hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
43 BC 170 170 Browse Search
44 BC 146 146 Browse Search
49 BC 140 140 Browse Search
45 BC 124 124 Browse Search
54 BC 121 121 Browse Search
46 BC 119 119 Browse Search
63 BC 109 109 Browse Search
48 BC 106 106 Browse Search
69 AD 95 95 Browse Search
59 BC 90 90 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith). Search the whole document.

Found 16 total hits in 15 results.

1 2
rs, until the death of Cyril, it must suffice to say that Theodoret acquiesced in the peace effected by the intercession of the emperor between the parties of Cyril and of John, in so far as its doctrinal basis was concerned; and he even submitted, and urged the friends of Nestorius to submit, to the deposition of Nestorius. But he always protested against that deposition; and, when it became evident that no limits were assigned to the severity with which the Nestorians were to be treated (A. D. 435), he threw aside all pretence of peace, and stood forth as the decided opponent of Cyril, who, on his part, displayed the bitterest enmity against Theodoret. It is alleged that, when Cyril died (A. D. 444), Theodoret so far forgot himself as to express his exultation at the event. Such conduct might be excused on the plea, that his joy was for the deliverance of the Church from a source of bitterness ; but the truth is, that the charge rests on passages in two works which it is probable th
own to us consigned to the list of heretics, by men, such as Cyril and Dioscorus, to whose spirit, it is no small praise to Theodoret to say, his conduct displays the most marked contrast. Theodoret was born at Antioch towards the end of the fourth century of our era. The exact year of his birth is uncertain : from a minute examination of the fragments of evidence, which are supplied chiefly by his own works, Garnier has fixed it at A. D. 386; and Tillemont, with greater probability, at A. D. 393. (See their works, quoted at the end of this article.) Theodoret himself, who was naturally infected with the credulity, which was universal in his age,--for even the sceptics of the time were grossly credulous in some matters,--has related various marvels which attended his birth, as well as subsequent passages of his life. His parents were persons of good condition in life, and of distinguished piety; and his mother, especially, had the most profound respect for the hermits or ascetics,
ited in the same urn with those of his stedfast supporter, the monk Jacobus Thaumaturgus, who died shortly after him. Since his death his memory has met with the same varied fortune that he himself suffered during life. The emperor Justin honoured his statue with a solemn installation in his episcopal throne; but the various Monophysite sects continued their opposition to his writings, and twice procured the condemnation of them by ecclesiastical synods during the reign of Anastasius, in A. D. 499, and 512. Marius Mercator, the bitter opponent of everything connected with Nestorianism, represents Theodoret as one of the worst of heretics; and lie is followed by Garnier, the completer of Sirmond's edition of Theodoret, the value of whose very learned and elaborate treatise on the life of Theodoret is seriously diminished by the recklessness with which he not only adopts the calumnies of Mercator, but even falsifies facts in order to support them. Cave has been to some degree misled b
Ecclesiastical History His Ecclesiastical History, in five books (*(Ekklhsiastikh=s i(stori/as lo/goi pe/nte), is a very valuable work, on account of its learning and general impartiality, though it is occasionally one-sided, and often runs into a theological treatise. It was intended, as he himself tells us in the preface, as a continuation of the History of Eusebius. It begins with the history of Arianism, under Constantine the Great, and ends with the death of Theodore of Mopsuestia in A. D. 429, although it contains an allusion to an isolated fact which occurred as late as A. D. 444. 2. *Filo/qeos *(Istori/a (Religiosa Historia,) The work entitled *Filo/qeos *(Istori/a, or Religiosa Historia, contains the lives of thirty celebrated hermits, and displays that weak side of the character of Theodoret, which has already been mentioned as the necessary result of the earliest impressions he received. It is rather the work of a credulous ascetic than of a learned theologian. III. W
he champion of religious freedom, and the opponent of those authoritative statements of doctrine, which fetter private opinion without settling any controversy, or ensuring any permanent peace. To enter into the details of this subject would be inconsistent with the nature of this work, as well as impossible within the limits of the present article. We must be content to give a brief sketch of the external history of Theodoret's share in the dispute. At an early stage of the controversy (A. D. 430), he wrote a letter to the monks of Syria and the neighbouring countries, in reply to the twelve capitula of Cyril, the patriarch of Alexandria, in whose representations he detects, of course by inference only, Apollinarianism, Arianism, and other errors at the opposite extreme to those of Nestorius, especially the confusion of the two natures in the person of Christ, by so representing the hypostatical union as to make them only one. At the council of Ephesus (A. D. 431) he arrived earlie
f the controversy (A. D. 430), he wrote a letter to the monks of Syria and the neighbouring countries, in reply to the twelve capitula of Cyril, the patriarch of Alexandria, in whose representations he detects, of course by inference only, Apollinarianism, Arianism, and other errors at the opposite extreme to those of Nestorius, especially the confusion of the two natures in the person of Christ, by so representing the hypostatical union as to make them only one. At the council of Ephesus (A. D. 431) he arrived earlier than the great body of the Eastern bishops, for whose presence he, with others, in vain urged the assembly to wait before condemning Nestorius; and, upon their arrival, he took part with them in the separate synod which condemned the proceedings of the council, and decreed the deposition of Cyril. The council of Ephesus having thus only widened the breach, it remained for the feeble emperor, Theodosius II., to decide which party he would support. At first he warmly espo
yet, but for that one fault, his name would have come down to us consigned to the list of heretics, by men, such as Cyril and Dioscorus, to whose spirit, it is no small praise to Theodoret to say, his conduct displays the most marked contrast. Theodoret was born at Antioch towards the end of the fourth century of our era. The exact year of his birth is uncertain : from a minute examination of the fragments of evidence, which are supplied chiefly by his own works, Garnier has fixed it at A. D. 386; and Tillemont, with greater probability, at A. D. 393. (See their works, quoted at the end of this article.) Theodoret himself, who was naturally infected with the credulity, which was universal in his age,--for even the sceptics of the time were grossly credulous in some matters,--has related various marvels which attended his birth, as well as subsequent passages of his life. His parents were persons of good condition in life, and of distinguished piety; and his mother, especially, had
ry and Alexander ; and, in the latter office, he seems to have obtained considerable reputation by his sermons against the Arians, Macedonians, and especially the Apollinarists, who were the most formidable, by their numbers, among the heretics in the diocese. This matter is not very certain; but it is clear that he must in some way have obtained a public reputation, to account for his appointment to the episcopate by Theodotus, the successor of Alexander in the see of Antioch. It was in A. D. 420 or 423, according to different computations from his own writings (Epist. 81, 113, 116), that he left his monastery to succeed Isidorus as bishop of Cyrus, or Cyrrhus, a small and poor city near the Euphrates, about two days' journey from Antioch; which was, however, the capital of a district of Syria, called Cyrrhestice, and the diocese of which contained eight hundred parishes (Epist. 32, 113). We learn from his own testimony, which there is every reason to believe, that he carried into
suddenly changed by the death of Theodosius II., A. D. 450, and the accession of Pulcheria and Marcianus, who were unfavourable to the Eutychians. Theodoret and the other deposed bishops were recalled from retirement, on the condition that they should be reinstated in their sees by the decision of an oecumenical council; and Theodoret himself joined in the demand for such a council, as necessary to restore peace to the Church. It assembled, first at Nicaea, and afterwards at Chalcedon, in A. D. 451. At its eighth session the petition of Theodoret for restoration to his bishopric was discussed, and he himself appeared to plead his cause. He was most enthusiastically received by his friends, but the party of his enemies was still powerful, at least in clamour. When he attempted to give an account of his opinions, he was interrupted by the cry, "Curse Nestorius, his doctrines, and his adherents!" In vain did he represent that he cared far less for restoration to his see than for permiss
think, is implied in the " farewell," by which he appears to utter his resolution never more to mix in such scenes of strife. That resolution he kept. After sharing in the subsequent proceedings of the council, which compensated to some degree for its conduct towards him by pronouncing the condemnation of Eutyches, Theodoret returned to his home at Cyrus, where he devoted the rest of his life to literary labours, committing the charge of his diocese to Hypatius. He appears to have died in A. D. 457 or 458. (Gennad. de Vir. Illustr. 89.) His remains were deposited in the same urn with those of his stedfast supporter, the monk Jacobus Thaumaturgus, who died shortly after him. Since his death his memory has met with the same varied fortune that he himself suffered during life. The emperor Justin honoured his statue with a solemn installation in his episcopal throne; but the various Monophysite sects continued their opposition to his writings, and twice procured the condemnation of the
1 2