whole Christian world with his quarrels and his ana- Faucibus ingentem fumum (mirabile dictu) Virgil. Æn. viii. 252. Anathematismi ejus, si verum volumus, et obscuri sunt, et doctrine Nestori peregrini. Eorum et nonnulli, primá quidem specie, pietatem non redolent. S. Basnage, Ann. iii. 337. Theodoret was accused of being a Nestorian; a dreadful accusation in those days, when it was a far greater crime to have thought Nestorius innocent, than to have worshipped Judas Iscariot, or an Egyptian monkey. But the Nestorian controversy was so perplexed on both sides, and involved in so many and so great difficulties, that the contenders should have agreed in tolerating each other. Theodoret was contemporary with Socrates and Sozomen, and seems to have written after them both, for his history often supplies the deficiencies in theirs. Porro de historia Theodoriti optime omnino judicavit Photius in Bibliotheca. Ejus stylum ait præstantiorem esse Socratis et Sozomeni stylo. Perspicuum enim esse et grandem, nec tamen redundantem, sed Historia rerum Ecclesiasticarum aptissime convenientem: nisi quod translationibus interdum utitur audacius, et, ut ita dicam, putide. -Illud præterea in historia Theodoriti reprehendendum mihi videtur, quod in toto opere nullam notam temporum adhibuit. Valesius. Theodoret's character may be found in an epistle which he wrote to a man of quality, and a consul, in which he thought it necessary for his justification to give some account of himself. My parents, says he, before I was conceived, made a vow to God that they would consecrate me to his service, and they educated me according to their promise. After having passed my first days in a monastery, I was ordained bishop against my inclination. For twenty-five years I have so lived in that station, as never to be at variance, never to prosecute any one at law, or to be prosecuted. The same I can say of all the pious clergy who are under my inspection, none of whom was ever seen in any court of justice. Neither I nor my domestics ever received the smallest present from any person, not even a loaf or an egg. My patrimony I gave away long ago to the poor, and I have made no new acquisitions. I have neither house, nor land, nor money, nor a sepulchre where my friends may lay my body when I die. I am possessor of nothing, save the poor raiment which I wear. Out of the Ecclesiastical revenues I have built Portico's, and two very large bridges, and put the public baths in good condition. I found the city without water, and the inhabitants obliged to go to the river to fetch it. I built them an aqueduct, which supplies them plentifully. I found eight villages infected with the heresy of the Marcionites, and one full of Eunomians, and another of Arians. I have converted them all, yet not without incurring much danger, having been often assaulted, wounded, stoned, and reduced to death's door. Epist. 81. et Epist. 113. ad Leon. Thus Theodoret was * extremely poor, and there Augustin was as poor as Theodoret, and so was Paulinus, bishop of Nola, who had parted with great possessions. * fore not qualified to contend with Cyril, who was rich, and drew over the emperor to his side, by bribing an eunuch who governed his Royal Master. During the Nestorian quarrel, when the emperor sent a letter to Theodoret, to let him know that, if he would not submit, he should be deposed and removed, he laughed at the threatening, knowing that he had nothing to lose, except his garment, and that some friend would give him another, and not let him go naked; but the Christians in his Diocese were all greatly alarmed with the fear of being deprived of him, and earnestly importuned him to come to some accommodation for their sakes. His Diocese was large, and contained eight hundred parishes. · Theodoret, speaking of the violent and cruel persecution raised against Chrysostom and his friends, says, Porro quot Episcopi ejus caussa pulsi sint Ecclesiis, et in extremos imperi Romani fines deportati, quot item Monachi eandem calamitatem perpessi sint, superfluum arbitror commemorare, et prolixam historiam texere: præsertim cum ea quæ tristia sunt, contrahenda esse censeam, et Auctorum qui ejusdem nobiscum sunt fidei, errata obtegenda, v. 34. But if Christians, giving a loose to pride, insolence, and revenge, treat their brethren and their betters with the utmost inhumanity, and do what an honest Pagan would blush to do, is an historian to spare them, and to draw a veil over their iniquities, because they were orthodox? As I cannot commend Theodoret for this remark, so I think him very discreet for saying nothing in his History concerning Cyril, except these few words: Erat eo tempore Episcopus Alexandrice Cyrillus, Theo Theodosius Junior. phili Ph phili fratris filius, qui patruo in Episcopatu successerat. v. 35. As he had been at variance with Cyril, he did well to pass him by without praise or censure, especially if we consider how many things he might justly have said against him. A very ample account of Theodoret may be found in Tillemont H. E. xv. 207. Du Pin B. E. iv. Fleury H. E. and Cousin, who translated Theodoret's History into French; and they are all friends and favourers of this prelate. Father Garnier published an additional volume to the works of Theodoret, and dissertations upon his life and writings, with a view to insult him, to run him down as an heretic, and to censure him upon all occasions. If Theodoret had been a Damasus, a Cyril, a Thomas Becket, a Kalendar Saint, Garnier would have paid him more respect. The fifth general council, at Constantinople A. D. 553, thought fit to condemn the impious writings of Theodoret relating to Cyril and the Nestorian quarrels. Evagrius was a lawyer, and a pleader, as it seems, at Antioch. He wrote an history from A. D. 431. to A. D. 594. Cæterum laudanda est in primis Evagrii diligentia, qui cum historiam Ecclesiasticam scribere agressus esset, quæcunque ad id argumentum spectabant, ex optimis scriptoribus collegit.-Stylus quoque ejus non improbandus est: habet enim elegantiam et venustatem, ut testatur etiam Photius. Sed quod præcipue in Evagrio laudundum est, ex Græcis Ecclesiastice historia scriptoribus, solus hic rectae fidei doctrinam integram atque illibatam servavit, ut post Photium observavit Baronius. Illud ta men in eo reprehensionem meretur, quod non tantam diligentiam adhibuit in conquirendis antiquitatis Ecclesiasticæ monumentis, quantam in legendis profanis scriptoribus.-Stylus præterea plerisque in locis redundat ac luxuriat, ut recte judicavit Photius. Valesius. A fabulosis narrationibus non nimis alienum esse Evagrium scribit Casaubonus. Fabricius, B. Gr. Que de imaginibus, reliquiis, miraculis, Evagrius multa habet, ipsius Historiam in commendatione non ponunt. S. Basnage Ann. iii. 921. This is saying too little; for in points of theological controversy, Evagrius was an injudicious prejudiced zealot, and in the article of miracles a most ridiculous and contemptible bigot. But then, as Photius, Baronius, and Valesius observe, he was always on the right side of the question, which is more than can be said of any other Greek writer of Ecclesiastical History, and which atones even for want of common sense, and sets him above Eusebius and Socrates; for Socrates, says Tillemont, was a lawyer, and very ignorant of the spirit and discip line of the church. Hence it comes to pass that he commends equally either Catholics or Heretics, when they did things which seemed to him to be commendable. H. E. x. p. 232, 233. Theodorus Byzantius, Lector majoris Ecclesice Constantinopolitana, duplex opus Historia Ecclesiasticæ conscripsit. Primum opus nihil aliud erat quam Historia Tripartita, duobus libris comprehensa, quam ex Socrate, Sozomeno, ac Theodorito unum in corpus collegerat: Secundum opus duobus pariter libris comprehensum fuit, quibus res in Ecclesia gestas ab iis temporibus in quibus desierat Socrates, usque ad principatum Justini senioris complexus est.-Utinam vero Historiam Ecclesiasticam Theodori |