Fathers' Historical writings 662
91 Nothing seems known of this Cyprian beyond this mention of his expulsion by the Vandals. The letter is thus dated after 439.
92 Eusebius of Ancyra. The name also appears as Eulalius. Baron. Ann. 440.
93 Tella or (Constantina in Osrhoene. Sophronius was cousin of Ibas of Edessa.
94 Prefect of the East in 447. Theodoret writes to him again when in 448 or 449 Theodosius II had been induced to relegate him to his own diocese. Vide Letters LXXX and LXXXI.
95 Nomus was consul in 445.
96 cf. Epp. XLI and XCIX, but there are no notes of identity).
97 Dioscorus succeeded Cyril in 444, and this letter is probably dated soon after.
98 (Mt 11,29 Mt 11,
663 99 This name suggests correspondence of date with the preceding.
100 Garnerius gives the conjectural date 447.
101 Cf. 1Co 12,26).
102 (Ep 6,13 Ep 6,
103 cf. Ep. LXXI. Zeno was consul in 448. Nothing is known of his brother.
104 cf. Ep. XXX. This letter, conveying an invitation to a church which Aerius had built at Cyrus, his native city, was probably written early in the episcopate of Theodoret.
105 cf. Ep. VIII).
106 (Lc 8,52 Lc 8,
107 On the seaboard of Cilicia, now Ayas. The date may be 443 or 444.
108 Zeno was Consul in 448. cf. Ep. LXV).
109 “Nullus est sive temporis sive personoe index.” Garnerius.
664 110 cf. Ep. CIII. Apollonius was Comes Sacrarum Largitio. num in 436.
111 Thucydides, (I. 138,) writes of Themistocles that “to a greater degree than any other man he was to be admired for the natural ability which he displayed; for by his inborn capacity, he was an unrivalled judge of what the emergency of the moment required, and unsurpassed in his forecast of he future, and this without the aid of previous or additional instruction.”
The same historian (II. 60) records the speech of Pericles in his own vindication in which he says “I think myseIf inferior to none in knowing what measures should be taken and in enforcing them by word of mouth.”
112 Theoctistus; who, we learn from Letter CXXXIV, did not prove himself a friend in need, succeeded Acacius in 438. Garnerius, apparently on insufficient grounds, would therefore date the letter before this year).
113 cf. p. 262 n.
114 (Gn 31,39 Gn 31,
115 (1Tm 2,4 1Tm 2,
116 Baruch 3,38.
117 On the persecution in Persia see page 157.
118 (Lc 22,31 Lc 22,
119 (1Co 12,26 1Co 12,
665 120 (Ep 4,25 Ep 4,
121 (Col 1,18 Col 1,
122 (Jn x, 12, Jn x, 13, Jn x, 11.
123 (He 11,37, He 11,38 He 11,
124 (1Co 10,13 1Co 10,
125 (Ga 4,19 Ga 4,
126 I1Co 2,7.
127 I1Co 2,11.
128 Psalm 40,2 and Psalm 40,3.
129 (Ps 40,3 Ps 40,
130 “It is noticeable that with systematic discipline as to the persons taught, there was no order of teachers. It was part of the pastoral office to watch over the souls of those who were seeking admission to the Church, as well as those who were in it, and thus bishops, priests, deacons, or readers might all of them be found, when occasion required, doing the work of a Catechist. The Doctor Audientium of whom Cyprian speaks, was a Lector in the Church of Carthage. Augustine’s Treatise de Catechizandis Rudibus, was addressed to Deogratias as a deacon; the Catecheses of Cyril of Jerusalem were delivered by him partly as a deacon, partly asa presbyter. The word catechist implies accordingly a function, not a class.” Dean Plumptre in Dict. Christ. Ant. 1,319).
666 131 Cf. 1Co 4,17 and I. Thess. iii. 2.
132 (Gn 31,40 Gn 31, Gn 31,38 Gn 31, xxxi. Gn 39
133 Ezekiel 34,2, and cf. Ezekiel xxxiv. 17.
134 Cf. Ezekiel 3,17, Ezekiel iii. 18. Quotations are apparently from memory.
135 (Mt 25,26, Mt 25,27 Mt 25,
136 Lamentations 3,25.
137 I1Co 12,9.
138 I. Thess. 5,14).
139 Ezekiel 33. 1.
140 (Rm 16,20 Rm 16,
141 (Mc 4,39 Mc 4,
667 142 These letters on the Persian persecution might be placed anywhere while it lasted c. 420–450. Garnerius suggests 443. Eulalius and Eusebius are unknown.
143 cf. Epp. XLV. XCII. CXI. CXIX. CXXI. CXXXVIII.
144 This edict of Theodosius is dated by Tillemont March 30, 449. Theodoret received the order for his relegation to Cyrus while he was at Antioch, and at once submitted.
145 The allusion appears to be to the edict of Feb. 448, ordering the deposition of Theodoret’s friend Irenaeus bishop of Tyre, on the ground of his being a digamus and a heretic. Irenaeus was degraded from the priesthood and forbidden to appear in Tyre. cf. Epp. III. XII. XVI. XXXV.
146 (Ac 5,29 Ac 5,
147 Romans 14,10).
148 Vide Letter LVII.
149 This brings us to about the year 423, when Theodoret was consecrated bishop at the approximate age of 30, after passing seven years in the monastery of Nicerte, three miles from Apamea, and one hundred and twenty from Cyrus. Cf. Ep. CXIX.
150 Cf. Letter LVIII. Nomus was an influential officer of Theodosius II., being “Magister Officiorum” in 443, consul in 445 and patrician in 449. A friend of Dioscorus, he opposed Theodoret and was instrumental in procuring the decree which confined the bishop to his diocese in 449.
151 (Ac xxv, 16. Observe the variations in the citation).
152 Cf. note on page 276.
668 153 II. Tim. 3,12.
154 Eusebius was present at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 Mansi 6,565 c. See also Letter CIX. A Latin translation of this letter is in Baronius ann. 443).
155 The works mentioned are (a) those on the Octateuch, the Books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles, the Psalms, Can-ticles, and the Prophets; (b) on the xiv Epp. of St. Paul, including the Hebrews; the Dialogues, and the Hoereticarum Fabularum Compendium: (g) XII Books on the mysteries of the Faith; (e) the “de Providentia;” (z) on the Questions of the Magi, and (h) the Religious History. Of these (g) and (z) are lost.
156 (Ex 23,1, lxx. and marg).
157 Domnus succeeded his Uncle Jn at Antioch in 441.
158 I1Co 12,11.
159 The first formal insertion of the addition filloque is said to be in a Creed put forth at a council of Toledo about a.d. 400. At the third council of Toledo a.d. 589, the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed was promulgated with the addition — “ex Ppatre et Filio procedentem.”
160 (He 1,3 He 1,
161 (Rm 9,5 Rm 9,
162 (Rm 1,3, Rm 1,4 Rm 1,
163 cf. note on page 213.
669 164 (Ep 4,5 Ep 4,
165 (1Co 8,6 1Co 8,
166 (He 13,8 He 13,
167 Ephes. 4,10.
168 (Jn 1,14 Jn 1,
169 (Jn 1,15).
170 (Jn 20,28 Jn 20,
171 This encyclical is probably of the same date as the preceding.
172 (1Co 8,6 1Co 8,
173 Ephes. 4,5.
174 (Jn 3,13 Jn 3,
670 175 (Jn 6,62).
176 There appears to be nothing in this letter or in Letter CII. also addressed to bishop Basil to identify the recipient. Basil bishop of Seleucia in Isauria was at the Latrocinium and at Chalcedon. Basil, bishop of Trajanopolis was also present at the same councils.Garnerius is in favour of the former, and notes the date as 448.
177 (1Co 13,13 1Co 13,
178 Vide note on p. 44.
179 (Ps 120,6 and Ps 120,7 Ps 120, Ixx.
180 This important letter may be placed between the sentence of deposition issued by Dioscorus in Feb. 448 and the imperial edict of March 449; probably before November 448, when Eutyches was arraigned before the Synod of Constantinople presided over by Flavian.
181 cf. Letter LX, written probably not long after the consecration of Dioscorus in 444).
182 i.e. in Constantinople in 381. The second Canon of the Council is referred to, — confining each bishop to his own “diocese,” i.e. a tract comprising more than one province. So the bishop of Alexandria was restricted to Egypt.
183 The immediate cause of this enactment by the Constantinopolitan Fathers was the interference of Peter of Alexandria in the appointment to the see of Constantinople, when the orthodox party nominated Gregory of Nazianzus. cf. p. 136.
184 The third Canon of Constantinople had enacted that henceforth the see of the new capital should rank next after Rome. In the text the precedence of Antioch before Alexandria is based on association with St. Peter. “The so-called Cathedra Petri, which is kept in a repository of the wall of the apse of the Vatican Basilica,” and was “exhibited in 1866” “is probably a throne made for or presented to Charles the Bold in 875.” Dict. Christ. Ant. 2,1960. For the connexion of St. Peter with Antioch see Routh Rell. Sac. 1,179.
185 Domnus of Apamea is to be distinguished from Domnus II, bishop of Antioch the recipient of Letters XXXI, CX, CXII and CLXXX. He was present at Chalcedon in 451. This letter may be placed in 448–9.
671 186 Romans 12,15. Observe the inversion.
187 The action of the Osrhoene clergy here referred to is their accusation of Theodoret’s friend Ibas of Edessa. The “sentence” was that of excommunication delivered by Ibas. The leaders of the cabal against him were instigated by Uranius, bishop of Himeria, one of Ibas’s suffragans. cf. note on p. 291).
188 (Mt 5,11, Mt 5,12 Mt 5,
189 Garnerius dates Letters LXXXVIII-CIX in 447. They belong rather to 448–449.
190 Florentius, Praefect of the Imperial Guard, and already six times Praefect of the East, was present as a lay commissioner at the trial of Eutyches in 449 and at Chalcedon in 451.
191 i.e., magister officiorum, one of the great state officers under the Constantinian constitution. He had control over posts, police, arsenals, and the imperial correspondence and, from his authority in the palace, was a kind of “comptroller,” or “master of the household.” cf. Rufinus, p. 123).
192 (He 4,13 He 4,
193 vide p. 267.
194 This appears to be merely a figurative description of the inconsistency of the charges, for there was no question of Theodoret’s being a “digamos.”
195 I1Co 5,10.
196 Seven Letters are addressed to Anatolius; viz., XLV, LXXIX, XCII, CXI, CXIX, CXXI, and CXXXVIII.
672 197 (He 12,2 He 12,
198 Protogenes was Praefect of the East and Consul in 449 and was present at the Council of Chalcedon).
199 Antiochus was Consul in 431.
200 cf. Letters LVIII and LXXXI. Nomus the consul and Nomus the patrician are distinguished in Schulze’s Index to the Letters, but there seems no reason to doubt their identity. Nomus the powerful minister of Theodosius II. was consul in 445 and patrician in 449, to which year this third letter may be referred.
201 (Mt 18,15 Mt 18,
202 Ephes. 4,26.
203 Il. 9,256. cf. pp. 104 and 255.
204 (Mt 5,23, Mt 5,24 Mt 5,
205 Sporacius or Asporacius was present at Chalcedon in 451, as comes domesticorum, or one of the two commanders of the body guard. It was at his request that Theodoret wrote his Hoereticarum fabularum compendium which he dedicates “To the most magnificent and glorious lord Sporacius my Christ-loving son.” To Sporacius was also addressed the short treatise “adversus Nestorium” of which some editors have doubted the genuineness. The present letter may be dated in 449).
206 Cf. Letter XXXIV.
207 II. Tim. 1,16 and II. Tim. 1,18.
673 208 (Mt 8,26 Mt 8,
209 “Fuit vero antigrafeu" apud Graecos quem Galli vocant Contrôleur général des finances.” Garnerius.
210 (Is 59,5 Is 59,
211 cf. Letter XIV).
212 Cf. Letter LXXXV. There seems nothing to indicate whether this Basil is Basil of Seleucia or Basil of Trajanopolis, both of whom were present at the Latrocinium and took part against Theodoret. Garnerius refers it to the former, a time-server of the court.
213 (Mt 18,10 and Mt 18,6 Mt 18,
214 Leviticus 19,15.
215 (Jn 7,24 Jn 7,
216 (Ex 23,2 Ex 23,
217 (Is 33,15 Is 33, the inversion.
218 Cf. Letter LXXIII. Apollonius was “comes sacrarum largitionum” in 436.
674 219 Cf. Letters XI. and LXXXXVI. This letter may probably be placed between the sentence of internement and the assembling of the Latrocinium.
220 Compare Letter LXXXVI.
221 I1Co 1,12.
222 (Rm 9,1).
223 (He 2,16 He 2, He 2,17 He 2,
224 (Ga 3,16 Ga 3,
225 i.e. Manes.
226 emyucon.
227 yuch and nou".
228 cf. pp. 132 and 140.
229 Disciple of Marcellus. cf. Soc. ii. 30. Theodoret, in his interpretation of the Ep. to the Hebrews, links him with Sabellius. (Ed. Migne. 3,547).
230 cf. p. 139.
675 231 Patriarch of Antioch 260–270. Bp. Wordsworth calls him “the Socinus of the 3rd c.” Samosata (Samsat) was capital of the Commagene in Syria.
232 In an ecclesiastical sense the title (economus was used of
(i) the treasurer of a particular church: e.g. Cyriacus of Constantinople (Chron Pasch. p. 378).
(ii) a diocesan official. The Council of Chalcedon ordered that every diocese should have its oeconomus.
(iii) the custos monasterii, who had charge of the secular affairs of the monastery, as the diocesan oeconomus of those of the diocese.
233 (Ga 6,7).
234 Psalm 37,5. Psalm 37,6.
235 On the care of orphans in the early church vide Ig. Ep. Smyrn. VI. and Bp. Lightfoot’s note. At Constantinople the Orphanotrophus was a priest of high rank.
236 Cf. Letter LXXXII.
237 (Jn 15,33 Jn 15,
238 (Jn 15,20 Jn 15,
239 (Mt 25
676 240 (Jn 16,2 Jn 16,
241 Math. 7,14.
242 Math. 10,23.
243 II. Tim. 3,12. II. Tim. 3,13.
244 Garnerius supposes this to refer to Dial. II.
245 (1Co 13,9 1Co 13,
246 (1Co 8,2).
247 The route of the bishops would be by land, in consequence of the dangers of the sea voyage in winter time. From Ancyra (Angora) they would follow the course of the Sangarius into Bithynia, and would cross thence via Chalcedon to Constantinople.
248 This letter is placed by Garnerius in the end of 447 on account of its allusion to Proclus, who died in October 447, and to the deposition of Iren‘us of Tyre, for which the formal edict was issued in Feb. 448, but which was perhaps rumoured earlier. But by some the death of Proclus is placed a year earlier.
249 Hist. of Susannah 22.
250 Of the blessed Principius nothing is known. cf. Tillemont, XV. 267.
677 251 “The phraseology of this letter has given rise to much misapprehension. The use of the first person has led some to suppose that Theodoret, who belonged to another province, was the consecrator of Irenaeus, or that he took part in his consecration, or even with the Abbé Martin (le Pseudo-Synode d’Éphèse, pp. 84, 85) that it is erroneously ascribed to Theodoret, and was really written by Domnus. It is clear from the tenor of the epistle that it was written by Theodoret, and that the first person is employed by him as writing in Domnus’ name. (Tillemont 15,pp. 871, 872).” Dict. Christ. Biog. 3,281 n.
It is in consonance with this theory that Alexander of Antioch is described as bishop of this apostolic see, a phrase natural for Domnus to use, but not for Theodoret.
252 It is uncertain who this Diogenes was; he cannot have been Diogenes of Cyzicus, for he was alive and present at Chalcedon in 451.
253 No more is known of Domninus or Praylius. cf. p. 157. “It is clear from the Philosophumena of Hippolytus (ix, 12). that by the beginning of the third century the rule of monogamy for the clergy was well established, since he complains that in the days of Callistus ‘digamist and trigamist bishops, priests, and deacons began to be admitted.0’” Dict. Christ. Ant. 1,552.
254 The Pontic Diocese is one of the twelve civil divisions of the Constantinian empire.
255 This letter is in reply to that written by Anatolius on the receipt of Letter XCII. Garnerius, who places the decree of relegation earlier than Tillemont, dates it at about the end of April 448).
256 The leaders of the attack on Ibas, (bishop of Edessa and metropolitan, in 436) were four presbyters, Samuel, Cyrus, Eulogius, and Maras. The cabal chose the moment for action when Domnus visited Hierapolis for the enthrontzation of Stephen, and in 445 Ibas was summoned by Domnus to Antioch, but did not come. In 448 the eighteen charges — some frivolous, some of gross heresy — were formally heard, and Domnus decided in favor of Ibas. cf. p. 283, note.
257 i.e. recommended Ibas not to excommunicate his accusers.
258 (Col 1,5 Col 1,
259 Garnerius points out that the indications of the date of this letter are clear. It mentions the imperial summons to the Latrocinium, and contains Theodoret’s advice to Domnus as to what companions he should take with him. It must therefore be placed between the arrival of the summons at Antioch and the departure of Domnus for Ephesus. The summons is dated the 30th of March, and appointed the 1st of August for themeeting. Antioch is a clear thirty days’ journey from Ephesusand Domnus had not yet chosen his companions. We may therefore date the letter in the May of 449.
260 Presumably Irenaeus of Tyre.
678 261 i.e., in 361. For Theodoret’s account of the circumstances vide pp. 92, 93).
262 Cyril wrote his IIIrd letter to Nestorius probably on Nov. 3, 430. “To the end of the letter were appended twelve ‘articles0’ or ‘chapters,0’ couched in the form of anathematisms against the various points of the Nestorian theory.” “These propositions were not well calculated to reclaim Nestorius; nor were they indeed so worded throughout as to approve themselves to all who essentially agreed with Cyril as to the personal Deity of Christ. On the contrary the abruptness of their tone, and a certain one-sidedness …made some of them open, prima facie, to serious criticism from persons who, without being Nestorians, felt that in the attack on Nestorianism the truth of Christ’s real and permanent manhood might be in danger of losing its due prominence.” Canon Bright, Dict. Christ. Biog. i. 766.
263 Dioscorus succeeded Cyril at Midsummer, 444.
264 i.e. Jn of Antioch. He reached Ephesus June 27, 431.
265 Eutherius of Tyana (Kiliss Hissar in Karamania) was a strong Nestorian, and signed the appeal of Nestorius after his deposition in 431. On July 17th Jn and his adherents were deposed. Firmus of the Cappadocian C‘sarea (still “Kasaria”) himself a graceful letter writer, was an anti-Nestorian. Theodotus of Ancyra also sided with Cyril.
266 i.e. Cyril and Memnon. “No sooner had Jn reached Ephesus, than before the had washed and dressed after his journey, in the inn itself, late at night, in secret session, by the connivance of the Count Candidianus, a sentence was passed on Cyril and Memnon — on Cyril on the accusation of Theodoret.” Cf. Garnerius Hist. Theod., and Cyril. Ep. ad Caelest. Labbe 3,663.
267 (Jn of Antioch sent Paul of Emesa to confer with Cyril on terms of peace in 432).
268 Paul and Barnabas went up to Jerusalem, not to Peter, but “unto the Apostles and elders.” Ac 15,2. Peter took a leading part in the discussion, but the "sentence" was pronounced not by Peter, but by James, and the decree was that of “the Apostles and elders with the whole Church.” The slight “wresting” of the scriptures of which Theodoret is guilty is due rather to a desire to compliment an important personage than in anticipation of later controversies.
269 Rome was the only apostolic see in the West.
270 (Rm 1,8 Rm 1,
271 The traditional places of sepulture are, of half of each of the holy bodies, the shrine of SS. Peter and Paul in the crypt of St. Peter’s; of the remaining moiety of St. Peter the Lateran; of St. Paul, St. Paolo fuori le Mura.
679 272 Kolofwn. cf. note on page 262.
273 St. Paul is treated as in a sense bishop of Rome. The idea may have some bearing on the hypothesis sometimes adopted, to avoid the difficulties in the early Roman succession, that there was a Gentile line derived from St. Paul, who ordained Linus, and after him Cletus; and that for the Jewish brethren St. Peter ordained Clement.
274 His dogmatic epistles and his sermons. He is not known to have written any large treatise.
275 Dioscorus presided, and next him sat Julius of Puteoli, who in company with the presbyter Renatus, and the deacon Hilarius (successor to Leo in the papacy) had carried to Flavian the famous “tome” of Leo in June 449. Leo (Epp. XXXII. and XXXIV). describes his legates as sent “delatere meo.” According to one version of the story Renatus died at Delos on the way out. Labbe IV: 1079).
276 Patriarch at Antioch 420–429.
277 No word exactly renders the title of these ministers, discharging functions of an episcopal kind, though without high responsibility. They are first mentioned in the Councils of Ancyra and of Neo-Caesarea and fifteen of them subscribed the decrees of Nicaea.
278 Exarch, in .its most ordinary eccleslastical sense nearly equivalent to patriarch, came also to be used of officers charged with the visitation of monasteries.
279 If born in 386 (Garnerius), Theodoret would now be 63. Tillemont says 393).
280 The tone of this letter, it need hardly be said, is quite inconsistent with the later idea of an “appeal to Rome.” It is “an appeal,” but the appeal of a wronged man for the sup port, succour, and advice, of a brother bishop of the highest position and character. It does not on the face of it suggest that Leo has any authority to review or alter the sentence of the council. Tillemont (Mém. Ecc. 15,294) observes that though addressed to Leo in person the appeal is really made to the bishops of the West in council. Leo remonstrated, but Theodosius and his court maintained that the decrees of the Latrocinium must stand.
281 In Migne’s edition here follows the reply of Leo to Theodoret, which appears as Letter CXX. in the works of Leo.
282 Written after the deposition at Ephesus, and when Theodoret is either on the point of departing, or has departed, from Cyrus to the Apamean monastery. The simultaneous exercise of the clerical and medical professions points perhaps to the continuance of the class of “Silverless martyrs,” i.e. physicians who took no fee but healed on condition that their patients should turn to Christ. The legendary Saints of the un-feed faculty are Cosmo and Damian, the brothers whose church occupies the site of the Temple of Remus, or of the Penates, in the Roman Forum.
680 283 This letter will be of the same date as CXIII. Theodoret was aware that Leo was to be represented at the Latrocinium by Renatus as well as by Julius of Puteoli and the archdeacon Hilarius, but had not heard that he had never reached Ephesus. We are told on the authority of Felix, the author of the “Breviarium Hoeresis Eutychianoe” that Renatus died at Delos on the way out, This death is however discredited by Quesnel and some other authorities.
284 Numbers 25,7.
285 Hilarius did leave Ephesus before the second session of the council (Cf. Leo Ep. XLVI) and before the deposition of Theodoret. The “massacre” may refer to the brutal treatment of Flavian by the adherents and bullies of Dioscorus.
286 i.e. Leo.
287 This is more or less true up to the time of Leo the great, but Leo the great was the first pope who was an eminent theologian. Liberius is a doubtful case. Cf. page 76.
288 The Monothelite Controversy dates from two centuries after Theodoret, when Heraclius was trying to bring about religious union in his empire. Pope Honorius asserted two energies, but one will. Monothelitism was definitely condemned at Constantinople in 681, and Honorius anathematized).
289 There were at this time two well known personages of the name of Florentius to whom this letter may possibly have been addressed. Florentius the patrician, recipient of Letter LXXXIX., and Florentius bishop of Sardis. Against the former hypothesis are the terms of the letter; against the latter the character and sympathies of the metropolitan of Lydia, it as Garuerius thinks, he was an Eutychian. Canon Venables (Dict. Christ Bios. II. 540) supposes a Florentius bishop of a nameless western see. Garnerius and others think the letter was probably really addressed to the clergy or bishops assembled in synod at Rome.
290 Romans 9,25.
291 Vide page 72.
292 Cf. note on page 293. Garnerius however is doubtful whether the archdeacon is Hilarius or another. The evidence seems in favour of the identity.
293 This letter is of the same date as the rest of the present series. Theodoret has heard of his deposition and is expecting the sentence of banishment.
681 294 Cf. Psalm 19,4).
295 (Gn 18,20 Gn 18, Gn 18,21 Gn 18,
296 i.e. Nicerte.
297 Garnerius reads Lupicinus and identifies him with the recipient of Letter XC. Letter CXX is of the same date as the preceding.
298 This letter may be dated shortly after Letter CXIX. Garnerius points out that it contains it short summary of the orthodox tradition, but makes no mention of the council of Ephesus in 431).
299 The two following letters are written from the monaster at Nicerte where Theodoret found a retreat after his banishment from Cyrus. Garnerius would place the former late in 449, and the latter early in 450.
300 Uranius, bishop of Emesa in Ph‘nicia, was present at the two trials of Ibas, at Tyre in February and at Berytus in September 448. At the Latrocinium he was accused of immorality and of episcopal usurpation. It was during his episcopate that the head of the Baptist was supposed to be found at Emesa. Cf. notes on pp. 96 and 242.
301 Cf. note on p. 72. Here oikonomia is used for discreet silence like the German “Zurückhaltung,” and the French “ménagement.” Cf. the Socratic erwneia and the Latin dissimulatio.
302 II. Tim. 4,2.
303 (Ac 18,9 Ac 18,
304 (Is 58,1 Is 58,
682 305 Exodus 19,21.
306 Ezekiel 3,17. Ezekiel 3,19. inexact quotation.
307 Ephes. 6,14.
308 (He 10,38 He 10, Ha 2,4 Ha 2, Note inverted quotation of Habakkuk.
309 (He 10,37 He 10,
310 (Rm 2,6 Rm 2,
311 (1Co 7,31 1Co 7,
312 Jonah 2,8.
313 I1Co 12,9).
314 Cf. Letter LXVII. This letter may be dated during Theodoret’s banishment to Nicerte in 449, and is evidently in reply to a letter of condolence from the advocate.
315 (1Co 12,26 1Co 12,
683 316 (Ph 2,6 and Ph 2,7).
317 (1Co 15,20 1Co 15, 1Co 15,21 1Co 15, Cor. 1Co 15,22 1Co 15,
318 cf. Lc 22,31.
319 Sabinianus succeeded Athanasius bishop of Perrha on the deposition of the latter at Antioch in 445. He was deposed at the Latrocinium and Athanasius restored. Both bishops signed at Chalcedon as bishops of Perrha (Labbe iv, 602, 590. Dict: Christ: Biog: iv, 574. The letter may be dated 450. Theodoret chides Sabinianus for appealing to the dominant wrong doers against his expulsion.
320 Johius was an orthodox archimandrite of Constantinople, and subscribed the deposition of Eutyches by the hand of his deacon Andreas at Constantinople in 448. (Labbe iv, 232) In 450 Leo addresses him with other archimandrites (Ep. LXXI page 1012). This letter seems to have been written about the time of the Latrocinium.
321 (Gn 13,15 Gn 13,
322 (Ex 17,13 Ex 17,
323 I. Sam. 7,12.
324 Garnerius would date this letter at the time of the council of Chalcedon).
325 Garnerius supposes that this Antoninus is the same as the Antoninus mentioned as living in Theodoret’s Religious History and thinks that the Solitary may have become an Archimandrite after 445 when the Religious History was written, but the mss. vary as to the superscription of the letter, which may be addressed to Magnus, Antonius and others.
326 Joshua 1,5.
684 327 Matthew 28,20.
328 Psalm 118,6.
329 Timotheus was Bishop of Doliche, a town of the Euphratensis. He was present at Antioch when Athanasius of Perrha was deposed, and also at Chalcedon. The letter may be dated from Nicerte in 450.
330 (Lc 2,11).
331 (Lc 1,31 Lc 1,
332 (Mt 1,21 Mt 1, the confusion of quotation.
333 (Ph 2,6 Ph 2,
334 (Jn 1,1 Jn 1,
335 The word tetraktu" commonly expresses the sum of the first four numbers in the Pythagorean system, i.e. 10, the root of creation; (1+2+3+4=10). Cf. the Pythagorean oath “Nai ma ton ametera yuca paradonta tetraktun.” Its use for tetradeion or tetradion (Ac 12,4) may indicate acceptance of the theory of the mystic and necessary number of the gospels of which early and remarkable expression is found in Irenaeus (cont. Haer. 3,11)).
336 (Mt 28,6 Mt 28,
337 (Ac 8,2 Ac 8,
685 338 There were many martyrs of the name of Julianus. Theodoret might have visited a shrine of Julianus martyred at Emesa in the reign of Numerian. A Romanus was one of the seven martyrs at Samosata in the persecution of Diocletian. Among martyred Timothei was one who suffered at Gaza in 304.
339 (Jn 6,51 Jn 6,
340 (Lc 22,19 Lc 22,
341 (1Co 11,24 1Co 11,
342 The name is omitted.
343 Garnerius identifies the “short instruction” with the composition mentioned in letter CIX. and sent to Eusebius of Ancyra; and the bishop whose name is omitted with the same Eusebius. But in his note on CIX, he thinks this composition is a part of Dial. II. It would seem from this letter that the composition in question was distinct from the Dialogues.
344 Sent presumably at the same time as the preceding. Nothing is recorded of Longinus. It will be remembered that the name, recorded also in the Ac of Linus as that of an officer commanding the executioners of St. Paul, is assigned by tradition to the soldier who wounded the Saviour’s side.
345 (Mt 25,36 Mt 25,
346 (Mt 25,40 Mt 25,
347 (Mt 18,6 Mt 18,
348 (Mt 25,40 Mt 25,
686 349 (Ep 4,14, and Ep 6,11 Ep 6, in the case of the former citation Theodoret seems to quoting from memory, and coupling the two passages in which the word meqodeia occurs. “Wiles” fits in better with the evident allusion to Ep 6,11, than the periphrasis by which A. V. renders 4,14, and for which the revisers substitute “the wiles of error.” “meqodeia” may exactly described as “h apostolikh fwnh,” for it occurs nowhere but in these two passages.
350 To console him under the unjust sentence of the Latrocinium).
351 It will be remembered that Flavianus had actually died from the brutal treatment he had received at the hands—and the feet—of Dioscorus with his partisans and bullies, and “migravit ad Dominum dolore plagarum,” Aug. 11, 449, three days after he was carried from St. Mary’s at Ephesus to his dungeon. (Liberatus Brev. 19,Dict. Christ. Biog. 1,858).
352 (Jn of Germanicia (vide p. 86 n). was on the Nestorian side at Ephesus in 431, and so naturally associated with Theodoret. At Chalcedon he was compelled to pronounce a special anathema against Nestorius. (Mansi 7,193, Dict. Christ. Biog. iii. 374). The letter is written after the deposition and before the banishment to Nicerte. Cf. Ep. 147.
353 (Ps 9,6, 7, lxx.
354 (Ps 18,16, 17.
355 This letter marks the change in the condition of affairs which followed on the death of Theodosius on July 29, 450, and the accession of Pulcheria and Marcian. Eutyches was exiled, the eunuch Chrysaphius banished and executed, and Theodoret recalled. It may be placed in the autumn of 450 or early in 451. The earlier letter (xxxii) to Theoctistus claims on behalf of Celestinianus a kindness which Theodoret in his then hour of need had failed to receive.
356 (Mt 22,36–40).
357 cf. Mt 5,44. Mt 5,46 instead of tina misqon eceteÉ the text has ti pleon poieite.
358 The use of the somewhat rare and poetical word Bora suggests a possible allusion to several well known passages in the dramatists; e.g. Aesch. Pr. 583, Soph. Ant. 30 and Eur. Phoen. 1603.
359 Psalm lxxv. 8 and 9.
Fathers' Historical writings 662