ADMONITION CONCERNING THE TWO FOLLOWING HOMILIES ON EUTROPIUS
Eutropius the eunuch possessed great influence with the Emperor Arcadius, and by his counsel and authority the most important affairs of the Empire were conducted. Having been the author of the promotion of John Chrysostom to the see of Constantinople, he at first obeyed his admonitions and pronouncements not unwillingly. But when the holy doctor persistently rebuked him for his avarice and ambition, albeit with a friendly spirit, he finally incurred his hostility. Among other things which Eutropius performed contrary to the counsel and wish of Chrysostom, he caused a law to be passed that the right of asylum and immunity should be taken away from the churches. But he plotted this for his own destruction: for when, by the will of Arcadius, he had attained the consulship of the year 399, he stirred up against himself the hatred of all. Then the tribune Tribigild, secretly favored by Gainas, assembled a band of soldiers and obtained from the fearful prince the decree that Eutropius be removed from his rank. Consequently, Eutropius retreated into the church, the only place of refuge remaining to him, and was forced to become a suppliant seeking the very asylum he had endeavored to abolish. At that time, Chrysostom alone stood forth as the defender of both the asylum and Eutropius, bravely resisting the onslaught of the soldiers and the decree of the Emperor, and ensuring that the rights of the Church were not violated. But more of this is in the *Life of Chrysostom*.
On the day following Eutropius’s reception into the church, Chrysostom delivered this most elegant homily, in which he discourses wonderfully upon the fleeting condition of human affairs, addresses Eutropius, and exposes how imprudently he had attempted to violate the immunity of the Church, which he himself had subsequently been compelled to approach and entreat. Yet, he so moved the assembly of the people to mercy toward him that he drew tears from everyone. A few days after that homily was delivered, Eutropius, in order to elude the watch set by his enemies and to escape, fled from the church. However, he was captured, soon relegated to Cyprus, and then, after not much time had passed, was brought to Chalcedon, condemned, and beheaded. You have this tragedy recounted at more length in the *Life of Chrysostom* under the year 399; and we trust that we have restored to their true and genuine order many things pertaining to this history, whether hitherto untouched or quite intricate.
Scarcely two days after the flight of Eutropius, Chrysostom delivered the following homily: there, after some introductory remarks on the utility of reading the divine Scriptures, he recounts that the church had been besieged a few days earlier, yet Eutropius had not been handed over to his enemies, and that, had he not deserted the church, he never would have been captured. He again sets before their eyes the fleeting condition of human faculties and riches, and states that Eutropius had been deserted by his friends, his household, and all his fortunes. Adding many things concerning the true and legitimate use of riches, and concerning the present life, which he demonstrates to be a pilgrimage, he moves to the praises of the Church and treats at length of her marriage with Christ, frequently using this verse of the forty-fourth Psalm: *The queen stood at thy right hand in gilded clothing,* etc.
On the occasion of this verse, Savile and Fronto Ducaeus placed this homily among the *Various Homilies on the Psalms*, even though the title and the first part of the homily—where the capture of Eutropius by the soldiers is discussed at length—protest against it. For where could this homily more appropriately be placed than after that one delivered while Eutropius was himself present? In that former one, the discussion concerns Eutropius imploring the asylum and protection of the church; in this one, however, the discourse is held concerning the same eunuch, who was captured after he had left the asylum of the church. Both reason itself and the judgment of the learned men whom we have consulted suggested that homilies of this kind should not be separated.