The Author’s Preface

I have often turned this question over in my mind: how is it that other people are so ready to believe in God the Word, while the Jews are so unbelieving? It was to them, after all, that teaching about the things of God was given from the beginning by the prophets, who also told them beforehand of the events that would go with the coming of Christ, before they happened. Besides this, Abraham, the founder of their nation and of circumcision, was counted worthy to see the Son of God with his own eyes and to be his host. Isaac, his son, was honored as a figure of the sacrifice on the cross, for he was led bound to the altar by his father, and, as careful students of the sacred Scriptures say, the sufferings of Christ came about in the same way. Jacob foretold that the nations would look in expectation to Christ, as they now do. He also foretold the time of his coming, when he said, “The rulers of the Hebrews from the tribe of Judah, the leader of the tribe, will fail.” [a]

This plainly referred to the reign of Herod, who was an Idumean on his father’s side and an Arab on his mother’s, and to whom the Jewish nation was handed over by the Roman senate and by Augustus Caesar. Of the rest of the prophets, some declared beforehand the birth of Christ, his conception beyond all words, his mother remaining a virgin after his birth, his people, and his country. Some foretold his divine and wonderful deeds, while others foretold his sufferings, his resurrection from the dead, his ascension into the heavens, and what came with each of these. Anyone who does not know these things can easily learn them by reading the sacred books. Josephus too, the son of Matthias, who was a priest and a man of great distinction among both Jews and Romans, may be counted a notable witness to the truth about Christ. He hesitates to call him a man, since he worked wonderful deeds and taught true doctrine, but he openly calls him Christ. He says that he was condemned to death on the cross and appeared alive again on the third day. Nor was Josephus unaware of countless other wonderful predictions the holy prophets had made about Christ beforehand. He further testifies that Christ won many to himself, both Greeks and Jews, who went on loving him, and that the people named after him had not died out. It seems to me that in telling these things he all but proclaims that Christ, judged by his works, is God. As if struck by the wonder of it, he somehow took a middle course: he in no way attacked those who believed in Jesus, but rather agreed with them. [c]

When I consider this, it seems to me quite remarkable that the Hebrews did not see it coming and turn to Christianity at once, ahead of the rest of mankind. The Sibyl and certain oracles also announced beforehand what would happen concerning Christ, but we are not on that account to charge all the Greeks with unbelief. For only a few of them, those of superior education, could understand such prophecies, which were mostly in verse and were given out to the people in rather obscure words. So in my judgment it was the work of heavenly foreknowledge, for the sake of harmony in the events to come, that what was coming should be made known not only by God’s own prophets but in part by strangers as well. It is like a musician who, caught up in an unfamiliar melody, touches some of the extra strings lightly with his pick, or adds other notes to those already sounding. [e]

I have now shown that the Hebrews, although they had many clearer prophecies about the coming of Christ, were less willing than the Greeks to embrace faith in him. Let what has been said on that subject be enough. Yet no one should think it unreasonable that the church was built up mainly from the conversion of other nations. In the first place, it is clear that in divine and great affairs God delights to bring about changes in a wonderful way. Then too, remember that those who stood at the head of religious affairs at the very beginning held their ground by no ordinary virtue. They may not have had a tongue sharpened for speech or for beauty of style, nor the power to win over their hearers with fine phrases or mathematical proofs, but they accomplished the work they had taken on all the same. They gave up their property and left their families behind. They were stretched on crosses, and as if their bodies were not their own, they endured many terrible tortures. They were neither won over by the flattery of the people and rulers of any city nor frightened by their threats, and by their conduct they showed plainly that they were sustained in the struggle by the hope of a great reward. So they had no real need to resort to arguments in words. Without any effort on their part, their very deeds compelled the people of every house and every city to believe their testimony, even before they knew what it was.

So divine and wonderful a change has come over human affairs that ancient cults and national laws have fallen into contempt. Many of the most celebrated Greek writers have spent all their eloquence describing the Calydonian boar, the bull of Marathon, and other such marvels, which really happened in some country or city, or have a mystical origin. Why, then, should I not rise above myself and write a history of the church? I am well aware that, since the subject is not the achievements of men, it may seem almost unbelievable that such a history should be written by me. But with God nothing is impossible. [g]

At first I was strongly inclined to trace the course of events from the very beginning. But I reflected that similar records of the past up to their own time had already been compiled by those wisest of men, Clement and Hegesippus, successors of the apostles, by Africanus the historian, and by Eusebius, called Pamphilus, a man thoroughly acquainted with the sacred Scriptures and with the writings of the Greek poets and historians. So I merely drew up a summary, in two books, of everything recorded to have happened to the churches from the ascension of Christ to the overthrow of Licinius. Now, with God’s help, I will try to tell what happened afterward as well. [h]

I will record the events I have been involved in myself, and also those I have heard about from people who knew or saw what happened, either in our own day or before our generation. For events of earlier date, I have searched for records among the established laws concerning religion, among the proceedings of the synods of the period, among the innovations that arose, and in the letters of emperors and priests. Some of these documents are kept in palaces and churches, and others are scattered about in the hands of learned men. I often thought of copying them out in full. But on further thought I judged it better, because of the sheer mass of the documents, to give only a brief summary of what they contain. Even so, wherever disputed questions come up, I will gladly quote freely from any work that may help to bring out the truth. Someone who does not know past events may conclude that my history is false, because he finds conflicting statements in other writings. Let him know this. Ever since the teachings of Arius and other more recent theories were put forward, the leaders of the churches, disagreeing among themselves, have each written down their own particular views for the benefit of their own followers. Remember too that these leaders called councils and issued whatever decrees they pleased, often condemning unheard those whose creed differed from their own, and doing everything they could to get the reigning emperor and the nobles of the day to take their side. Intent on maintaining the orthodoxy of their own teachings, the partisans of each party made collections of the letters that favored their own position and left out every document that pointed the other way. Such are the obstacles in the way of anyone trying to reach a conclusion on this subject! Still, since accurate history requires the closest attention to every means of bringing out the truth, I felt bound to examine all writings of this kind as well as I could.

Let no one accuse me of meddling or malice for dwelling on the disputes of churchmen among themselves over the first place and the supremacy of their own party. In the first place, as I have already said, a historian ought to put everything second to the truth. Moreover, the teaching of the catholic church has been shown to be the most genuine of all, precisely because it has so often been tested by the plots of those who thought otherwise. Yet, since the outcome lies with God, the catholic church has kept the upper hand, has regained its own power, and has brought all the churches and the people to accept its own truth.

I have had to consider whether I ought to confine myself to telling what happened to the church under the Roman government. But it seemed better to include, as far as possible, an account of what happened in matters of religion among the Persians and the barbarians as well. Nor is it out of place in a church history to give in this work an account of those who were the fathers and founders of what is called monasticism, and of their immediate successors, whose fame is well known to us either from what we have seen or from report. For I would not want to be thought ungracious toward them, or willing to let their virtue be forgotten, or ignorant of their history. Rather, I would like to leave behind such a record of their way of life that others, led by their example, may reach a blessed and happy end. As the work goes on, these subjects will be noted as far as possible.

Now, calling on the help and the favor of God, I turn to the telling of events. The history proper begins here.