 Chapter 10 Part 1 of the History of the Christian Church during the first six centuries. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. History of the Christian Church during the first six centuries by S. Cheatham. Chapter 10 Part 1 The fourth century, which gave to the church power and dignity, brought also a great accession of literary activity. In the Greek Church especially, the exposition of Scripture was steadily prosecuted and Christian eloquence largely developed. General culture still remained classical. If some of the Christian writers had their genius nursed in the solitude of the desert, many shared in the highest education of their time. The School of Athens still flourished. There were, to be found, philosophers who were ready to initiate disciples into the mysteries of Neoplatonism, Sophists who taught the dialectic art, Grammarians who expounded the great writers who were the glory of ancient Greece. There some of those who were afterward to adorn Greek theology studied under the guidance of the most illustrious teachers of paganism. But the general feeling towards the great pagans was in this age very different from that which had animated Clement of Alexandria and the early apologists. These sought in the ancient documents of heathendom for traces of the working of the ever-present word. The Christian writers of the second period, while many of them were fully conscious of the intellectual greatness and the perfect form of the Greek and Latin models, were yet torn with scruples if they gave to them an eager and admiring study. Jerome was filled with horror and remorse for the ardent study and admiration which he had given to Cicero. Augustine deplored the wine of error which was given to the young Christian to drink in the choice words of the ancient writers. Such men were conscious that a spirit which was not that of Christ underlay the beauty of the old world. But in spite of this feeling we are conscious that Christian literature shines with the evening glow of classical culture up to about the middle of the fifth century. The Council of Chalcedon seems to mark an epoch. The long dogmatic controversies, though they caused much writing, were not favorable to the quiet cultivation from which the best literature proceeds. As is natural, there is found a correspondence between the general culture of any period and its theology, for theology rises from the application of the intellect to revealed truth. Christian truth came into contact with philosophy both as a friend and as an enemy. In both characters it received an influence. And when Greek philosophy came to an end, all the vigor and originality of Christian theology came to an end with it. Men like Anastasius and Basil were found no more after the middle of the fifth century, and the barbarian invaders of the empire destroyed much of the old social life. In the end they produced the great literature of modern Europe, but at first the two tons were destructive rather than a creative force. Whatever the cause, about the middle of the fifth century a great change came over Christian literature. The vigorous intellectual life of an earlier period was lost in dullness or tawdryness. We see no longer the spirit of inquiry and philosophy, literature contents itself with bringing together an epitomizing old matter with a view rather to edification than to the extension of knowledge. So utterly did even a Roman of high rank come to despise the graces of style that Gregory the Great exalts, in the manner of a modern Puritan, that he had no need to trouble himself with the rules of Donatus, and he is very indignant with deciduous Avien for having ventured to lecture on some of the classical writers. The story told by John of Salisbury that he burned the ancient treasures of the Palatine Library is perhaps not worthy of belief. It was a highly significant sign that original literature and frank discussion had ceased when Pope Hormistus, if that was he, put forth a list of books which the faithful were not permitted to read. Most of these are, however, really heretical or falsely attributed to the persons whose name they bear. We find everywhere the two great principles of human nature in perpetual conflict. On the one hand, respect for authority, dread of change, desire to maintain the state of things in which man finds himself. On the other, more reliance on the powers which God has given to man, more hopefulness, more readiness to leave the things which are behind and to press forward to those which are before. To speak generally we may say that the Latin Church took the conservative side, the Greek that of free discussion and inquiry, but this description is by no means complete and exhaustive. The churches were separated by no impassable barrier, much respect for authority was found in the East and some free inquiry in the West. The great representative in the East of the freer tone in matters of dogma and exegesis was the School of Antioch. It owes its origin, no doubt, to the impulse given by origin to theology, but it ran an independent course. Instead of the originistic allegorizing of the Bible, in the School of Antioch the leading men insisted on the necessity of grammatical and historical exposition. Not that they rejected type and allegory, but that they insisted that all edifying exegesis must be founded on an accurate understanding of the words of Scripture in their literal and historical sense, which the allegorists, pure and simple altogether, disregarded. The authority of Christ himself and of his apostles encourages us to search for a deep and spiritual meaning under the ordinary words of Scripture, which however cannot be gained by any arbitrary allegorizing, but only by following out patiently the course of God's dealings with man. This was the principle of the Antiochenes. They looked to reason rather than to authority to explain and develop dogma taking their stand on Scripture. They were anxious that the human element in the Lord himself, in his word and in his church, should receive the consideration which it sometimes seemed in danger of losing. In this effort it is not to be denied that some of them took too little account of the divine element and failed to grasp the full significance of the work of Christ as incarnate savior and redeemer. The influence of this school was great in the East during the fourth and fifth centuries, and when it grew weak in its early home, the Antiochian Cassian planted an offshoot in Gaul. A very knowworthy figure in the School of Antioch is Eusebius, Bishop of Amesa, of whom Jerome wrote that his elegant and forcible style caused him to be much studied by those who wished to distinguish themselves in popular oratory. In the fragments which remain of his numerous works, Eusebius appears as a representative of those who thought that much of the theological dissension of his time arose from the morbid desire to know more than Scripture had revealed. Confess, he says, that which is written of the Father and the Son, and do not require that which is not written. If a dogma is not in Scripture, let it not be taught. If it is in Scripture, let it not be extinguished. His desire to avoid adding to Scripture propositions of man's device seems to have perplexed his contemporaries. For while Jerome describes him as a ringleader of the Arians, Socrates and Sozamen agree in saying that he was suspected of holding Sibelian opinions. Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, lived through the greater part of the eventful fourth century. Once suspected of heretical opinions, he was persecuted by the Aryan emperor Valens for his adherence to orthodoxy, and was among those who sat at the Council of Constantinople in 381. The catechetical lectures which he delivered while still a presbyter in Jerusalem, the first part of the series to those who were preparing for baptism, the latter part to the newly baptized, were a most valuable record both of the instruction which it was thought necessary to give to those who came to be baptized, and of the state of the liturgy of Jerusalem at the time when they were delivered. But the most flourishing period of the Antiochene school begins with Eusebius' pupil Diodorus, who in the year 378 was consecrated by Miledius to the sea of Tarsus. He wrote commentaries on many of the books of the Old Testament, giving his principal attention to the actual words of Scripture and disregarding allegory in his desire to reach the true historical sense of the text. He seems, however, to have fully recognized the divine element in the typical events of the sacred history. He was an energetic defender of the orthodox faith against the Aryans and taught John Chrysostom his principles of Scripture interpretation. John, sometimes called from his sea John of Constantinople, and afterwards from his splendid eloquence John of the Golden Mouth, Chrysostomus, was born about the year 347 at Antioch of distinguished family both on his father's and his mother's side. His father died while the son was yet a child, and the young widow, Anthusa, devoting herself to the education of her son, implanted in his infant mind the seeds of that earnest piety which he never lost. His early training under the pagan rhetorician Labanius, who regretted that the Christians had stolen his most promising pupil, in no way injured his faith in Christ. After he had for a short time practiced as an advocate with so much success that the highest offices seemed open to him, he withdrew from the turmoil of a worldly life and devoted himself to reading and meditating on Holy Scripture. Milledius, bishop of Antioch, seeing how highly gifted he was, instructed him in the great Christian verities, baptized him, and ordained him to the office of reader. When in the treblous year 370, Milledius and several of the neighboring bishops were deposed, it was hoped that John would be induced to fill one of the vacant seas. He, however, avoided the unquiet dignity which he induced his friend Basil to accept. A few years later, his mother being probably dead, he joined a community of monks in the neighborhood of Antioch, where he thought he had found a harbor of refuge from the rough waves of this troublesome world. Here, in company with men like-minded, such as Theodore, afterwards of Mapsuestia, he devoted himself to the ascetic life and the study of the Bible under the guidance of the learned Deodorus, afterwards Bishop of Tarsus, and Carterius, until about the year 380. To this period belonged his earliest writings. His health, having broken under the severity of his ascetic practices, he returned to Antioch, where Milledius, now restored to his sea, ordained him deacon, and his successor Flavian promoted him to the priesthood, giving him special permission to preach in the Cathedral Church. His reputation rose to the highest pitch when in the following year he preached a course of sermons to encourage the people of Antioch when they were dreading the Emperor's vengeance for a tumult in which his statues had been overthrown. For several years he continued to use his great influence in Antioch against sects and heresies, and against the pagan frivolity and luxury which were corrupting the Christian Church. In the year 397 this career came to an end. The Emperor Arcadius chose him, very much against his own wish, to be patriarch of Constantinople in succession to Nectarius, and he received consecration as bishop from Theophilus of Alexandria, who was afterwards to overthrow him. As in his high position he spared neither heresy nor corruption in high places, and endeavored strenuously to introduce a higher standard of life and work among the bishops and clergy, there were soon many powerful persons who desired the removal of this new John Baptist. These made common cause with the Empress Eudoxia, who had herself been greatly offended by the freedom of John's preaching against licentiousness of life. Theophilus of Alexandria, who had himself been summoned to Constantinople to answer before the patriarch and the council of his diocese to grave charges, was ready enough to prefer countercharges against John. A synod summoned at the oak, a suburb of Chelsedon, at which Theophilus, supported by the Empress, himself presided, deposed the good patriarch in his absence, for he steadily refused to acknowledge its authority. The Emperor Arcadius, requested by the synod and influenced by his wife at all costs to remove him from his sea, caused him in the dusk of a September evening to be conducted to the coast of Bithynia. Thereupon there arose in the city, where the people generally had been deeply impressed by the holiness and beneficence of their bishop, so fierce a tumult that the terrified Emperor ordered his recall. With the most enthusiastic expressions of joy, he was escorted back to the church from which he had been expelled. The hostility of the Empress, however, knew no remission, and the good bishop who reproved her, was again banished, first to Nicosia, then to Cacusus in the bleak district of the Taurus range. Even from this remote spot his influence was felt, and the Emperor ordered his removal to Piteus on the eastern shore of the Black Sea. He died, however, under brutal treatment on his journey thither. In this great teacher we see the most eager zeal for perfect simplicity and even rigor of life united with the most tender love for the souls of men. With all his championship of orthodoxy and belief, with all his devotion to monastic austerity, he still preached Christian love and beneficence as the most excellent gifts, and his practice corresponded to his preaching. But his great legacy to the church is found in the sermons and homilies in which he expounded a large part both of the Old and New Testament. In this exegetic work, uniting as he does simple and natural explanation of the text with earnest and eloquent application of it to the circumstances of his hearers, he is the flower of the great school of Antioch. Few nobler names are found in the church's role of saints than that of John Chrysostom. Perhaps the most remarkable product of the Antiochian school of scriptural interpretation was Theodore, a presbyter of Antioch who became Bishop of Mopswestia in Cilicia. He was a steady opponent of the allegorical method of interpreting scripture, and perhaps carried the historical and critical spirit to excess. He anticipated, in fact, several of the conclusions which have become more familiar to us in the present century. But throughout the history of the Israelites, he sees God's preparation of his people for better things to come. He finds types of the Savior, and he always acknowledges the reality of prophecy. Few men were in higher repute for earnest work and sanctity of life. Everywhere he was regarded as the herald of the truth and the teacher of the church. Even distant churches received instruction from him. We believe, as Theodore believed, long live the faith of Theodore, was a cry often heard in the churches of the East. Yet 125 years after his death, the Fifth General Council, under the influence of Justinian, condemned his works. It was perhaps the stir which followed this condemnation which caused some of his works to be translated into Latin and circulated in the West, where they had hitherto been almost unknown. To the Antiochian school belongs also Theodoreet, born in Antioch, from his cradle devoted to a life of religion, and visited frequently by pious monks. It is not wonderful that when he became a man he entered a monastery, from which he reluctantly withdrew on being chosen Bishop of Cyrus or Osiris in the Euphratesis, a widespread diocese containing many churches, and a bounding in heresies of various kinds which the good bishop endeavored to combat. In his interpretation of scripture he is a disciple of Theodore, but without the occasional extravagance of his master. For appreciation, terseness of expression and good sense, his commentaries on St. Paul are perhaps unsurpassed, but they have little claim to originality, and he who has read Chrysostom and Theodore of Mupswestia will find scarcely anything in Theodoreet which he has not seen before. He professes nothing more than to gather his stores from the Blessed Fathers. In controversy and in history he is as remarkable as in exegesis. He presents himself to us in his works and in the accounts of his contemporaries as a great and holy bishop, an accomplished man of letters, an acute and accurate scientific theologian, a sound and skillful controversialist, a church historian learned and generally impartial, an eloquent and persuasive preacher almost rivaling in his celebrity and his power over his hearers, his great fellow townsman John Chrysostom. He has a place of his own in the literature of the first centuries and a place in which he has no rival. We feel towards him as we can hardly feel towards any of his contemporaries in East or West. While in Western Syria the Greek language and Greek culture prevailed, in Eastern Syria the native tongue was the language of theology which there took oriental forms of thought and style. Here arose a divinity decked with florid poetical imagery exhorting men to a holy and ascetic life and often tinged with mysticism. It resembled the West Syrian school in favoring an exegesis which took account of the exact and literal sense of the words of Scripture, though in dogmatic prepossessions it came nearer to the later Alexandrian school. The principal seats of this school were Nassibius and Edessa. James, bishop of Nisbis, though Assyrian and living on the confines of the empire, took an eager interest in the dogmatic controversies of his time, defending the orthodox cause in many writings. His works have perished, but his influence lived in this pupil Ephraim, also Assyrian. This distinguished prophet of the Syrians was born probably at Nisbis, but when Nisbis fell into the hands of the Persians, removed to Edessa, near which city he lived an ascetic life and was greatly venerated by his countrymen. It was mainly Ephraim's influence which gave to the theological literature of the Syrians its peculiar form in which the dogma of the church is presented rather in the figurative style which is dear to the East than in the dialectics of the West. It is true especially of his homilies and treatises which were written in a poetical form attractive to those whom he addressed. This gives his compositions a certain elevation of style and occasionally rises them to the rank of true lyric poetry. He also commented on the Old Testament and on the Deotesseron of Tatian. All his works seem to have been written in Syriac, though they were soon translated into Greek. Beyond the bounds of the Roman Empire in the Kingdom of Persia seems to have existed in the fourth century a Christianity almost untouched by the dogmatic storms which agitated the Greek Church, of which the most remarkable representative is the Persian sage Afrahat, Afrates, who was bishop of Mar Matae near Mosul. His homilies or tracts show that he was influenced by the Jewish methods of exposition, though he blames the Jews for their legalism, their national exclusiveness and their refusal to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah. He appears to have made use of Tatian's Deotesseron and to have been to some extent influenced by his views. In his confession of faith he seems to have derived nothing from the current formularies of his time but to have drawn his views of our Lord's Divinity direct from Scripture itself. A conspicuous leader of the West Syrian party was Ibis, bishop of Edessa, where he had previously taught theology and where he had great influence. He was an ardent admirer of Theodore of Mopswestia, whose works he translated into Syriac and constantly recommended. As was natural he did not escape the suspicion of heresy which fell upon Theodore, and his posthumous fame is in fact do quite as much to the controversy which arose about him as to his own merits, for there is nothing to indicate that he was a man of original genius. Procopius of Gaza heads a long series of those useful commentators who are simply compilers, putting together the thoughts of those who have gone before them without venturing on originality. He wrote in a neat and concise style commentaries on most of the books of the Old Testament. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. History of the Christian Church during the first six centuries by S. Chidum, Chapter 10 Theology and Theologians, Part 2. A notable offshoot of the Syrian school was Junilius, an African who held high office in the Imperial Palace at Constantinople. He, at the urgent request of Primacius of Adromatum, who visited Constantinople in consequence of some of the disputes of the sixth century, wrote a book which, under the title of Iristituta Regularia Divina Sleges, is in fact an introduction to Holy Scripture founded on one by Paul, a Persian trained at Nisbis. We have in this work a reflection of the views of Theodore of Mufswestia as to the relative value of the books of the Holy Scripture. Primacius himself also published comments on St. Paul's Epistles and on the Apocalypse drawn from the works of earlier expositors. The old characteristics of Alexandria, the Alexandria of Clementine origin, were the eager pursuit of learning, the application of pagan culture and philosophy to the discussion of the Christian faith, and the allegorical interpretation of Scripture, and these characteristics were still found in many of the prominent Alexandrians of a subsequent period. This school of thought, however, gradually died out in the course of the fourth century and was succeeded by a race of theologians who attached very much more importance to tradition and the authority of the church. These were opposed to their brethren at Antioch in that they tended to dwell on the divine rather than the human nature of the incarnate word. Eusebius of Caesarea may be said to represent the older school, Athanasius the transition, while Cyril is the most conspicuous example of the new. In the fourth century, the man who, though not an Alexandrian by birth, best represents the learning, the breadth, the general culture of the Alexandrian school, is certainly Eusebius of Caesarea. At Caesarea in Palestine he passed his youth, there he listened to the exposition of Dorotheus, there he reveled with the delight of a bookworm in the splendid library of the rich presbyter Panthleus. So conscious was he of his obligations to this munificent friend that he chose to be distinguished as Panthleus's Eusebius. What he was Panthleus had made him. He saw in the persecution under Diocletian the churches leveled with the ground, the holy books committed to the flames, the clergy hunted hither and tither, mid the jeers and insults of the mob. Panthleus himself died a martyr's death. Eusebius in later times was accused of having escaped death by sacrificing. There seems, however, to be no evidence of this, and in the fierce disputes of the fourth century any testimony which existed would certainly have been produced. It was probably not long after the restoration of peace to the church that Eusebius was chosen Bishop of Caesarea, and in that office, though an effort was made to translate him to a more important sea, he died. At the Council of Nicaea he played a prominent part. His learning and ability no doubt entitled him to distinction, but the position which he held was probably due rather to his intimacy with the emperor than to his own excellent qualities. He was the clerk of the imperial closet. He was the interpreter, the chaplain, the confessor of Constantine. Nor do these cordial relations with his imperial friend appear to have suffered any interruption. He had, in fact, that union of pliancy and ability which fitted him to become the confidant of a great man who on some points needed informing and guiding. Eusebius's relations with the emperor and the church must have brought upon him very onerous and anxious duties, yet he found time for much study and incessant literary productiveness. He wrote history. He defended Christianity against Jews and Gentiles. He discussed dogma. He interpreted scripture. He delivered orations. And he had a large correspondence. In fact, he must have been one of the most unwearyed workers that the world has seen. He is best known by his ecclesiastical history which shows an extraordinary amount of reading and the general sincerity and good faith of which can scarcely be doubted. In spite of defects which are patent to a later time, he had probably in his own age no superior in the critical faculty any more than in multifarious learning and in knowledge of mankind. No ancient writer is so absolutely indispensable to the student. In the ecclesiastical history, in the chronicle and in the preparation, he has preserved for us a vast amount of early literature in three several spheres which would otherwise have been irretrievably lost. He had the instinct of genius for choosing themes which were of permanent and not merely temporary interest. Standing as he did between the old world of paganism and the new world of Christianity, he saw the greatness of the crisis. He seized the opportunity. He and he only preserved the past in all its phases, in history, in doctrine, in criticism, even in topography, for the instruction of the future. This is his real title to greatness. Writing while paganism was still a living force, he gave much of his thought and toil to the vindication of Christianity. Not only in his directly apologetic works, but everywhere, his mind turns to the defense of the faith. A true Alexandrian, he sought out the elements of truth in pre-existing philosophical systems or popular religions, and thus obtaining a foothold, he worked onward in his assault on paganism. It was the only method which could achieve success. His works were after his death fiercely attacked and defended, but probably the words of Pope Pelagius II, Holy Church wayeth the hearts of her faithful ones with kindness rather than their words with rigor, expressed the general sentiment of the learned in the church towards one of the ableist of her sons. At an early date he was numbered among the saints, and May 30 assigned to his commemoration. But the most impressive figure among the Alexandrias is no doubt Athanasius. This great man was born in Alexandria of Christian parents towards the end of the third century. Even as a child sportively imitating the ceremonies of the church, he attracted the notice of the bishop of that city, Alexander, who received him into his own house and caused him to receive the best education of his time. His theological studies led him to ponder especially on the great mystery of the relation of the father to the son into mankind. Drawn afterwards by the spirit of asceticism into the wilderness, he passed some time in retirement with the famous hermit, St. Anthony, and never ceased to admire and recommend the ascetic life. On his return to his native city, Bishop Alexander ordained him deacon and adopted him as a confidential advisor and secretary. In his earliest writings he entered the lists as the champion of Christianity against the assaults of educated paganism, but the publication in 320 of the specious errors of Arius made the contents against Arianism in defense of a true deity of the son, the work of his life. In this no pressure of theologians of a broader school, no frowns of high-placed tyranny, no suffering or banishment could bend his intrepid spirit. In 328 he was chosen on the death of his friend Alexander to be bishop of Alexandria, and in that sea, after attempts at deposition by the imperial power and repeated banishment, he died. No columny was able to shake the affection which his flock bore him. Whenever he was able to return, the city rejoiced. When he died, Arianism was, mainly in consequence of his efforts, drawing near extinction. He had sometimes stood almost alone against the world, but in the end he triumphed. In spite of his wandering and persecuted life he left behind numerous works of the highest value. He introduced into the defense of Christianity against unbelievers a more systematic method than that of the earlier apologists, showing from the principles of reason which all acknowledged both the truth of the revelation of God in the word and the absurdity of the pagan objections to it. He treated in dogmatic and controversial treatises of the great doctrines of the incarnation and the Holy Trinity. He made valuable contributions to the history of his own time. He interpreted scripture. He exhorted men to holiness of life. And in all his writings he appears as a true Alexandrian, a disciple of Clement in origin. It is the constant presence of the creative word in the world that he has made which gives it its law and its harmony. And where the word is, there is also the Father. We are not to regard the universe as something apart and aloof from God, but as maintained by a constant exertion of the divine power. God never leaves man, his last great work, even when fallen from his first estate. Man too is renewed by the word. Few men have combined in the same degree as Anastasias the active and the contemplative faculties. Capable as he was of regarding fixedly the highest mysteries of the Godhead, he showed great skill and dexterity in the practical conduct of affairs. He knew how to avoid snares and to seize opportunities. If the perversity of those who attempted by sophistry to draw aside the faithful from the right way sometimes provoked him to be immense of expression, with fair and reasonable opponents he was calm and charitable. Of all the Greek Fathers he is the least diffuse, the most simple and consequently the most forcible. He writes as one too much in earnest to be anxious about expression. It was not without reason that his contemporaries regarded him as the model bishop, the standard of orthodoxy, the trumpet that gave no uncertain sound, and this reputation lives even to this day. The man who perhaps best maintained in Alexandria itself the method of origin was Didymus, who, though blind from his childhood, made himself acquainted with all the science accessible to him and acquired a wonderful knowledge of Holy Scripture. Appointed by Athanasius to take charge of the catechetical school, he was the last teacher who maintained something of its ancient fame and taught such men as Daronne and Rufanus. After his death about 395 it sank into obscurity. Of his numerous exegetical works, once in high repute, only a small portion remains, but some of his other works are preserved either in the original or in a Latin version. The earnest worker, seeking knowledge without the aid of sight and clinging to the best traditions of his school even when they had fallen under suspicion, is a venerable and pathetic figure. The two writers who bear the name of Apollinarius are so intimately connected that, in their purely literary labors, it is hardly possible to separate them. The elder was born at Alexandria, but is found about the year 335 at Laodicea, where he was a presbyter. Here he married and had a son of the same name, afterwards Bishop of Laodicea. Both father and son were on intimate terms with the heathen rhetoricians Labanius and Epiphanius of Petra, whose lectures they attended and from whom they no doubt derived some culture. When Julian interdicted the reading of pagan authors in Christian schools, an attempt was made to produce a Christian literature which might take their place. The father and son working together turned the early portion of the biblical story into a Homeric poem in 24 books and produced lyrics, tragedies and comedies after the manner of Pindar, Euripides and Menander. Even the writings of the New Testament were brought into the form of Platonic dialogues. The Psalms turned into Greek hexameters by this unwirried pair. It cannot, however, be said that those productions of this kind which remain to us show any poetical genius or were ever likely to supersede the writers whom they imitated or plagiarized. They were only produced to supply a special want, and when the occasion for them passed away they ceased to be read. It was the younger Apollonaris, who in the latter part of the fourth century propounded the peculiar opinions by which his name came to be too well known. One of the most learned men of the fourth century was Epiphanius, who, born of Hebrew parents in Palestine about the year 315, early devoted himself to the ascetic life and founded, while still a young man, a monastery near Eleutheropolis in his native country. In middle life he was called to the Episcopal Sea of Salamis, the modern Constantia, in Cyprus, and was conspicuous from that time forth as an ardent promoter of monasticism and a leading opponent of the more philosophical treatment of the Christian faith which originated, he believed, with origin. It is therefore not surprising that he plunged eagerly into the originistic controversy in which he displayed more learning than judgment. He died in the year 403, leaving behind him several writings of which by far the most important is the Panarian, a treatise against the heresies which is of the highest value to the historian of the church. The writer is indeed credulous and uncritical, but he has preserved many fragments of lost works and many traditions which would otherwise have perished. His hot temper frequently led him astray, but he was all his life a faithful defender of the Orthodox belief. His own age regarded him as a saint. Next to Athanasius in importance among Greek theologians are no doubt the great Cappadocians, Basil with his friend Gregory of Naziansus and his brother Gregory of Nisa. Basil was born about the year 330 at Caesarea in Cappadocia. His father of the same name was a Christian, a man of considerable wealth and a much respected citizen. His mother Emilia was the daughter of a martyr so that the future bishop was brought up in a family where the memory of the early struggles of the church was still lively and where his youthful imagination would be stimulated by hearing of the constancy of those who gave their lives for the faith. The results show how deep an impression was made upon the children. Basil was educated first in Caesarea, then in Constantinople, perhaps under Labanius and finally in Athens where the literary culture was as yet but slightly tinged with Christianity under the famous Sophist Humerius and others. Here a common devotion to the studies of the place and to the faith of Christ drew him into still closer friendship with Gregory afterwards known as Naziansen whom he already knew as a fellow countryman. Here the two young men saw the future emperor Julian already perhaps pondering on the restoration of the paganism which he loved. On Basil's return home he was seized with a passion for the monastic life to which he was to give so powerful an impulse and declined the opportunities for worldly advancement which his position, his ability and his education offered him. After a period of retirement he began to work of the ministry as a reader in the church of his native Caesarea. Hitherto he had taken no part in the dogmatic contests which were waved around him. Now he came in contact with the Homo-Yossian party but soon threw in his lot with those who maintained the formula of Nicaea and became one of their chief leaders in the later conflicts which led to the council of Constantinople and the extinction of Arianism. In the year 370 he was chosen bishop of Caesarea where nine years later he died having done a great work in a life which did not pass its 50th year. His theology was mainly founded on the study of origin from whose works he made with the help of his friend Gregory a series of characteristic extracts still preserved under the title of Philokalia. The influence of origin is manifest in Basil's famous work on the six days of creation the Hexameron though the tendency to allegory appears here in a less extravagant form than in origin. But however Basil may have leaned towards its theology and exegesis of origin he was in all the essential points of Christian doctrine truly Athanasian. No one saw more clearly the real nature of the points in dispute between the Aryans and their opponents as appears in his books against Eunomius and on the Holy Spirit. His letters too which have a pleasant classical tinge are of the highest interest. Saint Basil was, as we shall presently see, an ardent promoter of monasticism but he had none of the littleness which sometimes clings to an ascetic. No one among the fathers gives a stronger impression of largeness and fairness of mind so that he might seem to have been divinely sent to heal the wounds of an age of controversy. His blameless life, his beneficence, his weight of character, his learning and clearness of thought all contributed to this end. It was not without reason that after ages called him the Great. With Basil is naturally coupled his lifelong friend Gregory Nazianzen whose father, also named Gregory, after belonging in early life to the theistic sect called Hipsis Tarei had been brought into the church by the influence of his devout wife Nanna and in the end became Bishop of Nazianzas. His son, after his years of study in Athens, for a while shared Basil's monastic retirement. When he returned to the world he was ordained, not without reluctance, to the priesthood by his father and a few years later was sent by Basil as Bishop to a little town called Sesima. There he found himself out of place and was glad to escape from it and become co-agitor to his aged father at Nazianzas. On his death he declined to become his successor and went into retirement until, after the death of the Emperor Yelins, the Orthodox community which still maintained itself at Constantinople chose him for their bishop. There he employed his active mind and well-trained eloquence in defending the doctrines of the Nicene Fathers and gained the name of Theologius, the Asserter of the Divinity of the Logos. He was listened to by crowds on whom he did not fail to impress the need of love of God and a holy life as well as of a right belief. Theodosius transferred him and his followers to the principal church in Constantinople from which the Aryan bishop was expelled and at the Synod of Constantinople in the year 381 he was formally chosen as bishop of that city. This selection was, however, by many regarded as invalid and it was not long before Gregory, weary of the strife of tongues and longing for rest, resigned his seat and passed the remainder of his life in quiet in his native city or in the neighboring Ariansas. He died about the year 389. There may be seen in Gregory's varied and troubled life a struggle between the shrinking of a cultivated and sensitive man from the rudeness of ecclesiastical conflict and the sense of duty quickened perhaps by the consciousness of power which impelled him to engage in it. If the time had permitted it he would perhaps have led his life in caught or learned shade but he lived in an age when no good man could be a mere spectator and with whatever shrinking he came forward to defend the truth. He left behind him discourses, letters and poems. It is evident that he, like Basil, had a real love for the old classic literature yet he thought that the true philosophy was to be found in monastic retreat from the world. He assailed Julian in two orations which he called Pesquenades. He defended himself before the people of Nessianus for his reluctance to undertake the priesthood. He preached frequently on festivals but his most famous sermons were those in which he maintained the divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit of subject to which indeed he constantly recurs. His letters which are written in a clear and simple style often supply valuable material for history. His poems, especially that which contains a half satirical account of his own life, are of some value for their matter if not for their poetry. Generally we may say that while Gregory sometimes, when his feelings are roused, rises to true eloquence, his manner is too often artificial, self-conscious and overloaded with illusions which are to us obscure. In originality and force of reasoning he is not to be compared with Athanasius or even with Gregory of Nissa. Gregory of Nissa was a younger brother of Basil who about the year 371 sent him, though married, to preside as bishop over the little town of Nissa in Cappadocia. In the persecution which befell the Nicene party in the reign of Valens he was deposed by a synod at the instigation of Demosthenes, the governor of Cappadocia for various crimes falsely alleged against him and withdrew into solitude. He returned, however, after the death of Valens and was received with great joy by the community. Henceforth he was a prominent figure in the church and at Constantinople in the year 381 pronounced the funeral oration over the remains of Maledius who died there and a few years later over those of the young Pulcheria, daughter of Theodosius I and the emperous Placilla. He was present at a council in Constantinople in the year 394 and probably died soon after. Gregory of Nissa is the most philosophical and the most influenced by the theology of origin of the Cappadocian trio. But, however speculative, he was as firm as Athanasius himself in his defense of the Orthodox doctrine of the Holy Trinity and stood by the side of his brother Basil in his contest against heretical dogma. He also wrote on the soul and the resurrection and a catechetic discourse intended to show by what methods Jews, Gentiles and heretics might best be brought to the knowledge of the truth. His disposition seems to have been gentle and amiable. And no one of the fathers stands more clear of all suspicion of meanness or underhanded dealing. It was not without reason that Vincentius of Larens pronounced him a worthy brother of Saint Basil and that the Second Council of Nicaea quoted him as of the highest authority. Isidore, head of the monastery near the Palusiot mouth of the Nile, stands out as one who in an age of fierce controversy never became a mere partisan, while on the whole, siding with Cyril of Alexandria, he never lent himself to his violent measures. While he did not wholly reject allegorical interpretation, he yet valued highly the historical method of the School of Antioch. His numerous letters, some of which give spiritual counsel, while others discuss matters of interpretation, are of great value for the history of his time. He lived so aesthetically that, says Evagrius, he passed to the angelic life while yet unearthed. A remarkable product of the pagan schools of Alexandria is Cinesius. Born about the year 370 of a good family at Cyrene in the Egyptian pentapolis, he studied Neoplatonism under Hepatia, the lady in the doctor's gown, of whom to the last he spoke with affection as his intellectual mother. He afterward visited Athens only to be disillusioned. It had nothing but great memories, he says. The real focus of philosophy was found in Alexandria. From about the year 400, he spent his time principally on his estate at Cyrene, leading the life of a cultivated country gentleman engaged in agriculture and field sports. He also kept up his philosophic studies, though in this he felt himself isolated in the midst of people who hardly knew whether they were not living in the reign of Agamemnon. It was on another visit to Alexandria that he married a Christian wife, a circumstance which no doubt aided his conversion to Christianity, the history of which is obscure. He was living at Cyrene when, in the year 409, the people oppressed by a brutal governor begged him, their most influential neighbor, to be their bishop and protector. He was extremely reluctant to undertake this office. Not only was he married and unwilling to separate from his wife, but his views in several points were, he felt, hardly to be reconciled with the current theology of the time, and he was conscious that it would be difficult for him to adopt the decorous life of a bishop. Still, his love for his people and the persuasion of theophilus of Alexandria prevailed. He was consecrated to the Sea of Ptolemies and discharged his duty faithfully in a time of great difficulty and distress. He is supposed to have died about the year 414, down by the weight of public and private cares. With him comes to an end the history of the ancient Christianity of the Libyan pentopolis. Senezius does not belong to the first order of minds, but he is a remarkable example of one whose philosophical principles were colored and ennobled rather than displaced by Christianity, and he gives a clearer and purer reflection of his school than a stronger character would have done. Senezius, bishop of Amesa in Syria, is also an instance of a Christianized philosopher. Although, so far as is known, he was a perfectly orthodox teacher, he seems to have turned his attention mainly to the great questions which interest all thoughtful men from age to age, the nature of man, his relation to the universe, the immortality of the soul, the reconciliation of the freedom of the will with the providence and omnipotence of God, his treatise on the nature of man, still extant, shows him to have studied human physiology as well as psychology and is an important contribution to philosophical theory. Cyril, the famous archbishop of Alexandria, is the chief representative of an Alexandrian school very different from that which derived its first impulse from origin. He was the nephew and successor of Bishop Theophilus by whom he had been brought up and whom in character he much resembled. His election to the sea was not affected without violence and he had not long occupied it when a quarrel arose between the archbishop and the Jews which led to his expelling them from the city at the head of a furious mob. Some of Cyril's partisans pelted arrestees, the prefect of the city with stones, conduct which, rightly or wrongly, brought discredit on their bishop. Cyril entered with great zeal and vigor into the controversies of his time and it is indeed as a very able controversial leader and writer that he is chiefly known. His best friends will scarcely deny that he was too vehement and imperious to be altogether wise or even just, but his faults were not inconsistent with great and heroic virtues, faith, firmness, intrepidity, fortitude, endurance, perseverance. We see in the writings which bear the name of Dionysius, the Areopagite, a neoplatonic system disguised under terms taken from the language of the church. God is absolute and unconditioned being. To him, no definition, no description, hardly any epithet can properly apply. He is beyond all time and space. He is the source of all existence, but he condescends to develop himself in a series of beings. A heavenly and an earthly hierarchy, through whom, on the one hand, he reveals himself so far as he may be, to man, and on the other enables man to ascend towards the being of beings himself. At the head of the heavenly hierarchy stands the Holy Trinity. The earthly hierarchy, through the sacraments or mysteries of the church, provides men with the means of purification and of rising towards God. The sacraments of the church, the means of purification and of rising towards God. These remarkable treatises were first cited, so far as we know, by the monophysite at a conference in Constantinople in the 6th century, and were probably written by some disciple of Proclus of Constantinople in the previous generation. It is, however, possible that the main portions of them were written anonymously at an earlier date, perhaps in the 4th century, and were interpolated at the beginning of the 6th by some controversialist, with the view of making them pass for the work of Dionysius. At the conference their spuriousness was at once recognized, but nevertheless from the beginning of the 7th century to the days of Laurentius Vala in the 15th, they were in the highest repute, and their account of the ranks and degrees of angels was generally accepted. Their teaching also largely influenced medieval theory about the sacraments of the church. During the period when Christian doctrine was still in some respects undefined, the philosophy of Plato, a seeker rather than a dogmatist, had been a dominant influence in the formation of theology. But when theology became more definite, the logical system of Aristotle was found better adapted for the use of theologians. The influence of Aristotelian modes of thought is found in Leontius of Byzantium, Ascythian monk, who was conspicuous in the 6th century. And even more in Johannes Philoponus, the labor-lover who took the opposite side in the divisions of Justinian's time. End of Chapter 10 Part 2 Chapter 10 Part 3 of History of the Christian Church during the first 6 centuries. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. History of the Christian Church during the first 6 centuries by S. Cheatham. Chapter 10 Theology and Theologians Part 3 The churches of the West were much less disturbed by speculative questions than those of the East. The Latin Theologians were for the most part rather deeply interested spectators of the contest which in the 4th and 5th centuries shook the Oriental churches to their foundations than active combatants, though they were greatly influenced by the works of their Greek contemporaries. On the other hand, in practical questions such as the nature and powers of the church, the relation of the grace of God to the soul of man and the like, they took a much keener interest than their Eastern brethren. The Romans, when they accepted the yoke of Christ, retained the old governing spirit of the empire and the Latin Theology generally was more of the practical than of the speculative spirit. When Greek philosophy came to an end and no longer supplied a training for theologians, the Romans still found in the study of law an intellectual exercise which preserved their minds from torpedoity. Latin Theology is in fact the work of men who regarded the problems submitted to them with the eyes of lawyers rather than of philosophers. The greatest names among the Latins are those of St. Ambrose, St. Augustine and Leo I, who, while retaining their own distinctive traits, were in harmony with the Alexandrian school of Athanasius and his followers. Hilary of Poitiers, Jerome in his earlier days and Ruffinius were more directly influenced by the theology to which Origen had given its character. In the south of Gaul was found a group of theologians who had drawn their original inspiration from the school of Antioch. Hilary, Hilarius, the Athanasius of the west was born at Poitiers about the year 320 of heathen parents, but after trying in vain to satisfy the hunger of his soul with philosophy was admitted by baptism into the Church of Christ. Chosen about the year 350 to be bishop of his native city, he contended so earnestly for the faith which was then persecuted that in the year 356 the Aryan emperor Constantius banished him to Phrygia. When in the year 360 he was permitted to return to his sea, he used his utmost efforts for the restoration of orthodoxy both in his own country and in Italy where at a council in Milan he entered the lists against the Aryan bishop of that city, Constantius. He died in the year 366. Hilary was one of the few Latins who understood the theology of the east which he no doubt learned more thoroughly during his banishment. Hence he was a most valuable link in the Latin Church. He wrote commentaries on scripture which show the influence of origin but he is best known by his great treatise on the Trinity in which he defends the faith of Nicaea. He also wrote hymns but it is by no means certain that any of these have come down to our time. Hilary recognized much more than most of his contemporaries the importance of a good literary style as a vehicle of truth. When he invokes God's help for his work on the Holy Trinity he prays not only for enlightenment but also for the power of correct expression. He who conveys the message of a king should do it in words not unworthy. If in spite of his pains his does not rival the style of the classical or even the silver age of Latinity we must remember that he had defined or fashioned equivalents for Greek theological terms in Latin a much less copious and flexible language. Under the circumstances he could scarcely avoid occasional obscurity and inelegance yet he is always terse and forcible and his manifest earnestness and unaffectedness keep the reader's attention better than the more rhetorical displays of some other writers. One of the noblest and most impressive figures in the great company of the saints is Saint Ambros. Ambrosius, the son of a Roman of high military rank became an advocate in Rome for consular governor of north Italy and came to reside at Milan. In the year 374 the sea of Milan became vacant by the death of the Aryan bishop Oksentius and the people clamorously demanding Ambros who showed Christian virtues though he was not yet baptized for their bishop he found himself unable to resist a call which he recognized as the voice of God. He sold his property distributed the proceeds among the poor and at once devoted himself to the glory of theology and the duties of his office. He died on April 4, 397. His literary works are not of the first importance and do not show much originality. He drew largely from Greek sources and was influenced in his interpretation of scripture by the Alexandrian school sometimes perhaps directly by Filo. His work on the duties of the clergy is a treatise on morality founded on Cicero's own discourse on duties but penetrated throughout by the spirit of Christianity. While the earlier writer has in his mind the typical Roman statesman the Christian contemplates one who serves God here and is to serve him better hereafter. He is also believed to have written hymns which have maintained their vogue even to this day and if his writings do not show much creative power we at least see in them not the facile declamation of the classics were familiar and who had been trained in great affairs but the bent of his mind was practical. His personal influence was extraordinary in his own city almost irresistible. He could defy so powerful a person as Theodosius while over the young emperor Gratian he seems to have had complete ascendancy. The very soldiers could not be induced to act against the great prelate. Saint Augustine gives an interesting account where his door was opened to all and whosoever would might enter unannounced though no one ventured to disturb him if he was found with his eyes bent on a book. He received his clients as an old Roman patrician might have done. For many years he was the most powerful man in the western church in which no important matter was transacted without him but perhaps the greatest and most fruitful of his works was the conversion of Saint Augustine. Saint Jerome of the Latin Fathers was born rather more than 300 years after the Lord's death in a little town called Striden on the frontier between Dalmatia and Pannonia on the border of the modern Herzegovina being thus one of that race of hearty mountaineers which in the declining days of the Roman Empire supplied so many able men to her service. His name Eusebius Heronimus is Greek but he always wrote a connection with the east than any other Latin father. His parents who were Christian were rich enough to give him an excellent education. Still young he went to Rome where he not only received a literary training but also cultivated that dialectic skill which in later days served him well in his numerous controversies. Here he began to acquire a library and to study Greek philosophy. Here too he was baptized no doubt after the usual from the great city he passed a travail and thence to Aquileia still eagerly pursuing his studies but a great change was soon to pass over the life of the young student it was probably in Aquileia that he received the first impulse to asceticism and it is perhaps this which drove him to the east then the land of monks and hermits. In Syria a dear friend who was with him died and he himself lay long distracted between love for the old classic writers and the feeling that he ought to live more completely to Christ he was deeply impressed by a vivid dream he abandoned for the time at least his classics and his philosophy and rushed into the Syrian desert there he occupied himself at first with the hand labor which has often soothed burning brains and afterwards with the transcription of books but he found no peace was filled with voluptuous visions of the world which he wished to leave prayer and meditation were often impossible but one thing happened in Jerome's retirement which makes an epoch in the history of the Christian church he learned Hebrew from a converted Jew he was probably the first member of the Latin church who was able to read the scriptures of the Old Testament in the original tongue and this learning was to bear much fruit when Jerome left the desert he betook himself to Antioch where he was ordained priest with the understanding that he was not to be required to undertake a pastoral charge thence he passed to Constantinople where he read the scriptures with Gregory of Nazianzas and improved his knowledge of Greek about two years after his arrival in Constantinople we find him again in Rome where he acted as secretary to Pope Damascus and was for a time though still only a presbyter it was at the bidding of Damascus that he undertook a revision of the Old Latin translation of the New Testament the copies of which buried in an extraordinary degree he also revised the Latin version of the Old Testament with the help of the Septuagint and somewhat later translated it afresh from the Hebrew his labors were received with no favor by the multitude the Old Latin was the only Bible with sermons and devotional writings it had grown familiar its quaintness, its very faults were dear but in the end Jerome's revised version became what is to this day the Bible in common use the Versio Volcata in every part of the Latin church its influence on Latin theology has been enormous since for a thousand years Latin writers with the rarest possible exceptions knew the scriptures in no other form Jerome's life in Rome was by no means holy literary he gained there a very remarkable influence in the highest ranks he was not a man to compromise with the paganism which still pervaded Roman society in the midst of luxury he practiced and advocated simplicity and even rigor of life over certain noble ladies in particular his influence was great and lasting fashionable society lampooned him in October 385 he left the half pagan city for the holy land and in the following year when he was about 40 years old settled at Bethlehem his devoted friend Paula a Roman lady of rank and wealth soon followed him and by her means a monastery was built over which Jerome presided and a convent for women of which she herself was the head there was also a hospice for the pilgrims and the nuns there he passed the last 34 years of his life and there he died worn out with constant toil and in poverty which he sometimes mentions in his letters but of which he never complains he and Paula had spent their means on the establishments at Bethlehem the day of his death is generally believed to have been September 30 AD 420 when he must have been between 70 and 80 years of age though the last years of Jerome's life were spent in one spot they are full of mental activity it was at Bethlehem that he finished his translation of the Bible but beside this great work there was hardly a controversy of his time in which he did not eagerly engage so that he left behind a large collection of letters and other writings Saint Jerome is generally painted as an emaciated man in a cave or cell with a book his presentation indicates the two things for which he is chiefly remarkable his devotion to the ascetic life and his learning until the time of Erasmus he remained the first scholar of the western church a scholar not only in his love for the old classic writers and in his vigorous and expressive style but in bringing a scholarly spirit to the interpretation of the Bible he was not content like his predecessors in the west to know the scriptures only at second hand he used the original text and illustrated by all the grammatical and historical knowledge which was within his reach his great snare was his vehemence of temperament with his incisive satirical bitterness and contempt for his opponents he scarcely ever put pen to paper without making a lifelong enemy still with all his faults Jerome had immense influence on his own age and remains one of the most striking figures in Christian antiquity one whose name is always connected with that of Jerome his friend in youth his foe in old age was Tyranius Rufanus born near Aquileia he early entered a monastery in that city his passion for the ascetic life drew him, like Jerome to the old home of asceticism Egypt where he saw the great Athanasius and visited many of the monks and hermits who peopled at the bayid but he also made the acquaintance of Hydria where he stayed several years and acquired that love for the Greek theology and most of all for origin which bore fruit in after years in the year 377 he passed on to Jerusalem where for 20 years he lived as a monk on the Mount of Olives during which period he was embroiled with Jerome on the questions which arose about origin in the year 397 he returned to Italy having been for the time the strife however broke out anew and was carried on by both the parties with the most ruthless animosity from the time of his return to Italy Rufinius lived mostly at Aquileia engaged in literary work until the invasion of the West Goth drove him to seek refuge in the south he died in Messina in the year 410 the fame of Rufinius rests principally on his translations he published a free translation or adaptation of Eusebius which he continued to the death of Theodosius I he collected and translated lives of the Egyptian ascetics he made origin known in the West by translating a portion of his works and it is to him that we owe our knowledge of the Clementine recognitions the original of which is lost without being a man of original power he rendered great service to the western church his lives of the saints have retained considerable influence the greatest of the Latin fathers the source and fountain deed of most of the Latin theology was, it is generally agreed Aurelius Augustinius whom we commonly know as Saint Augustine and of all the fathers he is best known to us for in his confessions he gives us a history of his religious opinions such as few men have left behind he was born on the 13th November 354 at Tagosti in Numidia and received his first religious impressions from his good Christian mother Monica endowed with the highest mental gifts and a temperament burning with southern passion he was in early days equally eager in the study of letters and in the pursuit of sensuous enjoyment in this life of excitement the religious impressions of his childhood were for a time obliterated it was the reading of Cicero's Hortensius which roused again in him the longing for the attainment of truth and for a higher and nobler life he read scripture but found its simplicity bald and unsatisfying he turned in his restlessness to the pretentious sect of the Macanayans then widely spread in South Africa attracted by their rigorous life and their claim to possess a hidden wisdom from his 19th to his 28th year he remained in the outer circle of the sect hoping at last by initiation to attain the knowledge of their mysteries undeceived at last he fell into despair of all truth from this painful state he was to some extent relieved by the works of the Neoplatonists which led him into a new world of thought while the Manacayans had represented the world as agitated by a ceaseless contest of good and bad of which man was the almost helpless sport Neoplatonism taught him that the good was the only real existence that the bad was but the absence of good it was in this state of mind that Augustine who had already taught rhetoric with success at Tagaste and in Carthage passed over to Rome and thence to Milan he was then religious after a fashion but regarded Christianity as only for such as could not rise to the heights of philosophy it was at this time that he became conscious of the divine force of Saint Paul's epistles and that he fell under the influence of Saint Ambrose he attended his preaching in the territory and found himself pricked to the heart by the truths which he delivered after a painful inward struggle he acknowledged the truth as it is in Christ Jesus and was baptized by Ambrose in the year 387 together with his natural son Adiodotus from this time began the controversy which only ended with his life against his old allies the Manacayans in the year after his baptism in the monastery in a kind of monastic solitude until in 392 he was ordained presbyter much against his will in Hippo Regius three years later he became its bishop hence forward though bishop of a small town of no fame or importance he belonged to the church at large he was in constant communication with all parts of the Latin church urging, advising, controversing and besieged by the invading army of the vandals he had unceasingly employed both tongue and pen in the service of the church he vindicated the ways of God to man against those who distrusted divine providence he asserted the true idea of the church against those who resisted its authority in a society still hot with the embers of the Aryan controversy he expounded the mystery of the holy trinity he maintained man's need and natural powers were sufficient for him in a word there was no prominent question of his time which he did not discuss and illustrate and his influence generally settled the disputed points in the form which he preferred he had a quick and lively fancy and a mind of almost unequaled ingenuity and readiness arguments and analogies never fail him probably no writer has produced so many striking maxims about his imagination or his dialectic skill which has given him the immense and abiding influence which he has in fact exercised in Latin Christianity this he owes to a combination of dialectic power with an earnestness in believing a conviction of the lost condition of those who deliberately reject the gifts which Christ has left in this church a knowledge of the human heart a devoutness tenderness and sympathy that his treatment of great questions is always adequate and satisfactory his extraordinary skill and reply seems sometimes to have hidden even from himself the real force of the statement which he answers and writing as he did in haste and with warmth he found in cooler moments many things in his own works which he wished to withdraw or modify but take him for all and all no writer in the Latin church was ever endowed with more brilliant gifts than his own an excellent instance of a man of wealth and culture brought to forsake the world is Paulinus of Nola who was born at Bordeaux of a wealthy and distinguished Roman family while still in Bordeaux he was a pupil of the poet Asonius a friend of his fathers in 379 he was council and everything seemed to promise him a brilliant secular career he was greatly struck by the veneration paid to Christian martyrs Martin of Tours and Ambrose gained great influence on his mind and he was seized with a great anxiety lest the last day should overtake him while engaged in things that profit not when a much-longed-for child was taken away after a few days life he and his wife who was also rich agreed to sell what they had and give to the poor the peril of riches and from the deceitful world his family were greatly troubled but Martin was delighted with the man who had supplied an almost unique example of obedience to a hard precept of the gospel in a hospice which they had built in Nola he and his wife spent their days in the most rigorous self-mortification but in all his austerity Paulinus retained his naturally kindly and genial character friend as he was very palagious his writings consist of letters and poems often of great interest for the history of the time as well as for the life of the poet himself it is curious to see the utmost rudeness of life recommended in the language of portly and artificial poetry almost as if Quakerism had been preached in the style of Pope he was chosen Bishop of Nola in the year 409 and died there in 431 another Latin poet whose family and engaged in early years in affairs of state was the Spaniard Prudentius he, feeling as he grew old that the pursuits of which he had been engaged were such as prophet not in the day of judgment set himself to him in a style imitative of the old Roman poets the heroes of the noble family of Martyrs and even to invade and verse against the enemies of Christian truth Leo the first Pope of that name was also the first Pope of whom we know any literary productions it was during his tenure of the papacy that he delivered the sermons which have come down to us if they have not Augustine's wealth of thought nor Ambrose's eloquence they are written in a style which is good for its time clear, vigorous and by no means commonplace he attains perhaps his highest eloquence when he speaks of that sea of Rome which he had himself done so much to raise to power over the church Leo's letters are also of the highest interest as documents of church history but these should perhaps be regarded rather as dispatches from the papal chancery than as the work of the Pope himself in any case they are well written Severinus Bothius a Roman philosopher and statesman holds a place apart in the history of the church born in Rome he rose to high place and dignity as the great king of the East Gauss Theoderic falling however under suspicion of a treasonable correspondence with the court of Byzantium he was cast into prison and in the year 525 was put to death during his captivity he wrote his treatise on the consolation of philosophy which though it rather breathes the spirit of the old Roman stoicism than of Christianity brought to its author the reputation of a great theologian the work of that holy soul who maketh manifest the cheating world to him who hears a right medieval readers probably found in him something which was wanting in the scholastic theology in Pavia where he was buried he has even been venerated under the title of St. Severinus and the papal congregazione de Riti in 1884 expressly allowed this cultist his translations and explanations of some of the treatises of Aristotle greatly influenced the philosophy of the school men it is doubtful whether he was really the author of the dogmatic treatises attributed to him end of chapter 10 part 3 chapter 11 part 1 of history of the Christian church during the first 6 centuries this is a Librivox recording all Librivox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer to visit the website at www.dogmatic.org recording by Sean F. Sawyers history of the Christian church during the first 6 centuries by S. Cheatham chapter 11 controversies on the faith part 1 standards of doctrine 1 the scriptures had in the 4th century has in all ages a unique respect every dogmatic statement must be capable of proof from scripture an opinion which wanted this support this universal recognition of scripture as of the highest authority seems to presume that the limits of scripture are exactly known but in fact though there was in ancient times no very conspicuous controversy on the matter there was no absolute agreement in all parts of the church as to the contents of the sacred canon with regard to the Old Testament the most competent judges among the ancient fathers recognized only the books of the Alexandrians contained in the Septuagint as of much less weight and value this view prevailed in the Greek church and was supported by the great authority of Athanasius he recognized only the books of the Hebrew canon as in the strictest sense canonical others contained in the Greek canon he held might be read for example of life and instruction of manners a rule adopted by the English church for venerable names still copies of the Septuagint translation to which a special sanctity was given by the legend of its origin continued to be sent forth and gave currency to the non-Hebrew books which formed part of it though it can scarcely be said that even to this day the Greek church has adopted the Alexandrian canon in the western church Rufinus gave his authority to a division equivalent to that of Athanasius he called canonical the second ecclesiastical the third apocryphal Jerome however used the word apocrypha so as to include all books not found in the Hebrew canon and this is the sense which has become familiar in the Anglican church this usage is also adopted in the so called 60th canon of the council of Laodicea which if not genuine is probably an ancient gloss still the current Latin bible the books contained in it were not all of the same authority and the great leaders of the Latin church were unwilling to draw distinctions which might shake the received tradition hence Augustine who was followed by the great mass of later Latin writers cites all the books in question as a like scripture and when he gives a list of the books of which the whole canon of the scriptures consists makes no clear distinction between the strictly canonical third council of Carthage a list of the books of holy scripture was agreed upon in which the apocrypha books are mingled with those of the Hebrew canon from this period usage received all the books of the enlarged canon more and more generally as equal in all respects learned tradition kept alive the distinction between the Hebrew canon and the apocrypha which had been drawn by Jerome as regards the New Testament the Latin church adopted in the fourth century though occasional doubts were still expressed as to the admission of the epistle to the Hebrews and the apocryphal epistle to the Laodiceans was often inserted among those of Saint Paul the church of Alexandria also received the full canon of the Latin church in the east generally it was otherwise the great writers of the Syrian church supply no evidence of the use of the epistle of Jude to Peter two and three John or the apocalypse while Joleneus places the epistle of the class with these books which are not universally received the churches of Asia Minor received generally all the books of the New Testament contained in the African canon except the apocalypse this is definitely excluded from the list of Gregory of Naziansus and pronounced spurious in that Amphilicus it is not included in the Laodicean canon nor in that given by Cyril of Jerusalem Epiphanus however though he notices the doubts in this book adopts the canon of Africa and the west which includes it the church of Constantinople does not seem to have recognized it until the late period everywhere and by all schools of thought the holy scriptures were accepted as inspired in a very special manner by God himself and almost everywhere the allegorical often called the spiritual method of interpretation was adopted plain history vanished in a cloud of mystic meaning Orthodox and heretical disputants alike commonly used this method so clear-sighted a theologian as Athanasius however though brought up in the very home of allegory saw the necessity for any sound interpretation of Saint Paul of taking account of the time of writing the person of the writer and the matter about which he wrote too besides the scriptures it was generally acknowledged that very great respect was to be paid to the voice to the developments of a body having a continuous and divine life in matters of ritual the actual usage of the church was held sufficient to justify such things as the trying immersion in baptism or the words of the invocation in the holy Eucharist which were confessively not found in holy scripture but in matters of doctrine also in an age when there was a fierce war of parties which all claimed the support of the scriptures appeal was made to the voice of the church itself this voice was found in the formularies of faith set forth by the representatives of the whole church solemnly assembled in council in the end it turned out not to be always easy to determine what councils were to be held to represent the whole church three we have seen already that it was found necessary to draw up short summaries of the faith of Christians both for the instruction of those who were without the confirmation of those who were within the church such rules of faith were found at this period in various churches but no one formula was universally adopted by the whole of the Christian church in the fourth century this was changed the whole church by its representatives in council set forth a confession of faith which was to be adopted by all Catholics throughout the world the church itself appears as giving authority to a creed not as independent of scripture but as founded on it it was admitted that a council which fairly represented the church at large meeting and deliberating as in God's sight might look for special guidance and enlightenment of the Holy Ghost Constantine claims such guidance for the council of Nicaea Isidore of Policium speaks of it as divinely inspired Basil the Great says that the fathers of Nicaea spake not without the influence of the Holy Spirit and the trust that what they have done is well pleasing to God the Father in the Holy Spirit yet even Saint Augustine did not regard the decisions of an ecumenical council as absolutely conclusive for all time a later council may be called upon to amend the decisions of an earlier when Remini is quoted against Nicaea recourse must be had to that which all parties acknowledge scripture and reason end of chapter 11 part 1 recording by Sean F. Sawyers of Fallon, Missouri