Listed 56 sub titles with search on: Religious figures biography Saints for destination: "ALEXANDRIA Ancient city EGYPT".
St. Ammon. Sometimes called AMUN or AMUS, born about 350; an Egyptian who, forced
into marriage when twenty-two years old, persuaded his wife on the bridal night
to pronounce a vow of chastity, which they kept faithfully, though living together
for eighteen years; at the end of this time he became a hermit in the desert of
Nitria.
Nitria, to which Ammon betook himself, is a mountain surmounted by
a desolate region, seventy miles south of Alexandria, beyond Lake Mareotis. At
the end of the fourth century there were fifty monasteries there inhabited by
5,000 monks. St. Jerome called the place “The City of God”. As to
whether Ammon was the first to build a monastery there, authorities disagree,
but it is certain that the fame of his sanctity drew many anchorites around him,
who erected cellos not only on the mountain but in the adjacent desert. St. Anthony
came to visit him and induced him to gather his scattered solitaries into monasteries.
When Ammon died at about the age of 62, Anthony, though thirteen days journey
distant, saw his soul entering heaven. He is honored on 4 October.
J. Cambell, ed.
Transcribed by: Michael Christensen
This text is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
St. Apollonia. A holy virgin who suffered martyrdom in Alexandria during a local
uprising against the Christians previous to the persecution of Decius (end of
248, or beginning of 249). During the festivities commemorative of the first millenary
of the Roman Empire, the agitation of the heathen populace rose to a great height,
and when one of their poets prophesied a calamity, they committed bloody outrages
on the Christians whom the authorities made no effort to protect. The great Dionysius,
then Bishop of Alexandria (247-265), relates the sufferings of his people in a
letter addressed to Fabius, Bishop of Antioch, long extracts from which Eusebius
has preserved for us. Dionysius writes: “At that time Apollonia the parthenos
presbutis (virgo presbytera, by which he very probably means not a virgin advanced
in years, but a deaconess) was held in high esteem. These men seized her also
and by repeated blows broke all her teeth. They then erected outside the city
gates a pile of fagots and threatened to burn her alive if she refused to repeat
after them impious words (either a blasphemy against Christ, or an invocation
of the heathen gods). Given, at her own request, a little freedom, she sprang
quickly into the fire and was burned to death.”
Apollonia belongs, therefore, to that class of early Christian martyrs
who did not await the death they were threatened with, but either to preserve
their chastity, or because confronted with the alternative of renouncing their
faith or suffering death, voluntarily embraced the latter in the form prepared
for them. In the honour paid to her martyrs the Church made no distinction between
these women and others.
The Roman Church celebrates her memory on 9 February, and she is popularly
invoked against the toothache because of the torments she had to endure. She is
represented in art with pincers in which a tooth is held.
J.P. Kirsch, ed.
Transcribed by: W.G. Kofron
This extract is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
St. Clement of Alexandria. Date of birth unknown; died about the year 215. St. Clement was an
early Greek theologian and head of the catechetical school of Alexandria. Athens
is given as the starting-point of his journeyings, and was probably his birthplace.
He became a convert to the Faith and travelled from place to place in search of
higher instruction, attaching himself successively to different masters: to a
Greek of Ionia, to another of Magna Graecia, to a third of Coele-Syria, after
all of whom he addressed himself in turn to an Egyptian, an Assyrian, and a converted
Palestinian Jew. At last he met Pantaenus in Alexandria, and in his teaching "found
rest".
The place itself was well chosen. It was natural that Christian speculation
should have a home at Alexandria. This great city was at the time a centre of
culture as well as of trade. A great university had grown up under the long-continued
patronage of the State. The intellectual temper was broad and tolerant, as became
a city where so many races mingled. The philosophers were critics or eclectics,
and Plato was the most favoured of the old masters. Neo-Platonism, the philosophy
of the new pagan renaissance, had a prophet at Alexandria in the person of Ammonius
Saccas. The Jews, too, who were there in very large numbers breathed its liberal
atmosphere, and had assimilated secular culture. They there formed the most enlightened
colony of the Dispersion. Having lost the use of Hebrew, they found it necessary
to translate the Scriptures into the more familiar Greek. Philo, their foremost
thinker, became a sort of Jewish Plato. Alexandria was, in addition, one of the
chief seats of that peculiar mixed pagan and Christian speculation known as Gnosticism.
Basilides and Valentinus taught there. It is no matter of surprise, therefore,
to find some of the Christians affected in turn by the scientific spirit. At an
uncertain date, in the latter half of the second century, "a school of oral instruction"
was founded. Lectures were given to which pagan hearers were admitted, and advanced
teaching to Christians separately. It was an official institution of the Church.
Pantaenus is the earliest teacher whose name has been preserved. Clement first
assisted and then succeeded Pantaenus in the direction of the school, about A.D.
190. He was already known as a Christian writer before the days of Pope Victor
(188-199).
About this time he may have composed the "Hortatory Discourse to the
Greeks" (Protreptikos pros Ellenas) It is a persuasive appeal for the Faith, written
in a lofty strain. The discourse opens with passages which fall on the ear with
the effect of sweet music. Amphion and Arion by their minstrelsy drew after them
savage monsters and moved the very stones; Christ is the noblest minstrel. His
harp and Iyre are men. He draws music from their hearts by the Holy Spirit: nay,
Christ is Himself the New Canticle, whose melody subdues the fiercest and hardest
natures. Clement then proceeds to show the transcendence of the Christian religion.
He constrasts Christianity with the vileness of pagan rites and with the faint
hope of pagan poetry and philosophers. Man is born for God. The Word calls men
to Himself. The full truth is found in Christ alone. The work ends with a description
of the God-fearing Christian. He answers those who urge that it is wrong to desert
one's ancestral religion.
The work entitled "Outlines" (Hypotyposeis) is likewise believed to
be a production of the early activity of Clement. It was translated into Latin
by Rufinus under the title "Dispositiones". It was in eight books, but is no longer
extant, though numerous fragments have been preserved in Greek by Eusebius, Oecumenius,
Maximus Confessor, John Moschos, and Photius. According to Zahn, a Latin fragment,
"Adumbrationes Clementis Alexandrini in epistolas canonicas", translated by Cassiodorus
and purged of objectionable passages, represents in part the text of Clement.
Eusebius represents the "Outlines" as an abridged commentary, with doctrinal and
historical remarks on the entire Bible and on the non-canonical "Epistle of Barnabas"
and "Apocalypse of Peter". Photius, who had also read it describes it as a series
of explanations of Biblical texts especially of Genesis, Exodus, the Psalms, Ecclesiastes
and the Pauline and Catholic Epistles. He declares the work sound on some points,
but adds that it contains "impieties and fables", such as the eternity of matter,
the creatureship of the Word, plurality of words (Logoi), Docetism, metempsychosis,
etc. Conservative scholars are inclined to believe that Photius has thrown the
mistakes of Clement, whatever they may have been, into undue relief. Clement's
style is difficult, his works are full of borrowed excerpts, and his teaching
is with difficulty reduced to a coherent body of doctrine. And this early work,
being a scattered commentary on Holy Writ, must have been peculiarly liable to
misconstruction. It is certain that several of the more serious charges can rest
upon nothing but mistakes. At any rate, his extant writings show Clement in a
better light.
Other works of his are the "Miscellanies" (Stromateis) and "The Tutor"
(Paidagogos). The "Miscellanies" comprise seven entire books, of which the first
four are earlier than "The Tutor". When he had finished this latter work he returned
to the "Miscellanies", which he was never able to finish. The first pages of the
work are now missing. What has been known as the eighth book since the time of
Eusebius is nothing more than a collection of extracts drawn from pagan philosophers.
It is likely, as von Annin has suggested, that Clement had intended to make use
of these materials together with the abridgement of Theodotus (Excerpts from Theodotus
and the Eastern School of Valentinus) and the "Eclogae Propheticae". Extracts
from the Prophets (not extracts, but notes at random on texts or Scriptural topics)
for the continuation of the "Miscellanies". In the "Miscellanies" Clement disclaims
order and plan. He compares the work to a meadow where all kinds of flowers grow
at random and, again, to a shady hill or mountain planted with trees of every
sort. In fact, it is a loosely related series of remaks, possibly notes of his
lectures in the school. It is the fullest of Clement's works. He starts with the
importance of philosophy for the pursuit of Christian knowledge. Here he is perhaps
defending his own scientific labours from local criticism of conservative brethren.
He shows how faith is related to knowledge, and emphasizes the superiority of
revelation to philosophy. God's truth is to be found in revelation, another portion
of it in philosophy. It is the duty of the Christian to neglect neither. Religious
science, drawn from his twofold source, is even an element of perfection, the
instructed Christian -- "the true Gnostic" is the perfect Christian. He who has
risen to this height is far from the disturbance of passion; he is united to God,
and in a mysterious sense is one with Him. Such is the line of thought indicated
in the work, which is full of digressions.
"The Tutor" is a practical treatise in three books. Its purpose is
to fit the ordinary Christian by a disciplined life to become an instructed Christian.
In ancient times the paedagogus was the slave who had constant charge of a boy,
his companion at all times. On him depended the formation of the boy's character.
such is the office of the Word Incarnate towards men. He first summons them to
be HIS, then He trains them in His ways. His ways are temperate, orderly, calm,
and simple. Nothing is too common or trivial for the Tutor's care. His influence
tells on the minute details of life, on one's manner of eating, drinking, sleeping,
dressing, taking recreation, etc. The moral tone of this work is kindly; very
beautiful is the ideal of a transfigured life described at the close. In the editions
of Clement "The Tutor" is followed by two short poems, the second of which, addressed
to the Tutor, is from some pious reader of the work; the first, entitled "A Hymn
of the Saviour Christ" (Hymnos tou Soteros Christou), is, in the manuscripts which
contain it, attributed to Clement. The hymn may be the work of Clement (Bardenhewer).
or it may be of as early a date as the Gloria in Excesis (Westcott).
Some scholars see in the chief writings of Clement, the "Exhortation",
"The Tutor", the "Miscellanies", a great trilogy representing a graduated initiation
into the Christian life -- belief, discipline, knowledge -- three states corresponding
to the three degrees of the neo-Platonic mysteries -- purification, initiation,
and vision. Some such underlying conception was doubtless before the mind of Clement,
but it can hardly be said to have been realized. He was too unsystematic. Besides
these more irnportant works, he wrote the beautiful tract, "Who is the rich man
who shall be saved? (tis ho sozomenos plousios). It is an exposition of St. Mark,
x, 17-31, wherein Clement shows that wealth is not condemned by the Gospel as
intrinsically evil; its morality depends on the good or ill use made of it. The
work concludes with the narrative of the young man who was baptized, lost, and
again rewon by the Apostle St. John. The date of the composition cannot be fixed.
We have the work almost in its entirety. Clement wrote homilies on fasting and
on evil speaking, and he also used his pen in the controversy on the Paschal question.
Duchesne (Hist. ancienne de l'Eglise, I, 334 sqq.) thus summarizes
the remaining years of Clement's life. He did not end his life at Alexandria.
The persecution fell upon Egypt in the year 202, and catechumens were pursued
with special intent of law. The catechetical school suffered accordingly. In the
first two books of the "Miscellanies", written at this time, we find more than
one allusion to the crisis. At length Clement felt obliged to withdraw. We find
him shortly after at Caesarea in Cappadocia beside his friend and former pupil
bishop Alexander. The persecution is active there also, and Clement is fulfillmg
a ministry of love. Alexander is in prison for Christ's sake, Clement takes charge
of the Church in his stead, strengthens the faithful, and is even able to draw
in additional converts. We learn this from a letter written in 211 or 212 by Alexander
to congratulate the Church of Antioch on the election Asclepiades to the bishopric.
Clement himself undertook to deliver the letter in person, being known to the
faithful of Antioch. In another letter written about 215 to Origen Alexander speaks
of Clement as of one then dead.
Clement has had no notable influence on the course of theology beyond
his personal influence on the young Origen. His writings were occasionally copied,
as by Hippolytus in his "Chronicon", by Arnobius, and by Theodoret of Cyrus. St.
Jerome admired his learning. Pope Gelasius in the catalogue attributed to him
mentions Clement's works, but adds, "they are in no case to be received amongst
us". Photius in the "Bibliotheca" censures a list of errors drawn from his writings,
but shows a kindly feeling towards Clement, assuming that the original text had
been tampered with. Clement has in fact been dwarfed in history by the towering
grandeur of the great Origen, who succeeded him at Alexandria. Down to the seventeenth
century he was venerated as a saint. His name was to be found in the martyrologies,
and his feast fell on the fourth of December. But when the Roman Martyrology was
revised by Pope Clement VIII his name was dropped from the calendar on the advice
of Cardinal Baronius. Benedict XIV maintained this decision of his predecessor
on the grounds that Clement's life was little known that he had never obtained
public cultus in the Church, and that some of his doctrines were, if not erroneous,
at least suspect. In more recent times Clement has grown in favour for his charming
literary temper, his attractive candour, the brave spirit which made him a pioneer
in theology, and his leaning to the claims of philosophy. He is modern in spirit.
He was exceptionally well-read. He had a thorough knowledge of the whole range
of Biblical and Christian literature, of orthodox and heretical works. He was
fond of letters also, and had a fine knowledge of the pagan poets and philosophers;
he loved to quote them, too, and has thus preserved a number of fragments of lost
works. The mass of facts and citations collected by him and pieced together in
his writings is in fact unexampled in antiquity, though it is not unlikely that
he drew at times upon the florilegia, or anthologies, exhibiting choice passages
of literature.
Scholars have found it no easy task to sum up the chief points of
Clement's teaching. As has already been intimated, he lacks technical precision
and makes no pretense to orderly exposition. It is easy, therefore, to misjudge
him. We accept the discriminating judgment of Tixeront. Clement's rule of faith
was sound. He admitted the authority of the Church's tradition. He would be, first
of all, a Christian, accepting "the ecclesiastical rule", but he would also strive
to remain a philosopher, and bring his reason to bear in matters of religion.
"Few are they", he said, "who have taken the spoils of the Egyptians, and made
of them the furniture of the Tabernacle." He set himself, therefore, with philosophy
as an instrument, to transform faith into science, and revelation into theology.
The Gnostics had already pretended to possess the science of faith, but they were,
in fact, mere rationalists, or rather dreamers of fantastic dreams. Clement would
have nothing but faith for the basis of his speculations. He cannot, therefore,
be accused of disloyalty in will. But he was a pioneer in a diffficult undertaking,
and it must be admitted that he failed at times in his high endeavour. He was
careful to go to Holy Scripture for his doctrine; but he misused the text by his
faulty exegesis. He had read all the Books of the New Testament except the Second
Epistle of St. Peter and the Third Epistle of St. John. "In fact", Tixeront says,
"his evidence as to the primitive form of the Apostolic writings is of the highest
value." Unfortunately, he interpreted the Scripture after the manner of Philo.
He was ready to find allegory everywhere. The facts of the Old Testament became
mere symbols to him. He did not, howerer, permit himself so much freedom with
the New Testament.
The special field which Clement cultivated led him to insist on the
difference between the faith of the ordinary Christian and the science of the
perfect, and his teaching on this point is most characteristic of him. The perfect
Christian has an insight into "the great mysteries" of man, of nature, of virtue
-- which the ordinary Christian accepts without clear insight. Clement has seemed
to some to exaggerate the moral worth of religious knowledge; it must however
be remembered that he praises not mere sterile knowledge, but knowledge which
turns to love. It is Christian perfection that he extols. The perfect Christian
-- the true Gnostic whom Clement loves to describe -- leads a life of unalterable
calm. And here Clement's teaching is undoubtedly colored by Stoicism. He is really
describing not so much the Christian with his sensitive feelings and desires under
due control, but the ideal Stoic who has deadened his feelings altogether. The
perfect Christian leads a life of utter devotion the love in his heart prompts
him to live always in closest union with God by prayer, to labour for the conversion
of souls, to love his enemies, and even to endure martyrdom itself.
Clement preceded the days of the Trinitarian controveries. He taught
in the Godhead three Terms. Some critics doubt whether he distinguished them as
Persons, but a careful reading of him proves that he did. The Second Terrn of
the Trinity is the Word. Photius believed that Clement taught a plurality of Words,
whereas in reality Clement merely drew a distinction between the Father's Divine
immanent attribute of intelligence and the Personal Word Who is the Son. The Son
is eternally begotten, and has the very attributes of the Father. They are but
one God. So far, in fact, does Clement push this notion of unity as to seem to
approach Modalism. And yet, so loose a writer is he that elsewhere are found disquieting
traces of the very opposite error of Subordinationism. These, however, may be
explained away. In fact, he needs to be judged, more than writers generally, not
by a chance phrase here or there, but by the general drift of his teaching. Of
the Holy Ghost he says little, and when he does refer to the Third Person of the
Blessed Trinity he adheres closely to the language of Scripture. He acknowledges
two natures in Christ. Christ is the Man-God, who profits us both as God and as
man. Clement evidently regards Christ as one Person -- the Word. Instances of
the interchange of idioms are frequent in his writings. Photius has accused Clement
of Docetism. Clement, however, clearly admits in Christ a real body, but he thought
this body exempt from the common needs of life, as eating and drinking, and the
soul of Christ exempt from the movement of the passions, of joy, and of sadness.
Francis P. Havey, ed.
Transcribed by: Joseph P. Thomas
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Clemens Alexandrinus, whose name was T. Flavius Clemens, usually surnamed Alexandrinus,
is supposed to have been born at Athens, though he spent the greater part of his
life at Alexandria. In this way the two statements in which he is called an Athenian
and an Alexandrian (Epiphan. Haer. xxvii. 6) have been reconciled by Cave. In
early life he was ardently devoted to the study of philosophy, and his thirst
for knowledge led him to visit various countries - Greece, southern Italy, Coelo-Syria,
Palestine, and Egypt.
It appears, from his own account, that he had various Christian preceptors,
of whom he speaks in terms of great respect. One of them was a Jew by birth, and
several were from the East. At length, coming to Egypt, he sought out Pantaenus,
master of the Christian school at Alexandria, to whose instructions he listened
with much satisfaction, and whom he prized far more highly than all his former
teachers. It is not certainly known whether he had embraced Christianity before
hearing Pantaenus, or whether his mind had only been favourably inclined towards
it in consequence of previous inquiries. Probably he first became a Christian
under the influence of the precepts of Pantaenus, though Neander thinks otherwise.
After he had joined the Alexandrian church, he became a presbyter, and about A.
D. 190 he was chosen to be assistant to his beloved preceptor. In this latter
capacity he continued until the year 202, when both principal and assistant were
obliged to flee to Palestine in consequence of the persecution under Severus.
In the beginning of Caracalla's reign he was at Jerusalem, to which city many
Christians were then accustomed to repair in consequence of its hallowed spots.
Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, who was at that time a prisoner for the gospel,
recommended him in a letter to the church at Antioch, representing him as a godly
minister, a man both virtuous and wellknown, whom they had already seen, and who
had confirmed and promoted the church of Christ. It is conjectured, that Pantaenus
and Clement returned, after an absence of three years, in 206, though of this
there is no certain evidence. He must have returned before 211, because at that
time he succeeded Pantaenus as master of the school. Among his pupils was the
celebrated Origen. Guerike thinks, that he died in 213; but it is better to assume
with Cave and Schrockh, that his death did not take place till 220. Hence he flourished
under the reigns of Severus and Caracalla, 193-217.
It cannot safely be questioned, that Clement held the fundamental
truths of Christianity and exhibited genuine piety. But in his mental character
the philosopher predominated. His learning was great, his imagination lively,
his power of perception not defective; but he was unduly prone to speculation.
An eclectic in philosophy, he eagerly sought for knowledge wherever it could be
obtained, examining every topic by the light of his own mind, and selecting out
of all systems such truths as commended themselves to his judgment. "I espoused",
says he, "not this or that philosophy, not the Stoic, nor the Platonic, nor the
Epicurean, nor that of Aristotle; but whatever any of these sects had said that
was fit and just, that taught righteousness with a divine and religious knowledge,
all that being selected, I call philosophy". He is supposed to have leaned more
to the Stoics than to any other sect. He seems, indeed, to have been more attached
to philosophy than any of the fathers with the exception of Origen.
In comprehensiveness of mind Clement was certainly deficient. He never
develops great principles, but runs chiefly into minute details, which often become
trifling and insipid. In the interpretation of the Scriptures he was guided by
fancy rather than fixed rules deduced from common sense. He pursues no definite
principles of exposition, neither does he penetrate into the essential nature
of Christianity. His attainments in purely religious knowledge could never have
been extensive, as no one doctrine is well stated. From his works no system of
theology can be gathered. It were preposterous to recur to them for sound exegesis,
or even a successful development of the duties of a Christian, much less for an
enlightened estimate of the obligations under which men are laid to their Creator
and to each other. It may be questioned, whether he had the ability to compose
a connected system of theology, or a code of Christian morality. Doubtless great
allowance should be made for the education and circumstances of the writer, the
character of the age in which he lived, the persons for whom chiefly he wrote,
the modes of thought then current, the entire circle of influences by which he
was surrounded, the principal object he had in view; but after all deductions,
much theological knowledge will not be attributed to him. The speculative philosopher
is still more prominent than the theologian--the allegoriser rather than the expounder
of the Bible appears--the metaphysician eclipses the Christian.
The works of Clement which have reached us are his Logos Protreptikos
pros Hellenas or Hortatory Address to the Greeks; Paidagogos, or Teacher; Stromateis,
or Miscellanies; and Tis ho sozomenos Plousios; Quis Dives salvetur?. In addition
to these, he wrote Hupotuposeis in eight books; Peri tou eascha, i. e. de Paschate;
peri Nesteias, i. e. de Jejunio; peri Katalalias, i. e. de Obtrectatione; Protreptikos
eis Hupomonen, i. e. Exhortatio ad Patientiam; Kanon Ekklesiastikos, i. e. Canon
Ecclesiasticus, or de Canonibus Ecclesiasticis; eis ten Propheten Amos, On the
Prophet Amos; peri Pronoias and Horoi diaphoroi. If the hupotuposeis be the same
as the Adumbrationes mentioned by Cassiodorus, as is probable, various fragments
of them are preserved and may be seen in Potter's edition. Perhaps the eklogai
ek ton prophetikon, which are also given by Potter, were originally a part of
the hupotuposeis. Among the fragments printed in the same edition are also ek
ton Theodotou kai tes anatolikes kaloumenes didaskalias kata tous Oualentinou
chronous epitomai, i e. extracts from the writings of Theodotus and the doctrine
called oriental, relating to the times of Valentinus. Whether these excerpts were
really made by Clement admits of doubt, though Sylburg remarks that the style
and phraseology resemble those of the Alexandrine father. The fragments of his
lost works have been industriously collected by Potter, in the second volume of
his edition of Clement's works; but Fabricius, at the end of his second volume
of the works of Hippolytus, published some of the fragments more fully, along
with several not found in Potter's edition. There are also fragments in the Biblioth.
Patr. of Galland. In various parts of his writings Clement speaks of other works
which he had written or intended to write.
His three principal works constitute parts of a whole. In the Hortatory
Address his design was to convince the Heathens and to convert them to Christianity.
It exposes the impurities of polytheism as contrasted with the spirituality of
Christianity, and demonstrates the superiority of the gospel to the philosophy
of the Gentile world by shewing, that it effectually purifies the motives and
elevates the character. The Paedagogue takes up the new convert at the point to
which he is supposed to have been brought by the hortatory address, and furnishes
him with rules for the regulation of his conduct. In the first chapter he explains
what he means by the term Paedagogue,-- one who instructs children, leading them
up to manhood through the paths of truth. This preceptor is none other than Jesus
Christ, and the children whom he trains up are simple, sincere believers. The
author goes into minutiae and trifling details, instead of dwelling upon great
precepts applicable to human life in all circumstances. The Stromata are in eight
books, but probably the last book did not proceed from Clement himself. The treatise
is rambling and discursive, without system, order, or method, but contains much
valuable information on many points of antiquity, particularly the history of
philosophy. The principal information respecting Egyptian hieroglyphics is contained
in the fifth book of this work of Clement. His object was to delineate in it the
perfect Christian or Gnostic, after he had been instructed by the Teacher and
thus prepared for sublime speculations in philosophy and theology. The eighth
book is a treatise on logic, so that the original seems to have been lost, and
this one substituted in its place. Bishop Kaye, however, inclines to the opinion,
that it is a genuine production of Clement. The treatise entitled tis ho sozomenos
is practical, shewing to what temptations the rich are particularly exposed. It
has the appearance of a homily. His Hypotyposes in eight books (hupotuposeis,
translated adumbrationes by Cassiodorus) contained, according to Eusebius (Hist.
Eccl. iv. 14), a summary exposition of the books of Scripture. Photius gives a
most unfavourable account of it, affirming that it contained many fabulous and
impious notions similar to those of the Gnostic heretics. But at the same time
he suggests, that these monstrous sentiments may not have proceeded from Clement,
as there is nothing similar to them in his acknowledged works. Most probably they
were interpolated.
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
Sts. Chrysanthus & Daria. Roman martyrs, buried on the Via Salaria Nova. The two martyrs were
revered in Rome in the fourth
century, as the appearance of their names in the “Martyrologium Hieronymianum”
proves.
The existing Acts of these Martyrs are without historical value; they
did not originate until the fifth century, and are compiled in two texts--a longer
one, written originally in Greek, but afterwards translated into Latin, and a
shorter one in Latin. The historical notices of Chrysanthus and Daria in the so-called
historical martyrologies of the West, as in the Greek synaxaria, go back to the
legend which makes Chrysanthus the son of the noble Polemius of Alexandria. He
came to Rome with his father
and was converted by the presbyter Carpophorus. Everything was done to make him
apostatize. Daria, a beautiful and very intelligent Vestal, entered into relations
with him, but she herself was won over to the Christian Faith by Chrysanthus,
and both concluded a virginal matrimonial union. Chrysanthus and Daria were condemned
to death, led to a sandpit in the Via Salaria, and there stoned to death.
The story, apart from the assured fact of their martyrdom and the
veneration of their tombs, has, perhaps, some historical value, in assigning the
date to the reign of the Emperor Numerianus (283-84). There is another martyrdom
closely connected with the tomb of the two saints, which is related at the end
of the Acts of these martyrs. After the death of Chrysantus and Daria, when many
of the faithful of Rome were assembled at their tomb to celebrate the anniversary
of their death, they were surprised by the persecutors, who filled in with stones
and earth the subterranean crypt where the Christians were assembled, so that
all perished. Later, when the tomb of Sts. Chrysanthus and Daria was looked for
and found, the bones of these martyrs, and even the liturgical silver vessels,
which they used for the celebration of the Eucharist, were also discovered. Everything
was left as it was found, and a wall was erected so that no one could enter the
place.
In the ninth century the remains of Sts. Chrysanthus and Daria were
brought to Prum and were thence transferred to Munstereifel in Rhenish Prussia,
where they are still greatly venerated. The feast of these saints stands in the
Roman Martyrology on the 25th of October. The Greeks celebrate their feast on
l9 March.
J.P. Kirsch, ed.
Transcribed by: Joseph P. Thomas
This extract is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
St. Cyrillus (Kurillos), was a native of Alexandria, and nephew of Theophilus, bishop of the
same place. The year of his birth is not known. After having been a presbyter
of the church at Alexandria, he succeeded to the episcopal chair on the death
of Theophilus, A. D. 412. To this office he was no sooner elevated than he gave
full scope to those dispositions and desires that guided him through an unquiet
life. Unbounded ambition and vindictiveness, jealousy of opponents, illdirected
cunning, apparent zeal for the truth, and an arrogant desire to lord it over the
churches, constituted the character of this vehement patriarch. His restless and
turbulent spirit, bent on self-aggrandisement, presents an unfavourable portrait
to the impartial historian. Immediately after his elevation, he entered with vigour
on the duties supposed to devolve on the prelate of so important a city. He banished
from it the Jews, who are said to have been attempting violence towards the Christians,
threw down their synagogue and plundered it, quarrelled with Orestes, and set
himself to oppose heretics and heathens on every side. According to Socrates,
he also shut up the churches of the Novatians, took away all their sacred vessels
and ornaments, and deprived Theopemptus, their bishop, of all he had (Histor.
Eccles. vii. 7). But his efforts were chiefly directed against Nestorius, bishop
of Constantinople; and the greater part of his life was passed amid agitating
scenes, resulting from this persevering opposition. In consequence of an epistle
written by Cyril to the Egyptian monks which had been carried to Constantinople,
Nestorius and his friends were naturally offended. When Cyril understood how much
Nestorius had teen hurt by this letter, he wrote to him in justification of his
conduct, and in explanation of his faith, to which Nestorius replied in a calm
and dignified tone. Cyril's answer repeats the admonitions of his first letter,
expounds anew his doctrine of the union of natures in Christ, and defends it against
the consequences deduced in his opponent's letter. Nestorius was afterwards induced
by Lampon, a presbyter of the Alexandrian church, to write a short letter to Cyril
breathing the true Christian spirit.
In the mean time the Alexandrine prelate was endeavouring to lessen
the influence of his opponent by statements addressed to the emperor, and also
to the princesses Pulcheria, Arcadia, and Marinia; but Theodosius was not disposed
to look upon him with a friendly eye because of such epistles; for he feared that
the prelate aimed at exciting disagreement and discord in the imperial household.
Cyril also wrote to Celestine, bishop of Rome, informing him of the heresy of
Nestorius, and asking his co-operation against it. The Roman bishop had previously
received some account of the controversy from Nestorius; though, from ignorance
of Greek, he had not been able to read the letters and discourses of the Constantinopolitan
prelate. In consequence of Cyril's statement, Celestine held a council at Rome,
and passed a decree, that Nestorius should be deposed in ten days unless he recanted.
The execution of this decree was entrusted to Cyril. The Roman prelate also sent
several letters through Cyril, one of which, a circular letter to the Eastern
patriarchs and bishops, Cyril forwarded with additional letters from himself.
This circular was afterwards sent by John of Antioch to Nestorins. Soon after
(A. D. 430), he assembled a synod at Alexandria, and set forth the truth in opposition
to Nestorius's tenets in twelve heads or anathemas, A letter was also drawn up
addressed to Nestorius another to the officers and members of the church at Constantinople,
inciting them to oppose their patriarch, and a third to the monks. With these
anathemas he sent four bishops as legates to Nestorius, requiring of him to subscribe
them if he wished to remain in the communion of the Catholic church and retain
his see. Celestine's letter, which he had kept back till now, was also despatched.
But Nestorius refused to retract, and answered the anathemas by twelve anti-anathemas.
In consequence of these mutual excommunications and recriminatory letters, the
emperor Theodosius the Second was induced to summon a general council at Ephesus,
commonly reckoned the third oecumenical council, which was held A. D. 431. To
this council Cyril and many bishops subservient to his views repaired. The pious
Isidore in vain remonstrated with the fiery Alexandrine prelate. Nestorius was
accompanied by two imperial ministers of state, one of whom had the command of
soldiers to protect the council. Cyril presided, and urged on the business with
impatient haste. Nestorius and the imperial commissioners requested that the proceedings
might be delayed till the arrival of John of Antioch and the other [p. 918] eastern
bishops, and likewise of the Italian and Sicilian members; but no delay was allowed.
Nestorius was condemned as a heretic. On the 27th of June, five days after the
commencement of the council, John of Antioch, Theodoret, and the other eastern
bishops, arrived. Uniting themselves with a considerable part of the council who
were opposed to Cyril's proceedings, they held a separate synod, over which John
presided, and deposed both Cyril and Memnon his associate. Both, however, were
soon after restored by the emperor, while Nestorius was compelled to return to
his cloister at Antioch. The emperor, though at first opposed to Cyril, was afterwards
wrought upon by various representations, and by the intrigues of the monks, many
of whom were bribed by the Alexandrian prelate. Such policy procured many friends
at court, while Nestorius having also fallen under the displeasure of Pulcheria,
the emperor's sister, was abandoned, and obliged to retire from the city into
exile. Having triumphed over his enemy at Ephesus, Cyril returned to Egypt. But
the deposition of Nestorius had separated the eastern from the western churches,
particularly those in Egypt. In A. D. 432, Cyril and the eastern bishops were
exhorted by the emperor to enter into terms of peace. In pursuance of such a proposal,
Paul of Emesa, in the name of the Orientals. brought an exposition of the faith
to Alexandria, sufficiently catholic to be subscribed by Cyril. He returned with
another from Cyril, to be subscribed by the Easterns. This procured peace for
a little while. But the spirit of the Alexandrian bishop could not easily rest;
and soon after the disputes were renewed, particularly between him and Theodoret.
In such broils he continued to be involved till his death, A. D. 444.
According to Cave, Cyril possessed piety and indomitable zeal for
the Catholic faith. But if we may judge of his piety by his conduct, he is scarcely
entitled to this character. His learning was considerable according to the standard
of the times in which he lived. He had a certain kind of acuteness and ingenuity
which frequently bordered on the mystical; but in philosophical comprehension
and in metaphysical acumen he was very defective. Theodoret brings various accusations
against him, which represent him in an unamiable and even an unorthodox light.
He charges him with holding that there was but one nature in Christ; but this
seems to be only a consequence derived from his doctrine, just as Cyril deduced
from Nestorius's writings a denial of the divine nature in Christ. Theodoret,
however, brings another accusation against him which cannot easily be set aside,
viz. his having caused Hypatia, a noble Alexandrian lady addicted to the study
of philosophy, to be torn to pieces by the populace. Cave, who is partial to Cyril,
does not deny the fact, though he thinks it incredible and inconsistent with Cyril's
character to assert that he sanctioned such a proceeding. (Suidas, s. v. Gpatia.)
As an interpreter of Scripture, Cyril belongs to the allegorising
school, and therefore his exegetical works are of no value. In a literary view
also, his writings are almost worthless. They develop the characteristic tendency
of the Egyptian mind, its proneness to mysticism rather than to clear and accurate
conceptions in regard to points requiring to be distinguished. His style is thus
characterised by Photius (Cod. 49): ho de lopsos antoi pepoiemenos kai eis idiazonsan
idean ekbebiasmenos kai oon lelumene kai to metron huperorosa puiesis. In his
work against Julian, it is more florid than usual, though never rising to beauty
or elegance. It is generally marked by considerable obscurity and ruggedness.
Cyril's extant works are the following:
Glaphyra (i. e. polished or highly-wrought commentaries) on the Pentateuch. This work appeared at Paris in Latin, 1605; and was afterwards published in Greek and Latin by A. Schott, Antwerp, 1618.
Concerning adoration and worship in spirit and in truth, in 17 books.
Commentaries on Isaiah, in 5 books.
A Commentary on the twelve minor Prophets. This was separately published in Greek and Latin at Ingolstadt, 1605.
A Commentary on John, in 10 books.
A treatise (thesaurus) concerning the holy and consubstantial Trinity.
Seven dialogues concerning the holy and consubstantial Trinity. To these a compendium of the seventh dialogue is subjoined, or a summary of the arguments adduced in it.
Two dialogues, one concerning the incarnation of the only-begotten, the other proving that Christ is one and the Lord. These dialogues, when taken with the preceding, make the eighth and ninth.
Scholia on the incarnation of the only-begotten. Far the greater part of the Greek text is wanting. They exist entire only in the Latin version of Mercator.
Another brief tract on the same subject.
A treatise concerning the right faith, addressed to the emperor Theodosius. It begins with the third chapter.
Thirty paschal homilies. These were published separately at Antwerp in 1618.
Fourteen homilies on various topics. The last exists only in Latin.
Sixty-one epistles. The fourth is only in Latin. Some in this collection were written by others, by Nestorius, Acacius, John of Antioch, Celestine, bishop of Rome, &c., &c.
Five books against Nestorius, published in Greek and Latin at Rome, in 1608.
An explanation of the twelve chapters or anathemas.
An apology for the twelve chapters, in opposition to the eastern bishops.
An apology for the same against Theodoret.
An apology addressed to the emperor Theodosius, written about the close of A. D. 431.
Ten books against Julian, written A. D. 433.
A treatise against the Anthropomorphites.
A treatise upon the Trinity.
Of his lost works mention is made by Liberatus of "Three books against excerpts
of Diodorus and Theodorus". Fragments of this work are found in the Acts of Synods.
Gennadius says, that he wrote a treatise concerning the termination of the Synagogue,
and concerning the faith against heretics. Ephrem of Antioch speaks of a treatise
on impassibility and another upon suffering. Eustratius of Constantinople cites
a fragment from Cyril's oration against those who say that we should not offer
up petitions for such as have slept in the faith. Nineteen homilies on Jeremiah
were edited in Greek and Latin by Corderius, at Antwerp, 1648, under the name
of Cyril; but it has been ascertained that they belong to Origen, with the exception
of the last, which was written by Clement of Alexandria. A liturgy inscribed to
Cyril, translated from Arabic into Latin by Victor Scialac, was published at Augsburg,
1604. Cyril's works were published in Latin by George of Trebizond at Basel in
1546; by Gentianus Hervetus at Paris, 1573, 1605. They were published in Greek
and Latin by Aubert, Paris, 1638. This is the best edition.
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. Cyrus, was a native of Alexandria, where he practised medicine gratuitously and with great reputation. He was a Christian, and took every opportunity of endeavouring to convert his patients from paganism. During the persecution of Diocletian he fled to Arabia, where he was said to heal diseases not so much by his medicines as by miraculous powers. He was put to death with many tortures by the command of the prefect Syrianus, in company with several other martyrs, A. D. 300; and his remains were carried to Rome, and there buried. His memory is celebrated on the thirty-first of January both by the Romish and Greek churches.
St. Dionysius the Great. Called the Great, by Eusebius, St. Basil, and others, was undoubtedly,
after St. Cyprian, the most eminent bishop of the third century. He was less a
great theologian than a great administrator. His writings usually took the form
of letters. He was a convert from paganism and was engaged in the controversies
as to the restoration of those who had lapsed in the Decian persecution, about
Novatian, and with regard to the iteration of heretical baptism. A single letter
of Dionysius has been preserved in Greek canon law. For the rest we are dependent
on the many citations by Eusebius, and, for one phase, to the works of his great
successor St. Athanasius.
Dionysius was an old man when he died, so that his birth will fall
about 190, or earlier. He is said to have been of distinguished parentage. He
became a Christian when still young. He studied under Origen. The latter was banished
by Demetrius about 231, and Heraclas took his place at the head of the catechetical
school. On the death of Demetrius very soon afterwards, Heraclas became bishop,
and Dionysius took the headship of the famous school.
In the last year of Philip, 249, although the emperor himself was
reported to be a Christian, a riot at Alexandria, roused by a popular prophet
and poet, had all the effect of a severe persecution. The houses of the faithful
were plundered. Not one, so far as the bishop knew, apostatized. It was impossible
for any Christian to go into the streets, even at night, for the mob was shouting
that all who would not blaspheme should be burnt. The riot was stopped by the
civil war, but the new Emperor Decius instituted a legal persecution in January,
250. St. Cyprian describes how at Carthage
the Christians rushed to sacrifice, or at least to obtain false certificates of
having done so. Similarly Dionysius tells us that at Alexandria many conformed
through fear, others on account of official position, or persuaded by friends;
some pale and trembling at their act, others boldly asserting that they had never
been Christians. Some endured imprisonment for a time; others abjured only at
the sight of tortures; others held out until the tortures conquered their resolution.
But there were noble instances of constancy. Numbers were martyred in the cities
and villages. After the persecution the pestilence. Many priests, deacons, and
persons of merit died from succouring others.
An Egyptian bishop, Nepos, taught the Chiliastic error that there
would be a reign of Christ upon earth for a thousand years, a period of corporal
delights; he founded this doctrine upon the Apocalypse in a book entitled “Refutation
of the Allegorizers”. It was only after the death of Nepos that Dionysius
found himself obliged to write two books “On the Promises” to counteract
this error. St. Dionysius went in person to the villages, called together the
priests and teachers, and for three days instructed them, refuting the arguments
they drew from the book of Nepos. At length Korakion, who had introduced the book
and the doctrine, declared himself convinced. Dionysius treats the Apocalypse
with reverence, and declares it to be full of hidden mysteries.
The Emperor Valerian, whose accession was in 253, did not persecute
until 257. In that year St. Dionysius was banished to Kephro in the Mareotis,
after being tried together with one priest and two deacons before Aemilianus,
the prefect of Egypt. Dionysius
was spared, and returned to Alexandria directly toleration was decreed by Gallienus
in 260. But not to peace, for in 261-2 the city was in a state of tumult little
less dangerous than a persecution. Famine and pestilence raged anew. The inhabitants
of what was still the second city of the world had decreased.
We find Dionysius issuing yearly, like the later bishops of Alexandria,
festal letters announcing the date of Easter and dealing with various matters.
When the heresy of Paul of Samosata,
Bishop of Antioch, began
to trouble the East, Dionysius wrote to the Church of Antioch
on the subject, as he was obliged to decline the invitation to attend a synod
there, on the score of his age and infirmities. He died soon afterwards.
John Chapman, ed.
Transcribed by: WG Kofron
This extract is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Dionysius. Bishop of Alexandria, was probably a native of the same city. He was born of pagan parents, who were persons of rank and influence. He studied the doctrines of the various philosophical sects, and this led him at last to embrace Christianity. Origen, who was one of his teachers, had probably great influence upon this step of his pupil. After having been a presbyter for some time, he succeeded, about A. D. 232, Heraclas as the head of the theological school at Alexandria, and after the death of Heraclas. who had been raised to the bishopric of Alexandria, Dionysius succeeded him in the see, A. D. 247. During the persecution of the Christians by Decius, Dionysius was seized by the soldiers and carried to Taposiris, a small town between Alexandria and Canopus, probably with a view of putting him to death there. But he escaped from captivity in a manner which lie himself describes very minutely (ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. vi. 40). He had, however, to suffer still more severely in A. D. 257, during the persecution which the emperor Valerian instituted againist the Christians. Dionysius made an open confession of his faith before the emperor's praefect Aemilianus, and was exiled in consequence to Cephro, a desert district of Libya, whither he was compelled to proceed forthwith, although he was severely ill at the time. After an exile of three years, an edict of Gallienus in favour of the Christians enabled him to return to Alexandria, where henceforth he was extremely zealous in combating heretical opinions. In his attacks against Sabellius he was carried so far by his zeal, that he uttered tlings which were themselves incompatible with the orthodox faith; but when he was taken to accountby Dionysius, bishop of Rome, who convoked a synod for the purpose, he readily owned that he had acted rashly and inconsiderately. In A. D. 265 he was invited to a synod at Antioch, to dispute with Paulus of Samosata, but being prevented from going thither by old age and infirmity, he wrote a letter to the synod on the subject of the controversy to be discussed, and soon after, in the same year, he died, after having occupied the see of Alexandria for a period of seventeen years. The church of Rome regards Dionysius as a saint, and celebrates his memory on the 18th of October. We learn from Epiphanes (Haeres. 69), that at Alexandria a church was dedicated to him. Dionysius wrote a considerable number of theological works, consisting partly of treatises and partly of epistles addressed to the heads of churches and to communities, but all that is left us of them consists of fragments preserved in Eusebius and others. A complete list of his works is given by Cave, from which we mention only the most important. 1. On Promises, in two books, was directed against Nepos, and two considerable fragments of it are still extant. (Euseb. H. E. iii. 28, vii. 24.) 2. A work addressed to Dionysius, bishop of Rome, in four books or epistles, against Sabellius. Dionysius here excused the hasty assertions of which he himself had been guilty in attacking Sabellius. A great number of fragments and extracts of it are preserved in the writings of Athanasiuis and Basilius. 3. A work addressed to Timotheus, " On Nature," of which extracts are preserved in Eusebius. (Praep. Exang. xiv. 23, 27.) Of his Epistles also numerous fragments are extant in the works of Eusebius. All that is extant of Dionysius, is collected in Gallandi's Bibl. Patr. iii., and in the separate collection by Simon de Magistris, Rome, 1796, fol. (Cave, Hist. Lit. i.)
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
Died about 470. Her story belongs to that group of legends which relate
how Christian virgins, in order the more successfully to lead the life of celibacy
and asceticism to which they had dedicated themselves, put on male attire and
passed for men.
According to the narrative of her life in the “Vitae Patrum”,
Euphrosyne was the only daughter of Paphnutius, a rich man of Alexandria, who
desired to marry her to a wealthy youth. But having consecrated her life to God
and apparently seeing no other means of keeping this vow, she clothed herself
as a man and under the name of Smaragdus gained admittance into a monastery of
men near Alexandria, where she lived for thirty-eight years after. She soon attracted
the attention of the abbot by the rapid strides which she made toward a perfect
ascetic life, and when Paphnutius appealed to him for comfort in his sorrow, the
abbot committed the latter to the care of the alleged young man Smaragdus. The
father received from his own daughter, whom he failed to recognize, helpful advice
and comforting exhortation. Not until she was dying did she reveal herself to
him as his lost daughter Euphrosyne. After her death Paphnutius also entered the
monastery. Her feast is celebrated in the Greek Church on 25 September, in the
Roman Church on 16 January.
J.P. Kirsch, ed.
Transcribed by: W.G Kofron
This text is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
A penitent in Egypt
in the fourth century. In the Greek menology her name occurs on 8 Oct., it is
found also in the martyrologies of Maurolychus and Greven, but not in the Roman.
The saint is represented burning her treasures and ornaments, or praying in a
cell and displaying a scroll with the words: “Thou who didst create me have
mercy on me”.
According to the legend Thais was a public sinner in Egypt
who was converted by St. Paphnutius, brought to a convent and enclosed in a cell.
After three years of penance she was released and placed among the nuns, but lived
only fourteen days more.
Francis Mershman, ed.
Transcribed by: C.A. Montgomery
This extract is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Bishop of Alexandria from 231 or 232; to 247 or 248.
Heraclas was probably at least five years older than Origen, who was
born in 185. Yet when Origen in his eighteenth year was obliged by his father's
martyrdom and the consequent confiscation of his goods to commence teaching grammar
(for a short time) and philosophy, Heraclas and his brother Plutarch were the
first pupils of the young teacher. Origen converted them both to Christianity,
and St. Plutarch soon suffered for the faith, being the first of Origen's pupils
to gain the crown of martyrdom.
Heraclas gave a great example of philosophical life and askesis and
it was his reputation for knowledge of philosophy and Greek learning that drew
Julius Africanus to visit Alexandria. In course of time Origen chose Heraclas
as his assistant in the catechetical to teach the beginners. Heraclas was made
a priest by the long-lived Bishop Demetrius. When in 231 the latter condemned
Origen, Heraclas became head of the school. Soon afterwards he succeeded Demetrius
as bishop. According to Theophilus of Alexandria, when Origen returned to the
city, Heraclas deposed him from the priesthood and banished him.
Heraclas was succeeded in the third year of the Emperor Philip, by
St. Dionysius, who had previously been his successor as head of the catechetical
school. Heraclas was inserted by Usuard in his martyrology on 14 July, and he
has thus come into the Roman Martyrology on that day. The Copts and Ethiopians
celebrate his feast on 4 Dec.
John Chapman, ed.
Transcribed by: Douglas J. Potter
This extract is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Became Bishop of Alexandria in 300; martyred Nov., 311. According
to Philip of Sidetes he was at one time head of the famous catechetical school
at Alexandria. His theological importance lies in the fact that he marked, very
probably initiated, the reaction at Alexandria against extreme Origenism.
When during the Diocletian persecution Peter left Alexandria for concealment,
the Meletian schism broke out. There are three different accounts of this schism:
(1) According to three Latin documents (translation from lost Greek originals)
published by Maffei, Meletius (or Melitius), Bishop of Lycopolis, took advantage
of St. Peter's absence to usurp his patriarchal functions, and contravened the
canons by consecrating bishops to sees not vacant, their occupants being in prison
for the Faith. Four of them remonstrated, but Meletius took no heed of them and
actually went to Alexandria, where, at the instigation of one Isidore, and Arius
the future heresiarch, he set aside those left in charge by Peter and appointed
others. Upon this Peter excommunicated him. (2) St. Athanasius accuses Meletius
not only of turbulent and schismatical conduct, but of sacrificing, and denouncing
Peter to the emperor. There is no incompatibility betweeen the Latin documents
and St. Athanasius, but the statement that Meletius sacrificed must be received
with caution; it was probably based upon rumour arising out of the immunity which
he appeared to enjoy. At all events nothing was heard about the charge at the
Council of Nic?a. (3) According to St. Epiphanius (Haer., 68), Meletius and St.
Peter quarrelled over the reconciliation of the lapsi, the former inclining to
sterner views. Epiphanius probably derived his information from a Meletian source,
and his story is full of historical blunders. Thus, to take one example, Peter
is made a fellow-prisoner of Meletius and is martyred in prison. According to
Eusebius his martyrdom was unexpected, and therefore not preceded by a term of
imprisonment.
There are extant a collection of fourteen canons issued by Peter in
the third year of the persecution dealing chiefly with the lapsi, excerpted probably
from an Easter Festal Epistle. The fact that they were ratified by the Council
of Trullo, and thus became part of the canon law of the Eastern Church, probably
accounts for their preservation. Many MSS. contain a fifteenth canon taken from
writing on the Passover. The cases of different kinds of lapsi were decided upon
in these canons.
The Acts of the martyrdom of St. Peter are too late to have any historical
value. In them is the story of Christ appearing to St. Peter with His garment
rent, foretelling the Arian schism. Three passages from "On the Godhead", apparently
written against Origen's subordinationist views, were quoted by St. Cyril at the
Council of Ephesus. Two further passages (in Syriac) claiming to be from the same
book, were printed by Pitra in "Analecta Sacra", IV, 188; their genuineness is
doubtful. Leontius of Byzantium quotes a passage affirming the two Natures of
Christ from a work on "The Coming of Christ", and two passages from the first
book of a treatise against the view that the soul had existed and sinned before
it was united to the body. This treatise must have been written against Origen.
Very important are seven fragments preserved in Syriac (Pitra, op. cit., IV, 189-93)
from another work on the Resurrection, in which the identity of the risen with
the earthly body is maintained against Origen.
Five Armenian fragments were also published by Pitra (op. cit., IV,
430 sq.). Two of these correspond with one of the doubtful Syriac fragments. The
remaining three are probably Monophysite forgeries (Harnack, "Altchrist. Lit.",
447). A fragment quoted by the Emperor Justinian in his Letter to the Patriarch
Mennas, purporting to be taken from a Mystagogia of St. Peter's, is probably spurious
(see Routh, "Reliq. Sac.", III, 372; Harnack, op. cit., 448). The "Chronicon Paschale"
gives a long extract from a supposed writing of Peter on the Passover. This is
condemned as spurious by a reference to St. Athanasius (which editors often suppress)
unless, indeed, the reference is an interpolation. A fragment first printed by
Routh from a Treatise "On Blasphemy" is generally regarded as spurious. A Coptic
fragment on the keeping of Sunday, published by Schmidt (Texte und Untersuchung.,
IV) has been ruled spurious by Delehaye, in whose verdict critics seem to acquiesce.
Other Coptic fragments have been edited with a translation by Crum in the "Journal
of Theological Studies" (IV, 287 sqq.). Most of these come from the same manuscript
as the fragment edited by Schmidt. Their editor says: "It would be difficult to
maintain the genuineness of these texts after Delehaye's criticisms (Anal. Bolland.,
XX, 101), though certain of the passages, which I have published may indicate
interpolated, rather than wholly apocryphal compositions."
F.J. Bacchus, ed.
Transcribed by: WG Kofron
This text is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
A priest and probably head master of the catechetical school at Alexandria
conjointly with Achillas, died at Rome
after 309. His skill as an exegetical writer and as a preacher gained for him
the appellation, “Origen the Younger”. Philip of Side,
Photius, and others assert that he was a martyr. However, since St. Jerome assures
us that he survived the Diocletian persecution and spent the rest of his life
at Rome, the term "martyr" can only mean that he underwent sufferings, not death,
for his Faith.The Roman Martyrology commemorates him on 4 November.
He wrote a work (biblion) comprising twelve treatises or sermons (logoi),
in some of which he repeats the dogmatic errors attributed by some authors to
Origen, such as the subordination of the Holy Ghost to the Father and the Son,
and the pre-existence of human souls. His known sermons are: one on the Gospel
of St. Luke (eis to kata Loukan); an Easter sermon on Osee (eis to pascha kai
ton Osee); a sermon on the Mother of God (peri tes theotokou); a few other Easter
sermons; and a eulogy on St. Pamphilus, who had been one of his disciples (eis
ton bion tou hagiou Pamphilou). Only some fragments of his writings are extant.
Michael Ott, ed.
Transcribed by: Douglas J. Potter
This extract is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Macarius the Alexandrian. Also called ho politikos either in reference to his
city birth or polished manners; died about 405. He was a younger contemporary
of Macarius the Egyptian, but there is no reason for confounding or identifying
him with his older namesake. More than any of the hermits of the time he exemplified
the spirit of emulation characteristic of this stage of monasticism. He would
be excelled by none in his austerities. Palladius asserts "if he ever heard of
any one having performed a work of asceticism, he was all on fire to do the same".
Because the monks of Tabennisi eschewed cooked food in Lent he abstained for seven
years. Once, in expiation of a fault, he lay for six months in a morass, exposed
to the attacks of the African gnats, whose sting can pierce even the hide of a
wild boar. When he returned to his companions he was so much disfigured that he
could be recognized only by his voice. He is credited with the composition of
a rule for monks, though his authorship is now generally denied.
[Note: Saint Macarius the Younger (the Alexandrian) is named in the Roman Martyrology on 2 January, Saint Macarius the Elder (the Egyptian) on 15 January; in Byzantine liturgical calendars, both Saints are commemorated on 19 January.]
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.
Macarius. Of ALEXANDRIA, contemporary with the foregoing, from whom he is distinguished
by the epithet ALEXANDRINUS (ho Alexandreus), or POLITICUS (Politikos), i.e. URBICUS,
and sometimes JUNIOR. Palladius, who lived with him three years, has given a tolerably
long account of him in his Historia Lausiaca, c. 20; but it chiefly consists of
a record of his supposed miracles. He was a native of Alexandria where he followed
the trade of a confectioner, and must not be confounded with Macarius, the presbyter
of Alexandria, who is mentioned by Socrates (H. E. i. 27) and Sozomen (H. E. ii.
22), and who was accused of sacrilegious violence towards Ischyras. Our Macarius
forsook his trade to follow a monastic life, in which he attained such excellence,
that Palladius (ibid. c. 19) says that, though younger than Macarius the Egyptian,
he surpassed even him in the practice of asceticism. Neither the time nor the
occasion of his embracing a solitary life is known, for the Macarius mentioned
by Sozomen (H. E. vi. 29) appears to be a different person. Tillemont has endeavoured
to show that his retirement took place not later than A. D. 335, but he founds
his calculation on a misconception of a passage of Palladius. Macarius was ordained
priest after the Egyptian Macarius, i. e. after A. D. 340, and appears to have
lived chiefly in that part of the desert of Nitria which, from the number of the
solitaries who had their dwellings there, was termed "the Cells" ("Cellae," or
"Cellulae," ta kellia); but frequently visited, perhaps for a time dwelt, in other
parts of the great Lybian wilderness, and occasionally at least of the wilderness
between the Nile and the Red Sea. Galland says he became at length archimandrite
of Nitria, but does not cite his authority, which was probably the MS. inscription
to his Regula given below, and which is of little value. Philippus Sidetes calls
him a teacher and catechist of Alexandria, but with what correctness seems very
doubtful. Various anecdotes recorded of him represent him as in company with the
other Macarius and with St. Antony. Many miracles are ascribed to him. most of
which are recorded by Palladius either as leaving been seen by himself, or as
resting on the authority of the saint's former companions, but they are frivolous
and absurd. Macarius shared the exile of his namesake [No. 1] in the persecution
which the Arians carried on against the orthodox. He died, according to Tillemont's
calculation, in A. D. 394, but according to Fabricius, in A. D. 404, at the age
of 100, in which case he must have been nearly as old as Macarius the Egyptian.
He is commemorated in the Roman Calendar on the 2d January, and by the Greeks
on the 19th January. Socrates describes him as characterized by cheerfulness of
temper and kindness to his juniors, qualities which induced many of them to embrace
an ascetic life. (Socrat. H. E. iv. 23, 24; Sozom. H. E. iii. 14, vi. 20; Theodoret.
H. E. iv. 21; Rufin. H.E. ii. 4; and apud Heribert Rosweyd, De Vita et Verbis
Senior. ii. 29; Pallad. Hist. Lausiac. c. 20; Bolland. Acta Sanctor. a. d. 2 Januar.;
Tillemont, Memoires, vol. viii. p. 626, &c.)
To this Macarius are ascribed the following works'--I. Rrgula S. Macarii
qui habuit sub Ordinatione sua quinque Millia Monachorum. This Regula, which is
extant in a Latin version, consists of thirty " Capita," and must be distinguished
from another, which is also extant in a Latin version, under the title of Regula
SS. Serapionis, Macarii, Paphnutii et alterius Macarii; to which the first of
the two Macarii contributed capp. v--viii., and the second ("alter Macarius")
capp. xiii.--xvi. Tillemont and others consider these two Macarii to be the Egyptian
and the Alexandrian, and apparently with reason. The Reyula S. Macarii, which
some have supposed to be the Epistola of Macarius the Egyptian [No. 1] mentioned
by Gennadius, is ascribed to the Alexandrian by S. Benedict of Anagni, Holstenius,
Tillemont, Fabricius, and Galland. Cave hesitates to receive it as genuine. II.
Epistola B. Macarii data ad Monachos. A Latin version of this is subjoined to
the Regular; it is short and sententious in style. The Regula was first printed
in the Historia Monasterii S. Joannis Reomaensis of the Jesuit Rouerus (Rouviere),
4to. Paris. 1637; and was reprinted together with the Epistola, in the Codex Regularum
of Holstenius (4to. Rome, 1661), and in the Bibliotheca Patrum of Galland, vol.
vii. fol. Venice, 1770. III. Tou hagiou Makariou tou Alexandreos logos peri exodou
psuches dikaion kai hamartolon: to pos chorizonrtai ek tou somatos, kai pos eisin,
Sancti Macarii Alexandrini Sermo de Exitu Animae Justorum et Peccatorum: quotmodo
separantur a Corpore, et in quo Statu manent. This was printed, with a Latin version,
by Cave (who, however, regarded it as the forgery of some later Greek writer),
in the notice of Macarius in his Historia Litteraria ad ann. 373 (vol. i. fol.
Lond. 1688, and Oxford, 1740-1742); and was again printed, more correctly, by
Tollius, in his Insignia Itineris Italici, 4to. Utrecht, 1696. Tollius was not
aware that it had been printed by Cave. It is given, with the other works of Macarius
of Alexandria, an the Bibliotheca Patrum of Galland. In one MS. at Vienna it is
ascribed to Alexander. an ascetic and disciple of Macarius. Cave is disposed to
ascribe to Macarius of Alexandria the Honmiliae of Macarius the Egyptian. (Cave,
l. c.; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. viii. p. 365; Holsten. Codex Regularum, vol.
i. pp. 10-14, 18-21, ed. Augsburg, 1759; Galland, Biblioth. Patr. Proleg. to vol.
vii.; Tilleniont, Memoires, vol. viii. pp. 618, 648; Ceillier, Auteurs Sacres,
vol. vii. p. 712, &c.)
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
Third bishop of Alexandria, Egypt. He succeded Sts. Mark and Anianus. Eusebius reported that Abilius was appointed bishop circa 84.
Feastday: Febuary 22
d.250, feastday: December 12
d.c. 250, feastday: December 12
d. 5th century, feastday: October 9
d. unknown, feastday: April 30
d. 257, feastday: October 3
d. 356, feastday: March 26
Martyrs, suffered under Julian the Apostate, 362, commemorated on 10 May. Gordianus was a judge but was so moved by the sanctity and sufferings of the saintly priest, Januarius, he embraced Christianity with many of his household. Being accused before his successor, or as some say before the prefect of the city, Apronianus, he was cruelly tortured and finally beheaded. His body was carried off by the Christians, and laid in a crypt on the Latin Way beside the body of St. Epimachus, who had been recently interred there. The two saints gave their name to the cemetery, and have ever since been joined together in the veneration of the Church.
John F.X. Murphy, ed.
Transcribed by: Joseph P. Thomas
This extract is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
d. 362 & 250, feastday: May 10
d. 476, feastday: April 14 (Catholic)
d. 250, feastday: June 1
d.c. 250, feastday: October 30 (Greek Orthodox) or February 27 (Roman Church)
d. 282, feastday: December 27
d. unknown, feastday: February 12 (Catholic).
d. 303, feastday: April 2
Bishop of Alexandra from about 283 to 301.
In his time Achillas, who had been appointed presbyter at Alexandria,
at the same time with Pierius, became celebrated. Theonas is commemorated in the
Roman Martyrology on 27 August. St. Athanasius in his apology to Constantinus
speaks of a church dedicated by his predecessor, St. Alexander, to Theonas.
F.J. Bacchus, ed.
Transcribed by: Thomas M. Barrett
This extract is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
d. 300, feastday: August 23 (Catholic).
d. 370, feastday: March 21
Born at Alexandria in the latter half of the fourth century; d. not
later than 449-50. He is occasionally designated through mistake as Isidore of
Damietta.
Leaving his family and possessions, Isidore retired to a mountain
near the city of Pelusium,
the name of which was henceforth connected with his own, and embraced the religious
life in the monastery of Lychnos, where he soon became remarkable for his exactitude
in the observance of the rule and for his austerities. He is spoken of as a priest
by Facundus and Suidas, although neither of these writers informs us concerning
the church to which he belonged; it may be that he had no clerical charge, but
was only a priest of the monastery. His correspondence gives us an idea of his
activity. It shows him fighting against unworthy clerics whose elevation to the
priesthood and diaconate was a serious peril and scandal to the faithful. He complains
that many laymen were ceasing to approach the sacraments so as to avoid contact
with these discreditable men.
His veneration for St. John Chrysostom led him to introduce St. Cyril
of Alexandria to render full justice to the memory of the great doctor. He opposed
the Nestorians. St. Isidore was still alive when the heresy of Eutyches began
to spread in Egypt; many
of his letters depict him as opposing the assertion of only one nature in Jesus
Christ.
It seems as though his life was scarcely prolonged beyond the year
449, because there is no mention in letters of the Robber Council of Ephesus
(August, 449) nor of the Council of Chalcedon
(451).
Isidore tells incidentally that he composed a treatise “Adversus
Gentiles” but it has been lost. Another work “De Fato”, which,
the author tells us, met with a certain degree of success, has also been lost.
The only extant works of St. Isidore are a considerable correspondence, comprising
more than 2000 letters. Even this number appears to fall far short of the amount
actually written, since Nicephorus speaks of 10,000. Of these we possess 2182.
These letters of St. Isidore may be divided into three classes according to the
subjects treated: those dealing with dogma and Scripture, with ecclesiastical
and monastic discipline, and with practical morality for the guidance of laymen
of all classes and conditions.
His advice with regard to those who were embracing the monastic state
was that they should not at first be made to feel all the austerities of the rule
lest they should be repelled, nor should they be left idle and exempt from ordinary
tasks lest they should acquire habits of laziness, but they should led step by
step to what is most perfect. Great abstinences serve no purpose unless they are
accompanied by the mortification of the senses. In a great number of St. Isidore's
letters concerning the monastic state it may be remarked that he holds it to consist
mainly in retirement and obedience; that retirement includes forgetfulness of
the things one has abandoned and the renunciation of old habits, while obedience
is attended with mortification of the flesh. A monk's habit should if possible
be of skins, and his food consist of herbs, unless bodily weakness require something
more, in which case he should be guided by the judgment of his superior, for he
must not be governed by his own will, but according to the will of those who have
grown old in the practice of the religious life.
Although for the most part very brief, the majority of St. Isidore's
letters contain much instruction, which is often set forth with elegance, occasionally
with a certain literary art. The style is natural, unaffected, and yet not without
refinement. The correspondence is characterized by an imperturbable equability
of temperament; whether he is engaged at explaining or reprimanding, at disputing
or praising, there is always the same moderation, the same sentiments of sincerity,
the same sober taste. In the explanation of the Scripture the saint does not conceal
his preference for the moral and spiritual sense which he judges most useful for
those who consult him. Everywhere he is seen to put in practice the maxims he
teaches to others, namely that the life should correspond with the words, that
one should practice what one teaches, and that it is not sufficient to indicate
what should be done, if one does not translate one's maxims into action.
H. Leclercq, ed.
Transcribed by: Tom Burgoyne
This extract is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Bishop of Alexandria from 188 to 231.
Julius Africanus, who visited Alexandria in the time of Demetrius,
places his accession as eleventh bishop after St. Mark in the tenth year of Commodus.
A legendary history of him is given in the Coptic “Synaxaria”,
in an Abyssinian poem cited by the Bollandists, and in the “Chronicon Orientale”
of Abraham Ecchellensis the Maronite. Three of their statements, however, may
have some truth: one that he died at the age of 105 (born, therefore, in 126);
another, found also in the Melchite Patriarch Eutychius, that he wrote about the
calculation of Easter to Victor of Rome,
Maximus (i.e. Maximinus) of Antioch
and Gabius or Agapius of Jerusalem.
Eutychius relates that from Mark to Demetrius there was but one see in Egypt,
that Demetrius was the first to establish three other bishoprics, and that his
successor Heraclas made twenty more.
At all events Demetrius is the first Alexandrian bishop of whom anything
is known.
John Chapman, ed.
Transcribed by: Gary Mros
This extract is cited May 2003 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
d. 552, feastday: August 25
d. 1st century, feastday.
Of noble birth and learned in the sciences, when only eighteen years
old, Catherine presented herself to the Emperor Maximinus who was violently persecuting
the Christians, upbraided him for his cruelty and endeavoured to prove how iniquitous
was the worship of false gods. Astounded at the young girl's audacity, but incompetent
to vie with her in point of learning the tyrant detained her in his palace and
summoned numerous scholars whom he commanded to use all their skill in specious
reasoning that thereby Catherine might be led to apostatize. But she emerged from
the debate victorious. Several of her adversaries, conquered by her eloquence,
declared themselves Christians and were at once put to death. Furious at being
baffled, Maximinus had Catherine scourged and then imprisoned. Meanwhile the empress,
eager to see so extraordinary a young woman, went with Porphyry, the head of the
troops, to visit her in her dungeon, when they in turn yielded to Catherine's
exhortations, believed, were baptized, and immediately won the martyr's crown.
Soon afterwards the saint, who far from forsaking her Faith, effected so many
conversions, was condemned to die on the wheel, but, at her touch, this instrument
of torture was miraculously destroyed. The emperor, enraged beyond control, then
had her beheaded and angels carried her body to Mount Sinai where later a church
and monastery were built in her honour. So far the Acts of St. Catherine.
Unfortunately we have not these acts in their original form, but transformed
and distorted by fantastic and diffuse descriptions which are entirely due to
the imagination of the narrators who cared less to state authentic facts than
to charm their readers by recitals of the marvellous. The importance attached
throughout the Middle Ages to the legend of this martyr accounts for the eagerness
and care with which in modern times the ancient Greek, Latin and Arabic texts
containing it have been perused and studied, and concerning which critics have
long since expressed their opinion, one which, in all likelihood, they will never
have to retract. Several centuries ago when devotion to the saints was stimulated
by the reading of extraordinary hagiographical narrations, the historical value
of which no one was qualified to question, St. Catherine was invested by Catholic
peoples with a halo of charming poetry and miraculous power.
Ranked with St. Margaret and St. Barbara as one of the fourteen most
helpful saints in heaven, she was unceasingly praised by preachers and sung by
poets. It is a well known fact that Bossuet dedicated to her one of his most beautiful
panegyrics and that Adam of Saint-Victor wrote a magnificent poem in her honour:
"Vox Sonora nostri chori", etc. In many places her feast was celebrated with the
utmost solemnity, servile work being suppressed and the devotions being attended
by great numbers of people. In several dioceses of France it was observed as a
Holy Day of obligation up to the beginning of the seventeenth century, the splendour
of its ceremonial eclipsing that of the feasts of some of the Apostles. Numberless
chapels were placed under her patronage and her statue was found in nearly all
churches, representing her according to medieval inconography with a wheel, her
instrument of torture. Whilst, owing to several circumstances in his life, St.
Nicholas of Myra, was considered the patron of young bachelors and students, St.
Catherine became the patroness of young maidens and female students. Looked upon
as the holiest and most illustrious of the virgins of Christ, it was but natural
that she, of all others, should be worthy to watch over the virgins of the cloister
and the young women of the world.
The spiked wheel having become emblematic of the saint, wheelwrights
and mechanics placed themselves under her patronage. Finally, as according to
tradition, she not only remained a virgin by governing her passions and conquered
her executioners by wearying their patience, but triumphed in science by closing
the mouths of sophists, her intercession was implored by theologians, apologists,
pulpit orators, and philosophers. Before studying, writing, or preaching, they
besought her to illumine their minds, guide their pens, and impart eloquence to
their words. This devotion to St. Catherine which assumed such vast proportions
in Europe after the Crusades, received additional eclat in France in the beginning
of the fifteenth century, when it was rumoured that she had appeared to Joan of
Arc and, together with St. Margaret, had been divinely appointed Joan's adviser.
Although contemporary hagiographers look upon the authenticity of
the various texts containing the legend of St. Catherine as more than doubtful,
it is not therefore meant to cast even the shadow of a doubt around the existence
of the saint. But the conclusion reached when these texts have been carefully
studied is that, if the principal facts forming the outline are to be accepted
as true, the multitude of details by which these facts are almost obscured, most
of the wonderful narratives with which they are embellished, and the long discourses
that are put into the mouth of St. Catherine, are to be rejected as inventions,
pure and simple. An example will illustrate. Although all these texts mention
the miraculous translations of the saint's body to Mount Sinai, the itineraries
of the ancient pilgrims who visited Sinai do not contain the slightest allusion
to it. Even in the eighteenth century Dom Deforis, the Benedictine who prepared
an edition of Bossuet's works, declared the tradition followed by this orator
in his panegyric on the saint, to be in a great measure false, and it was just
at this time that the feast of St. Catherine disappeared from the Breviary of
Paris. Since then devotion to the virgin of Alexandria has lost all its former
popularity.
Leon Glugnet, ed.
Transcribed by: Carolyn Hust
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
Bishop of Alexandria from about 283 to 301 (Eusebius, "Chronicle", Ann. Abr. 2299, St. Jerome's version). In his time Achillas, who had been appointed presbyter at Alexandra, at the same time with Pierius, became celebrated (Euseb., "Hist. eccl.", III, xxxii). The celebrated letter of Theonas to Lucianus, chamberlain to Diocletian, which has often been quoted as giving such a lifelike description of the position of a Christian in the imperial Court has been pronounced, first by Batiffol and then by Harnack, to be a forgery. Their verdict is endorsed by Bardenhewer. It was first published from what purported to be a transcript made by Jerome Vignier, by Dacherius in his "Spicilegium". Theonas is commemorated in the Roman Martyrology on 27 August. St. Athanasius in his apology to Constantinus speaks of a church dedicated by his predecessor, St. Alexander, to Theonas. The same church is alluded to in the "Act of SS. Pachomius and Theodorus".
F.J. Bacchus, ed.
Transcribed by: Thomas M. Barrett
This text is cited July 2004 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.
d. 491, feastday: September 11
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
