Pierius, catechista Alexandrinus, Fragmenta

(5) ‹anchor: not visible in the foot image› · call in col 243

Decennalem illam a Diocletiano incoeptam.

That is, the persecution of ten years begun by Diocletian.

(printed under page 132)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible in the foot image› · call in col 243

Scribit S. Hieronymus in Praefat. Osee.: Pierii legi tractatum longissimum, quem in exordio hujus prophetae die vigiliarum Dominicae passionis extemporali et diserto sermone profudit. In epist. Multa, contra Vigilantium: et in vigiliis Paschae tale quid fieri plerumque convincitur. In Matth. XXV: Traditio Judaeorum est, Christum media nocte venturum, unde reor et traditionem apostolicam permansisse, ut in die vigiliarum Paschae ante noctis dimidium populos dimittere non liceat exspectantes adventum Christi, et postquam illud tempus transierit, securitate praesumpta festum cunctis agentibus diem. Adamantii autem et Pierii exemplaria citat Hieron. in Matth. c. xxiv. H. GRAVIUS. — Jam diu autem est cum et ista in Oseam et caeterae lucubrationes Pierii omnes interciderunt. FABRICIUS.

St Jerome writes in the Preface to Hosea: "I have read a very long treatise of Pierius, which he poured forth in an extempore and eloquent sermon on the beginning of this prophet, on the day of the vigil of the Lord's Passion." In the letter beginning Multa, against Vigilantius: "and at the vigils of Easter something of the kind is generally proved to happen." On Matthew 25: "It is a tradition of the Jews that Christ will come at midnight; whence I think the apostolic tradition has also lasted, that on the day of the Easter vigil it is not permitted to dismiss the people before the middle of the night, as they await the coming of Christ, and once that time has passed, all keep the feast day, security being taken for granted." Jerome also cites the copies of Adamantius and Pierius on Matthew ch. 24. H. Gravius. — But it is long since both these writings on Hosea and all the other works of Pierius were lost. Fabricius.

(printed under page 132)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible in the foot image› · call in col 243

Ex scripto quodam Pierii in priorem S. Pauli, etc. Censet cl. Lardnerus in op. De fide hist. evang., part. II, lib. I, cap. 54, nullum in Pauli Epistolam a Pierio scriptum commentarium, sed tantum ῥῆσιν Paulinam hic commemoratam in aliquo opere Pierium fusius sermone exposuisse. Fabricius autem in Bibl. Graec. lib. V, cap. 35, ubi de scriptoribus in Photii Bibliotheca censurae subjectis agit, haud dubitare se ait, ex duodecim illis a Photio memoratis Pierii λόγοις fuisse hunc tractatum. Vid. paulo infra. Sed haec Fabricii conjectura de Pierii quidem λόγοις incerta videtur.

"From a certain writing of Pierius on the First [Epistle] of St Paul," etc. The celebrated Lardner, in his work On the Credibility of the Gospel History, part II, book I, chapter 54, judges that Pierius wrote no commentary on Paul's Epistle, but only expounded at greater length in some work the Pauline saying mentioned here. Fabricius, however, in the Bibliotheca Graeca, book V, chapter 35, where he treats of the writers subjected to censure in Photius's Bibliotheca, says he has no doubt that this treatise was one of those twelve "discourses" (λόγοι) of Pierius recorded by Photius. See a little below. But this conjecture of Fabricius about the "discourses" of Pierius seems uncertain.

(printed under page 132)

(8) ‹anchor: τῷ ἀδελφῷ› · call in col 244

Ὃν καὶ σὺν τῷ ἀδελφῷ, etc. De Pierio haec scripserat statim ante Photius in cod. 118, in quo recensetur Pamphili M. atque Eusebii Apologia pro Origene: Ἦν δὲ Παμφίλου διδάσκαλος ὁ Πιέριος, τοῦ ἐν Ἀλεξανδρείᾳ καὶ αὐτὸς προεστηκὼς διδασκαλείου. Μάρτυς δὲ καὶ ὁ Πιέριος ἅμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ Ἰσιδώρῳ, τῶν ἀθλητικῶν ἀξιωθέντες στεφάνων, οἷς, ὥς φασι, καὶ νεὼς καὶ οἶκοι ὑπὸ τῶν εὐσεβούντων ἱδρύνθησαν. Sed de Pierii rebus adisis illa ad Hieronymum De viris ill. modo notata. Inscriptio interea seu titulus ejus operis, quod mox memorabitur, in duodecim tomos partiti, nisi idem illud Οἱ Λόγοι appellatum fuerit, intercidisse videtur.

"Whom, together with his brother," etc. Photius had written this about Pierius just before, in cod. 118, in which the Apology for Origen of Pamphilus the Martyr and Eusebius is reviewed: "Pierius was the teacher of Pamphilus, and he too presided over the school at Alexandria. Pierius too was a martyr, together with his brother Isidore, being counted worthy of the athletes' crowns; to them, it is said, both a church and houses were raised by the devout." But on Pierius's life [consult] what was noted just now on Jerome's De viris illustribus. Meanwhile the inscription or title of his work, which will be mentioned presently, divided into twelve tomes, seems to have been lost, unless that very work was called "The Discourses."

(printed under page 132)

(9) ‹anchor: τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐπισφαλῶς› · call in col 244

Περὶ μέντοι τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐπισφαλῶς, etc. Guillelmus quidem Berriman. in Concionibus sacris de historia controversiae Trinitariae lingua vernacula praeclare scriptis, serm. 3, p. 154, Pierium defendens, negat hoc verisimile esse, in gravem ullum errorem de Spiritu sancto incidisse eum, qui de Filii quidem natura verum doceret. Opinatur porro secutus Bullum vir idem doctus, scripsisse Pierium, Spiritum S. minorem esse Patre et Filio eadem ratione, qua ipse Filius Patre minor a catholicis agnoscitur, nempe originis respectu. At vero, ut dicam quod res est, an Photium censemus, qui, quidquid ἀρχαιοτρόπως docuisset de Filii natura Pierius, nihil reprehendit in eo, voluisse eidem dicam scribere, quod periculose admodum et impie de Spiritu S. doceret, nisi revera in errore aliquo saltem verbo tenus Alexandrinus iste versatus esset? Quod quidem dixit, Spiritum S. gloria inferiorem esse Patre et Filio, hoc sequi existimare potuit Pierius, non respectu originis tantum, sed etiam ex oeconomia, quae dicitur redemptionis; sed aliqua tamen in scriptis ejus vereor exstitisse ab eo dicta perperam de Spiritu; neque id mirandum in eo, qui Origenem imitari vellet; cum periculose admodum circa Spiritum Dei philosophatum esse decus illud Alexandrinae scholae, probe norint omnes, qui in scriptis (continues)

"But concerning the Spirit, dangerously," etc. William Berriman, in his Sermons on the History of the Trinitarian Controversy, finely written in the vernacular, sermon 3, p. 154, defending Pierius, denies it is likely that one who taught the truth about the nature of the Son fell into any grave error about the Holy Spirit. The same learned man, following Bull, further thinks that Pierius wrote that the Holy Spirit is less than the Father and the Son in the same way in which the Son himself is acknowledged by Catholics to be less than the Father, namely in respect of origin. But in truth, to say how the matter stands, do we suppose that Photius, who found nothing to blame in whatever Pierius had taught "in the ancient manner" about the nature of the Son, would have meant to bring a charge against him for teaching very dangerously and impiously about the Holy Spirit, unless that Alexandrian had really been involved in some error, at least in words? As to his having said that the Holy Spirit is inferior to the Father and the Son in glory, Pierius may have thought this followed not only in respect of origin but also from the economy, called that of redemption; yet I fear that some things wrongly said by him about the Spirit did exist in his writings; nor is this surprising in one who wished to imitate Origen, since all who [are versed] in the writings know well that that glory of the Alexandrian school philosophized very dangerously about the Spirit of God (continues)

(printed under page 132)

Fragmentum ex scripto quodam Pierii in priorem S. Pauli ad Corinthios Epistolam. Hoc brevissimum attulit S. Hieronymus fragmentum in epist. 2 ad Pammachium, pro libris suis adversus Jovinianum.

A fragment from a certain writing of Pierius on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians. St Jerome adduced this very short fragment in the second letter to Pammachius, on behalf of his books against Jovinian.

Tom. IV, pag. 243 ed. Benedictin.

Vol. IV, p. 243 of the Benedictine edition.

De Pierii scriptis haec Photius in Bibliotheca, cod. 119, p. 300, ed. Hoeschel. Rothomagi 1653.

On the writings of Pierius, Photius says the following in the Bibliotheca, codex 119, p. 300, Hoeschel's edition, Rouen 1653.

<!-- note: Para 1 is the full-width heading below the dash that closes the run-on of the editors' Notitia on Pierius (col. 243 top, "artis, et post persecutionem (5) omne vitae suae tempus Romae ... ipse sermo demonstrat."), which is NOT set here: it belongs to the Notitia unit (other: pointer to the notitia, cols 241-243). The heading's footnote call "(7)" after "quodam" is omitted per the corpus rule on note calls (footnote 7, on Lardner and Fabricius, is set with the footnotes). Para 2 is the editors' source reference printed at the end of the Jerome passage (right column, after "κηρύσσει."); the Jerome passage itself is the fragment's text and is not set here. Para 3 is the second full-width heading, below a dash, introducing the Photius extract; Photius's Greek title "Πιερίου πρεσβυτέρου λόγοι διάφοροι" and the facing Latin/Greek text of cod. 119 below it are not editors' prose. The tail of footnote 8 in the right foot column ("Sed de Pierii rebus adisis ... intercidisse videtur.") is apparatus, set elsewhere. The editors' prose does not run into the next column. -->

(9, continued) ‹anchor: τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐπισφαλῶς› · call in col 244 (note begun under page 132, n243) legendis ejus versati sint. Hic ipse tamen Origenes in operibus suis, utinam Pierii quoque volumina ad nos pervenissent, non tantum saepe de Spiritu S. conjuncte cum duabus alteris τῆς προσκυνητῆς Triadis personis (ipsius voces sunt in Comment. in S. Joan. Evang.) locutus est, verum etiam in loco, quem hic designabo, τὸ συναΐδιον Spiritus docuit. Cons. Origenis loc. apud Euseb. lib. I, adv. Marcellum, c. 4, p. 22 ed. Paris. Notabilia sunt verba Origenis de sanctis principiis, sive sermonibus de divinis personis, in homil. 5, in Jerem.

are versed in reading them. Yet Origen himself in his works (would that the volumes of Pierius too had come down to us!) not only often spoke of the Holy Spirit jointly with the two other persons of the adorable Trinity (the words are his own, in the Commentary on St John's Gospel), but also, in a passage I shall point out here, taught the co-eternity of the Spirit. Consult the passage of Origen in Eusebius, book I Against Marcellus, ch. 4, p. 22 of the Paris edition. Notable are Origen's words on the holy principles, or discourses on the divine persons, in Homily 5 on Jeremiah.

(printed under page 133)

(10) ‹anchor: Εἰς τὸν Λόγον› · call in col 245

Εἰς τὸν Λόγον. H. e. unum ex tomis ejus libri, qui a Photio lectus est; idemque venit dicendum de tractatu in Osee statim post memorato, etsi de hoc, tanquam si separatus et justus quidam liber esset, Hieronymus in libro De viris ill. locutus est.

"In the discourse." That is, one of the tomes of that book which Photius read; and the same must be said of the treatise on Hosea mentioned just after, although Jerome, in his book De viris illustribus, spoke of it as though it were a separate and proper book.

(printed under page 133)

(11) ‹anchor: Χερουβὶμ… τῆς τοῦ Ἰακὼβ στήλης› · call in col 245

Χερουβὶμ… τῆς τοῦ Ἰακὼβ στήλης. De cherubim opere Moysis adi capp. XXV et XXXVII Exodi, de lapide vero a Jacobo posito post visos ab eo angelos ascendentes et descendentes, consulendum est cap. XXVIII Genesis. Hac in re quoque imitatus erat Pierius Origenem, duos illos seraphim apud Isaiam indicare Christum et Spiritum S. statuentem; quinimo interdum allegorias, ut alibi dixi, ita vecorde sectantem, ut veritatem litterae, quae vocatur, sacrae Scripturae in rebus procul dubio vere gestis subvertat. Hoc tamen an fecerit Pierius magistrum suum secutus, an contra in perscrutando mystico, seu spirituali, nonnullarum certe Scripturarum sensu, pie ac sobrie versatus fuerit, nescio. Sed etiam Hieronymum video tantum insanisse, ut scriberet ad Nepotianum in epistola De vita clericorum, historiam Davidis et Abisae Sunamitis figmentum esse de mimo vel Atellanarum ludicro, si sequeris litteram. Apage vero hasce allegoristarum nugas, quibus propter nonnulla vere typica in sacra Scriptura, et alia quaedam vel tropice prolata, vel ambiguae interpretationis, magni alioqui viri, dum alios captare volebant, suam ipsorum famam laeserunt. Mysterium autem hujusmodi expositionis videas ab Origene traditum cum alibi tum in lib. IV De principiis, cap. 1, § 15, sive cap. primo Philocaliae, pag. 12 ed. Spenceri.

"The cherubim … of Jacob's pillar." On the cherubim made by Moses see chapters 25 and 37 of Exodus; on the stone set up by Jacob after he had seen the angels ascending and descending, chapter 28 of Genesis is to be consulted. In this matter too Pierius had imitated Origen, who held that the two seraphim in Isaiah signify Christ and the Holy Spirit; indeed Origen at times pursued allegories, as I have said elsewhere, so senselessly as to overturn the so-called literal truth of sacred Scripture in matters that beyond doubt really happened. Whether Pierius did this following his master, or on the contrary conducted himself piously and soberly in searching out the mystical or spiritual sense of at least some Scriptures, I do not know. But I see that even Jerome went so far astray as to write to Nepotian, in the letter On the Life of Clerics, that the story of David and Abishag the Shunammite is "a fiction from a mime or an Atellan farce" if you follow the letter. Away with these trifles of the allegorists, by which men otherwise great, on account of some things truly typical in sacred Scripture and certain others either spoken figuratively or of ambiguous interpretation, harmed their own reputation while they sought to win over others. The mystery of this kind of exposition you may see set out by Origen both elsewhere and in book IV of De principiis, ch. 1, § 15, or the first chapter of the Philocalia, p. 12 of Spencer's edition.

(printed under page 133)

(12) ‹anchor: τὰ γεγενημένα› · call in col 245

Ὡς οὐδὲν ἦσαν ὡς ἕτερα τὰ γεγενημένα. Hoeschelius vult legere ὡς οὐδὲν ἦσαν, ὡς ἕτερον ἦσαν, ὡς ἕτερα, τ. γ. Atque additur istud, ὡς ἕτερον ἦσαν, in codicibus, quos affert in notis Hoeschelius. Sed fortasse locus sanus est, cujus ibidem Latinam addidi interpretationem. In verbis sequentibus, ὡς οὐδὲ τύπον, particulam ὡς delet Hoeschelius, quae abest a quatuor codicibus.

"As though they were nothing, as though other than the things that were made." Hoeschel wants to read "as though they were nothing, as though they were something other, as though other than the things made." And this phrase, "as though they were something other," is added in the manuscripts which Hoeschel cites in his notes. But perhaps the passage is sound; I have added a Latin rendering of it in the same place. In the following words, "as though not even a form," Hoeschel deletes the particle ὡς, which is absent from four manuscripts.

(printed under page 133)