives,—
"And yet here is where the Marquis de Lantenac made his escape!"
"And where he returns," said a voice.
And a white head appeared in the stone framework of the secret door.
It was the marquis.
Gauvain had not seen him so near for many years. He drew back.
All who were there remained in the same position, petrified.
The marquis had a large key in his hand. He cast a haughty look at the sappers in front of him, walked to the iron door, bent under the arch and put the key into the key-hole. The lock grated, the door opened, a gulf of flame met their eyes, the marquis entered it.
He went into it with a firm step, holding his head high.
All followed him with their eyes, shuddering.
The marquis had taken but a few steps in the burning hall, when the floor, undermined by the fire and shaken by his footsteps, fell in behind him, leaving a precipice between him and the door. The marquis never turned his head but went straight on. He disappeared in the smoke.
Nothing more was seen of him.
Had he been able to go farther? Had a new pit of fire opened under him? Had he only succeeded in being lost himself? They could not tell. They had nothing before them but a wall of smoke and flames. The marquis was beyond it, dead or alive.
# Odes of Pindar (Myers)/Nemean Odes

THE NEMEAN ODES.
    Ode I.
    Ode II.
    Ode III.
    Ode IV.
    Ode V.
    Ode VI.
    Ode VII.
    Ode VIII.
    Ode IX.
    Ode X.
    Ode XI.
# Odes of Pindar (Myers)/Isthmian Odes

THE ISTHMIAN ODES.
    Ode I.
    Ode II.
    Ode III.
    Ode IV.
    Ode V.
    Ode VI.
    Ode VII.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Letters/Letter 85

LXXXV. To the Bishop Basil.
The chief good is said by the divine Paul to be love, and by love he ordered the nurslings of the faith to be fed. Of this love your piety possesses great wealth, and so has told me what was befitting and given me pleasant news. For to them that fear the Lord what can be pleasanter than the health and harmony of the doctrines of the truth? Be well assured, most godly sir, that we were much delighted to hear the intelligence of our common friend; and in proportion to our previous distress at hearing that he described the nature of flesh and of Godhead as one, and openly attributed the passion of salvation to the impassible Godhead, so were all rejoiced to read the letters of your holiness, and to learn that he maintains in their integrity the properties of the natures and denies both the change of God the Word into flesh, and the mutation of the flesh into the nature of Godhead, maintaining on the contrary that in the one Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, God the Word made man, the properties of either nature abide unconfounded. We praise the God of all for the harmony of divine faith. We have however written to either Cilicia, although our intelligence is imperfect, as to whether there are really any opponents of the truth, and have charged the godly bishops to search and examine if there are any who divide the one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons, and either to bring them to their senses by admonition, or cut them off from the roll of the brethren. For in fact we equally repudiate both those who dare to assert one nature of flesh and Godhead, and those who divide the one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons and strive to go beyond the definitions of the Apostles.
But let your holiness be well assured that we are disposed to peace. For if the prophet says, “With them that hate peace I was peaceful,” much more readily do we welcome the peace of God.
Some of those men who have been fed on lies have hurried to Alexandria and patched up calumnies against me, with the result that the godly bishop of that city, led away by their statements, although he had been fully informed by my letters, has sent a pious bishop to the imperial city. I beg you therefore to shew your accustomed kindness to him, and to confront falsehood with the truth.

## Footnotes

* ↑ There appears to be nothing in this letter or in Letter CII. also addressed to bishop Basil to identify the recipient. Basil bishop of Seleucia in Isauria was at the Latrocinium and at Chalcedon. Basil, bishop of Trajanopolis was also present at the same councils. Garnerius is in favour of the former, and notes the date as 448.
* ↑ 1 Cor. xiii. 13
* ↑ Vide note on p. 44.
* ↑ Ps. cxx. 6 and 7. lxx.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Letters/Letter 87

LXXXVII. To Domnus, Bishop of Apamea.
The law of brotherly love demanded that I should receive many letters from your godliness at this time. For the divine Apostle charges us to weep with them that weep and rejoice with them that do rejoice. I have not received a single one, although just lately I was visited by some of the pious monks of your monastery with the pious presbyter Elias. Nevertheless I have written, and I salute your holiness; and I make you acquainted with the fact that the consolation of the Master has stood me in stead of all other, for in truth not even had I as many mouths as I have hairs on my head, could I worthily praise Him for my being deemed worthy of suffering on account of my confession of Him, and for the apparent disgrace which I hold more august than any honour. And if I be banished to the uttermost parts of the earth all the more will I praise Him as being counted worthy of greater blessings. Nevertheless I hope your holiness will put up prayers for the quiet of the holy churches. It is because of the storm that is assailing them that I wail and groan and lament. That quiet, as I know, was driven away by the Osrhoene clergy, who poured out countless words against me, although I had no share in their condemnation, nor in the sentence passed upon them; on the contrary, as your holiness knows, I besought that the communion might be given to them at Easter. But slanderers find no difficulty in saying what they like. My consolation lies in the blessing of the Master who said, “Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for my sake; rejoice and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ Domnus of Apamea is to be distinguished from Domnus II, bishop of Antioch the recipient of Letters XXXI, CX, CXII and CLXXX. He was present at Chalcedon in 451. This letter may be placed in 448–9.
* ↑ Romans xii. 15. Observe the inversion.
* ↑ The action of the Osrhoene clergy here referred to is their accusation of Theodoret’s friend Ibas of Edessa. The “sentence” was that of excommunication delivered by Ibas. The leaders of the cabal against him were instigated by Uranius, bishop of Himeria, one of Ibas’s suffragans. cf. note on p. 291.
* ↑ Matt. v. 11, 12
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Letters/Letter 88

LXXXVIII. To Taurus the Patrician.
Slanderers have forced me to go beyond the bounds of moderation, and compel me to write to you who have adorned the highest offices, and obtained the most distinguished honours. I therefore implore you to pardon me, for I do not write in self sufficiency, but because I am thrust forward by necessity. It is not because I expect to fall unjustly into trouble and distress, for this is the common fate of all who have sincerely served God, but because I desire to persuade your excellency that those who accuse my opinions are producing false charges against me. From my mother’s breast I have been nurtured on apostolic teaching, and the creed laid down at Nicæa by the holy and blessed Fathers I have both learnt and teach. All who hold any other opinion I charge with impiety, and if any one persists in asserting that I teach the contrary, let him not bring a charge which I cannot defend, but convict me to my face. For this is agreeable to the laws alike of God and of man, but to whom is it so becoming to champion the wronged as to you, O friend of Christ, to whom boldness of utterance is given by the splendour of your lineage, the greatness of your rank and your foremost place in the law?

## Footnotes

* ↑ Garnerius dates Letters LXXXVIII–CIX in 447. They belong rather to 448–449.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Letters/Letter 91

XCI. To the Prefect Eutrechius.
I well know, and need no words to tell me, how your excellency regards me. Actions speak more clearly than words, but I have been anxious for you to know the cause of the accusation that is brought against me. For I am suffering under a most extraordinary charge, being at one and the same time attacked as unmarried, and as having been married twice. If my present calumniators assert that I am falsifying the apostolic doctrine, why in the world, instead of accusing me in my absence, do they not attempt to convict me face to face? This fact alone is enough to give utter refutation to their lies, for it is because they know that I have innumerable witnesses to the apostolic character of my doctrines that they have urged an undefended indictment against me. Lawful judges must on the contrary keep one ear unbiassed for the accused. If they give both to the pleadings of the opponents, and deliver a sentence acceptable to them, I shall put up with the injustice as bringing me nearer to the kingdom of heaven, and shall await that impartial tribunal, where there is neither prosecutor, nor counsel, nor witness, nor distinction in rank, but judgment of deeds and words and righteous retribution. “For,” it is said, “we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ that every one may receive the things done in his body according to that he hath done whether it be good or bad.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ vide p. 267.
* ↑ This appears to be merely a figurative description of the inconsistency of the charges, for there was no question of Theodoret’s being a “digamos.”
* ↑ 2 Cor. v. 10
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Letters/Letter 9

IX. To an Anonymous Correspondent.
Your piety is annoyed and distressed at the sentence passed on me unjustly and without a trial. I am comforted that you are so feeling. Had I been justly condemned I should have been sorry at having given my judges reasonable grounds for what they have done, but, as it is, my conscience is quite clear, and I feel joyful and exultant and look forward to the remission of other sins on account of this injustice. Naboth lives in men’s memories only because he suffered that unjust death. Only pray that we be not abandoned of God and let the enemy continue to do his worst. God’s good will is enough to make me very cheerful and if He is on my side I despise all my troubles as trifles.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Probably the condemnation referred to is the imperial Edict of March 449 relegating Theodoret to the limits of his own diocese. cf. Epp. 79. 80.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Theodoret/Letters/Letter 89

LXXXIX. To Florentius the Patrician.
In sending a letter to your greatness I am daring what is beyond me, but the cause of my daring is not self-confidence, but the slanders of my calumniators. I have thought it well worth while to instruct your righteous ears how openly the impugners of my opinions are calumniating me. I have been guilty, I own, of many errors, but up to now I have ever kept the faith of the apostles undefiled, and on this account alone I have cherished the hope that I shall meet with mercy on the day of the Lord’s appearing. On behalf of this faith I continue to contend against every kind of heresy; this faith I am ever giving to the nurslings of piety; by means of this faith I have metamorphosed countless wolves into sheep, and have brought them to the Saviour who is the Arch-shepherd of us all. So have I learnt not only from the apostles and prophets but also from the interpreters of their writings, Ignatius, Eustathius, Athanasius, Basil, Gregory, John, and the rest of the lights of the world; and before these from the holy Fathers in council at Nicæa, whose confession of the faith I preserve in its integrity, like an ancestral inheritance, styling corrupt and enemies of the truth all who dare to transgress its decrees. I invoke your greatness, now that you have heard from me in these terms, to shut the mouths of my calumniators. It is in my opinion wholly unreasonable to accept as true what is charged against men in their absence; rather is it lawful and right that those who wish to appear as prosecutors should accuse the defendants in their presence, and endeavour to convict them face to face. Under these conditions the judges will without difficulty be able to arrive at the truth.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Florentius, Præfect of the Imperial Guard, and already six times Præfect of the East, was present as a lay commissioner at the trial of Eutyches in 449 and at Chalcedon in 451.