But his health at last gave way; and who can wonder? Who can long thrive

amid exhausting studies on root dinners and ascetic severities? He was

obliged to leave his cave, where he had dwelt six blessed years; and the

bishop of Antioch, who knew his merits, pressed him into the active

service of the Church, and ordained him deacon,--for the hierarchy of

the Church was then established, whatever may have been the original

distinctions of the clergy. With these we have nothing to do. But it

does not appear that he preached as yet to the people, but performed

like other deacons the humble office of reader, leaving to priests and

bishops the higher duties of a public teacher. It was impossible,

however, for a man of his piety and his gifts, his melodious voice, his

extensive learning, and his impressive manners long to remain in a

subordinate post. He was accordingly ordained a presbyter, A.D. 381, by

Bishop Flavian, in the spacious basilica of Antioch, and the active

labors of his life began at the age of thirty-four.

Many were the priests associated with him in that great central

metropolitan church; "but upon him was laid the duty of especially

preaching to the people,--the most important function recognized by the

early Church. He generally preached twice in the week, on Saturday and

Sunday mornings, often at break of day, in consequence of the heat of

the sun. And such was his popularity and unrivalled power, that the

bishop, it is said, often allowed him to finish what he had himself

begun. His listeners would crowd around his pulpit, and even interrupt

his teachings by their applause. They were unwearied, though they stood

generally beyond an hour. His elocution, his gestures, and his matter

were alike enchanting." Like Bernard, his very voice would melt to

tears. It was music singing divine philosophy; it was harmony clothing

the richest moral wisdom with the most glowing style. Never, since the

palmy days of Greece, had her astonishing language been wielded by such

a master. He was an artist, if sacred eloquence does not disdain that

word. The people were electrified by the invectives of an Athenian

orator, and moved by the exhortations of a Christian apostle. In majesty

and solemnity the ascetic preacher was a Jewish prophet delivering to

kings the unwelcome messages of divine Omnipotence. In grace of manner

and elegance of language he was the persuasive advocate of the ancient

Forum; in earnestness and unction he has been rivalled only by

Savonarola; in dignity and learning he may remind us of Bossuet; in his

simplicity and orthodoxy he was the worthy successor of him who preached

at the day of Pentecost. He realized the perfection which sacred

eloquence attained, but to which Pagan art has vainly aspired,--a charm

and a wonder to both learned and unlearned,--the precursor of the

Bourdaloues and Lacordaires of the Roman Catholic Church, but especially

the model for "all preachers who set above all worldly wisdom those

divine revelations which alone can save the world."

Everything combined to make Chrysostom the pride and the glory of the

ancient Church,--the doctrines which he did not hesitate to proclaim to

unwilling ears, and the matchless manner in which he enforced

them,--perhaps the most remarkable preacher, on the whole, that ever

swayed an audience; uniting all things,--voice, language, figure,

passion, learning, taste, art, piety, occasion, motive, prestige, and

material to work upon. He left to posterity more than a thousand

sermons, and the printed edition of all his works numbers twelve folio

volumes. Much as we are inclined to underrate the genius and learning of

other days in this our age of more advanced utilities, of progressive

and ever-developing civilization,--when Sabbath-school children know

more than sages knew two thousand years ago, and socialistic

philanthropists and scientific _savans_ could put to blush Moses and

Solomon and David, to say nothing of Paul and Peter, and other reputed

oracles of the ancient world, inasmuch as they were so weak and

credulous as to believe in miracles, and a special Providence, and a

personal God,--yet we find in the sermons of Chrysostom, preached even

to voluptuous Syrians, no commonplace exhortations, such as we sometimes

hear addressed to the thinkers of this generation, when poverty of

thought is hidden in pretty expressions, and the waters of life are

measured out in tiny gill cups, and even then diluted by weak platitudes

to suit the taste of the languid and bedizened and frivolous slaves of

society, whose only intellectual struggle is to reconcile the pleasures

of material and sensual life with the joys and glories of the world to

come. He dwelt, boldly and earnestly, and with masculine power, on the

majesty of God and the comparative littleness of man, on moral

accountability to Him, on human degeneracy, on the mysterious power of

evil, by force of which good people in this dispensation are in a small

minority, on the certainty of future retribution; yet also on the

never-fading glories of immortality which Christ has brought to light by

his sufferings and death, his glorious resurrection and ascension, and

the promised influences of the Holy Spirit. These truths, so solemn and

so grand, he preached, not with tricks of rhetoric, but simply and

urgently, as an ambassador of Heaven to lost and guilty man. And can you

wonder at the effect? When preachers throw themselves on the cardinal

truths of Christianity, and preach with earnestness as if they believed

them, they carry the people with them, producing a lasting impression,

and growing broader and more dignified every day. When they seek

novelties, and appeal purely to the intellect, or attempt to be

philosophical or learned, they fail, whatever their talents. It is the

divine truth which saves, not genius and learning,--especially the

masses, and even the learned and rich, when their eyes are opened to the

delusions of life.

For twelve years Chrysostom preached at Antioch, the oracle and the

friend of all classes whether high or low, rich or poor, so that he

became a great moral force, and his fame extended to all parts of the

Empire. Senators and generals and governors came to hear his eloquence.

And when, to his vast gifts, he added the graces and virtues of the

humblest of his flock,--parting with a splendid patrimony to feed the

hungry and clothe the naked, utterly despising riches except as a means

of usefulness, living most abstemiously, shunning the society of

idolaters, indefatigable in labor, accessible to those who needed

spiritual consolation, healing dissensions, calming mobs, befriending

the persecuted, rebuking sin in high places; a man acquainted with grief

in the midst of intoxicating intellectual triumphs,--reverence and love

were added to admiration, and no limits could be fixed to the moral

influence he exerted.

There are few incidents in his troubled age more impressive than when

this great preacher sheltered Antioch from the vengeance of Theodosius.

That thoughtless and turbulent city had been disgraced by an outrageous

insult to the emperor. A mob, a very common thing in that age, had

rebelled against the majesty of the law, and murdered the officers of

the Government. The anger of Theodosius knew no bounds, but was

fortunately averted by the entreaties of the bishop, and the emperor

abstained from inflicting on the guilty city the punishment he

afterwards sent upon Thessalonica for a less crime. Moreover the

repentance of the people was open and profound. Chrysostom had moved and

melted them. It was the season of Lent. Every day the vast church was

crowded. The shops were closed; the Forum was deserted; the theatre was

shut; the entire day was consumed with public prayers; all pleasures

were forsaken; fear and anguish sat on every countenance, as in a

Mediaeval city after an excommunication. Chrysostom improved the

occasion; and perhaps the most remarkable Lenten sermons ever preached,

subdued the fierce spirits of the city, and Antioch was saved. It was

certainly a sublime spectacle to see a simple priest, unclothed even

with episcopal functions, surrounded for weeks by the entire population

of a great city, ready to obey his word, and looking to him alone as

their deliverer from temporal calamities, as well as their guide in

fleeing from the wrath to come.

And here we have a noted example of the power as well as the dignity of

the pulpit,--a power which never passed away even in ages of

superstition, never disdained by abbots or prelates or popes in the

plenitude of their secular magnificence (as we know from the sermons of

Gregory and Bernard); a sacred force even in the hands of monks, as when

Savonarola ruled the city of Florence, and Bourdaloue awed the court of

France; but a still greater force among the Reformers, like Luther and

Knox and Latimer, yea in all the crises and changes of both the Catholic

and Protestant churches; and not to be disdained even in our utilitarian

times, when from more than two hundred thousand pulpits in various

countries of Christendom, every Sunday, there go forth voices, weak or

strong, from gifted or from shallow men, urging upon the people their

duties, and presenting to them the hopes of the life to come. Oh, what a

power is this! How few realize its greatness, as a whole! What a power

it is, even in its weaker forms, when the clergy abdicate their

prerogatives and turn themselves into lecturers, or bury themselves in

liturgies! But when they preach without egotism or vanity, scorning

sensationalism and vulgarity and cant, and falling back on the great

truths which save the world, then sacredness is added to dignity. And

especially when the preacher is fearless and earnest, declaring most

momentous truths, and to people who respond in their hearts to those

truths, who are filled with the same enthusiasm as he is himself, and

who catch eagerly his words of life, and follow his directions as if he

were indeed a messenger of Jehovah,--then I know of no moral power which

can be compared with the pulpit. Worldly men talk of the power of the

press, and it is indeed an influence not to be disdained,--it is a great

leaven; but the teachings of its writers, when not superficial, are

contradictory, and are often mere echoes of public sentiment in

reference to mere passing movements and fashions and politics and

spoils. But the declarations of the clergy, for the most part, are all

in unison, in all the various churches--Catholic and Protestant,

Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist--which accept God

Almighty as the moral governor of the universe, the great master of our

destinies, whose eternal voice speaketh to the conscience of mankind.

And hence their teachings, if they are true to their calling, have

reference to interests and duties and aspirations and hopes as far

removed in importance from mere temporal matters as the heaven is

higher than the earth. Oh, what high treason to the deity whom the

preacher invokes, what stupidity, what frivolity, what insincerity, what

incapacity of realizing what is truly great, when he descends from the

lofty themes of salvation and moral accountability, to dwell on the

platitudes of aesthetic culture, the beauties and glories of Nature, or

the wonders of a material civilization, and then with not half the force

of those books and periodicals which are scattered in every hamlet of

civilized Europe and America!

Now it was to the glory of Chrysostom that he felt the dignity of his

calling and aspired to nothing higher, satisfied with his great

vocation,--a vocation which can never be measured by the lustre of a

church or the wealth of a congregation. Gregory Nazianzen, whether

preaching in his paternal village or in the cathedral of Constantinople,

was equally the creator of those opinion-makers who settle the verdicts

of men. Augustine, in a little African town, wielded ten times the

influence of a bishop of Rome, and his sermons to the people of the town

of Hippo furnished a thesaurus of divinity to the clergy for a

thousand years.

Nevertheless, Antioch was not great enough to hold such a preacher as

Chrysostom. He was summoned by imperial authority to the capital of the

Eastern Empire. One of the ministers of Arcadius, the son of the great

Theodosius, had heard him preach, and greatly admired his eloquence, and

perhaps craved the excitement of his discourses,--as the people of Rome

hankered after the eloquence of Cicero when he was sent into exile.

Chrysostom reluctantly resigned his post in a provincial city to become

the Patriarch of Constantinople. It was a great change in his outward

dignity. His situation as the highest prelate of the East was rarely

conferred except on the favorites of emperors, as the episcopal sees of

Mediaeval Europe were rarely given to men but of noble birth. Yet being

forced, as it were, to accept what he did not seek or perhaps desire, he

resolved to be true to himself and his master. Scarcely was he

consecrated by Theophilus of Alexandria before he launched out his

indignant invectives against the patron who had elevated him, the court

which admired him, and the imperial family which sustained him. Still

the preacher, when raised to the government of the Eastern church,

regarding his sphere in the pulpit as the loftiest which mortal genius

could fill. He feared no one, and he spared no one. None could rob a man

who had parted with a princely fortune for the sake of Christ; none

could bribe a man who had no favors to ask, and who could live on a

crust of bread; none could silence a man who felt himself to be the

minister of divine Omnipotence, and who scattered before his altar the

dust of worldly grandeur.

It seems that Chrysostom regarded his first duty, even as the

Metropolitan of the East, to preach the gospel. He subordinated the

bishop to the preacher. True, he was the almoner of his church and the

director of its revenues; but he felt that the church of Christ had a

higher vocation for a bishop to fill than to be a good business man.

Amid all the distractions of his great office he preached as often and

as fervently as he did at Antioch. Though possessed of enormous

revenues, he curtailed the expenses of his household, and surrounded

himself with the pious and the learned. He lived retired within his

palace; he dined alone on simple food, and always at home. The great

were displeased that he would not honor with his presence their

sumptuous banquets; but rich dinners did not agree with his weak

digestion, and perhaps he valued too highly his precious time to waste

himself, body and soul, for the enjoyment of even admiring courtiers.

His power was not at the dinner-table but in the pulpit, and he feared

to weaken the effects of his discourses by the exhibition of weaknesses

which nearly every man displays amid the excitements of social

intercourse.

Perhaps, however, Chrysostom was too ascetic. Christ dined with

publicans and sinners; and a man must unbend somewhere, or he loses the

elasticity of his mind, and becomes a formula or a mechanism. The

convivial enjoyments of Luther enabled him to bear his burden. Had

Thomas à Becket shown the same humanity as archbishop that he did as

chancellor, he might not have quarrelled with his royal master. So

Chrysostom might have retained his favor with the court and his see

until he died, had he been less austere and censorious. Yet we should

remember that the asceticism which is so repulsive to us, and with

reason, and which marked the illustrious saints of the fourth century,

was simply the protest against the almost universal materialism of the

day,--that dreadful moral blight which was undermining society. As

luxury and extravagance and material pleasures were the prominent evils

of the old Roman world in its decline, it was natural that the protest

against these evils should assume the greatest outward antagonism.

Luxury and a worldly life were deemed utterly inconsistent with a

preacher of righteousness, and were disdained with haughty scorn by the

prophets of the Lord, as they were by Elijah and Elisha in the days of

Ahab. "What went ye out in the wilderness to see?" said our Lord, with

disdainful irony,--"a man clothed in soft raiment? They that wear soft

clothing are in king's houses,"--as much as to say, My prophets, my

ministers, rejoice not in such things.

So Chrysostom could never forget that he was a minister of Christ, and

was willing to forego the trappings and pleasures of material life

sooner than abdicate his position as a spiritual dictator. The secular

historians of our day would call him arrogant, like the courtiers of

Arcadius, who detested his plain speaking and his austere piety; but the

poor and unimportant thought him as humble as the rich and great thought

him proud. Moreover, he was a foe to idleness, and sent away from court

to their distant sees a host of bishops who wished to bask in the

sunshine of court favor, or revel in the excitements of a great city;

and they became his enemies. He deposed others for simony, and they

became still more hostile. Others again complained that he was

inhospitable, since he would not give up his time to everybody, even

while he scattered his revenues to the poor. And still others

entertained towards him the passion of envy,--that which gives rancor to

the _odium theologicum_, that fatal passion which caused Daniel to be

cast into the lions' den, and Haman to plot the ruin of Mordecai; a

passion which turns beautiful women into serpents, and learned

theologians into fiends. So that even Chrysostom was assailed with

danger. Even he was not too high to fall.

The first to turn against the archbishop was the Lord High

Chamberlain,--Eutropius,--the minister who had brought him to

Constantinople. This vulgar-minded man expected to find in the preacher

he had elevated a flatterer and a tool. He was as much deceived as was

Henry II. when he made Thomas à Becket archbishop of Canterbury. The

rigid and fearless metropolitan, instead of telling stories at his

table and winking at his infamies, openly rebuked his extortions and

exposed his robberies. The disappointed minister of Arcadius then bent

his energies to compass the ruin of the prelate; but, before he could

effect his purpose, he was himself disgraced at court. The army in

revolt had demanded his head, and Eutropius fled to the metropolitan

church of Saint Sophia. Chrysostom seized the occasion to impress his

hearers with the instability of human greatness, and preached a sort of

funeral oration for the man before he was dead. As the fallen and

wretched minister of the emperor lay crouching in an agony of shame and

fear beneath the table of the altar, the preacher burst out: "Oh, vanity

of vanities, where is now the glory of this man? Where the splendor of

the light which surrounded him; where the jubilee of the multitude which

applauded him; where the friends who worshipped his power; where the

incense offered to his image? All gone! It was a dream: it has fled like

a shadow; it has burst like a bubble! Oh, vanity of vanity of vanities!

Write it on all walls and garments and streets and houses: write it on

your consciences. Let every one cry aloud to his neighbor, Behold, all

is vanity! And thou, O wretched man," turning to the fallen chamberlain,

"did I not say unto thee that money is a thankless servant? Said I not

that wealth is a most treacherous friend? The theatre, on which thou

hast bestowed honor, has betrayed thee; the race-course, after

devouring thy gains, has sharpened the sword of those whom thou hast

labored to amuse. But our sanctuary, which thou hast so often assailed,

now opens her bosom to receive thee, and covers thee with her wings."

But even the sacred cathedral did not protect him. He was dragged out

and slain.

A more relentless foe now appeared against the prelate,--no less a

personage than Theophilus, the very bishop who had consecrated him.

Jealousy was the cause, and heresy the pretext,--that most convenient

cry of theologians, often indeed just, as when Bernard accused Abélard,

and Calvin complained of Servetus; but oftener, the most effectual way

of bringing ruin on a hated man, as when the partisans of Alexander VI.

brought Savonarola to the tribunal of the Inquisition. It seems that

Theophilus had driven out of Egypt a body of monks because they would

not assent to the condemnation of Origen's writings; and the poor men,

not knowing where to go, fled to Constantinople and implored the

protection of the Patriarch. He compassionately gave them shelter, and

permission to say their prayers in one of his churches. Therefore he was

a heretic, like them,--a follower of Origen.

Under common circumstances such an accusation would have been treated

with contempt. But, unfortunately, Chrysostom had alienated other

bishops also. Yet their hostility would not have been heeded had not

the empress herself, the beautiful and the artful Eudoxia, sided against

him. This proud, ambitious, pleasure-seeking, malignant princess--in

passion a Jezebel, in policy a Catherine de Medici, in personal

fascination a Mary Queen of Scots--hated the archbishop, as Mary hated

John Knox, because he had ventured to reprove her levities and follies;

and through her influence (and how great is the influence of a beautiful

woman on an irresponsible monarch!) the emperor, a weak man, allowed

Theophilus to summon and preside over a council for the trial of

Chrysostom. It assembled at a place called the Oaks, in the suburbs of

Chalcedon, and was composed entirely of the enemies of the Patriarch.

Nothing, however, was said about his heresy: that charge was ridiculous.

But he was accused of slandering the clergy--he had called them corrupt;

of having neglected the duties of hospitality, for he dined generally

alone; of having used expressions unbecoming of the house of God, for he

was severe and sarcastic; of having encroached on the jurisdiction of

foreign bishops in having shielded a few excommunicated monks; and of

being guilty of high treason, since he had preached against the sins of

the empress. On these charges, which he disdained to answer, and before

a council which he deemed illegal, he was condemned; and the emperor

accepted the sentence, and sent him into exile.

But the people of Constantinople would not let him go. They drove away

his enemies from the city; they raised a sedition and a seasonable

earthquake, as Gibbon might call it, and having excited superstitious

fears, the empress caused him to be recalled. His return, of course, was

a triumph. The people spread their garments in his way, and conducted

him in pomp to his archiepiscopal throne. Sixty bishops assembled and

annulled the sentence of the Council of the Oaks. He was now more

popular and powerful than before. But not more prudent. For a silver

statue of the empress having been erected so near to the cathedral that

the games instituted to its honor disturbed the services of the church,

the bishop in great indignation ascended the pulpit, and declaimed

against female vices. The empress at this was furious, and threatened

another council. Chrysostom, still undaunted, then delivered that

celebrated sermon, commencing thus: "Again Herodias raves; again she

dances; again she demands the head of John in a basin." This defiance,

which was regarded as an insult, closed the career of Chrysostom in the

capital of the Empire. Both the emperor and empress determined to

silence him. A new council was convened, and the Patriarch was accused

of violating the canons of the Church. It seems he ventured to preach

before he was formally restored, and for this technical offence he was

again deposed. No second earthquake or popular sedition saved him. He

had sailed too long against the stream. What genius and what fame can

protect a man who mocks or defies the powers that be, whether kings or

people? If Socrates could not be endured at Athens, if Cicero was

banished from Rome, how could this unarmed priest expect immunity from

the possessors of absolute power whom he had offended? It is the fate of

prophets to be stoned. The bold expounders of unpalatable truth ever

have been martyrs, in some form or other.

But Chrysostom met his fate with fortitude, and the only favor which he

asked was to reside in Cyzicus, near Nicomedia. This was refused, and

the place of his exile was fixed at Cucusus,--a remote and desolate city

amid the ridges of Mount Taurus; a distance of seventy days' journey,

which he was compelled to make in the heat of summer.

Beacon Lights of History, Volume 04: Imperial Antiquity · 第 11 / 20 段