Search results

1

The Catalogue of Virtues in the "Ecclesiastical History" of Sozomen of Bethelia

100%

Bralewski S.

Vox Patrum

|

2022

|

vol. 84

31-50

PL

W swojej Historii kościelnej Sozomen przedstawił przymioty, z jednej strony władcy, którego obdarzał wielką estymą, a więc Teodozjusza II, a z drugiej podziwianych przez siebie ascetów, nowych mędrców, żyjących w jego przekonaniu według zasad najlepszej filozofii. Interesujące, że użył do tego niemal identyczny zestaw cnót, który przypisywał i władcy i mnichom. W obydwu przypadkach pobożność utożsamiał z mądrością i czynił z nich najważniejsze, wiodące cnoty. To one warunkowały kolejne przymioty. Można zatem w przekazie Sozomena doszukiwać się teorii jedności cnót charakterystycznej już dla Sokratesa z Aten, wedle którego nie można posiadać cząstki jakiejś cnoty, nie posiadając jej całości, ani posiadać jednej konkretnej cnoty, nie posiadając wszystkich. Wydaje się, że zastosowana przez Sozomena kolejność cnót w katalogu zalet przypisanych Teodozjuszowi II nie jest przypadkowa, a oddaje ich hierarchię: εὐσέβεια-σοφία φιλανθρωπία, ἀνδρεία, σωφροσύνη, δικαιοσύνη, φιλοτιμία, μεγαλοψυχία. Hierarchia ta wynika z chrześcijańskich wartości przyjętych przez Sozomena

EN

On the one hand, in his Ecclesiastical History, Sozomen presented the qualities of the ruler he held in high esteem – Theodosius II; on the other, he listed characteristics of the ascetics he admired, the new sages, living – in his view – according to the principles of the best philosophy. Interestingly, in this presentation, he applied an almost identical set of virtues that he attributed to both rulers and monks. In both cases he equated piety with wisdom and made them the most important, leading virtues. They were the ones that conditioned the subsequent qualities. Thus, in Sozomen’s account, one can trace the theory of the unity of virtues characteristic of Socrates of Athens. It claimed that one cannot possess a particle of virtue without possessing the whole, nor can one possess one specific virtue without possessing all of them. It seems that the order of virtues used by Sozomen in the catalogue of virtues ascribed to Theodosius II is not accidental, and reflects their hierarchy: εὐσέβεια-σοφία φιλανθρωπία, ἀνδρεία, σωφροσύνη, δικαιοσύνη, φιλοτιμία, and μεγαλοψυχία. This hierarchy stems from the Christian values adopted by Sozomen.

2

Bałkany w ujęciu historiografii kościelnej V wieku związanej ze środowiskiem konstantynopolitańskim

84%

Bralewski S.

Vox Patrum

|

2016

|

vol. 66

277-299

EN

In the accounts of Socrates of Constantinople, Hermias Sozomenus and Philostorgius, i.e. those ecclesiastical historians who represented the Constantinopolitan point of view in church history, the region of the Balkans was neither administratively nor culturally or religiously uniform. Contents of their works suggest, however, that the area was very important strategically, which was indirectly stressed in Sozomenus’ and Phlilostorgius’ accounts of the conflicts between Constantine and Licinius, and then directly referred to when the three historians wrote on the invasion of the Goths and Maximus’ usurpation. All the three sources also imply that the Balkan peninsula became a shelter not only for refugees from the outside of the empire but also a safe haven for political fugitives from the Roman territories, as for instance is the case of Valentinian II and his entourage. It is also clearly visible that the region was treated by the historians as the hinterland of Constantinople, i.e. the second capital of the Roman Empire, founded by order of Constantine. Security of the capital was largely dependent on the stability of the Roman rule in the Balkans and the maintenance of peace in the area. The advent of the Huns, who pushed other barbarians to cross the Danube river, destabilized the region. The destabilization occurred even despite efforts of christianizing the inflowing tribes, which was an element of the strategy of the Romans targeted at subjecting the barbarian peoples to the empire both politically as well as religiously. Socrates’, Sozomenus’ and Philostorgius’ accounts also show that the Balkans became a border zone of the empire (divided into its western and eastern parts) and a melting pot of various religious influences, which is exemplified by the regional history of Arianism. It is also undeniable that not only Socrates of Constantinople and Hermias Sozomenus but also Phlostorgius devoted to the Balkans more attention than Eusebius of Caesarea did. The fact can be explained on he basis of their geographical proximity to the region, which naturally drew the interest of the former, Constantinopole-based three. Last but not least, Sozomenus displayed in his narrative a better geographical competence as for the region than Socrates and therefore he tried to emend the account of his predecessor.

3

The Pious Life of Empress Helena, Constantine the Great’s Mother, in the Light of Socrates of Constantinople and Sozomen

83%

Bralewski S.

Studia Ceranea

|

2017

|

vol. 7

27-39

EN

In his Ecclesiastical history, Socrates depicts Helena as a pious, strong and independent woman, the mother of the emperor, realizing her own ideas and acting as a tool in the hands of God – the ultimate inspiration of her actions. The emperor, her son, only supported her in her undertakings. According to Socrates, Helena travelled to Jerusalem to answer God’s call; there, she organized the search for the Sepulchre and the Holy Cross and found them. She was supported by Macarius, the bishop of Jerusalem, who, after God’s intervention, distinguished the True Cross from the crosses of the two villains. The empress divided the relics and sent some of them to her son to Constantinople; moreover, in the Holy Land, she built three basilicas connected with the life of Christ. Finally, Socrates mentions her piety and discusses the place of her burial. Conversely, in Sozomen’s account of the recovery of Christ’s Sepulchre and the relics, the main role is played by emperor Constantine, who wished to repay God for his blessings; he ordered the search and the construction of the basilica on Mount Golgotha. His mother only supported him in his plans, led by her devoutness, to which Sozomen pays more attention than his predecessor – he emphasizes Helena’s sensitivity to human poverty and suffering. The emperor was also involved in her generous deeds and gave her access to the imperial treasury. Thus, as indicated by Sozomen, Helena’s piety brought prosperity both to her family and to the whole Roman Empire.

4

Zagłada filozofów helleńskich w Imperium Romanum – obraz mędrców w relacji Sokratesa z Konstantynopola i Hermiasza Sozomena

71%

Bralewski S.

Vox Patrum

|

2012

|

vol. 57

59-76

EN

Socrates of Constantinople, the author of the Ecclesiastical History, distinguishes between two types of philosophy: one practised by the use of words and the second reflected in deeds. The reason why the latter was considered by Socrates to be the true philosophy was the fact that it was the way to find God. That, at the same time, was the most important exercise for philosophers. According to historians even an ordinary uneducated man, could also practise philosophy. However, Socrates believed that having Hellenic education with philosophical studies, was extremely useful for stopping the paganism, in particular. What is more, it enabled speech enhancement and development of the ability to think logically. He pointed out that a lot of sages were near the discovery of God. But he was aware of the existence of false philosophers with the emperor Julian the Apostate, who, unlike true philosophers, was still subject to the passions. By impersonating of the true philosophers they were cheaters and easily changed their views, in addition professed pagan cults. Sozomen also distinguished two types of philosophy: the Hellenic philosophy and the philosophy of church. Unlike Socrates, Sozomen did not attribute any value to the classical philosophy. He did not divide the philosophers into true and false. It seems that the work of Sozomen contains a crucial message. As the period of pagans quickly passed so did their wisdom and those who loved them. Thus, information about the extermination of Hellenistic philosophers was included in his Ecclesiastical History. They were replaced with Christian philosophers gathered in the monastic movement developing vigorously.

5

Świętowanie w chrześcijaństwie w IV–V wieku

30%

Komarnicki K. F.

Studia Redemptorystowskie

|

2013

|

issue 11

201-229

EN

Human time, no matter to what culture or religion a man belongs, is filled with celebrations that give rhythm to his life and help him capture the essence of his existence. Also Christianity over the centuries worked out various forms of specific celebration. The goal of this text is to look at the character of celebrate in the fourth and fifth centuries and to determine how the Christian writers wrote about the celebration. The first sources that author considered are two ancient texts of Socrates of Constantinople (Socrates Scholasticus) and Sozomen (Salminius Hermias Sozomenus) with the same names: Historia Ecclesiastica. In both works there are little chapters, in which appear the mention of the celebration, the majority of them is associated with Feast of the Passover and The First Council of Nicaea, others occur mainly on the margins of the narrative. This is because the history of the Church is here treated primarily as ‘political’ history, shaped by the decisions of great personages of the Church. The most important conclusion that emerges from these two texts is the observation that the differences in the way of celebration are not a source of division, but most of all divisions for doctrinal reasons manifest themselves in a separate celebration. The second source is The Travels of Egeria, also called The Pilgrimage of Aetheria (Itinerarium Egeriae), a letter describing the author’s travel to the holy places. In her report Egeria devotes much attention to the description of those involved in the celebration of subsequent festivals. The modern reader is struck by the generosity of crowds gathered in prayer and their vivid faith that motivates them to make long prayers going for hours. Celebration of Christians in the fourth and fifth centuries was an expression of a vivid faith. Their religion permeated life in all dimensions, and determined the essence of who they were. It was touching the inexpressible, the main aim was above all communion with Christ and the Church. Originally Christians celebrated entirely in the community of the Church, which gives a more or less clear framework to all that can be considered for celebration.

Refine search results

3 Vox Patrum

1 Studia Ceranea

1 Studia Redemptorystowskie

1 2022

1 2017

1 2016

1 2013

1 2012

4 Bralewski S.

1 Komarnicki K. F.

The Catalogue of Virtues in the "Ecclesiastical History" of Sozomen of Bethelia

Bałkany w ujęciu historiografii kościelnej V wieku związanej ze środowiskiem konstantynopolitańskim

The Pious Life of Empress Helena, Constantine the Great’s Mother, in the Light of Socrates of Constantinople and Sozomen

Zagłada filozofów helleńskich w Imperium Romanum – obraz mędrców w relacji Sokratesa z Konstantynopola i Hermiasza Sozomena

Świętowanie w chrześcijaństwie w IV–V wieku