DIOCESE

DIOCESE (formed on Fr. diocese, in place of the Eng. form diocesscurreat until the t9th centuryfrom Lat. dioecesis, med. Lat. variant diocesis, from Gr. &otici~otc, housekeeping, administration, &OtKeIP, to keep house, to govern ), the sphere of a bishops jurisdiction. In this, its sole modern sense, the word diocese (dioecesis) has only been regularly used since the 9th century, though isola ted instances of such use occur so early as the 3rd, what is now known as a diocese having been till then usually called a parochia (parish). The Greek word &oL,c~o~, from meaning administration, came to be applied to the territorial circumscription in which administration was exercised. It was thus first applied e.g. to the three districts of Cibyra, Apamea and Synnada, which were added to Cilicia in Ciceros time (between 56 and 50 B.c.). The word, is here equivalent to assize-districts (Tyrrell and Pursers edition of Cicero Epist. ad fam. iii. 8. 4; Xiii. 67; cf. Strabo xiii. 628-629). But in the reorganization of the empire, begun by Diocletian and completed by Constantine, the word diocese acquired a more important meaning, the empire being divided into twelve dioceses, of which the largestOriens-embraced sixteen provinces, and the smallestBritainfour (see RoME:

Ancient History; and W. T. Arnold, Roman Provincial Adininistration, pp. 187, 194-196, which gives a list of the dioceses and their subdivisions). The organization of the Christian church in the Roman empire following very closely the lines of the civil administration (dee CHURcH HISTORY), the word diocese, in its ecclesiastical sense, was at first applied to the sphere of jurisdiction, not of a bishop, but of a metropolitan.i Thus Anastasius Bibliothecarius (d. c. 886), in his life of Pope Dionysius, says that he assigned churches to the presbyters, and established dioceses (parochiae) and provinces (dioeceses). The word, however, survived in its general sense of office or administration, and it was even used during the middle ages for parish (see Du Cange, Glossarium, s. Dioecesis 2).

The practice, under the Roman empire, of making the areas of ecclesiastical administration very exactly coincide with those of the civil administration, was continued in the organization of the church beyond the borders of the empire, and many dioceses to this day preserve the limits of long vanished political divisions. The process is well illustrated in the case of English bishoprics. But this practice was based on convenience, not principle; and the limits of the dioceses, once fixed. did not usually change with the changing political boundaries. Thus Hincmar, archbishop of Reims, complains that not only his metropolitanate (dioecesis) but his bishopric (parochia) is divided between two realms under two kings; and this inconvenient overlapping of jurisdictions remained, in fact, very common in Europe until the readjustments of national boundaries by the territorial settlements of the 19th century. In principle, however, the subdivision of a diocese, in the event of the work becoming too heavy for one bishop, was very early admitted, e.g. by the first council at Lugo in Spain (569), which erected Lugo into a metropolitanate, the consequent division of diocese being confirmed by the king of the second council, held in 572. Another reason for dividing a diocese, and establishing a new see, has been recognized by the church as duly existing if the sovereign should think fit to endow some principal village or town with the rank and privileges of a city (Bingham, lib. xvii. c. 5). But there are canons for the punishment of such as might induce the sovereign so to erect any town into a city, solely with the view of becoming bishop thereof. Nor could any diocese be divided without the consent of the primate.

In England an act of parliament is necessary for the creation of new dioceses. In the reign of Henry VIII. six new dioceses were thus ceated (under an act of 1539); but from that time onward until the I9th century they remained practically unchanged. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners Act 1836, which created two new dioceses (Ripon and Manchester), remodelled the state of the old dioceses by an entirely new adjustment of the revenues and patronage of each see, and also extended or curtailed the parishes and counties in the various jurisdictions.

By the ancient custom of the church the bishop takes his title, not from his diocese, but from his see, i.e. the place where his cathedral is established. Thus the old episcopal titles are all derived from cities. This tradition has been broken, however, by the modern practice of bishops in the United States and the British colonies, e.g. archbishop of the West Indies, bishop of Pennsylvania, Wyoming, &c. (see BIsHoP).

See Hinschius, Kirchenrechi, ii. 38, &c.; Joseph Bingham, Origines ecclesiasticae, 9 vols. (I84o); Du Cange, Glossarium, s. Dioecesis ; New English Dictionary (Oxford, 1897), s. Diocese.

DIO CHRYSOSTOM (c. A.D. 40115), Greek sophist and rhetorician, was born at Piusa (mod. Brusa), a town at the foot of Mount Olympus in Bithynia. He was called Chrysostom ( golden-mouthed ) from his eloquence, and also to distinguish him from his grandson, the historian Dio Cassius; his surname Cocceianus was derived from his patron, the emperor Cocceius Nerva. Although he did much to promote the welfare of his native place, he became so unpopular there that he migrated to Rome, but, having incurred the suspicion of Domitian, he was banished from Italy. With nothing in his pocket but Platos Phaedo and Demosthenes Dc falsa legatione, he wandered about in Thrace, Mysia, Scythia and the land of the Getae. He returned to Rome on the accession of Nerva, with whom and his successor Trajan he was on intimate terms. During this period he paid a visit to Prusa, but, disgusted at his reception, he went back to Rome. The place and date of his death are unknown; it is certain, however, that he was alive in 112, when the younger Pliny was governor of Bithynia.

Eighty orations, or rather essays on political, moral and philosophical subjects, have come down to us under his name; the Corinthiaca, however, is generally regarded as spurious, and is probably the work of Favorinus of Arelate. Of the extant orations the following are the most important :Borysthenitica (xxxvi.), on the advantages of monarchy, addressed to the inhabitants of Olbia,and containing interesting information on the history of the Greek colonies on the shores of the Black Sea; Olympica (xii.), in which Pheidias is represented as setting forth the principles which he had followed in his statue of Zeus, one passage being supposed by some to have suggested Lessings Laocoon; Rhodiaca (xxxi.), an attack on the Rhodians for altering the names on their statues, and thus converting them into memorials of famous men of theday (an imitation of Demosthenes leptines); De regno (i.iv.), addressed to Trajan, a eulogy of the monarchical form of government, under which the emperor is the representative of Zeus upon earth; De Aeschylo at Sophocle et Euripide (lii.), a comparison of the treatment of the story of Philoctetes by the three great Greek tragedians; and Pijiloctetes (lix), a summary of the prologue to the lost play by Euripides. In his later life, Dio, who had originally attacked the philosophers, himself became a convert to Stoicism. To this period belong the essays on moral subjects, such as the denunciation of various cities (Tarsus, Alexandria) for their immorality. Most pleasing of all is the Euboica (vii.), a description of the simple life of the herdsmen and -huntsmen of Euboea as contrasted with that of the inhabitants of the towns. Troica (xi.), an attempt to prove to the inhabitants of Ilium that Homer was a liar and that Troy was never taken, is a good example of a sophistical rhetorical exercise. Amongst his lost works were attacks on philosophers and Domitian, and Getica (wrongly attributed to Dio Cassius by SuIdas), an account of the manners and customs of the Getae, for which he had collected material on the spot during his banishment. The style of Dio, who took Plato and Xenophon especially as his models, is pure and refined, and on the whole free from rhetorical exaggeration. With Plutarch he played an important part in the revival of Greek literature at the end of the 1st century of the Christian era.

Editions: J. J. Reiske (Leipzig, 1784); A. Emperius (Bruns~ wick, I8~l); L. Dindorf (Leipzig, I857); H. von Arnim (Berlin, I 893 1896). The ancient authorities for his life are Philostratus, Vst. So ph. i. 7; Photius, Bibliotheca, cod. 209; Suidas, s.v.; Synesius, Man. On Dio generally see H. von Arnim, Leben und Werke des Thou von Prusa (Berlin, 1898); C. Martha, Les Moratistes souslempire romaIn (1863); W. Christ, Geschichte der griechisch.en Litteratur (1898), 520; J. E. Sandys, History of Classical Scholarship (2nd ed., 1906); W. Schmid in Pauly-Wissowas Realencyclopadie, v. pt. 1 (1905). The Euhoica has been abridged by J. P. Mahaffy in The Greek World under Roman Sway (1890), and there is a translation of Select Essays by Gilbert Wakefield (1800).

To properly cite this DIOCESE article in your work, copy the complete reference below:

"DIOCESE." LoveToKnow 1911 Online Encyclopedia. © 2003, 2004 LoveToKnow.
http://5.1911encyclopedia.org/D/DI/DIOCESE.htm

Links to this article are encouraged. Please use the following format:
See: DIOCESE at LoveToKnow.