Listed 100 (total found 117) sub titles with search on: Religious figures biography for wider area of: "TURKISH RIVIERA Region TURKEY" .
ANTIOCHIA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Acacius, a Syrian by birth, lived in a monastery near Antioch, and, for his active defence of the Church against Arianism, was made Bishop of Berrhoea, A. D. 378, by St. Eusebius of Samosata. While a priest, he (with Paul, another priest) wrote to St. Epiphanius a letter, in consequence of which the latter composed his Panarium. (A. D. 374-6). This letter is prefixed to the work. In A. D. 377-8, he was sent to Rome to confute Apollinaris before Pope St. Damasus. He was present at the Oecumenical Council of Constantinople A. D. 381, and on the death of St. Meletius took part in Flavian's ordination to the See of Antioch, by whom he was afterwards sent to the Pope in order to heal the schism between the churches of the West and Antioch. Afterwards, he took part in the persecution against St. Chrysostom (Socrates, Hist. Eccl. vi. 18), and again compromised himself by ordaining as successor to Flavian, Porphyrius, a man unworthy of the episcopate. He defended the heretic Nestorius against St. Cyril, though not himself present at the Council of Ephesus. At a great age, he laboured to reconcile St. Cyril and the Eastern Bishops at a Synod held at Berrhoea, A. D. 432. He died A. D. 437, at the age of 116 years. Three of his letters remain in the original Greek, one to St. Cyril, (extant in the Collection of Councils by Mansi, vol. iv. p. 1056,) and two to Alexander, Bishop of Hierapolis.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Sep 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Evagrius, of Antioch, was a native of Antioch, the son of a citizen of that place,
named Pompeianus, and a presbyter apparently of the church of Antioch. lie travelled
into the west of Europe, and was acquainted with Jerome, who describes him as
a man "acris ac ferventis ingenii." During the schism in the patriarchate
of Antioch, he was chosen by one of the parties (A. D. 388 or 389) successor to
their deceased patriarch Paulinus, in opposition to Flavianus, the patriarch of
the other party. According to Theodoret, the manner of his election and ordination
was altogether contrary to ecclesiastical rule. The historians Socrates and Sozomen
state that Evagrius survived his elevation only a short time; but this expression
must not be too strictly interpreted, as it appears from Jerome that he was living
in A. D. 392. He was perhaps the Evagrius who instructed Chrysostom in monastic
discipline, though it is to be observed that Chrysostom was ordained a presbyter
by Flavianus, the rival of Evagrius in the see of Antioch. Evagrius had no successor
in his see, and ultimately Flavianus succeeded in healing the division.
Evagrius wrote treatises on various subjects (diversarum hypotheseon
traclatus). Jerome says the author had read them to him, but had not yet published
them. They are not extant. Evagrius also translated the life of St. Anthony by
Athanasius from Greek into Latin. The very free version printed in the Benedictine
edition of Athanasius (vol. i. pars ii.) and in the Acta Sanctorum (Januar. vol.
ii.), professes to be that of Evagrius, and is addressed to his son Innocentius,
who is perhaps the Innocentius whose death, A. D. 369 or 370, is mentioned by
Jerome. (Epist. 41 ad Rufinum.) Tillemont receives it, and Bollandus (Acta Sanct.
l c.) and the Benedictine editors of Athanasius (l. c.) vindicate its genuineness;
but Cave affirms that "there is more than one reason for doubting its genuineness
;" and Oudin decidedly denies the genuineness both of the Greek text and
the version. In the library of Worcester Cathedral is a MS. described as containing
the life of St. Antony, written by Evagrius and translated by Jerome: there is
probably an error, either in the MS. itself, or in the description of it. (Catal.
MSS. Angliae et Hib. vol. ii.)
Tillemont has collected various particulars of the life of Evagrius
of Antioch. Trithemius confounds him with Evagrius of Pontus. (Socrates, Hist.
Eccles. v. 15; Sozomen, Hist. Eccles. vii. 15 ; Theodoretus, Hist. Eccles. v.
23; Hieronymus (Jerome) de Viris Illust. 25; Tillemont, Memoires, vol. xii.; Cave,
Hist. Lit. vol. i., ed. Ox. 1740-43; Oudin, de Scriptor. et Scriptis Eccles. vol.
i. col. 882; Trithemius, de Scriptor. Eccles. c. 85; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol.
vii., vol. x.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Flavianus, of Antioch. According to Evagrius he was originally a monk of Tilmognon,
in Coele-Syria ; and, as appears from Theophanes, afterwards became a presbyter
and apocrisiarius of the church at Antioch. He was promoted to the see of Antioch
by the emperor Anastasius I. on the death of Palladius, in the year 496, or 497,
or 498, according to calculations or statements of Baronius, Victor Tununensis,
and Pagi respectively : the last date, which is also given by Tillemont, is probably
correct. The church throughout the whole Byzantine empire was divided by the Nestorian
and Eutychian controversies and the dispute as to the authority of the Council
of Chalcedon : and the impression that Flavian rejected the authority of that
council may perhaps have conduced to his elevation, as the emperor countenanced
the Eutychian party in rejecting it. But if Flavian was ever opposed to the council,
he gave up his former views after his elevation to the bishopric.
His period of office was a scene of trouble, through the dissensions
of the church, aggravated by the personal enmity of Xenaias or Philoxenus, bishop
of Hierapolis, in Syria, who raised the cry against him of favouring Nestorianism.
Flavian endeavoured to refute this charge by anathematizing Nestorius and his
doctrine; but Xenaias, not satisfied, required him to anathematize a number of
persons now dead (including Diodorus of Tarsus, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret
of Cyrus, and others), who were suspected, justly or not, of Nestorianism, declaring
that if he refused to anathematize them, he must remain subject to the imputation
of being a Nestorian himself. Flavian refused for a time to comply; but pressed
by the enmity of Xenaias and his supporters, and anxious to satisfy the emperor,
who supported his opponents. he subscribed the Henoticon or Edict of Union of
the late emperor Zeno; and having assembled the bishops of his province, he drew
up a synodal letter, and sent it to the emperor, owning the authority of the three
councils of Nice, Constantinople, and Ephesus, and silently passing over that
of Chalcedon, and pronouncing the required anathema against the prelates enumerated
by Xenaias. He also sent to the emperor a private assurance of his readiness to
comply with his wishes. (A. D. 508 or 509.) Victor Tununensis states that Flavian
and Xenaias presided over a council at Constantinopie A. D. 499, when the obnoxious
prelates and the Council of Chalcedon itself were anathematized : but his account
seenis hardly trustworthy.
The ememies of Flavian were not, however, satisfied. They required
him distinctly to anathematize the Council of Chalcedon, and all who held the
doctrine of the two natures. This he refused to do, and in a confession of faith
which he drew up, supported the authority of the council in the repudiation both
of Nestorius and Eutyches, but not in its definition of the true faith. The cry
of Nestorianism was again raised against him; and new disturbances were excited;
and the Isaurian, and apparently some other Asiatic churches, broke off from communiion
with Flavian. A synod was held A. D. 510 at Sidon, to condemn the Council of Chalcedon
and depose its leading supporters; but Flavian and Elias of Jerusalem managed
to prevent its effecting anything. Flavian still hoped to appease his opponents,
and wrote to the emperor, expressing his readiness to acknowledge the first three
councils, and pass over that of Chalcedon in silence; but his efforts were in
vain; a tumultuous body of monks of the province of Syria Prima assembled at Antioch,
and frightened Flavian into pronouncing an open anathema against the Council of
Chalcedon, and against Theodore of Mopsuestia and the other bishops whom Xenaias
had already obliged him to condemn. The citizens were not equally compliant; they
rose against the monks, and killed many of them : and the confusion was renewed
by the monks of Coele-Syria, who embraced the side of Flavian, and hasted to Antioch
to defend him. These disturbances, or some transactions connected with the Council
of Sidon, gave the emperor a ground or pretext for deposing Flavian (A. D. 511)
and putting Severus in his place. Victor Tununensis places the deposition of Flavian
as early as the consulship of Cethegus, A. D. 504. Flavian was banished to Petra
in Arabia, where he died. His death is assigned by Tillemoint, on the authority
of Joannes Moschus, to A. D. 518. In Vitalian's rebellion (A. D. 513 or 514) his
restoration to his see was one of the demands of that rebel. Flavian is (at least
was) honoured in the Greek Church as a confessor, and was recognised as such by
the Romish Church, after long opposition. (Evagr. Hist. Ecc. iii. 23, 30, 31,
32; Theophan. Chronog., ed. Bonn; Marcellin, Chron. (Paul. et Musc. Cass.); Vict.
Tun. Chiron. (ab Anast. Aug. Cos. ad Cet/heg. Cos.); Baron. Annal. Eccles. ad
Ann. 496 et 512; Pagi, Critice in Baron. ; Tillemont, Mem. vol. xvi.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Gregorius, of Antioch, was originally a monk in one of the convents of Constantinople,
or in a convent called the convent of the Byzantines, which Valesius supposes
to have been somewhere in Syria. Here he became eminent as an ascetic at an early
age, and was chosen abbot of the convent. From Constantinople, he was removed
by the emperor Justin II. to the abbacy of the convent of Mount Sinai. Here he
was endangered by the Scenite (or Bedouin) Arabs, who besieged the monastery;
but he succeeded in bringing them into peaceable relations to its inmates. On
the deposition of Anastasius, patriarch of Antioch, about A. D. 570 or 571 (Baronius
erroneously places it in 573), he was appointed his successor; and in that see,
according to Evagrius, he acquired, by his charity to the poor and his fearlessness
of the secular power, the respect both of the Byzantine emperor and the Persian
king. When Chosroes I., or Khosru, invaded the Roman empire (A. D. 572), he sent
the intelligence of his inroad to the emperor.
Anatolius, an intimate friend of Gregory, having been detected in the practice
of magic, in sacrificing to heathen deities, and in other crimes, the populace
of Antioch regarded the patriarch as the sharer of his guilt, and violently assailed
him. The attention of the emperor Tiberius II. was drawn to the matter, and he
ordered Anatolius to be sent to Constantinople, where he was put to the torture:
but the culprit did not accuse Gregory of any participation in his crimes, and
was,after being tortured, put to death, being thrown to the wild beasts of the
amphitheatre, and his body impaled or crucified.
Though delivered from this danger, Gregory soon incurred another.
He quarrelled with Asterius, count of the East; and the nobles and populace of
Antioch took part against him, every one declaring that he had suffered some injury
from him. He was insulted by the mob; and though Asterius was removed, his successor,
Joannes or John, was scarcely less hostile. Being ordered to inquire into the
disputes which had taken place, he invited any who had any charge against the
bishop to prefer it; and Gregory was in consequence accused of incest with his
own sister, a married woman, and with being the author of the disturbances in
the city of Antioch. To the latter charge he expressed his willingness to plead
before the tribunal of count John, but with respect to the charge of incest, he
appealed to the judgment of the emperor, and of an ecclesiastical council. In
pursuance of this appeal he went to Constantinople, taking Evagrius, the ecclesiastical
historian, with him as his advocate. This was about A. D. 589. A council of the
leading prelates was convened; and Gregory, after a severe struggle with those
opposed to him, obtained an acquittal, and returned to Antioch, the same year.
When the mutinous soldiers of the army on the Persian frontier had driven away
their general Priscus, and refused to receive and acknowledge Philippicus, whom
the emperor Maurice had sent to succeed him, Gregory was sent, on account of his
popularity with the troops, to bring them back to their duty: his address, which
is preserved by Evagrius, was effectual, and the mutineers agreed to receive Philippicus,
who was sent to them. When Chosroes II. of Persia was compelled to seek refuge
in the Byzantine empire (A. D. 590 or 591), Gregory was sent by the emperor to
meet him. Gregory died of gout A. D. 593 or 594, having, there is reason to believe,
previously resigned his see into the hands of the deposed patriarch Anastasius.
He was an opponent of the Acephali, or disciples of Severus of Antioch, who were
becoming numerous in the Syrian desert, and whom he either expelled or obliged
to renounce their opinions. The extant works of Gregory are, 1. Demogoria pros
ton Straton, Oratio ad Exercitum, preserved, as noticed above, by Evagrius, and
given in substance by Nicephorus Callisti. 2. Logos eis tas Murophorous Oratio
in Mulieres Unguentiferas, preserved in the Greek Menaeu, and given in the Novum
Auctarium of Combefis, Paris, 1648, vol. i. Both these pieces are in the twelfth
vol. of the Bibliotheca Patrum of Gallandius. Various memorials, drawn up by Evagrius
in the name of Gregory, were contained in the lost volume of documents collected
by Evagrius. (Evagr. H. E. v. 6, 9, 18, vi. 4-7, 11-13, 18, 24; Niceph. Callist.
H. E. xvii. 36, xviii. 4, 12-16, 23, 26; Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. xi. ; Cave, Hist.
Litt. vol. i., &c.; Galland. Bibl. Patr. vol. xii. Proleg. cxiii.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
SELEFKIA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Basilius, (Basileios and Basilios), commonly called Basil. Bishop of Seleuceia
in Isauria from 448 till after 458, distinguished himself by taking alternately
both sides in the Eutychian controversy. His works are published with those of
Gregory Thaumaturgus, in the Paris edition of 1622. He must not be confounded
with Basil, the friend of Chrysostom, as is done by Photius. (Cod. 168, ed. Bekker.)
SELEFKIA SIDIRA (Ancient city) TURKEY
SIDI (Ancient port) TURKEY
Amphilochius, bishop of Side in Pamphylia, who was present at the council of Ephesus, in which Nestorius was condemned, A. D. 421, and who was probably the author of some homilies that go under the name of Amphilochius of Iconium. (Phot. Cod. 52, Cod. 230; Labbeus, de Script Eccl. vol. i.)
TARSOS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Helladius. Bishop of Tarsus, originally a monk, flourished about A. D. 431, and
was remarkable for his attach ment to Nestorius, through which he lost his bishopric.
He was afterwards reconciled to the church, but he was compelled to join in the
anathema upon Nestorius. Six letters of his are extant. (Cave, Hist. Lit. s. a.
431.)
ANTIOCHIA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Macedonius Critophagus, or Crithophagus. (ho Krithophagos.) Macedonius was a celebrated
ascetic, contemporary with the earlier years of Theodoret, who was intimately
acquainted with him, and has left an ample record of him in his Philotheus or
Historia Religiosa (c. 13). He led an ascetic life in the mountains, apparently
in the neighbourhood of Antioch; and dwelt forty-five years in a deep pit (for
he would not use either tent or hut). When he was growing old, he yielded to the
intreaties of his friends, and built himself a hut; and was afterwards further
prevailed upon to occupy a small house. lie lived twenty-five years after quitting
his cave, so that his ascetic life extended to seventy years; but his age at his
death is not known. His habitual diet was barley, bruised and moistened with water,
from which he acquired his name of Crithophagus, " the barley-eater." He was also
called, from his dwelling-place, Gouba, or Guba, a Syriac word denoting a "pit"
or " well." He was ordained priest by Flavian of Antioch, who was obliged to use
artifice to induce him to leave his mountain abode; and ordained him, without
his being aware of it, during the celebration of the eucharist. When informed
of what had occurred, Macedonius, imagining that his ordination would oblige him
to give up his solitude and his barley diet, flew into a passion ill becoming
his sanctity; and after pouring out the bitterest reproaches against the patriarch
and the priests, he took his walking staff, for he was now an old man, and drove
them away. He was one of the monks who resorted to Antioch, to intercede with
the emperor's officers for the citizens of Antioch after the great insurrection
(A. D. 387), in which they had overthrown the statues of the emperor. His admirable
plea is given by Theodoret. (H. E. v. 19.) Chrysostom notices one part of the
plea of Macedonius, but does not mention his name. (Ad Popul. Antiochen. de Statuis.
Homil. xvii. 1.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2006 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Native of Melitene , Lesser Armenia (part of ancient Cappadocia)
Anastatius I., made patriarch of Antioch A. D. 559 or 561, took a prominent part in the controversy with the Aphthartodocetae, who thought that the body of Christ before the resurrection was incorruptible. He opposed the edict which Justinian issued in favour of this opinion, and was afterwards banished by the younger Justin. (570.) In 593 he was restored to his bishopric at Antioch, and died in 599.
Anastatius II., succeeded Anastasius I. in the bishopric of Antioch, A. D. 599. He translated into Greek the work of Gregory the Great, "de Cura Pastorali," and was killed by the Jews in a tumult, 609 A. D.
Macedonius of Antioch, a Monothelite, was patriarch of Antioch from A. D. 639 or 640, till 655 or later. He was appointed to the patriarchate by the influence, if not by the nomination, of Sergius, patriarch of Constantinople, by whom also he was consecrated. The year of his death is not certain. Macarius, who was his successor (though perhaps not immediately), stated in his Expositio Fidei, read at the sixth general council, A. D. 681, that Macedonius was present at a synod held while Peter was patriarch of Constantinople, i e. some time from A. D. 655 to 666, which shows he could not have died before 655. Macedonius appears to have spent the whole of his patriarchate at Constantinople, Antioch being in the power of the Saracens. (Le Quien, Oriens Christian. vol. ii. col. 740, 741; Bolland. Acta Sanctor. Julii, vol. iv. Tractat. Praelim. p. 109.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2006 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Macarius of Antioch. Macarius was patriarch of Antioch in the seventh century. He held the doctrine of the Monothelites; and having attended the sixth general or third Constantinopolitan council (A. D. 680, 681), and there boldly avowed his heresy, affirming that Christ's will was " that of a God-man" (Deandriken,); and having further boldly declared that he would rather be torn limb from limb than renounce his opinions, his was deposed [p. 876] and banished. His Ekthesis etoi homologia pisteos, Expositio sive Confessio Fidei; and some passages from his Prosphonetikos pros basilea logs, Hortatorius ad Imperatorem Sermo; his Logos apostaleis Loukai presbuteroi kai monachoi toi en Aphrikei, Liber ad Lucam Presbyterumn et Monachum in Africa missus; and from one or two other of his pieces, are given in the Concilia, vol. vi. col. 743, 902, &c., ed. Labbe; vol. iii. col. 1168, 1300, &c., ed. Hardouin; vol. xi. col. 349, 512, &c., ed. Mansi. (Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 680; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. viii. 368.) This heretical Macarius of Antioch is not to be confounded with a saint of later date, but of the same name, " archbishop of Antioch in Armenia," who died an exile at Ghent in Flanders, in the early part of the eleventh century, and of whom an account is given by the Bollandists in the Acta Sanctorum, a. d. 10 Aprilis. Of what Antioch this later Macarius was archbishop is not determined. There is no episcopal city of Antioch in Armenia properly so called.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2006 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ADANA (Ancient city) TURKEY
6th century, feastday: February 4
Theophilus the Penitent (sixth century) + Archdeacon and diocesan administrator in Adana, Cilicia (modern Turkey), who was offered the bishopric but declined out of humility. When the appointed bishop unfairly deposed him from his post, he grew so angry that he made a pact with the devil. Repenting of his sin, he prayed to the Virgin Mary and awoke the next morning to find upon his chest the devilish pact. He immediately made a public confession, performed sincere penance, and had the bishop burn the contract before the assembled congregation. While this legend is fanciful, Theophilus is an historical figure, quite popular during the Middle Ages. The legend served as the basis for the later Faust theme so brilliantly developed by Christopher Marlowe and Goethe.
This text is cited August 2004 from the Catholic Online URL below
d.c. 302, feastday: March 16
d.c. 305, feastday: August 8 (Catholic). Martyr at Anazarbus, in Cilicia. He is reported as having been quite elderly.
ANTIOCHIA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Chrysostomus (Chrusostomos) (St. John). An eminent Father of the Church,
born of a noble family at Antioch, A.D. 347. His father's name was Secundus, and
the surname of Chrysostom, or "golden mouth," obtained by the son, was
given to him on account of his eloquence. He was bred to the bar, but quitted
it for an ascetic life: first, with a monk on a mountain near Antioch, and then
in a cave by himself. He remained in this retirement six years, when he returned
to Antioch, and, being ordained, became so celebrated for his talents as a preacher
that, on the death of Nectarius, patriarch of Constantinople, he was chosen to
supply his place. On obtaining this preferment, which he very unwillingly accepted,
he acted with great vigour and austerity in the reform of abuses, and exhibited
all the mistaken notions of the day in regard to celibacy and the monastic life.
He also persecuted the pagans and heretics with great zeal, and sought to extend
his episcopal power with such unremitting ardour that he involved himself in a
quarrel with Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, who enjoyed the patronage of the
empress Eudoxia; which quarrel ended in his formal deposition by a synod held
at Chalcedon, A.D. 403. He was, however, so popular in Constantinople that a formidable
insurrection ensued, and the empress herself interfered for his return. Towards
the end of the same year, owing to his zeal relative to a statue of Eudoxia, placed
near the great church, and causing a disturbance of public worship, all his troubles
were renewed. If true, that in one of his sermons the empress was compared by
him to Herodias, who asked the head of John in a charger, the anger of Eudoxia
was not altogether unjustifiable. The consequence of her resentment was the assembling
of another synod, and in A.D. 404 the patriarch was again deposed and sent into
exile. The place of his banishment was Cucusus, a lonely town among the ridges
of Mount Taurus, on the confines of Cappadocia and Cilicia. He sustained himself
with much fortitude; but having, by means of his great influence and many adherents,
procured the intercession of the Western emperor, Honorius, with his brother Arcadius,
he was ordered to be removed still farther from the capital, and died on the journey
at Comana in Pontus, A.D. 407, at the age of sixty. Opinion was much divided in
regard to his merits for some time after his death, but at length his partisans
prevailed, and thirty years from his decease he was removed from his place of
interment as a saint, and his remains were met in procession by the emperor Theodosius
II., on their removal from the place of his original interment to Constantinople.
The Roman Church celebrates St. Chrysostom on the 27th of January; the Greek Church,
on the 13th of November.
Chrysostom was a voluminous writer, but more eloquent than
either learned or acute. Although falling short of Attic purity, his style is
free, copious, and unaffected, and his diction often glowing and elevated. The
numerous treatises or sermons by which he chiefly gained his reputation are very
curious for the information they contain on the customs and manners of the times,
as elicited by his declamation against prevailing vices and follies.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Chrysostomus, Joannes (Chrusostomos, golden-mouthed, so surnamed from the power
of his eloquence), was born at Antioch, most probably A. D. 347, though the dates
344 and 354 have also been given. His father Secundus was a general in the imperial
army, and his mother Anthusa was left a widow soon after his birth. From her he
received his first religious impressions, so that she was to him what Monica was
to Augustin, though, unlike Augustin, Chrysostom from his earliest childhood was
continually advancing in seriousness and earnestness of mind, and underwent no
violent inward struggle before he embraced Christianity. To this circumstance,
Neander attributes the peculiar form of his doctrine, his strong feeling that
the choice of belief or unbelief rests with ourselves, and that God's grace is
given in proportion to our own wish to receive it. Libanius taught him eloquence,
and said, that he should have desired to see him his successor in his school,
if the Christians had not stolen him. Before his ordination, he retired first
to a monastery near Antioch, and afterwards to a solitary cavern, where he committed
the whole of the Bible to memory. In this cavern he so injured his health that
he was obliged to return to Antioch, where he was ordained deacon by the bishop
Meletius, A. D. 381, who had previously baptized him, and afterwards presbyter
by Flavianus, successor to Meletius, A. D. 386. At Antioch his success as a preacher
was so great, that on the death of Nectarius, archbishop of Constantinople, he
was chosen to succeed him by Eutropius, minister to the emperor Arcadius, and
the selection was readily ratified by the clergy and people of the imperial city,
A. D. 397. The minister who appointed him was a eunuch of infamous profligacy,
and Chrysostom was very soon obliged to extend to him the protection of the church.
Tribigild, the Ostrogoth, aided by the treachery of Gainas, the imperial general,
who hated and despised Eutropius, threatened Constantinople itself by his armies,
and demanded as a condition of peace the head of Eutropius, who fled to the sanctuary
of the cathedral. While he was grovelling in terror at the altar, Chrysostom ascended
the pulpit, and by his eloquence saved his life for the time, though it was afterwards
sacrificed to the hatred of his enemies.
The sermons of the archbishop soon gave great offence at Constantinople.
The tone of his theology was always rather of a practical than a doctrinal kind,
and his strong sense of the power of the human will increased his indignation
at the immorality of the capital. He was undoubtedly rash and violent in his proceedings,
and the declamatory character of his preaching was exactly adapted to express
the stern morality of his thoughts. He was also disliked for the simplicity of
his mode of living, and the manner in which he diverted the revenues of his see
from the luxuries in which his predecessors had consumed them, to humane and charitable
objects. Many of the worldly-minded monks and clergy, as well as the ministers
and ladies of the court, became his enemies, and at their head appeared the empress
Eudoxia herself, who held her husband's weak mind in absolute subjection. His
unpopularity was spread still more widely in consequence of a visitation which
he held in Asia Minor, two years after his consecration, in which he accused several
bishops of simony and other gross crimes, and deposed thirteen of them. Meanwhile,
a contest had arisen in Egypt between Theophilus, patriarch of Alexandria, and
certain monks of Nitria, who followed the opinions of Origen. At their head were
four of one family, known as the Tall Brothers (adelphoi makpoi), against whom
Theophilus seems to have been prejudiced by a strictly private quarrel. He excommunicated
them, and they fled to Constantinople, where they sought the protection of Chrysostom
and of the empress. A long dispute followed, in the course of which Theophilus,
by artfully working on the simplicity of Epiphanius, bishop of Cyprus, and other
prelates hostile to the opinions of Origen, prejudiced them against Chrysostom
as implicated in the charge of heresy with which those views had recently been
branded by a synod. Eudoxia, who had summoned Theophilus to Constantinople to
answer the charge of persecuting the Nitrian monks, became his warm friend when
she saw in him her instrument for the destruction of Chrysostom; and he arrived
at the capital of the East not as an accused person, but as the judge of its archbishop.
But the same causes which had brought on Chrysostom the hatred of the higher orders
had made him the idol of the people; and as it was thought unsafe to hold a synod
against him within the city, it was summoned to meet on an estate at Chalcedon,
called the oak, whence it is known by the name of su/nodos pro\s th\n dru/n. The
accusations against him were various; his inhospitality was especially put forward
(hoti ten philoxenian athetei, monositian epitedeuon, hoti monos esthiei, asotos
xon Kuklopon Bion, Phot. Cod. 59), and the charge of Origenism was used to blind
the better part of the assembly. Before this council Chrysostom steadily refused
to appear, until four bishops, notoriously his enemies, were removed from it,
who are called by Isidore of Pelusium (i. 152) sunerloi e uallon sunapostatai
with Theophilus. He was therefore deposed for contumacy, forty-five bishops subscribing
his sentence, to which was added a hint to the emperor, that his sermons against
Eudoxia subjected him to the penalties of treason. At first he refused to desert
the flock which God had entrusted to him; but, on hearing that there was a danger
of an insurrection in his favour, he retired from Constantinople, to which he
was recalled in a few days by a hasty message from the empress, whose superstitious
fears were alarmed by an earthquake, which the enraged people considered as a
proof of the divine anger at his banishment. But in two months after his return
he was again an exile. The festivities attending the dedication of a silver statue
of Eudoxia near the cathedral had disturbed the worshippers, and provoked an angry
sermon from the archbishop, who, on hearing that this had excited anew the enmity
of the empress, began another sermon with this exordium: "Herodias again rages,
once more she dances, she again requires the head of John". This offence Eudoxia
could not forgive. A new synod of Eastern bishops, guided by the advice of Theophilus,
condemned Chrysostom for resuming his functions before his previous sentence had
been legally reversed, and he was hastily conveyed to the desolate town of Cucusus,
on the borders of Isauria, Cilicia, and Armenia.
Chrysostom's character shone even more brightly in adversity than
it had done in power. In spite of the inclement climate to which he was banished,
and continual danger from the neighbourhood of Isaurian robbers, he sent letters
full of encouragement and Christian faith to his friends at Constantinople, and
began to construct a scheme for spreading the gospel among the Persians and Goths.
He met with much sympathy from other churches, especially the Roman, whose bishop,
Innocent, declared himself his warm friend and supporter. All this excited jealousy
at Constantinople, and in the summer of A. D. 407 an order came for his removal
to Pityus, in Pontus, at the very extremity of the East-Roman empire. But the
fatigues of his journey, which was performed on foot under a burning sun, were
too much for him, and he died at Comana in Pontus, in the 60th year of his age.
His last words were those of Job,-- doxa to Theo panton heeken, and formed a worthy
conclusion of a life spent in God's service. His exile nearly caused a schism
at Constantinople, where a party, named after him Johannists, separated from the
church, and refused to acknowledge his successors. They did not return to the
general communion till A. D. 438, when the archbishop Proclus prevailed on the
emperor Theodosius II. to bring back the bones of Chrysostom to Constantinople,
where they were received with the highest honours, the emperor himself publicly
imploring the forgiveness of heaven for the crime of his parents, Arcadius and
Eudoxia. Chrysostom, as we learn from his biographers, was short, with a large
bald head, high forehead, hollow cheeks, and sunken eyes. The Greek church celebrates
his festival Nov. 13, the Latin, Jan. 27.
The works of Chrysostom are most voluminous. They consist of: 1. Homilies
on different parts of Scripture and points of doctrine and practice. 2. Commentaries,
by which, as we learn from Suidas, he had illustrated the whole of the Bible,
though some of them afterwards perished in a fire at Constantinople. 3. Epistles
addressed to a great number of different persons. 4. Treatises on various subjects,
e. g. the Priesthood (six books), Providence (three books), &c. 5. Liturgies.
Of the homilies, those on St. Paul are superior to anything in ancient theology,
and Thomas Aquinas said, that he would not accept the whole city of Paris for
those on St. Matthew, delivered at Antioch, A. D. 390-397. The letters written
in exile have been compared to those of Cicero composed under similar circumstances;
but in freedom from vanity and selfishness, and in calmness and resignation, Chrysostom's
epistles are infinitely superior to Cicero's. Among the collection of letters
is one from the emperor Hlonorius to his brother Arcadius in defence of Chrysostom,
found in the Vatican, and published by Baronius and afterwards by Montfaucon.
The merits of Chrysostom as an expositor of Scripture are very great.
Rejecting the allegorical interpretations which his predecessors had put upon
it, he investigates the meaning of the text grammatically, and adds an ethical
or doctrinal application to a perspicuous explanation of the sense. The first
example of grammatical interpretation had indeed been set by Origen, many of whose
critical remarks are of great merit; but Chrysostom is free from his mystical
fancies, and quite as well acquainted with the language of the New Testament.
The Greek expositors who followed him have done little more than copy his explanations.
The commentary of Theodoret is a faithful compendium of Chrysostom's homilies,
and so also are the works of Theophylact and Oecumenius, so much so that to those
who wish to gain a knowledge of the results of his critical labours, the study
of the two latter may be reconmmended as perfectly correct compilers from their
more prolix predecessor.
Of Chrysostom's powers as a preacher the best evidence is contained
in the history of his life; there is no doubt that his eloquence produced the
deepest impression on his hearers, and while we dissent from those who have ranked
him with Demosthenes and Cicero, we cannot fail to admire the power of his language
in expressing moral indignation, and to sympathise with the ardent love of all
that is good and noble, the fervent piety, and absorbing faith in the Christian
revelation, which pervade his writings. His faults are too great diffuseness and
a love of metaphor and ornament. He often repelled with indignation the applause
with which his sermons were greeted, exclaiming, "The place where you are is no
theatre, nor are you now sitting to gaze upon actors" (Hom. xvii. Matt. vii.).
There are many respects in which he shews the superiority of his understanding
to the general feelings of the age. We may cite as one example the fact, that
although he had been a monk, he was far from exalting monachism above the active
duties of the Christian life (See Hom. vii. in Heb. iv.; Hom. vii. in Ephes. iv.).
"How shall we conquer our enemiies", he asks in one place, "if some do not busy
themselves about goodness at all, while those wvho do withdraw from the battle"?
(Hom. vi. in 1 Cor. iv.). Again, he was quite free from the view of inspiration
which prevailed at Alexandria, and which considered the Bible in such a sense
the word of God, as to overlook altogether the human element in its composition,
and the difference of mind and character in its authors. Variations in trifles
he speaks of as proofs of truth (Hom. i. in Matth.); so that he united the principal
intellectual with the principal moral element necessary for an interpretator of
Scripture, a critical habit of mind with a real depth of Christian feeing. At
the -amie time he was not always free from the tendencies of the time, speaking
often of miracles wrought by the relics of martyrs, consecrated oil, and the sign
of the cross, and of the efficacy of exorcism, nor does he always express himself
on some of the points already noticed with the same distinctness as in the examples
cited above. His works are historically valuable as illustrating the manners of
the 4th and 5th centuries of the Christian aera, the social state of the people,
and the luxurious licence which disgraced the capital.
The most elaborate among the ancient authorities for Chrysostom's
life are the following:
1. Palladius, bishop of Helenopolis, whose work (a dialogue) was published in
a Latin translation at Venice A. D. 1533, and in the original text at Paris in
1680. It is to be found in Montfaucon's edition of Chrysostom's works, vol. xiii.
2. Tile Ecclesiastical Histories of Socrates (lib. vi.), Sozomenus (lib. viii.),
Theodoret (v. 27).
3. The works of Suidas (Ioannes), and Isidore of Pelusium (ii. Epist. 42), besides
several others, some published and some in MS.,of which a list will be fund in
Fabricius (Bibl. Graec.).
Among the more modern writers it will suffice to mention Erasmus (vol.
iii. Ep. 1150., ed. Lugd. Bat.), J. Frederic Meyer (Chrysostomus Lutheranus, Jena,
1680), with Hack's reply (S. J. Chrysostomus a Lutheranismo vindicatus, 1683),
Cave (Script. Eccl. list. Litter.), Lardner (Credibility of the Gospel Hist.),
Tillemont (Memoires Eccle/siastiques), and Montfaucon, his principal editor. Gibbon's
account (Decline and Fall, xxxii.) is compiled from Palladius, Socrates, Sozomen,
Theodoret, Tillemont, Erasmus, and Montfaucon. But the best of all will be found
in Neander (Kirchengesch.), who has also published a separate life of Chrysostom.
Chrysostom's works were first published in Latin at Venice in 1503,
Comment. impensa et studio Bernardini Slaynini Tridinenisis et Gregorii de Gregoriis.
Several editions followed at Basle, also in Latin, and in 1523 the Homilies on
Genesis were translated there by Oecolampadius (Hauschein). In 1536 his works
were published at Paris, but the most famous edition which appeared in that city
was cura Frontonis Ducaei, 1613, whose translation is much commended by Montfaucon.
In Greek were first published at Verona, 1529, the Homilies on St. Paul's Epistles,
edited by Gilbert Bishop of Verona, with a preface by Donatus, addressed to Pope
Clement VII. In 1610-13, the most complete collection of Chrysostom's works which
had yet appeared was published at Eton by Norton, the king's printer, under the
superintendence of Henry Savil, in 8 vols.: this edition contained notes by Casaubon
and others. In 1609, at Paris, F. Morell began to publish the Greek text with
the version of Ducaeus, a task which was completed by Charles Morell in 1633.
Of this edition the text is compiled from that of Savil, and that of an edition
of the Commentaries on the New Testament, published at Heidelberg by Commelin,
1591-1603. In 1718-38 appeared, also at Paris, the editio optima by Bernard de
Montfaucon, in 13 vols. folio. He has endeavoured to ascertain the date of the
different works, has prefixed to most of them a short dissertation on the circumstances
under which it was written, with an inquiry into its authenticity, and has added
very much hitherto unpublished, together with the principal ancient lives of Chrysostom.
Montfaucon was a Benedictine monk, and was assisted by others of his order. Of
separate works of Chrysostom the editions and translations are almost innumerable.
Erasmus translated some of the homilies and commentaries; and the edition of two
homilies (those on 1 Cor. and 1 Thess. iv.) "Gr. Lat. interprete Joanne Cheko,
Cantabrigiensi, Londini, ap. Reyner Vnolfuin. 1543" is interesting as the first
book printed with Greek types in England. Some of the homilies are translated
in the Library of the Fathers now publishing at Oxford, and those on St. Matthew
have been recently edited by the Rev. F. Field, Fellow of Trin. Coll. Cambridge.
The number of MSS. of Chrysostom is also immense: the principal of these are in
the royal library at Paris, the imperial library at Vienna (to which collection
two of great value were added by Maria Theresa), and that of St. Mark at Venice.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
The name of several saints. The old Syrian martyrology gives the feast
of a St. Pelagia of Antioch (in Antiochia Pelagiae) under the date of 8 October.
Further information concerning this martyr, undoubtedly an historical person,
is given in a homily of St. John Chrysostom [P. G., L, 479 sqq.; Ruinart, "Acta
mart. sincera" (ed. Ratisbon), 540 sqq.]. Pelagia was a Christian virgin fifteen
years of age. Soldiers came in search of her, evidently during the Diocletian
persecution, in order to force her to offer publicly a heathen sacrifice. She
was alone in the house, no one being there to aid her. She came out to the soldiers
sent after her and when she learned the order they had to execute, she requested
permission to go again into the house in order to put on other clothing. This
was granted to her. The virgin who probably knew what was before her was not willing
to expose herself to the danger of being dishonoured. She therefore went up to
the roof of the house and threw herself into the sea. Thus she died, as St. Chrysostom
says, as virgin and martyr, and was honoured as such by the Antiochene Church.
St. Ambrose also mentions this Pelagia of Antioch ("De virginibus", III, vii;
Epist. XXVII, "Ad Simplicianum", xxxviii).
There is a later legend of a Pelagia who is said to have led the life
of a prostitute at Antioch and to have been converted by a bishop named Nonnus.
According to the story she went to Jerusalem where disguised as a man and under
the name of Pelagius she led a life of self-mortification in a grotto on the Mount
of Olives. The author of this legend who calls himself the Deacon Jacob has drawn
the essential part of his narrative from the forty-eighth homily of St. Chrysostom
on the Gospel of St. Matthew. In this homily the preacher relates the conversion
of a celebrated actress of Antioch whose name he does not give. As no old authority
makes any mention of a Pelagia in Jerusalem, no doubt the alleged converted woman
is a purely legendary recasting of the historical Pelagia. In the East the feast
of this second Pelagia is observed on the same day (8 October); in the present
Roman martyrology the feast of the martyr is observed on 9 June, that of the penitent
on 8 October.
On the latter date the Greek Church also celebrates as virgin and martyr still another Pelagia of Tarsus. The Roman martyrology places the feast of this Pelagia on 4 May. There is a legend of later date concerning her. As Tarsus was near Antioch St. Pelagia of Tarsus should probably be identified with the Antiochene martyr, whose feast was also observed in Tarsus and who was afterwards turned into a martyr of Tarsus. Usener's opinion that all these different saints are only a Christian reconstitution of Aphrodite has been completely disproved by Delehaye.
In addition to St. Pelagia of Antioch, taken from the Syrian martyrology, the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" also mentions on 11 July a martyr Pelagia, the companion in martyrdom of a Januarius, naming Nicopolis in Armenia as the place of martyrdom, and giving a brief account of this saint. She is plainly a different person from the martyr of Antioch. Her name was included by Bede in his martyrology and was adopted from this into the present Roman list of saints.
J.P. Kirsch, ed.
Transcribed by: Elizabeth T. Knuth
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
More information at Side in Pamphylia, where was born c. 270
The name Lucas (Luke) is probably an abbreviation from Lucanus, like
Annas from Ananus, Apollos from Apollonius, Artemas from Artemidorus, Demas from
Demetrius, etc. (Schanz, "Evang. des heiligen Lucas", 1, 2; Lightfoot on "Col.",
iv, 14; Plummer, "St. Luke", introd.) The word Lucas seems to have been unknown
before the Christian Era; but Lucanus is common in inscriptions, and is found
at the beginning and end of the Gospel in some Old Latin manuscripts (ibid.).
It is generally held that <b>St. Luke was a native of Antioch</b>.
Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. III, iv, 6) has: Loukas de to men genos on ton ap Antiocheias,
ten episteuen iatros, ta pleista suggegonos to Paulo, kai rots laipois de ou parergos
ton apostolon homilnkos--"Lucas vero domo Antiochenus, arte medicus, qui et cum
Paulo diu conjunctissime vixit, et cum reliquis Apostolis studiose versatus est."
Eusebius has a clearer statement in his "Quaestiones Evangelic?", IV, i, 270:
ho de Loukas to men genos apo tes Boomenes Antiocheias en--"Luke was by birth
a native of the renowned Antioch" (Schmiedel, "Encyc. Bib."). Spitta, Schmiedel,
and Harnack think this is a quotation from Julius Africanus (first half of the
third century). In Codex Bez? (D) Luke is introduced by a "we" as early as Acts,
xi, 28; and, though this is not a correct reading, it represents a very ancient
tradition. The writer of Acts took a special interest in Antioch and was well
acquainted with it (Acts, xi, 19-27; xiii, 1; xiv, 18-21, 25, xv, 22, 23, 30,
35; xviii, 22). We are told the locality of only one deacon, "Nicolas, a proselyte
of Antioch", vi, 5; and it has been pointed out by Plummer that, out of eight
writers who describe the Russian campaign of 1812, only two, who were Scottish,
mention that the Russian general, Barclay de Tolly, was of Scottish extraction.
These considerations seem to exclude the conjecture of Renan and Ramsay that St.
Luke was a native of Philippi.
St. Luke was not a Jew. He is separated by St. Paul from those of
the circumcision (Col. iv, 14), and his style proves that he was a Greek. Hence
he cannot be identified with Lucius the prophet of Acts, xiii, 1, nor with Lucius
of Rom., xvi, 21, who was cognatus of St. Paul. From this and the prologue of
the Gospel it follows that Epiphanius errs when he calls him one of the Seventy
Disciples; nor was he the companion of Cleophas in the journey to Emmaus after
the Resurrection (as stated by Theophylact and the Greek Menol.). St. Luke had
a great knowledge of the Septuagint and of things Jewish, which he acquired either
as a Jewish proselyte (St. Jerome) or after he became a Christian, through his
close intercourse with the Apostles and disciples. Besides Greek, he had many
opportunities of acquiring Aramaic in his native Antioch, the capital of Syria.
He was a physician by profession, and St. Paul calls him "the most dear physician"
(Col., iv, 14). This avocation implied a liberal education, and his medical training
is evidenced by his choice of medical language. Plummer suggests that he may have
studied medicine at the famous school of Tarsus, the rival of Alexandria and Athens,
and possibly met St. Paul there. From his intimate knowledge of the eastern Mediterranean,
it has been conjectured that he had lengthened experience as a doctor on board
ship. He travailed a good deal, and sends greetings to the Colossians, which seems
to indicate that he had visited them.
St. Luke first appears in the Acts at Troas (xvi, 8 sqq.), where he
meets St. Paul, and, after the vision, crossed over with him to Europe as an Evangelist,
landing at Neapolis and going on to Philippi, "being assured that God had called
us to preach the Gospel to them" (note especially the transition into first person
plural at verse 10). He was, therefore, already an Evangelist. He was present
at the conversion of Lydia and her companions, and lodged in her house. He, together
with St. Paul and his companions, was recognized by the pythonical spirit: "This
same following Paul and us, cried out, saying: These men are the servants of the
most high God, who preach unto you the way of salvation" (verse 17). He beheld
Paul and Silas arrested, dragged before the Roman magistrates, charged with disturbing
the city, "being Jews", beaten with rods and thrown into prison. Luke and Timothy
escaped, probably because they did not look like Jews (Timothy's father was a
gentile). When Paul departed from Philippi, Luke was left behind, in all probability
to carry on the work of Evangelist. At Thessalonica the Apostle received highly
appreciated pecuniary aid from Philippi (Phil., iv, 15, 16), doubtless through
the good offices of St. Luke. It is not unlikely that the latter remained at Philippi
all the time that St. Paul was preaching at Athens and Corinth, and while he was
travelling to Jerusalem and back to Ephesus, and during the three years that the
Apostle was engaged at Ephesus. When St. Paul revisited Macedonia, he again met
St. Luke at Philippi, and there wrote his Second Epistle to the Corinthians.
St. Jerome thinks it is most likely that St. Luke is "the brother,
whose praise is in the gospel through all the churches" (II Cor. viii, 18), and
that he was one of the bearers of the letter to Corinth. Shortly afterwards, when
St. Paul returned from Greece, St. Luke accompanied him from Philippi to Troas,
and with him made the long coasting voyage described in Acts, xx. He went up to
Jerusalem, was present at the uproar, saw the attack on the Apostle, and heard
him speaking "in the Hebrew tongue" from the steps outside the fortress Antonia
to the silenced crowd. Then he witnessed the infuriated Jews, in their impotent
rage, rending their garments, yelling, and flinging dust into the air. We may
be sure that he was a constant visitor to St. Paul during the two years of the
latter's imprisonment at Caearea. In that period he might well become acquainted
with the circumstances of the death of Herod Agrippa I, who had died there eaten
up by worms" (skolekobrotos), and he was likely to be better informed on the subject
than Josephus. Ample opportunities were given him, 'having diligently attained
to all things from the beginning", concerning the Gospel and early Acts, to write
in order what had been delivered by those "who from the beginning were eyewitnesses
and ministers of the word" (Luke, i, 2, 3). It is held by many writers that the
Gospel was written during this time, Ramsay is of opinion that the Epistle to
the Hebrews was then composed, and that St. Luke had a considerable share in it.
When Paul appealed to Caesar, Luke and Aristarchus accompanied him from Caesarea,
and were with him during the stormy voyage from Crete to Malta. Thence they went
on to Rome, where, during the two years that St. Paul was kept in prison, St.
Luke was frequently at his side, though not continuously, as he is not mentioned
in the greetings of the Epistle to the Philippians (Lightfoot, "Phil.", 35). He
was present when the Epistles to the Colossians, Ephesians and Philemon were written,
and is mentioned in the salutations given in two of them: "Luke the most dear
physician, saluteth you" (Col., iv, 14); "There salute thee . . . Mark, Aristarchus,
Demas, and Luke my fellow labourers" (Philem., 24). St. Jerome holds that it was
during these two years Acts was written.
We have no information about St. Luke during the interval between
St. Paul's two Roman imprisonments, but he must have met several of the Apostles
and disciples during his various journeys. He stood beside St. Paul in his last
imprisonment; for the Apostle, writing for the last time to Timothy, says: "I
have fought a good fight, I have finished my course. . . . Make haste to come
to me quickly. For Demas hath left me, loving this world. . . . Only Luke is with
me" (II Tim., iv, 7-11). It is worthy of note that, in the three places where
he is mentioned in the Epistles (Col., iv, 14; Philem., 24; II Tim., iv, 11) he
is named with St. Mark (cf. Col., iv, 10), the other Evangelist who was not an
Apostle (Plummer), and it is clear from his Gospel that he was well acquainted
with the Gospel according to St. Mark; and in the Acts he knows all the details
of St. Peter's delivery--what happened at the house of St. Mark's mother, and
the name of the girl who ran to the outer door when St. Peter knocked. He must
have frequently met St. Peter, and may have assisted him to draw up his First
Epistle in Greek, which affords many reminiscences of Luke's style. After St.
Paul's martyrdom practically all that is known about him is contained in the ancient
"Prefatio vel Argumentum Luc?", dating back to Julius Africanus, who was born
about A.D. 165. This states that he was unmarried, that he wrote the Gospel, in
Achaia, and that he died at the age of seventy-four in Bithynia (probably a copyist's
error for Boeotia), filled with the Holy Ghost. Epiphanius has it that he preached
in Dalmatia (where there is a tradition to that effect), Gallia (Galatia?), Italy,
and Macedonia. As an Evangelist, he must have suffered much for the Faith, but
it is controverted whether he actually died a martyr's death. St. Jerome writes
of him (De Vir. III., vii). "Sepultus est Constantinopoli, ad quam urbem vigesimo
Constantii anno, ossa ejus cum reliquiis Andre? Apostoli translata sunt [de Achaia?]."
St. Luke its always represented by the calf or ox, the sacrificial animal, because
his Gospel begins with the account of Zachary, the priest, the father of John
the Baptist. He is called a painter by Nicephorus Callistus (fourteenth century),
and by the Menology of Basil II, A.D. 980. A picture of the Virgin in S. Maria
Maggiore, Rome, is ascribed to him, and can be traced to A.D. 847 It is probably
a copy of that mentioned by Theodore Lector, in the sixth century. This writer
states that the Empress Eudoxia found a picture of the Mother of God at Jerusalem,
which she sent to Constantinople (see "Acta SS.", 18 Oct.). As Plummer observes.
it is certain that St. Luke was an artist, at least to the extent that his graphic
descriptions of the Annunciation, Visitation, Nativity, Shepherds. Presentation,
the Shepherd and lost sheep, etc., have become the inspiring and favourite themes
of Christian painters.
St. Luke is one of the most extensive writers of the New Testament.
His Gospel is considerably longer than St. Matthew's, his two books are about
as long as St. Paul's fourteen Epistles: and Acts exceeds in length the Seven
Catholic Epistles and the Apocalypse. The style of the Gospel is superior to any
N. T. writing except Hebrews. Renan says (Les Evangiles, xiii) that it is the
most literary of the Gospels. St. Luke is a painter in words. "The author of the
Third Gospel and of the Acts is the most versatile of all New Testament writers.
He can be as Hebraistic as the Septuagint, and as free from Hebraisms as Plutarch.
. . He is Hebraistic in describing Hebrew society and Greek when describing Greek
society" (Plummer, introd.). His great command of Greek is shown by the richness
of his vocabulary and the freedom of his constructions.
C. Aherene, ed.
Transcribed by: Ernie Stefanik
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Bishop and Martyr. He was the successor of Zebinus as Bishop of Antioch in the reign of the Emperor Gordianus (238-244), being the twelfth bishop of this Oriental metropolis. During the Decian persecution (260) he made an unwavering confession of faith and was thrown into prison where he died from his sufferings. He was, therefore, venerated as a martyr. St. John Chrysostom and the "Acts of the Martyrs" relate further concerning him, that Babylas once refused an emperor, on account of his wrongdoing, permission to enter the church and had ordered him to take his place among the penitents. Chrysostom does not give the name of the emperor; the Acts mention Numerianus. It is more probably Philip the Arabian (244-249) of whom Eusebius (Hist. eccl., VI, xxxiv) reports that a bishop would not let him enter the gathering of Christians at the Easter vigil. The burial-place of St. Babylas became very celebrated. The Caesar Gallus built a new church in honor of the holy martyr at Daphne, a suburb of Antioch, and the bones of the saint were transferred to it. When after this Julian the Apostate consulted the oracle of Apollo at the temple to his god which was near by, he received no answer because of the proximity of the saint. He therefore, had the sarcophagus of the martyr taken back to its original place of burial. In the middle ages the bones of Babylas were carried to Cremona. The Latin Church keeps his feast on January 24th, the Greek Church on September 4th.
J.P. Kirsch, ed.
Transcribed by: Dick Meissner
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Bishop of Antioch, A.D. 559, distinguished for his learning and austerity of life, excited the enmity of the Emperor Justinian by opposing certain imperial doctrines about the Body of Christ. He was to he deposed from his see and exiled, when Justinian died; but Justin II carried out his uncles purpose five years later, and another bishop, named Gregory, was put in his place; on the death of that prelate in 593, Anastasius was restored to his see. This was chiefly due to Pope Gregory the Great, who interceded with the Emperor Maurice and his son Theodosius, asking that Anastasius be sent to Rome, if not reinstated at Antioch. From some letters sent to him by Gregory, it is thought that he was not sufficiently vigorous in denouncing the claims of the Patriarch of Constantinople to be universal bishop. He died in 598, and another bishop of the same name is said to have succeeded him in 599, to whom the translation Gregory's "Regula Pastoralis" is attributed, and who is recorded as having been put to death in an insurrection of the Jews. Nicephorus (Hist. Eccl., XVIII, xliv) (declares that these two are one and the same person. The same difficulty occurs with regard to certain Sermons de orthodoxa fide, some ascribing them to the latter Anastasius; others claiming that there was but one bishop of that name.
T.J. Campbell, ed.
Transcribed by: W.S. French, Jr.
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
One of the first great martyrs of the church. He was made Bishop of Ravenna by St. Peter himself. The miracles he wrought there soon attracted official attention, for they and his preaching won many converts to the Faith, while at the same time bringing upon him the fury of the idolaters, who beat him cruelly and drove him from the city. He was found half dead on the seashore, and kept in concealment by the Christians, but was captured again and compelled to walk on burning coals and a second time expelled. But he remained in the vicinity, and continued his work of evangelization. We find him then journeying in the province of Aemilia. A third time he returned to Ravenna. Again he was captured, hacked with knives, had scalding water poured over his wounds, was beaten in the mouth with stones because he persisted in preaching, and then, loaded with chains, was flung into a horrible dungeon to starve to death; but after four days he was put on board ship and sent to Greece. There the same course of preachings, and miracles, and sufferings continued; and when his very presence caused the oracles to be silent, he was, after a cruel beating, sent back to Italy. All this continued for three years, and a fourth time he returned to Ravenna. By this time Vespasian was Emperor, and he, in answer to the complaints of the pagans, issued a decree of banishment against the Christians. Apollinaris was kept concealed for some time, but as he was passing out of the gates of the city, was set upon and savagely beaten, probably at Classis, a suburb, but he lived for seven days, foretelling meantime that the persecutions would increase, but that the Church would ultimately triumph. It is not certain what was his native place, though it was probably Antioch. Nor is it sure that he was one of the seventy-two disciples of Christ, as has been suggested. The precise date of his consecration cannot be ascertained, but he was Bishop of Ravenna for twenty-six years.
d. 5th century, feastday: December 31 (Catholic). Confessor and counselor to the Roman Empress Galla Placidia. A priest of Antioch, Turkey, he went to Rome where the empress sought his council. She built a monastery for him at Ravenna.
d. unknown, feastday: November 27
d. unknown, feastday: October 19
Patriarch of Alexandria, Egypt, and a friend of Pope St. Gregory I the Great. Eulogius was a Syrian monk at Antioch named as abbot of Mother of God Monastery. In 579 , he became patriarch of Alexandria and met the future pontiff Gregory the Great. He wrote many treatises against the heresies of his era.
Feastday: November 18. Roman soldier. Suddenly moved to proclaim his faith, he threw off his military belt and announced himself a Christian. He was promptly martyred, drowned in the River Orontes c.303
Theodoret. Bishop of Cyrus and theologian, born at Antioch in Syria about 393;
died about 457.
He says himself that his birth was an answer to the prayers of the
monk Macedonius ("Hist. rel.", IX; Epist. lxxi). On account of a vow made by his
mother he was dedicated from birth to the service of God and was brought up and
educated by the monks Macedonius and Peter. At a very early age he was ordained
lector. In theology he studied chiefly the writings of Diodorus of Tarsus, St.
John Chrysostom, and Theodore of Mopsuestia. Theodoret was also well trained in
philosophy and literature. He understood Syriac as well as Greek, but was not
acquainted with either Hebrew or Latin. When he was twenty-three years old and
both parents were dead, he divided his fortune among the poor (Epist. cxiii; P.
G., LXXXIII, 1316) and became a monk in the monastery of Nicerte not far from
Apamea, when he lived for seven years, devoting himself to prayer and study.
Much against his will about 423 he was made Bishop of Cyrus. His diocese
included nearly 800 parishes and was suffragan of Hierapolis. A large number of
monasteries and hermitages also belonged to it, yet, notwithstanding all this,
there were many heathen and heretics within its borders. Theodoret brought many
of these into the Church, among others more than a thousand Marcionites. He also
destroyed not less than two hundred copies of the "Diatessaron" of Tatian, which
were in use in that district ("H?ret. fab.", I, xix; P. G., LXXXIII, 372). He
often ran great risks in his apostolic journeys and labours; more than once he
suffered ill-usage from the heathen and was even in danger of losing his life.
His fame as a preacher was widespread and his services as a speaker were much
sought for outside of his diocese; he went to Antioch twenty-six times. Theodoret
also exerted himself for the material welfare of the inhabitants of his diocese.
Without accepting donations (Epist. lxxxi) he was able to build many churches,
bridges, porticos, aqueducts, etc. (Epist. lxxxi, lxxviii, cxxxviii).
Towards the end of 430 Theodoret became involved in the Nestorian
controversy. In conjunction with John of Antioch he begged Nestorius not to reject
the expression Theotokos as heretical (Mansi, IV, 1067). Yet he held firmly with
the other Antiochenes to Nestorius and to the last refused to recognize that Nestorius
taught the doctrine of two persons in Christ. Until the Council of Chalcedon in
451 he was the literary champion of the Antiochene party. In 436 he published
his ?Anatrope (Confutation) of the Anathemas of Cyril to which the latter replied
with an Apology (P. G., LXXVI, 392 sqq.). At the Council of Ephesus (431) Theodoret
sided with John of Antioch and Nestorius, and pronounced with them the deposition
of Cyril and the anathema against him. He was also a member of the delegation
of "Orientals", which was to lay the cause of Nestorius before the emperor but
was not admitted to the imperial presence a second time (Hefele-Leclerq, "Hist.
des Conc.", II, i, 362 sqq.). The same year he attended the synods of Tarsus and
Antioch, at both of which Cyril was again deposed and anathematized. Theodoret
after his return to Cyrus continued to oppose Cyril by speech and writing. The
symbol (Creed) that formed the basis of the reconciliation (c. 433) of John of
Antioch and others with Cyril was apparently drawn up by Theodoret (P. G., LXXXIV,
209 sqq.), who, however, did not enter into the agreement himself because he was
not willing to condemn Nestorius as Cyril demanded. It was not until about 435
that Theodoret seems to have become reconciled with John of Antioch, without,
however, being obliged to agree to the condemnation of Nestorius (Synod. cxlvii
and cli; Epist. clxxvi). The dispute with Cyril broke out again when in 437 the
latter called Diodorus of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia the real originators
of the Nestorian heresy. Theodore entered the lists in their defence. The bitterness
with which these polemics were carried on is shown both by the letter and the
speech of Theodoret when he learned of the death in 444 of the Patriarch of Alexandria
(Epist. clxxx).
The episcopate of Dioscurus, the successor of Cyril, was a period
of much trouble for Theodoret. Dioscurus, by the mediation of Eutyches and the
influential Chrysaphius, obtained an imperial edict which forbade Theodoret to
leave his diocese (Epist. lxxix-lxxxii). In addition Theodoret was accused of
Nestorianism (Epist. lxxxiii-lxxxvi); in answer to this attack he wrote his most
important polemical work, called "Eranistes". Theodoret was also considered the
prime mover of the condemnation of Eutyches by the Patriarch Flavian. In return
Dioscurus obtained an imperial decree in 449 whereby Theodoret was forbidden to
take any part in the synod of Ephesus (Robber Council of Ephesus). At the third
session of this synod Theodoret was deposed by the efforts of Dioscurus and ordered
by the emperor to re-enter his former monastery near Apamea. Better times, however,
came before long. Theodoret appealed to Pope Leo who declared his deposition invalid,
and, as the Emperor Theodosius II died the following year (450), he was allowed
to re-enter his diocese. In the next year, notwithstanding the violent opposition
of the Alexandrine party, Theodoret was admitted as a regular member to the sessions
of the Council of Chalcedon, but refrained from voting. At the eighth session
(26 Oct., 451), he was admitted to full membership after he had agreed to the
anathema against Nestorius; probably he meant this agreement only in the sense:
in case Nestorius had really taught the heresy imputed to him (Mansi, VII, 190).
It is not certain whether Theodoret spent the last years of his life in the city
of Cyrus, or in the monastery where he had formerly lived. There still exists
a letter written by Pope Leo in the period after the Council of Chalcedon in which
he encourages Theodoret to co- operate without wavering in the victory of Chalcedon
(P. G., LXXXIII, 1319 sqq.). The writings of Theodoret against Cyril of Alexandria
were anathematized during the troubles that arose in connexion with the war of
the Three Chapters.
Chrys Baur, ed.
Transcribed by: WGKofron
This extract is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Bishop of Antioch. Eusebius in his "Chronicle" places the name of Theophilus against that of Pope Soter (169-77), and that of Maximinus, Theophilus's successor, against the name of Eleutherus (177-93). This does not mean that Maximinus succeeded Theophilus in 177, but only that Theophilus and Maximinus flourished respectively in the times of Soter and Eleutherus. Lightfoot and Hort showed that Eusebius, having no such precise chronological data for the bishops of Antioch as he had for those of Rome and Alexandria, placed the names of the Antiochene bishops against those of contemporary Roman bishops (Lightfoot, "St. Ignatius", etc., II, 468 sq., and St. Clement", etc., I, 224 sqq.). When therefore we find in the third book of Theophilus, "Ad Autolychum", that the writer was alive after the death (180) of Marcus Aurelius, it does not follow, as even writers like Harnack and Bardenhewer suppose, that Eusebius made a chronological blunder.
The "Ad Autolychum", the only extant writing of Theophilus, is an apology for Christianity. It consists of three books, really separate works written at different times, and corresponds exactly to the description given of it by Eusebius as "three elementary works" (Hist. eccl., IV, xxiv). The author speaks of himself as a convert from heathenism. He treats of such subjects as the Christian idea of God, the Scripture accounts of the origin of man and the world as compared with pagan myths. On several occasions he refers (in connection with the early chapters of Genesis) to an historical work composed by himself. Eusebius (op. cit.) speaks of refutations of Marcion and Hermogenes, and "catechetical books". To these St. Jerome (De vir. illust., xxv) adds commentaries on Proverbs and the Gospels. He speaks of the latter in the prologue to his own commentary on the Gospels, and also in his epistle "Ad Algasiam", where we learn that Theophilus commented upon a Diatessaron or Gospel Harmony composed by himself ("Theophilus . . . quattuor Evangelistarum in unum opus compingens"). A long quotation in the same epistle is all that survives of this commentary, for Zahn's attempt to identify it with a Latin commentary ascribed in some manuscripts to Theophilus has found no supporters.
F.J. Bacchus, ed.
Transcribed by: Herman F. Holbrook
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
A martyr, probably of the third century. Although St. Christopher is one of the most popular saints in the East and in the West, almost nothing certain is known about his life or death. The legend says: A heathen king (in Canaan or Arabia), through the prayers of his wife to the Blessed Virgin, had a son, whom he called Offerus (Offro, Adokimus, or Reprebus) and dedicated to the gods Machmet and Apollo. Acquiring in time extraordinary size and strength, Offerus resolved to serve only the strongest and the bravest. He bound himself successively to a mighty king and to Satan, but he found both lacking in courage, the former dreading even the name of the devil, and the latter frightened by the sight of a cross at the roadside. For a time his search for a new master was in vain, but at last he found a hermit (Babylas?) who told him to offer his allegiance to Christ, instructed him in the Faith, and baptized him. Christopher, as he was now called, would not promise to do any fasting or praying, but willingly accepted the task of carrying people, for God's sake, across a raging stream. One day he was carrying a child who continually grew heavier, so that it seemed to him as if he had the whole world on his shoulders. The child, on inquiry, made himself known as the Creator and Redeemer of the world. To prove his statement the child ordered Christopher to fix his staff in the ground. The next morning it had grown into a palm-tree bearing fruit. The miracle converted many. This excited the rage of the king (prefect) of that region (Dagnus of Samos in Lycia?). Christopher was put into prison and, after many cruel torments, beheaded.
The Greek legend may belong to the sixth century; about the middle of the ninth, we find it spread through France. Originally, St. Christopher was only a martyr, and as such is recorded in the old martyrologies. The simple form of the Greek and Latin passio soon gave way to more elaborate legends. We have the Latin edition in prose and verse of 983 by the subdeacon Walter of Speyer, "Thesaurus anecdotorum novissimus" (Augsburg, 1721-23), II, 27-142, and Harster, "Walter von Speyer" (1878). An edition of the eleventh century is found in the Acta SS., and another in the "Golden Legend" of Jacob de Voragine. The idea conveyed in the name, at first understood in the spiritual sense of bearing Christ in the heart, was in the twelfth or thirteenth century taken in the realistic meaning and became the characteristic of the saint. The fact that he was frequently called a great martyr may have given rise to the story of his enormous size. The stream and the weight of the child may have been intended to denote the trials and struggles of a soul taking upon itself the yoke of Christ in this world.
The existence of a martyr St. Christopher cannot be denied, as was sufficiently shown by the Jesuit Nicholas Serarius, in his treatise on litanies, "Litaneutici" (Cologne, 1609), and by Molanus in his history of sacred pictures, "De picturis et imaginibus sacris" (Louvain, 1570). In a small church dedicated to the martyr St. Christopher, the body of St. Remigius of Reims was buried, 532 (Acta SS., 1 Oct., 161). St. Gregory the Great (d. 604) speaks of a monastery of St. Christopher (Epp., x., 33). The Mozarabic Breviary and Missal, ascribed to St. Isidore of Seville (d. 636), contains a special office in his honour. In 1386 a brotherhood was founded under the patronage of St. Christopher in Tyrol and Vorarlberg, to guide travellers over the Arlberg. In 1517, a St. Christopher temperance society existed in Carinthia, Styria, in Saxony, and at Munich. Great veneration was shown to the saint in Venice, along the shores of the Danube, the Rhine, and other rivers where floods or ice-jams caused frequent damage. The oldest picture of the saint, in the monastery on the Mount Sinai dates from the time of Justinian (527-65). Coins with his image were cast at Wurzburg, in Wurtermberg, and in Bohemia. His statues were placed at the entrances of churches and dwellings, and frequently at bridges; these statues and his pictures often bore the inscription: "Whoever shall behold the image of St. Christopher shall not faint or fall on that day." The saint, who is one of the fourteen holy helpers, has been chosen as patron by Baden, by Brunswick, and by Mecklenburg, and several other cities, as well as by bookbinders, gardeners, mariners, etc. He is invoked against lightning, storms, epilepsy, pestilence, etc. His feast is kept on 25 July; among the Greeks, on 9 March; and his emblems are the tree, the Christ Child, and a staff. St. Christopher's Island (commonly called St. Kitts), lies 46 miles west of Antigua in the Lesser Antilles.
Francis Mershman, ed.
Transcribed by: Chris Angel
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Bishop of Antioch (190-211). Known principally through his theological writings. Of these Eusebius (Hist. eccl., V, 19) mentions a private letter addressed to Caricus and Pontius against the Montanist heresy; a treatise addressed to a certain Domninus, who in time of persecution abandoned Christianity for the error of "Jewish will-worship" (Hist. eccl., VI, 12); a work on the Docetic Gospel attributed to St. Peter, in which the Christian community of Rhossus in Syria is warned of the erroneous character of this Gospel. These were the only works of Serapion with which Eusebius was acquainted, but he says it is probable that others were extant in his time. He gives two short extracts from the first and third.
Patrick J. Healy, ed.
Transcribed by: Herman F. Holbrook
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
One of the defenders of the Faith of Chalcedon (451) against the Monophysites, b. at Amida in Mesopotamia; d. in 545. He was Count of the East (Comes Orientis) under Justinian I. In 527 he succeeded Euphrasius as Patriarch of Antioch. Most of his many works are lost. We know the titles of them, however, from Anastasius Sinaita (c. 700), St. John Damascene (d. about 754) or whoever was the author of the "Sacra Parallela", and especially Photius (d. 891). Anastasius (P.G., LXXXXIX, 1185-1188) quotes passages from a work of Ephraim against Severus, the Monophysite Patriarch of Antioch (512-519). The "Sacra Parallela" give a short passage from "St. Ephraim, Archbishop of Antioch", taken from a work "On John the Grammarian and the Synod" (Tit. lxi, cf. P.G., LXXXVI, 2, 2104-2109). Photius (P.G., CIII, 957-1024) speaks of four books by Ephraim. The first consisted of sermons and letters, the second, and third contained a treatise against Severus in three parts and an answer to five questions about Genesis addressed to the author by a monk named Anatolius. The fragments quoted by Photius represent practically all that is left of Ephraim's writings. Cardinal Mai was able to add a few more from a manuscript Catena in the Vatican library (P.G., LXXXVI, loc. cit.). Krumbacher (Byz. Litt., loc. cit.) mentions a few other fragments in the Paris library, etc., and considers that Ephraim would deserve the same reputation as Leontius Byzantinus if more of his work had been preserved. He had extensive knowledge of Greek Fathers and follows chiefly St. Cyril of Alexandria in his Christology.
Adrian Fortescue, ed.
Transcribed by: Thomas M. Barrett
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Ephraem. Ephraimius (Ephraimios), or, as Theophanes writes the name, Euphraimius
(Euphraimios), patriarch of Antioch, or, as it was then called, Theopolis. If
the designation given him by Theophanes (ho Amidios) indicates the place of his
birth, he was a native of Amida in Armenia, near the source of the Tigris. His
first employment were civil : and in the reign of the emperor Justin I. he attained
to the high dignity of Count of the East. While in this office he received, according
to a curious story, recorded in the Leimonarios, or Pratum Spirituale, written
by Joannes Moschus, but erroneously ascribed, by ancient as well as modern writers,
to Sophronius patriarch of Jerusalem, an intimation of the ecclesiastical dignity
to which he was destined to attain. In the years 525 and 526, Antioch was nearly
destroyed by successive shocks of an earthquake, and by a fire which had been
occasioned by the overthrow of the buildings. Among the suf ferers was Euphrasius
the patriarch, who was buried in the ruins of the falling edifices; and the people,
grateful for the compassionate care which Ephraimius manifested for them in their
distress, chose him successor to the deceased prelate. His elevation to the patriarchate
is generally placed in the year 526, but perhaps did not take place till the year
following. His conduct as patriarch is highly eulogized by ecclesiastical writers,
who speak especially of his charity to the poor, and of the zeal and firmness
with which he opposed heresy. His zeal against heretics was manifested in a curious
encounter with an heretical stylite, or pillar-saint, in which the heretic is
said to have been converted by the miraculous passing of the patriarch's robes,
unconsumed, through the ordeal of fire. He condemned, in a synod at Autioch, those
who attempted to revive the obnoxious sentiments of Origen; and wrote various
treatises against the Nestorians, Eutychians, Severians, and Acephali, and in
defence of the Council of Chalcedon. But, toward the close of his life, he was
obliged by the Emperor Justinian, under a threat of deposition, to subscribe the
condemnation of three of the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon, which he had
hitherto so earnestly supported. Facundus of Hermia, the strenuous advocate of
the condemned decrees, reproaches Ephraimius on this occasion, and with justice,
as more solicitous for the preservation of his office than for the interests of
what e deemed divine and important truth. Ephraimius died soon after this transaction,
A. D. 546, or perhaps 545, after a patriarchate, according to Theophanes, of eighteen
years, or, according to other calculations, of twenty years.
The works of Ephraimius are known to us only by the account of them
preserved in the Bibliotheca of Photius, who says that three volumes written in
defence of the dogmas of the Church, and especially of the decrees of the Council
of Chalcedon, had come down to his day : but he gives an account only of two.
The first comprehended, 1. An epistle to Zenobius, a scholasticus or advocate
of Emesa, and one of the sect of the Acephali ; 2. Some epistles to the emperor
Justinian ; 3. Epistles to Anthimus, bishop of Trapezus, Dometianus Syncleticus,
metropolitan of Tarsus, Brazes the Persian, and others ; 4. An act of a synod
(sunodike praxis) held by Ephraimius respecting certain unorthodox books; and,
5, Panegyrical and other discourses. The second volume contained a treatise in
four books, in which were defences of Cyril of Alexandria and the synod of Chalcedon
against the Nestorians and Eutychians; and answers to some theological questions
of his correspondent the advocate Anatolius. (Phot. Bibl. Codd. 228, 229; Facundus,
iv. 4; Evagrius, Eccles. Hist. iv. 5, 6 ; Joannes Moschus (commonly cited as Sophronius)
Pratum Spirituale, c. 36, 37 in Biblioth. Patrum, vol. xiii. ed. Paris, 1654;
Theophanes, Chronograph. ad Ann. 519 (Alex. Era=526 Common Era) and table ad Ann.
537, 538; Baronius, Annales ; Cave, Hist. Liter. vol. i. , ed. 1740-3; Fabric.
Bibl. Graec. vol. x.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Christians of Antioch who suffered martyrdom during the persecution of Diocletian at Nicomedia, 26 September, 304, the date in September being afterwards made the day of their feast. Cyprian was a heathen magician of Antioch who had dealing with demons. By their aid he sought to bring St. Justina, a Christian virgin, to ruin; but she foiled the threefold attacks of the devils by the sign of the cross. Brought to despair Cyprian made the sign of the cross himself and in this way was freed from the toils of Satan. He was received into the Church, was made pre-eminent by miraculous gifts, and became in succession deacon, priest, and finally bishop, while Justina became the head of a convent. During the Diocletian persecution both were seized and taken to Damascus where they were shockingly tortured. As their faith never wavered they were brought before Diocletian at Nicomedia, where at his command they were beheaded on the bank of the river Gallus. The same fate befell a Christian, Theoctistus, who had come to Cyprian and had embraced him. After the bodies of the saints had lain unburied for six days they were taken by Christian sailors to Rome where they were interred on the estate of a noble lady named Rufina and later were entombed in Constantine's basilica. This is the outline of the legend or allegory which is found, adorned with diffuse descriptions and dialogues, in the unreliable "Symeon Metaphrastes", and was made the subject of a poem by the Empress Eudocia II. The story, however, must have arisen as early as the fourth century, for it is mentioned both by St. Gregory Nazianzen and Prudentius; both, nevertheless, have confounded our Cyprian with St. Cyprian of Carthage, a mistake often repeated. It is certain that no Bishop of Antioch bore the name of Cyprian. The attempt has been made to find in Cyprian a mystical prototype of the Faust legend: Calderon took the story as the basis of a drama: "El magico prodigioso". The legend is given in Greek and Latin in Acta SS. September, VII. Ancient Syriac and Ethiopic versions of it have been published within the last few years.
Gabriel Meier, ed.
Transcribed by: Michael T. Barrett
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
The first Bishop of Antioch after St. Peter. Eusebius mentions him thus in his
"History": "And Evodius having been established the first [bishop] of the Antiochians,
Ignatius flourished at this time" (III, 22). The time referred to is that of Clement
of Rome and Trajan, of whom Eusebius has just spoken. Harnack has shown (after
discarding an earlier theory of his own) Eusebius possessed a list of the bishops
of Antioch which did not give their dates, and that he was obliged to synchronize
them roughly with the popes. It seems certain that he took the three episcopal
lists of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch from the "Chronography" which Julius Africanus
published in 221. The "Chronicle of Eusebius" is lost; but in Jerome's translation
of it we find in three successive years the three entries:
- that Peter, having founded the Church of Antioch, is sent to Rome, where he
perseveres as bishop for 25 years;
- that Mark, the interpreter of Peter, preaches Christ in Egypt and Alexandria;
and
- that Evodius is ordained first Bishop of Antioch.
This last year is given as Claudius III by the Codex Freherianus,
but by the fifth-century Bodleian Codex (not used in Schoene's edition) and the
rest as Claudius IV (A.D. 44). The Armenian translation has Claudius II. We have
no mention of Evodius earlier than that by Africanus; but the latter is confirmed
by his contemporary, Origen, who calls Ignatius the second bishop after Peter
(Hom. IV, in Luc., III, 938A). It is curious that the ordination of Evodius should
not have been given in the "Chronography" in the same year as the founding of
the Antiochian Church by Peter, and Hort supposed that the three entries must
have belonged to a single year in Eusebius. But the evidence is not in favour
of this simplification. The year of the accession of Ignatius, that is of the
death of Evodius, was unknown to Eusebius, for he merely places it in the "Chronicle"
together with the death of Peter and the accession of Linus at Rome (Nero 14-68),
while in the "History" he mentions it at the beginning of Trajan's reign.
The fame of Ignatius has caused later writers, such as Athanasius
and Chrysostom, to speak of him as though he were the immediate successor of the
Apostles. Jerome (De viris ill., 16) and Socrates (H.E. VI, 8) call him the "third"
bishop after St. Peter, but this is only because they illogically include Peter
among his own successors. Theodoret and Pseudo-Ignatius represent Ignatius as
consecrated by Peter. The difficulty which thus arose about Evodius was solved
in the Apostolic Constitutions by stating that Evodius was ordained by Peter and
Ignatius by Paul. The Byzantine chronographer, John Malalas (X, 252), relates
that as Peter went to Rome, and passed through the great city of Antioch, it happened
that Evodus (sic), the bishop and patriarch, died, and Ignatius succeeded him,
he attributes to Evodius the invention of the name Christian. Salmon does not
seem to be justified in supposing that Malalas ascribes any of this information
to Theophilus, the second century Bishop of Antioch. We may be sure that Evodius
is an historical personage, and really the predecessor of St. Ignatius. But the
dates of his ordination and death are quite uncertain. No early witness makes
him a martyr.
The Greeks commemorate together "Evodus" and Onesiphorus (II Tim.,
i, 16) as of the seventy disciples and as martyrs on 29 April, and also on 7 September.
Evodius was unknown to the earlier Western martyrologies the Hieronymian, and
those of Bede and Florus; but Ado introduced him into the so-called "Martyrologium
Romanum parvum" (which he forged not long before 860) and into his own work, on
6 May. His source was Pseudo-Ignatius, whom he quotes in the "Libellus de fest.
Apost.", prefixed to the martyrology proper. From him the notice came to Usuard
and the rest, and to the present Roman Martyrology.
John Chapman, ed.
Transcribed by: Joseph P. Thomas
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
d. unknown, feastday: July 20
d.c. 303, feastday: September 28 (Catholic). Martyr of Antioch, in Pisidia, with Alexander, Alphius, Zosimus, Nicon, Neon, Heliodorus, and thirty soldiers. Mark was a shepherd and his non-military companions were his brothers.
d. 814, feastday: April 19 (Catholic).
APOLLONIA (Ancient city) TURKEY
d.c. 735, feastday: March 20 (Catholic). Bishop of Apollonias in Bithynia, in modem Turkey. He suffered under the Iconoclast Byzantine Emperor Leo III and was exiled to Anatolia for opposing imperial prohibitions on the veneration of icons. He died in exile.
Cosmas (Kosmas), a celebrated physician, saint, and martyr, who lived in the third and fourth centuries after Christ. He is said to have been the brother of St. Damianus, with whose name his own is constantly associated, and under which article the particulars of their lives and deaths are mentioned. A medical prescription attributed to them is preserved by Arraldus Villanovanus (Antidot.), and there are several Greek homilies still extant in MS., written or preached in their honour. Their memory is observed by the Greek and Roman Churches on the 27th of September.
Damianus (Damianos), a celebrated saint and martyr, who was a physician by profession and lived in the third and fourth centuries after Christ. He is said to have been the brother of St. Cosmas, with whose name and life his own is commonly associated, and whose joint history appears to have been as follows. They were born in Arabia: their father's name is not known, their mother's was Theodora, and both are said to have been Christians. After receiving an excellent education, they chose the medical profession, as being that in which they thought they could most benefit their fellow men; and accordingly they constantly practised it gratuitously, thus earning for themselves the title of Anarguroi, by which they are constantly distinguished. They were at last put to death with the most cruel tortures, in company with several other Christians, during the persecution by Diocletian, A. D. 303 - 311. Justinian, in the sixth century, built a church in their honour at Constantinople, and another in Pamphylia, in consequence of his having been (as he supposed) cured of a dangerous illness through their intercession.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
FLAVIOPOLIS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Alexander (Alexandros), ST., Hierosolymitanus, a disciple, first, of Pantaenus,
then of St. Clement, at Alexandria, where he became acquainted with Origen (Euseb.
Hist. Eccl. vi. 14), was bishop of Flaviopolis (Tillemont, Hist. Eccl. iii. 415),
in Cappadocia (S. Hier. Vir. Ill.62). In the persecution under Severus he was
thrown into prison (circ. A. D. 204, Euseb. vi. 11), where he remained till Asclepiades
succeeded Serapion at Antioch, A. D. 211, the beginning of Caracalla's reign.
Eusebius relates, that by Divine revelation he became coadjutor bishop to Narcissus,
bishop of Aelia, i. e. Jerusalem, A. D. 212. During his episcopate of nearly forty
years (for he continued bishop on the death of St. Narcissus), he collected a
valuable library of Ecclesiastical Epistles, which existed in the time of Eusebius
(H. E. vi. 20). He received Origen when the troubles at Alexandria drove him thence,
A. D. 216, and made him, though a layman, explain the Scriptures publicly, a proceeding
which he justified in an epistle to Bishop Demetrius, of Alexandria (ap. Euseb.
H. E. vi. 19), who, however, sent some deacons to bring Origen home. As Origen
was passing through Palestine, on some necessary business, St. Alexander ordained
him priest, which caused great disturbance in the church. A fragment of a letter
from St. Alexander to Origen on the subject exists, ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. 14. St.
Alexander died in the Decian persecution, A. D. 251, in prison (S. Dion. Alex.
ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. 46) after great sufferings (Euseb. vi. 39), and is commemorated
in the Eastern church on 12th December, in the Western on 16th March. Mazabanes
succeeded him. St. Clement of Alexandria dedicated to him his De Canone Ecclesiastico
about the observance of Easter (H. E. vi. 13).
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
St. Alexander, who died in chains after cruel torments in the persecution of Decius, was first Bishop of Cappadocia, and was afterwards associated as coadjutor with the Bishop of Jerusalem, who was then 116 years old. This association came about as follows: Alexander had been imprisoned for his faith in the time of Alexander Severus and on being released came to Jerusalem, where he was compelled by the aged bishop to remain, and assist him in the government of that see. This arrangement, however, was entered into with the consent of all the bishops of Palestine. It was Alexander who permitted Origen, although only a layman, to speak in the churches. For this concession he was taken to task, but he defended himself by examples of other permissions of the same kind given even to Origen himself elsewhere, although then quite young. Butler says that they had studied together on the great Christian school of Alexandria. Alexander ordained him a priest. Especial praise is given to Alexander for the library he built at Jerusalem. Finally, in spite of his years, he, with several other bishops, was carried off a prisoner to Caesarea, and as the historians say, "the glory of his white hairs and great sanctity formed a double crown for him in captivity". He suffered many tortures, but survived them all. When the wild beasts were brought to devour him, some licked his feet, and others their impress on the sand of the arena. Worn out by his sufferings he died in prison. This was in the year 251. His feast is kept by the Latins on 18 March, by the Greeks, 22 December.
T.J. Campbell, ed.
Transcribed by: Joseph P. Thomas
This text is cited Nov 2005 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
d.c. 303, feastday: August 23
d. 450, feastday: February 27
d. 303, feastday: January 4
d.c. 475, feastday: March 5
d. 253, feastday: December 21 (Catholic). With companion Dioscorus, martyrs put to death during the persecutions under Emperor Valerian (r. 253-260). Themistocles was a shepherd in Lycia (modern Turkey). He died by beheading after refusing to divulge the hiding place of Dioscorus who was himself later martyred.
MAGYDUS (Ancient city) TURKEY
d. 251, feastday: February 26 (Catholic). Bishop of Magydos. Pamphylia, and martyr. He was arrested during the persecution under Emperor Trajanus Decius and was put to death when he refused to make sacrifices to the gods. The local governor, Pollio, condemned Nestor to death.
d. unknown, feastday: November 4
d.c. 127, feastday: May 2
PATARA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Feastday: December 6
d.c. 260, feastday: February 18
SELEUCIA PIERIA (Ancient port) TURKEY
SIDI (Ancient port) TURKEY
St. Eustathius. Bishop of Antioch, b. at Side in Pamphylia, c. 270; d. in exile at
Trajanopolis in Thrace, most probably in 360, according to some already in 336
or 337. He was at first Bishop of Beroea in Syria, whence he was transferred to
Antioch c. 323. At the Council of Nicaea (325), he was one of the most prominent
opponents of Arianism and from 325-330 he was engaged in an almost continuous
literary warfare against the Arians. By his fearless denunciation of Arianism
and his refusal to engage any Arian priests in his diocese, he incurred the hatred
of the Arians, who, headed by Eusebius of Caesarea and his namesake of Nicomedia,
held a synod at Antioch (331) at which Eustathius was accused, by suborned witnesses,
of Sabellianism, incontinency, cruelty, and other crimes. He was deposed by the
synod and banished to Trajanopolis in Thrace by order of the Emperor Constantine,
who gave credence to the scandalous tales spread about Eustathius. The people
of Antioch, who loved and revered their holy and learned patriarch, became indignant
at the injustice done to him and were ready to take up arms in his defence. But
Eustathius kept them in check, exhorted them to remain true to the orthodox faith
and humbly left for his place of exile, accompanied by a large body of his clergy.
The adherents of Eustathius at Antioch formed a separate community by the name
of Eustathians and refused to acknowledge the bishops set over them by the Arians.
When, after the death of Eustathius, St. Meletius became Bishop of Antioch in
360 by the united vote of the Arians and the orthodox, the Eustathians would not
recognize him, even after his election was approved by the Synod of Alexandria
in 362. Their intransigent attitude gave rise to two factions among the orthodox,
the so-called Meletian Schism, which lasted till the second decade of the fifth
century (Cavallera, Le schisme d'Antioche, Paris, 1905).
Most of the numerous dogmatic and exegetical treatises of Eustathius
have been lost. His principal extant work is "De Engastrimytho", in which he maintains
against Origen that the apparition of Samuel (I Kings, xxviii) was not a reality
but a mere phantasm called up in the brain of Saul by the witch of Endor. In the
same work he severely criticizes Origen for his allegorical interpretation of
the Bible. A new edition of it, together with the respective homily of Origen,
was made by A. Jahn in Gebhardt and Harnack's "Texte und Untersuchungen zur Gesch.
der altchristl. Literatur" (Leipzig, 1886), II, fasc. iv. Cavallera recently discovered
a Christological homily: "S. Eustathii ep. Antioch. in Lazarum, Mariam et Martham
homilia christologica", which he edited together with a commentary on the literary
fragments of Eustathius (Paris, 1905). Fragments of lost writings are found in
Migne (P. G., XVIII, 675-698), Pitra and Martin (Analecta Sacra, II, Proleg.,
37-40; IV, 210-213 and 441-443). "Commentarius in Hexaemeron" (Migne, P. G.,XVIII,
707-794) and "Allocution ad Imp. Constantinum in Conc. Nicaeno" (Migne, P. G.,
XVIII, 673-676) are spurious. His feast is celebrated in the Latin Church on 16
July, in the Greek on 21 Feb. His relics were brought to Antioch.
Michael Ott, ed.
Transcribed by: WGKofron
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Eustathius (Eustathios.) Bishop of Antioch, was a native of Side, a town in Pamphylia,
but according to Nicetas Choniates (v. 9), he was descended from a family of Philippi
in Macedonia. He was a contemporary of the emperor Constantine the Great, and
was at first bishop of Beroea in Syria, but the council of Nicaea appointed him
bishop of Antioch (Nicet. Chon. v. 6). At the opening of the council of Nicaea
he is said to have been the first who addressed the emperor in a panegyric (Theodoret,
i. 7). Eustathius was a zealous defender of the Catholic faith, and a bitter enemy
of the Arians, who therefore did everything to deprive him of his position and
influence. A synod of Arian prelates was convened at Antioch, at which such heavy,
though unfounded, charges were brought against him, that he was deposed, and the
emperor sent him into exile to Trajanopolis in Thrace, in A. D. 329 or 330 (Socrat.
i. 24; Sozomen, ii. 19; Theodoret, i. 21; Philostorg. ii. 7). A long time after,
his innocence and the calumnies of his enemies became known through a woman who
had been bribed to bear false witness against him, and who, on her death-bed,
confessed her crime; but it was too late, for Eustathius had already died in his
exile. He is praised by the ecclesiastical writers as one of the worthiest and
holiest men (Athanas. Ep. ad Solit; Sozomen. ii. 19).
Eustathius was the author of several works, but among those which
now bear his name, there are two which can scarcely have been his productions,
viz., the address which he is said to have delivered to the emperor (onstantine
at the council of Nicaea, and which is printed with a Latin version in Fabric.
Bibl. Gr. , and secondly, a commentary, or upomnema, on the Hexaemeron, which
was edited, with a Latin translation and copious notes, by Leo Allatius, Lugdun.
1629. This work is not mentioned by any ancient writer, and the only authority
for ascribing it to Eustathius, is the MS. used by Allatius, in which it bears
his name. But the work itself also contains proofs that it cannot have been written
by Eustathius. A work against Origen, entitled Kata Origenous diagnostikos eis
to engastromuthou theorema, on the other hand, is mentioned by Hieronymus (de
Script. illustr. 85; comp. Socrat. vi 13), and is undoubtedly genuine. It is printed
at the end of Allatius's edition of the commentary on the Hexaemeron. Eustathius
wrote further Homilies, Epistles, and an Interpretation of the Psalms, of which
some fragments are still extant. They are collected in Fabric. Bibl. Graec.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Dec 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
The Catholic Encyclopedia
d. unknown, feastday: March 28
d. 306, feastday: November 1
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
