OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/Prolegomena/Character/Summary

§8. Summary.
With this as center of perspective, we have a picture of Constantine with lights and shadows, to be sure, but in the main true in its drawing and coloring. He was a man of rather more than medium height, strongly built, with broad shoulders, thick neck, and generally athletic and well-formed figure. His piercing eye, slightly aquiline nose, scanty reddish beard, and florid complexion, together with his bright expression, made a countenance striking and even handsome. Of great physical strength and vigor, he carried himself in a manly, self-possessed, dignified, and serene manner, uniting a dignity which might rise at times even to hauteur, or even incipient arrogance, with a general and customary affability. His dress, like his complexion, was somewhat florid. His mind was active, alert, intense without being somber, penetrating, sound, fairly cultivated, and well exercised in expression by pen or word. He was animated, habile, and attentive in conversation, self-possessed, steady, and calm in formal address. He was pre-eminently a man of energy, intense and resistless, with a determination to accomplish whatever he attempted, which rose under opposition to irresistible impetuosity, and wrought a courage which, in action, was absolutely fearless. His ambition was limitless, but not wholly or even mainly selfish.
With his energy and ambition were united the ballast of marked prudence, patience, perseverance, faithfulness to details, steadfastness, and supreme self-control. He was amiable and tactful, popular with his soldiers, and careful to please. Toward those who came into his power he showed habitual mildness and forbearance,—a mildness so great that he was generally blamed for it; and toward all he showed great kindness, justice, and a generosity which verged on the lavish. He was open to the charge of over-generosity, almost of prodigality, a good measure of real vanity, some over-insistence on his own will and thought as the final standard of right, and by no means free from mistakes or human weaknesses. He was a good son, husband, father, a remarkably successful general, a tolerable legislator, and a clear-sighted, firm-willed statesman. In his religious life he abounded in creed and confession—believing in the Trinity, the Divinity of Christ, the Atonement, the Resurrection, and Eternal Life, in Repentance and Faith, in love to God, and love to man. He preached his faith on all occasions; he practiced thanksgiving and prayer abundantly. He regarded everything that he had or was as from God. The editor’s brief judgment is that Constantine, for his time, made an astonishingly temperate, wise, and, on the whole, benevolent use of absolute power, and in morality, kindly qualities, and, at last, in real Christian character, greatly surpassed most nineteenth century politicians—standing to modern statesmen as Athanasius to modern theologians.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/Prolegomena/Life
## Contents

* Early Years
* The First Five Years of Reign
* State of Affairs in 311
* Second Five Years
* Third Five Years
* Fourth Five Years
* Fifth Five Years
* Sixth Five Years
* Last Years
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/Prolegomena/Life/Fifth Five Years

§7. Fifth Five Years.
The beginning of this period was the beginning of the series of acts which have taken most from the reputation of Constantine. Sometime in 326, perhaps while at Rome, he ordered the death of his son Crispus. The same year (Hieron. Chron.) the Cæsar Licinius, his sister’s son, was put to death (Eutrop. 10. 6; Hieron.; Prosper.), and shortly after his wife Fausta died or was put to death. But apart from this shadow, the period was hardly less brilliant, in its way, than preceding ones. It was a time of gigantic and, as some said, extravagant internal improvements. Among various enterprises was the refounding, in 327, of Drepanum, his mother’s city, as Helenopolis (Hieron. An. 2343; Chron. Pasch. p. 283(?); Socr. H. E. 1. 18; Soz. 2. 2; Theoph. p. 41), and greatest of all, the transformation of the insignificant Byzantium into the magnificent Constantinople, which was dedicated in 330 (Idatius; Chron. Pasch. p. 285; Hesych. §42; Hieron.; cf. Clinton). It was probably during this period, too, that the work of improvement in Jerusalem was undertaken, and Helena made her famous visit thither (Euseb. V. C. 3. 42; Soz. 21; Socr. 1. 17; Ephraem. p. 24: Theoph. 37–8, &c.).

## Footnotes

* ↑ Crispus was alive and in power March 1, 326, as appears from coins (cf. Eckhel, 8, p. 101–2). Whether he was put to death before the Vicennalia does not appear, but that he was is not probable. For death of Crispus and its date, compare Zos. 2. 29; Vict. Cæs.; Soz. 1. 5; Vict. Epit. p. 50; Chron. Pasch.; Eutrop. 10. 6, &c., and discussion under Character.
* ↑ The same year according to Greg. Tur. (1. 34). Cf. Eutrop. and Sidon. 327, and even 328, is the date given by some (cf. Clinton, v. 1, p. 382, and Wordsworth).
* ↑ Disputed, but generally allowed. On this series of deaths, compare the somewhat opposite views of Görres and Seeck in the articles mentioned under Literature for latest views.
* ↑ The date of the beginning of the work is curiously uncertain. Socrates (1. 6) puts it directly after the Council of Nicæa, and Philostorgius in 334, while there is almost equal variety among the modern historians. Burckhardt says Nov. 4, 326; De Broglie, 328 or 329; Wordsworth as early as 325. It is possible that the strangeness which he felt in visiting Rome in 326, and the hostility with which he was met there (Zos. 2. 29, 30), may have been a moving cause in the foundation of this “New Rome,” and that it was begun soon after his visit there. He first began to build his capital near the site of Ilium (Soz. 2. 3; Zos. 2. 30), but “led by the hand of God” (Soz.), he changed his plan to that city whose site he so much admired (Soz.).
* ↑ For accounts of the founding of Constantinople, see Soz. 2. 3; Philostorgius, 2. 9; Malalas, 13. 5; Glycas, p. 462–64; Cedrenus, p. 495–98; Theoph. 41–42. Compare Zosimus, 2. 30; Anon. Vales. p. 475–76; Socrates, 1. 16; Orosius, c. 28; Praxagoras, Zononas, Codinus, Nicephoras Callistus, &c.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/Prolegomena/Life/Last Years

§9. Last Years.
Later in this year, Constantine is known to have been at Jerusalem, where he dedicated a church (V. C. 4. 40; Chron. Pasch., but wrong year). It was also the year of the Synods of Tyre (Athanas. c. Ar. 1. p. 788; V. C. 4. 41; Theod. 1. 28). The same year, or early in the following one, Eusebius pronounced his tricennial oration (see Special Prolegomena). In 337 the Great Emperor died at Ancyrona, near Nicomedia, just as he was preparing for an expedition against the Persians, and was buried in the Church of the Apostles, at Constantinople (cf. notes on Eusebius’ Life of Constantine).

## Footnotes

* ↑ The events and dates of these later periods have to do mainly with theological matters,—the “religious” activity of Constantine, to which Eusebius devotes his attention so fully,—and are treated in the V. C.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants/Book II/Chapter 19

Chapter 19.—Zacharias and Elisabeth, Sinners.
Now what must we say of Zacharias and Elisabeth, who are often alleged against us in discussions on this question, except that there is clear evidence in the Scripture that Zacharias was a man of eminent righteousness among the chief priests, whose duty it was to offer up the sacrifices of the Old Testament? We also read, however, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, in a passage which I have already quoted in my previous book, that Christ was the only High Priest who had no need, as those who were called high priests, to offer daily a sacrifice for his own sins first, and then for the people. “For such a High Priest,” it says, “became us, righteous, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins.” Amongst the priests here referred to was Zacharias, amongst them was Phinehas, yea, Aaron himself, from whom this priesthood had its beginning, and whatever others there were who lived laudably and righteously in this priesthood; and yet all these were under the necessity, first of all, of offering sacrifice for their own sins,—Christ, of whose future coming they were a type, being the only one who, as an incontaminable priest, had no such necessity.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Luke i. 6–9.
* ↑ See above, Book i. c. 50.
* ↑ Heb. vii. 26, 27.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants/Book II/Chapter 2

Chapter 2 [II.]—Some Persons Attribute Too Much to the Freedom of Man’s Will; Ignorance and Infirmity.
A solution is extremely necessary of this question about a human life unassailed by any deception or preoccupation of sin, in consequence even of our daily prayers. For there are some persons who presume so much upon the free determination of the human will, as to suppose that it need not sin, and that we require no divine assistance,—attributing to our nature, once for all, this determination of free will. An inevitable consequence of this is, that we ought not to pray “not to enter into temptation,”—that is, not to be overcome of temptation, either when it deceives and surprises us in our ignorance, or when it presses and importunes us in our weakness. Now how hurtful, and how pernicious and contrary to our salvation in Christ, and how violently adverse to the religion itself in which we are instructed, and to the piety whereby we worship God, it cannot but be for us not to beseech the Lord for the attainment of such a benefit, but be rather led to think that petition of the Lord’s Prayer, “Lead us not into temptation,” a vain and useless insertion,—it is beyond my ability to express in words.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. vi. 13.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants/Book II/Chapter 26

Chapter 26 [XVII.] — (3) Why No One in This Life is Without Sin.
[3d.] Let us now consider the point which I mentioned as our third inquiry. Since by divine grace assisting the human will, man may possibly exist in this life without sin, why does he not? To this question I might very easily and truthfully answer: Because men are unwilling. But if I am asked why they are unwilling, we are drawn into a lengthy statement. And yet, without prejudice to a more careful examination, I may briefly say this much: Men are unwilling to do what is right, either because what is right is unknown to them, or because it is unpleasant to them. For we desire a thing more ardently in proportion to the certainty of our knowledge of its goodness, and the warmth of our delight in it. Ignorance, therefore, and infirmity are faults which impede the will from moving either for doing a good work, or for refraining from an evil one. But that what was hidden may come to light, and what was unpleasant may be made agreeable, is of the grace of God which helps the wills of men; and that they are not helped by it, has its cause likewise in themselves, not in God, whether they be predestinated to condemnation, on account of the iniquity of their pride, or whether they are to be judged and disciplined contrary to their very pride, if they are children of mercy. Accordingly Jeremiah, after saying, “I know, O Lord, that the way of man is not in himself, and that it belongeth not to any man to walk and direct his steps,” immediately adds, “Correct me, O Lord, but with judgment, and not in Thine anger;” as much as to say, I know that it is for my correction that I am too little assisted by Thee, for my footsteps to be perfectly directed: but yet do not in this so deal with me as Thou dost in Thine anger, when Thou dost determine to condemn the wicked; but as Thou dost in Thy judgment whereby Thou dost teach Thy children not to be proud. Whence in another passage it is said, “And Thy judgments shall help me.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ See above, chs. 7 and 8.
* ↑ See above, chs. 7 and 8.
* ↑ Jer. x. 23.
* ↑ Jer. x. 24.
* ↑ Ps. cxix. 175.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants/Book II/Chapter 27

Chapter 27.—The Divine Remedy for Pride.
You cannot therefore attribute to God the cause of any human fault. For of all human offences, the cause is pride. For the conviction and removal of this a great remedy comes from heaven. God in mercy humbles Himself, descends from above, and displays to man, lifted up by pride, pure and manifest grace in very manhood, which He took upon Himself out of vast love for those who partake of it. For, not even did even this One, so conjoined to the Word of God that by that conjunction he became at once the one Son of God and the same One the one Son of man, act by the antecedent merits of His own will. It behoved Him, without doubt, to be one; had there been two, or three, or more, if this could have been done, it would not have come from the pure and simple gift of God, but from man’s free will and choice. This, then, is especially commended to us; this, so far as I dare to think, is the divine lesson especially taught and learned in those treasures of wisdom and knowledge which are hidden in Christ. Every one of us, therefore, now knows, now does not know—now rejoices, now does not rejoice—to begin, continue, and complete our good work, in order that he may know that it is due not to his own will, but to the gift of God, that he either knows or rejoices; and thus he is cured of vanity which elated him, and knows how truly it is said not of this earth of ours, but spiritually, “The Lord will give kindness and sweet grace, and our land shall yield her fruit.” A good work, moreover, affords greater delight, in proportion as God is more and more loved as the highest unchangeable Good, and as the Author of all good things of every kind whatever. And that God may be loved, “His love is shed abroad in our hearts,” not by ourselves, but “by the Holy Ghost that is given unto us.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ See below, in ch. 33: also De Naturâ et Gratiâ, 29–32; and De Corrept. et Gratia, 10.
* ↑ [Augustin appears to say, in this obscure passage, that had there been two persons, instead of two natures only, in our blessed Lord’s person, then no doubt salvation would have been due partly to a human cause.—W.]
* ↑ Ps. lxxxv. 12.
* ↑ Rom. v. 5.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants/Book II/Chapter 21

Chapter 21 [XIV.]—All Righteous Men Sinners.
In like manner, all who are described in the Scriptures as exhibiting in their present life good will and the actions of righteousness, and all who have lived like them since, although lacking the same testimony of Scripture; or all who are even now so living, or shall hereafter so live: all these are great, they are all righteous, and they are all really worthy of praise,—yet they are by no means without sin: inasmuch as, on the authority of the same Scriptures which make us believe in their virtues, we believe also that in “God’s sight no man living is justified,” whence all ask that He will “not enter into judgment with His servants:” and that not only to all the faithful in general, but to each of them in particular, the Lord’s Prayer is necessary, which He delivered to His disciples.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Ps. cxliii. 2.
* ↑ Ps. cxliii. 2.
* ↑ Matt. vi. 12; Luke xi. 4.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants/Book II/Chapter 23

Chapter 23 [XXI.]—Why God Prescribes What He Knows Cannot Be Observed.
We must not deny that God commands that we ought to be so perfect in doing righteousness, as to have no sin at all. Now that cannot be sin, whatever it may be, unless God has enjoined that it shall not be. Why then, they ask, does He command what He knows no man living will perform? In this manner it may also be asked, Why He commanded the first human beings, who were only two, what He knew they would not obey? For it must not be pretended that He issued that command, that some of us might obey it, if they did not; for, that they should not partake of the fruit of the particular tree, God commanded them, and none besides. Because, as He knew what amount of righteousness they would fail to perform, so did He also know what righteous measures He meant Himself to adopt concerning them. In the same way, then, He orders all men to commit no sin, although He knows beforehand that no man will fulfil the command; in order that He may, in the case of all who impiously and condemnably despise His precepts, Himself do what is just in their condemnation; and, in the case of all who while obediently and piously pressing on in his precepts, though failing to observe to the utmost all things which He has enjoined, do yet forgive others as they wish to to be forgiven themselves, Himself do what is good in their cleansing. For how can forgiveness be bestowed by God’s mercy on the forgiving, when there is no sin? or how prohibition fail to be given by the justice of God, when there is sin?
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants/Book II/Chapter 25

Chapter 25.—God Punishes Both in Wrath and in Mercy.
Although there are some men who are so eminent in righteousness that God speaks to them out of His cloudy pillar, such as “Moses and Aaron among His priests, and Samuel among them that call upon His name,” the latter of whom is much praised for his piety and purity in the Scriptures of truth, from his earliest childhood, in which his mother, to accomplish her vow, placed him in God’s temple, and devoted him to the Lord as His servant;—yet even of such men it is written, “Thou, O God, wast propitious unto them, though Thou didst punish all their devices.” Now the children of wrath God punishes in anger; whereas it is in mercy that He punishes the children of grace; since “whom He loveth He correcteth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth.” However, there are no punishments, no correction, no scourge of God, but what are owing to sin, except in the case of Him who prepared His back for the smiter, in order that He might experience all things in our likeness without sin, in order that He might be the saintly Priest of saints, making intercession even for saints, who with no sacrifice of truth say each one even for himself, “Forgive us our trespasses, even as we also forgive them that trespass against us.” Wherefore even our opponents in this controversy, whilst they are chaste in their life, and commendable in character, and although they do not hesitate to do that which the Lord enjoined on the rich man, who inquired of Him about the attainment of eternal life, after he had told Him, in answer to His first question, that he had already fully kept every commandment in the law,—that “if he wished to be perfect, he must sell all that he had and give to the poor, and transfer his treasure to heaven;” yet they do not in any one instance venture to say that they are without sin. But this, as we believe, they refrain from saying, with deceitful intent; but if they are lying, in this very act they begin either to augment or commit sin.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Ps. xcix. 6.
* ↑ Ps. xcix. 8.
* ↑ Prov. iii. 12; Heb. xii. 6.
* ↑ Matt. vi. 12, 14; Luke xi. 4.
* ↑ Matt. xix. 12.
# On the Magnet/V-4

CHAP. IIII.
Concerning the length of a versorium convenient for declination on a terrella.
eclination being investigated on the earth itself by means of a declination instrument, we may use either a short or a very long versorium, if only the magnetick virtue of the stone that touches it is able to permeate through the whole of its middle and through all its length. For the greatest length of a versorium has no moment or perceptible proportion to the earth's semi-diameter. On a terrella, however, or in a plane near a meridian of a terrella, a short versorium is desirable, of the length, say, of a barleycorn; for longer ones (because they reach further) dip and turn toward the body of the terrella suddenly and irregularly in the first degrees of declination. For example, as soon as the long versorium is moved forward from the aequator A to C, it catches on the stone with its cusp (as if with a long extended wing), when the cusp reaches to the parts about B, which produce a greater rotation than at C. And the extremities of longer wires also and rods turn irregularly, just as iron wires and balls of iron and other orbicular loadstones are likewise turned about irregularly by a long non-orbicular loadstone. Just so magneticks or iron bodies on the surface of a terrella ought not to have too long an axis, but a very short one; so that they may make a declination on the terrella truly and naturally proportionate to that on the earth. A long versorium also close to a terrella with difficulty stands steady in a horizontal direction on a right sphere, and, beginning to waver, it dips immediately to one side, especially the end that was touched, or (if both were touched) the one which felt the stone last.
# On the Magnet/V-3

CHAP. III.
An indicatory instrument, showing by the virtue of a stone the degrees of declination from the horizon of each several latitude.
Description of the Instrument, and its use.
ake a terrella of the best strong loadstone, and homogeneous throughout, not weakened by decay or by a flaw in any parts; let it be of a fair size, so that its diameter is six or seven digits; and let it be made exactly spherical. Having found its poles according to the method already shown, mark them with an iron tool; then mark also the æquinoctial circle. Afterwards in a thick squared block of wood, one foot in size, make a hemispherical hollow, which shall hold half of the terrella, and such that exactly one half of the stone shall project above the face of the block. Divide the limb close to this cavity (a circle having been drawn round it for a meridian) into 4 quadrants, and each of these into 90 degrees. Let the terminus of the quadrants on the limb be near the centre of a quadrant described on the block, also divided into 90 degrees. At that centre let a short, slender versorium (its other end being rather sharp and elongated like a pointer) be placed in æquilibrio on a suitable pin. It is manifest that when the poles of the stone are at the starting points of the quadrants, then the versorium lies straight, as if in æquilibrio, over the terrella. But if you move the terrella, so that the pole on the left hand rises, then the versorium rises on the meridian in proportion to the latitude, and turns itself as a magnetick body; and on the quadrant described on the flat surface of the wood, the degree of its turning or of the declination is shown by the versorium. The rim of the cavity represents a meridional circle, to which corresponds some meridian circle of the terrella, since the poles on both sides are within the circumference of the rim itself. These things clearly always happen on the same plan on the earth itself when there is no variation; but when there is variation, either in the direction or in the declination (a disturbance, as it were, in the true turning, on account of causes to be explained later), then there is some difference. Let the quadrant be near the limb, or have its centre on the limb itself, and let the versorium be very short, so as not to touch the terrella, because with a versorium that is longer or more remote, there is some error; for it has a motion truly proportionate to the terrella only on the surface of the terrella. But if the quadrant, being far distant from the terrella, were moved within the orbe of virtue of the terrella toward the pole on some circle concentrick with the terrella, then the versorium would indicate the degrees of declination on the quadrant, in proportion to and symmetrically with that circle, not with the terrella.