Lessons he instructed them And truly he himself trusting in the sincerity of his own Faith not only declared but had his thoughts taken up with such matters as these But they were unapt to learn and deaf to all good Documents applauding indeed his sayings with their tongues and Acclamations but in their practises they disregarded them by reason of their unsatiableness CHAP. XXX That He shewed a certain Covetous person the measure of a Grave to the end he might shame him WHerefore one time He took one of those persons about him by the hand and spake these words to him How far Hark ye Do we stretch our Covetous desires Then marking out on the ground the length of a man with a spear which he hapned to have in his hand Although said he you were possest of all the Riches of this world and of the whole Element of the Earth yet you shall carry away nothing more than this space of ground which I have mark't out if even that be allowed you Notwithstanding this Blessed Prince said and did these things yet he reclaimed no person But 't was manifestly evidenced by the very event of affairs that the Emperours Admonitions were rather like Divine Oracles than bare words CHAP. XXXI That he was laught at because of his too great Clemency FUrther whereas there was no fear of any Capital punishment which might restrain ill men from wickedness the Emperour himself being wholly inclined to Clemency and the Governours in each Province wholly neglecting the prosecution and punishment of Crimes this thing exposed the publick Administration of Affairs to no ordinary blame and reprehension whether justly or otherwise every one may judge according as he shall think good Let me be permitted to record the Truth CHAP. XXXII Concerning Constantine's Oration which He wrote to The Convention of the Saints MOreover the Emperour wrote his Orations in the Latine tongue But they were rendred into Greek by the Interpreters whose imployment it was to do this One of these orations done into Greek I will for an instance annex after the close of this present Work to which Speech he himself gave this Title To the Convention of the Saints dedicating that His Discourse to the Church of God which Oration I will subjoyn for this reason least any one should account our Testimony in reference to these matters to be nothing more than Ostentation and Noise CHAP. XXXIII How He heard Eusebius's Panegyrick concerning the Sepulchre of our Saviour in a standing posture BUt that in my judgment is in no wise to be silently overpast which this admirable Prince did even in Our own presence For when we had one time besought him being confident of his singular piety towards God that he would be an Auditor of a Speech of Ours concerning the Sepulchre of our Saviour He gave us Audience with all imaginable willingness And a great company of Hearers standing round within the Imperial Palace it self He himself stood also and together with the rest gave Audience But when We entreated him to rest himself upon his Imperial Throne which was placed hard by he would by no means be perswaded to Sit But with an intent mind weighed what was spoken and by his own Testimony approved the truth of the Theologick Dogmata But when much time had been spent and our Oration was continued to a great length We were desirous to break off But he would not suffer that but entreated us to go on till we had ended our Discourse And when we again Sollicited Him to sit down He on the contrary was urgent in His Refusal sometimes affirming That it was unfit to hearken to Discourses which treated concerning God with ease and remisness at other times saying that this was usefull and advantagious to Him For it was He told us a thing consonant to Piety and Religion to hear Discourses about Divine matters in a standing posture After these things were finished we returned home and betook our selves to our usual Studies and exercises CHAP. XXXIV That He wrote to Eusebius concerning Easter and about the Divine Books BUt He always Sollicitously consulting the good of God's Churches wrote a Letter to us about providing some Copies of the Divinely inspired Oracles as also another Letter concerning the most Holy Feast of Easter For whereas we had dedicated a Book to Him wherein the Mystick account of that Festival was explained in what manner He rewarded and honoured us by His answer any one may perceive by perusing this Letter of His. CHAP. XXXV Constantine's Letter to Eusebius wherein He commends His Oration concerning Easter VICTOR CONSTANTINUS MAXIMUS AUGUSTUS To Eusebius IT is indeed a mighty Attempt and a work superiour to all the power of Oratory to declare the mysteries of Christ agreeably to their dignity and in a due manner to unfold the Reason and Ground of Easter and its Institution and its advantagious and laborious consummation For 't is impossible even to men that are able to understand things Divine to declare those matters according to their dignity Nevertheless I do highly admire your excellent Learning and your Extraordinary diligence and have my self most willingly perused your Book and according to your desire have given order that it should be put into the hands of many persons who sincerely adhere to the observance of the Divine Religion Whereas therefore you understand with how great a delight of mind we receive such Presents as these from Your Prudence take care to please us in future with more frequent Discourses whereto you confess your self to have been by education accustomed But as the saying is we incite you who run to your usuall Studies In as much as this so great an opinion does sufficiently demonstrate that you have not found an unworthy Translatour of Your Writings who can render Your Labours into Latine although 't is impossible that such a Version should express the dignity of Works that are so egregiously eminent God keep You Beloved Brother Such was his Letter in reference to this matter But that which he wrote about providing some Copies of the Scriptures to be read in Churches runs thus CHAP. XXXVI Constantine's Letter to Eusebius concerning the providing some Copies of the Divine Scriptures VICTOR CONSTANTINUS MAXIMUS AUGUSTUS To Eusebius IN That City which bears Our Name by the assistance of God Our Saviour's Providence a vast multitude of men have joyned themselves to the most Holy Church Whereas therefore all things do there receive a very great increase it seems highly requisite that there should be more Churches erected in that City Wherefore do you most willingly receive that which I have determined to do For it seemed fit to signifie to Your Prudence that you should order fifty Copies of the Divine Scriptures the provision and use whereof you know to be chiefly necessary for the instruction of the Church to be
doubtless understand with how many and how gross mistakes their Translations are stuft and that 't was not without reason that You had ordered me to make a new Version of Eusebius But because I am faln upon this discourse not willingly but by a necessity I will say something briefly concerning the errours of former Translatours For should I have a mind to reckon up all their mistakes one by one my discourse would be stretcht to a vast length To begin therefore with Rufinus who knows not that at his pleasure he has added many passages to Eusebius has taken away many passages from him has changed many and in most places is rather a Paraphrast than a Translatour For instance in the Seventh Book he has inserted a tedious Narrative concerning the Miracles of Gregory Thaumaturgus which occurs not in the Copies of Our Eusebius The same person in the Ninth Book rehearses a speech of Lucian the Martyr spoken before the Judge in defence of our faith which Speech the Copies of Eusebius do not acknowledge He has omitted almost the whole Tenth Book of the Ecclesiastick History in his Version I say nothing here concerning the Chapters altered by him in the Sixth and Seventh Book in as much as I have given the Reader notice of this thing in my Notes How many places of Eusebius are misunderstood and ill rendred by him This is he who of Zacharias the Priest of whom mention is made in Saint Luke's Gospel has made us a Martyr of Lyons This is he who hath confounded Biblias with Blandina This is he who has made the most noble Martyr Philoromus a Tribune of Souldiers from his being a Rationalist To what purpose is it to speak concerning Musculus whose Versions for he has translated other Writers also into Latine are not extraordinarily approved of by the Learned I could if I had a mind expose his innumerable mistakes amongst which this is a notorious one Dionysius Alexandrinus in his Epistle to Germanus which Eusebius records in his Sixth Book says that he was taken by the Souldiers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and was brought to Taposiris But Musculus believed Heliodysmas to be a Town For thus he renders it Ego namque cùm Heliodysmas unà cum illis qui mecum erant venissem Taposirim à militibus ductus sum For I after I was come to Heliodysmae together with them that were with me was brought by the Souldiers to Taposiris Farther the same Musculus in his Translation has wholly omitted Eusebius's Book concerning the Martyrs of Palestine which is subjoyn'd to the Eighth Book of his Ecclesiastick History for what reason I know not For that Book of Eusebius's is a most Elegant one The Translation of John Christophorson remains to be spoken of which very Version wants not its Blemishes For to omit the Barbarisms which do frequently occur in it his Translation is too prolix and intricate whilst he either adds some words to fill up the period or annexes his own Explanations in order to the clearing of an obscure place Sometimes also of two periods he makes but one and puts two Chapters into one in so much that the division of the Latine Chapters in his Translation differs much from the Greek Which thing how much trouble and vexation it breeds in citing places out of Eusebius all the Studious know The same Translatour was indeed sufficiently well vers'd in Divinity but he was meanly furnished with the skill of a Critick and with the knowledge of Roman antiquity Wherefore in the proper names of Roman Magistrates and in those matters which appertain to the Civil Administration he is always out for instance in rendring the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in other such like terms Lastly Christophorson has embodied Eusebius's Book concerning the Martyrs of Palestine which in Robert's Stephens's Edition and in the Manuscript Copies is subjoyned to the Eighth Book of his Ecclesiastick History with his Eighth Book because he believ'd it to be a part thereof Which mistake of Christophorson's the Geneva-Printers having afterwards followed that they might make the Greek agree with the Latine of two Books of Eusebius's have made but one And let thus much be briefly spoken concerning the Errours of former Translations not with any design to disparage or lessen the glory of any Translatour but that all the Studious may understand that we had good reason for our undertaking a new Translation Which as I dare not warrant to be perfect and every way compleat for that would be too much confidence so I do boldly affirm that it wants very many faults wherewith former Translations do abound Further whereas three things are required in a Version namely that it be faithfull Elegant and clear I have made it my Business that no one of these should be wanting in our Translation The Translation is followed by the Annotations Wherein I had an eye chiefly to two things first that I might give an account of my Emendations and might propose to the Studious the various Readings of Manuscript Copies Secondly that I might clear the obscurer passages in Eusebius and might explain the ancient Usages and Rites of the Church by producing and comparing the passages of other Writers To my Annotations I have subjoyned four dissertations The first whereof is Concerning the Beginning and Progress of the Schism of the Donâ—tists The Second Concerning the Anastasis and the Jerusalem-Martyrium This is followed by a disputution about the Version of the Seventy Translatours against James Usher Arch-Bishop of Armagh The Fourth is concerning the Roman Martyrologie which Rosweydus published And these are the things which with care and diligence I have performed in this Edition in order to the illustration of Eusebius's History Which if to any one they shall peradventure â—eem slight and of little worth let him think that all things which are published in this kind of Learning are in a manner of this nature and are either valued or contemned according to the affection and stomach of the Readers For if they find a candid and studious Reader they are highly esteemed but if they shall happen to fall into disdainful ears they are look't upon as nothing Besides what but that which is very ordinary and mean can be expected from me especially who by reason of my weakness of sight am forc'd both to reade and write by other mens eyes and hands and who whilst by reason of the greatness of the Labour I do always hasten forwards have so hastily dictated this whole work such as it is that I have scarce had leisure to reade it over again On which account I am the more to be pardoned if perhaps in any place of my Notes I have not so fully satisfied the Reader 's desire VALESIUS'S ACCOUNT Concerning the LIFE AND WRITINGS OF Eusebius Caesariensis COncerning the Life of Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea Acacius His Scholar and Successour in the See of Caesarea had heretofore written a Book as
find that Nero was the first who with the Imperial sword raged against this Sect then greatly flourishing at Rome But we even boast of such a beginner of our persecution For he that knows him may understand that nothing but some great Good was condemned by Nero. Thus therefore this man being proclaimed the first and chiefest enemie of God set upon slaughtering the Apostles Wherefore they relate that in his time Paul was beheaded at Rome and also Peter crucified And the name of Peter and Paul unto this present time remaining upon the Burial-places there doth confirm the story In like manner even an Ecclesiastical man by name Caius who flourisht in the time of Zephyrinus Bishop of Rome and wrote against Proclus a great defender of the opinion of the Cataphrygians says these very words concerning the places where the sacred bodies of the aforesaid Apostles were deposited I am able to shew the Trophies of the Apostles For if you would go to the Vatican or to the way Ostia you will find the Trophies of those who founded this Church And that they both suffered Martyrdome at the same time Dionysius Bishop of Corinth writing to the Romans doth thus affirm So also you by this your so great an admonition have joyned together the plantation both of the Romans and also of the Corinthians made by Peter and Paul For both of them coming also to our City of Corinth and having planted us did in like manner instruct us Likewise they went both together into Italy and having taught there suffered Martyrdome at the same time And thus much I have related that the History hereof might be yet farther confirmed CHAP. XXVI How the Jews were vexed with innumerable mischiefs and how at last they entred upon a war against the Romans MOreover Josephus discoursing at large about the calamities that happened to the whole Jewish nation makes it manifest in express words amongst many other things that a great number of the most eminent personages amongst the Jews having been cruelly beaten with scourges were crucified even in Jerusalem by the command of Florus For it happened that he was Procuratour of Judea when the war at first broke out in the twelfth year of Nero's Reign Afterwards he says that after the revolt of the Jews there followed great and grievous disturbances throughout all Syria those of the Jewish nation being by the inhabitants of every City every where destroyed as enemies without all commiseration In so much that a man might see the Cities filled with dead bodies that lay unburied and the aged together with the infants cast forth dead and women not having so much as any covering upon those parts which nature commands to be concealed and the whole Province was full of unspeakable calamities But the dread of what was threatned was greater and more grievous than the mischiefs every where perpetrated Thus much Josephus relates word for word And such was the posture of the Jews affairs at that time THE THIRD BOOK OF THE Ecclesiastical History OF EUSEBIUS PAMPHILUS CHAP. I. In what parts of the world the Apostles Preached Christ. NOW the affairs of the Jews being in this posture the holy Apostles and disciples of our Saviour being dispersed over the whole world Preached the Gospel And Thomas as Tradition hath it had Parthia allotted to him Andreas had Scythia John Asia where after he had spent much time he died at Ephesus Peter 't is probable Preached to the Jews scattered throughout Pontus and Galatia and Bithynia Cappadocia and Asia Who at last coming to Rome was crucified with his head downwards for so he desired to suffer It is needless to say any thing of Paul who having fully Preached the Gospel of Christ from Jerusalem unto Illyricum at last suffered Martyrdome at Rome in the time of Nero. Thus much Origen declares word for word in the Third Tome of his Expositions on Genesis CHAP. II. Who First Presided over the Roman Church AFter the Martyrdome of Paul and Peter Linus was the First that was elected to the Bishoprick of the Roman Church Paul writing from Rome to Timothy makes mention of him in the salutation at the end of the Epistle saying Eubulus grâ—â—teth thee and Pudens and Linus and Claudia CHAP. III. Concerning the Epistles of the Apostles INdeed one Epistle of Peter's called his First hath by general consent been received as genuine For that the worthy Antients in former ages quoted in their writings as being unquestionable and undoubted But as for that called his Second Epistle we have been informed by the tradition of our Predecessours that it was not acknowledged as part of the New Testament Yet because to many it seemed usefull 't was diligently read together with the other Scriptures But the Book called his Acts and the Gospel that goes under his Name and that Book termed his Preaching and that stiled his Revelution we know these have in no wise been accounted genuine writings because no Ecclesiastical Writer either antient or modern hath quoted any authorities or proofs taken out of them But in the procedure of our History we will make it our chief business to shew together with the successions what Ecclesiastical writers in every Age have used the authority of such writings as are questioned as spurious likewise what they say of those Scriptures that are Canonical and by general consent acknowledged as genuine and also what concerning those that are not such And thus many are the writings ascribed to Peter of which I have known onely one Epistle accounted to be genuine and universally acknowledged as such by the Antients But of Pauls there are fourteen Epistles manifestly known and undoubted Yet it is not fit we should be ignorant that some have rejected that to the Hebrews saying it is by the Roman Church denied to be Pauls Now what the Antients have said concerning this Epistle I will in due place propose But as for those Acts that are called his we have been informed from our Predecessours that they are not accounted as unquestionable and undoubted And whereas the same Apostle in his Salutations at the end of his Epistle to the Romans makes mention among others of one Hermas who they saâ—â— is Authour of that Book entitled Pastor you must know that that Treatise also has been questioned by some upon whose account it must not be placed amongst those which by general consent are acknowledged as genuine But by others it has been judged a most usefull Book especially for such as are to be instructed in the first rudiments of Religion Whereupon we know it is at this time publickly read in Churches and I do find that some of the most Antient writers doe quote it Let thus much be spoken in order to a representation of the Holy Scriptures to discriminate those Books whose authority is in no wise contradicted from those that by general consent are not acknowledged as genuine
Vespasian commanded that the descendants of David should be sought out ANd moreover it is reported that Vespasian after the taking of Jerusalem commanded all those that were of the kindred of David to be diligently sought out least any one of them who were of the Royal Race should be left remaining amongst the Jews and that a most sore persecution was thereby again brought upon the Jews CHAP. XIII That Anencletus was the Second Bishop of the Roman Church BUt when Vespasian had reigned ten years his son Titus succeeded him in the Empire In the second year of whose Reign Linus Bishop of the Roman Church having held that publick charge twelve years delivered it to Anencletus And Titus after he had reigned two years and as many months was succeeded by his brother Domitian CHAP. XIV That Avilius was the Second Bishop of Alexandria FUrthermore in the fourth year of Domitian Annianus the First Bishop of the Alexandrian Church having there spent two and twenty years compleat died After whom succeeded Avilius being the second Bishop there CHAP. XV. That Clemens was the Third Bishop of the Roman Church ALso in the twelfth year of this Emperours Reign Anencletus having been Bishop of the Roman Church twelve years had to his successour Clemens whom the Apostle writing an Epistle to the Philippians declares to be his fellow-labourer saying with Clement also and with other my fellow-labourers whose names are in the book of life CHAP. XVI Concerning the Epistle of Clemens MOreover there is extant one Epistle of this Clemens his which by general consent is acknowledged as genuine and is singularly excellent and admirable which he wrote in the name of the Roman Church to that of the Corinthians there being at that time a Faction raised in the Corinthian Church which Epistle also we have known to have been publickly read in many Churches before the whole congregation both in times past and also in our own memory Now that in the time of the aforementioned Clemens there was a Faction raised in the Corinthian Church Hegesippus is a witness worthy to be credited CHAP. XVII Of the Persecution in Domitians time BEsides Domitian having shown much cruelty towards many and by unjust sentences put to death no small company of men of Rome that were nobly descended and illustrious and having punished innumerable other most eminent persons undeservedly with banishment and loss of goods at length rendred himself the successour of Nero as to his hatred of God and his fighting against him For he raised the second persecution against us Although his father Vespasian had designed nothing injurious towards us CHAP XVIII Concerning John the Apostle and his Revelation IN this persecution its reported that John the Apostle and also Evangelist who yet lived was banished into the Isle Patmos upon account of the Testimony he exhibited to the word of God Indeed Irenaeus writing concerning the number of the name of Antichrist mentioned in the Revelation of John does in these very words in his fifth book against Heresies thus speak concerning John But if at this present time his name ought publickly to be preached it would have been spoken of by him who saw the Revelation For it was seen not a long time since but almost in our Age about the latter end of Domitian's Reign But so mightily did the doctrine of our faith flourish in those forementioned times that even those Writers who are wholly estranged from our Religion have not thought it troublesome to set forth in their Histories both this Persecution and also the Martyrdoms suffered therein And they have also accurately shown the very time relating that in the fifteenth year of Domitian Flavia Domitilla daughter of the sister of Flavius Clemens at that time one of the Consuls at Rome was together with many others also banished into the Island Pontia for the Testimony of Christ. CHAP. XIX How Domitian commanded that the descendants of David should be slain WHen the same Domitian gave command that the descendants of David should be slain there goeth an antient report that some Hereticks accused the posterity of Jude who was the brother of our Saviour according to the flesh as being of the off-spring of David and bearing affinity to Christ himself And this Hegesippus manifests word for word saying thus CHAP. XX. Concerning those that were Related to our Saviour THere were yet surviving who were related to our Lord the Nephews of that Jude who was called the brother of Christ after the flesh whom they accused as being descended from David And these Evocatus brought to Caesar Domitian For Domitian was afraid of the coming of Christ as well as Herod And he asked them if they were of the stock of David and they acknowledged it Then he questioned them how great possessions they had or what quantity of money they were masters of and they said that they both had but nine thousand pence a moiety whereof belonged to each of them and these they said they had not in ready money but in land of that value being onely thirty nine Acres of which also they paid tribute and themselves were maintained by their own labour And then they shewed their hands producing as an evidence of their working the hardness of their skin and a brawniness imprinted on their hands by reason of their assiduous labour Being also asked concerning Christ and his Kingdom of what sort it was and when and where it would appear they returned answer that it was neither worldly nor Terrestrial but Celestial and Angelical that it should be at the end of the world when he would come in Glory to judge the quick and dead and reward every man according to his deeds Upon which answer Domitian condemned them not but scorning them as despicable persons he dismist them unbound and by Edict appeased the Persecution raised against the Church But they thus released as t is said afterwards presided over Churches as being both Martyrs and also allied to our Lord and peace ensuing they lived till the Reign of Trajan So far Hegesippus But moreover Tertullian also makes mention of Domitian Domitian also attempted a Persecution who was a Limb of Nero as to cruelty But being also but a man he soon desisted from his enterprize restoring even those whom he had banished But after Domitian had reigned fifteen years Nerva having succeeded him in the Empire the Roman Senate decreed that Domitians Titles of Honour should be abrogated and that such as were by him unjustly banished should return to their houses and have their goods restored This they relate who committed to writing the History of those times Moreover the account of the Antients amongst us declares that then also the Apostle John was released from his banishment in the Island and took up his habitation again at Ephesus CHAP. XXI That Cerdo was the third that presided over the Alexandrian Church BUt Nerva
And thus much now concerning these things But at a more opportune season we will endeavour to manifest by a quotation of the Antient writers what has been said by others concerning this very matter Among the writings of John besides his Gospel also the former of his Epistles hath without controversie been admitted as genuine both by those men that are modern and also by the Antients The two other writings of his are questioned The opinion concerning his Revelation is even at this time on both sides much controverted among many But this controversie also shall at a seasonable opportunity be discussed by the authority of the Antients CHAP. XXV Concerning those Divine writings which are without controversie acknowledged and of those which are not such BUt it will in this place be seasonable summarily to reckon up those books of the New Testament which have been before mentioned In the first place therefore is to be ranked the four sacred Gospels next to which follows the book of the Acts of the Apostles after that are to be reckoned the Epistles of Paul after which follows that which is called the first Epistle of John and in like manner the Epistle of Peter is to be admitted as authentick Then is to be placed if you think good the Revelation of John the opinions concerning which I will in due place declare And these are the books that with general consent are acknowledged Among those which are questioned as doubtfull which yet are approved and mentioned by many is that which is called the Epistle of James and that of Jude also the second Epistle of Peter and those called the second and third Epistles of John whether they were written by the Evangelist or another of the same name with him Amongst the Spurious works let there be ranked both the work intituled the Acts of Paul and the book called Pastor and the Revelation of Peter and moreover that which is called the Epistle of Barnabas and that named the Doctrines of the Apostles and moreover as I said the Revelation of John if you think good which some as I have said doe reject but others allow of and admit among those books that are received as unquestionable and undoubted And among these some doe now number the Gospel according to the Hebrews with which those of the Hebrews that have embraced the faith of Christ are chiefly delighted All these books may be questioned as doubtfull And I thought it requisite to make a Catalogue of these also that we may discriminate those Scriptures that according to Ecclesiastical tradition are true and unforged and with general consent received as undoubted from those other books which are not such nor incorporated into the New Testament but are questioned as doubtfull which yet have been acknowledged and allowed of by many Ecclesiastical persons and further that we may know these very books and those other that have been put forth by Hereticks under the name of the Apostles containing as well the supposed Gospels of Peter Thomas and Matthias and of some others besides them as also the supposed Acts of Andrew and John and other of the Apostles Of which books no Ecclesiastical writer even from the Apostles times hitherto hath in any of his works voutsafed to make the least mention But moreover also the manner of the phrase and the stile wherein they are written are much different from the Apostolick natural propriety and innate simplicity and the meaning and drift of those things delivered in these books being mightily dissonant from Orthodoxal truth doth manifestly evince that they are the forgeries of Heretical men Upon which account they are not to be ranked amongst the Spurious writings but altogether to be rejected as wholly absurd and impious But we will now proceed to what follows of our History CHAP. XXVI Of Menander the Impostour MEnander succeeding Simon Magus shewed himself to be as to his disposition and manners a second Dart of Diabolical force no whit inferiour to the former He also was a Samaritan and arriving to no less height of imposture than his master abounded much more in greater and more monstrous illusions For he said that he himself was a Saviour sent from above for the salvation of men from invisible ages and he taught that no man could otherwise overcome the Angels the makers of this world unless he were first instituted in the Magical knowledge delivered by him and initiated in the baptism by him imparted Of which baptism those that were adjudged worthy they he affirmed would be partakers of a perpetual immortality in this very life they should be no longer subject to death but continuing in this present life should be always young and immortal And indeed its easie to know all this from the books of Ireneus And Justinus in like manner having made mention of Simon adds also a narration of this man saying And we knew one Menander a Samaritan also of the village Caparattae a disciple of Simons who being moved by the fury of devils and coming to Antioch seduced many by Magical art who also perswaded his followers that they should not die and at this time there are some of his Sect that profess the same Wherefore it was the device of the Diabolical power by such Impostours going under the name of Christians to endeavour to calumniate by Magick the great Mystery of Godliness and by them to expose to reproach the Ecclesiastical opinions concerning the immortality of the Soul and the Resurrection of the dead But those who joyned themselves to such Saviours as followers of them were frustrated of the true hope CHAP. XXVII Of the Heresie of the Ebionites THe malicious devil being unable to remove others from the love of the Christ of God finding that they might some other way be surprized he made them his own These the Antients fitly termed Ebionites in that they had a poor and low opinion of Christ. For they accounted him an ordinary man and nothing more than a man justified onely for his proficiency in virtue and begotten by Mary's accompanying with her husband and they asserted that an observance of the Law was altogether necessary for them supposing they could not be saved onely by faith in Christ and a life agreeable thereto But others among them being of the same name have eschewed the monstrous absurdity of the forecited opinions denying not that the Lord was begotten of the Virgin by the Holy Ghost but notwithstanding these in like manner also not confessing that he existed before all things as being God the Word and the Wisdome of the Father are lead into the same impiety with the former especially in that they make it their business to maintain and observe the bodily worship of the Law They also think that all the Epistles of the Apostle Paul ought to be rejected calling him an Apostate from the Law They made use of onely the Gospel called the Gospel according to the
valiantly with the Hereticks themselves whom they either confuted by dint of arguments and unwritten questions propounded face to face or else disproved their opinions by written Treatises most accurately compiled That Theophilus therefore did together with others engage these Hereticks 't is manifestly apparent from that elaborate piece not unworthy of himself which he wrote against Marcion which book together with those other we have recounted is at this present time extant Further Maximinus the seventh from the Apostles succeeded this person in the Bishoprick of the Antiochian Church CHAP. XXV Concerning Philippus and Modestus MOreover Philippus who as we are informed by the words of Dionysius even now quoted was Bishop of the Church at Gortyna compiled also a most elaborate piece against Marcion So likewise did Irenaeus and Modestus But this person last named did most excellently even better than the other Writers detect the errours and frauds of the man and exposed them to the view of the world Several others also wrote whose Labours are to this day with exquisite care preserved by many of the brethren CHAP. XXVI Concerning Melito and what he has made mention of ALso at that time Melito Bishop of the Church at Sardis and Apollinaris Prelate of the Church at Hierapolis flourished and were eminently famous Each of which persons did severally dedicate an Apology written in defence of our faith to the foresaid Roman Emperour who reigned at that time The Books of each of them which are come to our knowledge are these that follow Two books of Melito's concerning Easter one of his concerning the true way of converse and of the Prophets another concerning the Church and a third concerning the Lords day Moreover one concerning the nature of man and another about the frame and composure of man and one concerning the obedience of the senses and their subjection to faith and moreover one book concerning the soul the body and the mind a book concerning Baptism one of Truth one concerning the Origination and Generation of Christ his book of Prophecy another concerning Hospitality and that entitled The kâ—y besides one concerning the Devil and of the Revelation of John and another about the incarnatation of God and lastly his Apology to Antoninus Now in his books concerning Easter to wit in the beginning of that work he declares the time when he wrote in these words Servilius Paulus being Proconsul of Asia at that time when Sagaris suffered Martyrdom there arose a great controversie at Laodicea concerning Easter which happened to fall on those days in its due season at which time I wrote these books Clemens Alexandrinus makes mention of this book in his piece concerning Easter which book of Melito's was as he says the occasion of his composing that work Now in that book dedicated to the Emperour he relates what was acted against us Christians in his Reign For now says he that sort of men who are pious and holy are persecuted a thing which was never before done and molested with new Decrees throughout all Asia For most impudent informers who are desirous to possess themselves of other mens goods taking an occasion from the Imperial Edicts doe openly commit robberies and day and night take away the goods of innocent persons And after some words he continues thus Now if all this be done by Your command let it pass for an orderly and due way of proceeding For a just Emperour can never decree or authorize any thing that is unjust and we willingly undergoe the reward of such a death This request onely we humbly make to you that you your self would first take cognizance of them that are sufferers of this vexatious molestation and then determine impartially whether they are worthy of punishment and death or deserve to live in peace and quietness But if this Decree and this new Edict which ought not to have been established against the most barbarous enemies does not proceed from You then we more earnestly beseech You not to be unmindfull of us nor permit us to be any longer infested with these publick Rapines Then after the interposition of some words he adds thus much For this Sect of Philosophy which we profess at first flourisht amongst the Barbarians But when in the Reign of the Great Augustus Your Progenitour it began to be eminent and conspicuous in Your Provinces it brought with it most fortunate and prosperous success to Your Empire For from that time the power of the Roman Empire began to be eminently great and was much augmented Of which Empire You by succession are the most acceptable Inheritour that could be wish't for and shall so continue together with your Son if you will be the defender of that Religion which was nursed up together with Your Empire which took its beginning under the Reign of the Great Augustus and which your Ancestours did together with other Religions both esteem and reverence And this is a most certain evidence that our Religion which flourisht together with your happily begun Empire brought with it publick success and prosperity to wit that from the time of Augustus's Reign no unsuccessfull accident hath intervened but on the contrary such splendour and magnificence hath always artended Your Empire as is agreeable to the desires and prayers of all men Of all the Emperours onely Nero and Domitian induced thereto by the perswasion and advice of some malevolent persons endeavoured to fix a calumny and reproach upon our Religion From whom that false and malicious detraction happened to be conveyed down to succeeding times agreeable to the usage of the rude multitude which irrationally gives credit to such groundless rumours But Your pious Ancestours corrected their ignorance and by frequent Rescripts reproved such as audaciously attempted to be insolent and vexatious towards those of our Religion Amongst whom Your Grandfather Adrian wrote both to Fundanus Proconsul of Asia and also to many other Governours of Provinces and your Father even at that time when You were his Colleague in the Empire wrote to the Cities that they should not raise tumults nor commit any insolencies against us namely to the Larisseans to the Thessalonians the Athenians and to all the Grecians But we most confidently perswade our selves that You who retain the same opinion concerning us that your Ancestours had yea who are enclined to be much more gracious and mild towards us and to entertain wiser and discreeter thoughts concerning us will doe whatsoever we request of you This passage is extant in the fore mentioned Apologie of Melito The same Authour in that book of Extracts and Collections written by him does at the beginning of that work make a Catalogue of those books of the Old Testament that by general consent are acknowledged as Canonical which Catalogue I judged necessary to be here inserted It is word for word thus Melito to Onesimus the brother sendeth greeting Whereas because of your love to and diligence bestowed
of his own writings And concerning the translation of the divinely inspired Scriptures hear what he writes word for word God therefore was made man and the Lord himself saved us having given the sign of the Virgin But not as some say who are so audacious as to traduce the Scripture thus Behold a young woman shall conceive and bring forth a Son as Theodotion the Ephesian has translated it and Aquila of Pontus both Jewish proselytes Whom the Ebionites having followed say that Christ was begotten by Joseph Hereunto after a few words he adds saying For before the Romans had firmly compleated their Empire the Macedonians as yet possessing the Government of Asia Ptolemaeus the son of Lagus endeavouring with much care and industry to adorn the Library he had prepared at Alexandria with the writings of all men which were accurately compiled requested those of Jerusalem that he might have their Scriptures translated into the Greek Language They for till that time they were subject to the Macedonians sent to Ptolemaeus the Seventy Seniours which were the most skilfull persons among them in the Scriptures and most expert in both the Languages satisfying the Kings desire herein Ptolemy desirous to make tryal of every one of them and being fearfull least by compact they should agree to conceal the truth of the Scriptures by their translation separated them one from another and commanded every one of them to write a translation and this he did throughout all the books When they were come all together into the same place in the presence of Ptolemy and had compared together the version of every particular person amongst them God was both glorified and the Scriptures acknowledged to be truely divine For they all from the beginning to the end set down the same things in the same words and in the same expressions in so much that the Gentiles which were present acknowledged the Scriptures were translated by the inspiration of God Neither need it seem marvellous that God should doe this seeing that in the captivity of the people under Nebuchodonosor the Scriptures being then corrupted when after Seventy years the Jews returned into their own Country afterwards in the times of Artaxerxes King of the Persians He inspired Esdras the Priest of the tribe of Levi to recompose all the books of the former Prophets and restore to the people the Law delivered by Moses Thus far Ireneus CHAP. IX Who were Bishops in the Reign of Commodus MOreover Antoninus having held the Empire nineteen years Commodus assumed the Government In whose first year Julianus undertook the Prefecture of the Churches at Alexandria Agrippinus having compleated the twelfth year of his Presidency CHAP. X. Concerning Pantaenus the Philosopher AT that time there was a man Governour of the School of the Faithfull there who upon account of his learning was most eminent his name was Pantaenus for from a very ancient custom there had been an Ecclesiastical School among them which also continued to our days and we have been informed that 't is furnished with men who are very able Scholars and industrious about divine matters but Fame says that the forementioned Pantaenus was at that time the most eminent person among them because he was bred up in the precepts and institutions of that Philosophical Sect called Stoicks Moreover t is said he shewed so great a willingness of mind and ardency of affection towards the publication of the divine Word that he was declared the Preacher of Christs Gospel to the Nations of the East and jorneyed as far as India For there were many Evangelical Preachers of the Word even at that time who inflamed with a divine zeal in imitation of the Apostles contributed their assistance to the enlargement of the divine Word and the building men up in the faith Of which number Pantaenus was one and is reported to have gone to the Indians Where as 't is famed he found the Gospel according to Matthew amongst some that had the knowledge of Christ there before his arrival To whom Bartholomew one of the Apostles had Preacht and left them the Gospel of S t Matthew written in Hebrew which was preserved to the foresaid times Moreover this Pantaenus after many excellent performances was at last made Governour of the School at Alexandria where by his Discourses and Writings he set forth to publick view the Treasures of the divine points CHAP. XI Concerning Clemens Alexandrinus AT the same time flourisht Clemens at Alexandria being laborious together with Pantaenus in the studies of the divine Scriptures who had the same name with that ancient Prelate of the Roman Church that was a disciple of the Apostles He in his book of Institutions makes express mention of Pantaenus as having been his Master To me he seems to mean the same person also in the first book of his Stromatewn where recording the most eminent successours of the Apostolick doctrine by whom he had been instructed he says thus Now this work of mine I have not composed for ostentation but these memoires I have treasured up as a remedie against the forgetfulness of mine old age that they may be a true representation and aâ—umbration of those lively and powerfull discourses which I have had the happiness to hear from blessed and truely worthy and memorable persons Of which one was Ionicus whom I heard in Greece another in Magna Graecia the first of them was a Coelo-Syrian the other an Egyptian Others of them lived in the East of which one was an Assyrian the other in Palestine by original extract an Hebrew The last Master I met with who yet was the first and chiefest in power and virtue whom I inquisitively sought out and foundlying hid in Egypt I did fully acquiesce in and searched no further These therefore preserving the sincere tradition of the blessed doctrine which they had immediately received from the holy Apostles Peter James John and Paul like children from the hands of their Parents although few children be like their Parents are by Gods blessing come down to our time sowing those Primitive and Apostolic seeds of Truth CHAP. XII Concerning the Bishops of Jerusalem AT that time Narcissus Bishop of the Church at Jerusalem flourished a man very famous amongst many even at this time he was the fifteenth in succession from the siege of the Jews under Adrian From which time we have before manifested that the Church of the Gentiles was first constituted there after those of the circumcision and also that Mark was the first Bishop of the Gentiles that Presided over them After whom the successions of the Bishops there doe shew that Cassianus had the Episcopal Chair after him Publius then Maximus and after these Julianus then Caius to whom succeeded Symmachus then another Caius and again Julianus the second moreover Capito Valens and Dolichianus last of all this Narcissus who in a continued series of
Epistles of Prelates the Acts of Synods and the Books of Ecclesiastick Writers agreeable to their authority he composed his History And whereas in the first Edition of his Work having therein followed Rufinus he had placed the Synod of Tyre and the banishment of Athanasius into the Gallia's in the Reign of Constantius Augustus upon reading of Athanasius's Books afterwards he perceived his Errour Wherefore he was necessitated to set forth a new Edition of his History wherein he both mended the mistake I have mentioned and also made an addition of some other things which were wanting in the former Edition as he himself attests at the beginning of his Second Book Whence it appears how highly we ought to value Socrates's History to which the Writer himself put his last hand In the composure of his History Socrates has made use of a plain and mean Stile which was done by him on set purpose that he might the easier be understood by all persons as himself attests at the beginning of his First and Third Book For he lookt upon that Sublime and Eloquent manner of expression to be more agreeable for Panegyrick-Orations than an History of Ecclesiastick affairs Moreover he has dedicated his History to one Theodorus whom in the beginning of his Second Book he Stiles a sacred man of God which is the same appellation our Eusebius gives to Paulinus Bishop of Tyre at the beginning of his Tenth Book But who this Theodorus was it is to me unknown For I cannot believe it was Theodorus Bishop of Mopsuestia in regard Socrates wrote his History after the death of Theodorus Mopsuestenus But it is now time for us to inquire concerning his Sect and Religion as we promised at the beginning Baronius in his Annalls and Philippus Labbaeus in his Book De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis do affirm that our Socrates was by Sect a Novatian The same was Nicephorus's opinion before it was theirs who in the Proeme to his Ecclesiastical History says thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is That Socrates surnamed Catharus but as to his mind he was not pure Which words are not so to be understood as if Socrates were Surnamed Catharus but that it might be shown he was a Novatian For the Novatians termed themselves Cathari as we are informed from the Eighth Canon of the Nicene Councill The same Nicephorus in his 11 th Book and Chap. 14. writes thus concerning Socrates Socrates who in this place plainly shews himself not to be a detester of the Novatian Principles relates that these things were told him by a certain old man c. Now why our Socrates was by many accounted a Novatian the reasons are not few nor trivial For first he carefully Records the Series of the Novatian-Bishops who Presided over their Church at Constantinople from the times of Constantine and also remarks the Consulates wherein every one of them departed out of this life Secondly he highly extols them all especially Agerius Sisinius Chrysanthus and Paulus By whose prayers as he relates a certain miracle was wrought at Constantinople Lastly he prosecutes all matters belonging to the Novatian Sect with so great a care and diligence that he may seem to have been addicted to this Sect. But should any one examine these particulars with a greater accuracy he will find nothing in them that may evince our Socrates to have been a Novatian For with the like diligence he enumerates the Arian-Bishops who governed their Church at Constantinople and yet it is not said he was an Arian With no less carefulness also has he related all things that hapned to the Arians Eunomians and Macedonians at Constantinople than he has Recorded what befell the Novatians The reason hereof he himself has given in Chap. 24. of his Fifth Book Where he says it was his design to Record those things most especially which hapned at Constantinople both because he himself lived in that City wherein he had been born and educated and also in regard the affairs transacted there were more eminent and worthier to be Recorded But should any one object that the Arian-Bishops are not extolled by Socrates at the same rate that the Novatian-Bishops are the answer hereto is easie For the Arian-Bishops who then lived at Constantinople were far inferiour to the Novatian-Bishops For the Church of these Hereticks did in those times abound with many and those eminent Prelates which Sozomen also confirms by his testimony who Records their Elogues exactly like those given them by our Socrates Wherefore it must either be said that Sozomen was also a Novatian or else our Socrates must be discharged from that calumny But 't is manifest Sozomen was not a Novatian For to omit Theodorus Lector's testimony who in his Epistle prefixt before his Tripertite-History Stiles him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a most blessed person he himself in his 9 th book relates that he was present at a publick procession celebrated at Constantinople in honour of fourty Martyrs at such time as Proclus Presided over the Church of that City Whence 't is manifestly concluded that Sozomen was a person of the Catholick Communion in regard he was present at the publick prayers together with the Catholicks I confess indeed that our Socrates does frequently favour the Novatians for instance when he recounts the Ringleader of the Novatian-Heresie amongst the number of the Martyrs when he affirms that the Novatians were joyned to the Catholicks in the ties of a most intimate friendship and love and that they prayed together with them in the Church of God and lastly when he commends Sisinius's Oration which he made against this saying of Saint Crysostom Although thou hast repented a thousand times approach But 't is one thing to favour the Novatians another to be a Novatian Our Socrates might indeed be a favourer of the Novatians either because he was engaged in a friendship and familiarity with them or in regard he approved of their discipline and abstinence For as far as we can Collect from his Books he was something severe But I can hardly perswade my self that he was a Novatian especially when as I seem to have found the contrary from some places which occur in his History For first in Chap. 38. of his Second Book he frequently calls the Catholicks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those of the Church and opposes them to the Novatians Therefore he acknowledges that the Novatians were without the Church Which he would certainly never have done had he embraced that Heresie Besides in the 20. and 23. Chapters of his Fifth Book he reckons the Novatians amongst the Hereticks to wit amongst the Arians Macedonians and Eunomians Lastly from Chap. 19. of the same Book it may be apparently concluded that Socrates was not a Novatian For first he always calls the Church simply and absolutely the Catholick-Church opposing it to the Churches of other Sects concerning which he treats in the following Chapters to wit of the Arians Novatians and Eunomians
mind might be made perfectly pure within him After the same manner this is spoken For to make in himself of twain one new man instead of to conjoyn Consider also whether or no this saying be of the same sort Put on that new man which after God is created and this Therefore if any man be in Christ he is a new creature and whatever other expressions of this sort may be found by him that diligently searcheth the divinely inspired Scripture You need not wonder therefore because in this place The Lord created me the beginning of his ways the term Created is used metaphorically instead of Ordained or Constituted After this manner Eusebius discourses in his Books against Marcellus We have produced his words here upon their account who have attempted causelesly to raile at and revile this person Nor can they demonstrate that Eusebius doth attribute a beginning of Essence to the Son of God although they may find him frequently making use of the expressions of dispensation especially because he was a great Emulator and Admirer of Origens Writings wherein such as are able to understand Origens Books will find this every where asserted to wit that the Son is begotten of the Father Thus much we have said by the by upon their account who have attempted to reproach Eusebius CHAP. XXII That the Synod of Serdica restored Paulus and Athanasius to their Sees and that upon the Eastern Emperours refusal to admit them the Emperour of the West threatned him with War BUt the Bishops as well those convened at Serdica as they who made up a particular Synod by themselves at Philippopolis a City of Thracia having performed whatsoever each party thought requisite to be done returned to their own Cities Thence forward therefore the Western Church was severed from the Eastern and the boundary of communion between them was the mountain called Soucis which parts the Illyrians from the Thracians As far as that mountain there was a promiscuous communion although their Faith was different But they communicated not with those who lived beyond it Such was the confusion of the Churches affaires at that time Soon after this the Emperour of the Western parts acquaints his brother Constantius with what had been done at Serdica and entreats him to restore Paulus and Athanasius to their own Sees But when Constantius made demurrs to what he had written the Emperour of the Western parts in another Letter gave him his choice to wit that he should either admit Paulus and Athanasius to their own former dignities and restore their Churches to them or else if he did not this he must look upon him to be his Enemy and expect a War The Letter he wrote to his brother was this Paulus and Athanasius are indeed here with Us. But upon enquiry We find that they are Persecuted upon account of their piety If therefore You will promise to restore them to their Sees and punish those who have causelesly injured them We will send the men to You. But if You shall refuse to do as We have said know for certain that We Our Self will come thither and restore them to their own Sees whether You will or no. CHAP. XXIII That Constantius being afraid of his Brothers menaces by his Letters ordered Athanasius to appear and sent him to Alexandria THe Emperour of the East understanding these things was reduced to a very great streight And having forthwith sent for most of the Eastern Bishops he made them acquainted with the option his brother had proposed to him and enquired of them what was to be done They made answer that it was better for him to grant Athanasius the Churches than to undertake a Civil War Wherefore the Emperour being necessitated thereto summoned Athanasius to appear before him At that very interim the Western Emperour sends Paulus to Constantinople accompanied with two Bishops and other honorary provisions having fortified him both with his own Letters and also with those from the Synod But whilst Athanasius was yet fearful and in doubt whether he should go to Constantius or not For he was afraid of the treacherous attempts of the Sycophants the Eastern Emperour invited him to his Court not only once but a second and a third time as it is evident from his Letters the contents whereof being translated out of the Latine tongue into the Greek are these Constantius's Epistle to Athanasius CONSTANTIUS VICTOR AUGUSTUS to Athanasius the Bishop The humanity of Our clemency hath not permitted you to be any longer tossed in and disquieted with the boysterous surges as it were of the Sea Our indefatigable piety hath not neglected you during your being deprived of your native habitation whilst you wanted your goods and wandred up and down in desert and impassable places And although We have too long deferred the acquanting you by Letters with the purpose of Our mind expecting you would of your own accord have come to Us and requested a remedy for your troubles yet because peradventure fear hath hindred that purpose of your mind We have therefore sent to your Gravity Letters filled with indulgence that you should hasten to make your sudden appearance in Our presence without fear whereby you might enjoy your desire and having made experiment of Our humanity be restored to your own habitation For upon this account we made a request for you to Our Lord and Brother Constans Victor Augustus that He would grant you the liberty of coming to the end that being restored to your Country by both Our consents you should have this pledge and assurance of Our favour Another Epistle to Athanasius CONSTANTIUS VICTOR AUGUSTUS to Athanasius the Bishop Although We have made it sufficiently known to you by Our former Letter that you might securely come to Our Court in regard We are earnestly desirous to send you to your own habitation yet We have now sent this Letter to your Gravity Wherefore We entreat you to take a publick Chariot and hasten to Us without any mistrust or fear that you may enjoy what you desire Another Letter to the same person CONSTANTIUS VICTOR AUGUSTUS to Athanasius the Bishop Whilst we made Our residence at Edessa your Presbyters being present there We were pleased by sending a Presbyter to you to hasten your coming to Our Court to the end that after you were come into Our Presence you might go immediately to Alexandria But in regard a considerable space of time is now past since your receipt of Our Letter and you have not yet come We therefore took care to put you in mind by this that you should now hasten to make your sudden appearance in Our Presence that so you may be restored to your own Country and obtain your desire And that you might be most fully certified hereof We have sent Achetas the Deacon from whom you may understand both the purpose of Our mind and also that you shall readily obtain what you
your minds and endeavours a splendid and generous Character of that your noble Descent Let it be published to Our Citizens of Alexandria Thus wrote the Emperour CHAP. IV. How upon Georgius's being murdered Athanasius returned to Alexandria and recovered his own Church NOt long after Athanasius returning from his Exile was kindly received by the people of Alexandria who at that time expelled the Arians out of the Churches and gave Athanasius possession of the Oratories But the Arians assembled themselves in some obscure and mean houses and Ordained Lucius in the place of Georgius Such was the state of affairs then at Alexandria CHAP. V. Concerning Lucifer and Eusebius AT the same time Lucifer and Eusebius were by an Imperial Order recalled from banishment Lucifer was Bishop of Caralis a City of Sardinia Eusebius of Vercellae which is a City of the Lygurians in Italy as we have said before Both these persons therefore returning from Exile out of the Upper Thebais held a consult how they might hinder the impaired Laws of the Church from being violated and despised CHAP. VI. How Lucifer arriving at Antioch Ordained Paulinus IT was concluded therefore that Lucifer should go to Antioch in Syria and Eusebius to Alexandria that by assembling a Synod together with Athanasius they might confirm the opinions of the Church Lucifer sent a Deacon as his Substitute by whom he promised his assent to what should be determined by the Synod But he himself went to Antioch and finds that Church in a great disturbance For the people disagreed amongst themselves For not only the Arian Heresie which had been introduced by Euzoius divided the Church but as we have said before Meletius's followers also by reason of their affection towards their Master differed from those who embraced the same Sentiments with them Lucifer therefore when he had constituted Paulinus Bishop over them departed from thence again CHAP. VII How Eusebius and Athanasius accorded together and assembled a Synod of Bishops at Alexandria wherein they expensly declared that the Trinity is Consubstantial BUt as soon as Eusebius arrived at Alexandria he together with Athanasius was very diligent about convening a Synod There assembled Bishops out of several Cities and conferred amongst themselves concerning many and most weighty matters In this Synod they asserted the Divinity of the holy Ghost and included him in the Consubstantial Trinity They likewise determined that Christ at his incarnation assumed not only Flesh but an humane Soul which was also the opinion of the primitive Ecclesiasticks For they introduced not any new Doctrine invented by them into the Church but confirmed those points which Ecclesiastick tradition had from the beginning asserted and which the Learnedest persons amongst the Christians had demonstratively affirmed For such Sentiments as these all the Antients in their disputations concerning this point have left us in their Writings Irenaeus Clemens Apollinaris of Hierapolis and Serapion president of the Church in Antioch do assert this in the Books by them composed as an opinion by general consent acknowledged to wit that Christ at his assumption of Flesh was endowed with a humane Soul Moreover the Synod convened upon Berillus's account who was Bishop of Philadelphia in Arabia in their Letter to the said Berillus hath maintained the same Doctrine Origen also doth acknowledge every where in his works which are extant that Christ at his incarnation assumed an humane Soul but more particularly in the ninth Tome of his COmments upon Genesis he has explained the Mystery hereof where he hath copiously proved that Adam is a type of Christ and Eve of the Church Holy Pamphilus and Eusebius who borrowed his Sirname from him persons worthy to be credited do attest this For both these persons who club'd in their drawing up the Life of Origen in writing and answered such as were prepossest with a prejudice against that person in those famous Books wherein they made an Apology in defence of him do affirm that Origen was not the first person engaged in this Subject but that he interpreted the mystical tradition of the Church But those Bishops present at the Synod of Alexandria omitted not their researches into this question to wit concerning Ousia and Hypostasis For Hosius Bishop of Corduba in Spaine whom we formerly mentioned who was sent before by Constantine the Emperour to compose the disturbance at that time raised by Arius being desirous to root out the opinion of Sabellius the Libyan raised a dispute concerning Ousia and Hypostasis which was the occasion of another dissention But the Nicene Synod which was soon after convened made not the least mention of this dispute Notwithstanding in regard some persons were afterwards desirous of contending about this matter for that reason these determinations were made in this Synod concerning Ousia and Hypostasis It was resolved by them that these terms ought not to be used concerning God For they said that the term Ousia was not so much as mentioned in the sacred Scriptures and that the Apostle oblieged thereto upon a necessity of delivering some opinions had not rightly used the word Hypostasis But they Decreed that these terms were to be admitted of upon another account to wit when they refute Sabellius's opinion least for want of expressive words we should suppose the Trinity to be one thing called by a triple name but we must rather believe every one of those named in the Trinity to be truly God in his proper Person These were the determinations of the Synod at that time But nothing hinders but we may briefly declare our knowledge concerning the terms Ousia and Hypostasis Such persons amongst the Greeks as were Expositours of their Philosophy have given various definitions of Ousia but they have not made the least mention of Hypostasis Irenaeus Grammaticus in his Alphabetical Lexicon entitled Atticistes affirms this word Hypostasis to be a barbarous term For it is not says he used by any of the Antients but should it be any where found occurring it is not taken in that sense wherein 't is now used For in Sophocles in his Tragedy entitled Phoenix the term Hypostasis signifies Treachery In Menander it imports Sauces as if any one should term the Lees in an Hogshead of Wine Hypostasis But you must know that although the Antient Philosophers did not make use of this term Hypostasis yet the more modern Philosophick Writers used it frequently instead of Ousia Moreover they have given us as we said various definitions of Ousia But if Ousia may be circumscribed by a definition how can we properly make use of this term in reference to God who is incomprehensible Evagrius in his piece intitled Monachicus disswades us from discoursing rashly and inconsiderately concerning God But he altogether forbids the defining of the Divinity in regard it is a most Simple thing For definitions says he belong to
were stript naked were bound were stoned were slain with the Sword they were persons that wandred about in the Solitudes in Sheep-skins and Goat-skins being destitute afflicted tormented of whom the world was not worthy they wandred in Deserts and in Mountaines and in Dens and Caves of the earth notwithstanding they received a Testimony both from their Faith and from the Works and Cures which the Grace of God performed by their hands But as 't is probable divine Providence permitted these persons to suffer these things having provided some better thing that by those miseries which they underwent others might obtain salvation in God And this was demonstrated by the Event When therefore these admirable persons were superiour to all that force and violence used towards them Lucius quite out of heart advices the Commander of the Military Forces to banish the Fathers of the Monks These Fathers of the Monks were the Egyptian Macarius and he of Alexandria who bore the same name These persons therefore were exiled into an Island wherein there was no Christian Inhabitant In that Island there was an Heathen Temple and a Priest in it whom all the Inhabitants worshipped like a God But when these pious persons arrived in that Island all the Daemons there were seized with a fear and trembling At the same time also this accident hapned The Priests daughter possest on a sudden by a Devil fell into a rage and overturned all things She was extreamly unruly and could by no means be quieted but cried out with a loud voice and spake to those pious persons saying why are you come to cast us out from hence also These men therefore did in that place give another demonstration of that power of theirs which they had received from the Grace of God For they drove the Devil out of the Virgin and having restored her to her right mind delivered her to her Father whereby they induced both the Priest and also all the Inhabitants of that Island to embrace the Faith of the Christian Religion Wherefore they cast away their Images immediately changed the Fabrick of their Temple into the form of a Church received Baptism and with cheerfulness learned all the Doctrines of Christianity Thus these admirable persons persecuted upon account of the Homoöusian Faith rendred themselves more approved brought salvation to others and made the Faith more firm and strong CHAP. XXV Concerning Didymus a blind man ABout the same times God produced another person by whose Testimony he thought fit the Faith should be corroborated and confirmed For Didymus a man admirable and eloquent adorned with all sorts of Learning flourished at that time This person being very young when he had but just learned to read fell into a distemper of his eyes wherewith he was sorely troubled and lost his eye-sight But God instead of corporal eyes gave him those of the mind For what he could not be instructed in by seeing he learnt by hearing For being of an apt and ingenious disposition from his childhood and endued with an excellent wit he far surpassed even those ripe-witted children who had the acutest sight For he became Master of the Rules of Grammar with much ease and arrived to the knowledge of those of Rhetorick with more celerity Proceeding on from thence to Philosophy with an admirable facility he learnt Logick Arithmetick and Musick and treasured up within his own mind the other Precepts of the Philosophers in such a manner that he could readily dispute against those who had perfectly learnt those Arts by the benefit of their eyes Moreover he was so exactly well-skilled in the divine Oracles of the Old and New Testament that he published many discourses upon them he dictated Three Books concerning the Trinity and interpreted Origens Books Concerning Principles setting forth Comments thereupon wherein he asserts that those Books were incomparably well written and that their Cavils are frivolous who accuse Origen and make it their business to speak reproachfully of his Works for they are not able says he to arrive at the knowledge of that Authours perspicacity and prudence If any person therefore be desirous of knowing Didymus's great Learning and the fervency of his mind he may have an account thereof by a perusal of the Books elaborated by him It 's reported that Antonius the Monk discoursed with this Didymus long before the times of Valens at such time as he left the desart and came to Alexandria upon account of the Arians and that perceiving the Learning and knowledge of this person he spake these words to him O Didymus Let not the loss of your bodily eyes trouble you For you are deprived of such eyes as the Flies and Gnats can see with But rejoyce that you have those eyes wherewith the Angels see by which even God himself is discerned and his Light comprehended This was the saying of the pious Antonius to Didymus long before these times we are treating of But at that time Didymus was look't upon to be the greatest Patron and Defender of the genuine Faith who disputed against the Arians unravelled their Sophistick Cavills and confuted their adulterate and fraudulent discourses CHAP. XXVI Concerning Basilius of Caesarea and Gregorius of Nazianzum DIvine Providence set up Didymus indeed as an opponent to the Arians at Alexandria but in order to their Confutation in other Cities it made use of Basilius Caesariensis and Gregorius Nazianzenus Concerning whom I judge it now opportune to give a short account The memory and same of these two persons which is still preserved amongst all men and the Learning contained in the Books written by them might indeed be sufficient to set forth the praises and commendations of each of them But in regard they were persons in an eminent manner usefull to the Church at that time and were preserved by God as being the Incentives of the Orthodox Faith the Subject of our History does of necessity ingage us in an especiall manner to make mention of these two men Should any one therefore be desirous of comparing Basilius and Gregorius with one another and of giving an account of the Life Morals and Virtues that were in them he would be in a great doubt which of them he should prefer before the other For they were both equal to one another whether you respect their pious and exact course of Life or their Learning I mean as well their Grecian Literature as their knowledge in the sacred Scriptures For when very young they went to Athens and were the hearers of Himerius and Prohaeresius the two most eminent Sophistae of those times afterwards they frequented the School of Libanius at Antioch in Syria and by their industry arrived at the highest accomplishments of eloquence And when they were judged worthy to be professours of eloquence many persons perswaded them to enter upon the teaching and profession thereof Others advised them to practise the Law but they despised both
all others esteemed their own Laws of which the Scribes were not onely the keepers but the interpreters also Moreover they were consulted as being taken to be men of great knowledge and skill and who were best able to interpret Signs and Prodigies and also who best knew the mysteries of the Law So we read Matth. 2. 4. Herod there consults the Scribes and in this place of Josephus here the Scribes foretell the meaning of the Prodigies Moreover the Magistrate of the City of Jerusalem who was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had his Scribe as Josephus tells us B. 20. But whither this Scribe was among the number of those that were interpreters of the Law it is hard to say Farther the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst the Egyptians were certain Priests who look't after the Ordinances about things Sacred and had the keeping of the mystical Learning and foretold things to come concerning whom see Joseph L. 2. c. 5. where he calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These after the Cantor and the Horoscopus went in the third place into the Temple wearing wings on their heads and carrying before them in their hands Ink and a Pen with a Book They had also the Hieroglyphical Books of Mercury and those of Cosmography and of the scituation of Countries and of Egypt and of the Nile and of the places consecrated in honour of their Gods committed to their custody as Clem. Alexandrinus writes in his 6 B. Lucianus saith that these sort of men had been of long continuance in Egypt Vales. d After these words Eusebius omits some passages that are extant in Josephus as of this Prodigies's being told to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Magistrate for an account of whom and his office see the Learned Hammond in his notes on Luke 22. 52. e The reading must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. those that beat him as it is in Josephus not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. those that were present although Rufinus followed that reading Vales. f That is the Magistrate of the Temple the chief Priests and the Scribes Vales. g That was Albinus who then was Procuratour of Judea Vales. h Percrebuerat Oriente toto vetus constans opinio esse in satis ut eo tempore Judaeâ— profecti rerum potirentur Id de Imperatore Romano quantùm eventu posteà praedictum patuit Judaei ad se trahentes rebellarunt So Suetonius in the Life of Vespasian * Psal. 2. 8. †Psal. 19. 4. a In the Kings M. S. it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so also in Josephus in his Book of his own Life and in the proeme to his History of the Jewish wars In Sophronius's Book De scriptoribus Eccles. it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So also Sozomen calls him in the beginning of his first Book And Rufinus calls the father of Josephus Matthias Joseppus says he Mâ—thiae fillus ex Hierosolymis sacerdos So it is written in the most excellent M. S. of the Parisian Church Vales. Suetonius in the life of Vespasian has this passage of Josephus Unus ex nobilibus captivis Josephus cùm conjiceretur in vincula constantissime asseveravit fore ut ab eo brevi solveretur verum jam Imperatore b The words of Eusebius are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Nicephorus writes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Josephus seems to confirm who testifies that Apion wrote more Books than one against the Jewish nation But Jerom in Catalogo where he speaks of Josephus's writings defends the ordinary reading Vales. c Josephus in his Books against Apion answers not onely those who had calumniated the Laws and Institutions of the Jews but also he more especially writes against those who had forged certain falsities concerning the original and antiquity of the Jews as appears by his first Book But about the end of his second Book he answers Apollonius Molon and Lysimachus who had written some lies about the Laws and Institutions of the Jews The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore in this place must mean both these to wit the Antiquity and the Laws of the Jewish Nation Vales. a There were so many Books of the Scripture amongst the Jews as they had letters in their Alphabet So Origen tells us in his exposition of the first Psalm and Jerome in proemio galeato where also he saies that there were among them three ranks of these holy Volumes the first contained the Law the second the Prophets the third the Hagiography All which agrees very well with Josephus But in this they differ Josephus makes thirteen Books to be of the second order to wit following the series of the times But of the third he reckons onely four disagreeing from S. Jerom who in the foresaid preface and in that of his before the Prophecie of Daniel reckons up eight Books of the Prophets and nine of the Hagiography But Josephus seems to have placed the Book of Joshua and Judges also those of the Kings Chronicles and Ezra amongst the Prophetical writings not that they contain Prophecies as the Books of the Prophets doe but because they were written by men that were Prophets Vales. b To wit in the book of his own life pag. 1026 Edit Genev. which book is the conclusion of his twentieth and last book of his Antiquities from which it is separated unadvisedly in the Greek and Latine Editions Now that it is the conclusion of the 20 B. of Antiquities Josephus himself tells us at the close of that Book and at the end of this book of his own life Scaliger therefore is mistaken in his Animadvers on Euseb. p. 188 where he saies Eusebius forgot himself here and so is Christopherson who supposing this place in Eusebius to be corrupted altered it But had they seen the Greek M. SS Copies of Josephus or had they consulted the Basil. Edition of him they might easily have found that which I have said to be true to wit that this book of Josephus's of his own life was nothing else but an appendix or conclusion of his 20 book of Antiquities Vales. c Our M. SS Copies Maz. Med. and Fuk. have it thus written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 corruptly as I judge For both Stephanus Byzantius doth acknowledge it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and also Jerom in his book De Scriptorib Ecclesiast calls him Justus Tiberiensis whom we have followed But Scaliger stiles him Tiberiadensis This Justus wrote an History of the Jewish wars as Josephus tells us in his book De vitâ suâ and Stephanus in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Besides this History he wrote a Chronicle of the Kings of the Jews as Photius testifies in Bibliothecâ which work he dedicated to King Agrippa as Scaliger affirms in Animadvers Euseb. pag. 176. And he adds these words Nemo de obitu Regis Ag ippae certiûs pro nuntiare potuit quà m is qui illi opus suum dedicavit i. e. No body could speak
Exod. 39. 30. 〈◊〉 is called a plate of the Holy crown It was a long plate of gold two fingers broad and reacht from one ear of the Priest to the other says Maimon in his Treatise of the Implements of the Sanctuary Chap. 9. Sect. 1. See Ainsworth on the Pentat e In our four M. SS copies Maz. Med. Fuk. and S r Hen. Savills I found it written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. concerning the Apostles themselves the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being in them added Vales. a In the Kings M. S. it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Simon as Rob. Stephens observed Jerom in Chronico testifies that the name of this Bishop of Jerusalem was written two ways to wit Simeon and Simon The same Georg. Syncellus observes and also the Authour Chronici Alexandrini Vales. b That is when Atticus was Deputy of Syria The Syrians used to shew their years by the name of these their presidents Moreover of the Emperours Deputies some were of the Consular order others of the Pretorian Wherefore Atticus is here called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to shew that he was of the Consular order or had been Consul In the M. S. copies of Rufinus his translation that is in the Kings Librarie it is Martyr effectus est cum esset annorum centum xxv i. e. he was Martyred when he was 125. years old Vales. * Book 3. chap. 11. †i. e. Trajans * Book 3. chap. 20. c That is because he married Mary sister to the B. Virgin See note A in chap. 11. of this Book d The Authour Chronici Alexandrini supposes that the Cerinthian Hereticks and the Nicholaïtes are here meant to whom I doe not assent Hegefippus means those Sects which at that time were potent at Jerusalem to wit the Pharisees Sadduces and others of whom hereafter at book 4. chap 22. Vales. e That is because he Preacht the Faith of Christ as he said before and says again B. 4. chap. 22. Vales. f This Hegesippus spoke of the Church of Jerusalem in particular to wi◠that it continued a Virgin untill the death of Symeon unto Trajans time The words of Hegesippus you will meet with hereafter at chap. 22. B. 4. Eusebius seems to have attributed that to the whole Church which Hegesippus spake of the Church at Jerusalem in particular Vales. g All these words to the end of the chapter are wanting in the Maz. Med. and Fuk. M. SS neither doth Rufinus acknowledge them in his translation as appears therefrom And this whole clause seems to me to be Spurious and supposititious For whosoever added it thought the words that went before were Hegesippus his whereas they are not his but Eusebius's as we may see from chap. 22. B. 4. Vales. a He that translated the words of Tertullian into Greek has rendred them unhappily For neither does 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie discipline nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to agree together I would therefore rather translate these words of Tertullian thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. and that they had a certain summary of their polity Vales. b Here also the Greek translatour of Teriullian hath done ill for Tertullian or rather Trajan calls those Oblatos who were brought in before the Judges for so the Latines use to speak The sense therefore of the Emperour Trajans Rescript against the Christians is this that the Governours of Provinces should not too diligently hunt after the Christians by sending out Spies and Officers to take them but if any Christians were by chance found out by their Officers or if they were made appear to be such by their accusers that then they ought to be punished Vales. a This whole elogue of Papias is wanting in our M. SS copies Maz. Med. and Fuk. Neither did Rufinus read these words in his copies as may be gathered from his translation Wherefore I doubt not but they were inserted by some unskilfull Scholiast against the mind and opinion of Eusebius For how can it be that Eusebius should here stile Papias a man most excellently learned and very skilfull in the Scriptures whenas himself does at the end of this book expresly affirm that Papias was a man of an ordinary wit and altogether ignorant and simple Vales. b In the Maz. Med. and Fuk. M. SS 't is read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A little after I read with Isaac Vossius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is which I heartily wish may be found to be fierce which amendment Rufinus his translation confirms For thus he turns it Quas ego opto acriores parari Therefore Rufinus read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies soon or straight-ways the same errour is amended by us hereafter in the sixth book for there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was Printed for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. But Bishop Usher reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See his Annot. on this Epistle number 48. c It is as much as if Ignatius had said Let nothing envy me the Glory of being a disciple of Christ Let no man pluck me from his Embraces The holy Martyr alludes as he uses to doe to those words of S t Paul who shall separate us from the Love of Christ Rom. 8. 35. Vales. See Bishop Usher's notes on Ignatius Epist to the Romans number 52. d This passage of Ignatius his concerning Christ is taken out of the Gospel according to the Hebrews which was either omitted by Eusebius or unknown to him Jerome in his book de Ecclesias Scriptor informs us hereof as also in his 18 B. of Commentaries on Esaiah See Ushers Annotat on Ignatius his Epistles pag. 48. number 23. a In our M. SS Maz. Med. Fuk. and S r Henry Savills it is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. eminent or excellent disciples Vales. a In the tenth book Recognit of Clemens Romanus there is mention of Appion who is said to have come to Antioch with Anubion about the same time that the Apostle Peter came thither But there is nothing said there of Peters dispute with Appion What shall we say then that the book of Clemens which contains Peters dispute with Appion is different from his books Recognit To me indeed they seem not to be two books For if there had been two books of Clemens's the one Recognit the other containing the dispute of Peter with Appion why should Eusebius mention one onely and omit the other There was therefore but one book of Clemens's entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But 't was divided into two parts the former mentioned Matidia and Faustinianus to be acknowledged of their children in the second part was contained the dialogues of Peter and Appion Indeed Rufinus who translated that book of Clemens's into Latine does testifie in his Epistle to Gaudentius the Bishop that there were two parts of this book in the Greek in the one of
and Savil. M. SS read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For Letters c. The Letters about Easter are meant here The Acts of this Synod of Caesarea are extant in Bede in his book concerning the vernal Equinox which some look upon to be Spurious but I think they are in no wise to be despised Baronius accounted them to be genuine Vales. a The chapters of this fifth book were even in our M. S. Copies very much disordered but we have put them into due order from the authority of Rufinus with whom agrees the Kings and the Maz. and Fuk. M. SS For those copies begin the chapter at these words with this Title How many Monuments c. but they call it chap. 28. when as 't is truly the 26 as appears from the Index of the chapters prefixt before the Book The cause of the mistake was that the Titles of the former chapters were set down twice in the foresaid Copies through the negligence of the Transcribers Vales. b The reading in the original is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Valesius thinks it should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Demonstration c Rufinus translates it dialogos dialogues Jerom renders it Tractatus Tracts It may be taken to signifie Sermons or Discourses to the people for in that sense our Eusebius takes the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his 6B chap. 1â— and in the 36 chap. of that book he calls Origens homilies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the term here does properly signifie internoscere ac distinguere i. e. to discern or distinguish The import of Eusebius's words is that those Writers which by some certain mark be was able to distinguish from heretical authours were Heraclitus Maximus c. Rufinus and Jerom instead of Heraclitus read Heraclius Our Historian does here relate first the Ecclesiastick Writers of that time whose names he knew afterwards he mentions those whose books were 〈◊〉 extant but their names were unknown Vales. b The Title of Maximus's Book was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concernâ—ng matter it was composed by way of Dialogue Eusebius quotes a most excellent piece of it in his last chap. of his 7 B. Preparat Evang. where he gives the Authour this Elogue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Maximus a person in no wise obscure for his Christian life and conversation Wrote a seasonable piece entitled concerning matter Vales. c Eusebius does usually quote some passages out of those Authours works which he mentions So he did as we see out of Irenaeus Clemens Hegesippus Papias and others whenever he knew the time of the Authours Writing But in these Writers whom he mentions in this chapter Eusebius says he could not perform this because he could not certainly know the times they lived in but was in want of arguments and proofs thereof Vales. a Nicephorus B. 4. chap. 2â— says the name of this book the Authour whereof is unknown was The Little Labyrinth Photius in Biblioth chap. 48. relates that Caius was the Authour of this book and makes it not the same book with the Little Labyrinth But Theodoret B. 2. Heret Fabul confiâ—ms Nicephorus's opinion and mentions this very story of Theodotus the Tanner and Natalis the Bishop atteâ—ting he had taken it out of the book called Thâ— Little Labyrinth Vales. b Hence it appears that 't was an antient custom in the Church to compose Psalms and Hymns in honour of Christ. Pliny in his Epistle to Trajan mentions this usage amongst the Christians as we have already observed at B. 2. chap. 17. c Perhaps this person was that Caecilius Natalis who by a dispute of Octavius Januarius's before Minucius Faelix at Rome was converted to the Christian Faith as Minucius Faelix relates in his dialogue Indeed the name the time and the profession of this Person doe all agree to make this probable Vales. d The Maz. Med. Fuk. and Savill M. SS read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. to be elected The Kings M. S. and Rob. Stephens read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. to be called Vales. e Valesius says those stripes are meant here which Natalis had undergone for the confession of Christ Quas says he pro Christi confessione perâ—ulerat Indeed Natalis is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a confessour at the beginning of this story and afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Martyr or Witness but perhaps the Authour might mean here the stripes which the story says he received from the holy Angels f These are Logical terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is properly such a proposition as this if it be day there is light 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is such an one as this either it is day or it is light See Diogen Laert. in Zenone Vales. g He speaks of the last advent of our Saviour which the Antient fathers usually speak of not as future but present Vales. h Galen wrote books concerning the forms of Syllogisms and concerning the whole systeme of Philosophy as appears from the catalogue of his works From this place 't is evident that Galen is a very antient Authour which may be collected not onely from the Testimony of this Writer but from many others who have made him contemporary with Aristotle Theophrastus and Plato See Alexander Aphrodis B. 8. Topic. at the beginning Vales. i Some call him Asclepiades but Nicephorus and Rufinus termâ— him Asclepiadotus A little after this instead of Apollonius we read Apollonides as did Rufinus and Nicephorus Vales. k S r Henry Savill in the margin of his M. S. had made it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by him Our other M. SS read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by them But the former reading is the best for the Authour speaks onely of Apollonides here affirming that he put forth two Editions of the sacred Scriptures the latter of which differ'd very much from the former Vales. l The following words Neither did they receive such Copies as these from those who were their instructours nor yet can they shew the Copies out of which they transcribed these things are wanting in the Kings M. S. I think them not very necessary but they are in the Maz. Med. and Fuk. M. SS and in Rufinus's version Vales. m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. by or by reason of is here to be understood These Hereticks under a pretence of the Grace given by the Gospel rejected both the Law and the Prophets upon which account he calls their doctrine Lawless and Atheistical Vales. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lectisâ—imi i. e. the choicest 't is the nearest signification of the word but does not fully explain it for the word imports something more See Viger Idiot pag. 195. b 'T is a critical dispute whether the Greek word be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an Aspirate or a Tenuis some say 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because 't
at that time The Barbarians were in every engagement slain and the limits of the Roman Empire enlarged If we read the Histories of those times we shall find that the affairs of the Empire were never in a better posture when four Princes to wit two Augusti and as many Caesar's did each of them severally repell the Barbarians But although Diocletian and Maximian obtained so many victories over the enemies of the Roman Empire yet they triumphed but once a little before they resigned the Empire as Eutropius and Zonaras do attest The words of Eutropius are these uterque una die privato habitu imperii infigne mutavit Nicomediae Diocletianus Herculius Mediolani post triumphum inâ—lytum quem Romae ex numerosis gentibus egerant pompa serculorum illustri c. Hieronymus in his Chronicon has placed this triumph of Diocletian and Maximian on the eighteenth year of Diocletian At which place Scaliger in his Animadversions remarques that Hieronymus has committed an Anachronism For he says this triumph was performed on the twentieth year of Diocletian some months before he put off his purple But Scaliger himself is mistaken rather than Hieronymus For if Diocletian triumphed in the twentieth year of his Empire that is some few moneths before he resigned it it must be said he triumpht about January in the year of Christ 304 and put off his purple on the Kalends of April of the same year which time of his Resignation Idatius declares in Fastis Whence it follows that he triumpht in winter time and in the depth of winter travelled from Rome to Nicomedia neither of which is probable For neither did the Roman Emperours usually triumph in winter nor was Diocletian by reason of his age and infirmity of body able to endure the trouble of so tedious a journey Besides in the nineteenth year of his Empire in March and April Diocletian was at Nieomedia at which time the persecution against the Christians began as our Eusebius attests in chap. 5. book 8. He was at Nicomedia also when the Palace there was burnt as Constantine witnesseth in his Oration ad sanctorum coetum chap. 25. which fire happened some moneths after the persecution was began Let us therefore suppose that that happened in May is it credible that Diocletian could goe from Nicomedia to Rome triumph there return from thence to Nicomedia put off his purple there and retire into Dalmatia to lead the rest of his life in retirement there is it I say credible he could do all this within ten moneths space Besides the disease by which Diocletian was for some time put out of his wits seized him first at Nicomedia a little after he raised the persecution as Constantine relates Wherefore 't is very improbable that Diocletian troubled with such a distemper undertook such a long journey Further the Authour of the panegyrick spoken to Maximian and Constantine does expresly affirm that Diocletian and Maximian triumphed at Rome some years before the twentieth of Diocletian's Empire see his words Scaliger therefore is much mistaken in saying Diocletian and Maximian triumphed in the twentieth year of Diocletian's Empire Hieronymus more truly placed it on the eighteenth of Diocletian In which year Idatius in Fastis observes that the Emperours gave command by their Edict that Corn should be sold cheap which seems to have been ordered by them after the triumph to please the people of Rome But Cedrenus places this triumph on the seventeenth year of Diocletian Vales. f Eusebius had better have said the first year was scarce compleated For this Resignation of the Empire made by Diocletian and Maximian happened about the beginning of the second year of the persecution on the Kalends of April in the year of Christ 304. the persecution having been begun in the moneth of March of the foregoing year Whenas therefore Eusebius says the second year of this war was not compleated his meaning must be this it was the second year current of the persecution in this sense that other place of Eusebius which occurs in chap. 3. of his B. concerning the Martyrs of Palestine about the end of the chapter is to be taken Vales. g Christophorson translates these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus primus nostrarum aerumnarum auctor the first authour of our sorrows which version is not good but he seems to have followed Nicephorus herein who in B. 7 chap. 16. writes out this passage of Eusebius and instead of his words here set down uses these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the authour of our mischief Vales. h For Constantius and Galcrius parted the Empire between themselves which was the first division of the Empire as Eusebius here asserts For although there had been more than one Augustus at the same time yet they governed the Roman Empire together without making any division of it thus it was in the Reign of Marcus and Verus Neither was there any division made of the Empire in the reign of Diocletianus and Herculius Maximianus when those two Augusti parted neither the provinces nor the legions See Eutropius B. 10. Orosius B. 7. Concerning this division of the Empire which Rome was much displeased at Porphyrius in his Panegyrich to Constantine written by him in the 15 th year of Constantine's reign speaks these words Laccrata cruentis Imperiis pars fessa poli divisa gemebat Sceptra Ausoniae marebat perdita jura Vales. i The meaning of his passage is not that Constantius was the first Emperour that had the honour to be deified after his death for many Emperours before Constantius were by the Senate accounted amongst the number of the divi But that of the four Emperours who governed the Empire together to wit Diocletianus Maximianus Constantius and Galerius Constantius was the first that obtained this honour because he was the first of them four that dyed Vales. k In the Kings M. S. the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a fertunate end of his life but in the Maz Med. Fuk. and Savil. M. SS the words here are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an honourable and thrice-happy conclusion of his life Vales. l In the Maz. Med. and Fuk. M. SS the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 honoured with the title of Caesar onely before or otherwise than all the rest which reading is truer than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by all men For four Augusti at that time governed the affairs of the Roman Empire to wit Galerius Constantinus Maxentius and Licinius But Maximinus was long before made Caesar by Galerius and continued in that dignity untill Galerius's death Wherefore 't is most true what Eusebius here saith that Maximinus was much displeased because there being then so many Augusti he alone had no other title than that of Caesar when as notwithstanding he had received that title of Caesar before the other three Princes now mentioned Vales. m These words whom we before manifested to have re-assumed the Empire after his resignation of it
this it may be concluded that the account of the whole year and of the months was not of one and the same form amongst the Syrians For those of Gaza computed them after one way those of Tyre after another and those of Caesarea after a third manner But I am fully perswaded that the Caesareans used months wholly composed according to the Julian form For in all places of this book of Eusebius's concerning the Martyres of Palestine wherever mention is made of the Macedonian months amongst the Caesarians the mention whereof does frequently occur in it the days of those months do always agree with the days of the Roman months excepting this only place in this first Chapter Therefore I think that the reading in the Text of Eusebius here should be thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on the seventh day of the month Desius Vales. f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is on the fourth feria or to render it word for word on the fourth day of the Sabbath or of the week For the ancient Christians having received a set account of the seven days of the week from the Jews named them as they did Therefore they called them the first of the Sabbath the second of the Sabbath c. See Tertullian in his Book De jejuniis Sometimes they called them feriae Feria is the same with Sabbath Therefore as the Jews termed the week-days the first the second the third of the Sabbath and so on to the Seventh-day which they called the Sabbath so the antient Christians termed them the first second and third feria c. making an alteration only in this that they did not keep the Sabbath-day holy as did the Jews but observed their Sabbath 〈…〉 the first day of the Sabbath which they also called Sunday or The Lord's Day So Isidorus in his Book De Natura Rerum Chap. 3. Bede in his Book De Ratione Temporum says the week-days were called feriae because the Clergy-men by the decree of Pope Sylvester were ordered to keep every day holy But this opinion cannot be true for the days of the week were called feriae long before Pope Sylvester's time as Tertullian informs us Moreover not only the Christians but the Gentiles also received the computation of the week from the Jews as Josephus informs us in the close of his second book against Apion But the Gentiles called the days of the week by the names of the seven Planets which names continue still in use amongst most Nations being as it were certain reliques of the ancient errour of the Gentiles See Tertullian in his Book Ad Nationes Vales. The Ecclesiastical year of old began at Easter the first week whereof was all Holyday the days being distinguished by prima secunda tertia c. added unto feria From thence the days of any other week began to be called feria prima secunda c. See M r Jo. Gregory of Oxford in his Tract De Aeris Epochis Chap. 5. The original of the names which we in England give to the days of the week may be seen in Verstegan's Antiquities pag. 68 c. Edit Antwerp 1605. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we render primum Martyrium the first Martyrdom so the Latine Acts render it whence it appears the Translator thereof did read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. * See B. 8. Chap. 3. He was a Deacon of the Church of Gadara Concerning whom we have this passage in the Mâ—â—ologiâ— at the 18 th of November The commemoration of the holy Martyrs Michaeus Zacchaeus Deacon of Gadara and Alphaeus The blessed Zacchaeus was led before the tribunal having an heavy iron-chain about his neck Vales. a The Greeks in their Menaeum make mention of two Romanus's both Martyrs the one they say was condemned by Asclepiades the Praefect at Antioch in the Reign of Galerius the other was a Deacon of Caesarea concerning whom Eusebius here speaks who as they affirm suffered under Diocletian But in as much as they confess that both of them suffered on one and the same day for they affirm that both of them had their tongues cut out that they both spoke after they were cut out and that both of them were afterwards strangled in prison 't is plain that the Greeks mistake in their making of them two distinct Martyrs I wonder that this opinion of theirs should please Baronius in his notes on the Martyrologie If there were two Martyrs called by the same name to wit Romanus and if they both suffered Martyrdom on the same day at Antioch why does Eusebius mention but one here It will perhaps be answered that Eusebius was resolved to speak of the Martyrs of Palestine onely in this book and therefore that he onely mentioned Romanus the Deacon because he was a Palestinian But Eusebius has made mention of this Martyr in another place to wit in his second Book concerning the Resurrection and Ascension of Christ where he acknowledges but one Romanus who was Martyred at Antioch Vales. b Amongst the Primitive Christians especially in the smaller Towns because the Clergy were few in number one and the same Clergy-man performed two or three Offices Hence 't is that in the Acts of Procopius the Martyr which we related before Procopius is said to have born three Offices at the same time in the Church of Scythopolis to wit the Office of a Reader of an Interpreter and of an Exorcist After the same manner therefore Romanus was both a Deacon and also an â—xorcist in the Church of Caesarea See Vetus Author Question Veter Novi Testament ch 101. Vales. c There was in former times a twofold use of the Exorcists in the Church For their business was to cleanse both those possessed with devils and also the Catechumens who were exorcized more than once For after every examination in their Catechism they were brought to the Exorcist ungirt and with their Shoes off that they might be purged by him See Cyril Hierosolymit in procatechesi ad Illuminandos and Chrysostom in his first Homily ad Illuminandos in his first Tome Vales. d Many of these persons had renounced Christ as Eusebius declares in his second Sermon concerning the Resurrection where he speaks of the tortures inflicted on Romanus which he mentions not here Vales. e I suppose he means Galcrius Caesar for Diocletian made his abode then at Nicomedia The Caesars like Apparitours and Officers went all over the bounds of their own district Indeed in that year when the persecution begun Diocletian lived together with Galerius at Nicomedia in April as Eusebius attests in his eighth book Also a little after the persecution began when the Imperial Palace aâ— Nicomedia was burnt by Lightning Diocletian was at that City as Constantine informs us in his Oration Ad Caetum Sanctorum Wherefore he could not be at Antioch when Romanus was condemned to be burnt which happened about the beginning of the Persecution For Romanus was strangled on the 15 th
Secondly in his dissertation de duplici Synodo Sirmiensi doth by most evident arguments demonstrate that the year of that Synod is truly assigned by Socrates after the Consulate of Sergius and Nigrinianus which was the year of Christ 351. I know Jacobus Sirmondus hath written two books wherein he has endeavoured to maintain Baronius's opinion against Dionysius Petavius But in regard he himself did not publish those books that is an evidence sufficient that at length he acknowledged his own opinion to be false Vales. b The Bishops here named by Socrates sate not in that Synod of Sirmium which was convened against Photinus after the Consulate of Sergius and Nigrinianus in the year of Christ 351 but in that other Synod which was convened there when Eusebius and Hypatius were Consuls in the year of Christ 359 a little before the Council of Ariminum which Latter Synod at Sirmium did also set forth that draught of the Creed which was afterwards recited at Ariminum before which the Consuls names were perfixt And this is evidently made out by Germinius in his Epistle to Valens which is recorded in Hilarius's Fragments and by Epiphanius in Heres Semiarian In the former Sirmium-Synod assembled against Photinus the Eastern Bishops only were present this is attested by Hilarius in his book de Synodis and by Vigilius Bishop of Tapsis in his Fifth Book against Eutyches Vales. c Georgius was not at this time viz. after the Consulate o◠Sergius and Nigrinianus Bishop of Alexandria For he was created Bishop there in the eighth Consulate of Constantius Augustus and in the First Consulate of Julianus Caesar which was in the year of Christ 356. Wherefore he could not sit in the former Sirmium Synod which deposed Photinus in the year of Christ 351. The same must be said of Hosius also who at that time lived under Magnentius's jurisdiction nor was he as yet banished to Sirmium Vales. * See chap. 14. of this book d Theodorus continued to be Bishop of Heraclea in Thracia in the year of Chist 356 as it is manifest from Athanasius's Circular Epistle to the Bishops of Egypt and Libya pag. 290 which Epistle Athanasius wrote in the year of Christ 356 after Georgius's entrance into the See of Alexandria Wherefore Hypatianus must necessarily have been made Bishop of Heraclea after the year 356. Sozomen hath made mention of the same Hypatianus book 6. chap. 7. Eccles. Hist. Vales. e Socrates here means by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ludi Circenses which the Consuls exhibited at their entrance upon their Consulate which by the Latines is termed Consulatum dare Some Consuls besides the Ludi Circenses entertained the people with Scenical Plays and with hunting of wild beasts in the Amphitheatre Vales. f At this place we follow the Sfortian M. S. in which Copy this passage is more fully exprest thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. But those Bishops who staid behind c. Incomparably well in my judgment Indeed that draught of the Creed which was published in the Synod of Sirmium against Photinus is approved of by Hilarius in his book de Synodis as being Catholick but Athanasius in his book de Synodis Arimini Seleuciae condemns and rejects it in the same manner with the other Creeds composed by the Arians Nor do Hilarius and Athanasius disagree with one another concerning this one form of the Creed but about other draughts of it also for example about the Antiochian draught For Hilarius confesseth that the Eastern Bishops had good reason to compose new forms of the Creed when new Heresies arose against the Church But Athanasius doth maintain that those new draughts of the Creed were craftily composed by the Arians with a design to destroy the Nicene Creed Further that this place of Socrates instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which was not best for all men I had rather read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which was not gratefull to all men And so I have rendred it Vales. * Or other explanations concerning the Faith a Socrates and with him Sozomen is here doubly mistaken First because he supposed that there were three forms of the Creed drawn up in the Synod of Sirmium against Photinus whereas there was one form only composed in that Synod which besides Socrates is recorded by Athanasius pag. 900. and by Hilarius in his book de Synodis 338. Edit Paris 1631. Secondly in regard he asserts that that form of the Creed which was published in the Greek tongue at the Synod of Sirmium against Photinus was dictated by Marcus of Arethusa Marcus of Arethusa did not dictate that form I have mentioned but another before which the Consuls names were prefixt and which was afterwards recited at Ariminum as Nicholaus Faber hath already observed in the Preface he wrote to Hilarius's Fragments from Germinius's Epistle We must therefore distinguish between the three Synods of Sirmium each of which published their form of the Creed The first was convened against Photinus in the year of Christ 351. The second was assembled in the year of our Lord 357 wherein the Blasphemie of Hosius and Potamius was composed The third was celebrated when Eusebius and Hypatius were Consuls in the year of Christ 359 wherein that Creed was drawn up which Marcus of Arethusa dictated Vales. b Instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 another the reading must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other two or two more as it is in the Allat M. S. For Socrates here recounts three draughts of the Creed composed at Sirmium the two latter whereof he saith were written at first in Latine and afterwards translated into Greek Which in my judgment is not true I grant indeed that that Creed which by Hilarius is termed Hosius's Blasphemie was at first published in Latine But the other which had the Consuls names prefixt before it was undoubtedly at first dictated in the Greek tongue For he that dictated it viz. Marcus of Arethusa and the rest of the Bishops then assembled were almost all Graecians Lastly the subscriptions of the Bishops who subscribed this form are extant in Greek in Epiphanius in Hares Semiarian Vales. c Without doubt it must be Ariminum not Sirmium which reading Epiphan Scholasticus followed as appears from his Version See chap. 37. of this second book Vales. * Ephes. 3. 15. * Are not d Hilarius seems to have read otherwise For in his book de Synodis where he records this Creed he renders this passage thus fiquis c. and if any one affirming one God but shall not profess Christ to be God the Son of God before ages c. Vales. †Enlarged * Esai 44. 6. †John 1. 14. e In the Allat M. S. and in Athanasius's book de Synodis this Anathema is thus worded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and we have rendred it accordingly after the same manner Hilarius read this passage as from his Version appears Vales. †Gen.
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Arius says Athanasius de Adv. Christi prosesses the flesh only to be the Cover of the Deity and asserts the Word to have been in the flesh in the stead of our inner man that is the soul. In this opinion he was followed by Eunomius as Theodoret informs us Contr. Haeres book 5. chap. 11. But the Apollinarians differred from him for they distinguished as we may see from this passage in our Socrates between the soul and mind of man acknowledging in the second Edition of their Heresie that God the Word assumed an humane Body and a Soul which latter Arius and his crew denied but not the mind or spirit of man the place whereof was supplied said they by the Word it self This Phylosophick notion making Man consist of three parts a body a soul and a mind they borrowed from Plotinus so says Nemeseus in his de Nat. Hom. * Or Proceeded to a War against c. a We have the same account in Idatius's Fasti Tauro Florentio his Coss. c. in the Consulate of Taurus and Florentius Constantius Augustus died at Mopsucrinae in the confines of Cilicia a Province of Phaenicia on the third of November And Julianus made his entry into Constantinople on the eleventh of December But what Socrates adds to wit that Julian was proclaimed Emperour in that City must be so understood not as iâ— that were the first time of his being saluted Emperour For he had been proclaimed Emperour in the Gallia's a long while before whilst Constantius was alive But upon his entry into Constantinople he was declared Emperour by the senate and Constantinopolitans and â—ook possession of the Empire of the East Vales. * That is Gallus and Julianus b There are several Epistles of Libanius's extant written to this Nicocles particularly the seventh Epistle of his fourth book wherein Libanius excuses the insolency of a Citizen of Antioch who had abused him amongst other passages he says that the fault of one Citizen was not to be ascribed to the whole City For in a City containing an hundred and fifty thousand inhabitants 't is not to be wondred at if one bad Citizen be â—ound wheras neither in your Sparta which yet has Lycurgus for its Law-giver all are alike good and generous Vales. * That is Constantinople c This Oration of Libanius's Against the School-masters is not to my knowledge now extant Vales. d Maximus of Epirus or the Philosopher of Bizantium is mentioned by Suidas he wrote concerning insoluble Questions and concerning numbers as also a Comment upon Aristotle which he dedicated to Julianus the Emperour his Scholar Now if this be true Julianus had two Maximus's his masters in Philosophy the one an Epirote or a Byzantine the other an Ephesian There is extant an Elogue of Maximus the Ephesian in Libanius's fourty first Epistle of his fifth book his words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. and the Philosophy which he received from Maximus the Improver of Philosophy whilst be lived and its Extinguisher when he died Vales. e Epiphanius Scholasticus renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the term here a Crown of Laurel with which the Cities were usually adorned Indeed the Provinces of the Roman Empire were wont to be represented in this habit wearing Crowns like Towers upon their heads as may be seen in the Notitia Imperii Romani Yet any one may conjecture that this place should be thus worded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with which the Cities adorn the Emperours Vales. * Or Chief Priest f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the phrase here in the original is by Epiphanius Scholasticus rendred thus quaesitâ occasione he took an occasion c. But there may be another rendition of these words thus By doing hereof he raised a Civil War against Constantius having undertaken an expedition against him Vales. g The term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signifie here to be fulfilled compleated or perfected Epiphanius Scholasticus therefore renders it thus non enim fine multo sanguine studium ejus Philosophi poterat adimpleri i. e. for the desire of this Philosopher could not have been accomplished without much bloud Musculus's Version which is declarari could not have been declared and also Christophorson's which is intetnosci could not have been discerned are in my judgment absurd Vales. * Or Force †Or without the damage of others h Translatours perceived not that this place was faulty I doubt not but Socrates wrote thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the rapines of Eusebius the principal person of the Bed chamber to him For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the Provost or chief Officer of the sacred Bed-chamber which Office Eusebius then bore Socrates does frequently use this word in this sense as we may see in his second book chap. 2. Vales. i Gregory Nazianzen in his former Invective against Julian does confess also that the publick way or manner of travelling and conveying of necessaries from place to place was well rectified by Julian For Constantius had impaired it much by allowing the Bishops every where the use thereof that they might come to the Synods 〈◊〉 by him But what regulations Julianus made in this matter 't is hard to determine And yet we may conjecture from Socrates's words that the way of travelling by Chariots which was also called the Cursus Clavularis was put down by him and that travelling on Horse-back upon Horses provided for publick uses remained only in use Johannes Lydus has treated at large de publico Cursu in his book de Mensibus Vales. * See Eusebius's Eccles Hist. book 6. chap. 19. note p. ‖ The Persians suppose Mithra to be the Sun to whom they offer many sacrifices No person was initiated into the Mysteries hereof before he had arrived to them by certain degrees of torture and had declared himself holy and approved by sufferings †That is A secret place in the Heathen Temples to which none but their Priests had access a Or by all manner of treacheries for that 's the reading in the Sfortian M. S. Vales. a For an account of the reasons of the Alexandrians hatred towards Georgius consult Ammianus Marcellinus book 22. pag. 223 c. Edit Paris 1631. See also Epiphanius in Heres 76 to wit that of the Anoâ—oeâ— Vales. * Or good-behaviour b In the Florentine and Sfortian M. SS instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherefore I doubt not but this whole place is to be thus restored 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But when you had repressed your fury c. Vales. c He means Artemius Commander in chief of the Forces in Egypt as he is stiled by Theodoreâ— book 3. chap. 17. Eccles Histor. who relates that he was deprived of his estate and beheaded by Julian because being Captain of Egypt in the reign of Constantius he had broken many images It was he who
and whereas the Imperial commands do require this confession Vales. f Instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about those of his own opinion it must be thus mended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with or to those of his own opinion The same errour occurs before in this chapter where he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we have corrected by rendring it thus For some were one way affected towards the Books of the Ancients others another Vales. g I read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with those Churches of his own Faith For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Churches is understood The priviledges of Churches are a priviledge of sanctuary a priviledge of receiving Embassies and the like Vales. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perhaps he means the Imperial power for Constantius and Valens were great favourers of these Sects †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 making a joynt attempt again a Musculus and Christophorson seem to have thought as by their Versions appear that this man was born in Brittain which though perhaps true yet cannot be made out from this passage in our Socrates Zosimus Histor. book 4. says this Maximus was a Spaniard Our Countrey-man Guildas calls him Germen Plantationis Britannicae a branch of the Britannick Plantation Camden mentions him in his Britannia pag. 240 241 Edit Lond. 1607. where he quotes some verses out of Ausonius in which he is termed Rhutupinum Latronem the Richborow-Thief * Or Merogaudus b I will here propose my doubt to the Reader I am of opinion therefore that Thessalonica which was the chief City of Macedonia was under Theodosius's Empire My reasons are 1. because Theodosius after he had been Proclaimed Augustus by Gratianus at Sirmium went to Thessalonica resided there a long while and received the Embassies of the Cities of the East and when he fell sick he was baptized by Acholius Bishop of that City as Zosimus Prosper Socrates and others do relate 2. During his Residence in that City he published many Laws which are extant in the Theodosian Code in the Titles de fide Catholica and de Haereticis which Laws are dated at Thessalonica 3. Lastly in the Constantinopolitan Synod at which 't is manifest the Eastern Bishops only were present Acholius Bishop of Thessalonica is reckoned as may be seen in the eighth chapter of this book After Theodosius's times there is no doubt but Thessalonica was under the Eastern Emperours For 't was the chief City of the Oriental Illyricum which contained Macedonia and Dacia as we are informed from The Notitia of the Roman Empire But whether or no it was under the Eastern Emperours about the beginning of Theodosius's Reign may deservedly be doubted For Aurelius Victor and Zonaras do expresly affirm that Gratianus gave Theodosius only the East and the Thracia's And Zosimus relates that Valentinlanus Junior upon his division of the Empire with his Brother had Italy Africk and Illyricum Neither had Constantius or Valens who governed the Eastern Empire before Theodosius Illyricum under their Dominion In the times of Valens 't is certain Mamertinus Praefect of the Praetorium Governed Italy Africa and Illyricum at the same time as Amm. Marcellinus attests Notwithstanding Valens after his Brother Valentinianus's death seems to have annext Macedonia and Dacia to his own Empire by the consent of his Brother's Sons Which Collection I make from the close of Amm. Marcellinus's thirty first book where he says that Valens's Souldiers and Palatines who had been besieged by the Goths at Adrianople went out after that Siege was broken up and hastned some into Dacia others into Macedonia supposing that Valens had retired thither See Amm. Marcellinus pag. 468. Edit Par. 1636. Vales. * Or Richomelius a The phrase is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Christophorson renders ill thus Valentinian's Souldiers For Socrates means Valentinian himself who was on this year when Valentinian himself was the third time Consul with Eutropius conquered by Maximus as Sulpitius informs us in his first book concerning the life of Martinus and together with his mother Justina his Praesects and Comites fled to Thessalonica Vales. b But Zosimus says that Maximus's Embassy was received by Theodosius and that he acknowledged him to be Emperour and admitted of his Statues and ordered Cynegius Praefect of the Praetorium in the East that Maximus's Statues should be proposed to publick view at Alexandria and that he should declare to the people that Maximus was Colleague of his Empire Which thing Sigonius in his book de Occidentati Imperio has done ill to place on the year of Christ 384 when Richomeres and Clearchus were Consuls in regard it was done in Valentinianus's third Consulate which he bore with Eutropius on the year of Christ 387. For on this year Cynegius was Praefect of the Praetorium Vales. c He should rather have said Aquileia For thither Maximus went as Zosimus and the other Chronologers do inform us Vales. * This Character does well befit too many persons of our own nation at this juncture a Socrates i s mistaken For Maximus was slain not on the 27 th of August but on the 28 th of July as Idatius says in his Chronicon The same is recorded in those Fasti which Jacobus Sirmondus has published under Idatius's name For these are the words there Theodosio Aug. II. Cynegio Coss. c. In the second Consulate of Theodosius Augustus which he bore with Cynegius on that year Maximus the Tyrant that publick Enemy is slain by Theodosius Augustus three miles from Aquileia on the fifth of the Calends of August that is on the 28 th of July Also his Son Victor is slain a few days after in the Gallia's by Theodosius's Comes Further this Victor had been created first Caesar and then Augustus by his Father as we are informed from this Old Inscription recorded by Sigonius in his 9 th book de Occidentali Imperio DD. NN. MAG CL. MAXIMO ET FL. VICTORI PIIS FELICIBUS SEMPER AUGUSTIS BONO R. P. NATIS Where you see Maximus has two Praenomina to wit Magnus Clemens Sulpitius Severus book 2. Histor. Sacr. calls him Clemens Maximus But by Orosius he is termed Magnus Maximus Vales. b Here is a mistake either of Socrates or of his transcribers in calling Symmachus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a person that had born the Consulate For Symmachus whose Epistles are extant at this day had not at that time been Consul but three years after he bore a Consulate with Tatianus Vales. a Instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about Antioch in Syria I had rather word it thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at Antioch in Syria Vales. * Compare chap. 5. with chap. 9. of this book †See chap. 5. * That is Mithra's Temple what these Mysteries were Socrates has told us book 3. chap. 2. †Pieces of wood made in fashion of a mans privities * See book 3. chap. 2.
〈◊〉 In the Kings Sheets these words are added in the margin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which words some Learned man hath added by conjecture as 't is sufficiently apparent I think there is only one word wanting here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give I word it thus therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Then he commanded c. Which sort of expression is usuall with Eusebius Vales. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 At the margin of Morâ—us's Copy 't is mended thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But this emendation is needless For amongst the Ancients money was deposited in Temples on account of securing it and there kept by Guards or Watches of Souldiers as Juvenal's Old Scholiast remarks and Lipsius in his book de Magnitudine Romanâ To these Souldiers therefore Eusebius alludes By the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Palatini may also be meant here who guarded the sacred Treasurie In the Kings Sheets 't is over written in the same hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Faithfull which displeases not In the Fuketian Manuscript 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doubtless the reading must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 piety as I found it mended in the margin of Turnebus's Copy Vales. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Adverb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not without reason troubled both the Translatours as may be gathered from their Renditions But they ought to have considered that Palatium a Pallace is taken in a twofold sense For sometimes it imports the Court of a Prince In which sense there were at that time only Four Pallaces to wit answerable to the number of the Emperours But sometimes every House wherein an Emperour does usually dwell is termed a Pallace And in this sense there were very many Pallaces in the Roman Empire For there was scarce a City which had not a Pallace Such Pallaces or Imperial Houses as these were under the dispose of certain Officers who were termed Curae Palatiorum concerning whom there is mention in the Notitia Imperii Romani Eusebius therefore means these Pallaces I am of opinion that the Publick or Royall Villae are likewise meant which the Caesariani look't after Vales. * Or Only into Constantius entred â— wisedome of thought a After this word in the King's Sheets the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pious is elegantly added in the margin thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 't is in the Fuketian and in Moraeus's Copy That is to all the Palatines who bore Office under him and also to the Judges themselves who were placed in power Power is a term properly attributed to the Greater Judges of which sort were the Praefecti Praetorio So Eusebius expresses himself hereafter and Socrates book 2. chap. 16 where he speakâ— concerning Philippus Praefectus Praetorio Moreover in the Gesta purgationis Caeciliani Agesilaus Official to the Proconsul Aelian says thus Potestas tua c. Your power c. See what I have remarked above at book 5. chap. 1. of Euseb. Eccles. Histor. note e. Vales. c In the King's Copy at the side of these words is set such a mark as this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we have taken notice of such a mark as this some where before but that Letter which is set before the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not open on the top here but closed on all sides Whence I am rather induced to believe that this mark is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that it signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is attend consider For this mark is added at places which have something of difficulty For instance the newness of this expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may put the Reader to a stand here unless he knows that these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are to be understood Vales. * Or Worthy of d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the King's Copy the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. amongst the chiefest and nearest c. Those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ought to be made use of are a redundancy of expression frequent with Eusebius For so he has exprest himself in his books of History as I well remember Vales. a We have made a division of a new chapter here from the Authority of the Kings Manuscript whereto agrees the Fuketian Copy and the old Sheets Vales. †Or The Nature of affairs b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledging or some such like word is wanting In the Kings Sheets after these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confessing or avowing is added in the margin Turnebus and S r Henry Savill add 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 knowing after the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But that reading which I have produced out of the Kings Sheets is better For the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is elegantly opposed to that which follows immediately to wit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemning In the Fuketian Manuscript 't is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. * Or The Polytheisme of the Atheists c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S r H. Savil has noted at the margin of his Copy that perhaps the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 't is said is to be added But that emendation is far better which I found written in the Kings Sheets at the margin it is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which reading we have exprest in our Version The reading in the Fuketian Manuscript is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. d He alludes to that saying of Epicurus concerning God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Nemesius relates it chap. 44 Cicero in his first book de Natura Deorum and Laertius pag. 795. Vales. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Kings Sheets the last word is undermarked with points and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is written over which I like better Further in the same Sheets before these words these are added in the margin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and these Acts of worship were performed with him only They that will may follow this conjecture of the Learned Antiquary To me these words seem not necessary Vales. * Or Imperial power †Viz. Diocletian and Maximian a This place is highly remarkable For from it this conclusion may be made that the Persecution began on Diocletian's eighth and Maximian's seventh Consulate and not on the foregoing year as Baronius will have it Concerning which matter I have spent many words in my notes on Euseb. Eccles. History see book 8. chap. 2. note c. For whereas Eusebius affirms that the Emperours Diocletian and Maximian divested themselves of their purple on the year after the Persecution was begun and whereas 't is manifest that they did that on the year of Christ 304 what I have said does necessarily follow to wit that Diocletian's Persecution was begun on the year of Christ 303. Vales. * Or Siege †Or Adorable * See Eusebius's Eccesiastical
the Emperour himself sate in the midst on a golden chair between the two rows of the sitting Prelates The Tribunal of the nineteen Accubita at Constantinople was some such like thing made in imitation of this Constantinian Feast as I think Vales. See Evagr. book 5. chap. 13 note a. * Multitudes or people a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Theodoret and Nicephorus the reading is truer thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. in order to c. Vales. †Or To a consent of unity a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These words of Constantine Athanasius seems to have had a respect to when in his Book de Synodis Arimini Seleuciae pag. 873. he observes that the Fathers of the Nicene Synod spake one way in their exposition of the Faith another in their defining the day of Easter For in this business they made use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it pleased or it was thought good But in their Exposition of the Faith they did not in any wise say placuit it pleased but ita credit sancta Universalis Ecclesia the holy and Universall Church believes thus 'T is certain the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Athanasius mentions is not found in the Synodick Letter but in this Letter only of Constantine's which any one might conjecture was not without reason taken for the Synodick Letter Vales. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Nation I reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 usage with Christophorson and Gruterus We have noted the same fault in his Eccles. Hist. In the Kings Sheets and S r Henry Savils Copy 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 usage Vales. * Or Completion of this observation c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Gelasius and Nicephorus the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a decent Law But Socrates and Theodoret defend the common reading Vales. d For they who celebrate the Lord's Pascha with the Jews seem to be conscious of that wickedness which the Jews committed against the Lord. But Christophorson renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Opinion with whom I agree not Vales. In Socrates instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 impure the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hostile or Adverse * Or Violence e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrates Theodoret Gelasius and Nicephorus have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. which I like not For 't is rightly said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. f Whereas the Paschal Neomenia or New-moon of the Jews began from the fifth day of the moneth March and was ended on the third of April hence it sometimes hapned that their Pascha began before the Aequinox So they kept a twosold Pascha in the same year if you understand the Solar or Julian year to wit from the Vernall Aequinox of this year to the Vernall Aequinox of the year following Ambrosius says the same in his Epistle to the Bishops of Aemilia where he writes that the Jews sometimes celebrated the Pascha on the twelfth month that is according to the Latines or Orientals For the Jews never celebrated the passover on that month which amongst them was accounted the twelfth but on the fourteenth day of the first month Further this repetition or doubling of their passover which Constantine objects against the Jews seems to me not at all momentous For the Jews might have retorted against the Christians namely that they celebrated Easter twice in the same year if we understand the year current For let us suppose that this year Easter was celebrated on the tenth of the Calends of May on the year following it must necessarily be kept sooner And so there will occur two Easters amongst the Christians within the space of one year current Which nevertheless will not happen if you count the year from the Aequinoctial Cardo to the Vernal Aequinox of the other year See Epiphanius in Haeres Audian and Petav. Animad p. 294. To whom add Aegidius Bucherius de Paschali Judaeorum Cyclo cap. 3. Vales. g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Theodoret and Nicephorus the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what reason therefore c. so 't is also in Socrates and Gelasius From whom the following words must be amended in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your prudence And a little after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in no likeness Although in those writers I have mentioned the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the likness of any thing In the Fuketian Copy 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon no pretence Further the Authour of the Apostolick Constitutions book 5. chap. 16. seems to allude to these words Which any one will confess who compares that place with these words of Constantine Vales. h He means the head or beginning of the Fast which by the Quartodecimani was begun at one time by the other Christians at another Indeed the following words concerning the days after Easter do inform us that these words are to be understood concerning the held of the Fast. Otherwise it would be a superfluous Repetition But if any one had rather understand these words concerning the end of the Lent fast I shall not gainsay him See Chrysostome in his Homily against those who fasted the first day of Easter pag. 714. Vales. * In the Greek 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nation a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Socrates Theodoret Gelasius and Nicephorus the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for these reasons But it would be better thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 't is above In the Fuketian Manuscript 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on this account and so 't is in Turnebus's Copy Vales. b Every one sees that the words are misplac't here 'T is righter therefore in Gelasius thus The Britannia's Egypt and the Libya's Socrates has Libya which reading I like best Vales. c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Theodoret and Gelasius the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which displeases me not provided 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is diligens supputatio an exact reckoning whence 't is termed Computus Paschalis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken in another sense in the Synodick Letter of the Nicene Council where it treats concerning the cause of Meletius For 't is there taken for the rigour of the Law and 't is opposed to equity or a dispensation Vales. See Socrates book 1 chap. 9. note b. d The Jews are termed persidious and perjured men who whenas they acknowledged no King or Lord besides God afterwards denied the same Lord and attested they had no other King but Casar Vales. e After these words there was a whole line wanting in Robert Stephens's Edition which 't was easie to have made good from Socrates Theodoret Gelasius and Nicephorus in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein there is no mixture of or converse with strange errour and impiety This is what Constantine had said above
PROV GALLECIAE There is also extant a ninth Oration of Gregory Nazianzene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Julianus the Peraequator Vales. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Every one sees that the words are transposed here which is a fault frequently committed in these Books At my peril therefore write thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the end the party that had c. In the Fuketian Copy the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than him in favour of whom Sentence had past are wanting But Turnebus and S r Henry Savil place those words after the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might not go away The said S r Henry Savil hath noted at the margin of his Copy that perhaps it should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the comma after the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be blotted out Which when I had read I was extreamly glad that my conjecture was confirmed by the judgment of that most Learned person But whereas S r Henry Savil adds there that Christophorson seems to have read thus in this I can't assent to him For Christophorson read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and renders it Libenter willingly Further Turnebus does here mend it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which pleases me Vales. * The Emperour's a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I doubt not but It should be written thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Than which emendation there is nothing more certain In the Kings Sheets the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S r Henery Savil at the margin of his Copy mends it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Fuketian and Turnebian Copies the reading of this place is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. b Instead of the Scythae Socrates book 1. chap. 18 and Sozomen book 1. chap. 8 term them The Goths Indeed Greek Writers do usually term them Scythae whom the Latines call Goths So Libanius Themistius Eunapius and many others Further the Goths were vanquished by the Roman Army in the Country of the Sarmatae on the twelfth of the Calendr of May in the Consulate of Pacatianus and Hilarianus as 't is recorded in Idatius's Fasti that is on the year of Christ 332. Vales. c Socrates says the same at the place before cited Indeed Jordanes in his book de Rebus Geticis speaking concerning the Emperour Philippus says the Romans paid an annual tribute to the Goths And Petrus Patricius in his Excerpta Legationum attests the same concerning Tullus Menophilus where he writes concerning the Carpi Vales. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Fukctian and Turnebian Copies and from the Kings Sheets Vales. * Or Drove under †Or Took up a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From the Fuketian Copy it must be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Further this Conspiracy of the Sarmatae against their Masters hapned on the year of Christ 334. In those Fasti which Jacobus Sirmondus terms Idatius's these words occur Optato Paulino His Coss. Sarmatae servi universa Gens Dominos suos in Romaniam expulerunt Jerome agrees also in the Chronicon who terms those Slaves of the Sarmatae Limigantes And so does Amm. Marcellinus See the Excerpta de Gestis Constanti Vales. For a further account of these Limigantes the Reader may consult D r Howell's History second part pag. 11 and 127 128. ‖ Or All sorts of * Eminent or conspicuous a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I found it written in the Fuketian Manuscript and in the Kings Sheets So Graecians termed that gate of an house which they who go in do first of all meet with and they accounted that to be the Limit to pass which was lookt upon as a thing indecent in Matrons Philo's words in his Book de Specialibus Legibus are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Without doubt Philo alludes to these Verses of Menander which Stobaus records chap. 163. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These very verses of Menander Harpocration does tacitly mean in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. b Homer's words Odyss 1. near the beginning are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which M r Hobbs has thus Englished The Blackmoors are the utmost of mankind As far as East and West asunder stand So far the Blackmoors Borders are disjoyn'd c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These words seem to be superfluous unless Eusebius had a mind to express the matter it self more clearly in this manner in favour to those who had not been present and seen it For the pictures of the Emperours were usually so drawn as that they might represent the Embassadours of the Barbarians making them presents or the Provinces paying them Gold as may be seen in the Notitia of the Roman Empire Vales. d He means the Barbarick manner of weaving of which sort is that in Virgil in the first Book of his Aeneid Et circumtextum croceo Velamen acantho Vales. * Or Laid in order e Amm Marcellinus says the same in his 21 Book pag. 190 and 195 of our Edition Vales. †Or Fell in love with a The only person that I know of who speaks concerning this Embassie of Sapor to Constantine is Libanius in his Oration entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 119 where he writes that Sapor King of the Persians when he had resolved upon entring into a War with the Romans and in order to that affair wanted Iron took such measures as were fraudulent and crasty and dispatcht away Embassadours to Constantine who might adore him as his Lord and might request of him a vast quantity of Iron under a pretence indeed that with his Arms he might revenge himself on some Barbarians that were his neighbours but in reality that he might make use of that Iron against the Romans Vales. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The other Translatours render these words so as if they were all spoken concerning Constantine supposing the import of them to be this that Constantine entred into a League with the Persian King But Valesius whom we have followed takes the former part of this clause as meant concerning the Persian King and therefore has plac't a semicolon after his rendition of these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Or Acknowledge the Divine Faith †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so the reading is in Theodoret book 1. chap. 25. where a more perfect Copy of this Letter occurs and therefore we have taken our Version of it from thence a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It must doubtless be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of safety although in Theodoret book 1. chap. 25 Edit Stephen the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is wanting But Epiphanius Sholasticus acknowledges that word as his Version informs us in the 3 d book of the Tripertite History Vales. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T is evident that this place is imperfect In Maraeus's Copy I found it supplied in the same manner as 't is in the Geneva Edition namely thus 〈◊〉
Readings I read therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 befitting or agreeable to with Christophorson Scaliger Gruter and others or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which comes nearer to the footsteps of the written reading In the Fuketian Copy 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Saviour's Commands It should I think be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Precepts of Salvation as 't is noted in the margin of the Geneva-Edition You may also write 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c in the Father's Commands For the mistake seems to have risen from a contracted way of writing In the Kings and Fuketian Copy and in the Sheets at this place 't is thus written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Christophorson has rendred this place thus Et ex illis qui id temporis hominum vitae adjumento fuerunt longè optimos advocasse ad 〈◊〉 and had called to himself by far the best of those men who at that time were an assistance to the life of men But who ever exprest himself in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the best men of the most usefull Wherefore I doubt not but this place is thus to be mended and pointed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and having called together unto c as we have rendred it In the Fuketian and Turnebian Copies the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. * Or Adverse Nature c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Turnebus's and Moraus's Book 't is mended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c to allure and deceive c. But the Fuketian Copy has it truer written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Robert Stephens's Edition it was Printed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which reading is confirmed by the Kings and Fuketian Copy and by the Sheets But in Moraeus's Book I found it mended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and I don't understand why the Geneva-men admitted this emendation into the Text. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has the same import with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S t Paul calls it Sapere ad sobrietatem to think soberly or to sobriety Vales. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I had rather write 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 't is noted in the margin of the Geneva-Edition For 't is our common usage to term such Calamities as these which do sometimes happen to good men the Visitations of God But Christophorson has followed the common reading and renders it Mandatum the Command Vales. f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Moraus's Book the Learned man has mended it at the Margin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which displeases not For there are many Platonick Expressions in this Oration Vales. * Or Given place to anger g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 't is in Moraeus's Book wherein 't is also mended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not ill In the Fuketian Copy 't is likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and we have rendred it accordingly Vales. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This place is thus to be restored from the Fuketian and Turneb Copies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. As to the following clause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I had rather write thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or should attempt to resist him c. Vales. i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Moraeus's Book the Learned man hath set these words at the margin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There are indeed many passages in this Oration taken out of Plato's Philosophy which the Learned Reader will of himself acknowledge Vales. * Or Is encompast with k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Fuketian and Turneb Coples the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scaliger Gruter and others have mended it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which emendation I likewise found written in Moraeus's Book It might also be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the two last words being left out which as every one sees are not very necessary here But the Fuketian Manuscript agrees with those Books of Scaliger and Gruter Vales. m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I doubt not but it should be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is made use of instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the Translatour who rendred this Oration of Constantine into Greek had but little skill in the Greek tongue and was careless enough as 't is apparent from many places Constantine gives a reason here why the worshippers of the supream God would never revenge themselves nor resist force by force For should they do that saith he they must fight with their adversary but they would be uncertain of the Victory But if they shall in no wise defend themselves then they have a most certain Victory for God fights for them This is the meaning of this place which I admire at it neither Christophorson nor Musculus understood Vales. n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the will of the only God It must be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c by the sole c as I found it mended in Moraeus's Book And a little after I read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 't is in the same Book For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is understood In the Fuketian Copy and Old sheets the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. * Ground-work o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I would rather write 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Nominative case For that seems to me far more elegant Presently the reading must doubtless be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is understood which is used a little before In the Fuketian Copy and in the Sheets the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. when any trial of Calamities falls out c. Vales. p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Fuketian Manuscript 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 At the margin of the Moraean Copy 't is mended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 possesses him c. Which reading Christophorson has followed And so 't is written in the Fuketian Manuscript Vales. r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Besides we have where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken adverbially for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Moraeus's Book at the margin 't is mended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which reading Christophorson has exprest in his Version To me this expression seems scarce Greek Therefore I had rather write 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein c. Yet in the Fuketian Copy 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Vales. * Or just Souls b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Constantine says that he himself had been a spectatour of the ruine and destruction of those two Cities Memphis namely and Babylon which had heretofore been most potent We must therefore make enquiry at
〈◊〉 This verse was omitted from Moraeus's Book the Fuketian Copy the Kings Sheets and from that Edition of the Sibylline Verses which Seb. Castalio published it is to be supplied in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Although I had rather read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Neuter Gender Now that this verse was omitted we are informed from the Old Version in Saint Austin de Civit. Dei B. 18 chap. 23 which runs thus Exuret terras ignis pontumque polumque Inquirens Further they had expunged this Greek Verse for this reason because the Acrostick seemed to be entire without it Nor did they perceive that in the Acrostick the name of Christ is written with a diphthong thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reason of doing which I don't understand Yet the Latine Acrostick in Saint Austin has retained it Indeed the Old Greeks made the name of Christ to consist of eight Letters writing it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a diphthong as Irenaeus informs us Book 1. Chap. 10. Vales. f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the reading is in the ordinary Edition of the Sibylline Verses The Old Version does likewise confirm this writing for thus it runs Volvetur Coelum c. Yet I doubt not but it should be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is understood which occurs a little before Vales. g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Fuketian Copy and the Kings Sheets the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Vales. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Castalio's Edition this verse is written thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which reading the Old Version in Saint Austin confirms where 't is thus rendred Sed Tuba tunc sonitum tristem dimittet ab alto Orbe gemens facinus misâ—rum variosque Labores In the Fuketian Copy the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Edition of the Sibylline Versâ—s the reading is truer thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enlightening Believers In the Edition of the Sibylline Verses the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the call'd which I am better pleased with both because the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is made use of a little before and also in regard it cannot be rightly said of the Faithfull that they are illuminated by Baptism For the Faithfull are not enlightned by Baptism but the Gentiles rather who are called to the Faith But after they shall have been illuminated by the Sacred Laver then they are termed the Faithfull Father the twelve Streams denote as I suppose the twelve Apostles Vales. l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Betuleius has well remarked that the Sibyll does allude here to the second Psalm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt rule or feed them with a Rod of Iron Whence it appears that what we have observed above from Gregory Nazianzene is true namely that the Sibyll or whoever wrote the Sibylline Verses hath borrowed many passages out of the Sacred Scriptures Therefore in my opinion 't is plain that these Verses as Cicero has long since told us were not published by a Sibyll possest with a Prophetick Fury but were written with a considerate and composed mind by some body under the Cover of â— Sibyll's name Vales. * Or In Riddles a In the Fuketian Copy and in the Old Sheets this chapter is begun from these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And these things were predicted after the end of the Acrostick Vales. b ' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I embrace Christophorson's Emendation who read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the truth it self c. Vales. * Or Our men c The passage in Cicero which Constantine means is extant in his second Book de Divinatione where he makes mention of some Verses of the Sibyll and of an Acrostick But that Acrostick spoken of by Cicero can no way be proved to be the very same with this which Constantine produces here Yea the contrary may be gathered from Cicero's words For in that Acrostick mentioned by Cicero the Romans were warned that they should choose themselves a King if they would be safe as Cicero does there attest Therefore the first Letters of those Verses shewed as 't is probable the name of Julius Caesar. But in this Acrostick produced by Constantine there is no such thing extant Wherefore 't is not to be doubted but Cicero meant an Acrostick different from this though Sebastianus Castalio thought otherwise as did likewise several other persons Besides what Constantine adds is false namely that Cicero rendred this Greek Acrostick concerning Christ into Latine and inferted it into his own Books Vales. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here also we must acknowledge the unskilfullness of the Translatour who has made use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no good expression but it should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. †Begun or instituted e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Fuketian Copy and in the Sheets I found it written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T is apparent that it must be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 place And so 't is in the Fuketian Copy Further neither the Fuketian Manuscript nor the Old Sheets begin a new chapter here Vales. g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Add these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the wisht-for King of whom mention is made in the fast Verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nevertheless in Virgil's Verse there is no such expression as this But Constantine as it may be supposed had altered Virgil's Verses a little and had designedly expunged Saturn's name that he might serve his own design Vales. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The last word is wanting in the Fuketian Copy and in the Sheets But Turnebus had noted at the margin of his Book that perhaps it should be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This verse is in my judgment to be restored thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the verse which precedes this wants no mending Yet in the Fuketian Copy and Turnebus's Book 't is written thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And a little after where the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ's Divinity these words seem necessary to be added 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Fuketian Copy 't is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so 't is in S r Henry Savils Book Vales. l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I write 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c But least any one which is an amendment wholly necessary and 't is strange to me that neither Scaliger nor any of the other Correctors saw it For whereas these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c went before of necessity it must follow
Constantine himself but by the Greek Translatour who misunderstood Virgils last Verses For Constantine himself took those Verses of Virgil in their true sense as 't is visible from hence For when he had quoted Virgils words which run thus Cui non risere Parentes Nec Deus hunc Mensâ Dea nec dignata cubili est presently finding fault with the Poet as 't were he adds these words How says he could his Parents smile on him in regard His Father is God who wants both a body and figure also Besides how can a Bed and a Table be any ways agreeable to God who 't is manifest is wholly void of a Marriage-bed nor is he affected with the pleasures of meates Then he adds these words whence what I have said plainly appears namely that Constantine understood Virgil's Verses excellently well Verùm illis humanam quandam Generationem exponunt concedamus ut ita loquantur But let us pernsit those who set forth a certain humane Generation to speak thus In which words he excuses Virgil in regard he was ignorant of Christ's Divine Generation But in the Greek translation wherein Virgils Verses are expounded ill this period has no coherence with the foregoing words Vales. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I embrace the conjecture of Learned men which I likewise found noted in S r Henry Savil's Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and who make it not c. Vales. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Rules of Grammar enjoyn it to be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 't is in the Fuketian Copy Further this is a most elegant definition of the Christian Religion but 't is basely corrupted by an ill punctation I reade therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most desireable of all Goods c. Nothing certainer than this reading nothing more elegant Constantine terms Religion the School-mistris of a most Holy Hope in regard She teaches us to hope for things Celestial and to place all our hope in God not in earthly and frail Goods In the Fuketian Copy the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is the same punctation in the Sheets Vales. k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we stood in need of It must questionless be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereby we were healed For 't is elegantly said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is healed by Thy Remedies Vales. l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I had rather write 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His Work or workmanship Vales. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Any one might with good reason guess that it ought to be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But whereas the sense is plain without this Emendation I think no alteration is to be made here Vales. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the Greeks are wont to call Rome as may be made appear by innumerable instances Thus Tatianus terms it in his Oration adversus Graecos where he speaks concerning the worship of Jupiter Latiaris as also Porphyrius in his Book de Abstinentiâ Moreover Eusebius in his Tricennalian Oration concerning Constantine's praises terms Rome thus as we shall see there Vales. c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I had rather write 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c that I might address c. Vales. * Or Chast and good d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Before these words there is an Asterisk plac't in Robers Stephens's Edition whereby 't is shown that some words are wanting here in the Manuscript Copies But the Geneva-Edition has taken out those Asteriscks which had been diligently noted by Robert Stephens especially in the end of this book Further some words are wanting here which I make good thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Both against Thee c. For he speaks to the Christian Religion Vales. e He means the field wherein the Martyrs underwent their last punishment For it was the usage as well amongst the Gracians as Romans that Criminals should have punishments inflicted on them without the Gates as I have at large remarked in my notes on Amm. Marcellinus Whence it was that Offenders led to punishment were said ad campum duci to be led to the field So Saint Austin in his first Book against the Epistle of Parmenianus chap. 8. Vales. f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That is and didst voluntarily deliver up thy self being supported c. Constantine alludes to the courage of the Martyrs who voluntarily offered themselves to the Judges and ran to death on their own accord without compulsion Indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not said but concerning Him who does any thing voluntarily as for instance concerning Christ who of his own accord delivered Himself for the salvation of mankind Christophorson therefore has rendred this place ill thus tâ—ipsum adversariis opposuisti thou hast opposed thy self against the Adversaries Our conjecture is confirmed by the Fuketian Copy wherein 't is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Cruelty of impious Mortals In mine own judgment I have happily found out the emendation of this place For whereas before these words the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 occurs the two last Letters of this word being repeated I have restored the place thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Then the cruelty of the impious c. Nothing more certain Away therefore with Gruter's and Christophorson's conjecture who reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Yet the Fuketian Copy confirms that reading of Gruter's But I have observed before that many ill corrections are found in that copy Vales. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After these words Christophorson Scaliger and others add 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you might have seen as I also found it in Moraeus's Book and in the Fuketian Copy But there is no need of adding these words here in regard the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 precedes whereto all these words ought to be referred Nevertheless I do acknowledge that the discourse would be far more perspicuous if you should add these words Vales. i He speaks to one of the persecutors Maximinus namely as 't is in the Title of this Chapter For he persecuted the Christians with more of Cruelty and Malice than the others Vales. * Or perswaded k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The reading I think ought to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unless there be a fauls in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vales. l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The last word must be blotted out in adding which Christophorson Scaliger and Gruter did ill I found the same term added likewise in the Fuketian and Moraean Copies But it is not at all necessary only after the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or polluted with filth a Semicolon must be placed And thus Portesius understood this place who has indeed rendred these words more happily than Christophorson in this manner Omnis illa Curae tua Omne studium ne sordibus opplerentur Ita Magni primariique Dii humanâ—
same sense Sozomen took this word in his fore-cited 24 chapt Moreover we must note that Melitius was more severely dealt with as being the authour of a Schism than the Melitiani For the Nicene Fathers deprived Melitius of all Episcopal jurisdiction and left him only the name of a Bishop But they permitted the Melitians to exercise their Functions in the Church That is that the Deacons should Minister in the Order of Deacons and that the Presbyters should Consecrate and Baptize as should also the Bishops They only took from them their power of Voting in Elections which was prudently done of the Nicene Fathers least the Melitians should clandestinely promote some men of their own party to the Ecclesiastick preferments Vales. g It should rather be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishops as it is in Theodoret and in the Allat M. S. Vales. h These words do plainly confirm what we said before to wit that not only the Presbyters and Deacons but the Bishops also who had been Ordained by Melitius are here spoken of For if they here treated concerning the Presbyters only that were to succeed in the places of other Presbyters why should the Nicene Fathers use so great caution require so many and great things for this reason that one of the Melitian Presbyters should be put into the place of a defunct Presbyter of the Catholick Church For the holy Fathers expresly prohibit that any of the Melitians shall succeed in the place and dignity of the defunct unless he seem worthy of that honour unless the people Elect him and unless his Election be confirmed by the Bishop of Alexandria What need of so great caution and diligence in the promotion of a Presbyter 'T is therefore apparent that these words do rather belong to the Bishops In the Elections of whom most especially the peoples suffrages were necessary and whose Election must besides be confirmed by the Bishop of Alexandria in regard he was the Metropolitane of all Egypt Vales. i Socrates does undeservedly stile Melitius an Arch-Heretick For neither do the Nicene Fathers nor Athanasius in his 2 Apology nor Epiphanius accuse Melitius of any Heresie they only affirm he was the Authour of a Schism But when the Melitians had afterwards joyned themselves to the Arians which as I remarkâ— before hapned after the Nicene Synod and Melitius's death they turned their Schism into an Heresie as Augustine writes concerning the Donatists In this sense therefore Melitius may be termed an Arch-Heretick Vales. k The Sfortian Florentine M. SS add these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Verses which Christophorson found in his Copy as appears from his Version Concerning Arius's Thalia see Athanasius in his second Oration against the Arians When Socrates says that this book of Arius's was condemned by the Synod we must not so understand him as if the Poem it self were particularly condemned but the Doctrine only contained in that Poem Vales. * He was a Maronite a most obscene Greek Poet. * In the Allat M. S. the reading is concerning our Saviour which I like better than this concerning our Great Saviour Vales. l This Epistle of Constantine the Emperour is not rightly placed by our Author It should rather be placed immediately after Constantin's Letter to the Churches which is the next in this chapter For certainly those Letters which concern the Council of Nice should regularly be placed first But this Letter does not concern that Council nor does it in the least mention the Council Athanasius in his Epistle ad Solitar alludes to this Letter of Constantin's where he speaks thus concerning the Emperour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Why does he to wit Constantine endeavour to reduce the Arians into the Church whom he himself calls Porphyrians Vales. * In book 3 chap. 18. of Eusebius's Life of Constantine where we have this Epistle of the Emperour the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Valesius at that place and here renders thus ab illâ turpissimâ societate conscientiâ from that most abominable society and their consciousness Of this his Version he gives this reason they who celebrate Easter with the Jews seem to be conscious of that wickedness which they committed against our Lord. See his Annotat. at the book and chapter now cited * Violence m Instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Florent and Sfortian M. SS the reading is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 always which reading Theodoret confirms In book 3. chap. 18. of Eusebius's Life of Constantine it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereas the Jewish Paschal Neomenia or new Moon began from the fifth day of March and was concluded at the third of April hence it sometimes hapned that their Passover began before the Aequinox So that they celebrated two Passovers in one year suppossing you mean the Solar and Julian year that is accounting from the Vernal Aequinox of this year to the Vernal Aequinox of the year following Ambrosius asserts the same in his Epistle to the Bishops of Aemilia where he relates that the Jews sometimes celebrated their Passover in the twelfth month that is according to the Latines and Eastern men For the Jews never kept their Passover on their own twelfth month but on the fourteenth day of their first month Moreover this celebrating of their Pasover twice in one year which Constantine objects against the Jews seems to me not at all momentous For the Jews might have returned the objection upon the Christians to wit that they celebrated Easter twice in the same year For suppose Easter is this year kept on the tenth of the Calends of May that is on the 22 d of April next year it must necessarily be kept sooner And so there will occur two Easters amongst the Christians within the space of one year current But this will not happen if you reckon the year from the Aequinoctial Cardo to the Vernal Aequinox of the year following See Epiphan pag. 824. Edit Petav. and Petav. Animadvers pag. 294 295. See also Aegidius Bucherius de Paschali Judaeorum Cyclo chap. 3. n This Letter of the Emperour to Eusebius and also the two next are misplaced For they have no relation to the Council of Nice neither do they make the lest mention of Arius or the Arians Yea the first of Constantin's Letters to Eusebius was written before the Council of Nice as Eusebius himself testifies in his 2 d Book of Constantin's Life Chap. 46. Vales. o We meet with this Letter of the Emperours to Eusebius at book 2. chap. 46. of Eusebius's Life of Constantine where these three words that Persecutor Licinius are wanting being added here instead of a Scholion by Socrates or some other Scholiast He â—erms Licinius a serpent by reason of his craftiness and age Hence we may conjecture that this Letter was written soon after Licinius's deposition See Valesius's notes on book 2. chap. 46. of Eusebius's Life of Constantine p Here we made choice
of this reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. having now acknowledged c. By the term fear in the foregoing clause he means the Christians who through fear of persecution had neglected the Churches or renounced the faith The term Unbelief belongs to the Heathens who had demolished the Churches and divers ways vexed the Christians See Valesius's notes at the Book and Chapter before cited q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the term here used signifies an Office or company of Apparitours attending on a Magistrate i. e. a certain number of Souldiers waiting on the Judges 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the Praesects of the Praetorium so termed because they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over the Presidents and Rectours of Provinces Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the phrase here used imports the Office of the Praetorian Praesecture concerning which consult the Notitia Imperii Romani Further the Office or Attendants of the Prefect of the Praetorium was more honourable than the Offices of all the other Magistrates For as the Prefect of the Praetorium excelled all the other judges as well Military as Civil in dignity so his Officials or attendants were lookt upon to be more honourable then the other officials Hence in the Chalcedon Council Action 3 the Office of the Praefects of the Praetorium is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Valesius's notes at the before cited book and Chapter * He means the City of Constantinople r In Eusebius's Life of Constantine book 4. chap. 36. where this Letter occurs this place is far otherwise read and pointed than it is here so aâ—so it is in Theodoret book 1. chap. 16. Vales. s Concerning the Rationalist and his Office we have spoken before in our notes on Eusebius By Dioecesis is meant here the Diocess of the East The old Romans called a certain number of Provinces which taken together were under a Deputy of the Praetorian Praefecture by this name Dioecesis For the Prefect of the Praetorium had under his jurisdiction many Dioeceses but the Deputies had each but one Dioecesis This term began to be used in this sense about Constantin's time as appears from his Letters and from some Laws in the Cod. Theod. See Valesius's Annotations on Eusebius's Life of Constant. B. 4. chap. 36. * He means our Blessed Saviours Sepulchre t Constantine here terms Licinius the publick enemy after whose destruction he says the sacred Sepulchre of our Lord which had been before concealed was discovered Licinius was slain in the year of Christ 326 as 't is recorded in Fast. Idat. And on that very year when Helena came to Jerusalem the Sepulchre of our Lord was found By the name of the publick Enemy the Devil might here be meant were not this contradicted by the expressions here used For the Devil was not then vanquished and overcome when the Sepulchre of our Lord was cleared from the rubbish that covered it Besides the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 slaughter is more expressive being meant of Licinius than of the Devil See Valesius's notes on Euscbius's Life of Constant. book 3. chap. 30. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the faith autority or estimation of this miracle c. u He means the Temple built by Adrian the Emperour on Mount Calvary in honour of Venus which receptacle of Paganism was demolished by Helena Constantines mother and in the room thereof was built a magnificent Temple at this day called The Temple of the Sepulchre the description whereof you may see in Sandys Travels book 3. pag. 125. c. Edit Lond. 1673. †There are two Laws made by Constantine extant in the Cod. Theod. the one in Tit. de usuris the other in Tit. de Haereticis written to this Dracilianus The former of these Laws bears this Inscription Imp. Constantinus Aug. ad Dracilianum agentem vices Praefectorum praet that is Emperour Constantinus Augustus to Dracilianus Deputy to the Praefects of the Praetorium This Law was published at Caesarea in Palestine on the 15 th of the Calends of May when Paulinus and Julianus were Consuls The other is said to have been published on the Calends of September Constantinus Aug. being the seventh time and Constantius Caesar Coff that is in the year of Christ 326. In which year Constantine wrote this Epistle to Macarius Bishop of Jerusalem Further we must remarke that the Praefects of the Praetorium are here stiled clarissimi most excellent For as yet they had not received the title of Most Illustrious Moreover in other of Constantin's Laws the Praefects of the Praetorium are stiled Most Excellent Now as the Praefects of the Praetorium were in Conctantin's time allowed only the title of Most Excellent so the Deputies of the Praetorian Praefecture had in the said Constantin's times only the title of Most Perfect given them as the Epistle to Probianus Proconsul of Africa shews which we meet with in Athanasius's Apology to Constantius pag. 794. See Valesius's notes on book 3. chap. 31. of Eusebius's Life of Constantine x At this place the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the Model or Delineation of the Fabrick that was to be erected It is taken in the same sense in the Epistle of Himerius Rationalist of Alexandria to the Praefect of Mareotis which Athanasius has recorded in his Apology pag. 803. For after he had said that Augustus and the Caesars had permitted Ischyras to build a Church in his Town he orders the Governour of that Town that he should forthwith draw a Model of the future building and transmit it to his Office 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Valesius's notes at the book and chapter before cited y The inner roofs of Churches were commonly framed two ways For they were either beautified with arched or embowed roofs or else painted with Mosaick-work Concerning the arched or embowed roofs this place of Constantin's Letter is an evidence Procopius evidences the use of the Mosaick-work in his first book De Fabricis Justiniani where he describes the Temple of Sancta Sophia Now the arched roofs were usually adorned two ways For they were either guilded with gold or painted which latter way was first invented by Pausias as Pliny attests book 35 chap. 11. Hist. Natural See Valesius's notes at the book and chapter before cited z Instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He added the reading must necessarily be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He published For the Roman Emperours did usually propose to publick view those Rescripts they wrote to the Cities Therefore at the close of the Rescript they added this word Proponatur let it be published as we have observed in our notes on Eusebius So Constantine when he had wrote many Letters against Arius and his followers commanded they should be proposed to publick view in the Forum Of this sort was Constantin's Epistle to Arius and the Arians which Gelasius Cyzicenus has recorded in his 3 d book De Gestis Synod Nicaenae which Epistle
History For when Gregory Bishop of Rome supposing the Inhabitants of this Island to be still intangled in the errours of Paganism had sent hither Augustine the Monk to convert them to Christianity he unexpectedly found not only the Christian Religion disseminated amongst them long before his arrival but Bishops also rightly and duely constituted which Prelates could not in my simple judgment be supposed the Subjects of the Roman Bishop because he was so far from having any knowledge of them that he did not believe there was one single Christian in this Island But though Augustine at his arrival found not the British Bishops dependants on the Roman See yet he resolves to use his utmost endeavour to make them such In order to which by the assistance of â—thelbert King of Kent as Bede tells us book 2. chap. 2. Eccles. Histor. he summons together the Prelates of the adjacent Province of the Britons advises them to alter their ancient usages and to accept of him for their Arch-bishop But they having an Arch-bishop of their own already to wit the Bishop of Kaerleon and looking upon it to be a strange and unheard-of thing that they should become Subjects to a Forreigner wholly refused him and his monstrous proposal telling him that they would not own him for their Arch-bishop and as to their ancient customs and usages that they could not relinquish them without the consent and licence of their own Nation Whereupon they desired a second Synod might be convened At which there met seaven Brittish Bishops whose names you may see in Sir Henry Spelmans Councils Tom. â— pag. 106 and many other Learned men who by Dionothus or as Bedâ— calls him Dinoâ—th Abbot of Bangor gave Augustine the Monk this answer See Sir Henry Spelman as before pag. 108 109 Be it known to you and without doubt that we are and every one of us obedient and subject to the Church of God and Pope of Rome and to every true and pious Christian to love every one in his degree with perfect charity and to help every one of them by word and deed to be the sons of God As for any other obedience I do not know that I owe it to him whom â—e call the Pope or that he hath right to challenge or require to be the Father of Fathers This obedience we are ready to give and pay to him and to every Christian continually Besides we are placed under the Government of the Bishop of Kaerleon upon Uske who is to supervise under God over us to make us keep the spiritual way What treatment the Brittish Prelates found from Augustines hand after they had given him this answer the Reader may see in Bedâ— at the book and chapter now quoted Where we find this Augustine their pretended convertour threatning them with a War Which by his instigation see M r Wheelocks notes on Bed Eccles. Hist. book 2. chap. 2. Ethelâ—ridus King of the Northanhumbrians waged against them wherein no less than 1200 Brittish Ecclesiasticks were slain at one time After this the Romish Bishop for upwards of nine Centuries exercised a supream Ecclesiastick power in this Nation though several of our Kings promulged severe Laws against it But now at length his Tyrannick yoak is broken off and our Church enjoys its ancient priviledges which may that God continue to it by the most pretious bloud of whose eternal Son it was purchased Amen g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They are the words of the second Canon of the Constantinopolitan Synod which Dionysius Exiguus renders thus qui sunt super Dioecesim Episcopi c. the Bishops who are over a Dioecesis There may be a twofold sence of these words For first They may be termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who are over a dioecesis or preside over a whole Dioecesis of which sort is the Bishop of Alexandria or the Bishop of Antioch who is constituted not over a Province but over a Dioecesis Or secondly they may be termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who are without their own Dioecesis So Zonaras explains these words in his Comment on this Canon Lucas Holstenius has embraced the former sense of these words For at the Margin of his copy he had made a remark that this passage in Socrates is to be explained thus ne Episcopi c. Least the Bishops set over their own Dioecesis's should invade the Churches situate without their limits But the latter sense is the truer which the Canon it self declares in the following words for the Fathers add 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the uncalled Bishops come not beyond their Dioecesis Wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prelates without their bounds which title Socrates has given Gregory Nazianzen at chap. 7. of this book because of his removal from the Bishoprick of Sasimi which was in the Pontick Dioecesis to Constantinople Further it is to be noted that Dioecesis in this Canon does not signifie a Diocese as that word is commonly used or a Province as the Greek Interpreters Zonaras and Balsamon supposed but it imports many Provinces joyned together which are subject to one Governour Whence the title of this Canon is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning Dioeceses For its express words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the fore written Canon concerning Dioecesises being observed 't is manifest that a Provincial Synod will govern affairs throughout every Province You see what the title of this Canon is and how it distinguishes a Province from a Dioecesis For 't is not forbidden by this Canon that Bishops should goe out of one Province into another to celebrate Ordinations that being not to be done otherwise To instance in the Asian Dioecesis see note f. the Fathers prohibit not a removal out of Lycia into Pamphilia nor out of Caria into Lycia on account of Ecclesiastick business but they only forbid them to pass out of one Dioecesis into another Vales. * That is Constantinople h The term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not here used in such a sense as to signifie a Patriarchate strictly so taken Nor must we think that these Prelates here mentioned by Socrates were constituted Patriarchs properly so called because as Valesius well remarks there are more than one named here to be superintendents over one Dioecesis for instance Helladius Gregorius and Otreïus are assigned for the Pontick Dioecesis Now what that power was which is here given to these Prelates by the Synod or rather by the Emperour Theodosius himself will appear from an inspection into the occasion of their being intrusted with this power The Emperour Theodosius perceiving the Churches to be notoriously pestred with Arianisme took a resolution to extirpate it In order whereto he published an Edict which is mentioned by Sozomen book 7. chap. 9 and is still extant being the third Law in the Theodosian Code Tit. de fide Catholicâ to this effect that in all places the
possession of the Churches should be delivered to such persons only as would acknowledge and profess one and the same Deity of the Father Son and Holy Spirit in a subsistency of three persons equal in honour and power In order to a more clear manifestation of those persons that owned this acknowledgment and profession such of them as were in Constantinople and Thracia were by this Imperial Law obliged to hold communion with Nectarius Prelate of the Constantinopolitan See those in the Pontick Dioecesis with Helladius Gregorius and Otreïus c. For these Prelates says Sozomen the Emperour himself approved of after he had seen and spoken with them and also they had an eminent repute for their pious Government of their Churches And the Emperour orders further in his Edict that whosoever dissented from a communion of faith with these Prelates in their several districts he should be expelled out of the Church as a manifest Heretick You see then that the power given to these Prelates here was not properly Patriarchichal but only this that their faith was to be the standard as it were to measure that of others by and a communion with them the Test for admitting persons to or expelling them from Ecclesiastick preferments But though we affirm that the Prelates here mentioned by Socrates were not constituted Patriarchs properly so called yet we see no reason of making an inference from hence as Valesius in his note here does that Patriarchs were not constituted by the Constantinopolitan Fathers For this is plainly repugnant to our Socrates's fore-mentioned words in this chap. viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they constituted Patriarchs having made a distribution or division of the Provinces On which distribution of the Provinces the entire constitution of Patriarchs has its sole dependence For from it arose Dioecesis's over which Patriarchs were set See the Learned D r Beveredge's notes on the 6 th Canon of the Nicene Council pag. 52 and on the second Canon of the Constant. Synod pag. 94. * See Socrates book 2. chap. 26. book 2. chap. 16. note a. a This Funeral Oration in praise of Melitius Bishop of Antioch is now extant amongst the Works of Gregorius Nyssenus Vales. a Athanarichus King of the Goths entred Constantinople in the Consulate of Eucherius and Evagrius on the eleventh of January and died on the twenty fifth of the same month as 't is recorded in Idatius's Fasti and in Marcellinus's Chronicon On the year following which was the year of Christ 382 when Antonius and Syagrius were Consuls the whole Gothick Nation surrendred it self to Theodosius on the 3 d of Octob. as says the same Idatius Vales. * In the Greek he is called Merogaudus here and hereafter †His name in the Greek is Satornilus b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christophorson renders these word thus the forms of the Creed delivered by the Ancients Epiphanius Scholasticus thus the traditions of the Ancients I like neither Version For Socrates means the Books of the Ancient Doctors of the Church and more especially the interpretations of Sacred Scripture put forth by them 'T is certain what he terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expositions here he does a little after call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Books of the Ancients Wherefore I have here chosen to render it Expositions as Musculus does For what Socrates here calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a little lower he terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Exposition of the Ancients Vales. c Instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accommodated it must undoubtedly be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 flourished Which emendation is confirmed by Epiphanius Scholasticus for thus he renders it De Antiquis Ecclesiae Doctoribus qui ante divisionem floruissent concerning the Ancient Doctors of the Church who flourished before the division Vales. * Insist or rely upon †Or Dispersion d Instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make known their Draught of the Creed I had rather read as Nicephorus does 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to set forth and deliver in to him in writing a Draught c Vales. c This Draught of the Creed which Eunomius then presented to the Emperour Theodosius I have by me in Manuscript for which I am oblieged to the most famous and Learned Emericus Bigotius In the Bavarian Manuscript and in Livineius's Copy this Draught of the Creed was placed at the latter end of Gregorius Nyssenus's Books against Eunomius as Gretser attests But in the Florentine Copy from which Bigotius transcribed this Creed it was placed before those Books Nor will it be unusefull to insert it here For though it contains Eunomius's whole impiety yet some things occur in it in no wise despicable EUNOMIUS's Creed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whereas God and our Saviour Jesus Christ according to a most just sentence has said that he will confess before God and the Father those which should confess Him before men and that he will deny such as should deny Him and whereas the Apostolick Doctrine does exhort us to be always ready to give an account to every one that asketh it Whereas lastly the Imperial commands do require this Confession with all readiness We confess what our Sentiments are and that We Believe in one only true God according to his own Doctrine not honouring Him with a false voice For He cannot lye But is by nature and Glory truly one God without beginning always and eternally alone Not parted or divided into many as to his Substance according to which he is one nor existing sometimes one at others another no◠receding from what he is nor formed from one Substance into three Persons For he is altogether and wholly one continuing always alone in one and the same manner Having no companion of his Divinity no partaker of his Glory no Consort of his power no Assessour of his Kingdom For he is one and the only Omnipotent God God of Gods King of Kings and Lord of Lords The Highest over all the earth the Highest in the heavens the Highest in the Highest the Heavenly things true in being what he is and always continuing so True in his Works true in his Words The beginning of all Subjection Power Empire Above Conversion and free from change as being incorrupt Not dividing his own Substance in begetting nor being the same begetting and begotten or existing the same Father and Son For he is incorrupt In working in no wise wanting matter or members or natural instruments For he stands in need of nothing WE BELIEVE also in the Son of God the only Begotten God the First begotten of every Creature Christ the true God not unbegotten not before he was named the Son without Generation begotten before every Creature Not uncreated The Beginning of the Waies of God in order to his Works and being the Word in the beginning not without a beginning The living Wisdom the operating Truth the subsisting Power the begotten Life as being the Son of God