Chapter Xxxvii

Chapter Xxxvii

VI. 37.]

DISSENSION OF THE ARABIANS.

of these as we have been able to collect,' which have been preserved here and there by different persons.

He wrote also to Fabianus,® bishop of Rome, and to many other rulers of the churches concerning his orthodoxy.

You have examples of these in the eighth book the Epicurean, and the twenty-five books on the Gospel of Matthew,* besides those on the

Twelve Prophets, of which we have found

only twenty-five."

There is extant also an epistle® of his to the Emperor Philip, and another to Severa his wife, with several others to different persons.

We have arranged in distinct books to the number of one hundred, so that they might be no longer scattered, as many of the Apology® which we have written in his behalf.

CHAPTER XXXVII.

the ablest and most philosophical attacks of ancient times, and to have anticipated a great many arguments urged against Christianity by modern unbelievers.

Celsus was well acquainted with Christianity in its various forms and with its literature, and he set himseaf to work with all his learning and skill to compose a complete retu.a.ion of the whole thing.

He writes apparently less from a religious tnan from a political motive.

He was an ardent patriot, and considered paganism essential to the life of the State, and Christianity its necessary antagonist.

He undertakes first to show that Christianity is historically untenable, and then that it is false from the standpoint of philosophy and ethics, It is noticeable that it is not his desire to exterminate Christianity completely, but to make peace with it; to induce the Christians to give up their claim to possess the only true religion, and, with all their high ethics and lofty ideals, to join lands with the upholders of the ancient religion in e erate te religious ideas of the people, and thus benefiting the state. hen we look at his work in this light (and much misunderstanding has been caused by a failure to do this), we must admire his ability, and respect his motives.

He was, however, by no means free from the superstitions and prejudices of his age.

The most important book upon the work of Celsus is Keim's Celsus' Wahres Wort, Ziirich, 1873, which reconstructs, from Origen's reply, Celsus' work, and translates and explains it.

Origen's reply is philosophical and in parts very able, but it must be acknowledged that in many places he does not succeed in answering his opponent.

His honesty, however, must be admired in letting his adversary always speak for himself.

He attempts to answer ane argument urged by Celsus, and gives the argument usually in Celsus' own words.

The result is that the work is quite desultory in its treatment, and often weighted with unimportant details and tiresome repetitions.

At the same time, it is full of rich and suggestive thought, well worthy of Origen's genius, and shows a deep appreciation of the true spiritual nature of Christianity.

The entire work of eight books is extant in the original Greek, and is printed in all editions of Origen's works (Lommatzsch, Vol. XX The Dissension of the Arabians} AsouT the same time others arose in Arabia, putting forward a doctrine foreign to the truth.

They said that during the present time the human soul dies and perishes with the body, but that at the time of the resurrection they will be renewed together.

And at that time also a synod of considerable size assembled, and Origen, being again invited thither, spoke publicly on the question with such effect that the opinions of those who had formerly fallen were changed.

7 This collection of Origen's epistles made by Eusebius is no longer extant.

The catalogue of Jerome mentions "' eleven books of letters in all; two books in defense of his works."

Only two epistles are preserved entire, —the one to Julius Africanus ts chap.

31, note 1); the other to Gregory Thaumaturgus, written, apparently, soon after the departure of the latter from Czsarea (see chap,

note 1), for Gregory was, at the time it was written, still wedeaded as to the | Area which he should follow.

In addition to these two complete epistles, there are extant a sentence from a letter to his father (quoted in chap. 2); also a fragment of an epistle to some unknown person, describing the great zeal of his frend Ambrose

(see chap. 18, note 1.

The fragment is preserved by Suidas s. v.

*Opeyévys) ; also a fragment defending his study of heathen philosophy (quoted in chap, 19, above); and two fragments in Latin, from a letter addressed to some Alexandrian friends, complaining of the alterations made by certain persons in the reports of disputations which he had held with them (see chap. 32, note 4.

The one fragment is preserved by Jerome, in his Afo/. adv. Ruf, Il. 18; the other by Rufinus, in his apology for Origen).

Of his epistles to Fabian and others no trace remains, . 1-226), and is translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, Am. ed.

'ol. IV.

395-669.

It was one of Origen's latest works, as we are told here by Eusebius, and was composed (as we learn from its preface) at the urgent request of Ambrose, to whom also it was dedicated.

4 The commentary on Matthew was written toward the close of Origen's life, as Eusebius informs us here, a fact which is confirmed by references in the work itself to many of his earlier commentaries.

There are extant a single fragment from the first book (quoted in chap. 25, above), one from the second book (quoted in the Phz/ocalia, chap. 6), and Books X.-XVII. entire in the original Greek, covering Matt. xiii. 36-xxii. 33. There are also extant numerous notes, which may have been taken, some of them from the commentary, and others from the homilies; and a Latin version of the commentary covering Matt. xvi. 13-xxvii,

(See Lommatzsch, Vols.

II.-V.).

The catalogue of Jerome mentions twenty-five books d twenty-five homilies, and in the preface to his commentary on Matthew, Jerome states that he had read the twenty-five books, but elsewhere (in the prologue to his translation of Origen's homilies on Luke; Migne, VII. 219) he speaks of thirty-six (or twenty-six) books of the commentary, but this is doubtless a mistake (and so Vallarsi reads vigint? guznque in the text).

There is no reason to think that Origen wrote more than twenty-five books, which must have covered the whole Gospel (to judge from the portions extant).

The books which are preserved contain much that is interesting and suggestive.

8 On Fabian, see chap. 29, note 4. We do not know when this letter to Fabian was written; but it cannot have been written in eoneemencs of Origen's condemnation by the Alexandrian ods called Aedsightye for they were held in 231 or 232, and Fabian did not become bishop until 236.

There must have been some later cause, — perhaps a condemnation by a later synod of Alexandria, perhaps only the prevalence of a report that Origen was heterodox, which was causing serious suspicions in Rome and elsewhere.

We know that the controversies which raged so fiercely about his memory began even before his death.

9 On this Defense, see above, p. 36.

1 The exact nature of the heresy which is here described by Eusebius is somewhat difficult to determine,

It is disputed whether these heretics are to be reckoned with the @vntomavxitat (whom

John of Damascus mentions in his de Heres. c. go, and to whom Augustine refers, under the name of Avraéici, in his de Heres, c. 83), that is, those who taught the death of the soul with the body, or with the Urvowvxirar, who taught that the soul slept between the death and the resurrection of the body.

Redepenning, in a very thorough discussion of the matter (II. 105 sq.), concludes that, the heresy to which Eusebius refers grew up under Jewish influence, which was very strong in Arabia, and that it did not teach the death

Jerome also mentions twenty-five books upon the twelve prophets (in duodecitm Be heey vigint? quingue eényncewv Origents volumina), of which he had found a copy in the library of Czsarea; transcribed by the hand of Pamphilus (de vir. i/.75).

The catalogue of Jerome enumerates two books on Hosea, two on Joel, six on Amos, one on Jonah, two on Micah, two on Mahum, three on Habakkuk, two on Zephaniah, one on Haggai, two on Zechariah, two on Malachi; but in the preface to his commentary on Malachi,

Jerome mentions three books on that Bropbedy. Of all these books only one fragment of the commentary on Hosea is extant, being preserved in the Philocalia,c.8..

|, 6 These epistles to Philip and his wife Severa are no longer extant, nor can we form an accurate idea of their contents.

We are reminded of Origen's interview with Mammza, the mother of Alexander Severus, mentioned in chap. 21.

Whether he wrote in response to a request from Philip is uncertain, but is not likely in view of the silence of Eusebius, It is possible that the favor shown by the emperor and his wife had led Origen to believe that they might be won for the faith, and there is cig rising in his addressing epistles to them with this idea.

On Philip's relations to as Eusebius asserts), but only the slumber of the soul. He reckons them therefore with the second, not the first, class mentioned.

But it seems to me that Redepenning is almost hypercritical in maintaining that it is impossible that these heretics can have taught that the soul died and afterward was raised again; for it is no more impossible that they should have taught it than that Eusebius and others should have supposed that they did.

In fact, there does not seem to be agrees ground for correcting Eusebius' statement, which describes heretics who must distinctly be classed with the Ovntroravxirat mentioned later by John of Damascus.

We do not know the date at which the synod referred to in this chapter was held.

We only know that it was subsequent to the one which dealt with Beryllus, and therefore it must have been toward the close of Philip's reign.

Christianity, see chap. 34, note 2,

THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS.

[VI. 38. ay ee ee ee ee er A ee heart.

They produce a certain book which they say fell from heaven.

They hold that whoever hears and believes® this shall 'receive remission of sins, another remission than that which Jesus

Christ has given."

CHAPTER XXXVIII.

The Heresy of the Elkesttes.

ANOTHER error also arose at this time, called the heresy of the Elkesites,| which was extinguished in the very beginning.

Origen speaks of it in this manner in a public homily on the eighty-second Psalm :?

Such is the account of these persons.

CHAPTER XXXIX.

The Persecution under Decius, and the Suffer- "A certain man® came just now, puffed up greatly with his own ability, proclaiming that godless and impious opinion which has appeared lately in the churches, styled 'of the Elkesites.'

I will show you what evil things that opinion teaches, that you may not be carried away by it.

It rejects certain parts of every scripture.

Again it uses portions of the Old Testament and the Gospel, but rejects the apostle * altogether.

It says that to deny Christ is an indifferent matter, and that he who understands will, under | necessity, deny with his mouth, but not in his ings of Origen.

AFTER a reign of seven years Philip was

succeeded by Decius.t'

On account of his hatred of Philip, he commenced a persecution of the churches, in which Fabianus? suffered martyrdom at Rome, and Cornelius succeeded him in the episcopate.>

In Pales-

tine, Alexander,' bishop of the church of Jerusalem, was brought again on Christ's account

5 Origen does not mention the baptism of the Elkesites, which is described at length by Hippolytus.

It seems that both belief in the teachings of the book and Peptisur were necessary.

It may be that in Origen's opinion the receiving of the book itself involved the peculiar baptism which it taught, and that, therefore, he thought it unnecessary to mention the latter.

1 Philip was defeated and slain near Verona, on June 17, 249, by the Pannonian legions who had compelled Decius, the envoy sent by Philip to Saclt a mutiny among them, to accept the title of Augustus.

Philip's death made Decius emperor; and he reigned for a little over two years, when he perished in a campaign against the Goths.

The cause given by Eusebius for the terrible persecution of Decius is quite incorrect.

The emperor, who before his elevation was one of the most highly respected senators, seems to have been a man of noble character and of high aims, He was a thoroughgoing patriot and a staunch believer in the religion and laws of 1 The Elkesites ('EAxeoatrai) were not a distinct sect, but ''a school scattered among all parties of the Judzo-Christian Church."

They are described by Hip yee (Phil. TX. 8-12) and by Epiphanius (in chap. 19 among the Essenes, in 30 among the Ebionites, and in 53 among the Sampszeans).

We learn from epoos that, in the time of Callistus or soon afterward, a certain Alcibiades, a native of Apameia in Syria, brought to Rome a book bearing the name of Elkesat (''HAxacai), which yerpore? to contain a revelation, made in the time of Trajan, by the Son of God and the Holy Spirit in the form of angels, and teaching the forgiveness of all sins, even the grossest, by means of belief in the doctrines of the book and baptism performed with certain peculiar rites.

The controversy in regard to the forgiveness of gross sins committed after baptism was raging high at this time in Rome, and Hippolytus, who took the strict side, naturally opposed this new system of indulgence with the greatest vigor. Bong oes doctrines taught in the book, was the Jawfulness of denying the faith in time of persecution, as told_us by Origen in this chapter, and by Epiphanius in chap. 19.

The book was strongly Ebionitic in its teaching, and bore striking resemblances to the Clementine Homzlzes and Recognitions.

Its exact relation to those writings has been disputed; but Uhlhorn (Homzlien und Recognitionen des Clemens Romanus) has shown conclusively that it is older than the latter, and that it represents a type of Ebionitic Christianity less modified than the latter by the influence of Christianity.

In agreement with the Ebionites, the Elkesites (as all those were called who accepted the teachings of the book, to whatever party they might belong) taught that Christ was a created being; soa they also repudiated sacrifices, which compelled them to ome.

He saw the terrible state of corruption and decay into which the empire had fallen; and he made up his mind that it could be arrested only by restoring the ancient Roman customs, and by strengthening the ancient religion.

He therefore revived the old censorship, hoping that the moral and social habits of the people might be lanl under its influence; and he endeavored to exterminate the Christians, believing that thus the ancient purity of the state religion might be restored.

It was no low motive of personal revenge or of caprice which prompted the persecution.

€ must recognize the fact that Decius was one of the best and noblest of the Roman emperors, and that he persecuted as a patriot and a believer in the religion of his fathers. e was the first one that aimed at the complete extermination of the Christians.

He went systematically to work to put the religion out of existence; and the persecution was consequently both universal and of terrible severity, far more terrible than any that had preceded it. The edicts published by Decius early in the year 250 are no longer extant; but we can gather from the notices, especially of Cyprian and Dionysius, that the effort was first made to induce Christians throughout the empire to deny their faith and return to the religion of the state, and only when large numbers of them remained obstinate did the persecution itself begin. reject certain portions of the Old Testament (cf. Origen's statement just below).

They likewise refused recognition to the apostle Paul, and ordained the observance of the Jewish law; but they went beyond the Clementines in teaching the necessity of circumcision and the repetition of baptism as a means to the forgiveness of sins.

The origin of the name E/kesaz has also been disputed.

Hippolytus says it was the name of the man who was claimed to have received the revelation, and Epiphanius calls Elkesai a false prophet; but some critics have thought them mistaken, and have supposed that Elkesai must have been the name of the book, or of the angel that gave the revelation.

Itis more probable, however, as Salmon concludes, that it was the name of a man whom the book represented as receiving the revelation, but that the man was only an imaginary person, and not the real founder of the school, as Epiphanius supposed.

The book cannot well be put back of the beginning of the third century, when it first began to be heard of in the Catholic Church,

It claimed to have been for a century in secret circulation, but the claim is quite unfounded.

Eusebius speaks of the heresy as extinguished in the very beginning, and it seems, in fact, to have played no prominent part in history; and yet it apparently lingered on for a long time in the East, for we hear of a sect in Arabia, as late as the tenth century, who counted El-Chasaiach as their founder (see Salmon's article, p. 98).

See the work of Uhlhorn already mentioned; also Ritschl's Entstehung d. alt-Katholischen

Kirche, p. 234 sq.

(Ritschl holds that the Clementines are older than the book of Elkesai), and Hilgenfeld's Nov. Test. extra Can. rec. 111. 153, where the extant fragments of the book are collected.

See also Salmon's article in the Dict. of Christ. Brog. Il. p. 95 sq.

2 On Fabianus, bishop of Rome, see chap. 29, note 4.

8 After the martyrdom of Fabianus the bear of Rome was without a bishop for about fourteen months.

The bishopric of that church was naturally under Decius a place of the atest danger.

Cornelius became bishop in 251, probably in March, while Decius was away from the city.

After the emperor's death, which took place in the following winter, Gallus renewed the persecution, and Cornelius with a large part of the church fled to Civita Vecchia, where he died in the summer of 253, according to Lipsius (the Liberian catalogue says 252, which is the commonly accepted date, but is clearly incorrect, as Lipsius has shown).

Both versions the Chron. are greatly confused at this point, and their statements are very faulty (Jerome's version assigning a reign of only fifteen months to Decius and two years and four months to Gallus). *

Eusebius, in Bk. VII. chap. 2, says that Cornelius held office " about three years," which is mefepnaily accurate, for he was actually bishop nearly two years and a half.

It was during the episcopate of Cornelius that the Novatian schism took place (see chap. 43).

Eight epistles from Cyprian to Cornelius are extant, and two from Cornelius to Cyprian.

In chap. 43 Eusebius makes extended quotations from an oped written by Cornelius to Fabius of Antioch, and mentions still others which are not preserved.

In chap. 46 he refers to one against Novatian addressed to Dionysius of Alexandria, which is likewise lost.

2 On Origen's writings on the Psalms, see chap. 24, note 3._ This fragment is the only portion of his homily on the eighty-second Psalm extant.

8 Alciabades, according to Hippolytus (see above, note r).

4 The apostle Paul (see note 1).

4 On Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, see chap, 8, note 6,

VI. 40.]

THE DECIAN PERSECUTION.

er a a ee ee before the governor's judgment seat in Czesarea,

CHAPTER XL.

and having acquitted himself nobly in a second The Events which happened to Dionysius. confession was cast into prison, crowned

with the hoary locks of venerable age. And I sHALL quote from the epistleof Dionysius

to Germanus?an account of what befell the former. Speaking of himself, he writes as follows :

Bs aaretbeusal, os <tenl diiadh Pinidl ss Onielbt eth Shonen after his honorable and illustrious confession at the tribunal of the governor, he fell asleep in prison, and Mazabanes* became his successor in the bishopric of Jerusalem. Babylas in Antioch, having like Alexander passed away in prison after hi confession, was succeeded

1 Dionysius the Great (Eusebius in the preface to Bk. VII. calls him 6 péyas 'AAcEavdpéwy éxioxomos) was born toward the close of the second centu fhe was an aged man, between 260 and 265, as w@learn from Bk, VI . chap 27), studied under Origen, and succeeded Heraclas as principal of the catechetical school in Alexandria (see above, chap. 29) in the year 231 or 232 (see chap. 3, note 2).

In the third year of Philip's reign (246-247) te succeeded Heraclas as bishop of Alexandria, according to chap. 35, above.

Whether he continued to preside over the catechetical school after he became Lasher we do not know.

Dittrich (p. 4 sq.) gives reasons for thinking that he did, which render it at least probable.

He was still living when the earlier synods, in which the case of Paul of Samosata was considered, were held (i.e. between 260 and 264; see Bk. VII. chap. 27, note ie but he was dead before the last one met, i.e. before 265 A.D. (see Bk, VII. chap. 29, note x).

Dionysius is one of the most prominent, and at the same time pleasing, figures of his age.

He seems to have been interested less in speculative than in practical: questions, and yet he wrote an important work Ox Nature, which shows that he possessed philosophical ability, and one of his epistles contains a discussion of the authorship of the uipacahy pees which is unsurpassed in the early centuries as an example of keen and yet judicious and well-balanced literary criticism (see Bk. VII. chap. 25).

His intellectual abilities must, therefore, not be underrated, but it is as a practical theologian that he is best known.

He took an active part in all the controversies of his time, in the Novatian difficulty in which the re-admission of the lapsed was the burning by Fabius' in the episcopate of that church.

But how many and how great things came upon Origen in the persecution, and what was their final result,—as the demon of evil marshaled all his forces, and fought against the man with his utmost craft and power, assaulting him beyond all others against whom he contended at that time,

— and what and how many things he endured for the word of Christ, bonds and bodily tortures and torments under the iron collar and in the dungeon; and how for many days with his feet stretched four spaces in the stooks® he bore patiently the threats of fire and whatever other things were inflicted by his enemies ; and how his sufferings terminated, as uestion; in the controversy as to the re-baptism of heretics; and in the case of Paul of Samosata. In all he played a prominent part, and in all he seems to have acted with great wisdom and moderation Gre chaps. 44 sq., Bk. VII. chaps. 5, 7 sq:, chap. 27). He was taken prisoner during the persecution of Decius, but made his escape (see the present or le oN In the precuiee of Valerian he was banished (see Bk. VII. chap. x1), but returned to Alexandria after the accession of Gallienus (see Bk. VII. chap. 21). His conduct durin the persecutions exposed him to adverse criticism, and he defended himself warmly against the accusations of a bishop

Germanus, in an epistle, portions of which are quoted in this chapter and in Bk. VII. chap. 11.

The writings of ase were chiefly in the form of epistles, written for some practical purpose.

Of such epistles he wrote a great many, and numerous fragments are extant, preserved chiefly by Eusebius.

Being called forth by particular circumstances, they contain much information in regard to contemporary events, and are thus an important historical source, as Eusebius wisely perceived.

Such epistles are quoted, or mentioned, in chaps.

41, 44,45, and 46 of this book, and in Bk. VII. chaps. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6,

7,9) 10, II, 20, 21,

22, 23, 26. 'For particulars in regard to them, see the notes on those chapters.

In addition to his epistles a work, On Promises, is referred to by Eusebius in Bk. VII. chap. 28, and in Bk. VII. chaps. 24 and 25, where extracts from it are quoted (see

Bk. VII. chap. 24, note x); also a commentary on the beginning of Ecclesiastes in Bk. VIL. chap. 26, and in the same chapter a work in four books inst Sabellius, addressed to Dionysius, bishop of Rome, in which he defends himself against the conege of tritheism, brought by some Sabellian adversaries.

He was able to clear himsdIf of all suspicion of heresy in the matter, though it ig quite clear his judge strove eagerly with all his might not to end his life; and what words he left after these things, full of comfort to those needing aid, a great many of bis epistles show with truth and accuracy.'

EEE 5 The time of Mazabanes' accession is fixed approximately by the fact that Alexander's death took place in the persecution of Decius.

His death is put by Eusebius (Bk. VII, chap. 14) in the reign of Gallienus (260-268), and with this the notice in the Chroz. agrees, which assigns it to the year ei Since his successor, Hymenzus, was present at the council

Antioch, in which the case of Paul of Samosata was considered (see below, Bk. VII. chaps.

29 and 30), it will not do to put Mazabanes' death later than 265.

® On Babylas, see chap. 29, note 8.

1 Eusebius gives the name of this bishop as BaBuos, Jerome as Fabianus, and Syncellus as PAaBiavds.

'The time of his accession is fixed by the death of Babylas in the persecution of Decius.

He was bishop of Antioch while Cornelius was bishop of Rome, as we learn from the latter's epistle to him, quoted in chap, 43, below.

From an epistle written by Dionysius of Alexandria to Cornelius of Rome (referred to in chap.

46), we learn that Fabius died while the latter was still bishop, i.e. hefore the summer of 253 (see note 3, above).

The Chron. pasch. assigns three years to the episcopate of Fabius; and though we cannot place much reliance upon the figure, yet it leads us to think that he must have been bishop for some time, —at least more than a year, —and so we are inclined to put his death as late as possible.

The Chron. pute the accession of his Successor Demetrianus in the year 254, which is too late, at least for the death of Fabius.

We may conclude that the latter died probably in the year 253, or not long before.

Harnack decides for the time between'the fall of 252 and the spring of 253.

Fabius, as we learn from the epistles| addressed to him by Cornelius and Dion sius t he had carried the subordinationism of Origen to a dangerous extreme, The attack upon him led him to be more careful in his statements, some of which were such as in part to justify the suspicibns of his adversaries.

Athanasius defended his orthodoxy in a special work, De Sententiis Dionysit, and there can be no doubt that Dionysius was honestly concerned to preserve the divinity of the Son; but as in the case of Eusebius of Caesarea, and of all those who were called upon to face Sabellianism, his tendency was to lay an over-emphasis upon the subordination of the Son (see above, p. 11 sq.).

For further particulars in regard to this work, see the chapter referred to, note 4.

Upon Dionysius' views of the Trinity, see Dittrich, p.91 sq.

Besides the writings referred to, or quoted by Eusebius, there should be mentioned an important canonical epistle addressed to Basilides, in which the exact time of the expiration of the lenten fast is the chief subject of discussion (still extant, and printed by Pitra, Routh, and others, and translated in the Azte- 'Nicene Fathers s see Dittrich, p. 46 sq.).

There are yet a few other fragments of Dionysius' writings, extant in various MSS., which it 5 Ae necessary to mention here, See Dittrich, p. 130.

The most complete collection of the extant fragments of his writings is that of Migne, Patr. Gr. X. 1233 sq., to which must be added

Pitra's Spic. Solesm. I. 15 sq.

English translation in the AxteNicene Fathers, V1. p. 87-120.

The most complete work upon Dionysius is the monograph of Dittrich, Dzonyszus der Grosse,

Freiburg, i. Br. 1867.

(see chaps, 43 and ), was inclined to indorse Novatian an the tigoristi¢ discipline favored by him.

We know nothing more of the ife or character of Fabius.

8 rovs wédas bd Téccapa Tov KoAagTypiov ~AoV mapaTnGeis Siacriuara.

Otto, in his edition of Justin's Apology (Corp. Apol.

Christ. I. p. 204), says: §0Aov erat truncus foramina habens, quibus pedes captivorum immitebantur, ut securtus tn carcere servarentur aut tormentis vexarentur ("a évAov was a block, with holes in which the feet of captives were put, in order that th might be kept more securely in prison, or might be afflicted wi tortures").

The farther apart the feet were stretched, the greater of course was the torture, Four spaces seems to have been the outside limit.

Compare Bk. VIII. chap, 10, § 8. wer 9 A tradition arose in later centuries that Origen died in the persecution of Decius (see Photius, Cod. 118); but this is certainly an error, for Eusebius cannot have been mistaken when he cites Ori2 This Germanus, as we learn from Bk. VII. chap. 11, was a bishop of some see, unknown to us, who had accused Dionysius of cowardice in the face of persecution.

In the present instance Dionysius undertakes to refute his calumnies, by recounting accuen's own letters as describing his sufferings during the persecution.

The epistles referred to here are no longer extant, On Origen's epistles in general, see chap. 36, note 7.

THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS.

[VI. 40ar i ee captured.

But coming later, he found the house deserted and guarded by soldiers, and ourselves reduced to slavery."

After a little he says :

"I speak before God, and he knows that I do not lie.

I did not flee on my own impulse

nor without divine direction.

But even before this, at the very hour when the Decian persecution was commanded, Sabinus® sent a frumentarius* to search for me, and I remained at home four days awaiting his arrival.

But he went about examining all places, — roads, rivers, and fields, —where he thought I might be concealed or on the way.

But he was smitten with blindness, and did not find the house,'

" And what was the manner of his admirable management? for the truth shall be told.

One of the country people met Timothy fleeing and disturbed, and inquired the cause of his haste.

And he told him the truth.

And when the man heard it (he was on his way to a marriage feast, for it was customary to spend the entire night in such gatherings), he entered and announced it to those at the table.

And they, as if on a preconcerted signal, arose with one impulse, and rushed out quickly and came and burst in upon us withashout. Immediately the soldiers who were guarding us fled, and they came to us lying as we were upon the bare couches.

But I, God knows, thought at first that they were robbers who had come for spoil and plunder.

So I remained upon the bed on which I was, clothed only in a linen garment, and offered them the rest of my clothing which was lying beside me.

But they directed me to rise and come away quickly.

for he did not suppose, that being pursued,

I would remain at home.

And after the fourth day God commanded me to depart, and made a way for me in a wonderful manner ; and I and my attendants* and many of the brethren went away together.

And that this occurred through the providence of God was T made manifest by what followed, in which perhaps we were useful to some.'"'

Farther on he relates in this manner what happened to him after his flight :

"For about sunset, having been seized with those that were with me, I was taken by the soldiers to Taposiris,' but in the providence of God, Timothy* was not present and was not Then I understood why they were come, 8% and I cried out, beseeching and entreating them to depart and leave us alone.

And I requested them, if they desired to benefit me in any way, to anticipate those who were carrying me off, and cut off my head themselves.

And when I had cried out in this manner, as my companions and partners in everything know, they raised me by force.

But I threw myself on my back on the ground; and they seized me by the hands and feet and dragged me away.

And the witnesses of all these occurrences

followed: Gaius, Faustus, Peter, and Paul."

But they who had seized me carried me out of the village hastily, and placing me on an ass without a saddle, bore me away." # rately his conduct during the persecutions.

It must be remembered that the letter is a defense against accusations actually made, or we shall misunderstand it, and misinterpret Dionysius' motives in dwelling at such cone upon the details of his own sufferings.

The epistle, a part of which is quoted in this chapter, and a part in Bk. VII. chap. 112, was written, as we learn from the latter chapter,

§ 18, while the persecution of Valerian was still in rogress, and recounts his experiences during the persecutions of Dees and of Valerian.

The fragment quoted in the present chapter is devoted to the persecution of Decius, the other fragment to the persecution of Valerian.

The letter is said to have been written mpos Teppavor.

This might be translated either #o or against Germanus.

Analogy would lead us to think the former translation correct, for all the epistles mentioned are said to have been written mpos one or another person, and it is natural, of course, to expect the name of the person addressed to be given.

I have therefore translated the word thus as is done in all the versions.

At the same time it must be noticed that Germanus is spoken of in the epistle (especially in § 18 sq. of the other chapter) not as if he were the person addressed, but as if he were the person complained of to others; and, moreover, a letter of defense sent to him alone would probably have little effect, and would fail to put an end to the calumnies which must have found many ready ears.

It seems, in fact, quite probable that the epistle was rather a public than a private one, and that while it was nominally addressed to Germanus, it was yet intended for a larger public, and was written with that public in view.

This will expiati the ered manner in which Germanus is referred to.

Certainly it is pase to think he would have been thus mentioned in a personal Dionysius relates these things respecting himself. etter.

VII. 26. He is there called Tiweos 6 wats. Dionysius can hardly have addressed a book to one of his servants, and hence we ma' conclude that Timothy was either Dionysius' son ee Westcott holds) or scholar (as 'Dittric believes).

It is reasonable to think him one of the maises, with others of whom Dionysitis was arrested, as recorded just above.

It is in that case of course necessary to give the word as used there some other, or at least some broader sense than " servants."

8 Sabinus, an otherwise unknown personage, seems to have been prefect of Egypt at this time, as Amilianus was during the persecution of Valerian, according to Bk. VII. chap. rr.

4 One of the /rusentartt milites, or military commissaries, who were sb etw hie for various kinds of business, and under the emperors especially as detectives or secret spies. an evpioxwy.

It is not meant that the frumentarius could not find the house, but that he did not think to go to the house at all, through an error of judgment ("being smitten with blindness"), supposing that Dionysius would certainly be elsewhere.

® Greek efnvdpamrodiapévous, meaning literally " reduced to slavery."

The context, however, does not seem to justify such a rendering, for the reference is apparently only to the fact that they were captured.

Their capture, had they not been released, would have resulted probably in death rather than in slavery,

6 oi matdes.

This is taken by many scholars to mean " children," and the conclusion is drawn by them that Dionysius was a married man.

Dittrich translates it '' pupils," supposing that Dionysius was still at the head of the catechetical school, and that some of his scholars lived with him, as was quite common.

Others translate "*servants," or '' domestics."

I have used the indefinite word " attendants" simply, because the aides may well have included children, scholars, servants, and others who made up his family and constituted, any or all of them, his attendants.

As shown in note 8, the word at any rate cannot be confined in the present case to servants.

10 These four men are known to us only as companions of DioMates during the persecution of Decius, as recorded here and in Bk. VII. chap. 11.

From that chapter, § 23, we learn that Caius. and Peter were alone with Dionysius in a desert place in Libya, after being carried away by the rescuing party mentioned here.

From § 3 of the same chapter we learn that Faustus was a deacon, and that he was with Diomyatis also during the persecution of Valerian, and from § 26 that he suffered martyrdom at a great age in the Diocletian persecution.

See also Bk. VIII. chap. 13, note rz.

11 As we learn from Bk. VII. chap, 11, § 23, this rescuing pa carried Dionysius to a desert place in Libya, where he was left wit only two companions until the persecution ceased.

7 Strabo (Bk. XVII. chap. 1) mentions a small town called Taposiris, situated in the neighborhood of Alexandria.

8 We know nothing about this Timothy, except that Dionysius addressed to him his work On Nature, as reported by Eusebius in

MARTYRS IN ALEXANDRIA.

VI. 41.) " They seized first anold man named Met-

ras,* and commanded him to utter impious words.

But as he would not obey, they beat him with clubs, and tore his face and eyes with sharp sticks, and dragged him out of the city and stoned him.

'Then they carried to their

idol temple a faithful woman, named Quinta, that they might force her to worship.

And as she turned away in detestation, they bound her feet and dragged her through the entire city over the stone-paved streets, and dashed her against the millstones, and at the same time scourged her ; then, taking her to the same place, they stoned her to death.

Then all

with one impulse rushed to the homes of the pious, and they dragged forth whomsoever any one knew as a neighbor, and despoiled and plundered them.

They took for themselves the more valuable property ; but the poorer articles and those made of wood they scattered about and burned in the streets, so that the city appeared as if taken byan enemy.

Butthe

brethren withdrew and went away, and 'took joyfully the spoiling of their goods,' * like those

CHAPTER XLI.

The Martyrs in Alexandria.

THE same writer, in an epistle to Fabius,! bishop of Antioch, relates as follows the sufferings of the martyrs in Alexandria under Decius :

"The persecution among us did not begin with the royal decree, but preceded it an entire year."

The prophet and author of evils® to this city, whoever he was, previously moved and aroused against us the masses of the heathen, rekindling among them the superstition of

their country.

And being thus excited by him and finding full opportunity for any 'wickedness, they considered this the only pious service of their demons, that they should slay us.

1] read @aB.ov with the majority of the MSS., and with Valesius, Stroth, Burton, Closs, and Crusé, preferring to adopt the same spelling here that is used in the other P ery in which the same

'bishop is mentioned.

A number of MSS. read Safravév, which is supported by Rufinus, and adopted by Schwegler, Laemmer, and Heinichen.

On Fabius, bishop of Antioch, see chap.

39, note 7.

The time of his episcopate stated in that note fixes the date of this epistle within narrow limits, viz. between 256 and the spring of 253The whole tone of the letter and the discussion of the readmission of the lapsed would lead us to think that the epistle was written after the close of the persecution, but in § 20, Dioscorus is said to to whom Paul bore witness.

I know of no one unless possibly some one who fell into their hands, who, up to this time, denied the Lord.

Then they seized also that most ad-

mirable virgin, Apollonia, an old woman, and, smiting her on the jaws, broke out all her teeth. And they made a fire outside the city and threatened to burn her alive if she would not join with them in their impious cries.

And she, supplicating a little, was released, when she leaped eagerly into the fire and was consumed.

Then they seized Serapion in his

own house, and tortured him with harsh cruelties, and having broken all his limbs, they threw him headlong from an upper story.

And there was no street, nor public road, nor lane open to us, by night or day ; for always and everywhere, all of them cried out that if any one would not repeat their impious words, he should immediately be dragged away and burned. Andmat-

ters continued thus for a considerable time.

But a sedition and civil war came upon the wretched people and turned their cruelty toward us against one another.® So we breathed fora little while as they ceased from their rage against us.

But presently the change from that milder reign was announced to us,' and great fear be still among them, waiting for '"'a longer and more severe conflict,"? which seems to imply that the persecution, if not raging at the time, was at least expected to break out again soon.

This would lead us to think of the closing months of Decius' reign, i.e. late in the year 251, and this date finds confirmation in the consideration that the epistle (as we learn from chap. 44) was written after the breaking out of the Novatian schism, and eppiresiy after the election of Novatian as opposition bishop, for Fabius can hardly have sided with him against te bishop, so long as he was only a presbyter.

Doubtless Novatian's official letter, eapourieny. his election, had influenced Fabius.

But Novatian was elected bishop in da robably in the summer or early fall; at least, some months after Comnelica' accession, which took place in February, 251.

It seems, from chap. 44, that Fabius was inclined to side with Novatian, and to favor Tis rigoristic principles.

This epistle was written (as we learn from chap. 42, § 6) with the express purpose of leading him to change his position and to adopt more lenient principles in his treatment of the lapsed.

It is with this end in view that Dionysius details at such length in this chapter the sufferings of the martyrs.

He wishes to impress upon Fabius their piety and steadfastness, in order to beget greater respect for their opinions.

Having done this, he states that they who best understood the temptations to which the persecuted were exposed, had received the lapsed, when repentant, into fellowship as before (see chap. 42, note 6).

Dionysius' own position in the matter comes out very clearly in this epistle.

He was in full sympathy with the milder treatment of the lapsed advocated in Rome and in Carthage by Cornelius and Cyprian.

% The edict of Decius was published early in the year 250, and therefore the persecution in Alexandria, eueryt to Dionysius, 'began in 249, while Philip was still emperor.

Although the latter showed the Christians favor, yet it is not at all surprising that this local persecution should break out during his reign.

The peace which the Christians were enjoying naturally fostered the growth of 'the Church, and the more patriotic and 5 pe of the heathen citizens of the empire must necessarily have felt great solicitude at its constant increase, and the same spirit which led Decius to persecute would lead many such persons to desire to persecute when the opportunity offered itself; and the closing months of Philip's reign were so troubled with rebellions and revolutions that he had little time, and perhaps less inclination, to interfere in such a minor

4 Of the various martyrs and confessors mentioned in this chapter, we know only what is told us by Dionysius in this epistle. matter as a local persecution of Christians.

The Common people of Alexandria were of an excitable and riotous disposition, and it was always easy there to stir up a tumult at short notice and upon slight pretexts. y '

8 6 xaxav TH TodeL TadTH wavTLs Kai morntys.

The last word is rendered '"' poet" by most translators, and the rendering is quite possible; but it is difficult to understand why Dionysius should speak

.of this person's being a poet, which could have no possible connec5 Heb. x. 34. Upon the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews, see Bk. III. chap. 3, note 17; and upon Eusebius' opinion in the matter, see Bk. tli. chap, 25, note x.

® We know that the closing months of Philip's reign were troubled with seditions in various quarters; but Dionysius is our only authority for this particular one, unless it be connected, as some think, with the revolt which Zosimus describes as aroused in the Orient by the bad government of Philip's brother, who was governor there, and by excessive taxation (see Tillemont, A7st. des Emp. III. p. 272).

7 This refers to the death of Philip and the accession of Decius.

The hostile edicts of the latter seem not to have been published untion with the matter in hand.

It seems better to take mowntijs in dts common sense of "' maker," or '"' author," and to suppose Dionysius to be thinking of this man, not pmply as the prophet of evils to the city, but also as their author, in that he '' moved and aroused against us the masses of the heathen,"

THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS.

[VI. 41.

One of these immediately denied.

But the other, whose name was Cronion, and whose surname was

of what was threatened seized us.

For the decree arrived, almost like unto that most terrible time foretold by our Lord, which if it

Eunus, and the old man Julian himself, both of them having confessed the Lord, were carried on camels through the entire city, which, as you know, is a very large one, and in this elevated position were beaten and finally burned in a fierce fire," surrounded by all the populace.

But a soldier, named Besas, who stood by

them as they were led away rebuked those who insulted them. And they cried out against him, and this most manly warrior of God was arraigned, and having done nobly in the great contest for piety, was beheaded.

certain other one, a Libyan by birth, but in name and blessedness a true Macar,"* was strongly urged by the judge to recant; but as he would not yield he was burned alive. machus and Alexander, having remained in bonds were possible would offend even the elect.®

All truly were affrighted.

And many of the more eminent in their fear came forward immediately ;* others who were in the public service were drawn on by their official duties ;° others were urged on by their acquaintances.

And as their names were called they approached the impure and impious sacrifices.

Some of them were pale and trembled as if they were not about to sacrifice, but to be themselves sacrifices and offerings to the idols ; so that they were jeered at by the multitude who stood around, as it was plain to every one that they were afraid either to die or to sacrifice.

But some advanced to the altars more readily, declaring boldly that they had never been Christians.

Of these the prediction of our Lord is most true that they shall 'hardly' be saved.

Of the rest some followed the one, others the other of these classes, some fled and some were seized. And of the latter some continued faithful until bonds and imprisonment, and some who had even been imprisoned for many days yet abjured the faith before they were brought to trial.

Others having for a time endured great tortures finally retracted.

But the firm and blessed pillars of the Lord being strengthened by him, and having received vigor and might suitable and appropriate to the strong faith which they posAfter them Epifor a long time, and endured countless agonies from scrapers * and scourges, were also consumed in a fierce fire®

And with them

there were four women. holy virgin, the judge tortured relentlessly and Ammonarium, a

excessively, because she declared from the first 'that she would utter none of those things which he commanded ; and having kept her promise truly, she was dragged away.

The others were Mercuria, a very remarkable old woman, and Dionysia, the mother of many children, who did not love her own children above the Lord.'

As the governor was ashamed of torturing thus ineffectually, and being always defeated by women, they were put to death by the sword, without the trial of tortures.

For the champion, Ammonarium, endured these in behalf of all.

sessed, became admirable witnesses of his

kingdom.

The first of these was Julian, a man who suffered so much with the gout that he was unable to stand or walk.

They brought him forward with two others who carried him.

The Egyptians, Heron and Ater and Isidorus, and with them Dioscorus," a boy about fifteen years old, were delivered up.

At first the judge attempted to deceive the lad by fair words, as if he could be brought over easily, and then to force him by tortures, as one who would readily yield.

But Dioscorus was neither persuaded nor constrained.

As the

til some months after his accession, i.e. early in 250, But his hosey to Christianity might have been known from the start, and it mig t have been understood that he would persecute as soon as he had attended to the other more important matters connected with his accession, 8 Matt. xxiv. 24. Eusebius reads oxavdadioo.; Matthew, mAavac0a. or mAavngat.

9 i.e. to sacrifice.

10 of 88 Snuootevovres U1d THY mpakewv HyovTo, Every officer of the government under the imperial regimen was obliged to sacrifice to the Gods upon taking office, and also to sacrifice at stated times during his term of office, and upon special occasions, or in connection with the performance of important official duties. He might thus be called upon in his official capacity frequently to offer sacrifices, and a failure to perform this part of his duties was looked upon as sacrilege and punished as a crime against the state.

Christian officials, therefore, were always in danger of suffering for their religion unless they were allowed, as a special favor, to omit the sacrifices, as was often the case under those emperors who were more favorably inclined toward Christianity. A private citizen was never obliged to sacrifice except in times of persecution, when he might be ordered to do so asatest. But an official could not carry out fully all the duties of his position without sacrificing.

This is one reason why many of the Christians avoided public office, and thus drew upon t eatilves the accusation of a lack of patriotism (cf. Origen, Contra Cels.

12 agBéoty mvp.

18 The Greek word dxap means " blessed.""

14 tugrnpas.

'<The instrument of torture here mentioned was an iron scraper, calculated to wound and tear the flesh as it passed. over it'' (Crusé).

15 rupt aoBéoTw.

16 Rufinus adds at this point, the words e¢ alia Ammonaria (and another Ammonaria"').

Valesius therefore conjectures that: the words kal "Aupovaprov éErepa must have stood in the original text; and he is followed by Stroth and Heinichen.

The MSS., however, are unanimous in their omission of the words, and the: second sentence below, which speaks of only a single Ammonarium, as if there were no other, certainly argues against their insertion.

It is possible that Rufinus, finding only three women mentioned after Dionysius had referred to four, ventured to insert the "* other'

Ammonaria."

I. 5 sq., and Tertullian's Afo/. c. 42); and it is also one reason why such Christians as happened to be in office were always the first to suffer under a hostile emperor.

17 It has been suggested (by Birks in the Dict. of Christ. Biog.) that this Dioscorus may be identical with the presbyter of the same: name mentioned in Bk. VII. chap. 11, § 24.

But this is quite mpossible, for Dioscorus, as we learn from this passage, was but: fifteen years old at the time of the Decian persecution, and_Dionysius is still speaking of the same persecution when he mentions the. presbyter Dioscorus in the chapter referred to (see note 31 on that chapter).

11 Cf. Matt. xix. 23.

This sentence shows that Dionysius did not consider it impossible even for those to be saved who denied

Christ before enduring any suffering at all.

He was clearly willing to leave a possibility of eal vation! even to the worst offenders, and in this agreed perfectly with Cornelius, Cyprian, and the body of the Roman and Carthaginian churches.

VI. 42.]

OTHERS WHO SUFFERED UNDER DECIUS.

firm, abused him. And as he still held out he seized a long staff and thrust it through his bowels? and slew him. others remained firm, he scourged them cruelly and then delivered them to the fire.

But admiring the manner in which Dicscorus had distinguished himself publicly, and his wise answers to his persuasions, he dismissed him, saying that on account of his youth he would give him time for repentance.

And this most godly Dioscorus is among us now, awaiting a "Why need I speak of the multitude that

wandered in the deserts and mountains, and perished by hunger, and thirst, and cold, and sickness, and robbers, and wild beasts?

Those of them who survived are witnesses of their election and victory.

But I will

relate one occurrence as an example.

Cheremon,? who was very old, was bishop of the city called Nilus.

He fled with his wife * to the Arabian mountain® and did not return.

And though the brethren searched diligently they could not find either them or their bodies.

And many who fled to the same

Arabian mountain were carried into slavery by the barbarian Saracens.

Some of them were ransomed with difficulty and at a large price ; others have not been to the present time.

I have related these things, my brother, not without an object, but that you may understand how many and great distresses came upon us. Those indeed will understand them the best who have had the largest experience of them." longer conflict and more severe contest.

Buta certain Nemesion, who also was an Egyptian, was accused as an associate of robbers ; but when he had cleared himself before the centurion of this charge most foreign to the truth, he was informed against as a Christian, and taken in bonds before the governor.

And the most unrighteous magistrate inflicted on him tortures and scourgings double those which he executed on the robbers, and then burned him between the robbers, thus honoring the blessed man by the likeness to Christ.

A band of soldiers, Ammon and Zeno and Ptolemy and Ingenes, and with them an old man, Theophilus, were standing close together before the tribunal.

And as a certain person who was being tried as a Christian, seemed inclined to deny, they standing by gnashed their teeth, and made signs with their

A little further on he adds: "These

divine martyrs among us, who now are seated with Christ, and are sharers in his kingdom, partakers of his judgment and judges with him, received some of the brethren who had fallen away and become chargeable with the guilt of sacrificing.

When they perceived that their conversion and repentance were sufficient to be acceptable with him who by no means desires the death of the sinner, but his repentance, having proved them they received them back and brought them together, and met with them and had fellowship with them in prayers and feasts.

What counsel then,

faces and stretched out their hands, and

gestured with their bodies.

And when the attention of all was turned to them, before any one else could seize them, they rushed up to the tribunal saying that they were Christians, so that the governor and his council were affrighted.

And those who were on trial appeared most courageous in prospect of their sufferings, while their judges trembled.

And they went exultingly from the tribunal rejoicing in their testimony ; ® God himself having caused them to triumph gloriously."

2 évrépwy Kai omAayxvar.

8 Of the bishop Chzeremon of Nilus we know only what is told us here.

The city Nilus or Nilopolis was situated on an island in the Nile, in middle Egypt, some distance south of Memphis.

CHAPTER XLII.

4 77H cvuBiy éavtov, The word avpufros, which means a "' companion" or "partner," can signify nothing else than "wife" as used here in the feminine.

Others of whom Dionysius gives an Account.

5 7d "ApaBiov Spos.

The name Avadicus mons, Td "ApdB.oy ovpos, was given by Herodotus to the range of mountains which separated that part of Arabia lying west of the{Arabian Gulf from the Nile valley (see Smith's Dict. of Greek and Rom. Geography).

'« Many others, in cities and villages, were torn asunder by the heathen, of whom I will mention one as an illustration.

Ischyrion' was employed as a steward by one of the rulers.

His employer commanded him to sacrifice, and on his refusal insulted him, and as he remained

6 cigedéfavto Kal ouviyayov Kal ouvégtynocav Kal mpooevxav avrois Kai éoTiacewy exowwwrngav.

It will be observed that nothing is said here about joining with these persons in celebrating the eucharist, or about admitting them to that service, and hence ate. sius is quite right in distinguishing the kind of communion spoken o here from official communion in the church, around the Lord's table.

Dionysius does not imply that these confessors had the power given them to receive the lapsed back again into the Church, and to dispense the eucharist to them.

That was the prerogative of the bishop, and evidently Dionysius has no thought of its being otherwise.

The communion of which he speaks was private fellowship merely, and implied a recognition on the part of these confessors that the persons in question had truly repented of their sin, and could be recommended for readmission into the Church.

As we see from chap. 44

§ 2, the recommendation of these persons or of the people in eneral was quite necessary, before the bishop would consent to absolve the fallen person and receive him back again into the Church.

And Dionysius' words in this passage show that he felt that the judgment of these confessors in regard to the fitness of the lapsed for readmission ought to be received with consideration, and have influence upon the final decision.

Dionysius thus shows great respect to the It is difficult to ascertain from Dionysius' language five soldiers suffered martyrdom or whether they were released.

The language admits either interpretation, and some have supposed that the magistrate was so alarmed at what he

18 paptupia. whether these feared might be a general defection among the troops that he dismissed these men without punishing them,

At the same time it seems as if Dionysius would have stated this directly if it were a fact, There is nothing in the narrative to imply that their fate was different from that of the others; and moreover, it hardly seems probable that the defection of five soldiers should so terrify the judge as to cause him to cease executing the imperial decree, and of course if he did not execute it in the case of the soldiers, he could hardly do it in the case of others.

E 1 Ischyrion is known to us only from this passage.

THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS.

[VI. 42. ee gance against these persons, as if there was no longer for them a hope of salvation, not even if they should do all things pertaining to a genuine and pure conversion, became leader of the heresy of those who, in the pride of their imagination, call themselves Cathari.?

There-

upon a very large synod assembled at Rome,' of bishops in number sixty, and a great many more presbyters and deacons ; while the pastors of the remaining provinces deliberated in their places privately concerning what ought to be done. A decree was confirmed by all, that Novatus and those who joined with him, and those who adopted his brother-hating and inhuman opinion, should be considered by the church as strangers; but that they should heal such of the brethren as had fallen into misfortune,t and should minister to them with the medicines of repentance. brethren, do you give us concerning such persons? What should we do?

Shall we have the same judgment and rule as theirs, and observe their decision and charity, and show mercy to those whom they pitied? Or, shall we declare their decision unrighteous, and set ourselves as judges of their opinion, and grieve mercy and overturn order?''?" These words Dionysius very properly added when making mention of those who had been weak in the time of persecution.

CHAPTER XLIII.

Novatus, his Manner of Life and his Heresy.

AFTER this, Novatus, a presbyter of the church at Rome, being lifted up with arroconfessors, but does not accord them the privileges which they claimed in some places (as we learn from Tertullian's de Pudicitia,

22, and from a number of Cyprian's Ezstles) of themselves absolving the lapsed and readmitting them to church communion.

In this he showed again his agreement with Cyprian and with the principles finally adopted in the Roman and Carthaginian churches (cf. e.g. Cyprian's Efzstles, 9 sq., a/.15; see also

Dittrich, p. 51 sq.).

7 the object of the letter is clearly revealed in these sentences (see chap. 41, note 1).

There have reached us epistles' of Cor-

nelius, bishop of Rome, to Fabius, of the church at Antioch, which show what was done at the synod at Rome, and what seemed best to all those in Italy and Africa and the regions thereabout.® Also other epistles, written in the 1 Eusebius, and the Greeks in general, write the name Noovaros eee in Bk, VII. chap. 8, below, Dionysius writes Noovaridvos), ocrates has the form Navaros, which appears also in some MSS of Eusebius.

Cyprian and the Latins write the name Novatianus.

Lardner, in a note on chap. 47 of his Credzézlity, argues with great force for the correctness of the name Novatus, while

Heinichen and others maintain that Novatianus is the right form.

The name Wovatiant, Noovatiavoi, which was given to his followers, is urged with some reason by Lardner as an argument for the shorter form of the name, But even if his opinion is correct, the name Novatian is too long established to be displaced, and serves to distinguish him from the Carthaginian presbyter Novatus.

The schism of Novatian was only one of the outcrops of the old strife between lax and strict discipline in the Church, the strife which had shown itself in connection with Montanism and also between Callistus and Hippolytus

Fudaicis, de Instantia, de Attalo Multaque alia, et de Trinitate grande Volumen.

The de Cribs $udazcis and the de Trinttate are still extant.

The best edition of his works is that of Jackson (London, 1728).

An English translation is given in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, V. 611-650.

Novatian was the author also of one of the epistles of the Roman clergy to Cyprian (Z%. 30).

Our contemporaneous sources for a knowledge of Novatian and his schism are the epistles of Cyprian (some ten of them), and the epistles of Dionysius and Cornelius, quoted by Eusebius in this chapter and in chaps. 44 and 45.

2 xa@apot, "' pure."

3 This council is undoubtedly identical with the one mentioned in Cyprian's epistle to Antonianus (Zf. 51, § 6; al. 55).

It was held, according to Cyprian, soon after the Carthaginian synod, in which the treatment of the /afsz was first discussed, and accepted the decisions of that council.

The Carthaginian synod met in the spring of 251 (see Hefele, Conczlien, wa

p. 112).

The Roman synod must, therefore, have been held before the end of the same year; Hefele thinks about October (24d. p. 114).

Cornelius would not, of course, have waited long before procuring the official condemnation of the eppesition bishop.

We know nothing more about the constitution of the council than is told us here.

It was, of course, only a local synod.

The pastors of the remaining provinces were the other Italian bishops who could not be present at the council.

Cornelius solicits their opinion, in order that the decree passed by the council may represent as large a number of bishops as possible.

4 robs dé TH TUMopa TepimemToKOTas.

The Can hasnian synod had decided that no offenses are beyond the regular power of the Church to remit.

: ac (de vir. zl, chap. 66) gives the singular instead of the plural (efistolam ad Fabium); so also Rufinus; but there is no reason for doubting the integrity of the Greek text of Eusebius, which runs, jAGov 5° obv cis Huas emiatoAat KopyyAiov.

Valesius, although Bansneng epistole Cornelzz, yet follows Jerome and Rufinus in believing that only one epistle is meant here.

Neither Rufinus nor, tern Jerome knew anything about the epistle, except what they read in Eusebius, and therefore it is more probable that Eusebius was correct in using the plural than that they were correct in using the singular.

It is easy to understand the change of Eusebius' indefinite plural into their definite singular.

They were evidently written in Greek; for in speaking of Cyprian's epistles immediately afterward, Eusebius especially mentions the fact that they were written in Latin, The epistle from which Eusebius quotes just below was also written in Greek, for Eusebius would otherwise, as is his custom, have mentioned the fact that he gives only a translation of it.

This has been pointed out by Valesius; but, as Routh remarks, we can certainly go further, and say that the other epistle mentioned vs Eusebius must have been in (oy too, since it was written by the same Cornelius, and addressed to the same Fabius.

These epistles are no longer extant, (see above, chap. 21, note 3).

But in the present case the immediate cause of the trouble was the treatment of the lapsed.

The terrible Decian persecution had naturally caused many to deny the faith, but afterward, when the stress was past, they repented and desired to be readmitted to the Church.

The question became a very serious one, and opinions were divided, some advocating their acceptance after certain prescribed penances, others their continued exclusion.

The matter caused a great deal of discussion, especially in Rome and Carthage.

The trouble came to a head in Rome, when Cornelius, who belonged to the lax party, was chosen bishop in the year 251, after the see had been vacant for more than a year.

The Stricter party at once aroused to action and chose Novatian, the leader oh the party, osition bishop.

He had been made a presbyter by the bishop AE and occupied a very prominent position in the Roman Church.

He seems originally to have held less rigid notions in regard to the treatment of the lapsed, but before the end of the persecution he became very decided in his opposition to their absolution and restoration.

His position, as well as his ability and piety, made him the natural leader of the party and the rival candidate for the bishopric.

He does not, however, seem to have desired to accept consecration as an opposition bishop, but his party insisted.

He immediately sent the usual letters announcing the Get to the bishops of the principal sees, to Carthage, Alexandria, and Rome.

Cyprian at once refused to recognize his appointment, "Dionysius wrote to him advising him to withdraw (see his epistle, quoted in chap. 45).

But Fabius of Antioch was inclined to take his side (see chap. 44, §1).

Novatian was excommunicated by the council mentioned just below, and then founded an independent church, baptizing all who came over to his side.

We know nothing of his subse- 'quent career faccording to the tradition of his followers, and also ocrates, H. #. IV. 28, he suffered martyrdom under Valerian), but 'his sect spread throughout the East and West, and continued in existence until the sixth century.

Novatian was not at all heretical in doctrine, His work upon the Trinity is both able and orthodox.

His character was austere and of unblemished purity (the account given by Cornelius below is a gross misrepresentation, from the pen of an enemy), and his talents were of a high order.

But the tendency of the Church was toward a more merciful treatment of the lapsed and of other sinners, and the stricter methods advocated by him fell more and more into disfavor.

Novatian was quite a prolific writer, According to Jerome, de wzr. z1l. chap. 10, he wrote de Pascha, de

Sabbato, de Circumcisione, de Sacerdote, de Oratione, de Cibis , ° Eusebius says, ra mept ris 'Pwpaiwy cvvddou Kai ta Séfavra

Tag Tos Kata THY ItaAtav K.7.A., which Jerome has transformed or compressed into de Synodo Romana, Italica, Africana, another instance of the careless way in which his de vzr. 2/7. was composed.

VI. 43]

THE NOVATIAN SCHISM.

Se ee ee ee ce eee en Ene by confession, with Sidonius," and Celerinus," a man who by the grace of God most heroically endured all kinds of torture, and by the strength of his faith overcame the weakness of the flesh, and mightily conquered the adversary, — these men found him out and detected his craft and duplicity, his perjuries and falsehoods, his unsociability and cruel friendship.

And they returned to the holy church and proclaimed in the presence of many, both bishops and presbyters and a large number of the laity, all his craft and wickedness, which for a long time he had concealed. And this they did with lamentations and repentance, because through the persuasions of the crafty and malicious beast they had left the church for the time." A little farther on he says :

Latin language, of Cyprian and those with him in Africa,' which show that they agreed as to the necessity of succoring those who had been tempted, and of cutting off from the Catholic

Church the leader of the heresy and all

that joined with him.

Another epistle of Cornelius, concerning the resolutions of the synod, is attached to these ; and yet others,® on the conduct of Novatus, from which it is proper for us to make selections, that any one who

sees this work may know about him.

Cornelius informs Fabius what sort of a man Novatus was, in the following words :

" But that you may know that a long time ago this remarkable man desired the episcopate, but kept this ambitious desire to himself and concealed it, —using as a cloak for his rebellion those confessors who had adhered to him

" How remarkable, beloved brother, the

change and transformation which we have seen take place in him in ashort time.

For this most illustrious man, who bound himself with terrible oaths in nowise to seek the bishopric, suddenfrom the beginning,

—I desire to speak.

Maximus,® one of our presbyters, and Urbanus,"° who twice gained the highest honor

11 Sidonius likewise was a confessor oe , and is mentioned with the others in the epistles of Cornelius and Cyprian, 12 Celerinus was also one of this party of Roman _confessors (as we learn from Cyprian, Z/. 15, a/. 87), who, upon his release from prison, went to Carthage, and was there ordained a reader by Cyprian (Ef. 33, 2/. 39).

His release from prison and departure for Carthage took place before the release of the others and before the death of Moses (as we learn from £/. 1 >» that is, before the end of the year 250.

He was still in Rome, however, at Easter of that year, as we learn from his epistle to Lucian, mentioned below.

He came of a family of martyrs (Z#. 33), and was himself one of the most celebrated confessors of his time.

There is extant an epistle written by him to Lucian, the Carthaginian confessor (Cyprian,

1 These epistles from Cyprian and the African bishops Jerome' transforms into a single epistle from Cornelius to Fabius, de Vovatiano, et de his quit lapst sunt.

At least, it seems impossible to explain this epistle mentioned by Jerome in any other way.

Knowing the slovenly way in which he put his work together, it is not surprising that he should attribute these epistles to the same person who wrote the ones mentioned just before and after.

Since the first epistles mentioned are said to have been addressed to Fabius and also the last one, from which Eusebius quotes, it is reasonable to conclude that all mentioned in this connection were addressed to him; and it would of course be quite natural for Cyprian, too, to write to Fabius who was known to be inclined to favor Novatian), in order to conleni

E}. 21), in which he begs absolution for his sisters, who had the faith.

The epistle (as we learn from its own statements) was written at Easter time and in the year 250, for there was no bishop of Rome at the time of its composition, As we learn from this passage, Celerinus went over with these other Roman confessors to the party of Novatian, and returned with them to the Church. He is, however, mentioned neither by pA oe nor by Cornelius (in his epistle to Cyprian) in connection with the schism of these confessors.

This is very remarkable, copecally since Celerinus was quite a prominent character.

It is possible that he was in Carthage the greater part of the time, and did not return to Rome until shortly before the confessors returned to the Church.

He might then have thrown in his lot with them, and have returned with them to the orthodox church; and yet, not having been mentioned by Cornelius' earlier epistle to Cyprian, announcing the schismatic position of the confessors, he was omitted also in the later letters announcing their return (which in fact only mentions the three leaders), and in Cyprian's reply, which of course would only mention those of whom he had been told in Cornelius' first epistle.

Of the subsequent career of Celerinus and of these other confessors we know nothing. m the account of Cornelius, and to announce that he agreed with the latter in regard to the treatment of the lapsed.

No epistle, however, of Cyprian or of other African bishops to Fabius are extant, though the same subject is discussed in' many epistles of Cyprian addressed to the people.

8 Rufinus mentions only two epistles of Cornelius in this connection, apparently confounding this one on the deeds of the Novatians with the one mentioned just before on the Decrees of the Council.

Jerome, on the other hand, making Cornelius, as alread mentioned, the author of the epistles of Cyprian and the African bishops. assigns four epistles to Cornelius.

None of the epistles mentioned in this section are extant, except the long fragment of the last one quoted just below.

As mentioned in the next chapter, Fabius inclined to take the side of Novatian over against the laxer party; and it was on this account that Cornelius wrote him so many epistles (compare also the epistle of Dionysius of Alexandria, Bae in chaps. 41 and 2, and see note x on the former chapter), and endeavored to blacken the character of Novatian as he does in the passages quoted.

9 This Maximus was a presbyter, and one of a party of Roman confessors who played a prominent part in the controve about the lapsed:

He and 'his companions were imprisoned at the very beginning of the Decian persecution (Cyprian, ZA. 24; al. 28), i.e. early in the year 250, and while in prison they adopted rigoristic views and wrote to some Carthaginian cc fessors, urging strict methods in dealing with the lapsed (see Cyprian, Ef. 22; al. 27), Farly in the year 251, after eleven months in prison, the presbyter

Moses, the leading spirit of the party, died, and Maximus became the chief one among them.

Moses before his death, in spite of his rigoristic principles, refused to commune with Novatian and his five presbyters (as we learn from § 20 of this chapter), apparently because he saw that his insistence upon strict discipline was tendin toward schism, and that such discipline could not be maintain without sacrificing the Church, But Maximus and those mentioned with him here, together with some others (see betta Ep. 45; al. 49), became even stricter than at first, and finally went over to the party of Novatian (which took its rise after the election of Cornelius in 251), but were at length reconciled to Cornelius and the rest of the Church, and received back with sy bat ays Cyprian,

Ep. 43) 45) te 9, 50; al. 46, 49, 5%, 53, 54).

Lhe notices of imus an Urbanus in Cyprian's epistles, which with the epistle of Cornelius constitute our only source for a knowledge of their lives, do not mention a second confession made by these two men,

18 There is no reason to doubt, as Cornelius does, Novatian's sincerity in declaring that he did not seek the office of bishop. Both

Cornelius and Cyprian make his ambition and his ety 2 of Cornelius, the successful candidate, the cause of his schism.

But such an accusation was made against every schismatic, even when there was not a'shadow of support for it, and there is no reason to suppose it nearer the truth in this than in other cases. In fact, his own

Epes mee as recorded here by Cornelius, and as testified to by ionysius in chap. 45, as well as the character of the man as revealed in his life previous to his episcopal ordination (as certified to even by his enemies), and in his writings, are entirely opposed to the supposition that he sought the episcopal office and that his schism was a result of his defeat.

We shall do mich better to reject entirely this exceedingly hostile and slanderous account of his enemy

Cornelius, and to accept his own.account of the matter as reported by Dionysius in chap. 25.

He was the natural head of the rigoristic party, made such by his commanding ability, his dace piety and his ascetic principles of living; and when Cornelius, the heai of the lax party, was made bishop (in March, 25t), the strict party revolted, and it could not be otherwise than that Novatian should be elected bishop, and that even if reluctant he should feel compelled to accept the office in order to assert the principles which he believed vital, and to prevent the complete ruin of the Church.

Covaelius gives a sad story of his ordination to the episcopate.

But one thing ts certain, he had with him for some time a large portion of the best people in the Roman church, among them Maximus and others of the most influential confessors, who seem at length to have returned so that we cannot tell when it took place, but it must of course have been during the persecution of Decius.

10 Urbanus was a confessor only, not a presbyter or deacon, as we learn from the notices of him in Cyprian's epistles, in connection with the party referred to in the previous note.

THE CHURCH HISTORY OF EUSEBIUS.

[VI. 43. i eee Ee could he be?) that in it there were forty-six presbyters, seven. deacons, seven sub-deacons," forty-two acolyths," fifty-two exorcists," readers," and janitors," and over fifteen hundred widows and persons in distress, all of whom the grace and kindness of the Master nourish.

But not even this great multitude, so necessary in the church, nor those who, through God's providence, were rich and full, together with the very many, even innumerable people, could turn him from such desperation and presumption and recall him to the Church."

Again,

farther on, he adds these words : ly appears a bishop as if thrown among us

bysome machine."

For this dogmatist, this defender of the doctrine of the Church," attempting to grasp and seize the episcopate, which had not been given him from above, chose two of his companions who had given up their own salvation.

And he sent them to a small and insignificant corner of Italy, that there by some counterfeit argument he might deceive three bishops, who were rustic and very simple men.

And they asserted positively and strongly that it was necessary that they should come quickly to Rome, in order that all the dissension which had arisen there might be appeased

" Permit us to say further: On account of what works or conduct had he the assurance to contend for the episcopate? Was it that he had been brought up in the Church from the beginning, and had endured many conflicts in her behalf, and had passed through many and great dangers for religion?

Truly this is not the fact.

But Satan, who entered and dwelt in

him for a long timg, became the occasion of his believing.

Being delivered by the exorcists, he fell into a severe sickness ; and as he seemed about to die, he received baptism by affusion, through their mediation, jointly with other

bishops.

When they had come, being, as we have stated, very simple in the craft and artifice of the wicked, they were shut up with certain selected men like himself.

And by the tenth hour, when they had become drunk and sick, he compelled them by force to confer on him the episcopate through a counterfeit and vain imposition of hands.

Because it had not come to him, he avenged himself by craft and treachery. One of these bishops shortly after came back to the church, lamenting and confessing his transgression.

And we communed with him as with a layman, all the people present interceding for him.

And we ordained successors of the other bishops, and sent them to the places where they were.

This avenger of the Gospel" then did not know that there should be one bishop in a catholic church ;" yet he was not ignorant (for how

opinion of Christendom, or otherwise Cyprian could not have apaled to universal custom as he does in discussing the matter. gee simply that the principle had never before been brought to such a test as to require its formal enunciation and public recognition by the clergy and the Church at large.

The emergency whic now arose compelled such formal statement of it; and the Council of Nicza made it canon law (cf. Bingham's A ntzguzties, I. p. 160 sq.).

18 The limitation of the deacons to seven in number was due to the fact that the appointment of the Seven by the apostles (Acts vi.) was commonly looked upon as the institution of the office of the diaconate.

But upon this matter, see above, Bk.!¥. chap. 1, note 2a.

The practice of limiting the number of the deacons to seven was quite a common one, and was enacted as a law in the fifteenth canon of the Council of Neo-Czsarea (held early in the third century).

The practice, however, was by no means universal, as we are informed by Sozomen (#. £. VII. 19).

Indeed, at least in Alexandria and in Constantinople, their number was much greater to the Church only because they saw that the schism was injuring it.

Certainly if Novatian had been a self-seeker, as Cornelius describes him, and if his ordination had been of such a nature as Cornelius reports, he could never have had the support of so many earnest and prominent men.

It is doubtless true, as Cornelius states, that Novatian was ordained by three Italian bishops, very likely bishops of rural and comparatively insignificant sees, and it is quite possible that one of them, as he also records, afterwards repented of his act as schismatic, and returned to the Church and received absolution.

But all this does not imply that these three bishops were deceived by false pretenses on the part of Novatian, or that they were intoxicated when they performed the service.

This, in fact, may be looked upon as baseless calumny.

Novatus, the Carthaginian agitator who had caused Cyprian so much trouble, took a prominent part in the Noyvyatian schism, though to make him the author of it, as Cyprian does, is undoubtedly incorrect (see Lardner, Works, III. p.

94 sq.; London ed. 1829).

It was perhaps he (as reported by Eulo ius, according to Photius, Cod. 182, and by Theodoret, Her. Fad. III. 5) that found these three bishops to ordain Novatian.

It is not at all improbable, when so many prominent men in the Roman church favored the stricter principles and supported Novatian, that bishops could be found in Italy who held the same principles and would be glad to ordain Novatian as bishop of Rome.

(see Bingham's Az. I. p. 286).

19 The sub-deacons (the highest of the inferior orders of the clergy) are first mentioned in this epistle of Cornelius and in various epistles. of Cyprian, At what time they arose we cannot tell, but they seem to have appeared in the East later than in the West, at least the first references we have to them in the Orient are in the fourth century, e.g. in the Afost. Const. VIII. 2x.

They acted as deacons' assistants, preparing the sacred vessels for use at the altar, attended the doors during communion service, and were often employed by the bishops for the conveyance of letters or messages to distant churches.

See Bingham's An#. Bk. LII. chap. 2.

20 The Acolyths (axdAov@or), another of the inferior orders of the clergy, are likewise first mentioned here and in Cyprian's epistles.

They seem to have been of much later institution in the East, for we first hear of them there in the time of Justinian (Justin. Vove/.

59).

'Their duties seem to have been to attend to the lights of the church and to procure the wine for communion service.

See Bingham, zézd. chap. 3.

21 The Exorcists likewise constituted one of the inferior orders of the clergy; but although we find exorcism very frequently referred to by the Fathers of the second century, there seems to have been no such office until the third century, the present being the earliest distinct reference to it.

In the fourt century we find the office in all parts of the Church East and West.

Their duty was to take charge of those piipposed to be possessed of an evil spirit; to pray with them, care for them, and exorcise the demon when possible.

See Bingham, zdzd. chap. 4.

22 The Readers, or Lectors (Greek, avayveora; Latin, Lectores), constituted still another of the inferior orders, and were already a distinct office in the time of Tertullian (cf. de Prescrip. chap. 41).

From the third century on the order seems to have been universal, Their duty was to read the Scriptures in the public services of the sanctuary.

See Bingham, 27d. chap. s.

#8 The Janitors, or Doorkeepers (Greek, mvAwpot or Ouvpwpois Latin, ostiarz? or janitores), are first mentioned in this passage.

In the fourth century, however, we find them frequently referred to.

Their office seems to have been about the same as that of the modern janitor or sexton.

See Bingham, zd7d. chap. 6.

14 wayyavor.

1 As Claes remarks, these words are evidently an allusion to Novatian's work, de Trinztate.

16 éxduxntys TOU evayyeAiov.

Possibly another sarcastic reference to Novatian's work in defense of the doctrine of the Church; possibly only an allusion to the fact that he prided himself on his orthodoxy.

11 The principle, that there should be only one bishop in a city, was not clearly enunciated and forcibly emphasized until the third century.

Cyprian's writings are full of it (cf. his treatise Ox the Unity of the Church), and in connection with this Novatian schism, which showed so plainly the disintegrating effects of a division of the church under two bishops, the principle was established so firmly as never again to be questioned.

I do not mean to assert here that the principle so clearly and conclusively established at this time was a new principle.

We find it enunciated even by Ignatius at the beginning of the second century, and it was the common

VI. 43.]

THE NOVATIAN SCHISM.

SS 8S SS eee " For this illustrious man forsook the Church of God, in which, when he believed, he was judged worthy of the presbyterate through the on the bed where he lay ;™ if indeed we can say that such a one did receive it. And when he was healed of his sickness he did not receive the other things which it is necessary to have according to the canon of the Church, even the being sealed by the bishop."

And as he did not receive this," how could he receive the Holy Spirit?'"'

Shortly after he says again :

"In the time of persecution, through cowardice and love of life, he denied that he was a presbyter.

For when he was requested and entreated by the deacons to come out of the chamber in which he had imprisoned himself, and give aid to the brethren as far as was lawful and possible for a presbyter to assist those of the brethren who were in danger and needed help, he paid so little respect to the entreaties of the deacons that he went away and departed in anger.

For he said that he no longer desired to be a presbyter, as he was an admirer

of another philosophy."

Passing by a few things, he adds the following : pete ee eS

favor of the bishop who ordained him to the presbyterial office.

This had been resisted by all the clergy and many of the laity ; because it was unlawful that one who had been affused on his bed on account of sickness as he had been should enter into any clerical office ;* but the bishop requested that he might be permitted to ordain this one only." He adds to these yet another, the worst of all the man's offenses, as follows :

"For when he has made the offerings, and distributed a part to each man, as he gives it he compels the wretched man to swear in place of the blessing.

Holding his hands in both of his own, he will not release him until he has sworn in this manner (for I will give his own words) :

'Swear to me by the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ that you will never forAnd the

sake me and turn to Cornelius.' unhappy man does not taste until he has called down imprecations on himself; and instead of saying Amen, as he takes the bread,

24 There is no reason to doubt that Novatian received clinical baptism, as here stated By, omnes This does not imply, as is commonly supposed, that he was of heathen parentage, for many Christians postponed baptism as long as possible, in order not to sacrifice baptismal grace by sins committed after baptism.

We do not know whether his parents were heathen or Christians.

Upon the objection to Novatian's ordination, based upon his irregular baptism, see below, § 17-

he says, I will never return to Cornelius."

Farther on he says again:

" But know that he has now been made bare and desolate; as the brethren leave him every day and return to the church.

Moses "

2% roy Te ohpayrcOjvat UTd TOD EmtoKOTOV. odpayioOnvat here means confirmation or consignation (as it was commonly called among the Latins); that is, the imposition of the hands of the bishop which regularly followed baptism, immediately if the bishop were on the ground,-in other cases at as ealy a date as possible.

The imposition of hands was for the purpose o conveying the Holy Spirit, who should supply the newly baptized Christian with the ReSeseayy. gmes to fit him for the Christian life.

Confirmation was thus looked upon as completing the baptism and as a necessary precondition of receiving the eucharist,

At the same time, if a person died after baptism, before it was possible to receive imposition of hands, the baptism was not regarded as rendered invalid by the omission, for in the baptism itself the full remission of sins was supposed to be granted. e confirmation was not necessary for such remission, but was necessary for the bestowal of the requisite sustaining grace for the Christian life.

Cornelius in the present paragraph does not intend to imply that regenerating grace was not given in Novatian's baptism.

He means simply that the Holy Spirit was not given in that full measure in which it was given by the laying on of hands, and which was necessary for growth in grace and Christian living.

The baptism was looked on in ordinary cases as in a sense negative, — effecting the washing away of sin, the laying on of hands as positive, confirming the gift of the Spirit.

The fcrmer, therefore, was sufficient to save the man who died immediately thereafter; the latter was necessary to sustain the man who still remained in the world.

Compare with these words of Cornelius Tertullian's de Baptism. chap. 6.

The earliest extant canon on this subject is the thirty-eighth of the synod of Elvira (306 A.D.), which decrees that a sick person may in case of necessity be baptized by a layman, but that he is afterward, if he recovers, to be taken to the bishop that the baptism may be perfected by the laying on of hands.

The seventy-seventh canon decrees the same thing for those baptized by deacons, but expressly declares that if the baptized person die before the imposition of hands, he is to be regarded as saved in virtue of the faith which he confessed in his baptism.

It is not necessary to give other references in connection with this matter.

For further particulars, see Bingham, zdzd. Bk. XII.

27 This is certainly a calumny.

It is possible, as Neander sug~gests, that Novatian, although a presbyter, withdrew somewhat rom active du d lived the life of an ascetic, and that it is this to which Cornelius refers in speaking of his admiration for " another philosophy."

But however that may be, Cornelius' interpretation. of his conduct as cowardly or unworthy is quite false.

See above, note I, 28 Clinic baptism (so-called from KAtvy, "a bed") was ordinarily looked upon in the early Church, in which immersion was the common mode of baptism, as permanently debarring a person from the presbyterate, and by many persons it was denied that such baptism was baptism at all.

The latter opinion, however the Church refused to sustain (cf, Cyprian, Zp. 75; a/. 19).

The twelfth canon of the Council of Nake acuta (held early in the fourth century) says, "' If any man is baptized only in time of sickness, he shall not be ordained a presbyter; because his faith was not voluntary, but. as it were of constraint; except his subsequent faith and diligence recommend him, or else the scarcity of men make it necessary to ordain him."

{t is clear that this canon meant to apply only to: persons whose baptism was delayed by their own fault.

It was common for catechumens to postpone the rite as long as possible in order not to forfeit baptismal grace by their foo haptsatel sins, and it was to discourage this practice that such canons as this of Neo-Czsarea were passed. ven this canon, however, provided for excepuinpal cases, and the fact that Novatian was ordained in spite of his irregular baptism is a proof that he must have been an exceptionally pious and zealous man, . 29 On Moses (or Moyses, as he is called by Cyprian), see note 9, above.

Lipsius (Chron. der rim. Bischéfe, p. 202, note) maintains. that Cornelius is referring, at this point, not to Novatian, but to Novatus, the Carthaginian presbyter, and that Eusebius has confounded the two men.

He bases this opinion upon the mention of the five presbyters, whom he identifies with those who, with Novatus, separated from the Carthaginian church in connection with the schism of Felicissimus (see Cyprian, Zf. 39; @/. 43), and also upon the fact that Moses died before the election of Novatian as opposition bishop.

In regard to the first point, it must be noticed that, in. an epistle to Cyprian upon the schism of Novatian (Cyprian, EA. 47; al. 50), Cornelius mentions five presbyters (including Novatus) as. connected with Novatian in his schism.

Certainly it is most natural to refer Cornelius' words in this paragraph to the same five men.

Indeed, to speak of Novatus and the five presbyters with him would be very peculiar, for Novatus himself was one of the five, and therefore there were but four with him.

As to the second point, it ma simply be said that Moses might well have refused to commune wit

Novatian, before the election of the latter, seeing that his position.

On the signification of the verb ofpayigw, see Suicer's Thesauvus.

Wecan hardly believe that Novatian failed to receive imposition of hands from the bishop, for it is inconceivable that the latter would have omitted what was regarded as such an important prerequisite to church communion in the case of one whom he ordained to the presbyterate.

Novatian may not have received confirmation immediately after his recovery, but he must have received it before his ordination, As seen in § 17, it is not the omission of confirmation that causes the objections on the part of the clergy, but the clinical baptism.

26 The majority of the MSS., followed by Schwegler, Laemmer, and Heinichen, read rovrwv, But some of the best MSS., followed by all the other editors, read TovTOV.

↑ Back to top