OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Apology to the Emperor/Apologia Ad Constantium/Chapter 35

35. It was therefore better for me to hide myself, and to wait for this opportunity. Yes, I am sure that from your knowledge of the sacred Scriptures you will assent and approve of my conduct in this respect. For you will perceive that, now those who exasperated you against us have been silenced, your righteous clemency is apparent, and it is proved to all men that you never persecuted the Christians at all, but that it was they who made the Churches desolate, that they might sow the seeds of their own impiety everywhere; on account of which I also, had I not fled, should long ago have suffered from their treachery. For it is very evident that they who scrupled not to utter such calumnies against me, before the great Augustus, and who so violently assailed Bishops and Virgins, sought also to compass my death. But thanks be to the Lord who has given you the kingdom. All men are confirmed in their opinion of your goodness, and of their wickedness, from which I fled at the first, that I might now make this appeal unto you, and that you might find some one towards whom you may shew kindness. I beseech you, therefore, forasmuch as it written, ‘A soft answer turneth away wrath,’ and ‘righteous thoughts are acceptable unto the King;’ receive this my defence, and restore all the Bishops and the rest of the Clergy to their countries and their Churches; so that the wickedness of my accusers may be made manifest, and that you, both now and in the day of judgment, may have boldness to say to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the King of all, ‘“None of Thine have I lost,” but these are they who designed the ruin of all, while I was grieved for those who perished, and for the Virgins who were scourged, and for all other things that were committed against the Christians; and I brought back them that were banished, and restored them to their own Churches.’

## Footnotes

* ↑ Prov. xv. 1; xvi. 13. vid. §27, note 1.
* ↑ John xviii. 9.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Apology to the Emperor/Apologia Ad Constantium/Chapter 5

5. No possible time or place for the alleged offence.
Now what place and time does my accuser specify, at which I made use of these expressions according to his slanderous imputation? In whose presence was I so mad as to give utterance to the words which he has falsely charged me with speaking? Who is there ready to support the charge, and to testify to the fact? What his own eyes have seen that ought he to speak, as holy Scripture enjoins. But no; he will find no witnesses of that which never took place. But I take your Piety to witness, together with the Truth, that I lie not. I request you, for I know you to be a person of excellent memory, to call to mind the conversation I had with you, when you condescended to see me, first at Viminacium, a second time at Cæsarea in Cappadocia, and a third time at Antioch. Did I speak evil before you even of Eusebius and his fellows who had persecuted me? Did I cast imputations upon any of those that have done me wrong? If then I imputed nothing to any of those against whom I had a right to speak, how could I be so possessed with madness as to slander an Emperor before an Emperor, and to set a brother at variance with a brother? I beseech you, either cause me to appear before you that the thing may be proved, or else condemn these calumnies, and follow the example of David, who says, ‘Whoso privily slandereth his neighbour, him will I destroy.’ As much as in them lies, they have slain me; for ‘the mouth that belieth, slayeth the soul.’ But your long-suffering has prevailed against them, and given me confidence to defend myself, that they may suffer condemnation, as contentious and slanderous persons. Concerning your most religious brother, of blessed memory, this may suffice: for you will be able, according to the wisdom which God has given you, to gather much from the little I have said, and to recognise the fictitious charge.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Prov. xxv. 7, LXX.
* ↑ In Mœsia.
* ↑ [Prolegg. ch. ii. §5 fin., §6 (3).]
* ↑ Ps. ci. 5.
* ↑ Wisd. i. 11.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Apology to the Emperor/Apologia Ad Constantium/Chapter 6

6. The second charge, of corresponding with Magnentius.
With regard to the second calumny, that I have written letters to the tyrant (his name I am unwilling to pronounce), I beseech you investigate and try the matter, in whatever way you please, and by whomsoever you may approve of. The extravagance of the charge so confounds me, that I am in utter uncertainty how to act. Believe me, most religious Prince, many times did I weigh the matter in my mind, but was unable to believe that any one could be so mad as to utter such a falsehood. But when this charge was published abroad by the Arians, as well as the former, and they boasted that they had delivered to you a copy of the letter, I was the more amazed, and I used to pass sleepless nights contending against the charge, as if in the presence of my accusers; and suddenly breaking forth into a loud cry, I would immediately fall to my prayers, desiring with groans and tears that I might obtain a favourable hearing from you. And now that by the grace of the Lord, I have obtained such a hearing, I am again at a loss how I shall begin my defence; for as often as I make an attempt to speak, I am prevented by my horror at the deed. In the case of your departed brother, the slanderers had indeed a plausible pretence for what they alleged; because I had been admitted to see him, and he had condescended to write to your brotherly affection concerning me; and he had often sent for me to come to him, and had honoured me when I came. But for the traitor Magnentius, ‘the Lord is witness, and His Anointed is witness,’ I know him not, nor was ever acquainted with him. What correspondence then could there be between persons so entirely unacquainted with each other? What reason was there to induce me to write to such a man? How could I have commenced my letter, had I written to him? Could I have said, ‘You have done well to murder the man who honoured me, whose kindness I shall never forget?’ Or, ‘I approve of your conduct in destroying our Christian friends, and most faithful brethren?’ or, ‘I approve of your proceedings in butchering those who so kindly entertained me at Rome; for instance, your departed Aunt Eutropia, whose disposition answered to her name, that worthy man, Abuterius, the most faithful Spirantius, and many other excellent persons?’

## Footnotes

* ↑ [On Magnentius, see Prolegg. ch. ii. §7 sub. fin.; Gwatkin, Studies, p. 143 sq.]
* ↑ 1 Sam. xii. 5.
* ↑ Nepotian, the son of Eutropia, Constantine’s sister, had taken up arms against Magnentius, got possession of Rome, and enjoyed the title of Augustus for about a month. Magnentius put him to death, and his mother, and a number of his adherents, some of whom are here mentioned.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book VIII/Chapter 5

Chapter V.—John swayed the People by his Teachings. Concerning the Woman, a Follower of Macedonius, on account of whom the Bread was turned into a Stone.
John governed the church of Constantinople with exemplary prudence, and induced many of the pagans and of the heretics to unite themselves with him.
Crowds of people daily resorted to him; some for the purpose of being edified by listening to his discourses, and others with the intention of tempting him. He, however, pleased and attracted all classes, and led them to embrace the same religious sentiments as himself. As the people pressed around him, and could not get enough of his words, so that when they were pushed hither and yon, and were pressing one another, they incurred danger; and each one was forcing his way to go farther, so that by standing near, he might hear more accurately what John was saying, he placed himself in the midst of them upon the platform of the readers, and, having taken a seat, taught the multitude. It seems to me that this is a suitable place in my history for the insertion of the account of a miracle which was performed during the life of John. A certain man of the Macedonian heresy, lived with a wife of the same belief; he chanced to hear John discoursing concerning the opinion one ought to hold about the Divine nature; he was convinced by the argument he heard advanced, and strove to persuade his wife to embrace the same sentiments. Her previous habits of mind, and the conversation of other women of her acquaintance, deterred her from complying with his wishes; and, when he found that all his efforts to convince her were futile, he told her that, unless she would be of one mind with him on Divine subjects, she should not continue to live with him. The woman, therefore, promised to do as she was required; but, at the same time, she made known the matter to one of her servant maids, in whose fidelity she confided, and used her as an instrument in deceiving her husband. At the season of the celebration of the mysteries (the initiated will understand what I mean), this woman kept what was given to her and held down her head as if engaged in prayer. Her servant, who was standing behind her, placed in her hand a bit of bread which she had brought with her; but, as soon as she had placed it between her teeth, it was converted into stone. Since such a divine affair had happened to her, she was very fearful lest any further calamity should befall her, and ran to the bishop, and confessed on herself. She showed him the stone, which bore the marks of her teeth; it was composed of some unknown substance, and was marked by a very strange color. She implored forgiveness with tears, and continued ever after to hold the same religious tenets as her husband. If any person should consider this narrative incredible, he can inspect the stone in question; for it is still preserved in the treasury of the church of Constantinople.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Independent chapter.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book VIII/Chapter 8

Chapter VIII.—Antiphonal Hymns against the Arians introduced by John. The Interests of the Orthodox are much augmented by the Teachings of John, while the Wealthy are More and More Enraged.
The Arians, having been deprived of their churches in Constantinople during the reign of Theodosius, held their churches without the walls of the city.
They previously assembled by night in the public porticoes, and were divided into bands, so that they sang antiphonally, for they had composed certain refrains which reflected their own dogma, and at the break of day marched in procession, singing these hymns, to the places in which they held their churches. They proceeded in this manner on all solemn festivals, and on the first and last days of the week. The sentiments propounded in these odes were such as were likely to engender disputes. As, for instance, the following: “Where are those who say that the Three Persons constitute one Power?” Other similar acrimonious observations were interspersed throughout their compositions. John was fearful lest any of his own church people should be led astray by witnessing these exhibitions, and therefore commanded them to sing hymns in the same manner. The orthodox became more distinguished, and in a short time surpassed the opposing heretics in number and processions; for they had silver crosses and lighted wax tapers borne before them. The eunuch of the empress was appointed to regulate these processions, to pay the cost of whatever might be required, and to prepare hymns. Hence the Arians, impelled either by jealousy or revenge, attacked the members of the Catholic Church. Much bloodshed ensued on both sides. Briso (for this was the name of the imperial eunuch) was wounded on the forehead by a stone that was cast at him. The resentment of the emperor was kindled, and he put a stop to the Arian assemblies. Having commenced the custom of singing hymns in the manner and from the cause above stated, the members of the Catholic Church did not discontinue the practice, but have retained it to the present day. The institution of these processions and his services in the Church endeared John to the people; but he was hated by the clergy and the powerful on account of his free boldness, for he never failed to rebuke the clergy when he detected them in acts of injustice, nor to exhort the powerful to return to the practice of virtue when they abused their wealth, committed impiety, or yielded to voluptuousness.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Soc. vi. 8.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book VIII/Chapter 9

Chapter IX.—Serapion, the Archdeacon, and St. Olympias. Some of the Celebrated Men insolently bear down upon John, traducing him as Impracticable and Passionate.
The enmity of the clergy against John was greatly increased by Serapion, his archdeacon. He was an Egyptian, naturally prone to anger, and always ready to insult his opponents.
The feelings of hostility were further fostered by the counsel which Olympias received from John. Olympias was of most illustrious birth, and although she had become a widow while young, and was zealously attached to the exercises of monastic philosophy according to the laws of the church, yet Nectarius had ordained her as deaconess. John, perceiving that she bestowed her goods liberally on any one who asked her for them, and that she despised everything but the service of God, said to her: “I applaud your intentions; but would have you know that those who aspire to the perfection of virtue according to God, ought to distribute their wealth with economy. You, however, have been bestowing wealth on the wealthy, which is as useless as if you had cast it into the sea. Know you not that you have voluntarily, for the sake of God, devoted all your possessions to the relief of the poor. You ought, therefore, to regard your wealth as belonging to your Master, and to remember that you have to account for its distribution. If you will be persuaded by me, you will in future regulate your donations according to the wants of those who solicit relief. You will thus be enabled to extend the sphere of your benevolence, and your mercy and most zealous care will receive reward from God.”
John had several disputes with many of the monks, particularly with Isaac. He highly commended those who remained in quietude in the monasteries and practiced philosophy there; he protected them from all injustice and solicitiously supplied whatever necessities they might have. But the monks who went out of doors and made their appearance in cities, he reproached and regarded as insulting philosophy. For these causes, he incurred the hatred of the clergy, and of many of the monks, who called him a hard, passionate, morose, and arrogant man. They therefore attempted to bring his life into public disrepute, by stating confidently, as if it were the truth, that he would eat with no one, and that he refused every invitation to a meal that was offered him. I know of no pretext that could have given rise to this assertion, except that, as I have been assured by a man of undoubted veracity, John had, by rigorous asceticism, rendered himself liable to pain in the head and stomach, and was thus prevented from being present at some of the choicest symposia. Hence, however, originated the greatest accusation that was ever devised against him.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Soc. vi. 4, 11; Pallad. Dialog. Pallad. H. L. cxliv.; Epp. xvii. ad Olympiadem. Soz. has independent material concerning Olympias and Isaac.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book VIII/Chapter 28

Chapter XXVIII.—Effort of Innocent, Bishop of Rome, to recall John through a Council. Concerning those who were sent by him to make Trial of the Matter. The Death of John Chrysostom.
Innocent, bishop of Rome, was very anxious, as appears by his former letter, to procure the recall of John.
He sent five bishops and two presbyters of the Roman church, with the bishops who had been delegated as ambassadors to him from the East, to the emperors Honorius and Arcadius, to request the convocation of a council, and solicit them to name time and place. The enemies of John at Constantinople framed a charge as though these things were done to insult the Eastern emperor, and caused the ambassadors to be ignominiously dismissed as if they had invaded a foreign government. John was at the same time condemned by an imperial edict to a remoter place of banishment, and soldiers were sent to conduct him to Pityus; the soldiers were soon on hand, and effected the removal. It is said that during this journey, Basiliscus, the martyr, appeared to him at Comani, in Armenia, and apprised him of the day of his death. Being attacked with pain in the head, and being unable to bear the heat of the sun, he could not prosecute his journey, but closed his life in that town.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Pallad. Dialog. ibid.; Soc. vi. 21; Theodoret, H. E. v. 34. Soz. has new material. Cf. Chrys. Epp. in exil., vol. iii.
* ↑ PGM.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book VIII/Chapter 3

Chapter III.—Rapid Promotion of John to the Bishopric, and more Vehement Grappling with its Affairs. He re-establishes Discipline in the Churches everywhere. By sending an Embassy to Rome, he abolished the Hostility to Flavian.
As soon as John was raised to the episcopal dignity, he devoted his attention first to the reformation of the lives of his clergy;
he reproved and amended their ways and diet and every procedure of their manifold transactions. He also ejected some of the clergy from the Church. He was naturally disposed to reprehend the misconduct of others, and to antagonize righteously those who acted unjustly; and he gave way to these characteristics still more in the episcopate; for his nature, having attained power, led his tongue to reproof, and nerved his wrath more readily against the enemy. He did not confine his efforts to the reformation of his own church; but as a good and large-minded man, he sought to rectify abuses throughout the world. Immediately upon entering the episcopate, he strove to put an end to the dissension which had arisen concerning Paulinus, between the Western and Egyptian bishops and the bishops of the East; since on this account a general disunion was overpowering the churches in the whole empire. He requested the assistance of Theophilus in effecting the reconciliation of Flavian with the bishop of Rome.
Theophilus agreed to co-operate with him in the restoration of concord; and Acacius, bishop of Berea, and Isidore, whom Theophilus had proposed as a candidate for ordination instead of John, were sent on an embassy to Rome. They soon effected the object of their journey, and sailed back to Egypt. Acacius repaired to Syria, bearing conciliatory letters to the adherents of Flavian from the priests of Egypt and of the West. And the churches, after a long delay once more laid aside their discord, and took up communion with one another. The people at Antioch, who were called Eustathians, continued, indeed, for some time to hold separate assemblies, although they possessed no bishop. Evagrius, the successor of Paulinus, did not, as we have stated, long survive him; and I think reconciliation became easier for the bishops from there being no one to oppose. The laity, as is customary with the populace, gradually went over to those who assembled together under the guidance of Flavian; and thus, in course of time, they were more and more united.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Soc. vi. 4. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. v. 28; Pallad. Dialog. 5.
* ↑ Soc. vi. 3; Theodoret, H. E. v. 23.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book VIII/Chapter 7

Chapter VII.—Concerning Eutropius, Chief of the Eunuchs, and the Law enacted by him. On being turned from the Church, he was put to Death. Murmurs against John.
Eutropius was originally the chief of the eunuchs, and was the first and only person of that rank of whom we have known or heard who attained the consular and patrician dignity.
When he was raised to present power, he thought not of the future, nor of the instability of human affairs, but caused those who sought an asylum in churches to be thrust out. He treated Pentadia, the wife of Timasius, in this manner. Timasius was a general in the army, capable and much feared; but Eutropius procured an edict for his banishment to Pasis in Egypt, under the pretext that he aspired to tyranny. I have been informed that Timasius fell a victim to thirst, or dreading lest anything worse might be in store, he was caught in the sands there, and was found dead. Eutropius issued a law, enacting that no one should seek refuge in churches, and that those who had already fled thither should be driven out. He was, however, the first to transgress this law; for not long after its enactment, he offended the empress, and immediately left the palace, and fled to the Church as a suppliant. While he was lying beneath the table, John pronounced a discourse, in which he reprehended the pride of power, and directed the attention of the people to the instability of human greatness. The enemies of John hence took occasion to cast reproach on him, because he had rebuked instead of compassionating, one who was suffering under the calamities of adverse fortunes. Eutropius soon after paid the penalty of his impious plan, and was beheaded; and the law which he had enacted was effaced from the public inscriptions. The wrath of God having been thus promptly visited on the injustice that had been perpetrated against the Church, prosperity was restored to it, and there was an increase in the Divine worship. The people of Constantinople were more sedulous then than before, in attendance at the singing of the morning and evening hymns.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Independent chapter. Cf. Soc. vi. 5; Philost. xi. 4–6; Chrys. Homilia in Eutropium eunuchum patricium; homilia de capto Eutropio et de divitiarum vanitate; Claudianus in Eutropium, i. ii.; Eunap. Fragm. ii. 53–56; Fragm. iii. 16; Fragm. iv. 20–23; Fragm. v. 3; Zos. v. 3, 8–18.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Introduction
## Contents

* The Life
* Sozomen as Author
* Bibliography
* Conclusion
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Letters/Letters

B.—The Festal Letters, and Their Index,
Or Chronicon Athanasianum.

## Contents

* Introduction
* Index
* Festal Letters
* Personal Letters
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Letters

Letters of Athanasius,
with Two Ancient Chronicles of His Life.

## Contents

* Introduction
* The Historia Acephala
* Letters