Tertullian, On Prayer (De oratione)

(1) ‹DE ORATIONE LIBER› · printed under cols 1149–1150 (lower series of numbered notes)

Inter eximias orationis dominicae dotes, haec plane est mirabilis atque divina, quod cum ab humilibus et angustis mentibus capiatur, sublimes nihilominus et capacissimas explet. Illis quidem familiaris et quotidiana precandi formula, his praeterea totius christianae disciplinae breviarium. Hoc coelestis gratiae pignus Patres antiqui certatim praedicavere. Nemo Tertulliano doctius explicavit; nemo sanctiore cultu posteris colendum demonstravit. Libello titulum, fecit, De Oratione, tam excellentem quam simplicem cum significet christianam ab ipso Dei Filio dictatam. Preces imperatori dandae concipi solebant adhibito jurisperito. Preces ad Deum nostras composuit nobis coelestis jurisperitus Dominus noster Jesus Christus. RIG.

Among the outstanding endowments of the Lord's Prayer, this one is plainly wonderful and divine: that while it is grasped by humble and narrow minds, it nonetheless fills lofty and most capacious ones. To the former it is a familiar and daily form of praying; to the latter it is, besides, a breviary of the whole Christian discipline. The ancient Fathers vied with one another in proclaiming this pledge of heavenly grace. No one expounded it more learnedly than Tertullian; no one showed with more holy reverence that it is to be cherished by posterity. He gave his little book the title "On Prayer", as excellent as it is simple, since it denotes the Christian [prayer] dictated by the very Son of God. Petitions to be presented to the emperor used to be drawn up with the help of a jurist. Our petitions to God were composed for us by the heavenly jurist, our Lord Jesus Christ. RIG[ALTIUS].

(a) ‹Dei spiritus› · printed under col 1149 and continued at the head of the notes under col 1150

Dei spiritus. Non hic tantum sed et alibi Christus a Tertulliano Dei spiritus appellatur, ut videre est in Apolog., cap., 21., et adversus Marcion., lib. I., cap. 10., et lib. III., cap 6 et 16., et lib IV., cap. 21., et adversus Praxeam, cap. 26, Appellatio certe nostris nunc auribus male sonans, at veteribus quibusdam, haereses, quae deinde obortae sunt, ante oculos non habentibus, incaute usurpata. In ea potissimum sententia fuit Lactantius Firmianus, teste sancto Hieronymo in epistola ad Pammachium et Oceanum de Erroribus Origenis: Lactantius, inquit ille, in libris suis, et maxime in epistolis ad Demetrianum, Spiritus sancti omnino negat substantiam, et errore judaico dicit eum vel ad Patrem referri, vel ad Filium, et sanctificationem utriusque personae sub ejus nomine demonstrari. Idem ab Hieronymo repetitur in comment. ad cap. IV Epist. ad Galatas. Quare quin et hic Tertullianus erret, dubitandum non videretur. Cum tamen aliis in libris: Patre ac Filio Spiritum sanctum apertissime distinguat, tertium numen divinitatis, et tertium nomen majestatis appellans, ideo Christum Dei spiritum ab illo vocatum arbitror, quod generali nomine Deum dici spiritum crederet Joanne apostolo scribente: Deus spiritus est. L. A. MURAT. — Dei spiritus. Interpretaturus orationem dominicam, praemittit quis illam docuerit. Fuit autem Christus, quem pluribus appellat nominibus; est enim spiritus, quo miracula edidit, et sermo Dei, ratio, seu sapientia, quae venit in mundum, ut infra subjicit. Idem Tertullianus in Apologiae cap. 17: Quod colimus, inquit, Deus unus est, qui totam molem istam cum omni instrumento elementorum, corporum, spirituum, verbo, quo jussit, ratione, qua disposuit, virtute, qua potuit, de nihilo expressit in ornamentum majestatis suae. G. PANCIROL.

The Spirit of God. Not here only but elsewhere too Christ is called by Tertullian the Spirit of God, as may be seen in the Apology, ch. 21, and Against Marcion, bk. 1, ch. 10, and bk. 3, chs. 6 and 16, and bk. 4, ch. 21, and Against Praxeas, ch. 26. A designation that certainly sounds ill to our ears now, but was incautiously used by certain ancients who did not have before their eyes the heresies that arose afterwards. Lactantius Firmianus was especially of that opinion, as Saint Jerome testifies in the letter to Pammachius and Oceanus on the Errors of Origen: "Lactantius," he says, "in his books, and above all in his letters to Demetrianus, altogether denies the substance of the Holy Spirit, and with a Jewish error says that He is referred either to the Father or to the Son, and that the sanctification of both Persons is shown under His name." The same is repeated by Jerome in his commentary on chapter 4 of the Epistle to the Galatians. Hence it would not seem to be doubted that Tertullian too errs here. Since, however, in other books he most plainly distinguishes the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son, calling Him the third divine power of the Godhead and the third name of the majesty, I think Christ is called by him the Spirit of God for this reason, that he believed God is called spirit by a general name, since the apostle John writes: God is spirit. L. A. MURAT[ORI]. — The Spirit of God. About to interpret the Lord's Prayer, he first states who taught it. It was Christ, whom he calls by several names: for He is the spirit by which He worked miracles, and the Word of God, the reason or wisdom which came into the world, as he adds below. Tertullian likewise in the Apology, ch. 17: "What we worship," he says, "is the one God, Who by the word with which He commanded, by the reason with which He ordered, by the power with which He was able, brought forth out of nothing this whole mass with all its equipment of elements, bodies and spirits, for the adornment of His majesty." G. PANCIROL[I].

(b) ‹et Dei ratio› · printed under col 1150

Dei sermo et Dei ratio. Λόγος proprium Filii Dei apud Graecos nomen varias latine interpretationes habuit, nempe Verbi, Sermonis, Rationis. Latinis hisce nominibus promiscue usi sunt veteres Ecclesiae scriptores, ut idem significarent. Nunc libentius Verbum interpretamur. MURAT.

The Word of God and the Reason of God. Λόγος, the proper name of the Son of God among the Greeks, has had various Latin renderings, namely Verbum, Sermo, Ratio. The ancient writers of the Church used these Latin names indiscriminately, to signify the same thing. Now we more willingly render it Verbum. MURAT[ORI].

ARGUMENTUM.

ARGUMENT.

Aureus ille libellus, a Tertulliano sane adhuc catholico descriptus, imo, modo ad martyras adhortationem, si lubet, excipias, primus, judice D. Lumpero, tanti hujusce ingenii recenti fide jam reviviscentis fructus, partim de re dogmatica est, partim de moribus et disciplina.

That golden little book, written by Tertullian while certainly still a Catholic, indeed, if you please to except only the exhortation to the martyrs, the first fruit, in D. Lumper's judgement, of this great genius, now reviving by his recent faith, is partly on a matter of doctrine and partly on morals and discipline.

In priore ipsius parte, Orationem dominicam, primus omnium quos noverimus, Septimianus noster luculenter explicat, in eaque totius Evangelii doctrinam velut in cujusdam compendii speculo collectam exhibet; multi post eum eamdem tritam habuere viam ac in eam imprimis ejus ex aperto discipulus Cyprianus totus abiit. In posteriori parte, qua praesertim ratione sacris interagendum sit, quive precum ritus sint aut omittendi aut sedulo perficiendi, rara admodum, pro temporum vetustate, expositione indigitat.

In its first part our Septimius, first of all whom we know, lucidly expounds the Lord's Prayer, and shows the teaching of the whole Gospel gathered in it as in the mirror of a kind of compendium; many after him have kept to the same well-trodden path, and above all his avowed disciple Cyprian went wholly into it. In the second part he indicates, with an exposition quite rare for the antiquity of the times, in what manner above all one should take part in the sacred rites, and what rites of prayer are either to be omitted or carefully performed.

Porro haec sunt praecipua prioris partis capita: 1° Quanta sit oratio illa quam ipsemet tradidit Dei sermo et Dei ratio, sermo rationis et ratio sermonis, D. N. J. C. Cap. 1. 2° Subinde deducitur exordium in quo agnoscitur Pater, et in Patre Filius invocatur, nec mater quidem Ecclesia praeteritur. Cap. 2. 3° Tum singula sigillatim explicatur petitio, prima nempe, qua et nos Angelorum candidati, coelestem Dei gloriam ipsiusque in nobis nomen sanctificatum postulamus. Cap. 3. Secunda vero rogatur ut fiat ejus voluntas in nobis qui coelum et terra sumus. Cap. 4. Tertia autem festinandum est ad spei nostrae

Further, these are the chief heads of the first part: 1° How great is that prayer which the Word of God and the Reason of God, the Word of reason and the Reason of the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ, Himself handed down. Ch. 1. 2° Next the opening is drawn out, in which the Father is acknowledged, and in the Father the Son is invoked, and not even Mother Church is passed over. Ch. 2. 3° Then each petition is explained one by one: namely the first, by which we too, candidates of the angels, ask for the heavenly glory of God and for His name to be hallowed in us. Ch. 3. In the second it is asked that His will be done in us, who are heaven and earth. Ch. 4. In the third, however, [we are told] that we must hasten to the embrace of our hope, […]

(a) continued from col 1149, set in n1149

(b) call in col 1149, printed under col 1150, set in n1149

(c) ‹sermo› · printed under col 1150 and continued under col 1151 (p. 620); no note (d) is printed

Sermo rationis, et ratio sermonis. Cur Deum Patrem Sermonis quoque et Rationis appellatione hic Tertullianus donet, mirabitur quisquis veterum loquelam e recentiorum sermone metiri velit. At cum τοῦ λόγου, vox anceps rationem, cogitationem, mentem, ac intellectionem significet, eo sensu Patri quoque facta est communis et τοῦ Λόγου, et rationis, et sermonis appellatio. Quamobrem Λόγος ἐκ Λόγου, Verbum de Verbo a nonnullis Patrum dictus est Filius; et sanctus Irenaeus, lib. II, cap. 48, Patrem λογόν, seu verbum, et mentem appellat, ita scribens: Deus autem totus existens mens, et totus existens Logos, quod cogitat, hoc et loquitur, et quod loquitur, hoc et cogitat. Cogitatio enim ejus Logos, et Logos mens, et omnia concludens mens, ipse est Pater. Verum, quocumque modo appellentur Pater, et Filius, inepta ac dubia divinitatis vocabula inenarrabilis rei magnitudine et majestate excusantur, modo in id consentiatur, ut Filium a Patre distinguamus, unamque in iis, ac in Spiritu sancto essentiam et naturam praedicemus. Ita praeclarissime sensit sanctus Ambrosius in lib. de Filii divinitate, cap. 5., cujus verba producere volumus, ut pateat, non a Tertulliano duntaxat, sed ab aliis quoque scriptoribus ecclesiasticis tum Patrem, tum Filium nominibus Verbi, seu Rationis, et Sermonis ac Spiritus fuisse designatos. Haec est autem, inquit, nominis ratio; ut in Patre, et Filio unitatem substantiae credas; licet rem ipsam, quae est inenarrabibis, definire non possis; ut sive lumen de lumine dicas, sive Verbum de Verbo, sive Spiritum de Spiritu, sive Dominum de Domino, quodcumque de eo dixeris, unius tamen essentiae Patrem et Filium credas. Vide et sanctum Irenaeum, lib. II., cap. 48. PAM..

The Word of reason and the reason of the Word. Anyone who would measure the speech of the ancients by the language of more recent writers will wonder why Tertullian here bestows on God the Father too the designation of Word and of Reason. But since λόγος, an ambiguous term, signifies reason, thought, mind and understanding, in that sense the designation of Λόγος, of reason and of word has become common to the Father also. For that reason the Son was called by some of the Fathers Λόγος ἐκ Λόγου, Word from Word; and Saint Irenaeus, bk. 2, ch. 48, calls the Father λόγος, or word, and mind, writing thus: "But God, being wholly mind and wholly Logos, what He thinks, this He also speaks, and what He speaks, this He also thinks. For His thought is Logos, and the Logos is mind, and the mind that encloses all things is the Father Himself." But in whatever way the Father and the Son are named, unfit and doubtful terms for the Godhead are excused by the greatness and majesty of the unutterable reality, provided there is agreement on this: that we distinguish the Son from the Father, and proclaim one essence and nature in them and in the Holy Spirit. So Saint Ambrose thought most admirably in his book on the divinity of the Son, ch. 5, whose words we wish to bring forward, so that it may be clear that not by Tertullian alone but by other ecclesiastical writers too both the Father and the Son were designated by the names of Word, or Reason, and of Speech and Spirit. "This," he says, "is the reason for the name: that you may believe the unity of substance in the Father and the Son, although you cannot define the reality itself, which is unutterable [printed "inenarrabibis"]; so that whether you say Light from Light, or Word from Word, or Spirit from Spirit, or Lord from Lord, whatever you say of Him, you may nevertheless believe the Father and the Son to be of one essence." See also Saint Irenaeus, bk. 2, ch. 48. PAM[ELIUS].

complexum, ad votum Christianorum, ad confusionem nationum, ad exultationem Angelorum. Cap. 5. Quarta trifariam quidem habet explicationem, scilicet de pane communi, deinde de Christo utpote credentium pane, postremo de corpore Christi eucharistico. Cap. 6. Tum Dei clementiam quinta implorat. Cap. 7. Sexta demum et septima tentationem, malumque deprecatur. Cap. 7-9.

[…] to the object of Christians' prayer, to the confounding of the nations, to the exultation of the angels. Ch. 5. The fourth has a threefold explanation: namely of common bread, then of Christ as the bread of believers, and lastly of the eucharistic body of Christ. Ch. 6. Then the fifth implores the mercy of God. Ch. 7. The sixth and seventh, finally, pray to be spared temptation and evil. Chs. 7–9.

Pars vero posterior multiplex est, nec tamen aegerrime ad tria haec reducitur: 1° Quaenam ante orationem fructuose animam praeparent, nimirum memoria praeceptorum, ac prae omnibus officia charitatis, libera animi intentio qua inenarrabiles spiritus ad Patrem gemitus eliciuntur. Cap. 10—15. 2° Quaenam sive ante sive post orationem libeat omittere, hoc nempe est vel manus abluere, vel penulam deponere, vel assidere. Cap. 16—17. 3° Quaenam vero deceant aut necesse sint peragenda, scilicet manuum elatio; vultus, vocisque demissio; osculum pacis; statio ad aram, accepto corpore Domini et reservato; habitus foeminarum modestus, velamenque virginum; genua flectendi ritus, locus orandi, horaeque solemniores; alternus psalmorum cantus; agapeque devota, coronata cum pompa operum bonorum, inter psalmos et hymnos ad altare Dei deducta. Cap. 16-28. Confertae huic ac mirum in modum opimae veterum rituum copiae superadditur, coronidis instar, de vi et effectu orationis ornata amplissimaque descriptio. Cap. 29. EDD.

The second part is manifold, yet it is reduced without much difficulty to these three: 1° What things fruitfully prepare the soul before prayer: namely the remembrance of the commandments, and above all the duties of charity, and the free attention of the mind by which the unutterable groanings of the spirit are drawn forth to the Father. Chs. 10–15. 2° What things one may omit either before or after prayer: that is, washing the hands, or laying aside the cloak, or sitting down. Chs. 16–17. 3° What things are fitting or must be done: namely the raising of the hands; the lowering of the face and voice; the kiss of peace; standing at the altar, with the body of the Lord received and reserved; the modest dress of women, and the veil of virgins; the rite of bending the knees, the place of prayer, and the more solemn hours; the alternate singing of the psalms; and the devout agape, crowned with a procession of good works, conducted to the altar of God among psalms and hymns. Chs. 16–28. To this crowded and wonderfully rich store of ancient rites there is added, like a crowning flourish, an ornate and most ample description of the power and effect of prayer. Ch. 29. EDD.

(c) continued from col 1150, set in n1150

(1) ‹novi› · printed under col 1151 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Nobis delet Semler. Oberth.

Semler and Oberthür delete "nobis".

(2) ‹de carnalibus in spiritualia› · printed under col 1151 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Spiritualia Seml. Oberth.

"spiritualia": Semler, Oberthür.

(3) ‹ratio qua› · printed under col 1151 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Ita Rigalt. Jun. Seml. Leop.; alii quo venit.

So Rigaltius, Junius, Semler, Leopold; others read "quo venit".

(4) ‹Sic igitur› · printed under col 1152 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Igitur del. Seml.

Semler deletes "igitur".

(e) ‹novum vinum› · printed under col 1151

Novum vinum. Alludit ad illud quod legitur in Matthaeo, cap. VI., ubi dicitur Novum vinum novis utribus convenire; et novam plagulam, id est stragulam, novo assui vestimento. Scilicet conveniebat, novae legis institutorem novam docere orationem. Nonio auctore plagula est linteum tegmen. G. PANC.

New wine. He alludes to what is read in Matthew, ch. 6, where it is said that new wine suits new wineskins; and that a new patch, that is, a covering, is sewn on a new garment. That is, it was fitting that the founder of the new law should teach a new prayer. On the authority of Nonius, a plagula is a linen covering. G. PANC[IROLI].

(f) ‹aut demutatum est› · printed under col 1151

Aut demutatum est, ut circumcisio. Quae mutata est in baptismo; et ita quod fuit antea, aut mutatum est; aut antiquum suppletum, ut reliqua lex, quae est apud Matthaeum: Non concupisces mulierem, videndo eam; item: Diligite inimicos vestros, et alia, quae ibi habentur; aut est impletum, ut prophetia; aut perfectum, ut fides: in veteri testamento fides dirigebatur in Christum, in quo nunc perfecta est. Et haec gravis est sententia. Idem.

Or has been changed, as circumcision. This was changed into baptism; and thus what existed before has either been changed; or the old has been supplemented, as the rest of the law, which is in Matthew: You shall not desire a woman by looking at her; also: Love your enemies, and the other things contained there; or it has been fulfilled, as prophecy; or perfected, as faith: in the Old Testament faith was directed towards Christ, in Whom it is now perfected. And this is a weighty judgement. The same.

(g) ‹Evangelio› · printed under col 1151

Expunctore. Abolitore. Idem.

Expunctore: abolisher. The same.

(h) ‹spiritus› · printed under col 1151

Spiritus, qua valuit. Edendo miracula. Idem.

The spirit, by which He was powerful: in working miracles. The same.

(i) ‹ratio› · printed under col 1152

Ratio, qua venit. Lego qua venit in Mundum Dei sapientia. Idem.

The reason, by which He came. I read: "by which the wisdom of God came into the world". The same.

(4) call in col 1151, printed under col 1152, set in n1151 (i) call in col 1151, printed under col 1152, set in n1151

(5) ‹qua suscipitur› · printed under col 1152 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Qua docetur. Pamel. Seml. Fran.

"qua docetur": Pamelius, Semler, Franeker [edition].

(j) ‹ex spiritu› · printed under col 1152 (the letter of the note is lost in the print)

Ex spiritu, quo tantum potest. Id est quo plurimum potest. Ista admirative, quoniam spiritu pervenitur ad Deum, et omnia exornantur, et miracula eduntur. Deest tertium, quod est Sophiae, quae docet de modo orandi, de quo infra dicetur. Idem.

From the spirit, by which it is so powerful. That is, by which it is most powerful. This is said in admiration, since by the spirit one reaches God, and all things are adorned, and miracles are worked. The third is lacking, which is of Wisdom, who teaches about the manner of praying, of which there will be talk below. The same.

(k) ‹Consideremus› · printed under col 1152

Consideremus itaque, etc. Quae sint haec tria de oratione praecepta, seu potius consilia, quae hic et in sequentibus enumerat Tertullianus, ictu oculi ab Evangelio Joannis, cap. VI, n. 6, intelliges, ubi Christus, divina Sophia, sive Sapientia in hujusmodi verba loquitur: Et cum oratis, non eritis sicut hypocritae, qui amant in synagogis, et in angulis platearum stantes orare, ut videantur ab hominibus. En primum praeceptum, videlicet ut ambitionem in orando fugiamus, quasi nos audire, et conspicere in propatulo tantum possit Deus, atque ut Dei omnipotentis et conspectum et auditum sub tectis et in abditis etiam adesse confidamus: quod ad fidem hominis pertinet. Tum autem pergit dicere Christus: cum oraveris, intra in cubiculum tuum, et clauso ostio ora Patrem tuum in abscondito. En alterum praeceptum, nempe, Tertulliano ita explicante: ut quem ubique audire et videre fidimus, ei soli religionem nostram offeramus: quod ad fidei modestiam spectat. Orantes autem, sequitur divinus Magister, nolite multum loqui sicut ethnici; putant enim quod in multiloquio suo exaudiantur. Tertium hoc est praeceptum, scilicet ut cum Tertulliano loquar, ne agmine verborum adeundum putemus ad Dominum, quem ultro suis prospicere certi sumus. MURAT.— Consideremus itaque. Hoc est tertium, ex quo constat oratio, scilicet Sophia, quae nos docet modum orandi. Duo enim in hoc praecipit: primo ut secrete et in abdito loco oremus; secundo ut breviter, prout habetur in Matthaei cap. VI: Cum oraveris, intra in cubiculum tuum, et ostio clauso ora Patrem tuum in abscondito, et Pater tuus, qui videt in abscondito, reddet tibi. Orantes autem nolite multum loqui, sicut ethnici faciunt; putant enim in multiloquio exaudiri. G. PANCIRLO.

Let us consider, then, etc. What these three precepts, or rather counsels, about prayer are, which Tertullian enumerates here and in what follows, you will understand at a glance from the Gospel of John [so printed], ch. 6, n. 6, where Christ, the divine Sophia or Wisdom, speaks in these words: And when you pray, you shall not be like the hypocrites, who love to pray standing in the synagogues and at the corners of the streets, so that they may be seen by men. Here is the first precept: namely that we should shun ambition in praying, as though God could hear and see us only in the open, and that we should trust that the sight and hearing of almighty God are present even under roofs and in hidden places: which pertains to the faith of man. Then Christ goes on to say: when you pray, enter into your chamber, and having shut the door pray to your Father in secret. Here is the second precept, namely, as Tertullian explains it: that we should offer our worship to Him alone Whom we trust to hear and see everywhere: which concerns the modesty of faith. But when you pray, the divine Master continues, do not speak much, as the heathen do; for they think that they are heard for their much speaking. This is the third precept, namely, to speak with Tertullian, that we should not think we must approach the Lord with a column of words, since we are certain that He provides for His own of His own accord. MURAT[ORI]. — Let us consider, then. This is the third [element] of which prayer consists, namely Sophia, who teaches us the manner of praying. For in this she enjoins two things: first that we should pray secretly and in a hidden place; second, briefly, as it is in Matthew ch. 6: When you pray, enter into your chamber, and having shut the door pray to your Father in secret, and your Father, Who sees in secret, will repay you. But when you pray do not speak much, as the heathen do; for they think they are heard for their much speaking. G. PANCIROL[I].

(l) ‹secrete› · printed under col 1152 and continued under col 1153 (p. 621)

Secrete adorandi. Ad abundat pro orandi. Hunc locum imitatus D. Cyprianus, lib. de Orat. domin., ait: Dominus secrete orare nos praecipit in abditis, et semotis locis, in cubiculis ipsis, quod magis con⟨gruit⟩ fidei, ut sciamus eum ubique praesentem esse, audire omnes, et majestatis suae plenitudine in abdita quoque et occulta penetrare. Idem.— De praecepto secreto ador. Intellige mentem Christi jubentis secreto orandum. Non abrogat usum sanctissimum orandi in publ⟨ico⟩; nam et Paulus ait in omni loco orandum, et id firmatum multis testimoniis sacri eloquii. Et fideles quidem pariter in ecclesiis oramus, sed vult ut inanem gloriam fugiamus in orando. Itaque qui gloriam tantum Dei quaerens, orat, is orat secreto et in cubiculo: contra qui orat in cubiculo, volens tamen ut alii sciant, is certe in plateis orat, et tuba canit. LAC.

Of worshipping in secret. "Ad" is redundant, [adorandi standing] for "orandi". Imitating this passage, Saint Cyprian, in the book on the Lord's Prayer, says: "The Lord commands us to pray secretly in hidden and remote places, in our very chambers, which better befits faith, so that we may know that He is present everywhere, hears all, and by the fullness of His majesty penetrates even into hidden and secret places." The same. — On the precept of worshipping in secret. Understand the mind of Christ when He bids us pray in secret. He does not abolish the most holy practice of praying in public; for Paul too says that one must pray in every place, and this is confirmed by many testimonies of sacred Scripture. And we the faithful indeed pray together in the churches, but He wishes us to shun vainglory in praying. So he who prays seeking only the glory of God prays in secret and in his chamber; on the contrary, he who prays in his chamber but wishing others to know it certainly prays in the streets, and sounds a trumpet. LAC.

(l) continued from col 1152, set in n1152

(1) ‹et modestiam› · printed under col 1153 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Modestum Seml. Oberth.

"modestum": Semler, Oberthür.

(2) ‹sequente› · printed under col 1153 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Sequens Junius.

"sequens": Junius.

(3) ‹quod etsi proinde› · printed under col 1153 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Quod etsi delent Seml. Oberth.

Semler and Oberthür delete "quod etsi".

(4) ‹et modestiam› · printed under col 1154 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Modestum Paris.

"modestum": Paris [edition].

(5) ‹certi sumus› · printed under col 1154 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Simus. Rigalt. Paris.

"simus": Rigaltius, Paris [edition].

(6) ‹attamen› · printed under col 1154 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Sic Rigalt. Seml. Leop. Paris; alii et tamen.

So Rigaltius, Semler, Leopold, Paris [edition]; others read "et tamen".

(a) ‹ret :› · printed under col 1153

Et modestiam fidei desiderabat. Id est breviter oremus, credentes Deum omnia scire, et audire. Et hoc appellat modestiam fidei. G. PANCIROL.

And it required modesty of faith. That is, let us pray briefly, believing that God knows and hears all things. And this he calls modesty of faith. G. PANCIROL[I].

(b) ‹sequente› · printed under col 1153

Sequente sophia. Quod sequitur sapientia, in sequente praecepto, ut simus breviloqui, pertinet ad fidem et modestiam, ut confidamus etiam paucis nos exaudiri. Idem.

With wisdom following. What wisdom goes on to [say] in the following precept, that we should be brief of speech, pertains to faith and modesty, that we should trust that we are heard even with few [words]. The same.

(c) ‹agmine verborum› · printed under col 1153

Agmine verborum. Blateratione. S. Matth. usus est vocibus πολλυλογία et βαττολογία. LE PR,

With a column of words: with babbling. Saint Matthew used the words πολυλογία [printed πολλυλογία] and βαττολογία. LE PR[IEUR].

(d) ‹attamen› · printed under col 1153

Attamen brevitas ista. Id est brevitas orationis dominicae habet plenam interpretationem, et quantum verbis coarctatur, tantum sensibus diffunditur. Continet enim omnem disciplinam fidei. Brevitas autem orandi pertinet ad tertium gradum Sophiae, id est quem significavit Dei sapientia, et ejus Filius. Primus enim gradus est, id est primum praeceptum est, ut secreto oremus; secundus, ut cum fide, tertius, ut breviter. MURAT.

Yet this brevity. That is, the brevity of the Lord's Prayer contains a full interpretation, and as much as it is compressed in words, so much is it spread out in meanings. For it contains the whole discipline of faith. The brevity of praying pertains to the third degree of Sophia, that is, the one which the Wisdom of God, His Son also, signified. For the first degree, that is the first precept, is that we pray in secret; the second, with faith; the third, briefly. MURAT[ORI].

(e) ‹Incipit› · printed under col 1153

CAP. II.—Incipit a testimonio Dei. Hic incipit interpretari orationem dominicam dicens, primis verbis testimonium Dei et fidei meritum contineri, quia Deum patrem testamur. Alia addit D. Cyprianus, ubi supra. G. PANCIROL.

CH. II. — It begins with the witness to God. Here he begins to interpret the Lord's Prayer, saying that the first words contain a witness to God and the merit of faith, because we bear witness to God as Father. Saint Cyprian adds other things, in the place cited above. G. PANCIROL[I].

(4), (5), (6) calls in col 1153, printed under col 1154, set in n1153

(f) ‹PATER QUI IN COELIS ES› · printed under col 1153

Pater qui in coelis es. Notam etiam Luciano fuisse dominicae hujus orationis formulam declarant ista Triephontis ad Critiam, sub finem dialogi qui inscribitur Philopatris, ἔασον τούτους τὴν εὐχὴν ἀπὸ πατρὸς ἀρξάμενος, καὶ τὴν πολυώνυμον ᾠδὴν εἰς τέλος ἐπιθείς. RIG.

Our Father Who art in heaven. That the form of this Lord's Prayer was known even to Lucian is shown by these words of Triephon to Critias, near the end of the dialogue entitled Philopatris: "let these be, beginning the prayer from the Father, and setting the many-named song at the end." RIG[ALTIUS].

(g) ‹etiam› · printed under col 1153

Et praeceptum obimus. Ei paremus, Deum patrem verum vocantes. G. PANCIROL.

And we fulfil a precept: we obey it by calling God our true Father. G. PANCIROL[I].

(h) ‹quod› · printed under col 1153 and continued under col 1154

Quod coelum et terram Spiritus contestatur. Id est Spiritus sanctus dicendo per Isaiam, cap I: Audi coelum, et auribus percipe, terra, quia Dominus locutus est: Filios genui, et illi me non agnoverunt. Idem.

Because the Spirit calls heaven and earth to witness. That is, the Holy Spirit, saying through Isaiah, ch. 1: Hear, O heaven, and give ear, O earth, for the Lord has spoken: I have begotten sons, and they have not known Me. The same.

(i) ‹praeteritur› · printed under col 1154

Ne mater quidem Ecclesia praeteritur. Ecclesiam intelligit, quam libro ad Martyras appellat Dominam matrem Ecclesiam; quam Spiritus sanctus congregavit. De qua scilicet constat nobis Patris et Filii nomen. Per eam nos Deus Christianos facit. Absque ejus testimonio nulla nobis neque de Deo Patre, neque de Christo Domino fides; ut in hanc quoque sententiam possimus illud Telemachi assumere: Μήτηρ μέν τ' ἐμέ φησι τοῦ ἔμμεναι· αὐτὰρ ἔγωγε Οὐκ οἶδα· γάρ πωτίς ἑὸν γόνον αὐτὸς ἀνέγνω. RIG. — Ne mater quidem Eccles. Ecclesiam eam intelligit, quam in Patre, Filio, et Spiritu sancto pluribus locis constitutam esse affirmat, ut de Bapt. et de Pud., c. 21. Quibus locis existimat Tertullianus Ecclesiam esse in Patre, Filio, et Spiritu sancto: sed praecipue in S⟨p⟩iritu sancto; unde concludit hoc loco mentionem fieri Spiritus et Ecclesiae in oratione dominica quando dicimus Pater noster, qui enim invocat Patrem, F⟨i⟩lii quoque et matris Ecclesiae sive Spiritus sancti numen implorare videtur; atque ita uno nomine, Patris videlicet, tres personae recensentur. ALBASP.

Not even Mother Church is passed over. He means the Church which in the book To the Martyrs he calls "the Lady Mother Church"; which the Holy Spirit gathered. From her, namely, the name of the Father and of the Son is made certain to us. Through her God makes us Christians. Without her testimony we have no faith either in God the Father or in Christ the Lord; so that we may apply to this view too the words of Telemachus: "My mother says that I am his; but I myself do not know: for no one yet has known his own begetting." RIG[ALTIUS]. — Not even Mother Church. He means the Church which in several places he affirms to be constituted in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, as in On Baptism and On Modesty, ch. 21. In these places Tertullian holds that the Church is in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, but especially in the Holy Spirit; whence he concludes that in this place mention is made of the Spirit and of the Church in the Lord's Prayer when we say Our Father: for he who invokes the Father is seen to implore also the divine power of the Son and of Mother Church, that is, of the Holy Spirit; and so under one name, namely that of the Father, three Persons are reckoned. ALBASP[INAEUS].

(j) ‹Uno› · printed under col 1154 and continued under col 1155 (p. 622)

Uno igitur genere, etc. Orationem dominicam ita exorditur Tertullianus: Pater, qui in coelis es. Vox noster praeteritur, quae tamen in codice quodam ms. legitur. Sed a Tertulliano omissam fuisse ejus explicatio suadere satis videtur; etenim indefinito hoc nomine non nos tantum filios Dei designatos ostendit, sed et ibi invocatum quoque divinum Filium affirmat, cujus nomen tacite significatur, quando generale vocabulum Patris exprimitur. Praeterea Patris, ac filiorum mentione facta, Ecclesiae quoque nomen subintelligendum Tertullianus inquit; non enim est pater sine filiis, neque filii sine patre ac matre. Quae quidem argumentandi ratio quanquam in divinis sit fallax, Tertulliano tamen, quod est ad nos Dei filios, placuisse videtur, ut quoties appellamur filii, praeter Deum patrem nostrum Ecclesiam itidem matrem nostram, quae nos per Christum Deo genuit, intelligamus. Uno igitur vocabulo Patris Deum cum suis, id est Deum Patrem, et Filium ejus aeternum, et matrem Ecclesiam honoramus. Praecepti vero meminimus, cum Christus Matthaeo testante, edixerit ne quem in terris patrem vocemus, nisi quem habemus in coelis. Quod ad Ecclesiae nomen hic usurpatum eruditissimus Albaspinaeus attulit, facile amplecti non possumus. Censet enim vir clarissimus, Spiritum sanctum per hoc vocabulum a Tertulliano significari, cum is in lib. de Bapt., cap. 6, Ecclesiam in Patre, et Filio, et Spiritu sancto constitutam affirmet; et in lib. de Pudicit., cap. 21, haec habeat: Nam et ipsa Ecclesia proprie et principaliter ipse est Spiritus, in quo est Trinitas divinitatis, Pater, Filius et Spiritus sanctus. Illam Ecclesiam congregat, quam Dominus in tribus posuit. Tum Albaspinaeus: quibus locis existimat Tertullianus, Ecclesiam esse in Patre, Filio et Spiritu sancto, sed praecipue in Spiritu sancto. Unde concludit, hoc loco mentionem fieri Spiritus et Ecclesiae in oratione dominica, quando dicimus: Pater noster. Qui enim invocat Patrem, Filii quoque et matris Ecclesiae, sive Spiritus sancti numen implorare videtur: atque ita uno nomine, Patris videlicet, tres personae recensentur. At nolim e libro de Pudicitia loci hujus explicationem peti, siquidem certum mihi videtur, non alium ibi Spiritum sanctum intelligi, quam heresiarcham Montanum, cujus deliramentis ut Tertullianus assentaretur, Ecclesiam in eo proprie et principaliter constitutam somniavit, imo ipsum esse Ecclesiam lepidissima opinione est arbitratus. Contra cum hucusque S. Hilario teste creditum fuerit, librum de Oratione a Tertulliano catholico scriptum fuisse, nescio quam bene huic libro lucem afferre possimus, productis alterius libri nugis ac somniis. Si vero Ecclesiam in Patre, Filio et Spiritu sancto constitutam dicamus, quod recte dici potuisse non inficior, ne ita quidem ab hisce ambagibus nos expediemus, ut serio cogitanti patebit. MURAT.

In one term, then, etc. Tertullian begins the Lord's Prayer thus: Father, Who art in heaven. The word "our" is passed over, though it is read in a certain manuscript. But his explanation seems enough to show that it was omitted by Tertullian; for with this indefinite name he shows not only that we are designated sons of God, but he also affirms that there the divine Son too is invoked, Whose name is tacitly signified when the general term "Father" is expressed. Moreover, once mention is made of the Father and of the sons, Tertullian says that the name of the Church is also to be understood; for there is no father without sons, nor sons without a father and a mother. Although this way of arguing is fallacious in divine matters, Tertullian nevertheless seems to have been pleased with it as regards us, the sons of God, so that whenever we are called sons we should understand, besides God our Father, the Church likewise our mother, who begot us to God through Christ. In the one term "Father", then, we honour God with His own, that is, God the Father, and His eternal Son, and Mother Church. And we remember the precept, since Christ, as Matthew testifies, decreed that we should call no one on earth father, except Him Whom we have in heaven. What the most learned Albaspinaeus has brought forward about the name of the Church used here, we cannot readily embrace. For that most distinguished man holds that the Holy Spirit is signified by Tertullian through this term, since in the book On Baptism, ch. 6, he affirms that the Church is constituted in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; and in the book On Modesty, ch. 21, he has this: "For the Church itself is properly and principally the Spirit Himself, in Whom is the Trinity of the Godhead, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He gathers that Church which the Lord placed in three." Then Albaspinaeus: "In these places Tertullian holds that the Church is in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, but especially in the Holy Spirit. Whence he concludes that in this place mention is made of the Spirit and of the Church in the Lord's Prayer when we say: Our Father. For he who invokes the Father is seen to implore also the divine power of the Son and of Mother Church, that is, of the Holy Spirit: and so under one name, namely that of the Father, three Persons are reckoned." But I would not have the explanation of this passage sought from the book On Modesty, since it seems certain to me that by the Holy Spirit nothing else is understood there than the heresiarch Montanus, in whom, to humour his ravings, Tertullian dreamed that the Church was properly and principally constituted, indeed by a most charming opinion held him to be the Church himself. On the contrary, since it has been believed up to now, on the testimony of Saint Hilary, that the book On Prayer was written by Tertullian as a Catholic, I do not know how well we can throw light on this book by bringing forward the trifles and dreams of another book. And if we say that the Church is constituted in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, which I do not deny could rightly be said, not even so shall we free ourselves from these tangles, as will be plain to one who thinks seriously. MURAT[ORI].

(j) of col 1154 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1154

(1) ‹audierat› · printed under col 1155 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Aliud quid, non nomen Jun.

"aliud quid", not "nomen": Junius.

(2) ‹glorifica nomen tuum› · printed under col 1155 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Verba: ego veni — nomen tuum, primus addidit Muratorius.

The words "ego veni … nomen tuum" were first added by Muratori.

(3) call in col 1156, printed under col 1155, set in n1156

(a) ‹denotamus› · printed under col 1155

Oblitos patris denotamus. Nam Dominus dixit: Ne quem dixeritis patrem; unus est enim Pater vester in coelis. Hoc est praeceptum, de quo sensit Tertullianus. G. PANCIROL. — Et oblitos patris denotamus. In malam partem vox denotare sumitur, hicque Judaeos perstringit auctor Tertul. qui Christum per prophetas promissum non modo non ut Deum et Messiam exceperunt, verumetiam infami supplicio affecerunt. LE PR.

We brand those who have forgotten the Father. For the Lord said: Call no one father; for one is your Father in heaven. This is the precept which Tertullian had in mind. G. PANCIROL[I]. — And we brand those who have forgotten the Father. The word denotare is taken in a bad sense, and here the author, Tertul[lian], censures the Jews, who not only did not receive Christ, promised through the prophets, as God and Messiah, but even inflicted on Him a shameful punishment. LE PR[IEUR].

(b) ‹Etiam› · printed under col 1155 and continued under col 1156

CAP. III.—Etiam qui de ipso. Subaudi: Etiam qui de ipso Deo interrogaverat Moyses, nomen Dei quod esset, aliud quidem nomen audiverat Rogante enim Moyse. Exodi cap. 3: Si dixerint mihi, quod est nomen ejus, quid dicam eis? Dixit Dominus ad Moysem: Ego sum qui sum. Id est summa essentia, qui sum per me ipsum, et a me pendeo; unde aliud nomen et diversum a patre Moyses audivit. Sed Filius nobis hoc nomen manifestavit; prodendo enim se esse Filium, manifestavit Patrem. G. PANCIROL.

CH. III. — Even he who about Him. Understand: even Moses, who had asked about God Himself what the name of God was, had heard another name. For when Moses asked, Exodus ch. 3: If they say to me, what is His name, what shall I say to them? The Lord said to Moses: I am Who am. That is, the supreme essence: I Who am through Myself and depend on Myself; whence Moses heard another name, different from "Father". But the Son has made this name manifest to us; for by revealing that He is the Son, He made the Father manifest. G. PANCIROL[I].

(c) ‹novum Patris nomen est› · printed under col 1156

Jam enim filius novum Patris nomen est. Dei nomen Moysi quidem patefactum: at nomen Dei Patris nemini, et ne ipsi quidem Moysi, proditum fuerat. Patris ergo nomen novissime cognitum, cum Filii nomen in Christo innotuit. Si enim Christus Dei Filius, ergo et Deus Pater. MURAT.

For "Son" is now a new name of the Father. The name of God had indeed been disclosed to Moses; but the name of God the Father had been revealed to no one, not even to Moses himself. The name of Father, then, became known last, when the name of the Son became known in Christ. For if Christ is the Son of God, then God is also Father. MURAT[ORI].

(d) ‹apertius› · printed under col 1156

Et apertius. Manifestavit nomen Dei, quia fecit ut sui Pater agnosceretur. Alii interpretantur, quod Deum gentibus ignotum manifestaverit, et impletum est illud Psalmi XXI: Narrabo nomen tuum fratribus meis, ubi Euthymius sequitur interpretationem Tertulliani. Idem habetur apud Paulum ad Hebr. cap. II. G. PANCIROL.

And more openly. He made manifest the name of God, because He brought it about that His Father was acknowledged. Others interpret it that He made manifest God, unknown to the gentiles, and that saying of Psalm 21 was fulfilled: I will declare Thy name to my brethren; where Euthymius follows Tertullian's interpretation. The same is found in Paul, Hebrews ch. 2. G. PANCIROL[I].

(e) ‹postulamus› · printed under col 1156

Ut sanctificetur postulamus. Dei nimirum sanctificatio est optimus vivendi modus, sic in cap. II, proph. Amos Cyrillus Alex. Ἁγιάζειν λέγονται Θεὸν, οἱ ζῶντες ὀρθῶς. Deum sanctificare dicuntur qui bene vivunt. LE PR.

We ask that it be hallowed. The hallowing of God is, of course, the best manner of living; so Cyril of Alex[andria] on ch. 2 of the prophet Amos: "Those who live uprightly are said to hallow God." Those who live well are said to hallow God. LE PR[IEUR].

(b) of col 1155 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1155

(c), (d), (e) calls in col 1155, printed under col 1156, set in n1155

(3) ‹et aliud› · printed under col 1155 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Alius Rig. Paris. Venet.

"alius": Rigaltius, Paris [edition], Venice [edition].

(4) ‹Cui› · printed under col 1156 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cur Venet. Paris.

"cur": Venice [edition], Paris [edition].

(5) ‹non cessant› · printed under col 1156 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cesset Semler. Leop.

"cesset": Semler, Leopold.

(6) ‹si meminerimus› · printed under col 1156 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Meminerimus. Ita Rhen. Rig. Paris. Venet. Leop. Meruerimus. Cod. Agob. ed. Fran. et Seml.

"meminerimus": so Rhenanus, Rigaltius, Paris, Venice, Leopold. "meruerimus": the Agobardine codex, the Franeker edition and Semler.

(f) ‹optari› · printed under col 1156

Quasi sit et alius de quo ei possit optari. Hoc est, Quasi ulla sit alia majestas numinis ullius, de qua ei possit optari ut sanctificetur. Etenim nulla est, cum unus sit Deus, et praeter eum nullus. RIG.

As if there were also another of whom it could be wished for Him. That is, as if there were any other majesty of any divinity about which it could be wished for it that it be hallowed. For there is none, since God is one, and besides Him there is none. RIG[ALTIUS].

(g) ‹sanctificatum› · printed under col 1156

Quando non sanctificatum. Hieronymus, ep. 135: Non quod nobis orantibus sanctificetur quod per se sanctum est, sed quod petamus ut quod per naturam sui sanctum est, sanctificetur in nobis. RIG.

When it is not hallowed. Jerome, letter 135: "Not that what is holy in itself is hallowed by our praying, but that we ask that what is holy by its own nature be hallowed in us." RIG[ALTIUS].

(h) ‹circumstantia› · printed under col 1156

Illa Angelorum circumstantia non cessant. Sic habet liber Agobardi. Circumstantiam dicit apparitionem, satellitium, stipatum, et congruenter nomini collectivo pluralis numeri verbum apposuit. RIG.

That surrounding host of angels do not cease. So the Agobardine book has it. By circumstantia he means the attendance, the retinue, the escort, and he has fittingly joined a plural verb to a collective noun. RIG[ALTIUS].

(i) ‹candidati› · printed under col 1156

Et nos Angelorum, si meminerimus, candidati. In libro Agobardi legitur, si meruerimus. Sed candidati dicuntur qui dignitates ambigunt, digni vel indigni; nec refert, ut id vocentur, bene an male sint meriti, est enim commune vocabulum. Is vero quem penes est datio dignitatis, cum advenerit conferendae dies, tunc merita singulorum expendet, et indignos ablegabit, quamvis candidatos. Itaque magis placet quod et in antiquissimo Ful. Ursini codice, et in editione Rhenani legitur, si meminerimus. Tertullianus ubique illud suggerit, nos apud Deum fore sicut angelos, et de familia angelica deputari, et repromissam esse nobis angelicam substantiam. Quare hic etiam nobis aurem vellit: Et, si bene meminerimus, inquit, angelorum candidati sumus, et jam hinc coelestem illam acclamationem ediscimus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus. RIG.

And we, if we remember, candidates of the angels. In the Agobardine book is read "if we have deserved". But those are called candidates who canvass for [printed "ambigunt", probably for "ambiunt"] dignities, worthy or unworthy; nor does it matter, for them to be so called, whether they have deserved well or ill, for it is a common term. But he in whose power lies the granting of the dignity, when the day for conferring it comes, will then weigh the merits of each, and will send away the unworthy, although candidates. So what is read both in the very ancient codex of Ful[vius] Ursinus and in Rhenanus's edition pleases more: "if we remember". Tertullian everywhere suggests this, that we shall be with God like the angels, and are assigned to the angelic household, and that the angelic substance is promised to us. Therefore here too he plucks our ear: "And, if we remember well," he says, "we are candidates of the angels, and already from here we learn that heavenly acclamation, Holy, Holy, Holy." RIG[ALTIUS].

(1) ‹huic› · printed under col 1157 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Hujus Jun.

"hujus": Junius.

(2) ‹nos sumus› · printed under col 1157 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Non Venet. Male.

"non": Venice [edition]. Wrongly.

(a) ‹Secundum› · printed under col 1157

CAP. IV.— Secundum hanc formam. Id est ordinem ipsius orationis dominicae. Et transfert se ad illud, id est: Adveniat regnum tuum. G. PANCIROL.

CH. IV. — Next, according to this form. That is, the order of the Lord's Prayer itself. And he passes over to that, that is: Thy kingdom come. G. PANCIROL[I].

(b) ‹VOLUNTAS TUA› · printed under col 1157

Fiat voluntas tua. Hoc iterum Christus ad Deum Patrem sub tempus passionis dixit (Matth., XXVI): Εἰ οὐ δύναται τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον, etc. γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου. Socrates cicutae sorbendae proximus, Εἰ ταύτῃ τοῖς θεοῖς φίλον, ταύτῃ γινέσθω. RIG. — Fiat voluntas tua in coelis et in terra. Etsi codices omnes graeci et latini qui hodie exstant, addant sicut, quia tamen in contextu nulla illius comparationis explicata mentio, retinuimus hanc lectionem: quod in B. Cypriano non fecimus, quia disertis verbis ibidem illud sicut explicat. PAM.

Thy will be done. Christ said this again to God the Father near the time of His passion (Matt. 26): "If this cup cannot [pass], etc., Thy will be done." Socrates, when about to drink the hemlock: "If so it pleases the gods, so let it be." RIG[ALTIUS]. — Thy will be done in heaven and on earth. Although all the Greek and Latin codices that exist today add "as", yet since no mention of that comparison is explained in the context, we have kept this reading: which we did not do in Blessed Cyprian, because there he explains that "as" in express words. PAM[ELIUS].

(c) ‹interpretatione› · printed under col 1157

Ex interpretatione enim figurata. Nostra caro terram, spiritus coelum prae se fert. S. Cyprianus ubi supra, haec a Tertulliano mutuatus, ait: Nam cum corpus e terra, et spiritum possideamus e coelo, ipsi terra et coelum sumus, et in utroque, id est corpore et spiritu, ut Dei voluntas fiat, oramus. G. PANCIROL.

For by a figurative interpretation. Our flesh displays earth, the spirit heaven. Saint Cyprian, in the place cited above, borrowing this from Tertullian, says: "For since we possess a body from the earth and a spirit from heaven, we ourselves are earth and heaven, and we pray that God's will be done in both, that is, in body and in spirit." G. PANCIROL[I].

(3) ‹Ita› · printed under col 1157 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Item Semler. Paris. Venet. Leop.

"item": Semler, Paris, Venice, Leopold.

(4) ‹instantiam› · printed under col 1158 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cum Substantia Semler.

"cum substantia": Semler.

(5) ‹et› · printed under col 1158 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Semler. conj. quod est, fiat, etc.; malit Leop. scribere quo et fiat vel ad quod et fiat, etc.

Semler conjectures "quod est, fiat", etc.; Leopold would rather write "quo et fiat" or "ad quod et fiat", etc.

(d) ‹velut› · printed under col 1157

Velut ad exemplaria provocamur. Ut ejus exemplum, actusque sequamur. G. PANCIROL.

We are called forth as if to patterns. That we may follow His example and deeds. G. PANCIROL[I].

(e) ‹passionis› · printed under col 1157

Sub instantiam passionis. Cyprianus, Rogatiano: Sub ictu passionis cum alapam accepisset. Leo, serm. 8, de Passione Dom.: Dominus cum de passionis suae loqueretur instantia dixit, Nunc judicium mundi est. RIG.

At the imminence of His passion. Cyprian, to Rogatianus: "at the stroke of His passion, when He had received a slap." Leo, sermon 8 on the Lord's Passion: "The Lord, when He was speaking of the imminence of His passion, said: Now is the judgement of the world." RIG[ALTIUS].

(f) ‹cordatus› · printed under col 1157

Et recordatus. Scilicet ejus, quod docuerat, et volebat, ut subjicit. G. PANCIROL.

And having remembered: namely what He had taught and willed, as he adds. G. PANCIROL[I].

(g) ‹nisi quod› · printed under col 1157

Nisi quod. Verumtamen. G. PANCIROL.

Except that: nevertheless. G. PANCIROL[I].

(h) ‹Ipse erat› · printed under col 1157 and continued under col 1158

Ipse erat voluntas et potestas Patris. Recte, et cum theologis melioribus tum graecis, tum latinis, qui Filium voluntatem, ac potentiam Patris appellarunt. Magnus Athanasius in orat. 3. ἔστι γὰρ ὁ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ δημιουργὸς, καὶ ποιητικὸς, καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν ἡ τοῦ Πατρὸς βουλή. Est enim Verbum Dei artifex, et efficiens, et est ipse Patris voluntas. Cui consentit S. Augustinus, lib. XV, de Trin., cap. 20, ubi Filium dici ait Voluntatem de Voluntate. Quidam, inquit, ne Filium consilii, vel voluntatis Dei dicerent unigenitum Verbum, ipsum consilium seu Voluntatem Patris idem Verbum esse dixerunt. Sed melius, quantum existimo, dicitur consilium de consilio, et Voluntas de Voluntate. Faustinus itidem, in lib. contra arianos, cap. 1: Pie ergo dictum est, quod Filius Voluntas est Patris. Idem senserunt Origenes, Clemens et Cyrillus Alexandrini, Gregorius Nyssenus, Hieronymus, Ambrosius, Marius Victorinus, et alii. Cum praeterea Deus omnia per Filium fecerit, hinc est quod Filius potentia, seu potestas, et vis, et virtus, et manus, et brachium Patris appellatur. Cujus rei testimonia producere superfluum reor. MURAT.

He was Himself the will and power of the Father. Rightly, and in agreement with the better theologians, both Greek and Latin, who have called the Son the will and power of the Father. The great Athanasius in Oration 3: "For the Word of God is maker and creator, and He Himself is the will of the Father." For the Word of God is the artificer and the effecter, and is Himself the will of the Father. Saint Augustine agrees with him, De Trinitate bk. 15, ch. 20, where he says the Son is called Will from Will. "Some," he says, "so as not to call the only-begotten Word the Son of the counsel or will of God, have said that this same Word is the very counsel or Will of the Father. But better, as far as I judge, is He called Counsel from Counsel and Will from Will." Faustinus likewise, in the book against the Arians, ch. 1: "It was piously said, therefore, that the Son is the Will of the Father." Origen, Clement and Cyril of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa, Jerome, Ambrose, Marius Victorinus and others thought the same. Since, moreover, God made all things through the Son, hence it is that the Son is called the power, or authority, and might, and strength, and hand, and arm of the Father. To bring forward testimonies of this I think superfluous. MURAT[ORI].

(i) ‹Itaque› · printed under col 1158

CAP. V.— Itaque si ad Dei voluntatem. Scilicet si a Dei arbitrio pendet regni coelestis adventus, nosque illud anxie optare, atque exspectare in recitanda oratione dominica profitemur, cur quidam saeculi mundique finem serius desiderant, cum regnum Dei, ac aeterna felicitas, quam votis prosequimur, non nisi consummato saeculo et mundo, impetrari possit? Quibus ex verbis fortassis intelligas, quod aliis in locis apertissime Tertullianus sensit, nempe animas piorum corpore solutas a coelesti beatudine arceri, donec novissimum judicium a Christo in fine mundi instituatur. Cum vero in eadem opinione non pauci ex antiquis Patribus fuerint, illam Tertulliano veniam libentissime impertimur, quam reliquis negaremus, si post contraria conciliorum decreta idem sentire et scribere pergerent, cujusmodi sunt nostris temporibus Graeci schismatici in eadem sententia perseverantes. MURAT.

CH. V. — So if to the will of God. That is, if the coming of the heavenly kingdom depends on God's decision, and we profess in reciting the Lord's Prayer that we anxiously desire and await it, why do some desire the end of the age and of the world later, when the kingdom of God and the eternal happiness which we pursue with our prayers cannot be obtained except when the age and the world are consummated? From these words you may perhaps understand what Tertullian held most openly in other places, namely that the souls of the godly, released from the body, are kept from heavenly beatitude [printed "beatudine"] until the last judgement is held by Christ at the end of the world. But since not a few of the ancient Fathers held the same opinion, we most willingly grant Tertullian that indulgence which we would refuse to the rest, if after the contrary decrees of councils they went on thinking and writing the same, as are in our times the schismatic Greeks who persist in the same view. MURAT[ORI].

(j) ‹nostram› · printed under col 1158 and continued under col 1159 (p. 624)

Ad nostram suspensionem. Quia nos sumus suspensi exspectantes, quando ad suum regnum nos Deus vocabit. Quare ergo quidam protractum quemdam, id est prorogationem quamdam postulant, ut in hoc saeculo diutius vivant G. PANC. — Et ad nostram suspensionem. Id est ad christianos duntaxat, atque eorum statum et conditionem, non autem ad Judaeos aut gentiles; suspendere enim apud Tertull. est distinguere, separare, limitare, ut paulo ante suspensa enuntiatione, id est restricta. Haec tamen ab auctore dicta putabam, quod existimaret cum caeteris illius aevi fato functos, non prius debere frui beatitudine quam saeculum finitum esset, atque adeo moram illam suspensionem vocare. ALBASP.

To our suspense. Because we are held in suspense, waiting for when God will call us to His kingdom. Why then do some ask for a certain protraction, that is, a certain prolongation, so as to live longer in this age? G. PANC[IROLI]. — And to our suspense. That is, to Christians only, and their state and condition, not the Jews or gentiles; for suspendere in Tertull[ian] means to distinguish, separate, limit, as a little before, "with a suspended utterance", that is, a restricted one. Yet I used to think this was said by the author because he held, with the others of that age, that the dead should not enjoy beatitude before the age was finished, and so called that delay "suspense". ALBASP[INAEUS].

(j) of col 1158 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1158

(1) ‹protractum› · printed under col 1159 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Pertractum Semler.

"pertractum": Semler.

(2) ‹saeculo› · printed under col 1159 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

In saeculo Semler. Leop.

"in saeculo": Semler, Leopold.

(3) ‹protulissemus› · printed under col 1159 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Postulassemus Seml.

"postulassemus": Semler.

(4) ‹invidia› · printed under col 1159 and continued under col 1160 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Ita Venet. Paris. Rigalt. In visu alii aut. Rigal. et Seml. Leop.

So Venice, Paris, Rigaltius. Others, "in visu" [printed "aut.", perhaps for "ant.", before] Rigaltius, and Semler, Leopold.

(5) ‹fine› · printed under col 1160 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Ad saeculi finem Pamelius, male.

"ad saeculi finem": Pamelius, wrongly.

(a) ‹quemdam› · printed under col 1159

Protractum quemdam saeculo postulant. Orantes pro mora finis. RIG.

They ask for a certain protraction for the age: praying for a delay of the end. RIG[ALTIUS].

(b) ‹Etiam si› · printed under col 1159

Etiam si praefinitum. Etiam si in oratione dominica non esset positum Adveniat regnum tuum, illud optare debuissemus. G. PANC.

Even if it were not prescribed. Even if "Thy kingdom come" had not been placed in the Lord's Prayer, we should have had to desire it. G. PANC[IROLI].

(c) ‹invidia› · printed under col 1159 and continued under col 1160

Clamant ad Dominum invidia animae martyrum. Sic emendavimus ex antiquissimo exemplari, cum antea legeretur, clamant ad Dominum in visu, nullo sensu. Clamant invidia, hoc est, clamando invidiam faciunt. Usurpata saepius huic auctori locutio in Apolog.: In sacco et cinere voluntates invidia coelum tundimus. Libro de fuga in persec.: Dominus est, potens est: omnia illius sunt: ubi ubi fuero, in manu ejus sum: faciat quod vult, non discedo: et si perire me volet, ipse me perdat, dum me ego servo illi, malo invidiam ei facere per voluntatem ipsius pereundo, quam bilem per meam evadendo. Et libro adversus psychicos: Annuo ritu saccis velati et cinere conspersi idolis suis invidiam supplicem objiciunt. Sic etiam Tacitus, Annal., XI: Vibidiam depellere nequivit, quin multa cum invidia flagitaret, ne indefensa conjux exitio daretur. Et Juvenalis, sat. 15: Anne aliam terra Memphitide sicca Invidiam facerent nolenti surgere Nilo? Clamant igitur ad Dominum invidia animae martyrum sub altari, hoc est, multa cum invidia flagitant, invidiam Deo faciunt, Deum invidia tundunt, sanguine per tot cruciatus fuso invidiam objiciunt Deo. Tam sunt obnixae et efficaces martyrum voces, ut ab Deo vel invito, sanguinis ob ipsius nomen fusi vindictam extorquere valeant: adeoque ipsum, nisi petentibus annuat, invidia crudelitatis et immisericordiae onerare videantur. Idem.

The souls of the martyrs cry to the Lord with reproach. So we have emended from a very ancient exemplar, whereas before it was read "they cry to the Lord in a vision", which makes no sense. They cry with reproach, that is, by crying they raise reproach. A phrase often used by this author: in the Apology, "Rolling [printed "voluntates"] in sackcloth and ashes we beat upon heaven with reproach." In the book On Flight in Persecution: "He is Lord, He is mighty: all things are His: wherever I am, I am in His hand: let Him do what He will, I do not withdraw; and if He wills that I perish, let Him destroy me Himself, provided I keep myself for Him; I would rather lay reproach on Him by perishing through His will than escape by my own [will] His anger." And in the book against the Psychics: "With yearly rite, veiled in sackcloth and sprinkled with ashes, they cast a suppliant reproach at their idols." So also Tacitus, Annals 11: "He could not drive away Vibidia from demanding, with much reproach, that a wife should not be put to death undefended." And Juvenal, satire 15: "Would they raise some other reproach, in the dry Memphite land, against the Nile that would not rise?" The souls of the martyrs under the altar, then, cry to the Lord with reproach, that is, they demand with much reproach, they lay reproach on God, they beat upon God with reproach, with the blood shed through so many torments they cast reproach at God. So insistent and effective are the voices of the martyrs, that they are able to wrest from God, even unwilling, vengeance for the blood shed for His name: and so they seem to burden Him, unless He grants their petition, with the reproach of cruelty and mercilessness. The same.

(4), (5) calls in col 1159, printed under col 1160, set in n1159; (c) of col 1159 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1159

(6) ‹vita› · printed under col 1160 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Semler haud feliciter conj. vitae panis.

Semler, not happily, conjectures "vitae panis".

(d) ‹HODIE› · printed under col 1160

CAP. VI.— Da nobis hodie. S. Gregorius Nyssenus, orat. 4, in orat. dominicam, discendam inculcat hominibus hanc scientiam, ut inde †noscant de crastino non debere esse solliciti, etenim ὁ τὴν ἡμέραν σοι διδοὺς καὶ τὰ εἰς τὴν ἡμέραν σοι δίδωσι: qui diem tibi dedit, dabit quoque diei necessaria. ALBASP.

CH. VI. — Give us today. Saint Gregory of Nyssa, Oration 4 on the Lord's Prayer, impresses on men this knowledge, to be learned: that they should thereby learn that they must not be anxious about the morrow, for "He Who gives you the day gives you also what is for the day": He Who gave you the day will give also the day's necessities. ALBASP[INAEUS].

(e) ‹in pane› · printed under col 1160 and continued under col 1161 (p. 625)

Corpus ejus in pane censetur. Tria intelligi posse per verba illa, Panem nostrum, Tertullianus monet: scilicet alimenta corporea, tum alimenta spiritalia, denique vivificum sacrae mensae cibum, et realitatem corporis et sanguinis dominici in sacramento altaris. Postremum hunc sensum eruditissimus Pamelius illustravit, inde probans, vere corpus et sanguinem Christi secundum Tertulliani mentem in Eucharistiae sacramento contineri. Praeter illa quae Pamelius affert, possunt et alia Tertulliani verba referri idem probantia dilucidius. Lib. V contra Marcionem, cap. 8, haec ille scribit: Proinde panis et calicis sacramento jam in Evangelio probavimus corporis et sanguinis dominici veritatem adversus phantasma Marcionis. Christi carnem non veram, sed phantasticam, atque apparentem duntaxat, impius Marcion arbitrabatur. Si ergo per sacramentum panis et calicis probatur veritas corporis, et sanguinis dominici, quis non intelligat, verum et substantiale in augusto sacramento haberi corpus et sanguinem Christi? Alia colligas e reliquis ejus in Marcionem libris. Tum in lib. de Idol., cap. 7, haec animadverte: Ad hanc partem zelus fidei perorabit, ingemens Christianum ab idolis in Ecclesiam venire, de adversarii officina in domum Dei, attollere ad Deum Patrem manus matres idolorum; his manibus adorare, quae foris adversus Deum adorantur: eas manus admovere corpori Domini, quae daemoniis corpora conferunt, etc. Ubi in christianos idolorum artifices invehitur, qui manibus iisdem quibus idola formabant, Christi corpus, uti ferebat eorum temporum consuetudo, recipiebant. Vide etiam, cap. 14, lib. contra Judaeos. Proinde corpus ejus in pane censetur (verbum censetur idem significat ac est secundum jurisconsultos) indicat, nos sub nomine panis petere vivificum Christi corpus, ita ut, postulato pane, dominicum sacramentum, et individuitatem a corpore Christi postulemus. Murat. — Tum quod et corpus ejus in pane censetur. Sic videtur explicari posse: Per panis sacramentum commendat corpus suum. Quemadmodum Augustinus, lib. I Quaest. evang. 43, dixit: Per vini sacramentum commendat sanguinem suum. RIG. — Tum quod corpus ejus in pane. Quisquis diligenter haec verba attenderit, nunquam Auctorem in adversariorum sententiam transiisse dicturus est. Trifariam enim haec Christi verba: Panem nostrum quot. explicat. Primum de pane communi, deinde de Christo qui credentium verus est panis: postremo de corpore Christi quod est in Eucharistia ubi animadvertendum est eum discrimen constituere inter Jesum, quatenus fideles et credentes nutrit, et eumdem ipsum Jesum in Eucharistia existentem. Nam ubi exposuit, quamobrem Jesus panis sit eorum qui ipsum confitentur atque in eum credunt, alium rursus affert modum quo ipsemet Christus et panis. Itaque duos illos panes duplicemque alendi modum hoc loco distinguit, quod facere nihil fuit necesse, si Christus sola fide in Eucharistia sumitur, quemadmodum sola fide ab iis sumitur, qui in eum ejusque Evangelium credunt. Praeterea loquitur ut plurimum verbis jurisconsultorum propriis, apud quos censetur idem sonat ac est. ALBASP. — Corpus ejus in pane censetur. Ipse in eamdem sententiam explicat locum ex Jeremiae prophetia, Veni mittamus lignum in panem ejus, lib. advers. Jud., et lib. III advers. Marcionem, et lib. IV. Sic etiam libr. de Resur. carnis, pag. 385: Caro corpore et sanguine Christi vescitur, ut et anima de Deo saginetur. ALBASP. — In pane censetur. Habetur. G. PANCIR.

His body is reckoned in the bread. Tertullian advises that three things can be understood by the words "our bread": namely bodily food, then spiritual food, and finally the life-giving food of the sacred table, and the reality of the Lord's body and blood in the sacrament of the altar. This last sense the most learned Pamelius has illustrated, proving from it that according to Tertullian's mind the body and blood of Christ are truly contained in the sacrament of the Eucharist. Besides what Pamelius brings, other words of Tertullian too can be cited that prove the same more clearly. In Against Marcion bk. 5, ch. 8, he writes this: "Accordingly, by the sacrament of the bread and the cup we have already proved in the Gospel the reality of the Lord's body and blood against Marcion's phantom." The impious Marcion thought the flesh of Christ not real, but phantasmal and merely apparent. If, then, the reality of the Lord's body and blood is proved by the sacrament of the bread and the cup, who would not understand that the body and blood of Christ are held true and substantial in the august sacrament? You may gather other things from his remaining books against Marcion. Then in the book On Idolatry, ch. 7, note this: "On this point the zeal of faith will plead, groaning that a Christian comes from idols into the Church, from the adversary's workshop into the house of God; that he raises to God the Father hands that are mothers of idols; that he worships with those hands which outside are worshipped against God; that he brings to the Lord's body those hands which confer bodies on demons," etc. There he inveighs against Christian makers of idols who, with the same hands with which they fashioned idols, received the body of Christ, as the custom of those times was. See also Against the Jews, ch. 14. Accordingly, "His body is reckoned in the bread" (the word censetur, according to the jurists, means the same as est) shows that under the name of bread we ask for the life-giving body of Christ, so that, in asking for bread, we ask for the Lord's sacrament and for undividedness from the body of Christ. Murat[ori]. — Then that His body too is reckoned in the bread. It seems it can be explained thus: through the sacrament of the bread He commends His body. As Augustine said, Questions on the Gospels bk. 1, 43: "Through the sacrament of the wine He commends His blood." RIG[ALTIUS]. — Then that His body in the bread. Whoever pays careful attention to these words will never say that the author went over to the opinion of the adversaries. For he explains these words of Christ, "our bread", etc., in three ways: first of common bread, then of Christ, Who is the true bread of believers; lastly of the body of Christ which is in the Eucharist; where it must be noted that he makes a distinction between Jesus inasmuch as He nourishes the faithful and believers, and the same Jesus existing in the Eucharist. For when he has set out why Jesus is the bread of those who confess Him and believe in Him, he brings in again another way in which Christ Himself is also bread. So he distinguishes in this place those two breads and a twofold manner of nourishing, which there would have been no need to do if Christ is received in the Eucharist by faith alone, just as He is received by faith alone by those who believe in Him and His Gospel. Moreover he speaks for the most part in the words proper to the jurists, among whom censetur has the same sense as est. ALBASP[INAEUS]. — His body is reckoned in the bread. He himself explains in the same sense the passage of Jeremiah's prophecy, "Come, let us put wood into his bread", in the book Against the Jews, and in Against Marcion bk. 3, and bk. 4. So also in the book On the Resurrection of the Flesh, p. 385: "The flesh feeds on the body and blood of Christ, so that the soul too may be fattened on God." ALBASP[INAEUS]. — Is reckoned in the bread: is held. G. PANCIR[OLI].

(e) of col 1160 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1160

(1) ‹poscebat› · printed under col 1161 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Pulsabat Semler.

"pulsabat": Semler.

(a) ‹parabolis› · printed under col 1161

Parabolis retractat. Tractat et confirmat. G. PANCIR.

He goes over it again in parables: he treats and confirms it. G. PANCIR[OLI].

(b) ‹dicit› · printed under col 1161

Cum dicit: Numquid panem filiis, etc. Intelligit quod legitur in Matthaei cap. XV, et Marci cap. VII, quando Cananaea rogabat Dominum ut filiam suam a daemonibus liberaret, ipse respondit: Non est bonum sumere panem filiorum, et dare canibus, id est ethnicis, ubi in parabola intelligit corpus suum sub nomine panis, et canes ethnicos. Tertullianus vero illa verba aliquantum mutat, sed idem est sensus. His omnibus vult probare, panem pro corpore Christi accipi. PANC.

When He says: Does [a father] take bread from his sons, etc. He means what is read in Matthew ch. 15 and Mark ch. 7, when the Canaanite woman asked the Lord to free her daughter from demons, and He answered: It is not good to take the children's bread and give it to the dogs, that is, to the heathen; where in the parable He means His body by the name of bread, and by dogs the heathen. Tertullian changes those words somewhat, but the sense is the same. By all these he wishes to prove that bread is taken for the body of Christ. PANC[IROLI].

(c) ‹nocturnus› · printed under col 1161

Sed et nocturnus ille pulsator. Qui petiit panes ab amico media nocte, et eos habuit. (Lucae cap. XI). G. PANCIROL.

But also that knocker by night. He who asked loaves from his friend at midnight, and got them (Luke ch. 11). G. PANCIROL[I].

(2) ‹provenientibus› · printed under col 1161 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Qui pro venientibus distincte legit Jun., parum bene.

Junius reads "pro venientibus" as separate words, not well.

(3) ‹illi› · printed under col 1161 and continued under col 1162 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Si in eis reputamur. Jun. Franeq. Si illis Semler. Leop.

"si in eis reputamur": Junius, Franeker [edition]. "si illis": Semler, Leopold.

(4) ‹vult› · printed under col 1162 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Qui mavult primus et solus Leop.

"qui mavult": Leopold, first and alone.

(d) ‹Consequens› · printed under col 1161

CAP. VII. — Consequens erat. Nunc exponit alia verba Et dimitte nobis debita nostra, postquam dixit de liberalitate Dei, qui nos alit. G. PANCIROL.

CH. VII. — It followed. Now he expounds the next words, And forgive us our debts, after he has spoken of the generosity of God, Who feeds us. G. PANCIROL[I].

(e) ‹quasi› · printed under col 1161

Quasi taurus. Qui saginatur, ut occidatur. Idem esset de nobis, nisi delicta remitterentur. G. PANCIROL.

Like a bull: which is fattened so as to be slaughtered. The same would be true of us, unless our sins were forgiven. G. PANCIROL[I].

(f) ‹delicto esse› · printed under col 1161 and continued under col 1162

Sciebat Dominus se solum. Sane intelligendus locus, sicuti et similes Scripturae sacrae loci, uti alicubi annotavit S. Augustinus, ne excludatur beata virgo Deipara, quam sine omni delicto vixisse ille asserit. PAM.

The Lord knew that He alone. The passage must of course be understood, as also similar passages of sacred Scripture, as Saint Augustine has noted somewhere, so that the blessed Virgin Mother of God is not excluded, who, he asserts, lived without any sin. PAM[ELIUS].

(g) ‹vult› · printed under col 1162

Qui vult eam. Subaudi magis; et est elegans locutio. De hoc Ezechiel, cap. XXIII. G. PANCIROL.

Who wills it. Understand "rather"; and it is an elegant expression. On this, Ezekiel ch. 23 [so printed]. G. PANCIROL[I].

(h) ‹figura est› · printed under col 1162 and continued under col 1163 (p. 626)

Debitum autem. Nomen debiti significat delictum, et est ejus typus, seu figura, et significatio, quia sicut exigitur in judicio a debitore, nisi remittatur delictum, ita et delictum. PANC. — Debitum autem in Scripturis delicti figura est. Quod observat Tertullianus, debitum in Scripturis, delicti figuram esse, quia perinde judicio debeatur, et ab eo exigatur, nec evadat justitiam exactionis, nisi donetur exactio: consentaneum videtur iis quae tradit Aristoteles, Ethicor. V., contractuum alios esse voluntarios, alios involuntarios. Qui rem aliquam vendit, contrahit cum emptore, teneturque actionibus empti et venditi, voluntario contractu. Qui crimen aliquod committit, contrahit cum lege, ita ut poenae, quam lex crimini dixit, fiat obnoxius, etiam nolens et invitus. Sic debitores sumus Deo, qui delictis quotidianis Dei mandata spernimus, eoque nomine debemus poenas non leves; nec habemus unde immensae et infinitae majestati satisfacere possimus, qui per nos nullius pretii sumus. Deus igitur creditor noster tanta nos quamvis immerentes, beneficentia prosequitur, ut quo pacto liberari possimus edoceat. Remittite, inquit, et remittetur vobis. Erga hominem delinquit homo? quicquid intercedit, utique humanum est, quantulum est quod debetur? quantulum est quod remittitur? At erga Deum delinquit homo? jam hinc debitor homo, illinc creditor et vindex Deus. Omnino tam impar certamen, quam disparata sunt ab humanis divina. Itaque hominem Deus induit, ut nostra cum suis compenset. Nostris legibus nobiscum agit: delegari sibi patitur. Debitores sunt nostri, qui nobis injurias intulere. Delegamus debitores nostros Deo, quoties debitam nobis offensarum nomine satisfactionem debitori nostro sic donamus, ut ipsam illi a Deo condonari velimus. Tunc fit in coelis acceptilatio, per quam vicissim Deus nostra erga se debita expungit. Quare, ille ditior et locupletior est erga Deum debitor, qui plures injurias pertulit, etenim plures habet quos delegare queat debitores suos creditori Deo. Quid si debitorem non habeamus? Placet responsio, quam in scidis ad Augustinum suis Nic. Faber notaverat: Etsi scrutatori cordium Deo voluntas ad remissionem propensa sufficiat, quanto tamen ditior ille est debitor, quanto securior, qui non solum voluntate creditorem liberare, sed etiam re ipsa quod a se petitur exsolvere potest. Hoc autem ut queamus praestant qui nobis injurias inferendo se debitores nostros constituunt. Quam libenti igitur ac promoto animo, non dico parcere, verum etiam gratias agere illi debemus, qui nobis unde in gravibus debitis cum eo paria faciamus, cum quo nemo potest, suppeditant. RIG.

But a debt. The name of debt signifies sin, and is its type or figure and signification, because just as [payment] is exacted in judgement from a debtor, unless the sin is remitted, so also sin. PANC[IROLI]. — But in the Scriptures a debt is a figure of sin. What Tertullian observes, that in the Scriptures a debt is a figure of sin, because it is owed to judgement in the same way and exacted by it, and does not escape the justice of the exaction unless the exaction is waived, seems consistent with what Aristotle teaches, Ethics bk. 5, that some contracts are voluntary and others involuntary. He who sells something contracts with the buyer, and is bound by the actions of purchase and sale, by a voluntary contract. He who commits some crime contracts with the law, so that he becomes liable to the penalty which the law has fixed for the crime, even unwilling and against his will. So we are debtors to God, we who despise God's commands by daily sins, and on that account we owe no light penalties; nor have we the means to make satisfaction to an immense and infinite majesty, we who in ourselves are of no worth. God our creditor, then, pursues us, undeserving as we are, with such beneficence that He teaches us how we may be freed. "Forgive," He says, "and it will be forgiven you." Does a man sin against a man? Whatever passes between them is certainly human; how little is what is owed? how little is what is forgiven? But does a man sin against God? Then here is man the debtor, there God the creditor and avenger. The contest is altogether as unequal as divine things are unlike human ones. So God put on man, to set off our [debts] against His own. He deals with us by our laws: He allows [debts] to be assigned to Him. Our debtors are those who have done us injuries. We assign our debtors to God whenever we so remit to our debtor the satisfaction owed to us on account of offences that we wish it to be remitted to him by God. Then in heaven a formal release is made, by which God in turn cancels our debts towards Him. Therefore that debtor is richer and wealthier towards God who has borne more injuries, for he has more debtors of his own whom he can assign to God the creditor. What if we have no debtor? The answer pleases which Nic[olas] Faber had noted in his leaves on Augustine: "Although, for God the searcher of hearts, a will inclined to forgiveness suffices, yet how much richer, how much safer is that debtor who can not only release his creditor by his will, but can also in fact pay what is asked of him." And it is those who, by inflicting injuries on us, make themselves our debtors who enable us to do this. With how willing and eager a mind, then, we ought, I do not say to spare, but even to give thanks to him [those] who supply us with the means of squaring accounts, in heavy debts, with Him with Whom no one can. RIG[ALTIUS].

(h) of col 1162 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1162

(1) ‹ex specie› · printed under col 1163 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Ex hac specie Rigalt. Paris. Venet. Seml. Leop.

"ex hac specie": Rigaltius, Paris, Venice, Semler, Leopold.

(a) ‹Huc› · printed under col 1163

Huc enim spectat. Ad hunc locum pertinet tota illa parabola servi, cui dominus debitum remisit; ipse vero a conservo debitum sibi extorquebat. Significat autem, non dimitti nobis nisi ut ipsi injurias aliis dimiserimus. G. PANCIROL.

For to this looks. To this passage belongs that whole parable of the servant whose master forgave him his debt, while he himself was wringing from his fellow servant the debt owed to him. It signifies that we are not forgiven except as we ourselves have forgiven others their injuries. G. PANCIROL[I].

(b) ‹eo› · printed under col 1163

Eo competit. Ad id pertinet, et hoc significat. G. PANCIROL.

It applies to that: it pertains to this and signifies it. G. PANCIROL[I].

(c) ‹alibi› · printed under col 1163

Jam et alibi, etc. De hac petitione, ut nobis delicta remittantur, quemadmodum nos aliis remittimus, alibi est dictum. G. PANCIROL.

And elsewhere too, etc. Of this petition, that our sins be forgiven us as we forgive others, it is said elsewhere. G. PANCIROL[I].

(d) ‹ultio› · printed under col 1163

Ultio reputata est. Id est facta. Cum enim Lamech occidisset virum, id est Cain, dixit, Gen., cap. IV: Septuplum ultio dabitur de Cain; de Lamech vero septuagies septies. Aliqui interpretantur septies iri ultum illum, qui occiderit Cain. Sed D. Hieronymus, epist. 125, ad Damasum, quaest. 1, intelligit, non iri liberatum Cain, nisi in septima generatione, quod fuit quando occisus est a Lamech: nam tunc a tremore est liberatus ut poena, quam hic patiebatur. Peccatum vero Lamech, id est, totius mundi et sanguinis qui effusus est, liberatum est septuagies septies, id est septuagesima septima generatione, in qua fuit Christus, qui totum orbem liberavit a sceleribus; nam ipse fuit septuagesima septima generatio ab Adam, Lucae cap. III. Verum Tertullianus intelligit quia septies vindicandum erat peccatum Cain, et septuagies septies peccatum Lamech. A nova quoque lege jussum est, Matthaei cap. XVIII, ut toties peccatum dimitteretur, id est septuagies septies; sed ibi ponitur numerus finitus pro infinito, et significatur semper esse dimittendum, ut D. Hieronymus, lib. III Comment. in cap. XVIII Matthaei, et alii interpretantur. G. PANCIROL.

Vengeance was reckoned. That is, was done. For when Lamech had killed a man, that is Cain, he said, Gen. ch. 4: Sevenfold vengeance shall be given for Cain; but for Lamech seventy times seven. Some interpret it that he who killed Cain would be avenged seven times. But Saint Jerome, letter 125 to Damasus, question 1, understands that Cain would not be freed except in the seventh generation, which was when he was killed by Lamech: for then he was freed from trembling, as from the punishment he was suffering here. But the sin of Lamech, that is, of the whole world and of the blood that was shed, was freed seventy times seven, that is, in the seventy-seventh generation, in which Christ was, Who freed the whole world from crimes; for He was the seventy-seventh generation from Adam, Luke ch. 3. But Tertullian understands that the sin of Cain was to be avenged seven times, and the sin of Lamech seventy times seven. By the new law too it was commanded, Matthew ch. 18, that sin should be forgiven as many times, that is, seventy times seven; but there a finite number is put for an infinite one, and it is signified that one must always forgive, as Saint Jerome, Commentary on Matthew bk. 3, on ch. 18, and others interpret it. G. PANCIROL[I].

(2) ‹deji-cere› · printed under col 1163 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Ita Rigalt. e cod. Agob. Paris. Venet. Dejicere sit consentiens Seml. Leop.

So Rigaltius from the Agobardine codex, Paris, Venice. "dejicere sit consentiens": Semler, Leopold.

(3) ‹habenda› · printed under col 1163 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Ne quae pignora cariora Deo haberet cod. Agob.

"ne quae pignora cariora Deo haberet": the Agobardine codex.

(4) ‹DEVEHE› · printed under col 1164 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Ita Rigalt. Paris. Venet. 1744. Evehe Rhen. Gelen. Fran. Venet. 1701.

So Rigaltius, Paris, Venice 1744. "evehe": Rhenanus, Gelenius, Franeker, Venice 1701.

(5) ‹pauculorum› · printed under col 1164 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Alii paucorum.

Others read "paucorum".

(e) ‹gestiens› · printed under col 1163

CAP. VIII.— Dejicere gestiens, h. e.: Absit ut Dominus tentare videatur quasi gestiat nos dejicere, aut supplantare nos cum diabolo consentiat. (Vid. var. lect). EDD.

CH. VIII. — Eager to cast down, that is: far be it that the Lord should seem to tempt, as though He were eager to cast us down, or should agree with the devil to trip us up. (See the variant readings.) EDD.

(f) ‹exemplum› · printed under col 1164

Exemplum praecepto suo. Quod postea dedit Matthaei cap. XIV, ut oraremus, ne incideremus in tentationem. G. PANCIROL.

An example for His precept: which He afterwards gave, Matthew ch. 14 [so printed], that we should pray not to fall into temptation. G. PANCIROL[I].

(g) ‹pignora› · printed under col 1164

Neque pignora Deo cariora. Pignora appellat filios, quos Christus se cariores non habendos jussurus erat; ait enim Matthaei cap. X: Qui amat filium, aut filiam plus quam me, non est me dignus. G. PANCIR.

Nor pledges dearer than God. He calls children pledges, whom Christ was going to command not to be held dearer than Himself; for He says, Matthew ch. 10: He who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. G. PANCIR[OLI].

(h) ‹praesidem› · printed under col 1164

Praesidem, et artificem tentationis. Scilicet diabolum esse demonstravit Matthaei cap. IV. G. PANCIROL.

The chief and contriver of temptation: namely He showed that it is the devil, Matthew ch. 4. G. PANCIROL[I].

(i) ‹locum› · printed under col 1164

Hunc locum. Quod diabolus sit princeps tentationis, posterioribus, scilicet, verbis Evangelii demonstrat, Orate, dicens Matthaei cap. XXVI, ne intretis in tentationem. G. PANCIROL.

This passage. That the devil is the prince of temptation He shows by the later words of the Gospel, namely by saying, Matthew ch. 26: Pray, that you may not enter into temptation. G. PANCIROL[I].

(j) ‹adeo› · printed under col 1164

Adeo tentati sunt. Id est: itaque sunt tentati, quia non oraverunt. G. PANCIROL.

So far were they tempted. That is: so they were tempted, because they did not pray. G. PANCIROL[I].

(k) ‹SED› · printed under col 1164

Sed devehe nos a malo. Non hic, ut vulgo accipere solemus, malum intelligit, seu mala, quae homini contigere, contingunt, aut contingere possunt; sed malum, hoc est malignum, seu diabolum, a quo nos liberari cupimus, ne in tentationem atque in delicta inducamur. Cum qua lectione potissimum consentiunt graeca orationis dominicae verba, ubi legitur ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ, id est a cacodaemone, seu maligno. Chrysostomus sane et plures alii Patres hujusmodi interpretationem adhibuerunt. Vocem quidem ῥῦσαι, quam nos libera latine reddimus, crude atque aspere Tertullianus per vocem devehe expressit, revera enim significat protege, defende, tuere, eripe, ac libera. MURAT.

But carry us away from evil. He does not here understand "evil", as we commonly take it, as the evils which have befallen, befall or can befall a man; but "the evil one", that is, the malign one, or the devil, from whom we desire to be freed, so that we are not led into temptation and sins. With this reading the Greek words of the Lord's Prayer agree above all, where ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ is read, that is, "from the evil spirit", or the malign one. Chrysostom certainly and many other Fathers used this kind of interpretation. The word ῥῦσαι, which we render in Latin by libera, Tertullian expressed crudely and roughly by the word devehe; for in truth it means protect, defend, guard, rescue and free. MURAT[ORI].

(l) ‹IX› · printed under col 1164

CAP. IX. — In cod. Ambros. legitur tituli instar: Anacephalaeosis.

CH. IX. — In the Ambrosian codex there is read, by way of a title: Recapitulation.

(m) ‹Compendiis› · printed under col 1164

Compendiis pauculorum verborum, etc. Editi libri habent paucorum. Hinc Ambrosianus codex ms. exordium sumit. Recte autem Anacephalaeosis inscribitur hoc caput, cum compendiose tota dominicae orationis expositio ante legentium oculos exhibeatur. MURAT. — Compendiis paucorum. Nunc epilogat, quomodo omnia mandata Scripturarum contineat oratio dominica. G. PANCIROL.

In the compendium of a very few words, etc. The printed books have "paucorum". Here the Ambrosian manuscript codex begins. Rightly is this chapter entitled Recapitulation, since the whole exposition of the Lord's Prayer is shown in compendium before the readers' eyes. MURAT[ORI]. — In the compendium of few. Now he sums up how the Lord's Prayer contains all the commands of the Scriptures. G. PANCIROL[I].

(n) ‹officia› · printed under col 1164 and continued under col 1165 (p. 627)

Quot simul expunguntur officia? Legere maluissem exponuntur. Sed nulla Tertulliano barbarice scribenti de sermonis puritate sollicitudo. Aliis in locis, ac praecipue lib. III et IV et in fine lib. V adversus Marcionem eodem utitur verbo; at sane significatione diversa. Pari tamen sensu usurpasse videtur cap. 1 de Cor. militis, ubi inquit: Proxime factum est. Liberalitas praestantissimorum imperatorum expungebatur in castris. Scilicet exponebatur, exerebatur, ac implebatur Caesarum liberalitas in milites. Sumpta fortasse metaphora e calculis et rationibus quae expungi dicuntur, cum absolutae et confectae emergunt. Capite vero 11 hujus libri ita ille scribit: Ne verbo quidem malo iram Deus permittit expungi, hoc est mandat, ne ira in contumelias erumpat ac proponatur. Alibi expungere pro perficere et praestare adhibuit. Vide etiam infra, cap. 13. MURAT. — Quot simul expunguntur officia? Id est tot verbis dominicae orationis implentur officia in Deum, quia cum dicimus: Pater noster, eum ut patrem honoramus. In illis vero verbis: Sanctificetur nomen tuum, fidem in ejus nomine habere testamur. Oblatio vero obsequii est in voluntate, cum dicimus, Fiat voluntas; et commemoratio est spei in regno in illis verbis, Adveniat regnum tuum. Mox petitio vitae in pane, ibi, Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie; exomologesis, id est confessio delictorum quod deliquerimus in Deum, quando dicimus: Et dimitte nobis debita nostra; sollicitudo tentationum, id est solliciti sumus, ne tentemur, ubi petimus ut nos tueatur, ibi: Et ne nos inducas in tentationem. G. PANCIROL.

How many duties are fulfilled at once? I should have preferred to read "exponuntur" [are set forth]. But Tertullian, writing barbarously, had no concern for purity of language. In other places, and especially in books 3 and 4 and at the end of book 5 Against Marcion, he uses the same word, but certainly in a different meaning. He seems, however, to have used it in the same sense in ch. 1 of On the Soldier's Crown, where he says: "It happened lately. The largesse of the most excellent emperors was being paid out [expungebatur] in the camps." That is, the largesse of the Caesars to the soldiers was being set forth, put forth and fulfilled. The metaphor is perhaps taken from reckonings and accounts, which are said expungi when they come out settled and completed. In chapter 11 of this book he writes thus: "God does not allow anger to be discharged [expungi] even by an evil word", that is, He commands that anger should not break out into insults and be displayed. Elsewhere he has used expungere for "perform" and "fulfil". See also below, ch. 13. MURAT[ORI]. — How many duties are fulfilled at once? That is, by so many words of the Lord's Prayer duties towards God are fulfilled: for when we say Our Father, we honour Him as Father. In the words Hallowed be Thy name we bear witness that we have faith in His name. The offering of obedience is in the will, when we say Thy will be done; and the remembrance of hope is in the kingdom, in the words Thy kingdom come. Then the petition for life is in the bread, there: Give us this day our daily bread; the exomologesis, that is the confession of the sins by which we have sinned against God, when we say: And forgive us our debts; the anxiety about temptations, that is, we are anxious not to be tempted, where we ask Him to protect us, there: And lead us not into temptation. G. PANCIROL[I].

(n) of col 1164 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1164

(1) ‹accidentium› · printed under col 1165 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Accedentium juxta Latin.

"accedentium", according to Latinius.

(2) ‹superfluendi› · printed under col 1165 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Superstruendi Rig. Paris. Venet. Seml. Leop.

"superstruendi": Rigaltius, Paris, Venice, Semler, Leopold.

(a) ‹Ab ipso igitur› · printed under col 1165

Ab ipso igitur. Potes explicare simpliciter, ut de uno tantum Christo sit sermo. Non tamen displicet subtilitas Pamelii, qui in hac periodo Trinitatem agnoscit, ita ut ordinata ab ipso sit Patre, et de Spiritu ipsius scilicet Sancto, et ex ore divino Christi. LAC.

By Him, then. You can explain it simply, so that the talk is of Christ alone. Yet the subtlety of Pamelius does not displease, who recognizes the Trinity in this sentence, so that [the religion of prayer] is ordained by the Father Himself, and of His Spirit, namely the Holy [Spirit], and from the divine mouth of Christ. LAC.

(b) ‹CAPUT X› · printed under col 1165

Titulus in cod. Ambros.: Posse nos super adjicere.

Title in the Ambrosian codex: That we may add more.

(c) ‹Quoniam› · printed under col 1165

CAP. X.— Quoniam tamen. Addit posse nos et alia petere. G. PANCIROL.

CH. X. — Since, however. He adds that we may ask for other things too. G. PANCIROL[I].

(d) ‹prospector› · printed under col 1165

Prospector. Scilicet est. G. PANCIROL.

The provider: understand "is". G. PANCIROL[I].

(e) ‹accidentium› · printed under col 1165

Accidentium jus est desideriorum. Id est possumus petere quae, prout accidit, desideramus, praemissa legitima et ordinaria oratione, id est dominica oratione pro fundamento. G. PANCIROL.

There is a right of occasional desires. That is, we may ask for the things we desire as occasion arises, once the lawful and regular prayer, that is, the Lord's Prayer, has been set first as a foundation. G. PANCIROL[I].

(f) ‹superfluendi› · printed under col 1165 and continued under col 1166

Jus est superfluendi. Praeter generales orationis dominicae petitiones, quae cuilibet Christianorum sunt communes, alia saepe a Deo, singulorum propria hominum, petenda se offerunt. Communi itaque orationi quaedam addere licet pro cujusque necessitate, et voto, dummodo petitionibus nostris divina praecepta non adversentur. Imprimis autem nobis a Deo praecipitur, ne rogaturi ad altare accedamus, nisi prius cum fratribus nostris iniverimus pacem, ac odia deposuerimus. Hoc Tertullianus, cap. seq. ostendet. MURAT.

There is a right of overflowing. Besides the general petitions of the Lord's Prayer, which are common to every Christian, other things, proper to individual men, often present themselves to be asked of God. So it is permitted to add certain things to the common prayer according to each one's need and wish, provided the divine precepts are not opposed to our petitions. Above all, however, we are commanded by God not to approach the altar to make petitions unless we have first made peace with our brothers and laid aside our hatreds. This Tertullian will show in the next chapter. MURAT[ORI].

(f) of col 1165 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1165

(3) ‹CAPUT XI› · printed under col 1165 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. X, alias.

Ch. 10, elsewhere.

(4) ‹Memoria› · printed under col 1165 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cum memoria alias.

"cum memoria", elsewhere.

(5) ‹recedere› · printed under col 1165 and continued under col 1166 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Accedere ut voluit Muratorius, ita et Semler. ac Leop.

"accedere", as Muratori wished; so too Semler and Leopold.

(6) ‹inquit› · printed under col 1166 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Latin. parum bene, distinguit: ne inquit, irascamini in via nos scilicet monuit (alias enim via cognominatur disciplina nostra). Tum ne in via, etc.

Latinius, not well, punctuates: "ne," inquit, "irascamini in via nos scilicet monuit (alias enim via cognominatur disciplina nostra). Tum ne in via," etc.

(g) ‹CAPUT XI› · printed under col 1166

CAP. XI. — Titul. in cod. Ambr.: Ne orans patrem fratri irascaris.

CH. XI. — Title in the Ambrosian codex: That when praying to the Father you should not be angry with your brother.

(h) ‹ne› · printed under col 1166

Ne prius. Monet prius fratri esse conciliandum, quam oretur. G. PANCIROL.

Not before. He warns that one must be reconciled to one's brother before one prays. G. PANCIROL[I].

(i) ‹est› · printed under col 1166

Quid est enim. Id est: quam observandum. G. PANCIROL.

For what is it. That is: how [greatly] it is to be observed. G. PANCIROL[I].

(j) ‹recedere› · printed under col 1166

Recedere. Pro reverti hanc vocem usurpasse videntur Sallustius atque Horatius. Cum tamen dubium sensum habeant istorum exempla, et secedere etiam significent, vellem liceret mihi per Tertullianum hoc in loco scribere non recedere, sed accedere. MURAT. (Videtur Auctor, audaci nonnihil pro more suo syllepsi usus, junxisse: ad pacem Dei accedere? recedere sine pace? EDD.)

To withdraw. Sallust and Horace seem to have used this word for "to return". Yet since their examples have a doubtful sense, and can also mean "to go apart", I wish I were allowed by Tertullian to write in this place not recedere but accedere. MURAT[ORI]. (The author seems, using a somewhat bold syllepsis as is his way, to have joined: to approach the peace of God? to withdraw without peace? EDD.)

(k) ‹nos› · printed under col 1166

Nos scilicet monuit. Supple; idem agere debere. G. PANCIROL.

Namely He warned us. Supply: that we must do the same. G. PANCIROL[I].

(l) ‹Alias enim› · printed under col 1166

Alias enim via, etc. Unde homines viae primo dicti sunt Christiani, ut est in Actis, cap. IX, ubi Paulus acceperat litteras, ut homines viae comprehenderet, id est Christianos; quanquam vertendum non erat hujus viae, et dictio hujus delenda est, cum sit articulus graecus. G. PANCIROL.

For otherwise the way, etc. Whence Christians were first called men of the way, as it is in Acts ch. 9, where Paul had received letters to arrest the men of the way, that is, the Christians; although it should not have been translated "of this way", and the word "this" should be deleted, since it is the Greek article. G. PANCIROL[I].

(m) ‹in› · printed under col 1166

Tum ne in via. Subaudi: est observandum. PANC.

Then not on the way. Understand: it is to be observed. PANC[IROLI].

(n) ‹iram› · printed under col 1166

Iram in fratrem homicidio superponit. Expresso in veteri lege prohibita non videtur ira, sed quidem homicidium. At Christus amplians legem, hoc est perficiens, et novis disciplinae praeceptis amplificans, homicidio damnato, irae quoque damnationem ac prohibitionem addidit, sive superposuit. Omnis quidem ira ab initio interdicta est nobis, ut supra Tertullianus dixerat Genesis testimonio; verum cum aperte non videretur interdicta, expressis illam verbis a fidelium cordibus removere ac arcere Christus voluit. MURAT.

He sets anger against a brother above murder. In the old law anger does not seem to be forbidden expressly [printed "Expresso"], but murder indeed. But Christ, enlarging the law, that is, perfecting it and amplifying it with new precepts of discipline, after murder had been condemned added, or set above it, the condemnation and prohibition of anger also. All anger, indeed, was forbidden to us from the beginning, as Tertullian had said above by the testimony of Genesis; but since it did not seem to be openly forbidden, Christ willed to remove it and bar it from the hearts of the faithful in express words. MURAT[ORI].

(o) ‹superponit› · printed under col 1166

Superponit. Adjicit, ut est apud Matthaeum, cap. V. G. PANCIROL.

He sets above: He adds, as it is in Matthew ch. 5. G. PANCIROL[I].

(p) ‹expungi› · printed under col 1166

Expungi. Impleri iram convicio. G. PANCIROL.

To be discharged: that anger be fulfilled in insult. G. PANCIROL[I].

(1) ‹CAPUT XIII› · printed under col 1167 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XI alias.

Ch. 11, elsewhere.

(a) ‹CAPUT XII› · printed under col 1167

CAP. XII.— Tit. cod. Ambros.: Etiam omni animi confusione vacuum esse debere.

CH. XII. — Title in the Ambrosian codex: That [one] must also be free of all disturbance of mind.

(b) ‹ira› · printed under col 1167

Nec ab ira. Docet orantem tranquillum esse oportere, ut est Spiritus Sanctus, ad quem oramus. G. PANCIROL.

Not from anger. He teaches that one who prays must be calm, as is the Holy Spirit, to Whom we pray. G. PANCIROL[I].

(c) ‹confusione› · printed under col 1167

Confusione. In ms. codice Ambrosiano habetur contusione. MURAT.

Disturbance. In the Ambrosian manuscript codex there is "contusione" [bruising]. MURAT[ORI].

(d) ‹tali› · printed under col 1167

De tali spiritu emissa. Nil oratio prosit, nisi a puro, et minime inquinato spiritu ad Spiritum divinum, qui purissimus est, imo ipsa puritas, feratur. Neque enim Spiritui Sancto placere animus terrenis maculis infectus potest. Hic autem Tertullianus ad cap. I Sapientiae respicere videtur, ubi legitur: Spiritus sanctus disciplinae effugiet fictum. MURAT.

Sent forth from such a spirit. Prayer would profit nothing unless it is borne from a pure and wholly undefiled spirit to the divine Spirit, Who is most pure, indeed purity itself. For a mind stained with earthly blemishes cannot please the Holy Spirit. Here Tertullian seems to look to ch. 1 of Wisdom, where it is read: The holy spirit of discipline will flee from deceit. MURAT[ORI].

(e) ‹CAPUT XIII› · printed under col 1167

CAP. XIII.— Tit. cod. Ambros.: De Lavatione manuum.

CH. XIII. — Title in the Ambrosian codex: On the Washing of Hands.

(f) ‹Caeterum› · printed under col 1167 and continued under col 1168

Caeterum quae ratio. Hic docet, manus non aqua abluendas, sed a nequitiis mundas esse tenendas. G. PANC.—Caeterum quae ratio est, etc. Manuum, imo totius quandoque corporis lotio orationem praecedere solebat, non apud Christianos tantum, sed et apud ethnicos, atque Judaeos. Nempe abluto corpore manibusque potissimum purgatis, quae facilius plerumque sordes contrahunt, lavari quoque ac emundari a culpae sordibus animum, nonnulli arbitrabantur. Sed animo puro et purgato hominem ad Deum accedere debere, cum ratio, tum religio suadebant. Hunc autem apud gentiles invaluisse morem, omnium antiquissimo teste probabo. Homerus videlicet in Odyssea Penelopem nobis exhibet aqua sese ante preces abluentem. Ejus etiam filius Telemachus Χεῖρας νιψάμενος πολιῆς ἁλὸς εὔχετ' Ἀθήνῃ. Lotis in ponto manibus, sic Pallada adorat. Macrobius vero, Saturnal. lib. III, cap. 1: Constat, inquit, diis superis sacra facturum corporis ablutione purgari. Alia hujusce ritus exempla e Virgilio profert eo in loco Macrobius. Lactantius quoque Firmianus eosdem ethnicos ridet, qui se pie sacrificasse opinantur, si cutem laverint, tanquam libidines intra pectus inclusas ulli amnes abluant, aut ulla maria purificent. Judaeis pariter id moris fuisse, auctor est pseudo-Aristeas, in lib. de LXX Interpret.: Rege consultato, ait ille, ad diversa loca divertunt, atque, ut mos est Judaeis omnibus, manibus prius in mari lotis, Deo preces effundunt. Vide Spencerum, de Leg. Hebr., l. III, diss. 3, c. 3. Transiit postea ad Christi fideles hujusmodi consuetudo, et fortasse quidam ab ipso Apostolo in I ad Timoth., cap. II, id praeceptum fuisse censuerunt, ubi nos jubet χεῖρας ὁσίους ἐπαίρειν, manus puras ad coelum tollere, quasi et de externa manuum puritate ac ablutione, velut internae puritatis indicio, Apostolus loqueretur. Idcirco Apostolicarum Constitutionum auctor, lib. VIII, cap. 32: Πᾶς πιστὸς, inquit, ἢ πιστὴ ἕωθεν ἀναστάντες ἐξ ὕπνου, πρὸ τοῦ ἔργου ἐπιτελέσαι, νιψάμενοι προσευχέσθωσαν. Omnis Christianus, vel Christiana mane e somno surgentes, antequam opus faciant, manibus lotis, Deum orent. Verum hoc apertius patebit consideranti, posita antiquitus fuisse in templorum atriis labra, fontes, ac vasa, ut antequam ad orandum fideles accederent, manus abluerent. S. Paulinus in epistola ad Severum: Sancta nitens famulis interluit atria lymphis Cantharus, intrantumque manus lavat..... Chrysostomus pluribus in locis, et praesertim in homil. 57, tom. V, p. 390, ejusdem rei fidem his verbis facit.: Κρήνας εἶναι ἐν ταῖς αὐλαῖς τῶν εὐκτηρίων οἴκων νενόμισται, ἵνα οἱ μέλλοντες εὔχεσθαι τῷ Θεῷ πρότερον ἀπονιψάμενοι τὰς χεῖρας, οὕτως αὐτὰς εἰς εὐχὴν ἀνατείνωσιν. Ut in atriis domuum, in quibus oratur, sint fontes, constitutum est, ut qui orare volunt, prius abluant manus, et tunc demum eas ad preces extendant. Eumdem consule in homil. 82 et 108, tom. VI, et homil. 43, in I ad Corinth. Alibi tamen Chrysostomus ipse, videlicet in homil. 6, in I ad Timotheum, externum hunc ablutionis ritum, interna cordis puritate non accedente, irridet, eumque appellat γέλωτα καὶ λῆρον, παίγνια, καὶ παίδων ἀθύρματα, risum, nugas, jocos et puerorum ludicra. Ea quoque Tertulliani sententia est, illos redarguentis, qui manibus quidem ablutis, spiritu vero sordente, orationem obeunt. Caeterum apud quosdam Orientis populos, ac potissimum apud Mahumeti sectatores, nostris etiam temporibus hujusmodi consuetudo viget. MURAT.

But what reason. Here he teaches that the hands are not to be washed with water, but kept clean from wickedness. G. PANC[IROLI]. — But what reason is there, etc. The washing of the hands, indeed sometimes of the whole body, used to precede prayer, not among Christians only, but also among the heathen and the Jews. For some thought that when the body had been washed, and above all the hands cleansed, which mostly contract dirt more easily, the soul too was washed and cleansed from the filth of guilt. But both reason and religion urged that a man ought to approach God with a pure and cleansed mind. That this custom prevailed among the gentiles I shall prove by the most ancient witness of all. Homer, namely, in the Odyssey shows us Penelope washing herself with water before her prayers. Her son Telemachus too: "Having washed his hands in the grey sea, he prayed to Athena." With his hands washed in the sea, thus he worships Pallas. Macrobius, Saturnalia bk. 3, ch. 1: "It is agreed," he says, "that one about to sacrifice to the gods above is purified by washing the body." In that place Macrobius brings other examples of this rite from Virgil. Lactantius Firmianus too mocks those same heathen who think they have sacrificed piously if they have washed their skin, as though any rivers could wash away, or any seas purify, the lusts shut up within the breast. That this was likewise the custom of the Jews, pseudo-Aristeas is the authority, in the book on the Seventy Translators: "After consulting the king," he says, "they go off to different places and, as is the custom of all Jews, having first washed their hands in the sea, they pour out prayers to God." See Spencer, On the Laws of the Hebrews, bk. 3, diss. 3, ch. 3. Afterwards this kind of custom passed to the faithful of Christ, and perhaps some thought it had been commanded by the Apostle himself, in 1 Timothy ch. 2, where he bids us "lift up holy hands", raise pure hands to heaven, as if the Apostle were speaking also of the outward purity and washing of the hands, as a sign of inward purity. For that reason the author of the Apostolic Constitutions, bk. 8, ch. 32: "Let every faithful man," he says, "or faithful woman, rising from sleep at dawn, before doing work, wash and pray." Let every Christian man or woman, rising from sleep in the morning, before they do any work, pray to God with washed hands. But this will be plainer to one who considers that in ancient times basins, fountains and vessels were placed in the forecourts of churches, so that the faithful might wash their hands before they came to pray. Saint Paulinus in the letter to Severus: "A shining cantharus streams through the holy forecourts with its waters for the servants, and washes the hands of those who enter….." Chrysostom in several places, and especially in homily 57, vol. 5, p. 390, attests the same thing in these words: "It is the custom that there be fountains in the courts of the houses of prayer, so that those about to pray to God may first wash their hands and so lift them up in prayer." That there be fountains in the forecourts of the houses in which prayer is made has been established, so that those who wish to pray may first wash their hands, and only then stretch them out to prayer. Consult the same in homilies 82 and 108, vol. 6, and homily 43 on 1 Corinthians. Elsewhere, however, Chrysostom himself, namely in homily 6 on 1 Timothy, mocks this outward rite of washing when inward purity of heart does not accompany it, and calls it "laughter and nonsense, games and children's toys": laughter, trifles, jokes and children's play. This too is the view of Tertullian, who rebukes those who go to prayer with hands washed but spirit filthy. For the rest, among certain peoples of the East, and above all among the followers of Mahomet, a custom of this kind flourishes even in our times. MURAT[ORI].

(f) of col 1167 continued in the notes under this column, set in n1167

(g) ‹scrupulose› · printed under col 1168

Id cum scrupulose percunctarer. Quare manus ante preces abluerent, nonnulli a Tertulliano interrogati, se id facere respondebant in commemorationem dominicae deditionis, quod videlicet Pilatus, priusquam Christum dederet Judaeis, manus lavit. Hanc rationem facile Tertullianus retundit; nos enim, inquit, Dominum adoramus, non dedimus. MURAT.

When I was scrupulously inquiring into this. Some, asked by Tertullian why they washed their hands before prayer, answered that they did it in commemoration of the Lord's surrender, because Pilate, before he handed Christ over to the Jews, washed his hands. Tertullian easily beats back this reason; for, he says, we worship the Lord, we did not surrender Him. MURAT[ORI].

(h) ‹rationem› · printed under col 1168

Et rationem requirerem. Quare aliqui se lavent oraturi, comperi id eos facere in memoriam Domini a Juda proditi, ut factum illud execrentur et velut ab ipso se mundent. G. PANCIROL.

And sought the reason. Why some wash themselves when about to pray: I found that they do it in memory of the Lord betrayed by Judas, to abhor that deed and as it were cleanse themselves from it. G. PANCIROL[I].

(i) ‹nisi› · printed under col 1168

Nisi quod. Nisi aliquod inquinamentum conversionis humanae lavemus caussa conscientiae, postquam idolum tetigerimus. G. PANCIROL.

Unless. Unless we wash off some defilement from our dealings with men, for conscience' sake, after we have touched an idol. G. PANCIROL[I].

(j) ‹lavemus› · printed under col 1168

Conscientiae caussa. Hunc esse puto Tertulliani sensum, manus ideo tantum lavamus ut animi puritatem demonstremus. Atque in eo superstitionem damnat, quae externam tantum munditiam quaerit. LE PR.

For conscience' sake. I think this is Tertullian's sense: we wash our hands only in order to show purity of mind. And in this he condemns the superstition which seeks only outward cleanness. LE PR[IEUR].

(1) ‹e› · printed under col 1169 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Et dominica pass... Seml., Leop., qui scribendum opinatur: Dominicam passionem modulantes.

"et dominica pass[ione]…": Semler, Leopold, who thinks one should write "Dominicam passionem modulantes".

(a) ‹CAPUT XIV› · printed under col 1169

CAP. XIV. — Tit. cod. Ambros: Apostrophe.

CH. XIV. — Title in the Ambrosian codex: Apostrophe.

(b) ‹semel› · printed under col 1169

In Christo semel lavimus. Hoc est in baptismo, in quo manus cum toto corpore lavimus. Quibus verbis innuitur baptizandi ritus, quando nudi homines ter in aquam mergebantur. At in lib. de Baptismo haec apertissime Tertullianus tradit, et post illum complures alii. MURAT.

We have washed once in Christ. That is, in baptism, in which we washed our hands with the whole body. By these words the rite of baptizing is hinted at, when men were plunged naked three times into the water. But in the book On Baptism Tertullian teaches this most plainly, and many others after him. MURAT[ORI].

(c) ‹conscientia› · printed under col 1169

Conscientia patrum, etc. Haeredes reae conscientiae patrum suorum appellat Judaeos, a quibus conclamatum est: Sanguis ejus super nos, et super filios nostros. MURAT.—Conscientia patrum haereditarii rei. Judaeos ita circumscribit, quos reprehendit, quod manus non attollant in suis sacrificiis, quippe qui in terram proni orare plerumque soleant, saltem in hac sua execratione circa Christi passionem. PAM.

The conscience of the fathers, etc. He calls the Jews heirs of the guilty conscience of their fathers, by whom it was cried out: His blood be upon us and upon our children. MURAT[ORI]. — The conscience of the fathers, hereditary defendants. So he describes the Jews, whom he blames for not raising their hands in their sacrifices, since for the most part they are accustomed to pray bowed to the ground, at least in this their execration concerning the passion of Christ. PAM[ELIUS].

(d) ‹audent› · printed under col 1169

Nec attollere eas ad Dominum audent. Irenaeus, lib. IV: Judaei jam non offerunt. Manus enim eorum sanguine plenae sunt. Non enim receperunt Verbum, per quod offertur Deo. RIG.

Nor do they dare to raise them to the Lord. Irenaeus, bk. 4: "The Jews no longer offer. For their hands are full of blood. For they have not received the Word, through Whom offering is made to God." RIG[ALTIUS].

(e) ‹aliquis› · printed under col 1169

Ne exclamet aliquis Isaias. Ne aliquis spiritu Isaiae plenus cum illo exclamet, ac Deum ita loquentem inducat: Cum extenderitis manus vestras, etc. Atque hoc est emphatice dictum. MURATOR.—Nec exclamet aliquis Isaias. Abundat aliquis, ut saepe alibi. Intelligit quod dicit Isaias, cap. I: Cum extenderitis manus vestras, avertam faciem a vobis; manus enim vestrae sanguine plenae sunt. Lavamini, mundi estote, auferte nequitias ab animis vestris. Et ideo dicit: Ne exclamet Isaias. Et hic monet, Hebraeos immundas manus semper habere, quae nulla aqua possunt mundari. G. PANCIROL.

Lest some Isaiah cry out. Lest someone full of the spirit of Isaiah cry out with him and bring in God speaking thus: When you stretch out your hands, etc. And this is said emphatically. MURATOR[I]. — Nor should some Isaiah cry out. "Some" is redundant, as often elsewhere. He means what Isaiah says, ch. 1: When you stretch out your hands, I will turn away My face from you; for your hands are full of blood. Wash yourselves, be clean, take away the wickedness from your souls. And so he says: Lest Isaiah cry out. And here he warns that the Hebrews always have unclean hands, which no water can cleanse. G. PANCIROL[I].

(f) ‹nos vero› · printed under col 1169

Nos vero non attollimus, etc. Quandoquidem Judaei immundas, et ipsius Domini sanguine cruentatas manus attollere nec audent, nec debent, nobis Christi filiis gaudendum est, qui non attollere tantum, sed eas expandere possumus a dominica passione eruditi; suas enim expandit in cruce mundi Servator. Quapropter ea verba e dominica passione modulatum aliam desiderare vocem mihi videntur, cujusmodi esset capientes, habentes, aut quid simile, ut sit sensus: Nos vero non attollimus tantum, sed etiam expandimus manus, modulatum, hoc est mensuram, e Domini cruce capientes, ubi nos ille docuit manus expandere. In lib. de Pallio lunae modulationes menstruas Tertullianus dixit, ut mensuram lunaris motus significaret. MURAT.

But we do not raise, etc. Since the Jews neither dare nor ought to raise hands unclean and bloodied with the blood of the Lord Himself, we sons of Christ must rejoice, who can not only raise them but spread them out, taught by the Lord's passion; for the Saviour of the world spread out His own on the cross. For that reason the words "modelled on the Lord's passion" seem to me to want another word, such as "taking", "having", or something similar, so that the sense is: But we do not only raise but also spread out our hands, taking the model, that is, the measure, from the Lord's cross, where He taught us to spread out our hands. In the book On the Pallium Tertullian spoke of the monthly "modulations" of the moon, to signify the measure of the moon's motion. MURAT[ORI].

(2) ‹modulatum› · printed under col 1170 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Modulantes Seml. Leop. ex Pamel. editione.

"modulantes": Semler, Leopold, from Pamelius's edition.

(3) ‹CAPUT XV› · printed under col 1170 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XII alias.

Ch. 12, elsewhere.

(g) ‹passione› · printed under col 1169 and continued under col 1170

E dominica passione modulantes. Formantes, ut tenebat Dominus manus in cruce. Ita orabant passis brachiis et manibus. G. PANCIROL. — Sed expandimus e dominica passione modulatum. Pamelius edidit: Nos vero non attollimus tantum, sed etiam expandimus et dominica passione modulantes, et orantes confitemur Christo. Ferri quidem posset, sed etiam expandimus, e dominica passione modulantes. Verius tamen videtur ex libro Agobardi: Sed etiam expandimus e dominica passione modulatum. Utriusque autem scripturae sensus satis erit obscurus et ambiguus, nisi ritus tunc usitati ratio explicetur. Illud vero in primis notandum est, eos errare graviter, qui modulantes hic accipiunt quasi canentes aut psallentes. Nam cum de privata oratione sit sermo, quam sono vocis summisso atque subjecto fieri debere ait Tertullianus, nihil opus fuit modulis musicis. Nos modulatum interpretamur imaginem, figuram scilicet, seu gestum orantis. Expandimus igitur e dominica passione modulatum, hoc est, orantes non tantum attollimus manus, sed etiam expandimus modum, sed modulum, vel, ut ait Tertullianus, modulatum, quem exhibuit Dominus noster Jesus Christus expansis in cruce manibus. Qui ritus etiam hodie servatur apud nos in recitanda publicis precibus oratione dominica. Sic orantes confitemur Christo, quia nos inter orandum ipso gestu profitemur christianos, corpore nostro ad figuram Christi crucifixi conformato. Ipse Tertullianus, lib. I ad Nationes: Si statueris hominem manibus expansis, imaginem crucis feceris. Maximus Taurinensis, homil. II de cruce Domini: Ipsius etiam incessus hominis, cum manus levaverit, crucem pingit. Atque ideo elevatis manibus orare praecipimur, ut ipso quoque membrorum gestu passionem Domini fateamur. Quod Maximus dicit, Ipso membrorum gestu; Tertullianus dixisset, ipso corporis modulatu. Sic lib. de Anima, cap. 32, ubi de animarum in alia corpora translatione, Nec modulis corporum adaequantur, inquit, id est, mensurae, amplitudini, capacitati non conveniunt. Eoque sensu antiquiores Latini dixerant, Modum agri, et Metiri se suo modulo ac pede. RIGALT.

Modelling [them] on the Lord's passion. Shaping them as the Lord held His hands on the cross. So they prayed with arms and hands outspread. G. PANCIROL[I]. — But we spread them out modelled on the Lord's passion. Pamelius printed: "But we do not only raise, but also spread out, both modelling on the Lord's passion, and in praying we confess Christ." It could indeed be tolerated: "but also we spread out, modelling on the Lord's passion." More correct, however, seems [the reading] from the Agobardine book: "But we also spread them out, modelled on the Lord's passion." But the sense of either reading will be obscure and ambiguous enough unless the reason of the rite then in use is explained. This is to be noted first of all: that those err gravely who take modulantes here as "singing" or "chanting psalms". For since the talk is of private prayer, which Tertullian says should be made with a low and subdued sound of voice, there was no need of musical measures. We interpret modulatum as the image, that is, the figure or gesture of one praying. We spread out, then, modelled on the Lord's passion, that is: in praying we do not only raise our hands but also spread out the measure [so printed: "modum, sed modulum"], or, as Tertullian says, the model, which our Lord Jesus Christ showed with hands spread out on the cross. This rite is kept among us even today in reciting the Lord's Prayer at public prayers. So in praying we confess Christ, because while praying we profess ourselves Christians by the very gesture, our body being conformed to the figure of Christ crucified. Tertullian himself, To the Nations bk. 1: "If you set up a man with hands spread out, you will have made an image of the cross." Maximus of Turin, homily 2 on the Cross of the Lord: "The very bearing of a man, when he has raised his hands, depicts the cross. And therefore we are bidden to pray with raised hands, so that by the very gesture of our limbs too we may confess the Lord's passion." What Maximus says, "by the very gesture of the limbs", Tertullian would have said "by the very modelling of the body". So in the book On the Soul, ch. 32, on the transfer of souls into other bodies: "Nor are they made equal to the measures of bodies," he says, that is, they do not suit their measure, size and capacity. And in that sense the older Latins had said "the measure of a field" and "to measure oneself by one's own rule and foot". RIGALT[IUS].

(h) ‹CAPUT XV› · printed under col 1170

CAP. XV. — Tit. cod. Ambros.: De expositis penulis.

CH. XV. — Title in the Ambrosian codex: On cloaks laid aside.

(i) ‹Sed› · printed under col 1170

Sed quoniam, etc. Quia attigimus unum, quod est vanum de lavandis manibus, alia etiam dicemus non minus vana, ut est deponere penulas caussa orandi, de quo subjicit. G. PANCIR.

But since, etc. Since we have touched on one thing that is vain, about the washing of hands, we shall speak of other things no less vain too, such as laying aside cloaks for the sake of praying, of which he goes on to speak. G. PANCIR[OLI].

(j) ‹vacuae› · printed under col 1170

Vacuae observationis. Inanem scilicet ac superfluam appellat manuum ante preces ablutionem, nisi prius et animus a criminum sordibus purgetur. Pergit autem vanitatis arguere illorum quoque consuetudinem, qui depositis gravioribus vestibus ad orationem accedebant. MURAT.

Of an empty observance. He calls the washing of the hands before prayer empty, that is, and superfluous, unless the mind too is first cleansed from the filth of crimes. And he goes on to convict of vanity the custom also of those who came to prayer having laid aside their heavier garments. MURAT[ORI].

(k) ‹gentilibus› · printed under col 1170

Gentilibus adaequent. Pro adaequentur, et sint, prout observant ipsi. G. PANCIROL.

Make them equal to the gentiles: for "are made equal", and are as they themselves observe. G. PANCIROL[I].

(l) ‹Ut est› · printed under col 1170 and continued under col 1171 (p. 630)

Ut est quorumdam, expositis penulis, etc. Penula vestium genus fuit, quas pluvioso frigidoque coelo veteres induebant. Has antequam precibus operam darent, quidam e Christianis deponendas arbitrabantur. Quod vero Tertullianus, id consuevisse fieri a nationibus, hoc est ab ethnicis idola adeuntibus, Aeschyli graecus interpres confirmare videtur. Nescio quid etiam de mutationibus vestium in gentilium sacris ipse Tertullianus habet in lib. de Pallio, cap. 4. MURAT. Ut est quorumdam positis penulis, etc. Ita orabant gentiles. Penula vero vestis erat, qua pluviae vel itineris gratia utebantur. Lampridius in Alexandro: Penulis, inquit, intra urbem frigoris caussa ut senes uterentur permisit, cum id vestimenti genus semper itinerarium aut pluviae fuisset. Juvenalis, sat. V: Et multo stillaret penula nimbo. Cicero, in Orat. pro Mil.: Cum alter, inquit, veheretur rheda penulatus. Penulam pro lacerna veteres posuisse videntur. G. PANCIR.

As it is with some, having laid aside their cloaks, etc. The penula was a kind of garment which the ancients put on in rainy and cold weather. Some of the Christians thought these should be laid aside before they gave themselves to prayer. What Tertullian says, that this was customarily done by the nations, that is, by the heathen approaching their idols, the Greek commentator on Aeschylus seems to confirm. Tertullian himself also has something on changes of garments in the rites of the gentiles in the book On the Pallium, ch. 4. MURAT[ORI]. As it is with some, having laid aside their cloaks, etc. So the gentiles prayed. The penula was a garment which they used on account of rain or of a journey. Lampridius in the Alexander: "He allowed old men to use penulae within the city on account of the cold," he says, "although that kind of garment had always been for travelling or for rain." Juvenal, satire 5: "And the penula would drip with much rain." Cicero, in the speech for Milo: "When the other," he says, "was riding in a carriage, cloaked." The ancients seem to have used penula for lacerna. G. PANCIR[OLI].

(l) of col 1170 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1170

(1) ‹positis› · printed under col 1171 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Ita Rigalt. Paris. Venet. Positis Semler. Leop.

So Rigaltius, Paris, Venice. "positis": Semler, Leopold.

(2) ‹penulis› · printed under col 1172 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Poenulis alias, except. Seml.

"poenulis" elsewhere, except Semler.

(a) ‹Paulum› · printed under col 1171

Paulum penulam suam. Mandat enim Timotheo ut penulam ad se deferat, II ad Timoth., cap. IV. PANC. — Paulum penulam suam. Haec sunt Pauli verba: Penulam, quam reliqui Troade apud Carpum, veniens affer tecum. Ironice itaque Tertullianus ait: nisi hoc faciendum est ad exemplum Pauli, qui penulam Troade penes Carpum reliquerat orationi vacaturus. Vide Octavium Ferrarium, de Re vest. part. II, lib. II, ubi de Penulis multa. MURAT.

Paul [left] his cloak. For he bids Timothy bring the cloak to him, 2 Timothy ch. 4. PANC[IROLI]. — Paul his cloak. These are Paul's words: The cloak which I left at Troas with Carpus, bring with you when you come. So Tertullian says ironically: unless this is to be done after the example of Paul, who had left his cloak at Troas with Carpus when about to give himself to prayer. See Octavius Ferrarius, On Clothing, part 2, bk. 2, where there is much on cloaks. MURAT[ORI].

(b) ‹Deus› · printed under col 1171

Deus scilicet. Ironice loquitur. G. PANCIR.

God, of course. He speaks ironically. G. PANCIR[OLI].

(c) ‹cum› · printed under col 1171

Cum sarabaris. De sarabaris et tyaris dictum est in lib. de Resurrect. carn., cap. 58, num. 601. PANC.— Cum sarabaris. Tres pueri in fornacem cum braccis suis, et tyaris, et calceamentis, et vestibus conjecti fuere. Septuaginta Interpretes pro femoralibus, seu braccis habent σὺν τοῖς σαραβάροις, cum sarabaris. Quare non aliud hoc vocabulo significari vides, quam quaedam crurium aut femorum integumenta. In libro etiam de Trinitate (si quidem Tertulliani sit) et de Pallio hanc vocem usurpatam invenias. MURAT.

With their trousers. Of sarabara and tiaras it is spoken in the book On the Resurrection of the Flesh, ch. 58, n. 601. PANC[IROLI]. — With their trousers. The three youths were thrown into the furnace with their breeches, and tiaras, and shoes, and garments. For femoralia, or breeches, the Seventy Translators have σὺν τοῖς σαραβάροις, with their sarabara. So you see that nothing else is meant by this word than certain coverings of the legs or thighs. You may find this word used also in the book On the Trinity (if indeed it is Tertullian's) and in On the Pallium. MURAT[ORI].

(d) ‹CAPUT XVI› · printed under col 1171

CAP. XVI. — Tit. cod. Ambros.: De assidendo post orationem.

CH. XVI. — Title in the Ambrosian codex: On sitting down after prayer.

(e) ‹quod› · printed under col 1171

Item quod assignata oratione. Perfecta, ut infra dicit, ac transacta. Damnat eos qui sedere post orationem consueverunt. Non video, inquit, hujus instituti rationem, nisi forte trahunt hoc ex libro Pastoris condito ab Herma, quem alibi, de Pudicit., cap. 10, apocryphum esse vidimus, in quo narrat se post orationem lecto assedisse. Sed ibi narrat rem gestam, non praecipit, ut id nos agamus. Quid ergo, inquit, si aliud fecisset, hunc imitaremur? nequaquam. G. PANCIR.— Assignata oratione. Absolutam, et peractam orationem significat, metaphora deducta e signis, et sigillis, quae tum epistolis, tum testamentis aliisque tabulis jam confectis apponi solebant. MURAT.

Likewise that, when prayer has been sealed off: finished, as he says below, and completed. He condemns those who were accustomed to sit after prayer. I do not see, he says, the reason of this practice, unless perhaps they draw it from the book of the Shepherd composed by Hermas, which elsewhere, On Modesty ch. 10, we have seen to be apocryphal, in which he tells that he sat down on the bed after prayer. But there he tells what was done, he does not command that we should do it. What then, he says, if he had done something else, should we imitate him? By no means. G. PANCIR[OLI]. — When prayer has been sealed off. It means prayer completed and performed, a metaphor drawn from the signs and seals which used to be affixed to letters, wills and other documents once they were completed. MURAT[ORI].

(f) ‹assidendi› · printed under col 1171

Assidendi mos est. Christiani aut stantes, aut in genua procumbentes Deum adorabant, precesque fundebant. Trita est observatio. Verum nonnullis eorum per orationem sedendum esse videbatur, non quod defatigati sedibus indigerent, sed superstitiosis fortasse rationibus ducti. Eorum consuetudinem Tertullianus redarguit. MURAT.

There is a custom of sitting down. Christians worshipped God and poured out their prayers either standing or kneeling. The observation is commonplace. But some of them thought that one should sit during prayer, not because being tired they needed seats, but led perhaps by superstitious reasons. Tertullian refutes their custom. MURAT[ORI].

(2) call in col 1171, printed under col 1172, set in n1171

(g) ‹nisi si› · printed under col 1171 and continued under col 1172

Nisi si Hermas. Hic est Hermes quem Paulus jubet salutari ad Rom. cap. ult. Dicitur composuisse librum qui Pastor inscribitur, de quo Nicephorus ita loquitur, lib. II Hist. eccles., cap. ult.: Accipimus inter ambiguae quoque auctoritatis scripta esse Actorum Pauli librum, et eum, qui Pastoris titulum habet, quem Hermae quidam adscribunt ei, cui in Epist. ad Rom. Paulus salutem nuntiari jubet. Nonnullis autem is admodum necessarius esse videtur, eis praecipue qui primae pietatis discunt rudimenta, multum afferens maturi fructus et utilitatis. Non pauci quidem apud antiquos eo sunt usi. Eumdem Eusebius Caesariensis commendat Hist. eccles., lib. III, cap. 3 et cap. 25., et lib. V, cap. 8. Tertullianus vero in lib. de Pudicitia hunc librum impurum vocat, et ab Ecclesia etiam damnatum scribit. Cum vero hic illud opus non damnet, catholicus fuisse credendus est, cum haec scripsit. G. PANCIROL. — Nisi si Hermas. Hermae antiquissimi scriptoris librum, cui titulus est Pastor, latine tantum habemus. Quanto in pretio fuerit, eruditis omnibus compertum est, ita ut quidam inter canonicas Scripturas ipsum referrent, alii vero illum vel inter apocrypha et contemnenda rejicerent, modum excedentes utrinque; non enim librum hunc veluti canonicum suspicere fas est, sed certe tanquam fidei catholicae utilissimum, plurimique faciendum judicare debemus. Quod autem ad hunc locum pertinet, recte ex hujusmodi verbis conjicimus, librum de Oratione a Tertulliano catholico adhuc fuisse conscriptum. Nam cum sibi Pastoris auctoritatem objiciat, non damnando repellit, sed explicando sibi conciliat. Quin addit, si Hermas revera post orationem ex quadam religione consedisset, id ad observationem vindicari, scilicet ad ejus imitationem, fieri merito potuisse. Accedit quod infra Scripturam nominans, Hermae librum canonicis Scripturis conjungere videtur. Contra ipsemet scriptor in Montani castra, haeresimque delapsus, Pastoris fidem, atque auctoritatem totis, ut aiunt, nervis elevare, et infringere conatur, ut ex ejus libro de Pudicitia, cap. 10 et cap. 20, constat, quem certe postremum librum in haereticorum officina procudit. MURAT.

Unless Hermas. This is the Hermes whom Paul bids be greeted, Romans last chapter. He is said to have composed the book entitled the Shepherd, of which Nicephorus speaks thus, Church History bk. 2, last chapter: "We accept that among the writings of doubtful authority too are the book of the Acts of Paul, and that which has the title of the Shepherd, which some ascribe to Hermas, to whom Paul in the Epistle to the Romans bids greeting be sent. To some, however, it seems quite necessary, especially to those who are learning the first rudiments of piety, bringing much ripe fruit and usefulness. Not a few among the ancients used it." Eusebius of Caesarea commends the same, Church History bk. 3, chs. 3 and 25, and bk. 5, ch. 8. But Tertullian in the book On Modesty calls this book impure, and writes that it was even condemned by the Church. Since here he does not condemn that work, he must be believed to have been a Catholic when he wrote this. G. PANCIROL[I]. — Unless Hermas. The book of Hermas, a most ancient writer, entitled the Shepherd, we have only in Latin. How highly it was valued is known to all the learned, so that some counted it among the canonical Scriptures, while others threw it out among the apocryphal and contemptible, going beyond measure on either side; for it is not right to look up to this book as canonical, but we must certainly judge it most useful to the Catholic faith and to be highly esteemed. As regards this passage, we rightly conjecture from words of this kind that the book On Prayer was written by Tertullian while still a Catholic. For when he raises against himself the authority of the Shepherd, he does not repel it by condemning it, but wins it over to himself by explaining it. Indeed he adds that if Hermas had really sat down after prayer from some religious motive, it could rightly have been claimed for observance, that is, for imitation of him. Add that below, naming it Scripture, he seems to join the book of Hermas to the canonical Scriptures. On the contrary, the same writer, once fallen into the camp of Montanus and into heresy, tries with all his sinews, as they say, to disparage and break down the credit and authority of the Shepherd, as is clear from his book On Modesty, chs. 10 and 20, which book he certainly hammered out last in the workshop of the heretics. MURAT[ORI].

(h) ‹scriptura› · printed under col 1172

Scriptura fere. Subaudiendum ab omnibus, aut addendum. G. PANCIROL.

Whose writing almost: understand "by all", or add it. G. PANCIROL[I].

(i) ‹nunc› (the call letters (i) and (j) are printed in the text in reverse order: (j) at "Utique", (i) at "nunc") · printed under col 1172

Utique non. Scilicet: illud non vindicaremus ad orandi observantiam; ergo neque morem in lecto sedendi. G. PANCIROL.

Certainly not. That is: we would not claim that for the observance of praying; so neither the custom of sitting on the bed. G. PANCIROL[I].

(j) ‹Utique› · printed under col 1172

Et nunc positum. Lego: est hoc positum. Scilicet quod sederit in lecto, est simpliciter positum, nec ut traderetur haec observatio, sed ut res prout gesta est exponeretur. G. PANCIROL.

And now it is set down. I read: "this is set down". That is, that he sat on the bed is set down simply, not so that this observance should be handed down, but so that the event should be related as it happened. G. PANCIROL[I].

(k) ‹adorassem› · printed under col 1172

Cum adorassem. Sunt ipsa Pastoris verba in prooemio lib. II, quae in editis ita se habent: Cum orassem domi, et consedissem supra lectum, intravit vir quidam, etc. Haec igitur, ut Tertullianus inquit, non refert Hermas, ut sedendum post orationem nos doceat, sed ut historiae suae narrationem persequatur. Et quid si, addit, in cathedra, aut subsellio post preces peractas quis sedeat, num in scripturam, hoc est contra Hermae praeceptum peccabit, qui in lectulo, et non in subsellio, sive in cathedra sedit? MURAT.

When I had worshipped. These are the very words of the Shepherd in the preface of book 2, which in the printed editions run thus: "When I had prayed at home and had sat down on the bed, a certain man came in," etc. This, then, as Tertullian says, Hermas does not relate in order to teach us that one must sit after prayer, but to pursue the narration of his story. And what if, he adds, someone sits in a chair or on a bench after his prayers are finished, will he sin against the scripture, that is, against the precept of Hermas, who sat on a couch and not on a bench or in a chair? MURAT[ORI].

(l) ‹aut› · printed under col 1172 and continued under col 1173 (p. 631)

Aut subsellio sederit. Deridet eos qui ex Pastoris libro post orationem argumentum sedendi sumunt, quod cum ipse in lecto sederit, in scamno non sit sedendum; nam id esset contra illam scripturam, ubi ipse in lecto sedit, non in cathedra. G. PANCIROL.

Or has sat on a bench. He mocks those who take from the book of the Shepherd an argument for sitting after prayer: that since he sat on a bed, one must not sit on a stool; for that would be against that scripture, where he himself sat on a bed, not in a chair. G. PANCIROL[I].

(l) of col 1172 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1172

(a) ‹nationes› · printed under col 1173

Cum perinde faciant nationes. Similiter faciant ethnici, qui sedent adoratis sigillaribus suis. Ita enim appellabant sua idola, et signa, ut alias dictum est, lib. de Anima, cap. 7, num. 114, et advers. Valentin., cap. 12 et cap. 18, et est apud Macrobium, lib. I, Saturnal. G. PANCIROL.

Since the nations do likewise. The heathen would be doing the same, who sit down after worshipping their little figures. For so they called their idols and images, as has been said elsewhere, On the Soul ch. 7, n. 114, and Against the Valentinians chs. 12 and 18; and it is in Macrobius, Saturnalia bk. 1. G. PANCIROL[I].

(b) ‹sigillaribus› · printed under col 1173

Sigillaribus suis. Sigillaria, seu sigilla, erant signa parva, seu icunculae, et imagunculae, ac simulacra deorum modo palmaria, modo cubitalia, ita membris artificiose compacta, ut nervis tracta, vel fidibus mota vivere, obambulare, et reliquos humani corporis motus exercere, atque imitari possent. Nostro quoque aevo similia habemus, quibus Romae nomen est poppacci, et in Gallia marionettes, iisque comoedias interdum actas vidimus. Νευρόσπαστα Graeci appellabant. Ad hujusmodi simulacra alludens Horatius aiebat: Tu mihi qui imperitas, aliis servis miser, atque Duceris, ut nervis alienis mobile lignum. Praeter Aristotelem, qui in lib. de Mundo sigillaria eleganter descripsit, ut apud Apuleium illius interpretem videre est, de iis quoque mentionem fecerant Herodotus, in Euterpe, Xenophon, in Symposio, Lucianus, de Dea Syra, Gellius, lib. XIV, cap. 1, et M. Antonius imperator, in lib. VIII de seipso; atque hic potissimum sigillaria expresse appellat. Sigillarium autem in ethnicorum sacris multus erat usus, nimirum deos insana eorum superstitio sub hisce icunculis plerumque ligneis exhibebat, movebat, rudem plebeculam ad venerationem simul concitans, atque adorationem. Hinc Arnobius, lib. VI, contra Gentes, hujusmodi morem irridens aiebat: Et abstinetis a risu cum pro diis immortalibus, sigilliolis hominum, formis supplicatis humanis? Quinimo deos esse sigillaria ipsa censetis, nec praeter haec quidquam vim creditis habere divinam. Infra vero addit: Saepenumero videmus ab artificibus haec signa (hoc est deorum simulacra) modo parvula fieri, et palmarem in minutiem contrahi; modo in immensum tolli, et admirabilem in amplitudinem sublevari. Ratione hac ergo sequitur, ut intelligere debeamus in sigilliolis parvulis contrahere se deos, et alieni ad corporis similitudinem coarctari, etc. Tertullianus igitur ut falsa numina, eorumque signa decenti nomine insigniat, sigillaria vocat, quod vera carerent anima, atque aliena tantum ope moverentur. Ab eodem auctore, in lib. advers. Valentin., cap. 18, sigillarius ductus nominatur his verbis: A qua occulto nihil sentiens, et velut sigillario extrinsecus ductu, in omnem operationem movebatur. In libro etiam de Anima, cap. 6, sigillarius motus simili ratione appellatur, qui fit externa vi, et operatione impellente. MURAT.

Their little figures. Sigillaria, or sigilla, were small images, or little icons and little likenesses, and statues of the gods, sometimes a palm high, sometimes a cubit, so artfully put together in their limbs that, drawn by strings or moved by cords, they could live, walk about, and perform and imitate the other motions of the human body. In our age too we have similar things, which at Rome are called poppacci and in France marionettes, and we have sometimes seen comedies acted with them. The Greeks called them νευρόσπαστα [string-pulled figures]. Alluding to images of this kind Horace said: "You who command me are a wretched slave to others, and are led like a wooden puppet moved by another's strings." Besides Aristotle, who elegantly described sigillaria in the book On the World, as may be seen in his translator Apuleius, Herodotus had also mentioned them in Euterpe, Xenophon in the Symposium, Lucian in On the Syrian Goddess, Gellius bk. 14, ch. 1, and the emperor M[arcus] Antoninus in book 8 of his Meditations; and he above all expressly calls them sigillaria. There was much use of sigillaria in the rites of the heathen: their insane superstition generally displayed and moved the gods under these little images, mostly of wood, rousing the rude common people at once to veneration and worship. Hence Arnobius, Against the Gentiles bk. 6, mocking a custom of this kind, said: "And do you refrain from laughter when, in place of the immortal gods, you have supplicated little human figures, human forms? Indeed you think the sigillaria themselves are gods, and believe that nothing besides them has divine power." And below he adds: "We often see these images (that is, statues of the gods) made by craftsmen now very small and shrunk to the tininess of a palm, now raised to an immense size and lifted to an admirable magnitude. By this reasoning, then, it follows that we must understand that the gods contract themselves in tiny little figures and are squeezed into the likeness of another's body," etc. Tertullian therefore, to mark false deities and their images with a fitting name, calls them sigillaria, because they lacked a true soul and were moved only by another's power. By the same author, in the book Against the Valentinians, ch. 18, a "puppet's drawing" is named in these words: "By which, perceiving nothing, secretly, and as if by a puppet's drawing from outside, he was moved to every operation." In the book On the Soul too, ch. 6, a puppet's motion is so called by a like reasoning, one that happens by an external force and a driving operation. MURAT[ORI].

(c) ‹vel› · printed under col 1173

Vel propterea. Ob id solum a nobis est reprehendendus mos sedendi, quia apud idololatras id celebratur seu frequentatur. His accedit, quod sedere est irreverentiae crimen, etiam apud Christianos, si saperent. G. PANCIROL.

Or for this reason. For this reason alone the custom of sitting is to be censured by us, because it is practised or frequented among the idolaters. To this is added that sitting is a charge of irreverence, even among Christians, if they had sense. G. PANCIROL[I].

(d) ‹idola› · printed under col 1173 and continued under col 1174

Apud idola celebratur. Non e Tertulliano tantum, sed et e Pindaro ac Plutarcho discimus, gentiles consuevisse assidere, postquam stantes orassent. Pindarus enim, ode 6, isthm., descriptis precibus, quas Hercules ad deos miserat, haec subdit: ὣς ἄρα εἰπὼν, αὐτίκα ἕζετο.... Sic locutus, statim consedit. Plutarchus vero legem hanc a Numa promulgatam narrat: Ut sedeatur, postquam adoratum fuerit. Haec ille in ipsius Numae Vita; quorum etiam triplicem explicationem profert. In Quaestionibus vero Romanis tradit, suo quoque tempore usitatum, ut qui precati essent ac adorassent, in templis perstarent ac sederent. Quamobrem Tertullianus hac itidem ratione Christianos post orationem sedere solitos objurgat, quod gentilium consuetudinem imitari viderentur. MURAT.

It is practised before idols. Not from Tertullian only, but also from Pindar and Plutarch we learn that the gentiles were accustomed to sit down after they had prayed standing. For Pindar, Isthmian ode 6, after describing the prayers which Hercules had sent up to the gods, adds this: "So having spoken, at once he sat down…." Having so spoken, he at once sat down. Plutarch relates that this law was promulgated by Numa: That one should sit after worshipping. He says this in his Life of Numa, and gives also a threefold explanation of it. In the Roman Questions he relates that in his time too it was customary for those who had prayed and worshipped to remain in the temples and sit. For that reason Tertullian likewise rebukes Christians who were accustomed to sit after prayer, since they seemed to imitate the custom of the gentiles. MURAT[ORI].

(d) of col 1173 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1173

(1) ‹CAPUT XVII› · printed under col 1173 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XIII alias.

Ch. 13, elsewhere.

(2) ‹elatis› · printed under col 1174 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Elatis delendum censet Jun.

Junius thinks "elatis" should be deleted.

(e) ‹angelo› · printed under col 1174

Angelo adhuc orationis. Sentit, nobis angelum orationis adesse, cujus ratio est habenda. G. PANCIROL. — Angelo adhuc orationis adstante. August. ad Probam, epist. 121, orationes nostras innotescere ait angelis qui sunt apud Deum, ut quodammodo eas offerant Deo, et de his consulant, et quod eo jubente implendum esse cognoverint, hoc nobis vel evidenter vel latenter apportent. Dixit enim, inquit, angelus homini: Et nunc quando orabas tu et Sara, ego obtuli orationem vestram in conspectu caritatis Dei. RIG.

While the angel of prayer is still. He holds that the angel of prayer is present to us, and must be taken into account. G. PANCIROL[I]. — While the angel of prayer is still standing by. Augustine to Proba, letter 121, says that our prayers become known to the angels who are with God, so that in some way they offer them to God and take counsel about them, and whatever they know must be fulfilled at His command, this they bring to us either openly or secretly. "For the angel said," he says, "to the man: And now, when you and Sarah were praying, I offered your prayer in the sight of the charity of God." RIG[ALTIUS].

(f) ‹CAPUT XVII› · printed under col 1174

CAP. XVII. — Tit. Cod. Ambros.: De manibus elatis et de vultu.

CH. XVII. — Title in the Ambrosian codex: On raised hands and on the face.

(g) ‹ipsis› · printed under col 1174 and continued under col 1175 (p. 632)

Ne ipsis quidem manibus elatis. Attollere manus ad coelum, et ad Deum, cum preces funduntur, vetustissimus fuit mos non a Judaeis tantum, sed et ab ethnicis usurpatus. Furius Camillus, apud Livium, lib. V, cap. 21: Dicitur, manus ad coelum tollens precatus esse. Marius etiam apud Plutarchum diis vota faciens, νιψάμενος τὰς χεῖρας, καὶ πρὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν ἀνασχὼν, lotis manibus, ac in coelum sublatis. Mitto alios testes, ac praesertim latinorum poetarum principem, lib. II et XII Aeneid., Aristotele contentus, qui in lib. de Mundo, πάντες, inquit, οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἀνατείνομεν τὰς χεῖρας εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν, εὐχὰς ποιούμενοι. Omnes homines ad coelum manus tollimus, preces facturi. Porro antiquissimus iste ritus a Judaeis potius in gentiles, quam a gentilibus ad Judaeos transiisse videtur; siquidem, ut habetur Exodi cap. XVII, v. 11, Moyses ipse sublatis in coelum manibus orabat: Cumque levaret Moyses manus, vincebat Israel; sin autem paululum remisisset, superabat Amalec. Legimus etiam in psal. CXXXIII, Extollite manus vestras in sancta, etc. Idem colligas e psal. CXL, et ex Lament. Jerem, cap. III, n. 41. Caeterum Christianos manibus in coelum sublatis orare consuevisse, imo debuisse, Apostolo praecipiente, seu monente in cap. II Ep. I ad Timoth., patet. Inquit enim: Volo viros orare in omni loco, levantes puras manus. Clemens Alex., lib. VII, Strom., istius moris fidem facit, scribens: Dum oramus, manus in coelum tollimus: τὰς χεῖρας εἰς οὐρανὸν αἴρομεν. Ab aliis referendis abstineo, cum et aevo nostro in ecclesiastica liturgia, et in sacris faciendis christiani sacerdotes manus attollant Deum precaturi. Non quidem sublimius attollunt, sed temperate, ac probe, ut hoc in loco Tertullianus exigit, videlicet supra humeros non erigendo. Quem sacerdotum ritum elevationemne manuum, an extensionem appellem, nescio. Id quidem constat, antiquitus inter Christianos promiscuum fuisse, ut manus in precando aut attollerentur, aut id figuram crucis expanderentur. MURAT.

Not even with hands raised. To raise the hands to heaven and to God when prayers are poured out was a most ancient custom, used not by the Jews only but also by the heathen. Furius Camillus, in Livy bk. 5, ch. 21: "He is said to have prayed raising his hands to heaven." Marius too, in Plutarch, making vows to the gods, "having washed his hands and holding them up to heaven": with washed hands, raised to heaven. I pass over other witnesses, and especially the prince of the Latin poets, Aeneid bks. 2 and 12, content with Aristotle, who in the book On the World says: "all we men stretch up our hands to heaven when we make prayers." All we men raise our hands to heaven when about to pray. Further, this most ancient rite seems to have passed from the Jews to the gentiles rather than from the gentiles to the Jews; since, as is found in Exodus ch. 17, v. 11, Moses himself prayed with hands raised to heaven: And when Moses raised his hands, Israel conquered; but if he had let them down a little, Amalek prevailed. We read also in Psalm 133: Lift up your hands to the holy places, etc. You may gather the same from Psalm 140 and from the Lamentations of Jeremiah, ch. 3, n. 41. For the rest, that Christians were accustomed, indeed obliged, to pray with hands raised to heaven, at the Apostle's command or admonition in ch. 2 of the First Epistle to Timothy, is plain. For he says: I will that men pray in every place, lifting up pure hands. Clement of Alex[andria], Stromata bk. 7, attests this custom, writing: "While we pray, we raise our hands to heaven." I refrain from citing others, since in our age too, in the Church's liturgy and in performing the sacred rites, Christian priests raise their hands when about to pray to God. They do not raise them too high, but with moderation and properly, as Tertullian requires in this place, that is, not lifting them above the shoulders. Whether I should call this rite of the priests an elevation or an extension of the hands, I do not know. This at least is certain, that among Christians in ancient times it was indifferent whether the hands in praying were raised or spread out in [printed "id"] the figure of the cross. MURAT[ORI].

(g) of col 1174 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1174

(a) ‹probe› · printed under col 1175

Ac probe elatis. Id est: paululum elatis, vel pansis. G. PANCIROL.

And raised properly. That is: raised a little, or spread out. G. PANCIROL[I].

(b) ‹sonos› · printed under col 1175

Sonos etiam vocis. Id est: oportet vociferari, si vocem Deus inspiceret. Non legendum est interrogative; hoc enim vult: si pro sono vocis Deus exaudiret, esset clamandum; sed non vocem, verum cor inspicit. PANCIR.— Sonos etiam vocis subjectos esse oportet. Hoc est submissos, et compressos, ne proximum quemque turbent; non enim voce est opus, ut a Deo audiamur. In hac sententia fuerunt et alii Patres, quippe clamorem, quem ad Deum SS. prophetae mittebant, non oris, sed mentis clamorem, seu animae alacritatem ac studium, τῆς ψυχῆς προθυμίαν, ut cum Theodoreto loquar, intelligebant. Videndi Basilius M., in psal. XXXIII, v. 16; Clemens Alex., Strom. lib. VII; Chrysostomus, hom. 12, tom. V; S. Augustinus, et alii; ac in primis Cyprianus, qui, ut in aliis, hic etiam Tertullianum describere videtur, cap. 2, de Orat. Quod restat, haec de illis intelligenda sunt, qui privata voce pro suo arbitrio in templis orant. Horum preces ac orationes ne nunc quidem toleramus, si alta voce proferantur, caeteris demissa precantibus. At vocem attollere cum reliquis et fas et pium est, quando concorditer in templo sacrae peraguntur preces, et una est multorum oratio. MURAT.

The sounds of the voice too. That is: one would have to shout, if God looked at the voice. It is not to be read as a question; for he means this: if God heard according to the sound of the voice, one would have to shout; but He looks not at the voice but at the heart. PANCIR[OLI]. — The sounds of the voice too must be subdued. That is, lowered and held in, so as not to disturb each neighbour; for there is no need of voice for us to be heard by God. Other Fathers too were of this view, since they understood the cry which the holy prophets sent up to God as a cry not of the mouth but of the mind, or the eagerness and zeal of the soul, "the readiness of the soul", to speak with Theodoret. See Basil the Great on Psalm 33, v. 16; Clement of Alex[andria], Stromata bk. 7; Chrysostom, homily 12, vol. 5; Saint Augustine and others; and above all Cyprian, who, as in other things, here too seems to copy Tertullian, On the Lord's Prayer ch. 2. For the rest, these things are to be understood of those who pray in the churches with a private voice at their own will. Their petitions and prayers we do not tolerate even now, if they are uttered in a loud voice while the others pray with lowered voice. But to raise the voice together with the rest is both lawful and pious, when sacred prayers are performed in the church in concord, and the prayer of the many is one. MURAT[ORI].

(c) ‹Deus autem› · printed under col 1175

Deus autem non vocis. Haec ad verbum transtulit D. Cyprianus. G. PANCIROL.

But God is not [the hearer] of the voice. Saint Cyprian took this over word for word. G. PANCIROL[I].

(d) ‹daemonium› · printed under col 1175

Daemonium oraculi. Daemon mutos audit; ergo magis Deus. PANCIR. — Daemonium oraculi Pythii. Hujusmodi responsum a daemone Pythio datum Croesi legatis, auctor est Herodotus, lib. I Hist. MURAT.

The demon of the oracle. A demon hears the dumb; all the more, then, God. PANCIR[OLI]. — The demon of the Pythian oracle. That a response of this kind was given by the Pythian demon to the envoys of Croesus, Herodotus is the authority, Histories bk. 1. MURAT[ORI].

(1) ‹CAPUT XVIII› · printed under col 1175 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XIV alias.

Ch. 14, elsewhere.

(e) ‹clarius› · printed under col 1175

Qui clarius adorant. Pro clarius orant, scilicet qui clara, atque altiori voce Deum precantur. Alibi verbum adorare pro simplici orare Tertullianus usurpavit, idque etiam in superioribus fecit, non sine meliorum exemplo. Neque sane est, cur Adrianus Valesius quemdam Virgilii versum immutet, ubi verbum adorare eodem sensu occurrit. MURAT.

Who worship more loudly: for "pray more loudly", that is, who pray to God with a clear and louder voice. Elsewhere Tertullian has used the verb adorare for the simple orare, and did so also in what precedes, not without the example of better [writers]. Nor indeed is there any reason why Adrian Valois should alter a certain verse of Virgil where the verb adorare occurs in the same sense. MURAT[ORI].

(f) ‹in publico› · printed under col 1175

Quam si in publico orent? Videntur vociferantes in publico orare, quod est contra illud Matthaei, cap. VI. G. PANCIROL.

Than if they prayed in public? Those who shout seem to pray in public, which is against that [saying] of Matthew, ch. 6. G. PANCIROL[I].

(g) ‹CAPUT XVIII› · printed under col 1175

CAP. XVIII.— Tit. Cod. Ambros.: De Osculo.

CH. XVIII. — Title in the Ambrosian codex: On the Kiss.

(h) ‹invaluit› · printed under col 1175 and continued under col 1176

Alia jam consuetudo. Aliqui cum jejunant, aut tempore quadragesimae, peracta oratione nolunt fratres osculari, quos Tertullianus reprehendit. G. PANCIROL. — Alia jam consuetudo invaluit. Quae sequuntur emendavimus, partim conjectura, partim auctoritate codicis Agobardi. Damnat Tertullianus consuetudinem, quae jam tum inter Christianos invaluerat, ut plerique quibus diebus privato sese afficiebant jejunio, orationem cum fratribus habitam non clauderent pace, non consignarent osculo pacis; quod orationis signaculum esse ait ut supra, hoc libro, assignatam orationem dixit, transactam confectamque. Pravae consuetudinis caussam non inquirit, nec aliam vulgo afferri video, nisi quod in osculo hilaritatis aliquid esse dicerent alienum ab jejunii moestitia luctuque. Profani suggerebant aliam, scilicet oris jejuni, graveolentiam, unde Martialis, epigrammate 4, lib. IV, Bassam redolere dicit, Quod jejunia sabbatariorum, Moestorum quod anhelitus reorum. Sed hanc stomachi sane delicatioris mollitiem in robustis illis temporum prope apostolicorum pectoribus fuisse, haud vero simile videatur: cum et martyrum in carcere squalorem, et in agone fluentia tabo vulnera, amplexari ac deosculari ipsae etiam mulierculae non exhorrescerent. Quid enim? cum et inter profanos basia captatorum tam obvia, tam importuna fuisse, idem poeta significet, libro IX, epigrammate 99: Effugere non est, Basse, basiatores, Non ulcus acre, pustulaeve lucentes, Non triste mentum, sordidique lichenes, Non labra pingui delibuta cerato, Nec congelati gutta proderit nasi. Omissa igitur caussa superstitionis illius adeo morosae, ut jejunantes osculandi officio defungi sibi nefas esse ducerent; Tertullianus consuetudinem vituperat, hac praesertim ratione, quod tunc potissimum pax conferenda sit cum fratribus, cum oratio commendabilior ascendit. Omnino sic legendum esse res ipsa indicat, non, ut edidit Pamelius, cum oratione commendabilior ascendit. Etenim quaestio non erat, an conferenda esset pax cum fratribus habita oratione; sed, an conferenda esset ab eo qui jejunii sibi privatim indicti sumptive diebus in ecclesia cum fratribus oraverat. Et tunc potissimum conferendam esse docet Tertullianus, cum oratio commendabilior ascendit, nimirum vehiculo jejunii sublevata: Νηστεία προσευχὴν εἰς οὐρανὸν ἀναπέμπει, οἱονεὶ πτερὸν αὐτῇ γινομένη πρὸς τὴν ἄνω πορείαν, inquit Basilius, homil. de Jejunio, et ipse Tertullianus, libro de Jejuniis, ait per jejunium pinguiorem orationem Deo immolari. Itaque Christiano inter publicas orationes privatis jejuniis operanti, pacis cum fratribus quibuscum orationem celebravit conferendae osculum eo libentius tunc temporis usurpandum, cum suam orationem speret Deo gratiorem et commendabiliorem fore ut communionis christianae beneficio de jejunantis operatione fratres etiam non jejunantes participent. RIGALT.

Another custom now. Some, when they fast, or in the time of Lent, will not kiss the brethren after the prayer is finished; Tertullian rebukes them. G. PANCIROL[I]. — Another custom has now prevailed. What follows we have emended, partly by conjecture, partly on the authority of the Agobardine codex. Tertullian condemns a custom which had already then prevailed among Christians, that most, on the days on which they were keeping a private fast, did not close the prayer held with the brethren with the peace, did not seal it with the kiss of peace; which he says is the seal of prayer, as above in this book he spoke of prayer "sealed off", that is, completed and finished. He does not inquire into the cause of the wrong custom, nor do I see any other commonly alleged than that they said there was something of cheerfulness in the kiss, foreign to the sadness and mourning of fasting. The profane suggested another: the foul smell of a fasting mouth; whence Martial, bk. 4, epigram 4, says that Bassa smells "of what the fasts of the sabbath-keepers [smell], of what the breath of mournful defendants [smells]". But that such squeamishness of a more delicate stomach was found in those robust breasts of almost apostolic times would hardly seem likely, since even weak women did not shrink from embracing and kissing the squalor of the martyrs in prison and their wounds running with gore in the contest. What then? When the same poet indicates, bk. 9, epigram 99, that even among the profane the kisses of fortune-hunters were so frequent and so importunate: "There is no escaping the kissers, Bassus; neither a sharp ulcer, nor gleaming pustules, nor a gloomy chin and filthy lichens, nor lips smeared with greasy salve, nor the drop of a frozen nose will help you." Leaving aside, then, the cause of that superstition, so morose that those fasting thought it a sin for them to perform the office of the kiss, Tertullian finds fault with the custom above all for this reason: that the peace should be given to the brethren especially when prayer rises more commended. That it must be read so the matter itself shows, not, as Pamelius printed, "rises more commended with prayer". For the question was not whether the peace should be given to the brethren once prayer had been held, but whether it should be given by one who had prayed in church with the brethren on the days of a fast privately imposed on himself or undertaken. And Tertullian teaches that it should be given above all then, when prayer rises more commended, lifted, that is, by the vehicle of fasting: "Fasting sends prayer up to heaven, becoming as it were a wing for it on its upward journey," says Basil, homily On Fasting; and Tertullian himself, in the book On Fasting, says that through fasting a richer prayer is offered to God. So for a Christian engaged in private fasts amid the public prayers, the kiss of peace to be given to the brethren with whom he has celebrated prayer is to be used all the more willingly at that time, since he hopes his prayer will be more pleasing and more commended to God, so that by the benefit of Christian communion the brethren too, though not fasting, share in the work of the one who fasts. RIGALT[IUS].

(i) ‹subtrahunt› · printed under col 1176 and continued under col 1177 (p. 633)

Subtrahunt osculum pacis. Nihil apud eruditos magis vulgatum, quam quod in publicis precibus, et sacris faciendis, quin imo et in viis, et in aedibus privatis Christiani se osculo pacis consalutare, atque ad concordiam ac pacem invitare solerent. Ideoque signaculum orationis appellatur a Tertulliano, quod Christianorum preces, et omnia fere ecclesiastici ritus sacramenta, hujusmodi pacis signo, veluti †sigilla quodam fraternitatis concluderentur. At invaluerat apud nonnullos consuetudo, ac opinio, tum osculum fratribus post orationem subtrahendum, cum ipsi jejunium aliquod sua sponte ac privata religione observabant. Pluribus argumentis morem ac sententiam illorum improbat Tertullianus, ostendens orationem sine osculo integram non esse: quin tunc magis decere pacem orationi conjungere, cum oratio per jejunium commendabilior ad Deum ascendit. Addit etiam, id a praecepto Domini abhorrere, quo jubemur jejunia nostra celare; neque vero ii celabant, quos idcirco abstinere ab osculo apparebat, quod jejunarent. MURAT.

They withhold the kiss of peace. Nothing is better known among the learned than that in public prayers and in performing the sacred rites, and indeed on the roads and in private houses, Christians used to greet one another with the kiss of peace and invite one another to concord and peace. And so it is called by Tertullian the seal of prayer, because the prayers of Christians, and almost all the sacraments of the Church's rite, were closed with this sign of peace as with a kind of seal of brotherhood. But among some a custom and opinion had prevailed that the kiss should be withheld from the brethren after prayer when they themselves were observing some fast of their own accord and by private devotion. Tertullian disproves their custom and opinion with several arguments, showing that prayer without the kiss is not whole: indeed that it is more fitting to join the peace to prayer then, when prayer rises more commended to God through fasting. He adds too that it is at odds with the Lord's precept, by which we are commanded to hide our fasts; and those were not hiding them whom it was evident they abstained from the kiss because they were fasting. MURAT[ORI].

(i) of col 1176 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1176

(1) ‹operatio› · printed under col 1177 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Ita Rig. oratio cod. Agob., ratio Seml. Leop.

So Rigaltius; "oratio" the Agobardine codex; "ratio" Semler, Leopold.

(a) ‹signaculum› · printed under col 1177

Quod est signaculum orationis. Id est confirmatio. G. PANCIROL.

Which is the seal of prayer. That is, its confirmation. G. PANCIROL[I].

(b) ‹pace› · printed under col 1177

De sua pace fratri transigere? Optent de sua pace fratri transigere, id est, cum fratre communicare? G. PANCIROL. — De sua pace fratri transigere? Hoc est: ut fratres cum fratribus jejunantibus convenire, certique fieri de mutua concordia ac pace possint. Osculum enim pacis, ut cum legum peritis loquar, tanquam transactio et conventio erat, qua ab omnibus simultatibus atque odiis se recessisse fratres testabantur. MURAT.—Ut ipsi de nostra operatione participes, jam audeant de sua pace fratri transigere. Lectionem istam ex Ursini libro restituimus, cum in vulgata sensus non esset satis commodus. Et repetenda sunt ea de superioribus: Christianae caritatis beneficio fieri, ut de jejunantis operatione fratres etiam non jejunantes participent, eoque beneficio affecti, jam audeant transigere cum jejunante, ita ut pro communicato jejunii merito pacis suae christianae gratiam mutua pensatione communicent. In Agob. codice legitur: Ut ipsi de nostra operatione participent quam auderent de sua pace fratri transigendus, nullo sensu. RIGALT.

To settle with a brother from their own peace? Should they choose to settle with a brother from their own peace, that is, to share with the brother? G. PANCIROL[I]. — To settle with a brother from their own peace? That is: so that brethren may come to terms with brethren who are fasting and be assured of mutual concord and peace. For the kiss of peace, to speak with the jurists, was a kind of settlement and agreement, by which the brethren attested that they had withdrawn from all quarrels and hatreds. MURAT[ORI]. — That they, sharers in our work, may now venture to settle with a brother from their own peace. We have restored this reading from Ursinus's book, since in the common text the sense was not suitable enough. And what was said above must be repeated: that by the benefit of Christian charity it comes about that brethren, even not fasting, share in the work of the one fasting, and, affected by that benefit, may now venture to settle with the one fasting, so that in exchange for the shared merit of the fast they may share by mutual compensation the grace of their Christian peace. In the Agobardine codex is read "Ut ipsi de nostra operatione participent quam auderent de sua pace fratri transigendus", which makes no sense. RIGALT[IUS].

(c) ‹integra› · printed under col 1177

Quae oratio cum divortio sancti osculi integra? Quasi diceret: Quam aliena ab homine christiano arrogantia nostram operationem, hoc est, jejunium, nobis habemus, et fratres suam sibi pacem habere jubemus? quod proxime ad divortii formulam accedit, Res tuas tibi habeto. Ideoque subnectit: Quae oratio cum divortio sancti osculi integra? Quem Domino officium facientem impedit pax. Officium vocat, quod supra operationem et jejunium. Pacem vero dicit osculum pacis. RIGALT.

What prayer is whole with the divorce of the holy kiss? As if he said: with what arrogance foreign to a Christian man do we keep our work, that is, our fast, to ourselves, and bid the brethren keep their peace to themselves? which comes very close to the formula of divorce, "Keep your things to yourself". And so he adds: What prayer is whole with the divorce of the holy kiss? Whom, doing his duty to the Lord, does peace hinder? He calls "duty" what above [he called] work and fast. And by "peace" he means the kiss of peace. RIGALT[IUS].

(d) ‹receditur› · printed under col 1177 and continued under col 1178

Quale sacrificium est a quo sine pace receditur? Sacrificium hic intelligo orationem cum participatione corporis Christi: cujus clausula et signaculum fuit osculum pacis, osculum sanctum. Sequitur in vulgatis editionibus, Quaecumque ratio sit. Quod ferri posse non videtur, cum paulo post Auctor παρομολογίαν inferat, Sed et si qua ratio est. In vetustissimo codice legitur, Quaecumque oratio sit, non erit potior praecepti observatione, menda apertissima. Unde appareat Tertullianum scripsisse: Quaecumque operatio sit, non erit potior observatione praecepti; hoc sensu: quamlibet severa aut perfecta sit jejunii, vel cujuscumque operationis, quam ipsi nobis imperaverimus, austeritas, non erit commendabilior observatione praecepti dominici, quo jubemur jejunia nostra celare. Nempe qui ob jejunia privata osculo pacis post celebratam cum fratribus orationem abstinebant, ipsa osculi abdicatione praedicabant se jejunare. Hactenus igitur Tertullianus osculi abstinentiam superstitiosam jejunantibus esse ostendit: primum, quod nulla sit abstinendi ratio; deinde, quod osculi refutatione jejunia sua praedicent, quae celari Deus voluit. Adjicit: Sed et si qua ratio est, ne tamen huic praecepto reus sis, nimirum praecepto celandi jejunii, potes domi, si forte, inter quos latere jejunium in totum non datur, differre pacem. Tanta fuit Patribus caritatis cura, ut plerosque ritus ratione non bona receptos tolerarent potius quam rigida censura vel minimam scissurae occasionem praeberent; haec erat illo aevo Christianorum συγκατάβασις. Itaque fingit Tertullianus ritum, quem supra tollendum esse docuit, posse aliqua ratione defendi: simul et modum praescribit ritus servandi, salvo Domini praecepto, nempe ut jejunantibus liceat, habita cum domesticis et familiaribus oratione, osculo pacis abstinere. Sic enim quamvis ob jejunii religionem osculo abstineant, fore ut jejunium tamen minime prodant, cujus conscios habeant nullos, nisi quos domestica latere non possunt. Excusationis istius colorem confirmat exemplo jejunii, quod die Paschae, sic passionis dominicae diem nuncupat, communis et publica religio sanxit. Nam quotannis, recurrente die quo Sponsus ablatus est, Ecclesiae placuerat, viduitatis ac desolationis significatione, osculandi consuetudinem intermitti, absque ulla tamen occultandi jejunii cura; cum inaffectate quisquis id proderet, quod una cum omnibus faciendum haberet. RIGALT.

What sort of sacrifice is it from which one departs without the peace? By sacrifice I here understand prayer with participation in the body of Christ, whose close and seal was the kiss of peace, the holy kiss. There follows in the common editions "Whatever reason there may be". That does not seem tolerable, since a little later the author brings in a concession, "But even if there is some reason". In the very ancient codex is read "Whatever prayer there may be, it will not be preferable to the observance of the precept", a most evident error. Whence it would appear that Tertullian wrote: "Whatever the work may be, it will not be preferable to the observance of the precept"; in this sense: however severe or perfect the austerity of a fast, or of any work which we have imposed on ourselves, it will not be more commended than the observance of the Lord's precept by which we are commanded to hide our fasts. For those who, on account of private fasts, abstained from the kiss of peace after prayer celebrated with the brethren, by that very renouncing of the kiss proclaimed that they were fasting. So far, then, Tertullian shows that abstaining from the kiss is superstitious in those who fast: first, because there is no reason for abstaining; then, because by refusing the kiss they proclaim their fasts, which God willed to be hidden. He adds: "But even if there is some reason, lest you be guilty against this precept", namely the precept of hiding the fast, "you may at home, if perhaps [you are] among those from whom it is altogether impossible to hide your fast, put off the peace." So great was the Fathers' care for charity that they would rather tolerate many rites received for no good reason than give even the least occasion of schism by a rigid censure; this was in that age the condescension of Christians. So Tertullian supposes that the rite which above he taught must be removed can be defended on some ground; and at the same time he prescribes a way of keeping the rite without prejudice to the Lord's precept, namely that those who fast may abstain from the kiss of peace when prayer is held with their household and familiars. For so, although they abstain from the kiss on account of the devotion of fasting, they will not at all betray their fast, since they have no one aware of it except those from whom domestic matters cannot be hidden. He confirms the plausibility of this excuse by the example of the fast which the common and public religion ordained on the day of Pascha, as he calls the day of the Lord's passion. For every year, when the day recurred on which the Bridegroom was taken away, the Churches had resolved, as a sign of widowhood and desolation, that the custom of kissing should be interrupted, yet without any care for hiding the fast; since whoever betrayed it did so unaffectedly, as something he had to do together with all. RIGALT[IUS].

(e) ‹Quaecumque› · printed under col 1178

Quaecumque ratio sit. Quacumque ratione movearis ad subtrahendum fratri osculum, alia potior aut melior ratio suadet ut osculeris, quia hoc modo manifestas te, non osculando, jejunare: et jejunia jubet Deus celari, Matthaei cap. 6. G. PANCIROL.

Whatever the reason may be. By whatever reason you are moved to withhold the kiss from a brother, another, preferable or better reason urges you to kiss, because in this way, by not kissing, you make it manifest that you are fasting; and God commands fasts to be hidden, Matthew ch. 6. G. PANCIROL[I].

(d) of col 1177 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1177; (e) call in col 1177, printed under col 1178, set in n1177

(2) ‹reus sis› · printed under col 1177 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Praeceptor tu sis Seml.

"praeceptor tu sis": Semler.

(3) ‹si forte› · printed under col 1178 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Si abest a Seml. et Leop.

"si" is absent in Semler and Leopold.

(4) ‹operationem› · printed under col 1178 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Orationem conj. Seml.

Semler conjectures "orationem".

(f) ‹ratio› · printed under col 1178

Sed et si qua ratio est. Quaecumque sit ratio, ut jejunantes non osculentur, hujus ritus tu non sis praeceptor, nec inventor; sed id observa domi, ubi domestici sciunt te jejunare, et inter eos differas pacem in aliud tempus; sed foris omnes osculeris, ne te eo modo jejunare intelligant. G. PANCIROL.

But even if there is some reason. Whatever the reason may be for those who fast not to kiss, do not be the teacher or inventor of this rite; but observe it at home, where your household know that you fast, and among them put off the peace to another time; but outside kiss everyone, lest they understand in that way that you are fasting. G. PANCIROL[I].

(g) ‹meminisse› · printed under col 1178

Debes meminisse praecepti. Quo jubemur celare jejunium. G. PANCIROL.

You must remember the precept: by which we are commanded to hide our fasting. G. PANCIROL[I].

(h) ‹est› · printed under col 1178 and continued under col 1179 (p. 634)

Sic et die Paschae. Tempore Paschae; intelligo enim tempus, quod praecedit Pascha, quo omnes jejunant: merito enim tunc osculamur, quia non curamus, quod depositione osculi prodatur jejunium, cum illud omnes observent. Et hoc est quod dicit. PANC.— Sic et die Paschae. Pascha hic pro die passionis, seu postremo die veneris in quadragesima, quem sacrum in parasceve appellamus, accipiendum esse, jejunii publici tunc servati mentio satis ostendit. Ipsemet Auctor, cap. 10, contra Judaeos: Pascha, inquit, passio Domini est; eoque sensu aliis locis hanc adhibet vocem. Itaque feria sexta in parasceve ab osculo pacis Christiani abstinebant aevo Tertulliani, quod et nostris temporibus in ecclesiastica liturgia servatur. Idem testantur antiqui Rituales, et rationem hujusmodi consuetudinis praeter alios scriptores affert Berno, cap. 7, de rebus ad missam spectantibus. In parasceve, ait, ab osculo abstinemus propter Judae traditoris exemplum, qui per simulatae pacis osculum tradidit Dominum Jesum Christum. MURAT. — Sic et die Paschae quo communis, et quasi publica jejunii religio est. Hoc ipso argumento probari videtur, aevo Tertulliani, in Africa, integrum, sive solidum jejunium, commune ac publicum non fuisse, nisi dominicae passionis die, eoque die ac jejunio, omissas fuisse sacrificiorum orationes, omissa pacis oscula: sed usitatissima certis per reliquum annum diebus spontanea seu privata et propria cuique pro sua religione jejunia; solida quidem et in vesperam usque producta, quibus tamen ad sacrificiorum orationes et pacis oscula convenirent. Praeterea statos fuisse dies, quibus ad martyrum sepulcra conventus indicerentur, atque ibi statim ab exortu solis, orationibus, hortamentis, sacrarum lectionum interpretationibus vacantes et jejuni, sed non ultra nonam, perstarent; hora nona, post Eucharistiam et oscula, conventus et jejunia solverent. Haec tunc temporis stationes, haec castrorum disciplina christianorum. Interea vero minime prohibebantur, nec ipsis quidem stationum diebus, privata et spontanea de quibus dixi jejunia, etsi privata illa solida essent atque in vesperam continua: stationaria vero tantum in horam usque nonam sustinerentur, ac prae illis essent quasi semi-jejunia. Sed privatim operantium nonnulli operationem sive jejunium ante vesperam solvere religioni ducebant; ideoque ad Eucharistiam, quae hora nona distribuebatur, non accedebant. Hunc scrupulum Tertullianus ferri posse ait eadem illa συγκαταβάσει, ut jejunium privatum integrumque jejunantes, intersint nihilominus stationum semi-jejuniis, acceptoque hora nona corpore Domini, de statione quidem una cum caeteris decedant, sed buccellam sacram in vesperam usque, jejunii proprii terminum, reservent. Sic utrumque salvum fore, et participationem sacrificii, et executionem officii. At parum cavere videtur periculo, quod summopere vitandum monuit, ne videlicet huic praecepto rei fiant, quo jubemur jejunia nostra celare; jam enim accepto corpore Domini, et reservato, agnoscuntur jejunantes: nisi dicamus tam promiscui moris fuisse, acceptas Eucharistiae partes in ecclesiis manducare, aut reservatas domum deferre privatim sumendas, ut etiam jejuniis tantum stationariis operati, prout visum sibi esset, vel comederent, vel reservarent. Sane tutius fecerit, qui propositum illud Tertulliani rigide constituet, devotum Deo obsequium, quale est jejunium Eucharistia non resolvi. Etenim, ut sanctissimi Patres nicaeni profitentur, non multum accipimus panis aut vini, sed paululum; ut intelligamus nos id accipere sanctificationi, non satietati; οὐκ εἰς πλησμονὴν, ἀλλ' εἰς ἁγιασμόν. Porro extrema illa de stationibus christianis ad exemplum militare obeundis, inconsiderate admodum citantur apud Isidorum, Orig. VI, neque aptius aut prudentius apud Rabanum. RIG.

So too on the day of Pascha. At the time of Pascha; for I understand the time which precedes Pascha, when all fast: for then we rightly kiss, because we do not care that the fast is betrayed by laying aside the kiss, since all observe it. And this is what he says. PANC[IROLI]. — So too on the day of Pascha. That Pascha is to be taken here for the day of the passion, that is, the last Friday in Lent, which we call holy, in the Parasceve, the mention of the public fast then kept sufficiently shows. The author himself, Against the Jews ch. 10: "Pascha," he says, "is the passion of the Lord"; and in that sense he uses this word in other places. So on the sixth day, in the Parasceve, Christians in Tertullian's age abstained from the kiss of peace, which is also kept in our times in the Church's liturgy. The ancient Rituals testify the same, and besides other writers Berno, ch. 7, on matters concerning the Mass, gives the reason for this custom. "In the Parasceve," he says, "we abstain from the kiss because of the example of Judas the betrayer, who by the kiss of a feigned peace betrayed the Lord Jesus Christ." MURAT[ORI]. — So too on the day of Pascha, when the observance of the fast is common and as it were public. By this very argument it seems to be proved that in Tertullian's age, in Africa, a whole or solid fast was not common and public except on the day of the Lord's passion, and that on that day and at that fast the prayers of the sacrifices were omitted and the kisses of peace were omitted; but that on certain days through the rest of the year spontaneous, that is, private fasts, proper to each according to his devotion, were very common: solid indeed and prolonged until evening, yet with which they came together for the prayers of the sacrifices and the kisses of peace. Moreover, that there were fixed days on which assemblies were appointed at the tombs of the martyrs, and there, right from sunrise, occupied with prayers, exhortations and interpretations of the sacred readings, they stood fasting, but not beyond the ninth hour; at the ninth hour, after the Eucharist and the kisses, they broke up the assemblies and the fasts. These were the stations of that time, this the camp discipline of Christians. Meanwhile the private and spontaneous fasts of which I spoke were by no means forbidden, not even on the very days of the stations, although those private fasts were solid and continuous until evening, while the stational ones were kept only until the ninth hour and were, compared with those, as it were half-fasts. But some of those engaged privately thought it against religion to break their work, that is their fast, before evening; and so they did not come to the Eucharist, which was distributed at the ninth hour. Tertullian says this scruple can be tolerated by that same condescension, so that those keeping a private and entire fast may nevertheless attend the half-fasts of the stations and, having received the body of the Lord at the ninth hour, may indeed leave the station together with the others, but reserve the sacred morsel until evening, the end of their own fast. So both would be safe, the participation in the sacrifice and the discharge of the duty. But he seems to take too little care of the danger which he warned must above all be avoided, namely that they should become guilty against this precept, by which we are commanded to hide our fasts; for once the body of the Lord has been received and reserved, those fasting are recognized: unless we say that it was so common a custom to eat the portions of the Eucharist received in the churches, or to carry them home reserved to be taken privately, that even those engaged only in the stational fasts, as seemed good to them, either ate or reserved them. Certainly he would act more safely who holds rigidly to that principle of Tertullian's, that a devout service offered to God, such as fasting is, is not broken by the Eucharist. For, as the most holy Fathers of Nicaea declare, we receive not much bread or wine, but a little, so that we may understand that we receive it for sanctification, not for satiety: "not for fullness, but for sanctification". Further, those last remarks about the Christian stations to be kept after the military example are cited quite thoughtlessly in Isidore, Etymologies bk. 6, and no more aptly or prudently in Rabanus. RIG[ALTIUS].

(h) of col 1178 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1178

(a) ‹osculum› · printed under col 1179, continued under col 1180 and at the head of the notes under col 1181 (p. 635)

Merito deponimus osculum. Albaspinaeus aurelianensis episcopus, lib. I Observ. de veter. Eccles. Rit., cap. 17, his Tertulliani verbis ductus, in eam sententiam ivit, ut crederet, osculum pacis antiquitus a Christianis omissum diebus illis, quibus indictum et promulgatum esset plenum atque integrum jejunium. Si enim (ita ille ratiocinatur) die veneris sancto osculum non usurpabatur, quia commune omnibus jejunium erat, neque periculum jactantiae imminebat, quod se jejunantem proderet, qui cum omnibus jejunabat: ergo tum semper ab osculo abstinebatur, cum solemne jejunium et commune erat. Ejus verba fuse prolata non exhibeo. At vereor ut vir doctissimus Tertulliani mentem, et vetustum Ecclesiae morem fuerit assecutus. Primo enim S. Ambrosius ac antiquissimae liturgiae, osculum pacis in Christianorum coetibus usurpatum omnibus jejunii diebus, atque ipsa in quadragesima testantur, exceptis tantum postremis diebus. Secundo cum constet, ad incruentum sacrificium celebrandum neque sacerdotes, neque populum accedere sine osculo consuevisse; et praeterea compertum sit, multis jejunii diebus sacrificium peragi solitum: quis non intelligat, vel ipsis jejunii publici diebus osculum a Christianis fuisse usurpatum? Quale, nuper Tertullianus dixerat, sacrificium est, a quo sine pace receditur? Cum vero secundum communem Ecclesiae ritum duobus postremis quadragesimae diebus minime sacrificium offerretur, nil mirum, si tunc osculo parcerent Christiani. Ex hoc igitur Tertulliani loco aliter, ut mihi suborta suspicio est., Albaspinaeus argumentari debuit. Scilicet aevo Tertulliani, in africanis saltem ecclesiis, duobus duntaxat extremis quadragesimae diebus, jejunium communi et publica religione fuisse observatum, cum reliquo anni atque ipsius etiam quadragesimae tempore liberum Christianis esset jejunio vel operam dare, vel renuntiare. Quare quanquam daremus (quod certe affirmare non audeo) nil aliud quam jejunium caussam fuisse, cur in parasceve, et pervigilio dominicae resurrectionis osculum pacis omitteretur; nihilominus cum nullis aliis anni diebus ex Tertulliani mente jejunium publicum haberetur, osculi omissio ad duos tantum illos quadragesimae dies restringenda fuit. Vere itaque dici ab Albaspinaeo potuit, Christianos iis diebus, quibus integrum ac plenum jejunium indicebatur, ab osculo abstinuisse; sed secundum Tertulliani mentem addendum fuerat, eos dies non plures quam duos toto anno fuisse, et reliquis propterea diebus, quanquam privata religione jejunaretur, osculum pacis fuisse usitatum. Cum autem fere omnibus persuasum sit, saltem quadragesimale jejunium, veluti ex apostolica traditione institutum, primis etiam Ecclesiae saeculis religiose ab universis Christianis fuisse celebratum, neque ab eo sine crimine quemquam abstinuisse, facile videar audaci sententia Tertullianum interpretari, atque inconsulto divinare, duobus tantum quadragesimae diebus jejunia olim publica fuisse. Verum pro me Tertullianus ipse stabit, qui in Montani haeresim delapsus, haec in lib. de Jejun. advers. psychicos (ita ille Catholicos invidiose appellabat), cap. 2, scripsit: Certe in Evangelio illos dies jejuniis determinatos putant. (Psychici seu Catholici) in quibus ablatus est Sponsus, et hos esse jam solos legitimos jejuniorum christianorum, abolitis legalibus et propheticis vetustatibus. Tum pergit dicere: Itaque de caetero indifferenter jejunandum ex arbitrio, non ex imperio novae disciplinae, pro temporibus et caussis uniuscujusque. Sic et Apostolos observasse, nullum aliud imponentes jugum certorum, et in commune omnibus obeundorum jejuniorum. En habes quae Catholicorum, in Africa saltem, sententia ac usus tum foret. Nempe duos tantum, dominico praeeunte praecepto, dies jejunabant, cum sponsus ablatus est, nimirum quando sponsus Christus in crucem conjectus, et in sepulcro conditus fuit quemadmodum veteres Christiani verba Marci, cap. II, et Lucae, cap. V, interpretari solebant. Caeteris vero diebus jejunia quidem Christiani servabant, sed ex arbitrio, non ex imperio. Quamvis enim iis quoque temporibus quadragesima celebraretur a Christianis, eamque ex Apostolorum traditione originem habuisse unusquisque pro certo haberet, ut pluribus veterum testimoniis ostendere facile foret, nondum tamen integri istius jejunii observatio lege et praecepto constituta, aut nondum saltem in omnibus Ecclesiis, invaluerat. Quatuor etiam temporum, aliaque jejunia, et nonnulla disciplinae capita, licet ab ipsa Apostolorum traditione manantia, non continuo in tota Ecclesia Dei recepta fuere, neque praecepto obligata. Id sensim per concilia, Patrumque, ac romanorum praecipue pontificum decreta praestitum fuit, ita ut quae jejunia olim e singulorum arbitrio pendebant, concordi nunc religione et praecepto celebrentur. Iterum auctor est idem Tertullianus, in eodem lib. de Jejun., cap. 13, Catholicos praeter Pascha, et citra illos dies, quibus ablatus est Sponsus, jejunasse, non quidem ex lege praecepti, seu ex imperio, sed ex arbitrio. Quamobrem colligere hinc fortasse possumus, ideo a Tertulliano eorum consuetudinem improbari, qui, dum jejunarent, ab osculo pacis abhorrebant, ne se jejunio operam dantes cum periculo modestiae proderent, quando incertum erat an reliqui fratres eodem die jejunarent. Hanc autem osculi omissionem in Paschate tantum, iisque diebus, quibus ablatus est Sponsus, videlicet feria sexta in parasceve, et sabbato sancto, admittere ac laudare Tertullianus videtur. MURAT.

Rightly do we lay aside the kiss. Albaspinaeus, bishop of Orléans, Observations on the Ancient Rites of the Church bk. 1, ch. 17, led by these words of Tertullian, came to the view that the kiss of peace was anciently omitted by Christians on those days on which a full and entire fast had been proclaimed and promulgated. For if (so he reasons) the kiss was not used on Holy Friday because the fast was common to all, and there was no danger of boasting, since he who fasted with all did not betray himself as fasting, then there was always abstention from the kiss when the fast was solemn and common. I do not give his words, set out at length. But I fear that this most learned man did not grasp the mind of Tertullian and the ancient custom of the Church. For first, Saint Ambrose and the most ancient liturgies testify that the kiss of peace was used in the assemblies of Christians on all fast days, and in Lent itself, only the last days excepted. Secondly, since it is certain that neither priests nor people were accustomed to approach the celebration of the unbloody sacrifice without the kiss, and it is moreover known that the sacrifice was usually performed on many fast days, who would not understand that even on the very days of public fasting the kiss was used by Christians? "What sort of sacrifice is it," Tertullian had just said, "from which one departs without the peace?" But since, according to the common rite of the Church, the sacrifice was not offered at all on the last two days of Lent, it is no wonder if Christians then refrained from the kiss. From this passage of Tertullian, then, Albaspinaeus ought to have argued otherwise, as the suspicion has arisen in me: namely, that in Tertullian's age, in the African churches at least, the fast was observed by common and public religion only on the last two days of Lent, while for the rest of the year, and even for the time of Lent itself, Christians were free either to give themselves to fasting or to forgo it. So even if we granted (which I certainly do not dare to affirm) that fasting was the only reason why the kiss of peace was omitted in the Parasceve and on the vigil of the Lord's resurrection, nevertheless, since on no other days of the year was there a public fast in Tertullian's mind, the omission of the kiss had to be restricted to those two days of Lent only. So Albaspinaeus could truly have said that Christians abstained from the kiss on the days on which an entire and full fast was proclaimed; but according to Tertullian's mind he should have added that those days were no more than two in the whole year, and that on the other days, therefore, although there was fasting by private devotion, the kiss of peace was in use. But since almost everyone is persuaded that at least the Lenten fast, as instituted by apostolic tradition, was religiously celebrated by all Christians even in the first centuries of the Church, and that no one abstained from it without sin, I may easily seem to interpret Tertullian with a bold opinion, and to guess rashly, that public fasts were once held only on two days of Lent. But Tertullian himself will stand for me, who, having fallen into the heresy of Montanus, wrote this in the book On Fasting against the Psychics (so he spitefully called the Catholics), ch. 2: "Certainly they think that those days were fixed for fasts in the Gospel" (the Psychics, that is the Catholics) "on which the Bridegroom was taken away, and that these are now the only lawful days of Christian fasts, the legal and prophetic antiquities having been abolished." Then he goes on to say: "So for the rest one must fast indifferently, by choice, not by the command of a new discipline, according to the times and reasons of each. So too the Apostles observed, imposing no other yoke of fixed fasts to be undergone in common by all." Here you have what the view and practice of the Catholics, in Africa at least, then was. Namely, they fasted only two days, following the Lord's precept, when the Bridegroom was taken away, that is, when Christ the Bridegroom was put on the cross and laid in the tomb, as the ancient Christians used to interpret the words of Mark ch. 2 and Luke ch. 5. On the other days Christians kept fasts indeed, but by choice, not by command. For although in those times too Lent was celebrated by Christians, and each held for certain that it had its origin from the tradition of the Apostles, as it would be easy to show by many testimonies of the ancients, yet the observance of that entire fast had not yet been established by law and precept, or at least had not yet prevailed in all the Churches. The fasts of the Four Seasons too, and others, and some heads of discipline, though flowing from the very tradition of the Apostles, were not at once received in the whole Church of God, nor bound by precept. This was brought about gradually through councils and the decrees of the Fathers, and above all of the Roman pontiffs, so that the fasts which once depended on the choice of individuals are now celebrated with concordant religion and by precept. Again the same Tertullian is the authority, in the same book On Fasting, ch. 13, that the Catholics, besides Pascha and short of those days on which the Bridegroom was taken away, fasted not by the law of a precept, or by command, but by choice. Hence perhaps we can gather that Tertullian disapproved the custom of those who, while fasting, shrank from the kiss of peace, lest while engaged in fasting they should betray themselves with danger to modesty, when it was uncertain whether the other brethren were fasting on the same day. But this omission of the kiss Tertullian seems to admit and praise only at Pascha, and on those days on which the Bridegroom was taken away, namely the sixth day in the Parasceve and Holy Saturday. MURAT[ORI].

(a) of col 1179 continued: the whole of the notes under this column belong to it, set in n1179

(a) of col 1179 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1179

(1) ‹occultando› · printed under col 1181 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Osculando male legitur Fran. Paris.

"osculando" is wrongly read in the Franeker and Paris [editions].

(2) ‹Similiter› · printed under col 1182 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Similiter Seml.

"similiter": Semler.

(a) ‹omnibus› · printed under col 1181

Quod cum omnibus faciamus. Scilicet: jejunium. G. PANCIROL.

Since we do it with all: namely, the fast. G. PANCIROL[I].

(b) ‹CAPUT XIX› · printed under col 1181

CAP. XIX.— Tit. cod. Ambros: De stationibus.

CH. XIX. — Title in the Ambrosian codex: On the Stations.

(c) ‹Similiter› · printed under col 1181

Similiter et stationum diebus. Stationem esse conventum Christianorum, qui certis diebus fiebant caussa orandi, et producebantur a Catholicis usque ad nonam, a Montanistis usque ad tenebras, dictum est in l. de Jejun., cap. 10, n. 91. G. PANCIROL.— Stationum diebus. Quid stationes fuerint, amplissime proditum ab aliis; itaque paucis contentus ero. Hermas, lib. III. Pastoris, simili. 4: Quid est, inquit Pastor, statio? et dixi: jejunium. Nihil aliud revera nomine stationum ecclesiastici scriptores significabant, quam jejunium a Christianis celebratum, ita ut stationes quaelibet jejunia interdum fuerint appellata. Cum enim jejunabant fideles, mane summo in sacras aedes convenire, ibique perstare ad horam usque nonam solebant, precibus rerumque divinarum contemplationi operam dantes: unde jejuniis stationum nomen postea adhaesit. Quaestio tamen inter quosdam eruditos agitatur, num a jejuniis stationes differrent. Equidem arbitror discriminis aliquid interfuisse tum solum, cum strictae stationis vocabulum accipiebatur. Tunc enim jejunia duntaxat quartae et sextae feriae indicabantur, ac propterea stationes ad horam usque nonam, ut diximus, perdurabant; jejunia vero in vesperam usque producebantur. Incertum porro, num hoc loco Tertullianus quaelibet jejunia significare velit, an ea tantum quae mercurii ac veneris diebus celebrabantur. In posteriorem sententiam ego facilius concederem. MURATORIUS.

Likewise also on the days of the stations. That a station was an assembly of Christians, held on certain days for the sake of praying, and prolonged by the Catholics until the ninth hour, by the Montanists until dark, has been said in the book On Fasting, ch. 10, n. 91. G. PANCIROL[I]. — On the days of the stations. What the stations were has been set out most fully by others; so I shall be content with a few words. Hermas, Shepherd bk. 3, similitude 4: "What is a station?" says the Shepherd; "and I said: a fast." The ecclesiastical writers indeed meant nothing else by the name of stations than a fast celebrated by Christians, so that any fasts were sometimes called stations. For when the faithful fasted, they used to come together into the sacred buildings early in the morning and remain there until the ninth hour, giving themselves to prayers and the contemplation of divine things: whence the name of stations afterwards clung to fasts. Yet the question is debated among certain scholars whether stations differed from fasts. For my part I think there was some difference only when the word station was taken in its strict sense. For then only the fasts of the fourth and sixth days were proclaimed, and so the stations lasted, as we have said, until the ninth hour; but fasts were prolonged until evening. It is uncertain, moreover, whether in this place Tertullian means any fasts, or only those which were celebrated on Wednesdays and Fridays. I would more readily yield to the latter view. MURATORI.

(d) ‹sacrificiorum› · printed under col 1181 and continued under col 1182

Sacrificiorum orationibus. Dic, haeretice, quid per haec verba intelligatur? Quid aliud vis esse sacrificii orationes, quam missam, quam impie damnas? Ex his verbis notandum est, omnes qui missae (ea latine est sacrificium) intererant, solitos fuisse sumere sacram Eucharistiam, et quia statim ea sumpta discedebant, ideo nec missae eo die interesse volebant, ne stationem solverent. Id Tertullianus reprehendit. PANCIROL.—Sacrificiorum orationibus. Non simpliciter orationes dicit, neque orationum sacrificia, sed sacrificiorum orationes, quia hic agit de jejuniis et Eucharistia; quae sacrificia maxime celebrantur orationibus. Ipsae autem orationes sacrificia sunt, ut jam notavimus ad ea quae habentur libello ad Scapulam: Sacrificamus, quomodo praecepit Deus, pura prece. Id etiam, lib. III adversus Marcionem, ad illud ex Malachia: Et in omni loco sacrificium nomini meo offertur et sacrificium mundum: « Gloriae scilicet relatio, inquit, et benedictio et laus, et hymni. » Et p. 502, sacrificium mundum, scilicet simplex oratio de conscientia pura, et p. 512, ubi de figuris sacrificiorum legis mosaicae: Significabant hominem, quondam peccatorum, verbo mox Dei emaculatum, offerre debere munus Deo apud templum, orationem scilicet et actionem gratiarum apud Ecclesiam, per Christum Jesum catholicum Patris sacerdotem. Plerisque autem locis afflictationum carnis et jejuniorum sacrificia commendat, et libro quidem de Patientia hostias esse ait Domino placatorias. Illud etiam notandum, lib. de Jejun., jejunium vocari sacrificium carnale. RIG.

At the prayers of the sacrifices. Tell us, heretic, what is understood by these words? What else do you take the prayers of the sacrifice to be than the Mass, which you impiously condemn? From these words it is to be noted that all who attended the Mass (which in Latin is sacrificium) used to receive the holy Eucharist, and because they left as soon as it was received, they would not attend the Mass on that day, so as not to break the station. Tertullian censures this. PANCIROL[I]. — At the prayers of the sacrifices. He does not say simply prayers, nor sacrifices of prayers, but prayers of the sacrifices, because he is treating here of fasts and the Eucharist; which sacrifices are celebrated above all with prayers. And prayers themselves are sacrifices, as we have already noted on what is found in the little book To Scapula: "We sacrifice, as God has commanded, with pure prayer." This too in Against Marcion bk. 3, on that [verse] from Malachi: And in every place sacrifice is offered to My name, and a clean sacrifice: "namely the rendering of glory," he says, "and blessing and praise, and hymns." And p. 502: "a clean sacrifice, namely simple prayer from a pure conscience"; and p. 512, where he treats of the figures of the sacrifices of the Mosaic law: "They signified that man, once [guilty] of sins, soon cleansed by the word of God, must offer a gift to God in the temple, namely prayer and thanksgiving in the Church, through Christ Jesus, the catholic priest of the Father." In many places he commends the sacrifices of the afflictions of the flesh and of fasts, and in the book On Patience he says they are victims that appease the Lord. Note also that in the book On Fasting fasting is called a carnal sacrifice. RIG[ALTIUS].

(2) call in col 1181, printed under col 1182, set in n1181; (d) of col 1181 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1181

(e) ‹statio› · printed under col 1182

Quod statio solvenda sit, etc. Nunquam a statione christianus populus recedebat, nisi accepto corpore Domini, cujus communicatione peracta absolvebantur preces et piis conventibus finis imponebatur. At a sacra synaxi abstinebant delicatuli quidam, quod sibi viderentur accepto corpore Domini jejunium frangere, in quo custodiendo certe antiquis maxima fuit cura atque religio. Quantum autem hi fallerentur, Tertullianus hic probare nititur, ostendens a cibo sacrae mensae non vitiari, sed perfici atque sacrari Christianorum jejunia. MURATORIUS.

That the station must be broken, etc. The Christian people never left the station except after receiving the body of the Lord; once communion in it was completed, the prayers were concluded and an end was put to the pious assemblies. But certain over-delicate people abstained from the sacred synaxis, because they thought that by receiving the body of the Lord they broke their fast, in keeping which the ancients certainly took the greatest care and scruple. How far these were mistaken Tertullian here tries to prove, showing that the fasts of Christians are not spoiled by the food of the sacred table, but perfected and consecrated. MURATORI.

(f) ‹steteris› · printed under col 1182 and continued under col 1183 (p. 636)

Nonne solemnior erit statio tua, si et ad aram Dei steteris. Ergo aras habebant tunc temporis Christiani! Unde igitur illa gentilium in ipsos odia et tanquam adversus impios crimina, quod nec delubra, nec aras haberent, nec sacrificarent? Putatis autem, inquit, Minutius, nos occultare quod colimus, si delubra et aras non habemus. Ut Malachias, cap. 1, mensam Domini dixit, quod ibidem altare dixerat, ita hic aram dicit Septimius, mensam Christi. Unde scilicet corpus Christi sumebatur, pane, vino, sanctis orationibus in passionis Domini memoriam consecrato. Sic enim Paulus, I ad Corinthios, X, postquam dixit, Panem quem frangimus, participationem et communionem esse corporis Christi quod pro nobis tradi et immolari voluit Deus, adjicit, eos qui victimas edunt, participes fieri altaris. Deinde monet Corinthios, ut si forte ipsis apud ethnicos coenantibus aliquid apponatur quod immolatum idolis fuisse dicatur, partem inde sibi ullam ne sumant: etenim non posse mensae Domini participes esse, et mensae daemoniorum. Quod praeceptum, mensae vocabulo gentilium sacrificiis accommodato, mensam Christi apud fideles arae instar esse significat: et Judaeos quidem, qui secundum carnem sapiant, sacrificiis suis participes fieri tantum altaris, θυσιαστηρίου, hostia scilicet flammis consumpta; Christianos autem participes fieri θυσίας, ipsius sacrificii, nempe corporis Christi. Atque hic Septimius noster acceptam a Christiano buccellam, participationem esse ait sacrificii. Quin et ipse Christianus ara Domini censetur, imbuenda quidem sanguine, sed Christi. Idemque ille noster fideles arcens spectaculis et circo, ait: Vis autem et sanguinis aliquid? habes Christi. Denique et Chrysostomus auditores suos quasi Christi ipsius verbis compellans: Εἰ αἵματος ἐπιθυμεῖς, φησὶ, μὴ τὸν τῶν εἰδώλων βωμὸν τῷ τῶν ἀλόγων φόνῳ, ἀλλὰ τὸ θυσιαστήριον τὸ ἐμὸν τῷ ἐμῷ φοίνισσε αἵματι. RIG.— Solemnior erit statio. Statio pro jejunio aliquando sumitur, quoniam statio nulla sine jejunio: fiebant autem stationes seu frequentes ad ecclesiam concursus dieb. veneris et mercurii, in quibus erant statuta jejunia. Frivola autem est dubitatio Magdeburgensium, qui de jejunio Montanistarum id accipi dicunt, licet enim ad vesperam usque producerentur haec stationum jejunia, nihil tamen haereticis illis conducit; Patres quippe illud inter Montani errores non numerant. LE PR.— Ad aram Dei steteris. Alludens ad stationes utitur proprio sacrorum verbo. Stare ad aram dicitur dedicatum animal victimae patiens. Virgilius, II. Georg.: Et cornu ductus stabit sacer hircus ad aram. Hircus.... Et Martial: Vite nocens rosa stabat moriturus ad aras (Mart., epig. 24, l. VII.) Inde et illud: Rode, caper, vitem, tamen hinc cum stabis ad aram, In tua quod spargi cornua possit, erit. RIG.

Will not your station be more solemn if you have also stood at the altar of God? So the Christians had altars at that time! Whence then those hatreds of the gentiles against them, and the charges as against impious men, that they had neither shrines nor altars, nor sacrificed? "Do you think," says Minucius, "that we hide what we worship, if we have no shrines and altars?" As Malachi, ch. 1, called the table of the Lord what he had called an altar in the same place, so here Septimius calls the table of Christ an altar: whence, that is, the body of Christ was received, the bread and wine having been consecrated with holy prayers in memory of the Lord's passion. For so Paul, 1 Corinthians 10, after saying that the bread which we break is the participation and communion of the body of Christ, which God willed to be delivered and sacrificed for us, adds that those who eat the victims become partakers of the altar. Then he warns the Corinthians that if perhaps, when they dine among the heathen, something is set before them which is said to have been sacrificed to idols, they should take no part of it for themselves: for they cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord and of the table of demons. This precept, the word "table" being applied to the sacrifices of the gentiles, signifies that the table of Christ among the faithful is equivalent to an altar: and that the Jews, who are wise according to the flesh, become partakers in their sacrifices only of the altar, θυσιαστήριον, the victim being consumed by the flames; but Christians become partakers of the θυσία, the sacrifice itself, namely the body of Christ. And here our Septimius says that the morsel received by a Christian is a participation in the sacrifice. Indeed the Christian himself is reckoned an altar of the Lord, to be steeped with blood, but Christ's. And the same author of ours, keeping the faithful away from the shows and the circus, says: "Do you want some blood too? You have Christ's." Finally Chrysostom too, addressing his hearers as if in the words of Christ Himself: "If you desire blood," he says, "redden not the altar of idols with the slaughter of brute beasts, but My altar with My blood." RIG[ALTIUS]. — Your station will be more solemn. Station is sometimes taken for fast, since there is no station without fasting: stations, or frequent gatherings at church, were held on Fridays and Wednesdays, on which fasts were appointed. Frivolous is the doubt of the Magdeburg [Centuriators], who say this is to be taken of the fast of the Montanists; for although these fasts of the stations were prolonged until evening, it is of no help to those heretics; for the Fathers do not count that among the errors of Montanus. LE PR[IEUR]. — If you have stood at the altar of God. Alluding to the stations, he uses a word proper to the sacred rites. A dedicated animal, submitting as victim, is said to stand at the altar. Virgil, Georgics bk. 2: "And the sacred goat, led by the horn, will stand at the altar." "The goat…." And Martial: "Harmful to the vine, he stood at the altars about to die" (Martial, epigram 24, bk. 7). Hence also that [line]: "Gnaw the vine, goat; yet when you stand at the altar, there will be enough of it to be sprinkled on your horns." RIG[ALTIUS].

(f) of col 1182 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1182

(1) ‹CAPUT XX› · printed under col 1183 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XV alias.

Ch. 15, elsewhere.

(2) ‹effecit› · printed under col 1183 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Efficit Rigal. Paris. Venet. Seml. Leop.

"efficit": Rigaltius, Paris, Venice, Semler, Leopold.

(a) ‹cepto› · printed under col 1183

Accepto corpore Domini et reservato. Et hoc eruditis compertissimum est, veteres christianae religionis cultores interdum consuevisse corpus Christi a sacerdote acceptum deferre secum, ut domi ac in privatis precibus manducarent: quae consuetudo a conciliis postea sublata fuit. Hoc igitur omisso, alia potius consideranda occurrunt. Scilicet ex hoc Tertulliani loco recentiorum quorumdam haereticorum sententia refellitur, qui corpus Domini post sacra peracta conservare nefas putant. Verum quod nunc in catholica Ecclesia praestatur antiquitus etiam factum, non haec solum Tertulliani verba, sed Cyprianus aliique vetustissimi scriptores apertissime probant, quorum testimonia ab aliis prolata repetere superfluum foret. Secundo cum hic unius corporis accepti mentionem Tertullianus faciat, et unum corpus domum deferri, ac reservari consuevisse intelligamus, discere possumus, sat olim fuisse Christianis, si Christi corpore vescerentur; atque hunc usum ab Ecclesia catholica servatum, et sexcentis aliis veterum documentis confirmatum, male a nuperis haereticis improbari. MURATORIUS.

With the body of the Lord received and reserved. This too is very well known to the learned: that the ancient followers of the Christian religion were sometimes accustomed to carry with them the body of Christ received from the priest, so as to eat it at home and in private prayers; a custom which was afterwards abolished by councils. Leaving this aside, then, other things rather present themselves for consideration. Namely, by this passage of Tertullian the opinion of certain more recent heretics is refuted, who think it wrong to keep the body of the Lord after the sacred rites are finished. That what is now done in the Catholic Church was done also in ancient times is most plainly proved not only by these words of Tertullian, but by Cyprian and other very ancient writers, whose testimonies, brought forward by others, it would be superfluous to repeat. Secondly, since Tertullian here mentions the reception of the body alone, and we understand that the body alone was customarily carried home and reserved, we can learn that it was once enough for Christians if they fed on the body of Christ; and that this practice, kept by the Catholic Church and confirmed by countless other documents of the ancients, is wrongly disapproved by recent heretics. MURATORI.

(b) ‹nulla› · printed under col 1183

Nulla laetitia, sive tristitia. Sive laetum quid, sive triste nuntietur, milites stationem, ubi praesident, non deserunt: nec nos milites christiani, sive fuerit dies laetus, sive jejunii et afflictionis, nostras stationes deseremus. Et hic notandum est, stationes Christianorum a stationibus militum dici; cum enim milites Christi simus, multa a militibus mutuamur. G. PANCIROL.

No joy or sadness. Whether something joyful or sad is announced, soldiers do not desert the post where they stand guard; nor shall we Christian soldiers desert our stations, whether the day is joyful or one of fasting and affliction. And here it is to be noted that the stations of Christians are named from the stations of soldiers; for since we are soldiers of Christ, we borrow many things from soldiers. G. PANCIROL[I].

(c) ‹CAPUT XX› · printed under col 1183

CAP. XX.— Tit. Cod. Amb.: De habitu foeminarum.

CH. XX. — Title in the Ambrosian codex: On the dress of women.

(d) ‹habitu› · printed under col 1183

Quae sequuntur ad haec verba: per Ecclesias, quas.......... primus e vetustissimo exemplari adjecit Rigaltius, Muratorius vero ea omnia quae ad finem usque libri leguntur. EDD.

What follows, up to these words, "per Ecclesias, quas…", Rigaltius first added from a very ancient exemplar; but Muratori [added] all that is read up to the end of the book. EDD.

(e) ‹varietas› · printed under col 1183 and continued under col 1184

De habitu vero, etc. De vestibus etiam quas foeminae ad orationem accedentes induere debebant, agendum sibi Tertullianus censet. Ad hoc autem incitatum se ait, quod pro diversitate locorum varius esset vestium foeminarum usus, ideoque se de hujusmodi argumento scribere velle, quod praecipue tanquam nullius loci homo, videlicet nulli locorum consuetudini favens, rem aequissime pertractare poterat. At impudentia videbitur de hoc iterum agere, postquam Paulus apostolus aperte egit in I ad Timotheum, cap. II. Se tamen impudentem non existimat, cum post Apostolum quidem, sed secundum Apostolum, hoc est secundum Apostoli mentem in eodem argumento versetur. MURATORIUS. — De habitu vero duntaxat foeminarum. Haec reperiuntur in vetustissimo exemplari, neque spernenda sunt. Post illa vero: Per Ecclesias quas, sequitur in eodem exemplari, absque ulla distinctione, Disposita utensilitas ut et proprias operas plures et necessariores, etc., quae habentur lib. I de Cultu foem. RIGALT.

But on the dress, etc. Tertullian thinks he must treat also of the garments which women coming to prayer ought to wear. He says he was prompted to this because the use of women's garments varied with the diversity of places, and so he wishes to write on an argument of this kind, which he could treat most fairly above all as a man of no place, that is, favouring the custom of no place. But it will seem impudence to treat of this again after the apostle Paul has treated it openly in 1 Timothy ch. 2. Yet he does not think himself impudent, since he is engaged on the same argument after the Apostle indeed, but according to the Apostle, that is, according to the Apostle's mind. MURATORI. — But on the dress of women only. These words are found in the very ancient exemplar, and are not to be despised. After the words "Per Ecclesias quas", there follows in the same exemplar, without any break, "Disposita utensilitas ut et proprias operas plures et necessariores", etc., which is found in bk. 1 of On the Apparel of Women. RIGALT[IUS].

(e) of col 1183 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1183

(3) ‹crinium› · printed under col 1183 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

An lenoninam inquit Seml.

Semler says: perhaps "lenoninam"?

(4) ‹CAPUT XXI› · printed under col 1184 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XVI alias.

Ch. 16, elsewhere.

(5) ‹Sed quid› · printed under col 1184 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Sed quod Seml. Leop.

"sed quod": Semler, Leopold.

(f) ‹operositatem› · printed under col 1184

Crinium lenonem operositatem. In Ambrosiano codice legitur criminum lenonem morositatem. At in eo codice quo usus est Rigaltius, quique in haec verba desinit, habetur et crinium lenonem operositatem. Quae lectio mihi libentius probatur, ut significetur ac damnetur immodicum foeminarum studium in crinibus componendis et in cincinnos educandis, unde viri tanquam a lenonibus sollicitati ad concupiscentiam rapiantur. Hujusmodi autem lectioni consonat apostolus uterque a Tertulliano laudatus. Petrus in Ep. I, cap. III, ita de mulieribus scribit: Quarum non sit extrinsecus capillatura, aut circumdatio auri, aut indumenti vestimentorum cultus. Paulus vero in I. ad Timotheum, c. II: Similiter, inquit, et mulieres in habitu ornato, cum verecundia et sobrietate ornantes se, et non in tortis crinibus aut auro, aut margaritis vel veste pretiosa. Ubi crinium factam mentionem vides. MUR.

The pandering elaborateness of the hair. In the Ambrosian codex is read "criminum lenonem morositatem". But in the codex which Rigaltius used, and which ends at these words, there is "et crinium lenonem operositatem". This reading I approve more willingly, so that the immoderate zeal of women in arranging their hair and training it into curls is signified and condemned, by which men are carried off to lust as if solicited by panders. With this kind of reading both apostles praised by Tertullian agree. Peter, 1 Epistle ch. 3, writes thus of women: Whose [adornment] is not to be the outward plaiting of hair, or the putting on of gold, or the wearing of garments. And Paul, 1 Timothy ch. 2: Likewise, he says, women too in seemly dress, adorning themselves with modesty and sobriety, and not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing. There you see mention made of the hair. MUR[ATORI].

(g) ‹CAPUT XXI› · printed under col 1184

CAP. XXI. — Tit. Cod. Murat. De virginibus.

CH. XXI. — Title in Muratori's codex: On virgins.

(h) ‹Sed quid› · printed under col 1184

Sed quid promiscue. Vestes et ornamenta foeminarum modestiam spirare debere, certissimum ex Apostoli praecepto dixerat. Nunc velarine debeant virgines, an non, tanquam res incerta, pertractandum ait. Erant enim qui virgines in templo atque in sacris conventibus non velatas ferebant; alii vero iis quoque, ut reliquis mulieribus, velum esse necessarium, modestiae caussa et apostolici praecepti auctoritate, sentiebant. MURATORIUS.

But what is indiscriminately. He had said that the garments and ornaments of women must breathe modesty, as is most certain from the Apostle's precept. Now he says that whether virgins ought to be veiled or not must be treated as an uncertain matter. For there were those who tolerated virgins unveiled in church and in the sacred assemblies; others held that for them too, as for the other women, the veil was necessary, for modesty's sake and by the authority of the apostolic precept. MURATORI.

(i) ‹capitis› · printed under col 1184

Capitis immunitatem. Qui virginibus indulgent capitis nuditatem, atque immunitatem a velamine. MUR.

Exemption of the head: those who allow virgins bareness of the head and exemption from the veil. MUR[ATORI].

(j) ‹virgines› · printed under col 1184 and continued under col 1185 (p. 637)

Apostolus non virgines nominatim, etc. Πᾶσα δὲ γυνὴ προσευχομένη, ἢ προφητεύουσα ἀκατακαλύπτῳ τῇ κεφαλῇ καταισχύνει τὴν κεφαλὴν ἑαυτῆς· ἓν γάρ ἐστι καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τῇ ἐξυρημένῃ: Sunt Apostoli verba in I ad Cor., cap. XI, n. 5, quae ita exhibentur a vulgato interprete nostro: Omnis mulier orans, vel prophetans non velato capite, deturpat caput suum: unum enim est ac si decalvetur. Qui contendebant, virginibus nequaquam praeceptum fuisse, ut velatae in templo orarent, ex ipsis Apostoli verbis tale argumentum conflabant: Si Apostolus hoc praecipere in animum induxisset, vocabulo γυνὴ, quod mulier latine sonat, non fuisset usus, nam γυνὴ de nuptis tantum foeminis usurpari solet. Potius θήλεια dixisset, quo nomine foeminas omnes, tum nuptas, tum innuptas Graeci significant; aut addidisset παρθένους, quoque, id est virgines. Ergo non totum sexum, sed gradum et partem foeminei sexus, mulieres videlicet nuptas, eo in loco Apostolus significavit. Quin ipse eadem in Epistola ad Cor., cap. VI, virgines a mulieribus distinxit, inquiens: μεμέρισται δὲ ἡ γυνὴ καὶ ἡ παρθένος, divisa est mulier, et virgo. Non hic autem solum, sed et in lib. de velandis Virginibus, quem postea conscripsit in schola Montani, simile sibi argumentum Tertullianus objecit. Inquit ibi, cap. 4: Opponitur nobis, nullam mentionem virginum ab Apostolo factam, ubi de velamine praefinit, sed tantum mulieres nominatas: cum si voluisset et virgines tegi, de virginibus quoque cum mulieribus pronuntiasset, quomodo illic, inquit, ubi de nuptiis tractat, quid observandum sit etiam de virginibus, declarat. Itaque non contineri eas lege velandi capitis, ut non nominatas in hac lege; imo ex hoc revelari, quia non jubentur, quae nec nominantur. MURAT.

The Apostle [named] not virgins specifically, etc. "But every woman praying or prophesying with her head unveiled dishonours her head; for it is one and the same as if she were shaven." These are the Apostle's words in 1 Corinthians ch. 11, n. 5, which are rendered thus by our Vulgate translator: Every woman praying or prophesying with her head not veiled disgraces her head: for it is the same as if she were shaven. Those who contended that there had been no command to virgins to pray veiled in church built this argument from the Apostle's own words: if the Apostle had meant to command this, he would not have used the word γυνή, which in Latin means mulier, for γυνή is usually used only of married women. He would rather have said θήλεια, by which name the Greeks signify all females, both married and unmarried; or he would have added παρθένους too, that is, virgins. So in that place the Apostle signified not the whole sex but a grade and part of the female sex, namely married women. Indeed in the same Epistle to the Corinthians, ch. 6 [so printed], he himself distinguished virgins from women, saying: "The woman and the virgin are divided", the woman and the virgin are divided. And not only here but also in the book On the Veiling of Virgins, which he wrote later in the school of Montanus, Tertullian raised a similar argument against himself. He says there, ch. 4: "It is objected to us that no mention of virgins was made by the Apostle where he gives rules about the veil, but only women were named: whereas if he had wished virgins too to be covered, he would have pronounced about virgins together with women, just as there," he says, "where he treats of marriage, he declares what must be observed about virgins too. So they are not bound by the law of veiling the head, as not named in this law; indeed, from this they are to be unveiled, because those who are not even named are not commanded." MURAT[ORI].

(j) of col 1184 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1184

(1) ‹CAPUT XXII› · printed under col 1185 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XVII ed. Leop.

Ch. 17, Leopold's edition.

(2) ‹tum› · printed under col 1186 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Divinitatum Murat. nullo sensu.

"divinitatum": Muratori, which makes no sense.

(a) ‹Evam› · printed under col 1185 and continued under col 1186

CAP. XXII.— Evam nondum virum expertam, etc. Ut ostendat Tertullianus, nomine γυναικὸς nuptas ac innuptas foeminas significari, e Genesis cap. II, v. 23, exemplum profert; ibi enim de Eva loquens Deus: αὐτὴ, inquiunt LXX Interpretes, κληθήσεται γυνὴ, ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς ἐλήφθη. Scilicet: ipsa vocabitur mulier, quia de viro suo sumpta est, ut alibi aptissime interpretatur idem Tertullianus, versionem τῶν LXX secutus. Vulgatus autem interpres habet: quae vocabitur virago, quoniam de viro sumpta est. Supra etiam dixerat divinus Scriptor: Aedificavit Dominus Deus costam, quam tulerat de Adam, in mulierem, εἰς γυναῖκα. Utrobique Eva, quanquam adhuc virgo neque virum experta γυνὴ, mulier appellatur. Igitur per hoc vocabulum non gradus sexus, seu nuptarum ordo significatur, sed generaliter foemineus sexus: atque adeo tum virgines, tum nuptae ab Apostolo jubentur velari. MURAT.

CH. XXII. — Eve, not yet having known a man, etc. To show that by the name γυνή married and unmarried women are signified, Tertullian brings an example from Genesis ch. 2, v. 23; for there God, speaking of Eve: "she," say the Seventy Translators, "shall be called woman, because she was taken out of her man." That is: she shall be called woman, because she was taken from her man, as the same Tertullian most aptly interprets elsewhere, following the version of the Seventy. The Vulgate translator has: she shall be called virago, because she was taken from man. Above too the divine writer had said: The Lord God built the rib which He had taken from Adam into a woman, εἰς γυναῖκα. In both places Eve, although still a virgin and not having known a man, is called γυνή, woman. So by this word is signified not a grade of the sex, or the order of married women, but the female sex in general: and so both virgins and married women are commanded by the Apostle to be veiled. MURAT[ORI].

(b) ‹alio› · printed under col 1186

Sic alio in loco. Eamdem Epistolam I ad Cor., cap. VII, n. 34, innuit, ubi ita loquitur Paulus: Mulier innupta, et virgo, cogitat quae Domini sunt, ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu. Quae vero nupta est, cogitat quae sunt mundi, quomodo placeat viro. Si, inquit Tertullianus, innuptas a nuptis distinguere voluisset Apostolus, velari mulieres jubens, eas aliquo distinxisset vocabulo, quemadmodum fecit, ubi revera illas distinguere voluit. Apparet igitur, tum nuptas, tum innuptas uno mulieris, seu γυναικὸς nomine fuisse comprehensas, quando eas Paulus distinguere noluit. Eadem ratione respondet idem Tertullianus in lib. de vel. Virgin., cap. 5. MURAT.

As in another place. He hints at the same First Epistle to the Corinthians, ch. 7, n. 34, where Paul speaks thus: The unmarried woman and the virgin thinks on the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body and spirit. But she who is married thinks on the things of the world, how she may please her husband. If, says Tertullian, the Apostle had wished to distinguish unmarried from married women when commanding women to be veiled, he would have distinguished them by some word, as he did where he really wished to distinguish them. It appears, then, that both married and unmarried women were comprehended under the one name of mulier, or γυνή, when Paul did not wish to distinguish them. By the same reasoning the same Tertullian replies in the book On the Veiling of Virgins, ch. 5. MURAT[ORI].

(2) call in col 1185, printed under col 1186, set in n1185; (a) of col 1185 continued under this column, set in n1185; (b) call in col 1185, printed under col 1186, set in n1185

(c) ‹tam› · printed under col 1186

Quam foeminas. Id est potius quam foeminas. Est elegans in hebraeo sermone dicendi formula, et aliis in locis a Tertulliano usurpata. MURAT.

As women. That is, rather than females. It is an elegant form of expression in the Hebrew tongue, and used by Tertullian in other places. MURAT[ORI].

(d) ‹sicut› · printed under col 1186 and continued under col 1187 (p. 638)

Sicut nec vir, nec velandi. Apostolus in laudata Epistola I ad Cor., cap. XI, n. 4. Omnis, inquit, vir orans aut prophetans velato capite, deturpat caput suum. Infra vero addit: Vir quidem non debet velare caput suum. Cuicumque igitur viro, quando orat, turpe esse velari ait Paulus, et omnem virum nominans, omnes cujuscumque ordinis, aetatis et conditionis masculos intelligit. Igitur sub nomine omnis mulieris foeminas omnes, tum virgines, tum nuptas ac viduas complectitur. Caeterum, quin haec verba sint in codice nostro vitiata, nemo dubitabit. Fortasse restitui poterunt, aut saltem iis lux aliqua affulgebit, si quod ille in lib. de vel. Virgin., cap. 8, refert, nos quoque referamus. Apostolus: « Omnis, inquit, mulier. » Quid est omnis? nisi omnis generis, omnis ordinis, omnis conditionis, omnis dignitatis, omnis aetatis? Siquidem omne, totum est, et integrum, et nulla sui parte defectum. Pars autem mulieris et virgo est. Aeque et de viro non velando omnis, inquit. Ecce duo diversa nomina, vir et mulier. Omnis uterque. Duae leges obnoxiae invicem hinc velandi, inde nudandi. Igitur si eo quod dictum sit omnis vir, commune est nomen viri etiam nondum viri, masculi investis: commune autem cum sit nomen secundum naturam, communis est et lex non velandi ejus, qui inter viros virgo est, etc. MURAT.

As neither a man nor of veiling. The Apostle in the Epistle cited, 1 Corinthians ch. 11, n. 4: Every man, he says, praying or prophesying with his head veiled disgraces his head. And below he adds: A man ought not to veil his head. Paul says, then, that it is shameful for any man whatever to be veiled when he prays, and in naming every man he understands all males of whatever order, age and condition. So under the name of every woman he embraces all females, virgins as well as married women and widows. For the rest, no one will doubt that these words are corrupt in our codex. Perhaps they can be restored, or at least some light will shine on them, if we too quote what he reports in the book On the Veiling of Virgins, ch. 8: "The Apostle says: 'Every woman.' What is 'every'? What but of every kind, every order, every condition, every dignity, every age? For 'every' is the whole, and entire, and lacking in no part of itself. And the virgin too is a part of woman. Likewise of the man not to be veiled he says 'every'. Here are two different names, man and woman. 'Every' of each. Two laws answering each other, of veiling on the one side, of uncovering on the other. So if, because it is said 'every man', the name of man is common even to one not yet a man, the beardless male; and since the name is common according to nature, common too is the law of not veiling him who is a virgin among men," etc. MURAT[ORI].

(d) of col 1186 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1186

(a) ‹virginitati› · printed under col 1187

Et virginitati defunctas concupiscentiae. Hic mihi verbum aliquod desiderari videtur, cujusmodi esse ignes excitare, aut quid simile, ut sit sensus: Num nuptae tantum ac virginitate carentes angelorum hominumque concupiscentiam accendere possunt? neque virginibus licet forma corporis excellere, sibique amatores invenire? MURAT.

And [women] done with virginity, [able to stir] desire. Here some word seems to me to be wanting, of the kind "to kindle fires", or something similar, so that the sense is: Can only married women, who lack virginity, kindle the desire of angels and men? and may virgins not excel in beauty of body and find lovers for themselves? MURAT[ORI].

(b) ‹videmus› · printed under col 1187

Imo videmus. Imo, inquit Tertullianus, Angeli virgines potius quam nuptas concupiisse videntur, siquidem Scriptura testante, cap. VI Gen., n. 2: Videntes filii Dei filias hominum quod essent pulchrae, acceperunt sibi uxores ex omnibus quas elegerant. Igitur non uxores hominum, non foeminae indifferenter a filiis Dei, sive ab Angelis, ut Tertullianus interpretatur (quam solide non quaero) expetitae fuerunt, sed virgines, et quae vacabant, hoc est nondum conjugatae. Quamobrem ita legendus mihi videtur Tertulliani locus: Imo videmus quod virgines solas concupierint. Infra etiam uxores pro uxorem legendum esse, nemo neget. Hunc eumdem Genesis locum a Tertulliano tractatum videas in memorato libro de vel. Virgin., cap. 7. MURAT.

Indeed we see. Indeed, says Tertullian, the angels seem to have desired virgins rather than married women, since Scripture testifies, Genesis ch. 6, n. 2: The sons of God, seeing that the daughters of men were beautiful, took for themselves wives of all whom they had chosen. So it was not the wives of men, nor women indiscriminately, who were sought by the sons of God, or by the angels, as Tertullian interprets it (how soundly I do not ask), but virgins, and those who were free, that is, not yet married. For that reason the passage of Tertullian seems to me to be read thus: "Indeed we see that they desired virgins alone." Below too no one would deny that uxores must be read for uxorem. You may see this same passage of Genesis treated by Tertullian in the book cited, On the Veiling of Virgins, ch. 7. MURAT[ORI].

(c) ‹vacant› · printed under col 1187

Itaque vacant. Id est: illae dicuntur vacare, quae aut virgines, aut viduae sunt. MURAT.

So they are free. That is: those are said to be free who are either virgins or widows. MURAT[ORI].

(d) ‹dicit› · printed under col 1187

Item cum dicit, etc. In eodem cap. XI Ep. I ad Cor., n. 14: Ipsa natura, inquit Apostolus, docet vos, quod vir quidem si comam nutriat, ignominia est illi. Mulier vero si comam nutriat, gloria est illi, quoniam capilli pro velamine ei dati sunt. Igitur cum virginibus quoque capilli pro velamine ne a natura sint dati, velo et ipsae uti debent. MURAT.

Likewise when he says, etc. In the same ch. 11 of 1 Corinthians, n. 14: Nature itself, says the Apostle, teaches you that if a man grows his hair, it is a disgrace to him. But if a woman grows her hair, it is a glory to her, since her hair has been given her for a covering. So since hair has been given by nature to virgins too for a covering [printed "ne a natura"], they too must use the veil. MURAT[ORI].

(e) ‹Israel› · printed under col 1187

Sic denique et Israel observat. Judaeis etiam foeminis in usu fuisse, ut velato capite incederent, idem Tertullianus alibi testatur, nempe cap. 4, libri de Cor. militis, cujus haec sunt verba: Apud Judaeos tam solemne est foeminis eorum velamen capitis, ut inde noscantur. Tum addit exemplum Rebeccae adhuc virginis, quae velata ad sponsum profecta est, et Susannae, quae cum judicio sisteretur, operta erat velamine pro more caeterarum mulierum hebraearum. Similia repetit in lib. de vel. Virg., cap. 11. Rabbi etiam Nathan, in Aruch, veli cujusdam tenuis mentionem facit, quo foeminarum capita obtegi solebant. MURAT.

So finally Israel too observes it. That it was also the custom of Jewish women to go about with veiled head the same Tertullian testifies elsewhere, namely On the Soldier's Crown ch. 4, whose words are these: "Among the Jews the veil of the head is so customary for their women that they are known by it." Then he adds the example of Rebecca, still a virgin, who went veiled to her bridegroom, and of Susanna, who, when she was put on trial, was covered with a veil after the custom of the other Hebrew women. He repeats similar things in the book On the Veiling of Virgins, ch. 11. Rabbi Nathan too, in the Aruch, mentions a certain thin veil with which the heads of women used to be covered. MURAT[ORI].

(f) ‹non› · printed under col 1187

Sed si non observaret. Quanquam virginibus judaeis velandi capitis consuetudo non esset, nihilominus in lege Christianorum servandus foret hujusmodi ritus; nam in Novo Testamento veteres leges et ampliatae et suppletae sunt. MURAT.

But if it did not observe it. Even if Jewish virgins had not had the custom of veiling the head, nevertheless a rite of this kind would have to be kept in the law of Christians; for in the New Testament the old laws have been both enlarged and supplemented. MURAT[ORI].

(g) ‹aetas› · printed under col 1188

Nunc aetas, quae sexum suum ignorat. Hinc patet, puellis, quae nondum rationis usum attigerant, intecto capite procedere licuisse. Simplicitatis privilegium Tertullianus appellat. Verum in iis quae ad adolescentiam creverant, cum natura mutaretur, mutari quoque disciplinam decebat. Vide ipsum, citato cap. 11 de vel. Virg. MURAT.

Now the age which does not know its own sex. Hence it is clear that girls who had not yet reached the use of reason were allowed to go out with uncovered head. Tertullian calls it the privilege of simplicity. But in those who had grown to adolescence, since nature changed, it was fitting that the discipline too should change. See him in the chapter cited, 11, of On the Veiling of Virgins. MURAT[ORI].

(h) ‹texuerunt› · printed under col 1188

Texuerunt. Lego texerunt, ut Gen. cap. III, n. 7. MURAT.

They wove. I read "texerunt" [they covered], as in Gen. ch. 3, n. 7. MURAT[ORI].

(i) ‹qua› · printed under col 1188

Sed aliqua se Deo vovit. Et ab ipsis Ecclesiae incunabulis virgines fuisse, quae suam virginitatem Christo dicarent, cum e nonnullis Tertulliani locis in memorato lib. de vel. Virg., tum ex hoc capite ostendi evidenter potest, ut subeat mirari quorumdam aut in re aperta caecitatem, aut in improbanda re tot saeculorum usu probata audaciam; negant enim hunc morem aut in antiquis Christianorum Ecclesiis viguisse, aut in recentioribus esse laudandum. At hic legimus, aliquas se deo vovere, sanctumque hoc institutum Dei gratia exerceri. Infra ait: Nupsisti Christo, illi carnem tuam tradidisti. Age pro mariti tui (scilicet Christi) disciplina. Si nuptas alienas velari jubet Christus, suas utique multo magis. His adde quae doctissimus Pamelius habet, praefat. in eumdem lib. de Virg. vel. Ego in argumento satis explorato aliis veterum testimoniis parco. MURAT.

But one who has vowed herself to God. That from the very cradle of the Church there were virgins who dedicated their virginity to Christ can be shown clearly both from several passages of Tertullian in the book cited, On the Veiling of Virgins, and from this chapter; so that one cannot but wonder at the blindness of certain people in a plain matter, or at their audacity in disapproving a thing approved by the practice of so many centuries; for they deny either that this custom flourished in the ancient Churches of the Christians or that it is to be praised in more recent ones. But here we read that some vow themselves to God, and that this holy institution is practised by the grace of God. Below he says: "You have married Christ, you have handed over your flesh to Him. Act according to the discipline of your husband" (namely Christ). "If Christ commands other men's brides to be veiled, much more certainly His own." Add to these what the most learned Pamelius has in the preface to the same book On the Veiling of Virgins. In an argument sufficiently explored I spare the other testimonies of the ancients. MURAT[ORI].

(j) ‹crinem› · printed under col 1188 and continued at the head of the notes under col 1189 (p. 639)

Crinem exinde transfigurat. Ubi virgines castitatem dicaverant, crinem transfigurasse diximus. Neque, ut arbitror, hoc nomine comas tonderi Tertullianus significat; auctor enim ipsemet est, virginibus quoque turpe esse tonderi. Si mulieri, inquit, turpe est radi, et virgini perinde. Idem repetit in lib. de vel. Virg., cap. 7. Me quidem non fugit nonnullis in regionibus a sacratis virginibus crinem deponi consuevisse, ac praecipue in Syria et Aegypto, uti Hieronymus, in epist. 48. ad Sabinianum, aliaque monumenta testantur. Sed hujusmodi consuetudinem in Africa tribus saltem prioribus Ecclesiae saeculis obtinuisse, nusquam invenio. Censeo itaque nil aliud hic intelligi, nisi modestam crinium compositionem, quam virgines tum servare incipiebant, cum se Christo dicabant. Et quidem antiquitus usitatum fuit ut crine soluto ac libero virgines incederent. Simul ac autem conjugio sese obligabant, comae illis coactae et compositae erant, ut jam in matronarum gravitatem transirent. Quae igitur divino sponso nubebant, par erat ut crine composito, compresso ac transfigurato proderent se Deo nuptas, omnemque habitum ad mulieres convertendo, hoc est matronalibus se vestibus induendo, matronis sive mulieribus nuptis accenserentur. Reliquae vero virgines in spem saecularium nuptiarum educatae, vix pueritiam transgressae vertunt capillum, et acu lasciviore comam sibi inserunt, crinibus a fronte divisis, apertam professae mulieritatem. Haec sunt Tertulliani ipsius verba in cap. 12 de vel. Virg. At cum cap. 11 dicat: Adspice nuptam illam tuam virginem et animum exspectatione, et carnem transfiguratione, nescio an huic loco tenebras addat, an illa verba hinc sint corrigenda. Si quis crinem transfigurare hic sumere velit pro memorata virginum lascivia in componendis, interserendis, ac dividendis crinibus, ostendat in hac periodo Tertullianum de virginibus Deo dicatis non loqui. MURAT.

Thereupon she transforms her hair. We have said that virgins transformed their hair when they had dedicated their chastity. Nor, I think, does Tertullian mean by this term that the hair was shorn; for he himself is the authority that it is shameful for virgins too to be shorn. "If it is shameful for a woman," he says, "to be shaven, so too for a virgin." He repeats the same in the book On the Veiling of Virgins, ch. 7. I am not unaware that in some regions it was customary for consecrated virgins to lay down their hair, especially in Syria and Egypt, as Jerome, letter 48 to Sabinianus, and other records testify. But I nowhere find that a custom of this kind prevailed in Africa, at least in the first three centuries of the Church. So I think that nothing else is meant here than the modest arrangement of the hair which virgins then began to keep when they dedicated themselves to Christ. And indeed it was the ancient custom for virgins to go about with their hair loose and free. But as soon as they bound themselves in marriage, their hair was gathered and arranged, so that they now passed to the gravity of matrons. It was fitting, then, that those who married the divine Bridegroom should show themselves wedded to God with their hair arranged, pressed together and transformed, and, by turning their whole dress to that of women, that is, by putting on the garments of matrons, should be counted among matrons or married women. "But the other virgins, brought up in hope of worldly marriages, scarcely past childhood turn their hair, and with a more wanton pin set their locks, parting the hair from the forehead, openly professing womanhood." These are Tertullian's own words in ch. 12 of On the Veiling of Virgins. But since in ch. 11 he says: "Look at that bride of yours, a virgin both in mind by expectation and in flesh by transformation", I do not know whether it adds darkness to this passage, or whether those words should be corrected from here. If anyone should wish to take "transform the hair" here for the aforesaid wantonness of virgins in arranging, interweaving and parting the hair, let him show that in this sentence Tertullian is not speaking of virgins dedicated to God. MURAT[ORI].

(j) of col 1188 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1188

(a) ‹asseveret› · printed under col 1189

Totum ergo asseveret. Verum de virginibus sacris hic agi, magis per ista persuadeor: sensus enim est: Si ex quo virginitatem Deo dicavit, crinium licentiam comprimere, et gravitatem in vestibus prae se ferre virgo debet, cur postea intecto capite in sacris hominum conventibus conspiciendam se praebet? Omnino igitur ostendat se Christo nuptam, et totam sacrae virginis modestiam servet, plene obumbrando virgineum caput, quod propter Deum abscondit. MURAT.

Let her then assert the whole. That consecrated virgins are treated here I am the more persuaded by these words: for the sense is: if from the time she dedicated her virginity to God a virgin must restrain licence in her hair and display gravity in her garments, why afterwards does she offer herself to be seen with uncovered head in the sacred assemblies of men? Let her, then, show herself altogether wedded to Christ, and keep the whole modesty of a consecrated virgin, fully overshadowing the virgin head which she has hidden for God's sake. MURAT[ORI].

(b) ‹denudas› · printed under col 1189

Quid denudas ante Deum? En quod Tertulliano minime ferendum videbatur. Sacratae Christo virgines non secus ac matronae velato capite in publico procedebant, in ecclesia vero nequaquam. Ab ostentationis culpa immunes non credit has virgines Tertullianus, quae veluti gloriabundae, se a divina gratia ad continentiae votum electas, in reliquarum virginum conspectu jactare propriam virtutem videbantur. Cumque id a se fieri quaedam responderent, ut exemplo suo alias ad sacrum virginitatis votum incitarent, ne hoc quidem ambitionis periculo carere Tertullianus ait. MURAT.

Why do you uncover before God? Here is what seemed to Tertullian not at all to be borne. Virgins consecrated to Christ went out in public with veiled head just like matrons, but in church by no means. Tertullian does not believe these virgins free from the fault of display, who, as if boasting that they had been chosen by divine grace for the vow of continence, seemed to vaunt their own virtue in the sight of the other virgins. And when some answered that they did this so as to rouse others by their example to the sacred vow of virginity, Tertullian says that not even this is free from the danger of ambition. MURAT[ORI].

(c) ‹bene› · printed under col 1189

Bene mentiris nuptam. Exploratum est, cunctas mulieres nuptas, ut Apostolo obtemperarent, tum in publicis locis, tum in sacris aedibus velo capita obduxisse. Proinde hoc nuptarum indicium erat. Cum virgines sacrae pro nuptis Christo haberi vellent, iisdem vestibus, ornatibus et velamentis in publico utebantur, quibus matronae ac nuptae mundo; in Ecclesia vero velum ad earum differentiam deponebant. Inquit igitur Tertullianus: Nemo miretur in tuam faciem, nemo mendacium tuum sentiat. Scilicet mendacium appellat, pium utique, se fingere nuptas, cum adhuc virgines essent. Si et in Ecclesia velo usae fuissent virgines, nemo eas a nuptis distinxisset; et bene solum se nuptas mentiri poterant virgines, si caput ubique velassent. MURAT.

You do well to feign yourself a bride. It is established that all married women, to obey the Apostle, covered their heads with a veil both in public places and in the sacred buildings. Hence this was the mark of married women. Since the consecrated virgins wished to be held as brides of Christ, they used in public the same garments, adornments and veils as matrons and women married to the world; but in church they laid aside the veil, to distinguish themselves from them. So Tertullian says: "Let no one wonder at your face, let no one perceive your pretence." That is, he calls it a pretence, a pious one certainly, that they feigned themselves married when they were still virgins. If the virgins had used the veil in church too, no one would have distinguished them from married women; and the virgins could feign themselves married well only if they had veiled their heads everywhere. MURAT[ORI].

(d) ‹mentiri› · printed under col 1189 and continued under col 1190

Imo mentiri non videris. Se corrigit Tertullianus, quod a sacris virginibus nuptias simulari dixisset: nam revera Christo nupsere, illique suum corpus dicavere, ideoque ad instar nuptarum velato capite divinis officiis interesse debebant. Eadem habet cap. 16, de Virg. velandis. Adimple, inquit, habitum mulieris, ut statum virginitatis serves. Mentire aliquid ex his, quae intus sunt, ut soli Deo exhibeas veritatem. Quanquam non mentiris nuptam; nupsisti enim Christo, illi tradidisti carnem tuam, illi sponsasti maturitatem tuam. Incede secundum sponsi tui voluntatem. Christus est, qui et alienas sponsas, et maritatas velari jubet: utique multo magis suas. Quare nullus dubito, quin Tertullianus hic de virginibus, non omnibus, sed Christo tantum dicatis loquatur ab iis verbis: Sed aliqua se Deo vovit, usque ad sequentia: Sed non putet. MURAT.

Indeed you do not seem to feign. Tertullian corrects himself for having said that marriage was feigned by the consecrated virgins: for in truth they married Christ and dedicated their body to Him, and so they ought to attend the divine offices with veiled head like married women. He has the same in ch. 16 of On the Veiling of Virgins: "Fill out the dress of a woman," he says, "so as to keep the state of a virgin. Feign something of what is outward, so as to show the truth to God alone. And yet you do not feign yourself a bride; for you have married Christ, you have handed over your flesh to Him, you have betrothed your maturity to Him. Walk according to the will of your Bridegroom. It is Christ Who commands even other men's brides and wives to be veiled: much more certainly His own." So I have no doubt that Tertullian here speaks of virgins, not all, but only those dedicated to Christ, from the words "But one who has vowed herself to God" as far as the following, "But let not…". MURAT[ORI].

(d) of col 1189 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1189

(1) ‹Multi› · printed under cols 1189–1190 (LECTIONES VARIANTES, one note across both columns)

Depravatum esse hunc locum jam Muratorius intellexit, nec satis restitui, si scriberetur: uniuscujusque et multae. A. Neander emendavit: Institutionem unusquisque.

Muratori already understood that this passage is corrupt, and that it is not sufficiently restored if one were to write "uniuscujusque" and "multae". A. Neander emended: "Institutionem unusquisque".

(e) ‹non› · printed under col 1190

Sed non putet. Latere mendum in his verbis sentio, sed reparare non audeo. Fortasse legendum uniuscujusque. Sensus autem est; non esse virginum, quae antecesserunt, consuetudinem pro ratione adducendam. MURAT.

But let not [anyone] think. I sense that an error lurks in these words, but I do not dare to repair it. Perhaps "uniuscujusque" should be read. The sense is: the custom of the virgins who went before is not to be adduced as a reason. MURAT[ORI].

(f) ‹Multi› · printed under col 1190

Multi alienae consuetudini. Et hic verba corrupta existimo. Legere mallem multae. Inquit autem, complures virgines, ne in templo velari compellerentur, praecedentium virginum consuetudine sese tueri, satis se prudentes arbitratae, si quod illae constanter fecerunt, et ipsae facerent. MURAT.

Many, to another's custom. Here too I think the words are corrupt. I would rather read "multae". He says that very many virgins, so as not to be compelled to be veiled in church, protected themselves by the custom of the virgins who went before, thinking themselves prudent enough if they themselves did what those had constantly done. MURAT[ORI].

(g) ‹voluntarias› · printed under col 1190

Certe voluntarias. Ita ego interpretarer. Velari foeminas nuptiis saeculi, aut Christi addictas, omnino necessarium est. At quae virginitatem voluntariam colunt, donec maritum sibi comparent, his prorsus interdicenda non est capitis nuditas, sed monendae tantum ut meliora disciplinae consilia amplectantur, quamvis se virgines interdum mentiantur. Mendosum codicem explicare per solas conjecturas cogimur. MURAT.

Certainly those who are voluntary. So I would interpret it. It is altogether necessary that women bound to marriages of the world, or of Christ, be veiled. But those who keep a voluntary virginity until they get themselves a husband are not to be forbidden bareness of the head outright, but only admonished to embrace the better counsels of discipline, although they sometimes feign themselves virgins. We are forced to explain a faulty codex by conjectures alone. MURAT[ORI].

(h) ‹illis› · printed under col 1190

De illis tamen. Nihilominus, quae virgines voluntariae dicuntur, adhuc velandas esse, Tertullianus arbitratur ex eo die, quo viris desponsae fuerunt, seque ad futuras nuptias parare coeperunt. Has a vere nuptis nihil differre contendit. Similia habet cap. 11 de Virg. vel. Sponsalia vero a Christianis dato osculo et dextera conjuncta peragi solita diximus. Caeterum quae in isto capite afferuntur compendiose, ea fusius postea ab ipso Tertulliano pertractata fuere in saepe memorato libro de Virginibus velandis. MURAT.

Yet concerning those. Nevertheless Tertullian holds that those who are called voluntary virgins must still be veiled from the day on which they were betrothed to men and began to prepare themselves for their future marriage. He contends that these differ in nothing from those truly married. He has similar things in ch. 11 of On the Veiling of Virgins. We have said that betrothals were customarily performed by Christians with a kiss given and right hands joined. For the rest, what is brought forward briefly in this chapter was afterwards treated more fully by Tertullian himself in the often-mentioned book On the Veiling of Virgins. MURAT[ORI].

(1) ‹CAPUT XXIII› · printed under col 1191 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XVIII ed. Leop.

Ch. 18, Leopold's edition.

(a) ‹CAPUT XXIII› · printed under col 1191

CAP. XXIII.—Tit. cod. Murat.: De genu ponendo.

CH. XXIII. — Title in Muratori's codex: On kneeling.

(b) ‹sabbato› · printed under col 1191

Sabbato abstinent genibus. Antiquissimus est ritus genua flectendi in oratione. Exempla habemus in lib. I Regum, cap. VIII, n. 54, in Evang. Lucae, cap. XXII, n. 41, in Act. apost., c. VII, n. 60, et c. XX, n. 36, et cap. XXI, n. 5. Quin Eusebius Caesariensis hunc morem Christianorum proprium appellat, Hist. Eccles., lib. V, cap. 5, ubi Christianos milites orasse ait γόνυ θέντας ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν κατὰ τὸ οἰκεῖον τοῖς χριστιανοῖς τῶν εὐχῶν ἔθος: genu in terram usque flectentes secundum consuetudinem Christianis in precando propriam. Quidam vero a genu flectendo sabbato abstinebant, cum Ecclesiae reliquae contrarium usum tuerentur. In posteriorum sententia erat Tertullianus, qui idcirco hujusmodi ritus differentiam tolli cupit. Et certe sublatam arbitror, cum ex antiquis neminem offendam, qui sabbato genua flectere prohibeat. Graecis tamen recentioribus eamdem placuisse opinionem, auctor est Joannes Monachus in canonario subjecto libris Morini de Poenit. Ibi haec habentur: τὰς πάσας σαββατοκυριακὰς, καὶ ἑορτὰς δεσποτικὰς, καὶ δωδεκαήμερον, ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ τὰς ἀπὸ τοῦ Πάσχα ἡμέρας ἕως τῶν ἁγίων πάντων μὴ γονυκλινεῖν ἐν ταῖς εὐχαῖς. Omnibus autem sabbatis, et diebus dominicis, et dodecahemero, similiter et diebus a Paschate usque ad festum omnium sanctorum in orationibus genua flectere non licet. In Juris etiam graeco-romani lib. III, ubi de Luca patriarcha, num. 9, legitur: οἱ ἀποστολικοὶ κανόνες κολάζουσι τὸν ἐν τῷ τυχόντι σαββάτῳ, ἢ τῇ κυριακῇ γονυκλινοῦντα, ἢ νηστεύοντα. Apostolici canones eum puniunt, qui quovis sabbato, vel dominico die, genu flectit, vel jejunat. Quanquam graeculus hic fallatur (non enim in Apostolorum canonibus quid tale reperitur), nihilominus palam fit, in Oriente multis post Tertullianum saeculis hujusmodi consuetudinem iterum invaluisse. MURAT.

They abstain from kneeling on the sabbath. The rite of bending the knees in prayer is most ancient. We have examples in 1 Samuel [so printed, "lib. I Regum"; the passage is Solomon's prayer, 1 Kgs.] ch. 8, n. 54, in the Gospel of Luke ch. 22, n. 41, in the Acts of the Apostles ch. 7, n. 60, and ch. 20, n. 36, and ch. 21, n. 5. Indeed Eusebius of Caesarea calls this custom proper to Christians, Church History bk. 5, ch. 5, where he says that the Christian soldiers prayed "setting the knee on the ground, according to the custom of prayers proper to Christians": bending the knee right to the ground according to the custom proper to Christians in praying. But some abstained from kneeling on the sabbath, while the other Churches maintained the contrary practice. Tertullian was of the latter's opinion, and therefore wishes this difference of rite to be removed. And I certainly think it was removed, since I meet no one among the ancients who forbids kneeling on the sabbath. Yet that the same opinion pleased the more recent Greeks, John the Monk is the authority, in the canonary appended to Morin's books On Penance. There is found this: "On all Saturdays and Sundays, and the feasts of the Lord, and the twelve days, and likewise on the days from Pascha to All Saints, not to kneel in prayers." But on all sabbaths and Lord's days, and in the twelve days, and likewise on the days from Pascha to the feast of All Saints, it is not permitted to bend the knees in prayers. In the Graeco-Roman Law too, bk. 3, on the patriarch Luke, n. 9, is read: "The apostolic canons punish one who kneels or fasts on any Saturday or on the Lord's day." The apostolic canons punish him who on any sabbath or on the Lord's day kneels or fasts. Although this little Greek is mistaken (for nothing of the kind is found in the canons of the Apostles), nevertheless it becomes plain that in the East, many centuries after Tertullian, a custom of this kind prevailed again. MURAT[ORI].

(c) ‹solo› · printed under col 1191 and continued under col 1192

Solo die dominico. In libro quoque de Cor. mil. eadem affirmantur, veluti e traditionis penu atque auctoritate accepta. Die, inquit, dominico jejunium nefas ducimus, vel de geniculis adorare. Eadem immunitate a die Paschae in Pentecostem usque gaudemus. Communis autem inter Christianos tum erat hic ritus; quare cum nonnulli ab eo descivissent, placuit Patribus concilii nicaeni primi rem statuere in can. ult., ne Ecclesiae non eo dissentirent. De intermittenda genuflexione tum singulis diebus dominicis, tum diebus a Paschate ad Pentecostem, mentionem faciunt S. Hilarius, Prologo in Psalt., S. Hieronymus, cap. 4, contra Luciferianos, auctor Quaest. ad orthodoxos, inter opera S. Justini, quaest. 113, S. Basilius, cap. 17, lib. de Spir. Sancto, S. Augustinus, epist. 119, Cassianus, Germanus Constantinopol., Balsamon, Zonaras, aliique non pauci. MURAT.

On the Lord's day alone. In the book On the Soldier's Crown too the same things are affirmed, as received from the store and authority of tradition. "On the Lord's day," he says, "we count it wrong to fast, or to worship on our knees. We rejoice in the same exemption from the day of Pascha to Pentecost." This rite was then common among Christians; so, since some had departed from it, the Fathers of the first council of Nicaea resolved to settle the matter in the last canon, so that the Churches should not [printed "non eo"] disagree. Of the omission of kneeling both on every Lord's day and on the days from Pascha to Pentecost mention is made by Saint Hilary, Prologue to the Psalter, Saint Jerome, Against the Luciferians ch. 4, the author of the Questions to the Orthodox among the works of Saint Justin, question 113, Saint Basil, On the Holy Spirit ch. 17, Saint Augustine, letter 119, Cassian, Germanus of Constantinople, Balsamon, Zonaras, and not a few others. MURAT[ORI].

(d) ‹anxietatis› · printed under col 1192

Sed omni anxietatis habitu. Desiderari hic verbum abstinere mihi videtur. Cum genu flectere, et jejunare, moestitiam atque poenitentiam spirarent, dominico die, nempe exultationis die, abstinendum ab eo more fuit. MURAT.

But from every posture of anxiety. The verb "to abstain" seems to me to be wanting here. Since kneeling and fasting breathed sadness and penitence, on the Lord's day, the day of exultation, one had to abstain from that custom. MURAT[ORI].

(e) ‹exultationis› · printed under col 1192

Quae eadem exultationis solemnitatem dispungimur. Diximus et in Pentecoste genua non flexisse Christianos. Nescio an legendum: quae eadem exultationis solemnitas est, dispungimus. In lib. de Patientia expunxit pro praestitit usurpatum est a Tertulliano; et dispuncta est pro absoluta cap. 5 de Carne Christi; et expunget pro perficiet in lib. de Resurr. carnis. In lib. etiam adversus Judaeos: Itaque, ait, dispungamus ordinem coeptum, hoc est absolvamus. Igitur tantumdem dispungimus hoc loco nil aliud significet, quam praestamus et absolvimus. MURAT.

Which we mark off with the same solemnity of exultation. We have said that Christians did not kneel at Pentecost either. I wonder whether one should read: "which is the same solemnity of exultation, we mark off [so]". In the book On Patience, expunxit is used by Tertullian for "performed"; and dispuncta est for "completed" in On the Flesh of Christ ch. 5; and expunget for "will perfect" in the book On the Resurrection of the Flesh. In the book Against the Jews too: "So," he says, "let us complete [dispungamus] the order we began", that is, let us finish it. So in this place "we perform [dispungimus] just as much" would mean nothing else than "we perform and complete". MURAT[ORI].

(f) ‹prima› · printed under col 1192

Vel prima saltem oratione. Celebres sunt apud antiquos ἑωθιναὶ seu matutinae preces. De iis consule Constitu. apostol. lib. VIII, cap. 34, Chrysostomum, homil. in ps. CIX, et alibi, ac Basilium, in Regulis fusius disputatis, interrog. 37, ut alios omittam. MUR.

At least at the first prayer. The ἑωθιναί, or morning prayers, are celebrated among the ancients. On them consult the Apostolic Constitutions bk. 8, ch. 34, Chrysostom, homily on Psalm 109, and elsewhere, and Basil in the Longer Rules, question 37, to pass over others. MUR[ATORI].

(c) of col 1191 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1191; (d), (e), (f) calls in col 1191, printed under col 1192, set in n1191

(2) ‹CAPUT XXIV› · printed under col 1191 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XIX ed. Leop.

Ch. 19, Leopold's edition.

(3) ‹CAPUT XXV› · printed under col 1192 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XX ed. Leop.

Ch. 20, Leopold's edition.

(g) ‹tempore› · printed under col 1192

Omni in tempore. Alludit ad cap. II Epist. ad Timoth., ubi inquit Paulus: Volo ergo viros orare in omni loco. At de tempore nullam habet mentionem. MURAT.

At every time. He alludes to ch. 2 of the Epistle to Timothy, where Paul says: I will, then, that men pray in every place. But of time he makes no mention. MURAT[ORI].

(h) ‹CAPUT XXIV› · printed under col 1192

CAP. XXIV. — Tit. cod. Murat. De Loco.

CH. XXIV. — Title in Muratori's codex: On Place.

(i) ‹apud› · printed under col 1192

Apud Paulum. Legendum videretur aut a Paulo. Respicit Act. apost. c. XXVII, n. 35. Paulus enim cum esset in navi, sumens panem, gratias egit Deo in conspectu omnium, et cum fregisset, coepit manducare. MURAT.

In the case of Paul. It would seem one should read "or by Paul". He looks to Acts of the Apostles ch. 27, n. 35. For Paul, when he was on the ship, taking bread, gave thanks to God in the sight of all, and when he had broken it, began to eat. MURAT[ORI].

(j) ‹CAPUT XXV› · printed under col 1192

Tit. cod. Murat.: De Tempore.

Title in Muratori's codex: On Time.

(k) ‹tertia› · printed under col 1192 and continued at the head of the notes under col 1193 (p. 641)

CAP. XXV.—Tertia, sexta, nona. Tempora, quibus orationi vacandum esset, alia alii constituerunt. Constitutionum apostolicarum auctor, l. VII, c. 34, sexies quotidie orandum ait, nempe circiter auroram, hora tertia, sexta, nona, vespere, et circiter gallicinium. Chrysostomus, homilia in psal. CIX, sexies itidem orandum esse docet, sed non eadem horarum divisione utitur. S. Basilius septies in die preces ad Deum fundendas esse statuit. Clemens vero Alexandrinus, Strom. lib. VII, hujusmodi horarum divisionem laudat quidem, sed alia subdit non contemnenda. Nonnulli, inquit, certas et definitas horas constituunt precationi, ut verbi caussa tertiam, sextam, nonam. At is, qui est cognitione praeditus, per totam orat vitam, dum per preces suas cum Deo versari studet. Tertullianus autem alibi, in libro nempe de Jejun., cap. 10, tertiam, sextam et nonam orationi destinatas repetit, suamque sententiam iisdem confirmat exemplis. In synagoga quoque ter die quolibet precibus dari operam auctor est, Maimonides, in lib. de Prec. et Benedict. sacerdot., cap. 1. Idemque et in Ecclesia Dei ter solitum fieri testatur S. Cyprianus, in lib. de Orat. et S. Hieronymus, in epist. ad Laetam et Demetriadem. MURAT.

CH. XXV. — The third, the sixth, the ninth. Different writers fixed different times to be given to prayer. The author of the Apostolic Constitutions, bk. 7, ch. 34, says one must pray six times daily, namely about dawn, at the third hour, the sixth, the ninth, in the evening, and about cockcrow. Chrysostom, in the homily on Psalm 109, likewise teaches that one must pray six times, but does not use the same division of the hours. Saint Basil laid down that prayers should be poured out to God seven times in the day. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata bk. 7, praises indeed a division of the hours of this kind, but adds other things not to be despised. "Some," he says, "fix certain and definite hours for prayer, as for example the third, the sixth, the ninth. But he who is endowed with knowledge prays through his whole life, while he strives by his prayers to be in converse with God." Tertullian elsewhere, namely in the book On Fasting, ch. 10, repeats that the third, sixth and ninth are appointed for prayer, and confirms his view by the same examples. That in the synagogue too prayer was attended to three times on every day, Maimonides is the authority, in the book On the Prayers and Blessings of the Priests, ch. 1. And Saint Cyprian, in the book On the Lord's Prayer, and Saint Jerome, in the letters to Laeta and Demetrias, testify that the same was customarily done three times in the Church of God. MURAT[ORI].

(k) of col 1192 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1192

(1) ‹CAPUT XXVI› · printed under col 1193 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XXI. ed. Leop.

Ch. 21, Leopold's edition.

(2) ‹exemptis› · printed under col 1193 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Scribend. exceptus. Leop.

One should write "exceptus": Leopold.

(a) ‹Exceptis› · printed under col 1193

Exceptis utique legitimis orationibus. Preces matutinas, ac vespertinas a lege praescriptas ait. De iis loquitur Chrysostomus, hom. 22. in Epist. ad Hebr. Vide et Cyprianum, cap. ult. de Orat., ubi mane et recedente sole necessario orandum ait. MURAT.

Besides, of course, the lawful prayers. He means the morning and evening prayers prescribed by law. Chrysostom speaks of them, homily 22 on the Epistle to the Hebrews. See also Cyprian, On the Lord's Prayer, last chapter, where he says one must of necessity pray in the morning and at the going down of the sun. MURAT[ORI].

(b) ‹CAPUT XXVI› · printed under col 1193

Tit. cod. Murat.: De fratrum digressu.

Title in Muratori's codex: On the departure of brethren.

(c) ‹fratrem› · printed under col 1193

CAP. XXVI. — Vidisti, inquit, fratrem. Haec e sacris Scripturis citari videntur: locum vero innuere nescio. Quod patet, respicit ad c. XIII, n. 2, Epist. ad Haebreos, ubi Apostolus hospitalitatem commendans ait, interdum Angelos hospitio recipi. Sunt ejus verba: Et hospitalitatem nolite oblivisci, per hanc enim latuerunt (placuerunt haben talii) quidam, Angelis hospitio receptis. Alludit autem ad Angelos, qui se hospites Abrahamo et Lot obtulerunt. Hinc S. Ambrosius, in lib. de Abraham, cap. 5: Qui scis, inquit, an Deum suscipias, quem hospitem putas? Abraham dum peregrinantibus defert hospitium, Deum atque Angelos ejus suscepit hospitio. Quamvis et cum hospitem suscipis, Deum suscipis, etc. Idem ab eo repetitur, lib. II, cap. 21, de Officiis. At in verbis Tertulliani aliquid fortasse desideratur. MURAT.

CH. XXVI. — "You have seen," it says, "a brother." These words seem to be quoted from the sacred Scriptures, but I do not know how to point to the place. What is clear [is that] he looks to ch. 13, n. 2, of the Epistle to the Hebrews, where the Apostle, commending hospitality, says that angels are sometimes received as guests. His words are: And do not forget hospitality, for through it some have been hidden (others have "have pleased"), angels having been received as guests. He alludes to the angels who presented themselves as guests to Abraham and Lot. Hence Saint Ambrose, in the book On Abraham, ch. 5: "How do you know," he says, "whether you are receiving God, whom you think a guest? Abraham, while he offered hospitality to travellers, received God and His angels as guests. Although even when you receive a guest, you receive God," etc. The same is repeated by him in On Duties bk. 2, ch. 21. But in Tertullian's words something is perhaps missing. MURAT[ORI].

(3) ‹CAPUT XXVII› · printed under col 1194 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XXII. Leop.

Ch. 22, Leopold.

(4) ‹CAPUT XXVIII› · printed under col 1194 (LECTIONES VARIANTES)

Cap. XXIII. Leop.

Ch. 23, Leopold.

(d) ‹CAPUT XXVII› · printed under col 1193

Tit. cod. Murat.: De subjungendo psalmo.

Title in Muratori's codex: On adding a psalm.

(e) ‹Alleluia› · printed under col 1193 and continued under col 1194

CAP. XXVII.— In orationibus Alleluia. De hujus vocis antiquitate ac repetito usu in precibus sacris jam alii satis egere, deque illa mentionem faciunt S. Augustinus, in psal. CVI et CX, S. Ambrosius, in Apologia pro Davide, Sozomenus, lib. VII, c. 15 et 19, S. Paulinus, S. Hieronymus, Isidorus, Sidonius et alii. A Judaeis ad Christianos transiit: est enim in davidicis psalmis frequens, eamque olim potissimum in Ecclesia hierosolymitana usurpatam discimus a S. Gregorio, lib. II, epist. 63. MURAT.

CH. XXVII. — In their prayers the Alleluia. Of the antiquity of this word and its repeated use in sacred prayers others have already treated enough, and Saint Augustine mentions it, on Psalms 106 and 110, Saint Ambrose in the Apology for David, Sozomen bk. 7, chs. 15 and 19, Saint Paulinus, Saint Jerome, Isidore, Sidonius and others. It passed from the Jews to the Christians: for it is frequent in the psalms of David, and we learn from Saint Gregory, bk. 2, letter 63, that it was once used above all in the Church of Jerusalem. MURAT[ORI].

(f) ‹quorum› · printed under col 1194

Quorum clausulis respondeant. Legentium eruditioni facerem injuriam, si post doctissimum summeque pium cardinalem Bonam de antiquissimo psallendi, ac davidicos psalmos aut recitandi, aut canendi usu loqui vellem. Ejus librum de Psalmodia consulat quisquis saturari cupit. Hic transiens animadverto, quam vetustus ille etiam sit ritus, quo psalmi alternis in choro, aliisque ecclesiasticis supplicationibus recitantur. MURAT.

To whose closing lines they may respond. I should do an injury to the learning of my readers if, after the most learned and supremely pious Cardinal Bona, I wished to speak of the most ancient practice of psalmody, and of reciting or singing the psalms of David. Let whoever wishes to be sated consult his book On Psalmody. Here in passing I note how ancient is that rite too, by which the psalms are recited alternately in choir and in the other supplications of the Church. MURAT[ORI].

(g) ‹saturatam› · printed under col 1194

Saturatam orationem. Siculi jejuna oratio, alio tamen sensu, a Cicerone dicta est, ita et saturata a Tertulliano dicitur, quae preces cum recitatione psalmorum conjungit. Haec est optima, haec est pinguis hostia, quam ad aram divinam perducimus. MURAT.

An enriched prayer. Just as a "fasting" speech was spoken of by Cicero, though in another sense, so Tertullian calls "sated" the prayer which joins petitions with the recitation of psalms. This is the best, this is the fat victim which we lead to the divine altar. MURAT[ORI].

(h) ‹corde› · printed under col 1194

CAP. XXVIII.— De toto corde devotam. Orationi, quam hostiam spiritalem appellat, singula tribuit, quae victimis carneis conveniebant, nimirum ut de toto corde voveatur Deo, ut sit pasta, curata, integra, munda, coronata. MURAT.

CH. XXVIII. — Devoted from the whole heart. To prayer, which he calls a spiritual victim, he attributes each of the things that suited fleshly victims: namely that it be vowed to God from the whole heart, that it be fed, tended, entire, clean, crowned. MURAT[ORI].

(i) ‹agape› · printed under col 1194 and continued under col 1195 (p. 642)

Agape coronatam. Etsi agaparum nomine convivia illa fere semper significari soleant, quae a primis christianis in sacro conventu celebrari solebant in pauperum solatium, in mutuae dilectionis communionem: interdum tamen ipsam Eucharistiam, atque incruentum Sacrificium ea voce significarunt Patres. Neque vero ab agapis olim disjungebatur Dominici Corporis et Sanguinis ministratio. Priore sensu intellexisse videtur Tertullianus, in Apologia, cap. 39: Coena nostra, inquit, de nomine rationem sui ostendit. Vocatur enim ἀγάπη, id quod dilectio penes Graecos est. In lib. etiam ad Martyres, cap. 2, agapen fratrum vocat. Hinc autem constat, post orationem celebrari solitam fuisse agapen, cum haec orationis corona dicatur. De agapis sublatis disquisitionem subdidi Carminibus anedoctis S. Gregorii Nazianzeni. MURAT.

Crowned with agape. Although by the name of agapes those banquets are almost always signified which used to be celebrated by the first Christians in the sacred assembly for the comfort of the poor and for the communion of mutual love, yet the Fathers sometimes signified by that word the Eucharist itself and the unbloody Sacrifice. Nor indeed was the ministration of the Lord's Body and Blood once separated from the agapes. Tertullian seems to have understood it in the former sense in the Apology, ch. 39: "Our supper," he says, "shows its character by its name. For it is called ἀγάπη, which is love among the Greeks." In the book To the Martyrs too, ch. 2, he calls it the agape of the brethren. Hence it is certain that the agape used to be celebrated after prayer, since it is called the crown of prayer. On the abolition of the agapes I have appended a disquisition to the unpublished Poems [printed "anedoctis"] of Saint Gregory Nazianzen. MURAT[ORI].

(i) of col 1194 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1194

(a) ‹omnia› · printed under col 1195

Omnia nobis impetraturam. Cum superioribus conjungenda erant haec verba. Nempe orationem hostiam spiritalem deducere ad Dei altare debemus, omnia nobis a Deo impetraturam. MURAT.

That will obtain all things for us. These words were to be joined with what precedes. Namely: we ought to lead prayer, the spiritual victim, up to the altar of God, [prayer] that will obtain all things for us from God. MURAT[ORI].

(b) ‹CAPUT ULTIMUM› · printed under col 1195

CAP. ULT. — Tit. cod. Murat.: De vi et affectu orationis. Et affectu. Scribendum reor effectu, ita enim quae sequuntur persuadent. MURAT.

LAST CH. — Title in Muratori's codex: On the power and disposition of prayer. "And disposition": I think one should write "effectu" [effect], for what follows so persuades. MURAT[ORI].

(c) ‹amplius› · printed under col 1195

Caeterum quanto amplius, etc. Vim et efficaciam christianae orationis commendans quorumdam objectiones praevertere videtur, qui miracula per orationem fieri non conspiciebant, qualia in veteri lege facta accepimus. Respondet igitur, non ea quidem ipsa prodigia, sed alia non minora per orationem Christianis praestari. Legendum quinimo arbitror: Non roris Angelum duntaxat, etc., sed etiam patientes, etc., ut sit sensus: Non ea tantum Christianorum precibus miracula impetrantur, quae synagoga impetravit; sed alia etiam majora, cum longe majus prodigium sit patienter ferre tormenta, quae sentiuntur, quam a tormentis liberari. Cui interpretationi consentire videntur tum superiora, tum subsequentia verba atque exempla. Utcumque tamen e vitioso codice conjicere possimus, certum est a Tertulliano eximia commemorari prodigia, quae per Christianos orantes e coelo impetrabantur. MURAT.

But how much more widely, etc. Commending the power and efficacy of Christian prayer, he seems to forestall the objections of some who did not see miracles worked through prayer such as we have learned were done under the old law. So he answers that not those same prodigies, but others no less great, are granted to Christians through prayer. Indeed I think one should read: "Not only an angel of dew, etc., but also the suffering," etc., so that the sense is: not only those miracles are obtained by the prayers of Christians which the synagogue obtained, but also other, greater ones, since it is a far greater prodigy to bear patiently the torments that are felt than to be freed from torments. Both the preceding and the following words and examples seem to agree with this interpretation. However we may conjecture from a faulty codex, it is certain that Tertullian recalls outstanding prodigies which were obtained from heaven through Christians at prayer. MURAT[ORI].

(d) ‹roris› · printed under col 1195 and continued under col 1196

Non roris Angelum. Eum Angelum, qui tres pueros, veluti roscido imbre perfusos, in fornace servavit, roris Angelum appellat. Eodem scilicet modo aliis Angelis ab aliqua re gesta, aut aliquo munere nomen imposuit. Angelum orationis supra nominavit; Angelos matrimonio praepositos memorat lib. II, ad Uxor., cap. ultimo; Angelum baptismi, lib. de Bapt., cap. 5 et 6, et Angelum, cui hominis in utero formandi est cura, nominat l. de Anima, c. 37. MURAT.

Not an angel of dew. He calls the angel of dew that angel who preserved the three youths in the furnace, as if drenched with a dewy shower. In the same way, that is, he has given other angels a name from some deed or some office. Above he named the angel of prayer; he mentions the angels set over marriage in To His Wife bk. 2, last chapter; he names the angel of baptism, On Baptism chs. 5 and 6, and the angel who has the care of forming man in the womb, On the Soul ch. 37. MURAT[ORI].

(e) ‹utilia› · printed under col 1196

Imbrium utilia prohibebat. Quando hic mendum non lateat, explicare possumus, orationem in caussa fuisse, ne utiles imbres e coelo in hostium arva fluerent. MURAT.

It withheld the benefits of the rains. If no error lurks here, we can explain that prayer was the cause of useful rains not flowing from heaven onto the fields of enemies. MURAT[ORI].

(d) of col 1195 continued at the head of the notes under this column, set in n1195; (e) call in col 1195, printed under col 1196, set in n1195

(f) ‹adversus› · printed under col 1196

Adversus hominem, etc. Haec revera de diabolo dicenda erant, qui semper circuit quaerens quem devoret. Sed quo jure hominem Tertullianus appellasset? De ethnicis ergo principibus loqui mihi videtur auctor, qui nihil non curabant, atque observabant, ut Christianorum reipublicae nocerent. MURAT.

Against the man, etc. This should really have been said of the devil, who always goes about seeking whom he may devour. But by what right would Tertullian have called him a man? So the author seems to me to speak of the heathen rulers, who left nothing untried and watched everything so as to harm the commonwealth of the Christians. MURAT[ORI].

(g) ‹nocte› · printed under col 1196

Nocte vigiliae meminerimus. Actum agerem, si de vigiliarum in Ecclesia Dei antiquitate mandare litteris aliquid vellem. Ad eam tamen luculentius probandam non parum conferet hic Tertulliani locus. Eorum autem confidentiam praeterire non possum, qui vigiliarum institutionem ex necessitate factam, ac servatam tribus primis Ecclesiae saeculis scribunt; cum enim (aiunt illi) convenire interdum Christiani non possent prae paganorum timore, hinc factum est ut noctu conventum celebrarent, vigilantes in oratione et in laudibus divinis. At quid evidentius quam et diurno tempore ad Ecclesiam coiisse Christianos vel ipsis tribus a Christo nato saeculis! Id satis probant quae de stationibus breviter ego, fusius alii, annotarunt. MURAT.

By night let us remember the vigil. I should be doing what has been done if I wished to commit to writing anything about the antiquity of vigils in the Church of God. Yet this passage of Tertullian will contribute not a little to proving it more clearly. But I cannot pass over the assurance of those who write that the institution of vigils arose from necessity and was kept in the first three centuries of the Church; for since, they say, Christians sometimes could not come together for fear of the pagans, it came about that they held their assembly by night, keeping vigil in prayer and in the divine praises. But what is more evident than that Christians came together to church in the daytime too, even in the very three centuries after the birth of Christ! What I briefly, and others more fully, have noted about the stations proves this sufficiently. MURAT[ORI].

(h) ‹otiosi› · printed under col 1196

Non otiosi ore. Scribendum est non otioso, aut non otiosae. MURAT.

Not idle, with mouth. One should write "non otioso" or "non otiosae". MURAT[ORI].

(i) ‹vibrantes› · printed under col 1196

Vibrantes. Si quidem ita scripserit Tertullianus, hoc verbum explicarem hac ratione: conantes spiritu suo ora ad laudandum Deum atque orandum movere. MURAT.

Quivering. If indeed Tertullian wrote so, I would explain this word in this way: striving with their breath to move their mouths to praise and pray to God. MURAT[ORI].