The Ethics of Diet: A Catena of Authorities Deprecatory of the Practice of Flesh EatingWilliams, Howard
Philosophy
The Ethics of Diet: A Catena of Authorities Deprecatory of the Practice of Flesh Eating
Williams, Howard
Diet; Vegetarianism
Having submitted himself in solitude to the severest austerities during
a considerable length of time, he entered the Church, and soon gained
the highest reputation for his extraordinary eloquence and zeal. On the
death of the Archbishop of Constantinople, he was unanimously elected
to fill the vacant Primacy. The _nolo me episcopari_ seems, in his
case, to have been no unmeaning formula. His beneficence and charity
in the new position attracted general admiration. From the revenues of
his See he founded a hospital for the sick--one of the very first of
those rather modern institutions. The fame of the “Golden-mouthed” drew
to his cathedral immense crowds of people, who before had frequented
the theatre and the circus rather than the churches, and the building
constantly resounded with their enthusiastic plaudits. He was, however,
no mere popular preacher; he fearlessly exposed the corrupt and selfish
life of the large body of the clergy. At one time he deposed, it is
said, no less than thirteen bishops, in Lesser Asia, from their Sees;
and in one of his _Homilies_ he does not hesitate to charge “the whole
ecclesiastical body with avarice and licentiousness, asserting that the
number of bishops who could be saved bore a very small proportion to
those who would be damned.”[91]
At length, his repeated denunciations of the too notorious scandals
of the Court and the Church excited the bitter enmity of his
brother-prelates, and, by their intrigues at the Imperial Court of
Constantinople, he was deposed from his See and exiled to the wildest
parts of the Euxine coasts, where, exposed to every sort of privation,
he caught a violent fever and died. So far did the hostility of the
Episcopacy extend, that one of his rivals, a bishop, named Theophilus,
in a book expressly written against him, amongst other vituperative
epithets had proceeded to the length of styling him “a filthy demon,”
and of solemnly consigning his soul to Satan. With the poor, however,
Chrysostom enjoyed unbounded popularity and esteem. His greatest fault
was his theological intolerance--a fault, it is just to add, of the age
rather than of the man.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account