Religious figures biography ANTIOCHIA (Ancient city) TURKEY - GTP - Greek Travel Pages

Location information

Listed 49 sub titles with search on: Religious figures biography for destination: "ANTIOCHIA Ancient city TURKEY".


Religious figures biography (49)

Saints

St John Chrysostomus

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


St. Pelagia

  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.


St. Eustathius, Bishop of Antioch

More information at Side in Pamphylia, where was born c. 270

St. Luke the Evangelist

  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.


St. Babylas Bishop of Antioch

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.


St. Anastasius, Patriarch of Antioch

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.


St. Apollinaris

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.

St. Asclepiades

d. 217, feastday: October 18

St. Barbatian

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.

St. Basileus and Companions

d. unknown, feastday: November 27

St. Beronicus

d. unknown, feastday: October 19

St. Clerus

d.c. 300, feastday: January 7

St. Eulogius of Alexandria

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.

St. Hesychius of Antioch

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

St. Publia

d.c. 362, feastday: October 9

St. Theodoret of Antioch

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.


St. Philogonius

d. 324, feastday: December 20

St. Theophilus, bishop of Antioch

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.


St. Serapion

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.


St. Ephraim, Patriarch of Antioch

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


Sts. Cyprian & Justina

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.


St. Evodius

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.


Patriarchs

Eudoxius (Bishop of Antioch 324-331)

Anastatius I., Sinaites (559-561 & 593-599 AD)

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., Sinaites (599-609 AD)

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 (639-655 AD)

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 (7th ce.)

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


Bishops

Acacius, Bishop of Berrhoea

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

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

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

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


Scholars

Diodorus

Diodorus. Of Antioch, an ecclesiastical writer who lived during the latter part of the fourth century after Christ, and belonged to a noble family. During the time that he was a presbyter and archimandrita at Antioch, he exerted himself much in introducing a better discipline among the monks, and also wrote several works, which shewed that he was a man of extensive acquirements. When Meletius, the bishop of Antioch, was sent into exile in the reign of the emperor Valens, Diodorus too had to suffer for a time; but he continued to exert himself in what he thought the good cause, and frequently preached to his flock in the open fields in the neighbourhood of Antioch. In A. D. 378 Meletius was allowed to return to his see, and one of his first acts was to make Diodorus bishop of Tarsus. In A. D. 381 Diodorus attended the council of Constantinople, at which the general superintendence of the Eastern churches was entrusted to him and Pelagius of Laodiceia. (Socrat. v. 8.) How long he held his bishopric, and in what year he died, are questions which cannot be answered with certainty, though his death appears to have occurred previous to A. D. 394, in which year his successor, Phalereus, was present at a council at Constantinople. Diodorus was a man of great learning (Facund. iv. 2); but some of his writings were not considered quite orthodox, and are said to have favoured the views which were afterwards promulgated by his disciple, Nestorius. His style is praised by Photius (Bibl. Cod. 223, where he is called Theodorus) for its purity and simplicity. Respecting his life, see Tillemont, Hist. des Emp. viii., ed. Paris.
  Diodorus was the author of a numerous series of works, all of which are now lost, at least in their original language, for many are said to be still extant in Syriac versions. The following deserve to be noticed : 1. Kata heimarmenes in 8 books or 53 chapters, was written against the theories of the astrologers, heretics, Bardesanes, and others. The whole work is said to be still extant in Syriac, and considerable Excerpta from it are preserved in Photius. (l. c.) 2. A work against Photinus, Malchion, Sabellius, Marcellus, and Ancyranus. (Theodoret. de Haeret. Fab. ii. in fin.) 3. A work against the Pagans and their idols (Facund. iv. 2), which is perhaps the same as the Kata Platonos peri Deou kai Deon. (Hieronym. Catal. 119.) 4. Chronikon diorthoumenon to sphalma Eusebiou tou Pamphilon peri ton chronon, that is, on chronological errors committed by Eusebius. (Suid. s. v. Diodoros.) 5. Peri tou heis Theos en Triadi, was directed against the Arians or Eunomians, and is said to be still extant in Syriac. 6. Pros Gratianon kephalaia. (Facund. iv. 2.) 7. Peri tes Hipparchou sphairas. This Hipparchus is the Bithynian of whom Pliny (H. N. ii. 26) speaks. 8. Peri pronoias, or on Providence, is said to exist still in Syriac. 9. Pros Euphronion philosophon, in the form of a dialogue. (Basil. Epist. 167 ; Facund. iv. 2.) 10. Kata Manichaion, in 24 books, of which some account is given by Photius. (Bibl. Cod. 85; comp. Theodoret. i. in fin.) The work is believed to be extant in Syriac. 11. Peri tou hagiou pneumatos. (Phot. Bibl. Cod. 102; Leontius, do Sectis) 12. Pros tous Sunousiastas, a work directed against the Apollinaristae. Some fragments of the first book are preserved in Leontius. (Bibl. Patr. ix., ed. Lugdun.) This work, which is still extant in Syriac, seems to have been the principal cause of Diodorus being looked upon as heretical; for the Nestorians appealed to it in support of their tenets, and Cyrillus wrote against it. 13. A commentary on most of the books of the Old and New Testament. This was one of his principal works, and in his interpretation of the Scriptures he rejected the allegorical explanation, and adhered to the literal meaning of the text. (Suidas, l. c. ; Socrat. vi. 2 ; Sozomen. viii. 2; Hieronym. Catal. 119.) The work is frequently referred to by ecclesiastical writers, and many fragments of it have thus been preserved. (Cave, Hist. Lit. i., ed. London ; Fabric. Bibl. Gr. iv., ix.)

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


Writers

Constantinus or Constantius of Antioch

Constantinus of Antioch, also called Constantius, was a presbyter at the metropolitan church of Antioch, lived about A. D. 400, and was destined to succeed bishop Flavianus, Porphyrius, however, who wished to obtain that see, intrigued at the court of Constantinople, and succeeded in obtaining an order from the emperor Arcadius for the banishment of Constantine. With the aid of some friends, Constantine escaped to Cyprus, where he seems to have remained during the rest of his life. He survived St. Chrysostom, who died in A. D. 407. Constantine edited the Commentary of St. Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews, consisting of thirty-four homilies, arranged by the editor. Among the Epistles of St. Chrysostom, two, viz. Ep. 221 and 225, are addressed to Constantine, who is perhaps the author of two other Epistles commonly attributed to St. Chrysostom, viz. Ep. 237 and 238.

St. Ignatius of Antioch

Ignatius, of Antioch, one of the Apostolical Fathers; called also Theodorus, or Deifer (ho Theophoros), a title explained by Ignatius himself in his conversation with the emperor Trajan to mean "one that has Christ in his heart". Some of the Greeks, interpreting the epithet passively "borne or carried of God", supposed that Ignatius was the little child whom our Lord took in his arms when he rebuked the ambitious contentions of his disciples (Mark, ix. 36, &c.); but this story, whatever currency it may have obtained, is unsupported by any early testimony, and is in fact contradicted by Chrysostom. who incidentally states (In S. Ignat. Homilia) that Ignatius never saw Jesus Christ. Jerome indeed, in one place (De Viris Illust. c. 16) states that Ignatius had seen Christ; but he did not correctly understand the text of Eusebius, from whom the passage is translated. By the Syriac writers, the expression has been understood to mean, "wearing", or "clad with God".
  Abulpharagius (Historia Dynastiarum. Dynast. vii.) had been understood to assert that Ignatius was a native of Nura, which was conjectured to be either Nura in Sardinia or Nora in Cappadocia. But the late researches of Mr. Cureton have shown that the words used had no reference to the place of his birth.
  Ignatius conversed (according to Chrysostom), with the apostles. Some accounts make him a disciple of Peter; but according to the better authority of the Martyrium Ignatii (c. 3), he was, together with Polycarp, a hearer of John. This would lead to the conclusion that Ephesus or its neighbourhood was the place of his residence. He was appointed bishop of the church at Antioch, Chrysostom says, by the choice of the apostles, and was ordained by the laying on of their hands. Theodoret especially mentions Peter as the apostle who laid hands on him (Orat. ad Manachos Euphratesiae, Opp. vol. iv.). But these statements are hardly consistent with the account of Eusebius (Chron. Pars II. interp. Hieron), that his ordination took place A. D. 69, when Peter and several of the apostles were already dead. He is said to have succeeded Evodius, whose ordination is placed in A. D. 44. As in the apostolic age a plurality of bishops existed in some at least of the first churches, e. g. Ephesus and Philippi (comp. Acts, xx. 17, 28; Philip. i.1), and as the church at Antioch was from the first a large and important church, it is not impossible that Ignatius may have been made bishop before the death of Evodius, and may therefore have been ordained by Peter or some other of the apostles.
  Of the episcopate of Ignatius we know little. He appears to have been over-earnest in insisting upon the prerogatives of the clergy, especially the bishops. The Martyrium Ignatii represents him as anxious for the stedfastness of his flock during the persecution said to have taken place in Domitian's reign; and incessant in watching and prayer, and in instructing his people, fearing lest the more ignorant and timid among them should fall away. On the cessation of the persecution he rejoiced at the little injury the church at Antioch had sustained.
  When the emperor Trajan, elated with his victories over the Dacians and other nations on the Danubian frontier, began to persecute the church, the anxiety of Ignatius was renewed; and, eager to avert the violence of persecution from his flock, and to obtain the crown of martyrdom for himself, he offered himself as a victim, and was brought before the emperor, then at Antioch on his way to the eastern frontier to attack the Armenians and Parthians. The conference between the emperor and the bishop is given in the Martyrium Ignatii ; it ended by the emperor passing sentence on Ignatius that he should be taken to Rome, and there thrown to wild beasts. He was led to Rome by a long and tedious route, but was allowed to have communication with his fellow-Christians at the places at which he stopped. He was thrown to the wild beasts in the Roman amphitheatre, at the feast distinguished as he triskaidekate, "the feast of the thirteenth" (i. e. the thirteenth before the kalends of January, or 20th Dec. according to our computation), one of the days of the Opalia, which made part of the great festival of the Saturnalia. (Dict. of Antiq. s. v. Saturnalia.) Such parts of him as remained were collected by his sorrowing friends, and were taken back to Antioch, where in Jerome's time they were resting in the cemetery outside the gate toward Daphne. From thence they were removed, by the Emperor Theodosius II. to the church of St. Ignatius (previously known as the Tychaeum, or Temple of Fortune), in the city of Antioch (Evagr. H. E. i. 16). Their subsequent removals are uncertain. The martyrdom of St. Ignatius is commemorated by the Romish church on the 1st of Feb.; by the Greek church on the 20th December, the correct anniversary of his martyrdom.
  The year of Ignatius's death has been much disputed. Many of the best writers (following the Martyrium Ignatii), place it in A. D. 107; but others contend for a later date; some as late as A. D. 116.
  On his way from Antioch to Rome, Ignatius is said to have written seven epistles. These are enumerated both by Eusebius (H. E. iii. 46) and Jerome (De Viris Illustr c. 16). The fact of his having written letters, though without specifying either the number or the parties to whom they are addressed, is attested by his contemporary, Polycarp (ad Philipp. c. 13. Vers. Lat.), who collected several and sent them to the Philippians, and some quotations from him are found in Irenaeus (Adv. Haeres. v. 28) and Origen (Proleg. in Cantic. Canticor. and Homil. VI. in Lucam). There are, however, at present extant fifteen epistles ascribed to Ignatius. Seven of these are considered to be genuine; namely, 1. Pros Ephesious, Ad Ephesios; 2. Magnesieusin, Ad Magnesianos; 3. Trallianois, Ad Trallianos; 4. Pros Romaious, Ad Romansos; 5. Philadelpheusin, Ad Philadelphenos; 6. Smurnaiois, ad Smyrneos; and, 7. Pros Polukarpon, Ad Polycarpum. The titles of these epistles agree with the enumeration of Eusebius and Jerome. There are found two recensions of them,--a longer, now regarded as an interpolated one, and a shorter form, which is considered as tolerably uncorrupted. Two ancient Latin versions are extant, corresponding in a great degree to the two forms or recensions of the Greek text : the larger, known as the common (vulgata) version; the other first discovered and published by Archbishop Usher. Many of the interpolations found in the larger form are of passages of the New Testament.
  Five other epistles, though extant in Greek, are regarded as spurious; namely, 8. Pros Marian eis Neapolin ten pros toi Zarboi, or Pros Marian Kassoboliten, or ek Kassobelon, or Kastabalitin, or ek Kastabalon, Ad Mariam, Neupolim, quae est ad Zarbun, or Ad Mariam Cassobolitaim, variously written (Castabaliiam, or Castabalensem, or ex Cossobelis, or Chassaobolorum, or Chasabolorum, or Castabalorum. 9. Pros tous en Tarsoi, Ad Tarsenses; 10. Pros Antocheis, Ad Antionchenos; 11. Pros Herona, diakonon Antiocheias Ad Heronem Diaconum Antionchiae; 12. Pros Philippesious, Ad Philippenses. Some copies add to the title of this epistle the words Peri Baptismatos, De Baptismate ; an addition which by no means correctly describes the contents. Of four of these spurious epistles two ancient Latin versions are extant, the common version and that published by Usher; of that to the Philippians, there is only one version (viz. the common). The epistle to Polycarp in the common Latin version is defective; containing only about one third of what is in the Greek text. There is also extant, both in the Greek and in the two Latin versions, an epistle of Mary of Cassobelae (called also Proselutos, Proselyta) to Ignatius, to which his letter professes to be an answer.
  The remaining three epistles ascribed to Ignatius are found only in Latin: they are very short, and have long been given up as spurious: they are, 13. S. Joanni Evangelistae; 14. Ad Eundem; and, 15, Beatae Virgini. With these is found a letter of the Virgin to Ignatius, Beata Virgo Ignatio, professing to be an answer to his letter. This also is given up as spurious. The whole, indeed, of the Epistles, the first seven as well as the rest, have been vehemently assailed, and by some eminent scholars; but the above statement is in accordance with the general opinion of the learned.
  The extent and celebrity of the controversy respecting these writings, and the importance of the letters in their bearing on the much-disputed question of primitive church government, require some notice to be taken of the discussion. In A. D. 1495 the three Latin epistles and the letter of the Virgin were printed at Paris, subjoined to the Vita et Processus S. Thomae Cantuarensis Martyris super Libertate Ecclesiastica. In A. D. 1498, three years after the appearance of these letters, another collection, edited by Jacobus Faber of Etaples (Stapulensis), was printed at Paris in folio, containing the common Latin version of eleven letters, that to Mary of Cassobelae not being among them. They were published with some of the works ascribed to Dionysius Areopagita and an epistle of Polycarp. These eleven epistles were reprinted at Venice, A. D. 1502, Paris, A. D. 1515, Basel, 1520, and Strasburg, 1527. In 1516, the preceding fourteen epistles, with the addition of the letter to Mary of Cassobelae, were edited by Symphorianus Champerius of Lyons, and published at Paris in 4to. with seven letters of St. Antony, commonly called the Great. The whole of the letters ascribed to Ignatius were now before the public in Latin, nor does their genuineness appear to have been as yet suspected. They were repeatedly reprinted in the course of the sixteenth century. In A. D. 1557 the twelve epistles of Ignatius in Greek were published by Valentinus Paceus or Pacaeus in 8vo. at Dillingen in Suabia on the Danube, from an Augsburg MS. They were reprinted at Paris, A. D. 1558 with critical emendations. The same twelve Greek epistles from another MS. from the library of Gaspar a Nydpryck, were published by Andreas Gesner with a Latin version by Joannes Brunnerus, fol. Zurich, 1559. In these editions the Greek text of the seven epistles was given in the larger form, the shorter form, both in Greek and Latin, being as yet undiscovered.
  The genuineness of these remains was new called into question, the acuteness of criticism being apparently increased by a distaste for the contents of the Epistles. The authors of the Centuriae Magdeburgenses were the first to express their doubts, though with caution and moderation. Calvin, in his Institutiones, i. 3, declared that " nothing could be more silly than the stuff (naeniae) which had been brought out under the name of Ignatius ; which rendered the impudence of those persons more insufferable who had set themselves to deceive people by such phantoms (larvae)." It has been observed, however, that the parts which incurred Calvin's reprehension were the supposititious epistles, or the parts since found to be interpolated in the larger form of the genuine ones. The controversy grew warm : the Romish writers and the Episcopalians commonly contending for the genuineness of at least a part of the Epistles, and some of the Presbyterians denying it. The three epistles not extant in Greek were the first given up; but the rest were stoutly contended for. Several however distinguished between the seven enumerated by Eusebius and the rest; and some contended that even those which were genuine were interpolated. While the controversy was in this state, Vedelius, a professor at Geneva, published an edition (S. Ignatii quae extant Omnia, 4to. Geneva, 1623), in which the seven genuine were arranged apart from the other five epistles. He marked also in the genuine epistles the parts which he regarded as interpolations. His conjectures, however, were not happy.
  In 1644 appeared the edition by Archbishop Usher (4to. Oxford) of the Epistles of Polycarp and Ignatius. This edition contained, 1. Polycarpiana Epistolarum Ignatianarum Sylloge (Polycarp's Collection of the Epistles of Ignatius), containing Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians, and six of the genuine epistles of Ignatius (that to Polycarp being referred by Usher to the next class) in the longer form, with the common Latin version printed in parallel columns. The interpolated portions, so far as they were ascertainable by the aid of an old Latin version of the shorter form, of which Usher had obtained two MSS. in England, and which he was the first to publish, were distinguished by being printed in red. This recension, however, by no means restored the text to its original purity, as may be seen by the most cursory comparison of Usher's text with that of Cotelerius and Le Clerc. The edition of Usher further contained, 2. Epistolae B. Ignatio adscriptae a Mediae Aetais Graecis Sex (Six Epistles ascribed to St. Ignatius by the Greeks of the Middle Age). The Epistle of Polycarp was included in this class, with the five spurious epistles extant in Greek. The common Latin version was also printed with these in parallel columns; and the three epistles which are extant only in Latin were subjoined. 3. A Latin version of eleven epistles (that to the Philippians being omitted) from the two MSS. obtained by Usher, and now first printed. This version is quite different from the common one, and very ancient. It corresponds, in the main, to the shorter text of the genuine Epistles.
  The work of Usher contains also a valuable introduction and notes to the Epistles of Ignatius and Polycarp, the Apostolical Constitutions, and the Canons ascribed to Clement of Rome. In 1646 the Epistles of Ignatius were published by Isaac Vossius (4 to. Amsterdam), from a MS. in the Medicean Library at Florence. The MS., which is not accurately written, and is mutilated at the end, is valuable as the only one containing the shorter recension of the genuine Epistles : it wants, however, that to the Romans, which was given by Vossius in the longer form, as in the former editions. The five spurious epistles, and that of Mary of Cassobelae to Ignatius, from the Medicean MS., the text of which differs materially from that previously published ; the three Latin Epistles, Usher's Latin version of the eleven Greek Epistles, and the common version of that to the Philippians, were all given by Vossius. In 1647 Usher published his Appendix Ignatiana, containing the Greek text of the seven Epistles, and two Latin versions of the Martyrum Ignatii. He gave the Medicean text of six of the Epistles; that to the Romans was the common text with the interpolations expunged, as determined by a collation of the epistle as given in the Martyrium, both in the Greek of Symeon Metaphrastes and the Latin versions published by Usher. The text of Ignatius was thus settled on the basis of MS. authority, except in the case of the Epistle to the Romans, and that was afterwards published by Le Clerc from a manuscript in the Colbertine Library.
  After the controversy had been carried on for some time, and great progress had been made towards the settlement of the text, the most formidable attack on the genuineness of the Epistles was made by DaillΓ© (Dallaeus), one of the most eminent of the French Protestants, in his work De Scriptis quae sub Dionysii Areopagitae et Ignatii Antiocheni circmferuntur Libri duo, 4to. Geneva, 16666. The works of Ignatius form the subject of the second book. This attack of DaillΓ© called forth the Vindiciae Ignatianae of Bishop Pearson, 4to. Cambridge, 1672, which may be considered as having exhausted the controversy. The subsequent contributions to the discussion do not require notice. The genuineness and substantial integrity of the seven epistles in the shorter form may be considered as now generally recognised.
  The Epistles of Ignatius are characterised by simplicity of thought and by piety. His eagerness to obtain the crown of martyrdom has been censured ; and his zeal in enforcing the claims of the bishops and clergy to reverence and obedience is very great. Perhaps this characteristic, which has quickened the suspicions of, or objections to, the genuineness of the Epistles, may be rather regarded as an argument that they were written while those claims were by no means generally admitted. His zeal in enforcing them is an indication of their being disputed, as men do not contend for what no one denies. The Greek style of Ignatius is by no means good, which is accounted for by the circumstance of Greek not being his vernacular tongue.
  The most complete and valuable edition of Ignatius is that contained in the Patres Apostolici of Cotelerius, the second edition of which by Le Clerc (2 vols. fol. Amsterdam. 1724) contains the two recensions of the genuine epistles, all the spurious epistles (Greek and Latin), with the epistles of Mary of Cassobelae and of the Virgin; the two ancient Latin versions (the common one and Usher's), the Martyrium Ignatii, the Dissertationes (i. e. the Introduction) of Usher, the Vindiciae of Pearson, a Dissertatio de Ignatianis Epistolis, by Le Clerc, and variorm notes. A useful edition of the genuine Epistles with those of Clement of Rome and Polycarp, and the Martyria of Ignatius and Polycarp, was published by Jacobson (2 vols. 8vo. Oxford, 1838). There are versions in several of the languages of modern Europe; including two English translations, an old one by Archbishop Wake, and a modern one by Clementson (8vo. 1827). Wake's translation has been repeatedly published.
  Ebed-jesu, the Syrian, speaks of Ignatius as having written De Re Fidei et Canones, but he is supposed to refer to his Epistles (Assemani, Bibl. Orient. ). There is also a Syriac liturgy ascribed to Ignatius, of which a Latin version is given by Renaudot (Liturg. Orientales, vol. ii.), who declares it to be spurious.
  The Martyrium Ignatii, which is our chief authority for the circumstances of Ignatius' death, professes to be written by eye-witnesses, the companions of his voyage to Rome, supposed to be Philo, a deacon of Tarsus or some other church in Cilicia, and Rheus Agathopus, a Syrian, who are mentioned in the Epistles of Ignatius (Ad Philadelph. c. 11; Ad Smyrneos, c.13). Usher adds to them a third person, Gaius, but on what authority we know not, and Gallandius adds Crocus mentioned by Ignatius (Ad Romanos, c. 10). The account, with many interpolations, is incorporated in the work of Symeon Metaphrastes (A. D. 20, Dec.), and a Latin translation from him is given by Surius, De Probatis Sanctor. Vitis, and in the Acta Sanctorum, under the date of the 1st of Feb. The Martyrium was first printed in Latin by archbishop Usher, who gave two distinct versions from different MSS. The Greek text was first printed by Ruinart in his Acta Martyrum Sincera (4to. Paris, 1689) from a MS. in the Colbertine library, and in a revised edition in Le Clerc's Cotelerius. It is given by Jacobson and by most of the later editors of the Epistles. Its genuineness is generally recognised; but it is thought to be interpolated. See the remarks of Grabe quoted by Jacobson at the end of the Martyrium. A considerable fragment of an ancient Syriac version of the Martyrium of Ignatius is published by Mr. Cureton.
  A recent discovery promises to reopen the question, as to the integrity of the shorter epistles. Several writers, including Beausobre, Lardner, and Priestly, had expressed their suspicion or conviction, that there were in them interpolations, more or less considerable. An ancient Syriac version of the epistles to Polycarp, to the Romans, and to the Ephesians, recently discovered, gives reason to believe that the interpolations are very considerable. This version was discovered among the MSS. of the library of the Syriac convent of the desert of Nitria, in Egypt, which has been lately purchased by the trustees of the British Museum. These epistles have been published by the Rev. W. Cureton, of the British Museum (The Ancient Syriac Version of the Epistles of St. Ignatius, &c., by William Cureton, M. A. 8vo. London. 1845), from two MSS., of which one, containing the epistle to Polycarp, is assigned by him to the sixth century; the other, containing the other two epistles, belongs, in his judgment, to the seventh or eighth century. The Syriac Epistle to Polycarp contains scarcely anything of c. vii. and [p. 567] vii, which, in the Greek text, form the close of the epistle. The Epistle to the Ephesians omits, with some trifling exceptions, c ii.--vii., xi.--xxi. ; beside the greater part of c. ix.; the omitted portion forming two-thirds of the Epistle in Greek. The Epistle to the Romans omits considerable portions of c. i.--iii., nearly the whole of c. vi.--viii., the greater part of c. ix., and the whole of c. x. The conclusion of the Epistle to the Romans in Syriac consists of what appears in the Greek as c. iv.--v. of the Epistle to the Trallians. Mr. Cureton gives an English version, interpaged with the Syriac text, and subjoins the Greek text conformed to the Syriac, the parts expunged being printed at the foot of the page. In a valuable preface he reviews the history of the Greek text of the Epistles, gives an interesting account of the fruitless endeavours made in the seventeenth century, by Mr. Huntington, chaplain at Aleppo, (afterwards Provost of Trinity College, Dublin, and Bishop of Raphoe), to discover the Syriac version, and the more recent and successful efforts. He discusses the question whether the Syriac text is to be preferred to the Greek, and argues strongly for its superiority. The interpolations, several of which enforce clerical and episcopal authority, while others support the deity of Jesus Christ, he considers to be subsequent to and intended to bear upon the Arian and Aerian controversies.
(Pearson, Usher, Jacobson, ll. cc.; Lardner, Credibility ; Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. vii. 32. &c.; Galland, Biblioth. Patrum, vol. i. Proleg. c. 7, 8; Cave, Hist. Litt. vol. i.; Oudin, de Scriptoribus Eccles. vol. i. cod. 71; Ceillier, Auteurs Sacroes, vol. i.)

St. Ignatius of Antioch, also called Theophorus (ho Theophoros); born in Syria, around the year 50; died at Rome between 98 and 117.
  More than one of the earliest ecclesiastical writers have given credence, though apparently without good reason, to the legend that Ignatius was the child whom the Savior took up in His arms, as described in Mark 9:35. It is also believed, and with great probability, that, with his friend Polycarp, he was among the auditors of the Apostle St. John. If we include St. Peter, Ignatius was the third Bishop of Antioch and the immediate successor of Evodius (Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl.", II, iii, 22). Theodoret ("Dial. Immutab.", I, iv, 33a, Paris, 1642) is the authority for the statement that St. Peter appointed Ignatius to the See of Antioch. St. John Chrysostom lays special emphasis on the honor conferred upon the martyr in receiving his episcopal consecration at the hands of the Apostles themselves ("Hom. in St. Ig.", IV. 587). Natalis Alexander quotes Theodoret to the same effect (III, xii, art. xvi, p. 53).
  All the sterling qualities of ideal pastor and a true soldier of Christ were possessed by the Bishop of Antioch in a preeminent degree. Accordingly, when the storm of the persecution of Domitian broke in its full fury upon the Christians of Syria, it found their faithful leader prepared and watchful. He was unremitting in his vigilance and tireless in his efforts to inspire hope and to strengthen the weaklings of his flock against the terrors of the persecution. The restoration of peace, though it was short-lived, greatly comforted him. But it was not for himself that he rejoiced, as the one great and ever-present wish of his chivalrous soul was that he might receive the fullness of Christian discipleship through the medium of martyrdom. His desire was not to remain long unsatisfied. Associated with the writings of St. Ignatius is a work called "Martyrium Ignatii ", which purports to be an account by eyewitnesses of the martyrdom of St. Ignatius and the acts leading up to it. In this work, which such competent Protestant critics as Pearson and Ussher regard as genuine, the full history of that eventful journey from Syria to Rome is faithfully recorded for the edification of the Church of Antioch. It is certainly very ancient and is reputed to have been written by Philo, deacon of Tarsus, and Rheus Agathopus, a Syrian, who accompanied Ignatius to Rome. It is generally admitted, even by those who regarded it as authentic, that this work has been greatly interpolated. Its most reliable form is that found in the "Martyrium Colbertinum" which closes the mixed recension and is so called because its oldest witness is the tenth-century Codex Colbertinus (Paris).
  According to these Acts, in the ninth year of his reign, Trajan, flushed with victory over the Scythians and Dacians, sought to perfect the universality of his dominion by a species of religious conquest. He decreed, therefore, that the Christians should unite with their pagan neighbors in the worship of the gods. A general persecution was threatened, and death was named as the penalty for all who refused to offer the prescribed sacrifice. Instantly alert to the danger that threatened, Ignatius availed himself of all the means within his reach to thwart the purpose of the emperor. The success of his zealous efforts did not long remain hidden from the Church's persecutors. He was soon arrested and led before Trajan, who was then sojourning in Antioch. Accused by the emperor himself of violating the imperial edict, and of inciting others to like transgressions, Ignatius valiantly bore witness to the faith of Christ. If we may believe the account given in the "Martyrium", his bearing before Trajan was characterized by inspired eloquence, sublime courage, and even a spirit of exultation. Incapable of appreciating the motives that animated him, the emperor ordered him to be put in chains and taken to Rome, there to become the food of wild beasts and a spectacle for the people.
  That the trials of this journey to Rome were great we gather from his letter to the Romans (par. 5): "From Syria even to Rome I fight with wild beasts, by land and sea, by night and by day, being bound amidst ten leopards, even a company of soldiers, who only grow worse when they are kindly treated." Despite all this, his journey was a kind of triumph. News of his fate, his destination, and his probable itinerary had gone swiftly before. At several places along the road his fellow-Christians greeted him with words of comfort and reverential homage. It is probable that he embarked on his way to Rome at Seleucia, in Syria, the nearest port to Antioch, for either Tarsus in Cilicia, or Attalia in Pamphylia, and thence, as we gather from his letters, he journeyed overland through Asia Minor. At Laodicea, on the River Lycus, where a choice of routes presented itself, his guards selected the more northerly, which brought the prospective martyr through Philadelphia and Sardis, and finally to Smyrna, where Polycarp, his fellow-disciple in the school of St. John, was bishop. The stay at Smyrna, which was a protracted one, gave the representatives of the various Christian communities in Asia Minor an opportunity of greeting the illustrious prisoner, and offering him the homage of the Churches they represented. From the congregations of Ephesus, Magnesia, and Tralles, deputations came to comfort him. To each of these Christian communities he addressed letters from Smyrna, exhorting them to obedience to their respective bishops, and warning them to avoid the contamination of heresy. These, letters are redolent with the spirit of Christian charity, apostolic zeal, and pastoral solicitude. While still there he wrote also to the Christians of Rome, begging them to do nothing to deprive him of the opportunity of martyrdom.
  From Smyrna his captors took him to Troas, from which place he dispatched letters to the Christians of Philadelphia and Smyrna, and to Polycarp. Besides these letters, Ignatius had intended to address others to the Christian communities of Asia Minor, inviting them to give public expression to their sympathy with the brethren in Antioch, but the altered plans of his guards, necessitating a hurried departure, from Troas, defeated his purpose, and he was obliged to content himself with delegating this office to his friend Polycarp. At Troas they took ship for Neapolis. From this place their journey led them overland through Macedonia and Illyria. The next port of embarkation was probably Dyrrhachium (Durazzo). Whether having arrived at the shores of the Adriatic, he completed his journey by land or sea, it is impossible to determine. Not long after his arrival in Rome he won his long-coveted crown of martyrdom in the Flavian amphitheater. The relics of the holy martyr were borne back to Antioch by the deacon Philo of Cilicia, and Rheus Agathopus, a Syrian, and were interred outside the gates not far from the beautiful suburb of Daphne. They were afterwards removed by the Emperor Theodosius II to the Tychaeum, or Temple of Fortune which was then converted into a Christian church under the patronage of the martyr whose relics it sheltered. In 637 they were translated to St. Clement's at Rome, where they now rest. The Church celebrates the feast of St. Ignatius on 1 February.
  The character of St. Ignatius, as deduced from his own and the extant writings of his contemporaries, is that of a true athlete of Christ. The triple honor of apostle, bishop, and martyr was well merited by this energetic soldier of the Faith. An enthusiastic devotion to duty, a passionate love of sacrifice, and an utter fearlessness in the defense of Christian truth, were his chief characteristics. Zeal for the spiritual well-being of those under his charge breathes from every line of his writings. Ever vigilant lest they be infected by the rampant heresies of those early days; praying for them, that their faith and courage may not be wanting in the hour of persecution; constantly exhorting them to unfailing obedience to their bishops; teaching them all Catholic truth ; eagerly sighing for the crown of martyrdom, that his own blood may fructify in added graces in the souls of his flock, he proves himself in every sense a true, pastor of souls, the good shepherd that lays down his life for his sheep.
Collections
The oldest collection of the writings of St. Ignatius known to have existed was that made use of by the historian Eusebius in the first half of the fourth century, but which unfortunately is no longer extant. It was made up of the seven letters written by Ignatius whilst on his way to Rome; These letters were addressed to the Christians:
of Ephesus (Pros Ephesious);
of Magnesia (Magnesieusin);
of Tralles (Trallianois);
of Rome (Pros Romaious);
of Philadelphia (Philadelpheusin);
of Smyrna (Smyrnaiois); and
to Polycarp (Pros Polykarpon).
We find these seven mentioned not only by Eusebius ("Hist. eccl.", III, xxxvi) but also by St. Jerome (De viris illust., c. xvi). Of later collections of Ignatian letters which have been preserved, the oldest is known as the "long recension". This collection, the author of which is unknown, dates from the latter part of the fourth century. It contains the seven genuine and six spurious letters, but even the genuine epistles were greatly interpolated to lend weight to the personal views of its author. For this reason they are incapable of bearing witness to the original form. The spurious letters in this recension are those that purport to be from Ignatius:
to Mary of Cassobola (Pros Marian Kassoboliten);
to the Tarsians (Pros tous en tarso);
to the Philippians (Pros Philippesious);
to the Antiochenes (Pros Antiocheis);
to Hero a deacon of Antioch (Pros Erona diakonon Antiocheias). Associated with the foregoing is
a letter from Mary of Cassobola to Ignatius.
It is extremely probable that the interpolation of the genuine, the addition of the spurious letters, and the union of both in the long recension was the work of an Apollonarist of Syria or Egypt, who wrote towards the beginning of the fifth century. Funk identifies him with the compiler of the Apostolic Constitutions, which came out of Syria in the early part of the same century. Subsequently there was added to this collection a panegyric on St. Ignatius entitled, "Laus Heronis". Though in the original it was probably written in Greek, it is now extant only in Latin and Coptic texts. There is also a third recension, designated by Funk as the "mixed collection". The time of its origin can be only vaguely determined as being between that of the collection known to Eusebius and the long recension. Besides the seven genuine letters of Ignatius in their original form, it also contains the six spurious ones, with the exception of that to the Philippians. In this collection is also to be found the "Martyrium Colbertinum". The Greek original of this recension is contained in a single codex, the famous Mediceo-Laurentianus manuscript at Florence. This codex is incomplete, wanting the letter to the Romans, which, however, is to be found associated with the "Martyrium Colbertinum" in the Codex Colbertinus, at Paris. The mixed collection is regarded as the most reliable of all in determining what was the authentic text of the genuine Ignatian letters. There is also an ancient Latin version which is an unusually exact rendering of the Greek. Critics are generally inclined to look upon this version as a translation of some Greek manuscript of the same type as that of the Medicean Codex. This version owes its discovery to Archbishop Ussher, of Ireland, who found it in two manuscripts in English libraries and published it in 1644. It was the work of Robert Grosseteste, a Franciscan friar and Bishop of Lincoln (c. 1250). The original Syriac version has come down to us in its entirety only in an Armenian translation. It also contains the seven genuine and six spurious letters. This collection in the original Syriac would be invaluable in determining the exact text of Ignatius, were it in existence, for the reason that it could not have been later than the fourth or fifth century. The deficiencies of the Armenian version are in part supplied by the abridged recension in the original Syriac. This abridgment contains the three genuine letters to the Ephesians, the Romans, and to Polycarp. The manuscript was discovered by Cureton in a collection of Syriac manuscripts obtained in 1843 from the monastery of St. Mary Deipara in the Desert of Nitria. Also there are three letters extant only in Latin. Two of the three purport to be from Ignatius to St. John the Apostle, and one to the Blessed Virgin, with her reply to the same. These are probably of Western origin, dating no further back than the twelfth century.
The Controversy
At intervals during the last several centuries a warm controversy has been carried on by patrologists concerning the authenticity of the Ignatian letters. Each particular recension has had its apologists and its opponents. Each has been favored to the exclusion of all the others, and all, in turn, have been collectively rejected, especially by the coreligionists of Calvin. The reformer himself, in language as violent as it is uncritical (Institutes, 1-3), repudiates in globo the letters which so completely discredit his own peculiar views on ecclesiastical government. The convincing evidence which the letters bear to the Divine origin of Catholic doctrine is not conducive to predisposing non-Catholic critics in their favor, in fact, it has added not a little to the heat of the controversy. In general, Catholic and Anglican scholars are ranged on the side of the letters written to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smyrniots, and to Polycarp; whilst Presbyterians, as a rule, and perhaps a priori, repudiate everything claiming Ignatian authorship.
  The two letters to the Apostle St. John and the one to the Blessed Virgin, which exist only in Latin, are unanimously admitted to be spurious. The great body of critics who acknowledge the authenticity of the Ignatian letters restrict their approval to those mentioned by Eusebius and St. Jerome. The six others are not defended by any of the early Fathers. The majority of those who acknowledge the Ignatian authorship of the seven letters do so conditionally, rejecting what they consider the obvious interpolations in these letters. In 1623, whilst the controversy was at its height, Vedelius gave expression to this latter opinion by publishing at Geneva an edition of the Ignatian letters in which the seven genuine letters are set apart from the five spurious. In the genuine letters he indicated what was regarded as interpolations. The reformer Dallaeus, at Geneva, in 1666, published a work entitled "De scriptis quae sub Dionysii Areop. et Ignatii Antioch. nominibus circumferuntur", in which (lib. II) he called into question the authenticity of all seven letters. To this the Anglican Pearson replied spiritedly in a work called "Vindiciae epistolarum S. Ignatii", published at Cambridge, 1672. So convincing were the arguments adduced in this scholarly work that for two hundred years the controversy remained closed in favor of the genuineness of the seven letters. The discussion was reopened by Cureton's discovery (1843) of the abridged Syriac version, containing the letters of Ignatius to the Ephesians, Romans, and to Polycarp. In a work entitled "Vindiciae Ignatianae" London, 1846), he defended the position that only the letters contained in his abridged Syriac recension, and in the form therein contained, were genuine, and that all others were interpolated or forged outright. This position was vigorously combated by several British and German critics, including the Catholics Denzinger and Hefele, who successfully de fended the genuineness of the entire seven epistles. It is now generally admitted that Cureton's Syriac version is only an abbreviation of the original.
  While it can hardly be said that there is at present any unanimous agreement on the subject, the best modern criticism favors the authenticity of the seven letters mentioned by Eusebius. Even such eminent non-Catholic critics as Zahn, Lightfoot, and Harnack hold this view. Perhaps the best evidence of their authenticity is to be found in the letter of Polycarp to the Philippians, which mentions each of them by name. As an intimate friend of Ignatius, Polycarp, writing shortly after the martyr's death, bears contemporaneous witness to the authenticity of these letters, unless, indeed, that of Polycarp itself be regarded as interpolated or forged. When, furthermore, we take into consideration the passage of Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., V, xxviii, 4) found in the original Greek in Eusebius (Hist. eccI., III, xxxvi), in which he refers to the letter to the Romans. (iv, I) in the following words: "Just as one of our brethren said, condemned to the wild beasts in martyrdom for his faith", the evidence of authenticity becomes compelling. The romance of Lucian of Samosata, "De morte peregrini", written in 167, bears incontestable evidence that the writer was not only familiar with the Ignatian letters, but even made use of them. Harnack, who was not always so minded, describes these proofs as "testimony as strong to the genuineness of the epistles as any that can be conceived of" (Expositor, ser. 3, III, p. 11).
Contents of the letters
It is scarcely possible to exaggerate the importance of the testimony which the Ignatian letters offer to the dogmatic character of Apostolic Christianity. The martyred Bishop of Antioch constitutes a most important link between the Apostles and the Fathers of the early Church. Receiving from the Apostles themselves, whose auditor he was, not only the substance of revelation, but also their own inspired interpretation of it; dwelling, as it were, at the very fountain-head of Gospel truth, his testimony must necessarily carry with it the greatest weight and demand the most serious consideration. Cardinal Newman did not exaggerate the matter when he said ("The Theology of the Seven Epistles of St. Ignatius", in "Historical Sketches", I, London, 1890) that "the whole system of Catholic doctrine may be discovered, at least in outline, not to say in parts filled up, in the course of his seven epistles". Among the many Catholic doctrines to be found in the letters are the following: the Church was Divinely established as a visible society, the salvation of souls is its end, and those who separate themselves from it cut themselves off from God (Philad., c. iii); the hierarchy of the Church was instituted by Christ (lntrod. to Philad.; Ephes., c. vi); the threefold character of the hierarchy (Magn., c. vi); the order of the episcopacy superior by Divine authority to that of the priesthood (Magn., c. vi, c. xiii; Smyrn., c. viii; Trall., c. iii); the unity of the Church (Trall., c. vi; Philad., c. iii; Magn., c. xiii); the holiness of the Church (Smyrn., Ephes., Magn., Trall., and Rom.); the catholicity of the Church (Smyrn., c. viii); the infallibility of the Church (Philad., c. iii; Ephes., cc. xvi, xvii); the doctrine of the Eucharist (Smyrn., c. viii), which word we find for the first time applied to the Blessed Sacrament, just as in Smyrn., viii, we meet for the first time the phrase "Catholic Church", used to designate all Christians; the Incarnation (Ephes., c. xviii); the supernatural virtue of virginity, already much esteemed and made the subject of a vow (Polyc., c. v); the religious character of matrimony (Polyc., c. v); the value of united prayer (Ephes., c. xiii); the primacy of the See of Rome (Rom., introd.). He, moreover, denounces in principle the Protestant doctrine of private judgment in matters of religion (Philad. c. iii), The heresy against which he chiefly inveighs is Docetism. Neither do the Judaizing heresies escape his vigorous condemnation.
Editions
The four letters found in Latin only were printed in Paris in 1495. The common Latin version of eleven letters, together with a letter of Polycarp and some reputed works of Dionysius the Areopagite, was printed in Paris, 1498, by Lefevre d'Etaples. Another edition of the seven genuine and six spurious letters, including the one to Mary of Cassobola, was edited by Symphorianus Champerius, of Lyons, Paris, 1516. Valentinus Paceus published a Greek edition of twelve letters (Dillingen, 1557). A similar edition was brought out at Zurich, in 1559, by Andrew Gesner; a Latin version of the work of John Brunner accompanied it. Both of these editions made use of the Greek text of the long recension. In 1644 Archbishop Ussher edited the letters of Ignatius and Polycarp. The common Latin version, with three of the four Latin letters, was subjoined. It also contained the Latin version of eleven letters taken from Ussher's manuscripts. In 1646 Isaac Voss published at Amsterdam an edition from the famous Medicean Codex at Florence. Ussher brought out another edition in 1647, entitled "Appendix Ignatiana", which contained the Greek text of the genuine epistles and the Latin version of the "Martyrium Ignatii".
  In 1672 J.B. Cotelier's edition appeared at Paris, containing all the letters, genuine and supposititious, of Ignatius, with those of the other Apostolic Fathers. A new edition of this work was printed by Le Clerc at Antwerp, in 1698. It was reprinted at Venice, 1765-1767, and at Paris by Migne in 1857. The letter to the Romans was published from the "Martyrium Colbertinum" at Paris, by Ruinart, in 1689. In 1724 Le Clerc brought out at Amsterdam a second edition of Cotelier's "Patres Apostolici", which contains all the letters, both genuine and spurious, in Greek and Latin versions. It also includes the letters of Mary of Cassobola and those purporting to be from the Blessed Virgin in the "Martyrium Ignatii", the "Vindiciae Ignatianae" of Pearson, and several dissertations. The first edition of the Armenian version was published at Constantinople in 1783. In 1839 Hefele edited the Ignatian letters in a work entitled "Opera Patrum Apostolicorum", which appeared at Tubingen. Migne took his text from the third edition of this work (Tubingen, 1847). Bardenhewer designates the following as the best editions: Zahn, "Ignatii et Polycarpi epistulae martyria, fragmenta" in "Patr. apostol. opp. rec.", ed. by de Gebhardt, Harnack, Zahn, fasc. II, Leipzig, 1876; Funk, "Opp. Patr. apostol.", I, Tubingen, 1878, 1887, 1901; Lightfoot, "The Apostolic Fathers", part II, London, 1885, 1889; an English version of the letters to be found in Lightfoot's "Apostolic Fathers", London, 1907, from which are taken all the quotations of the letters in this article, and to which all citations refer.

Related articles/documents:
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans
The Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp
The Epistle to Polycarp
The Second Epistle to the Ephesians
Third Epistle of Ignatius
Epistle to the Tarsians
Epistle to the Antiochians
Epistle to Hero
Epistle to the Philippians
Epistle to Ignatius
Epistle to Mary at Neapolis
Epistle to St. John the Apostle
Second Epistle to St. John
False Epistle to the Virgin Mary
The Martyrdom of Ignatius

John B. O'Connor, ed.
Transcribed by: Charles Sweeney, S.J.
This text is cited Jan 2006 from The Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent online edition URL below.


Joannes Maro

Joannes Maro, so called from the monastery of St. Maro on the Orontes, near Antioch, an eminent ecclesiastic among the Maronites of Syria; and according to some authors, Maronite patriarch of Antioch. He is said to have enjoyed the favour of the emperor Heraclius. He wrote in Syriac Commentarius in Liturgiam S. Jacobi, of which many extracts have been published. (Cave, Hist. Litt. vol. i. p. 537.)

Joannes Antiochenus & Scholasticus

Isaacus Syrus

Isaacus. Surnamed SYRUS, because he was a native of Syria, was first monk and afterwards priest at Antioch, and died about A. D. 456. He wrote in Syriac, and perhaps also in Greek, different works and treatises on theological matters, several of them to oppose the writers of the Nestorians and Eutychians. His principal work is De Contemtu Mundi, de Operatione Corporali et sui Abjectione Liber, published in the second edition of the Orthodoxographi, Basel, 1569; in the Bibl. Patr. Colon. vol. vi.; in the B. P. Paris, vol. v.; in the B. P. Novissima Lugdun, vol. xi.; and in Galland. Bibl. Patr. vol. xii. In all these collections it is printed in Greek, with a Latin translation, but the Greek text also seems to be a translation from the Svriac. It is very doubtful whether this work was written by Isaac, the subject of this notice, or by another Isaac, the subject of the following article. Neither Trithenius nor Gennadius (De Script. Eccles.) attribute the work to our Isaac. There is more reason to believe that he wrote " De Cogitationibus," the Greek text of which, with a Latin translation, was published by Petrus Possinus, in his Ascetica. Several other productions of Isaac are extant in MS. in the library of the Vatican and in other libraries. (Cave, Hist. Lit. vol. i. p. 434-435 ; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. xi. p. 214, &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


Leontius (Leontios) of Antioch

Leontius (Leontios) of Antioch. Leontius was born in Phrygia, and was a disciple of the martyr Lucianus; and having entered the church was ordained presbyter. In order to enjoy without scandal the society of a young female, Eustolius or Eustolia, to whom he was much attached, he mutilated himself; but, notwithstanding, did not escape suspicion, and was deposed front his office. On the deposition, however, of Stephanus or Stephen, bishop of Antioch, he was by the favour of the Emperor Constantius and the predominant Arian party appointed to that see, about 348 or 349. He was one of the instructors of the heresiarch Aetius, to whom, according to Philostorgius, he expounded the writings of the prophets, especially Ezekiel; but, after appointing him deacon, he was compelled by the opposite party under Diodorus and Flavian to silence and depose him. Leontius died about A. D. 358.
  Of his writings, which were numerous, nothing remains except a fragment of what Cave describes, we know not on what authority, as Oratio in Passionem S. Babylae, which is cited in the Paschal Chronicle in the notice of the Decian persecution. In this fragment Leontius distinctly asserts that both the Emperor Philip, the Arabian, and his wife, were avowed Christians. (Socrat. H. E. ii. 26; Sozomen, H. E. iii. 20; Theodoret. H. E. ii. 10, 24; Philostorg. H. E. iii. 15, 17, 18; Athanas. Apolog. de Fuga sua, c. 26, Hist. Arianor. ad Monachos, c. 28, Chron. Pasch. vol. i. pp. 270, 289, ed. Paris, pp. 216, 231, ed. Venice, pp. 503, 535, ed. Bonn; Cave, Historia Litteraria, vol. i. p. 211, ed. Oxon. 1740-43; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. viii. 324.)

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


Monks & ascetics

Macedonius Critophagus, or Crithophagus

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


You are able to search for more information in greater and/or surrounding areas by choosing one of the titles below and clicking on "more".


GTP Headlines

Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.

Subscribe now!

Ferry Departures

Promotions