The history of the church from our Lords incarnation, to the twelth year of the Emperour Maricius Tiberius, or the Year of Christ 594 / as it was written in Greek, by Eusebius Pamphilius ..., Socrates Scholasticus, and Evagrius Scholasticus ... ; made English from that edition of these historians, which Valesius published at Paris in the years 1659, 1668, and 1673 ; also, The life of Constantine in four books, written by Eusibius Pamphilus, with Constantine's Oration to the convention of the saints, and Eusebius's Speech in praise of Constantine, spoken at his tricennalia ; Valesius's annotations on these authors, are done into English, and set at their proper places in the margin, as likewise a translation of his account of their lives and writings ; with two index's, the one, of the principal matters that occur in the text, the other, of those contained in the notes.

CHAP. XIV. How Johannes (having invited Epiphanius to come to [his Pallace] and he refusing, and con∣tinuing his holding of separate Assemblies in the Church of the▪ Apostles,) admonished and re∣proved him, because he did many things contra∣ry to the Canons. Wher••at Epiphanius was terrified, and returned into his own Country.

a 1.1 JOhannes was in no wise angry, because Epi∣phanius had made an Ordination in his Church, contrary to the Canon: but invited him to come and lodge with him in the Bishops Pallace. But his answer was, that he would neither abide nor pray with him, unless he would expell Dioscorus and his Brethren out of the City, and with his own hand subscribe the con∣demnation of Origen's Books. Upon Johannes's deferring to do these things, and saying that no∣thing ought rashly to be done * 1.2 before a deter∣mination of a Generall Councill; those that ha∣ted Johannes put Epiphanius upon another design. For they contrive, that at the next Religious meeting which was to be held in that Church named The Apostles, Epiphanius should come forth publickly, † 1.3 condemn Origen's Books in the presence of all the people, Excommunicate Dioscorus with his followers, and reproach Jo∣hannes as being their favourer. These things were declared to Johannes: and on the day fol∣lowing he sends this message to Epiphanius (who was then come into the Church) by Serapion: Epiphanius, You do many things contrary to the Canons: first, you have made an Ordination in the Churches under my jurisdiction: then, without any order from me, you have made use of your own authority and ministred in the said Churches: Further, when b 1.4 heretofore I invited you hither, you refused to come, and now you allow your self that liberty. Take heed therefore, least a tumult being raised amongst the people, even you your self incur danger therefrom. Epiphanius having heard this, was fearfull and went from the Church: and after he had very much blamed Johannes, he began his voyage to Cyprus. Some persons report, that at his going a-board, he spake these words to Johannes, I hope you will not die a Bishop. And, that Johannes made him this return, c 1.5 I hope you will not arrive in your own Country. I cannot positively affirm, whether they who told me these things spake true. Not∣withstanding, the event was agreeable to both their wishes. For Epiphanius arrived not at Cyprus: but d 1.6 after his departure died on Shipboard. And within a small time after∣wards Johannes was deposed from his Bi∣shoprick, as we shall manifest in the procedure of our History.

Notes

• a 1.1

  This be∣ginning is too abrupt, especially in regard that digression concerning Ori∣gen went before. Therefore in my judgment [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] should precede here; and the begin∣ning of the next period should run thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. But his answer was, &c. Vales.
• * 1.2

  Or, be∣fore a Ca∣tholick, or, general disquisition.
• † 1.3

  Or, re∣proach.
• b 1.4

  Instead of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and a∣gain] it should in my judge∣ment be [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hereto∣fore;] (al∣though this reading be disagree∣able to all our co∣pies.) For 'tis oppo∣sed to what follows, to wit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and now. Valesius.
• c 1.5

  The rea∣ding in the Florentine, M. S. plea∣ses me best; which is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, do not hope, Epiphanius, to arrive in your own Country. Moreover, Ba∣ronius does deservedly deride these predictions of Epiphanius and Chrysostome, as fabulous and forged. Socrates relates them not for true and certain; and in my judgment they are altogether mi••be∣coming Holy men and Bishops. Vales.
• d 1.6

  Baronius does indeed place that contest between Epiphanius and Chrysostome on the year of Christ 402. But concerning Epiphanius's death he dissents from Socrates, Sozomen, and the other writers, who tell us that Epiphanius died soon after, in his return to his own Country. And yet Baronius confesses he knows not what year Epi∣phanius died on. Which I cannot wonder at enough. For, whereas Baronius follows Socrates and Sozomen in the fore-going account of that contest which hapned between those two eminent men, what reason had he to dissent from them about the death of Epiphanius? They might indeed have been mistaken in their relating the mutual predictions between Epiphanius and Chrysostome: nor is it sufficiently manifest, whether or no they predicted those accidents to one ano∣ther. But the things which hapned to each of them are most certain, nor could Socrates and Sozomen be ignorant hereof; the latter of whom was born at Salamine, over which City Epiphanius had been Bishop; and both of them were almost Epiphanius's contemporaries. It ought therefore to be look't upon as certain from the Testi∣mony of these Writers, that Epiphanius died at the close of the year 402▪ or at least on the beginning of the year following, before the Synod ad Quercum. Theophilus informs us hereof in his Epistle to Saint Je∣rome, which Epistle Jerome has prefix•• before The••••bilus's Paschal E∣pistles▪ which he translated into Latine. For in th••t Epistle Theophilus speaks these words concerning Chrysostome then condemned: Sed ille ut caetera ejus flagitia taccam, &c. But he, not to mention his other Crimes, admit••ed the Origenists to a familiarity with himself, and pre∣ferred many of them to the Sacerdotall Office; on account of which fact he ••••dned the hea••t of that man of God Epiphanius of Blessed memory, (who shined a bright Star in the world amongst the Bishops▪) and therefore has deserved to hear, Babylon is fallen, i•• fallen. Where you see Theophilus does speak of Epiphanius, as then dead; for he terms him a man of blessed memory: and he intimates, that he was dead be∣fore Chrysostome's condemnation. Vales.