transferred to its rival, Laodicea. The baths were closed, the
theatres were interdicted, and every municipal privilege was
withdrawn in anticipation of still direr woes awaiting the
inhabitants. But Flavian's intercession averted the impending
storm; Theodosius was open to Christian impressions; and
with every assurance of his favour, the bishops were hurried
back to Antioch to still the fears of the justly trembling popu-
lace. No sooner did these good tidings arrive than Chrysostom
delivered his twenty-first homily to the people of Antioch, in
which he recounts the circumstances of Flavian's journey and
their deliverance in the most moving terms.

By the appointment of Theodosius, at the instance of his
minister, Eutropius, Chrysostom was at length promoted to the
see of Constantinople, but not without great reluctance on the
part of the self-denying and laborious presbyter. Such a field of
labour would increase his responsibilities and chagrins, and it
was doubtful whether it would increase his usefulness. After
some scruples on the part of Theophilus of Alexandria, who
sought the promotion of a creature of his own, and who
was disappointed at his want of success, the Alexandrian
bishop took part in his consecration. No sooner was the
archbishop in his new see than he commanded universal
attention by his singular eloquence of speech and energy of
rule. The former won him thousands of admirers, the latter
unnumbered foes. The admiration of his hearers was shown in
ways that appear strange to colder Northerns; the joyous
temperament of the Greeks abounding in more vivid demonstra-
tions than are considered with us compatible with good manners
or the decorum of religious service. The manners of the
Athenian agora were engrafted upon the Christian basilic,
and the evangelical homilies of Chrysostom were saluted
with the same bravos and applauses as had erewhile attended
on the scenic stage the operas of Sophocles and Euripides.
Often as the golden-mouthed expositor preached, he did not
preach often enough to satisfy the itching ears of the excitable
crowds of the capital. The court and the commons were alike
emulous in showing their estimation of their archbishop;
Chrysostom was raised to a seventh heaven of reputation, and
the metropolis was attacked with a church-going mania, which
it mistook for devotion.

But his sermons were a small part of Chrysostom's duties. Luxury and self-indulgence, both in laity and clericy, he denounced with unfaltering voice,-he curbed with unsparing hand. Everything in the shape of an ecclesiastical abuse he rooted out of his see without ceremony, setting in his own person an example of frugality, order, and the observance of a hermit-like

N.S.-VOL. III.

D

propriety of life. In his charities to the poor he so abounded that he was called John the Alms-giver; for his denunciations of those ladies who kept the houses of the priests, and those ambiguous virgins who cultivated the intimacy of the clergy more than the observant approved, he might have been called John the Woman-hater. Against these two classes of females he had written a book, and required his clergy to shun the scandal to which such associations gave rise. We learn further from his addresses to the people, when Eutropius found sanctuary in in his church, that he had been faithful enough often to reprove and warn that ungodly minister when in the height of his power. The fidelity of the man of God to his high functions, the weaknesses and mistaken views of duty of a person not free from faults, and the corruption of many whom he encountered made him countless enemies; and all resulted, after a six years' tenure of his see, in an ignominious expulsion, the court acquiescing, the queen being active in procuring his banish

ment.

To some persons the exile or deposition of a patriarch haseemed a measure of too great importance to have resulted from the seemingly impotent dislike of an angry woman; and such persons are in their general principle right; but it must be borne in mind that Eudoxia the Empress was not impotent nor do we represent court intrigue as the only cause of the exclusion of Chrysostom from his archiepiscopal see. In the paragraph immediately preceding, we have hinted at cause of a totally different kind, namely, the virus of bigotry acting without control on hearts unsanctified by the Spiri of God, and wholly abandoned to the dominion of natura lust and heretical pravity. This cause was one of those i most vigorous and effective operation, for Arianism in thos days divided the Christian church along with orthodoxy, an claimed the larger moiety of the realm for its own. A intensely orthodox and actively propagandist archbishop w: little likely to be looked upon with favour by men who hel views on essential doctrines, such as the Divine constitution Christ's person, and all that depend thereon, so diametricall opposed to their own. But yet, as if John Chrysostom orthodoxy must sustain a cross-fire from different direction and parties, the very suspicion of being himself a participat in any degree in the opinions of Origen-a suspicion grounde on fact-awakened another class again to arms against hi This enmity was directed against him chiefly from Alexandri where the opinions of Origen were held in the greatest disestee and had been formally pronounced contrary to the verity Scripture, and the consistent tradition of the Church.

Be

may well suppose that there was a heathen element involved in the tide of detestation and persecution which eventually swept the great preacher away. Paganism still subsisted in more secret or open forms, raising its head probably in various rural quarters of his diocesan jurisdiction, if not in the metropolis itself, and encountering in the intensely Christian bishop an unslumbering and most formidable foe. His own clergy too, their parties and machinations, their corruption and indolence, their pride and insubordination, ought not to be overlooked as contributing their envious and malignant quota to the fall of their chief. But court intrigue, as it had the main hand in raising him to a conspicuous situation, had doubtless the principal merit of pulling John Chrysostom down. The elevation of the patriarch was owing in great part to the influence of the prime minister of Arcadius, the eunuch Eutropius, the first nomination of John of Antioch to the vacant see having been in fact made by that high official; so that, as the influence of the patron waned, it is at least nothing improbable that the fortunes of the client should be obscured in the same degree. Eutropius was sacrificed to the treachery of an intriguing commander-in-chief of the imperial troops, and was driven to take refuge from the queen's displeasure in the church of St. Sophia, the metropolitan church of the patriarch. Emboldened by the success of his treachery, Gainas, an Arian in his sentiments, demanded one of the churches of Constantinople to be ceded for the purposes of worship to the Arian party. This, with all the weight of his position and eloquence, Chrysostom withstood, with more success than he had withstood Eutropius's court scheme of robbing the clergy of the right of sanctuary in their churches. This right had much to be said in its favour in barbarous times, however much in a normal and desirable state of society any authority should be condemned which came between the secular authority of states and its subjects. The right of asylum had been conceded under Constantine, and in an unsettled state of affairs, like the Israelitish institution of the cities of refuge, was an auxiliary rather than a hindrance of justice. But as it sometimes interfered with the instincts of vengeance, and the gratification of personal pique, more especially on the part of those in power, who could obtain assassins and scelerats in abundance to wreak their will upon the life of obnoxious persons, Eutropius, the prime minister, found it easy to revoke that privilege in the year 398, through the weak assent of the Emperor Arcadius. But fallen from his high estate, he was himself among the first to need the refuge of which he had ought to strip the endangered, whether innocent or guilty. The minister, driven from his palace to avoid arrest and an

D 2

propriety of life. In his charities to the poor he so abounded that he was called John the Alms-giver; for his denunciations of those ladies who kept the houses of the priests, and those ambiguous virgins who cultivated the intimacy of the clergy more than the observant approved, he might have been called John the Woman-hater. Against these two classes of females he had written a book, and required his clergy to shun the scandal to which such associations gave rise. We learn further from his addresses to the people, when Eutropius found sanctuary in in his church, that he had been faithful enough often to reprove and warn that ungodly minister when in the height of his power. The fidelity of the man of God to his high functions, the weaknesses and mistaken views of duty of a person not free from faults, and the corruption of many whom he encountered made him countless enemies; and all resulted, after a six years' tenure of his see, in an ignominious expulsion, the court acquiescing, the queen being active in procuring his banish

ment.

a

To some persons the exile or deposition of a patriarch has seemed a measure of too great importance to have resulted from the seemingly impotent dislike of an angry woman; and such persons are in their general principle right; but it must be borne in mind that Eudoxia the Empress was not impotent, nor do we represent court intrigue as the only cause of the exclusion of Chrysostom from his archiepiscopal see. In the paragraph immediately preceding, we have hinted at cause of a totally different kind, namely, the virus of bigotry, acting without control on hearts unsanctified by the Spirit of God, and wholly abandoned to the dominion of natural lust and heretical pravity. This cause was one of those in most vigorous and effective operation, for Arianism in those days divided the Christian church along with orthodoxy, and claimed the larger moiety of the realm for its own. An intensely orthodox and actively propagandist archbishop was little likely to be looked upon with favour by men who held views on essential doctrines, such as the Divine constitution of Christ's person, and all that depend thereon, so diametrically opposed to their own. But yet, as if John Chrysostom's orthodoxy must sustain a cross-fire from different directions and parties, the very suspicion of being himself a participant in any degree in the opinions of Origen-a suspicion grounded on fact-awakened another class again to arms against him. This enmity was directed against him chiefly from Alexandria, where the opinions of Origen were held in the greatest disesteem, and had been formally pronounced contrary to the verity of Scripture, and the consistent tradition of the Church.

We

may well suppose that there was a heathen element involved in the tide of detestation and persecution which eventually swept the great preacher away. Paganism still subsisted in more secret or open forms, raising its head probably in various rural quarters of his diocesan jurisdiction, if not in the metropolis itself, and encountering in the intensely Christian bishop an unslumbering and most formidable foe. His own clergy too, their parties and machinations, their corruption and indolence, their pride and insubordination, ought not to be overlooked as contributing their envious and malignant quota to the fall of their chief. But court intrigue, as it had the main hand in raising him to a conspicuous situation, had doubtless the principal merit of pulling John Chrysostom down. The elevation of the patriarch was owing in great part to the influence of the prime minister of Arcadius, the eunuch Eutropius, the first nomination of John of Antioch to the vacant see having been in fact made by that high official; so that, as the influence of the patron waned, it is at least nothing improbable that the fortunes of the client should be obscured in the same degree. Eutropius was sacrificed to the treachery of an intriguing commander-in-chief of the imperial troops, and was driven to take refuge from the queen's displeasure in the church of St. Sophia, the metropolitan church of the patriarch. Emboldened by the success of his treachery, Gainas, an Arian in his sentiments, demanded one of the churches of Constantinople to be ceded for the purposes of worship to the Arian party. This, with all the weight of his position and eloquence, Chrysostom withstood, with more success than he had withstood Eutropius's court scheme of robbing the clergy of the right of sanctuary in their churches.

This right had much to be said in its favour in barbarous times, however much in a normal and desirable state of society any authority should be condemned which came between the secular authority of states and its subjects. The right of asylum had been conceded under Constantine, and in an unsettled state of affairs, like the Israelitish institution of the cities of refuge, was an auxiliary rather than a hindrance of justice. But as it sometimes interfered with the instincts of vengeance, and the gratification of personal pique, more especially on the part of those in power, who could obtain assassins and scelerats in abundance to wreak their will upon the life of obnoxious persons, Eutropius, the prime minister, found it easy to revoke that privilege in the year 398, through the weak assent of the Emperor Arcadius. But fallen from his high estate, he was himself among the first to need the refuge of which he had sought to strip the endangered, whether innocent or guilty. The minister, driven from his palace to avoid arrest and an