Firmilianus episcopus Caesareae Cappadociae, Epistola ad Cyprianum contra epistolam Stephani

(printed under page 652)

(21) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1201

Fratri autem MR. Mich. Goul.

"But to the brother": MR., Mich., Goul.

(printed under page 652)

(22) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1201

Deo maximas Ar.

"to God the greatest [thanks]": Ar.

([23]) ‹anchor: in eadem domo› · call in col 1202 Una atque eadem Goul.

"One and the same": Goul. [the variant's numeral is not visible on the scan; the call 23 stands in the text before "domo"]

(printed under page 652)

(59) ‹anchor: EPISTOLA FIRMILIANI› · call in col 1201

Hanc epistolam, quam primus protulit Morellius, habebant etiam ii qui Romae praefuerunt editioni operum sancti Cypriani in officina Pauli Manutii. Illi autem, ut ait Latinus Latinius, non probaverunt uti e tenebris proferretur; hujusque consilii auctorem se et suasorem fuisse ipse testatur ingenue, cum majorum exempla secutum, tum hominis, id est Firmiliani, cujus ea epistola est, petulantiam detestatum. Postea Pamelius, qui illam repererat in sex antiquis codicibus, eam recudit, innuens tamen, quo erat in rempublicam chistianam et ecclesiasticam affectu, se illam omissurum fuisse, quod paulo vehementius et acerbius quam episcopum deceat scripta sit, nisi jam a Morellio fuisset edita. Scilicet Romanos et Pamelium commoverunt liber Firmiliani stylus et excandescentia adversus papam Stephanum diverse ab eo sentientem. At, si attente considerassent quanti et quam vehementes soleant esse affectus cum agitur de causa religionis et fidei, considerassent etiam quam vehemens et acerbus fuerat Stephanus scribens adversus Cyprianum profecto hanc excandescentiam condonassent Firmiliano, neque propterea tenebris damnandum esse putassent illustre hoc antiquitatis ecclesiasticae monumentum, in quo sane bene multa sunt magni momenti quibus, hodie careremus, cum grandi rerum nostrarum dispendio, ut in simili argumento censuit Sirmondus edens in lucem libellum precum Marcellini et Faustini adversus papam Damasum. Neque illa Romanorum aut Pamelii cura impedivisset in hac luce litterarum quin epistola illa prodiret in publicum. Cum enim certum sit illam ex veteri libro editum fuisse a Morellio, exstiterit etiam in sex codicibus Pamelio visis, in iis in quibus inventa est a Latinio, in septem quibus usi sunt Angli in sua editione, in decem cum quibus ego contuli opera sancti Cypriani, manifestum est illam non potuisse semper latere, etiamsi Morellius non edidisset. Codices autem cum quibus illam contuli sunt, unus Remigianus, duo Compendienses, duo Victorini, unus Pithoeanus, unus monasterii Beccensis, Laeciensis, Bigotianus et unus meus. Assentior autem Pamelio et Rigalio, existimantibus illam graece scriptam fuisse a Firmiliano, versam autem Latine a sancto Cypriano. Epistola ergo Firmiliani inventa est in viginti sex codicibus manuscriptis. BALUZ.

This letter, which Morel was the first to bring out, was also in the hands of those who at Rome had charge of the edition of the works of Saint Cyprian at the press of Paolo Manuzio. But they, as Latino Latini says, did not approve of its being brought out of the darkness; and he himself candidly testifies that he was the author and urger of this counsel, both following the example of our forebears and detesting the insolence of the man, that is, of Firmilian, whose letter it is. Afterwards Pamelius, who had found it in six ancient manuscripts, printed it again, hinting nevertheless, from the affection he bore to the Christian and ecclesiastical commonwealth, that he would have left it out, because it is written somewhat more vehemently and bitterly than befits a bishop, had it not already been published by Morel. Evidently what disturbed the Romans and Pamelius was Firmilian's free style and his heat against Pope Stephen, who thought differently from him. But had they considered attentively how great and how vehement the feelings commonly are when the cause of religion and faith is at stake, and considered too how vehement and bitter Stephen had been in writing against Cyprian, they would surely have pardoned Firmilian this heat, and would not on that account have thought this illustrious monument of church antiquity worth condemning to darkness, a monument in which there are a great many things of great moment which today we should lack, to the great loss of our cause, as Sirmond judged in a similar matter when he brought to light the petition of Marcellinus and Faustinus against Pope Damasus. Nor would that care of the Romans or of Pamelius have prevented, in this enlightened age of letters, that letter from coming out in public. For since it is certain that it was published by Morel from an old book, that it existed also in the six manuscripts seen by Pamelius, in those in which Latini found it, in the seven which the English used in their edition, and in the ten with which I collated the works of Saint Cyprian, it is plain that it could not have stayed hidden for ever, even had Morel not published it. The manuscripts with which I collated it are: one of Saint-Remi, two of Compiègne, two of Saint-Victor, one of Pithou, one of the monastery of Bec, the Laeciensis, the Bigot manuscript, and one of my own. I agree, moreover, with Pamelius and Rigault, who think that it was written in Greek by Firmilian and translated into Latin by Saint Cyprian. Firmilian's letter, then, has been found in twenty-six manuscripts. BALUZE.

(printed under page 652)

(60) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1201

Firmilianus. Caesareae Cappadociae episcopus. Origenis auditor et admirator, ut docet Eusebius lib. VI, cap. 2 Historiae ecclesiasticae, cujus et magnae illius famae in Ecclesia Dei mentionem facit, cap. 46 et lib. VII, cap, 5 et 30. Vide etiam epistolam primam Basilii ad Amphilochium. Praesedit priori synodo Antiochenae, ut ostendit Henricus Valesius ad Eusebium. Obiit apud Tarsum in Cilicia anno Christi 272. BALUZ. Scripsisse eam Firmilianum anno 256 ingravescente tempore hiberno, ostendit Parsonius in Annal. Cyprianicis ad ann. 256, sect. x. Obiit anno 272. Litem autem Stephanum inter et ecclesias Orientales exortam de haereticis rebaptizandis memoravit in epistola ad Xystum Romanum S. Dionysius Alexandrinus his verbis: Ἐπέσταλκεν μὲν οὖν (Stephanus) πρότερον καὶ περὶ Ἑλένου καὶ περὶ Φιρμιλιανοῦ, καὶ πάντων τῶν τε ἀπὸ τῆς Κιλικίας καὶ Καππαδοκίας, καὶ Γαλατίας, καὶ πάντων τῶν ἑξῆς ὁμορούντων ἐθνῶν ὡς οὐδὲ ἐκείνοις κοινωνήσων, διὰ τὴν αὐτὴν ταύτην αἰτίαν, ἐπειδὴ τοὺς αἱρετικοὺς, φησὶν, ἀναβαπτίζουσι. Apud Eusebium Hist. Eccl. VII. 5. Porro unus de Firmiliani successoribus in Caesariensi sede S. Basilius M. hujus atque Cypriani de rebaptizandis haereticis sententiam commemoravit in Epistola sua Canonica ad Amphilochium in Beveregii Synodico posita. Quid, quod Cypriani et quorumdam Orientalium litteras, quae apud haereticos et schismaticos datum baptismum improbant, suo superesse tempore significat S. Augustinus? Vid. lib. ejus III Contra Cresconium cap. I et librum ejus Contra Petilianum, cap. 14. Plura autem contra adversarios epistolae, quae in editionem Conciliorum Florentinam nunc demum recepta est infra annotabimus. ROUTH.

Firmilian: bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia; a hearer and admirer of Origen, as Eusebius shows in book VI, chapter 2 [sic] of the Ecclesiastical History, who mentions him and his great fame in the Church of God in chapter 46 and in book VII, chapters 5 and 30. See also Basil's first letter to Amphilochius. He presided at the earlier synod of Antioch, as Henri de Valois shows in his notes on Eusebius. He died at Tarsus in Cilicia in the year of Christ 272. BALUZE. That Firmilian wrote it in 256, as winter was coming on, Pearson shows in the Annales Cyprianici at the year 256, section x. He died in 272. The dispute that arose between Stephen and the Eastern churches over rebaptizing heretics is recorded by Saint Dionysius of Alexandria in his letter to Xystus of Rome in these words: "He (Stephen) had earlier written also about Helenus and about Firmilian, and about all those from Cilicia and Cappadocia and Galatia and all the neighbouring nations, that he would not hold communion with them either, for this same reason, because, he says, they rebaptize heretics." In Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History VII.5. Further, one of Firmilian's successors in the see of Caesarea, Saint Basil the Great, recorded his and Cyprian's opinion on rebaptizing heretics in his Canonical Epistle to Amphilochius, printed in Beveridge's Synodicon. What of the fact that Saint Augustine indicates that the letters of Cyprian and of certain Easterners which reject baptism given among heretics and schismatics still survived in his time? See his book III Against Cresconius, chapter I, and his book Against Petilian, chapter 14. We shall note more below against the opponents of the letter, which has now at last been received into the Florentine edition of the Councils. ROUTH.

(printed under page 652)

(61) ‹anchor: in eadem domo› · call in col 1202

In una atque in eadem domo. Sic vulgo, ipsa pro una, mutavi fide nixus codicis Simonis Gou-

"In one and the same house": so the common text; I have changed it to "ipsa" ("the very") in place of "una" ("one"), relying on the authority of the manuscript of Simon Gou- [the note runs on under page 653; only the part printed under page 652 is set here]

(printed under page 652)

(61) ‹anchor: in eadem domo› · call in col 1202

In una atque in eadem domo. Sic vulgo, ipsa pro una, mutavi fide nixus codicis Simonis Gou- (continues)

"In one and the same house." So the common text has ipsa instead of una; I have changed it, relying on the manuscript of Simon Gou[lart] … (continues)

(printed under page 652)

(printed under page 653)

(24) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1203

In qua convenientes Ar. Bod. 2.

"In which [they] agreeing": Ar., Bod. 2.

(printed under page 653)

(25) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1203

Sic. Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Bod. 2. Mich. Vict. Enim omitt. Oxon.

So Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2, Mich., Vict. The Oxford edition omits "enim".

(printed under page 653)

(26) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1203

Sic Lam Ebor. NC. 1. Ar. Bod. 3. Mich. Morel. Goul. Passione Domini omitt. Oxon.

So Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Ar., Bod. 3, Mich., Morel, Goul. The Oxford edition omits "Passione Domini".

(printed under page 653)

(27) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1203

Hoc de quo nunc sequitur Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. MR. Bod. 2.

"This, of which now follows": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, MR., Bod. 2.

(printed under page 653)

(28) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1203

Veritatis unitatem L.m. Ebor. Ar. CN 1. MR.

"The unity of truth": Lam. [printed "L.m."], Ebor., Ar., CN [sic] 1, MR.

(printed under page 653)

(61) (continued) ‹anchor: not visible› · call on the previous page

lartii, qui Cyprianum edidit anno 1593, idemque faciendum suasit. Graeca fuerant. ROUTH.

… [Gou]lart, who edited Cyprian in 1593, and who advised that this be done. The words had been Greek. ROUTH.

(printed under page 653)

(63) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1203 [numbered (63) as printed; the next note is also (63)]

Magnam voluntatis charitatem, in unum convenire. Haec verba mendo non carere videntur. Quid si pro isto, voluntatis charitatem, reponamus voluntatis alacritatem? Exstat apud Apostolum in Epist. ejus posteriore ad Corinthios ἡ προθυμία τοῦ θέλειν, VII, 11; et in Glossariis Velt. habes ἡ προθυμία, alacritas. ROUTH.

"A great charity of will, to come together into one." These words seem not to be free of a fault. What if for this, "charity of will", we put back "eagerness of will"? There stands in the Apostle, in his second letter to the Corinthians, "the readiness to will" (VII [sic], 11); and in the Glossaries Velt. you have προθυμία glossed "eagerness". ROUTH.

(printed under page 653)

(63) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1203

Quasi non tantum unum, etc. Afferenda sunt quae de hoc loco scripsit vir eruditus Prudentius Maranus in Vita S. Cypriani editioni Baluzianae, seu Benedictinae, praemissa. « Haec Firmiliani epistola quae Latine reddita exstat inter Cyprianicas septuagesima quinta, sic Cypriani stylum redolet, ut non alium interpretem habuisse videatur. Fidus interpres Graecae linguae ingenium nonnullis in locis retinuit Paulo post initium, Contristantur (angeli) quando vident diversas quorumdam mentes et scissas voluntates, quasi non tantum unum et eumdem Deum simul invocent, sed separatis et divisis ab invicem nec confabulatio jam possit esse, aut sermo communis; id est, quasi non tantum unum et eumdem Deum simul non invocent; quae postrema negatio nonnunquam omittitur apud Latinos, sed saepius apud Graecos. » § 31, pag. 118. Tum pergit vir cl. ad alios locos similes indicandos, de quibus ordine suo posthac. ROUTH.

"As though not only one," etc. We should bring in what the learned Prudent Maran wrote on this passage in the Life of Saint Cyprian prefixed to Baluze's, that is the Benedictine, edition: "This letter of Firmilian, which survives in Latin as the seventy-fifth among Cyprian's letters, smells so much of Cyprian's style that it seems to have had no other translator. The faithful translator kept the idiom of the Greek tongue in some places. A little after the beginning: The angels are grieved when they see the divided minds and split wills of some, as though not only do they not call on one and the same God together, but, separated and divided from one another, there can no longer be even conversation or common speech between them; that is, as though not only did they not call together on one and the same God; this last negation is sometimes left out among the Latins, but more often among the Greeks." § 31, p. 118. Then the distinguished man goes on to point out other similar places, of which in their order hereafter. ROUTH.

(printed under page 653)

(64) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1203

Passione Domini. Nescio quomodo factum est ut ista exciderent in editionibus quae emissae sunt post Morellianam, in qua exstant. Habentur enim in omnibus antiquis codicibus, uno vetere Victorino excepto, et in codice etiam episcopi Acconensis. Hujus omissionis auctor est Pamelius, qui ait haec non habere codices manuscriptos et textum indicare illa esse superflua. Magis miror Anglos, qui, cum ea haberent in quinque libris suis veteribus, scirent etiam exstare in quibusdam nostris, et Rigaltium monuisse in observationibus suis ea non debere rejici, ea tamen in textum recipere noluerint, satis factum lectori putantes si monerent se ita invenisse in antiquis codicibus. BALUZ.

"The Passion of the Lord." I do not know how it came about that these words dropped out of the editions issued after Morel's, in which they stand. For they are found in all the old manuscripts, with the one exception of an old Saint-Victor manuscript, and also in the manuscript of the bishop of Acre. The author of this omission is Pamelius, who says the manuscripts do not have these words and the text shows them to be superfluous. I wonder more at the English, who, though they had the words in five of their old books, and knew that they also stood in some of ours, and that Rigault had warned in his observations that they ought not to be rejected, nevertheless refused to receive them into the text, thinking it enough for the reader if they noted that they had found it so in old manuscripts. BALUZE.

(printed under page 653)

(65) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1203 or 1204

Invenimus in fratribus nostris tam longe positis. Sententiae Cypriani super haereticorum baptismo favebant non solum per Africam, Numidiam et Mauritaniam Ecclesiae quamplurimae, verum etiam omnes fere quae in Oriente magno numero Christianam pietatem profitebantur. In iis autem episcopi nobilium civitatum celeberrimi in nominatim indicati epistola ad Stephanum, quae prima est de septem illis Dionysii Alexandrini περὶ βαπτίσματος ab Eusebio memoratis. Et in ea quidem epistola magnus ille Dionysius Stephanum certiorem faciebat sedatos esse motus quos in Oriente Novatiani concitaverant, itaque omnes Ecclesias in eo consentire, ut lapsis poenitentia daretur; verum adjecerat aliquid de poenitentibus, qui ab haereticis redirent, baptizandis, quod praetermisit Eusebius; unde Baronius (hic addendus est Pamelius Baronium secutus in notis ad Cyprianum), occasionem sumpsit affirmandi pro certo, sic omnes illas Ecclesias acquievisse Stephano, ut in ejus decretum de non baptizandis haereticis, abdicata Cypriani sententia, convenirent; quod adeo non est a Dionysio traditum, ut, defuncto postmodum Stephano, idem ille Dionysius Xystum Stephani successorem per alteram epistolam diligenter ac serio monuerit; consideraret attentius quaestionis pondus et causae difficultatem: Stephanum quidem Heleno et Firmiliano, caeterisque per Ciliciam et Cappadociam et finitimas Ecclesias episcopis nuntiasse per litteras minime communicaturum se cum iis, eo quod haereticos rebaptizarent. Verumtamen esse magni momenti negotium; Ὄντως γὰρ δόγματα γέγονεν ἐν ταῖς μεγίσταις τῶν ἐπισκόπων συνόδοις, ὡς πυνθάνομαι, ὥστε τοὺς προσιόντας ἀπὸ αἱρέσεως προκατηχηθέντας, εἶτα ἀπολούεσθαι καὶ ἀποκαθαίρεσθαι τὸν τῆς παλαιᾶς καὶ ἀκαθάρτου ζύμης ῥύπον. Per- (continues)

"We find in our brethren set so far away." Cyprian's opinions on the baptism of heretics were favoured not only by very many churches through Africa, Numidia and Mauretania, but also by almost all those which in great numbers professed the Christian faith in the East. Among them the most celebrated bishops of noble cities are named one by one in the letter to Stephen which is the first of those seven letters of Dionysius of Alexandria "On Baptism" mentioned by Eusebius. In that letter the great Dionysius informed Stephen that the disturbances the Novatians had stirred up in the East had calmed, and so all the churches agreed that penance should be granted to the lapsed; but he had added something about baptizing penitents returning from the heretics, which Eusebius passed over; whence Baronius (and here Pamelius must be added, who followed Baronius in his notes on Cyprian) took occasion to affirm as certain that all those churches so acquiesced in Stephen as to come round to his decree that heretics are not to be baptized, renouncing Cyprian's opinion. So far is this from being Dionysius's account that, after Stephen's later death, that same Dionysius carefully and earnestly urged Xystus, Stephen's successor, in a second letter, to weigh more attentively the gravity of the question and the difficulty of the case: that Stephen had indeed informed Helenus and Firmilian and the other bishops through Cilicia and Cappadocia and the neighbouring churches by letter that he would not hold communion with them, because they rebaptized heretics; but that the matter was of great moment, "for in truth decrees have been made in the greatest synods of bishops, as I learn, that those who come over from heresy, having first been instructed, should then be washed and cleansed of the filth of the old and unclean leaven." Per- … (continues)

(printed under page 653)

(printed under page 654)

(29) ‹anchor: nostra propria suscepimus› · call in col 1205

Sic Lam. Ebor. Ar. Mich. Vict. Suscipimus Oxon.

So Lam., Ebor., Ar., Mich., Vict. The Oxford edition reads "suscipimus" (we receive).

(printed under page 654)

(30) ‹anchor: memoriae mandavimus› · call in col 1205

Mandamus Mich. Vict. Goul.

"We commit" (present): Mich., Vict., Goul.

(printed under page 654)

(31) ‹anchor: multiplex et divina› · call in col 1205

Sic Mich. Vict. Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Et omittit Oxon.

So Mich., Vict., Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1. The Oxford edition omits "et".

(printed under page 654)

(65) (continued) ‹anchor: not visible› · call on the previous page

git Dionysius, atque hoc se ab Antiochiae, Caesareae. Aeliae, Tyri, Laodiceae. Tarsi episcopis rogatum scribere Xysto: quin et compresbyteris suis Dionysio et Philemoni, qui fuerant ejusdem cum Stephano sententiae, scripsisse hac de re plenius et uberius. RIGALTIUS.

… [Per]sists Dionysius, and says that he writes this to Xystus at the request of the bishops of Antioch, Caesarea, Aelia, Tyre, Laodicea and Tarsus; and indeed that he had written on this matter more fully and at greater length to his fellow presbyters Dionysius and Philemon, who had been of the same opinion as Stephen. RIGAULT.

(printed under page 654)

(66) ‹anchor: memoriae mandavimus› · call in col 1205

Mandamus. Sic Routhius pro praeterito mandavimus ex quinque codd. scriptis, e quibus tres in edit. Oxon. memorantur, quartus Bodleianus, quintus Novi Collegii est. ROUTH.

"We commit." So Routh, for the perfect "mandavimus", from five manuscripts, of which three are mentioned in the Oxford edition; the fourth is the Bodleian, the fifth that of New College. ROUTH.

(printed under page 654)

(67) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1205

Hibernum tempus. Hinc collegit Baronius hanc epistolam fuisse scriptam anno 257, aliquanto tempore ante hyemem. At Pearsonius in Annalibus Cyprianicis contendit ista accidisse anno superiore. BALUZ.

"Winter time." From this Baronius concluded that this letter was written in the year 257, some time before winter. But Pearson in the Annales Cyprianici argues that these things happened in the previous year. BALUZE.

(printed under page 654)

(68) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1205

Postea exstitisse. Verum hoc est, si modo sermo sit de haereticis illis, quorum causa tunc temporis agebatur, quosque hic nominat Firmilianus, maxime quidem tempore ejus vigentibus; sed aeque verum est, haereses haud minus pestiferas in apostolico aevo exstitisse. Dignus autem est, qui de hac re conferatur Tertullianus. supra, in lib. de Praescript. Haeret. cap. 33 et 34, ROUTH.

"Arose afterwards." This is true, provided the talk is of those heretics whose case was then being argued and whom Firmilian names here, who flourished most of all in his own time; but it is equally true that heresies no less pestilent arose in the apostolic age. Tertullian deserves to be compared on this matter, above, in the book On the Prescription of Heretics, chapters 33 and 34. ROUTH.

(printed under page 654)

(69) ‹anchor: Basilidis tempus› · call in col 1206

Basilidis tempus. Variae sunt opiniones virorum doctorum de tempore quo Basilidis dogma suum disseminavit. Qua de controversia vide quae docte et erudite scripsit amicus olim noster J. B. Cotelerius in epistolam Ignatii ad Trallianos, ubi tempus Basilidis revocat ad imperium Adriani. Vide etiam viri doctissimi Renati Massueti observationes ad Irenaeum pag. 59, § 112. Ineptos Basilidis errores, quos portenta vocat, graviter exagitat Hieronymus in epitaphio Lucinii Baetici et in libro adversus Vigilantium. Illum idem Hieronymus lib. II, adversus Jovinianum vocat magistrum luxuriae et turpissimorum complexuum, et in epistola ad Ctesiphontem adversus Pelagianos, commemorat impietatem Basilidis.

"The time of Basilides." Learned men hold various opinions about the time at which Basilides spread his teaching. On this controversy see what our late friend J. B. Cotelier wrote with learning and erudition on Ignatius's letter to the Trallians, where he assigns Basilides' time to the reign of Hadrian. See also the observations on Irenaeus of the most learned René Massuet, p. 59, § 112. Basilides' absurd errors, which he calls monstrosities, are sharply attacked by Jerome in the epitaph of Lucinius the Baetican and in the book against Vigilantius. The same Jerome, in book II against Jovinian, calls him a master of lust and of the foulest embraces, and in the letter to Ctesiphon against the Pelagians recalls the impiety of Basilides.

(printed under page 654)

(printed under page 655)

(32) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207 or 1208

Infamat Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Bod. 2.

"Defames": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2.

(printed under page 655)

(33) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207 or 1208

Quod ad alterutrum Oxon.

"That to one another": Oxford edition.

(printed under page 655)

(34) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207 or 1208

Probastis ridiculum Bod. 2.

"You have proved [it] ridiculous": Bod. 2.

(printed under page 655)

(35) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207 or 1208

Quod Lam. Ebor. NC. 1.

"That" (quod): Lam., Ebor., NC. 1.

(printed under page 655)

(36) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207 or 1208

Eo quod non teneant Lam. Ebor. NC. 1.

"Because they do not hold": Lam., Ebor., NC. 1.

(printed under page 655)

(37) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207 or 1208

Quod utique Bod. 1.

"Which certainly": Bod. 1.

(printed under page 655)

(38) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207 or 1208

Nec Filium; quibus Ar. NC. 1. Ebor. Bod. 2. Mich. Vict.

"Nor the Son; to whom": Ar., NC. 1, Ebor., Bod. 2, Mich., Vict.

(printed under page 655)

(39) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207 or 1208

Sic Lam. Sanctum; quibus Rig.

So Lam. Rigault reads "Holy; to whom".

(printed under page 655)

(70) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207

Frustra apostolorum. Contra, Vincentius Lirinensis de hoc ipso negotio agens ait: Ut omnes luce clarius videant beatorum apostolorum beata successio quanta vi semper, quanto studio, quanta contentione defenderit susceptae semel religionis integritatem. Et mox addit Stephanum papam dignum existimasse si reliquos omnes tantum fidei devotione vinceret quantum loci auctoritate superabat. Per apostolos hic et alibi intelliguntur Petrus et Paulus, quos Ecclesia considerat ut fundatores Ecclesiae Romanae. Magna animorum contentione agitata est aevo nostro quaestio de duplici capite in Ecclesia. Nolo referre quae tunc utrinque dicta et facta sunt. Illud tantum dicam legendam esse exercitationem de singulari primatu Petri quam ea occasione scripsit vir illustrissimus Petrus de Marca, archiepiscopus Parisiensis.

"In vain … of the apostles." On the contrary, Vincent of Lérins, treating this very affair, says: "So that all may see more clearly than light with what force always, with what zeal, with what striving the blessed succession of the blessed apostles has defended the integrity of the religion once received." And soon he adds that Pope Stephen thought it worthy of himself to surpass all the rest as much in devotion to the faith as he excelled them in the authority of his see. By "the apostles" here and elsewhere Peter and Paul are meant, whom the Church regards as the founders of the Roman Church. In our own age the question of a double head in the Church was argued with great heat of feeling. I will not report what was then said and done on either side. I will say only that one should read the dissertation on the unique primacy of Peter which the most illustrious Pierre de Marca, archbishop of Paris, wrote on that occasion.

(printed under page 655)

(71) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207

Nominum diversitate. Quamvis haec lectio constans sit in omnibus antiquis exemplaribus, puto tamen legendum esse hominum. BALUZ.

"By the diversity of names." Although this reading is constant in all the ancient copies, I think nevertheless that "hominum" (of men) should be read. BALUZE.

(printed under page 655)

(72) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1207

Nec tamen propter hoc ab Ecclesiae catholicae pace atque unitate aliquando discessum est. Ait. cl. Coustantius Firmiliani verba afferens in nota ad S. Irenaei epistolam ad Romanum episcopum Victorem, qui Asianos Pascham die 14 mensis celebrantes ab Ecclesia separare conatus fuerat, « Celeritas, quippe qua, ut credere est, pax ad modicum interturbata, in integrum restituta est, unitatis ruptae oblivionem ita peperit, ut ab ea aliquando dicessum esse Cypriani aetate ne recoleretur quidem. » Rom. Pontif. Epistolae., p. 99. Quin etiam testatus est Anatolius Laodicenus, is quis ante concilium floruit Nicaenum, contentionem istam de Paschate exortam ab Irenaeo pacatam esse, utrisque patribus, inquit, in sua regula perseverantibus, nec a coepto antiquitatis more declinantibus. Vide Anatolii locum ibidem adductum. ROUTH.

"Yet not on that account was there ever a departure from the peace and unity of the Catholic Church." The distinguished Coustant, citing Firmilian's words in a note on Saint Irenaeus's letter to Victor, bishop of Rome, who had tried to separate from the Church the Asians who celebrated Easter on the fourteenth day of the month, says: "The speed with which, as one may believe, the peace, troubled for a little, was restored entire, produced such forgetfulness of the broken unity that in Cyprian's time it was not even remembered that there had ever been a departure from it." Epistles of the Roman Pontiffs, p. 99. Indeed Anatolius of Laodicea, who flourished before the Council of Nicaea, testified that this dispute that arose over Easter was settled by Irenaeus, "both parties," he says, "persevering in their own rule and not turning aside from the custom of antiquity they had begun with." See the passage of Anatolius cited in the same place. ROUTH.

(printed under page 655)

(73) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1208

Alterutrum ad se venientes. Ad Cypriani epistolam ad Pompeium, ubi Stephani verba adhuc plenius afferuntur, hoc adnotavit Rigaltius. « Rectissima est haec scriptura. Hoc est, neque venientem a Marcione baptizat Montanus, neque venientem a Montano baptizat Marcion. Non rebaptizant alterutrum ad se venientes. ROUTH.

"Those coming to them from one another." On Cyprian's letter to Pompeius, where Stephen's words are given still more fully, Rigault noted this: "This reading is entirely right. That is, Montanus does not baptize one who comes from Marcion, nor does Marcion baptize one who comes from Montanus. They do not rebaptize those who come over to them from each other." ROUTH.

(printed under page 655)

(74) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1208

Spiritum sanctum. Certum est haec duo vocabula non exstare in libris nostris nec in quatuor Anglicanis. Ita etiam de uno suo testatur Pamelius, qui tamen illa addidit ex codice edito, in cujus marginibus Joannes Cauchius, Utrajectinus, apposuerat castigationes ex variis codicibus manuscriptis. Remanet tamen adhuc dubium an haec duo vocabula addita fuerint ex libro veteri, an vero ex conjectura Cauchii tantum. Nam, quia in veteribus libris post vocem Filium additur nec, ita ut videantur aliqua deesse, conjecerat Pamelius addenda esse duo illa vocabula, et addidit videns conjecturam suam confirmatam auctoritate libri Cauchiani. In codice porro Cauchii adnotatas fuisse, non solum varias lectiones veterum librorum, sed etiam conjecturas ejus, monet ipse Pamelius in adnotationibus suis. Itaque nos haec duo vocabula, quae posita sunt sine auctoritate, ex conjectura tantum, uncis conclusimus. BALUZ. Indicant quidem Var. Lectt. apud edit. Oxon. collectae tria verba nec Spiritum sanctum in quatuor illis libris Anglicis deesse; sed revera in duobus ex illis, hi sunt Bodleianus et novi Collegii codex, apparet nec post vocem Filium cum sequentibus conjunctum. In altero autem epistolarum Cypriani codice, qui penes est idem collegium, haud exstat Fimiliani epistola. ROUTH.

"The Holy Spirit." It is certain that these two words do not stand in our books, nor in the four English ones. Pamelius testifies the same of one of his own, yet he added them from a printed copy in whose margins Jan Cauchie of Utrecht had set corrections from various manuscripts. It still remains doubtful, however, whether these two words were added from an old book or only from Cauchie's conjecture. For since in the old books "nec" is added after the word "Filium", so that something seems to be missing, Pamelius had conjectured that those two words should be added, and he added them on seeing his conjecture confirmed by the authority of Cauchie's book. That in Cauchie's copy not only the various readings of old books but also his conjectures were noted, Pamelius himself warns in his annotations. So we have enclosed these two words, which were set there without authority and only by conjecture, in brackets. BALUZE. The various readings collected in the Oxford edition do indicate that the three words "nec Spiritum sanctum" are missing in those four English books; but in fact in two of them, namely the Bodleian and the New College manuscript, "nec" appears after the word "Filium", joined to what follows. And in the other manuscript of Cyprian's letters kept by the same college, Firmilian's [printed "Fimiliani"] letter does not occur. ROUTH.

(printed under page 655)

(printed under page 656)

(40) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1209 or 1210

Sic Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. At Oxon De quibus.

So Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1. But the Oxford edition reads "de quibus".

(printed under page 656)

(41) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1209 or 1210

Qui sunt nunc conjic. Routh.

"Who are now": Routh's conjecture.

(printed under page 656)

(42) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1209 or 1210

At qui est in Ecclesia perfectus et sapiens, hoc Ar. Lam. Ebor. Mich. Vict.

"But he who is perfect and wise in the Church, this …": Ar., Lam., Ebor., Mich., Vict.

(printed under page 656)

(75) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1209

Ubi praesident majores natu. Graece, ὅπου προκάθηνται οἱ πρεσβύτεροι. Sic et jam supra Firmilianus, Mos apud nos fuit, inquit, ut per singulos annos seniores (οἱ πρεσβύτεροι) et praepositi in unum conveniamus. Utroque loco designantur, nisi fallor, superioris ordinis, seu qui praesident, presbyteri. Praesidentem nominat episcopum Tertullianus in lib. de Pudicitia, cap. 14, et illo quidem presbyterorum nomine episcopi a veteribus interdum appellantur; raro vicissim, idque accomodatione tantum ad Vet. Test. locum, episcoporum titulo donantur presbyteri. Confer. Adnotatt. ad Concil. contra Noetum vol. II Reliquiar. Sacr. p. 377, ubi tamen minus recte dubitasse me fateor, utrum plures episcopi in unum, sive in provinciali concilio, collecti, presbyteri tertio saeculo Ecclesiae nominarentur. Porro apud episcopum sitam esse potestatem ritus omnes administrandi, baptizandi, offerendi, manum imponendi, ordinandi, credebant antiqui; sed et presbyteris licere, ut muniti auctoritate episcopi baptizarent atque offerrent Dandi quidem (Baptismum) habet jus summus sacerdos, qui est episcopus; dehinc presbyteri et diaconi, non tamen sine episcopi auctoritate propter Ecclesiae honorem. Quo salvo, salva pax est. Alioquin etiam laicis jus est, etc. Haec Tertullianus in lib. de Baptismo, c. 17, haud finito saeculo Ecclesiae secundo docuit. Ad solos vero episcopos ordinandi jus pertinere, consentit cum Hieronymo universa antiquitas. Adde quod idem hic Firmilianus, qui episcoporum ordinem presbyterorum nomine his locis appellavit, singulos episcopos, presbyteros, diaconos, alibi in epistola sua titulis suis distinxit. Porro ait infra, § 12, episcopos ordinatione vicaria successisse apostolis. ROUTH.

"Where the elders preside." In Greek, "where the presbyters preside." So too Firmilian above: "It has been our custom," he says, "that every year we elders (the presbyters) and those set over [the churches] meet together." In both places, unless I am mistaken, the presbyters of the higher order, that is, those who preside, are meant. Tertullian calls the bishop "the one presiding" in the book On Modesty, chapter 14, and bishops are indeed sometimes called by that name of presbyters by the ancients; rarely, conversely, and only by accommodation to a passage of the Old Testament, are presbyters given the title of bishops. Compare the notes on the Council against Noetus, vol. II of the Reliquiae Sacrae, p. 377, where, however, I confess I doubted less rightly whether several bishops gathered together, that is, in a provincial council, were called presbyters in the Church's third century. Further, the ancients believed that the power of administering all the rites, of baptizing, offering, laying on hands and ordaining, lay with the bishop; but that presbyters too might, fortified by the bishop's authority, baptize and offer: "The right of giving it (baptism) belongs to the high priest, who is the bishop; then to presbyters and deacons, yet not without the bishop's authority, for the honour of the Church. When this is safe, peace is safe. Otherwise laymen too have the right," etc. So Tertullian taught in the book On Baptism, chapter 17, before the Church's second century had ended. That the right of ordaining belongs to bishops alone, all antiquity agrees with Jerome. Add that this same Firmilian, who in these places called the order of bishops by the name of presbyters, elsewhere in his letter distinguished bishops, presbyters and deacons each by their own titles. Further, he says below, § 12, that the bishops succeeded the apostles by vicarious ordination. ROUTH.

(printed under page 656)

(76) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1209

Potestatem. Codex Laetiensis, facultatem. Sic etiam se legisse in codice Marchianensi testatur Pamelius. BALUZ.

"Power." The Liessies manuscript has "facultatem" (faculty). Pamelius testifies that he read the same in the Marchiennes manuscript. BALUZE.

(printed under page 656)

(77) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1209

Nec spiritaliter gerere. Edit. princeps praestat aut pro nec, firmantibus illud ms. Novi Collegii ac Bodleiano; qui et fortasse revocandum. ROUTH.

"Nor to conduct spiritually." The first edition offers "aut" for "nec", confirmed by the New College and Bodleian manuscripts; and perhaps it should be restored. ROUTH.

(printed under page 656)

(78) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1209

In Iconio. Dionysius Alexandrinus hoc Iconiense idque in Synnada concilium sanxisse rursus tingendos esse haereticos, in tertia epistola ad Philemonem Romanum commemorat. Verba ejus apud Eusebium, Hist. Eccles. VII, 7 haec sunt: Μεμάθηκα καὶ τοῦτο, ὅτι μὴ νῦν οἱ ἐν Ἀφρικῇ μόνον τοῦτο παρεισήγαγον, ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸ πολλοῦ κατὰ τοὺς πρὸ ἡμῶν ἐπισκόπους ἐν ταῖς πολυανθρωποτάταις ἐκκλησίαις παρὰ ταῖς συνόδοις τῶν ἀδελφῶν, ἐν Ἰκονίῳ καὶ Συννάδοις καὶ παρὰ πολλοῖς τοῦτο ἔδοξεν, ὧν, etc. Apud Iconium autem maxime ob Montanistarum baptismum motam esse quaestionem istam, constat ex Firmiliani verbis infra, in cap. 13. ROUTH. — Ait Prudentius Maranus in Vita S. Cypriani editioni Baluzianae praemissa, § XXXI, p. CXVIII: Nisi si his episcopis quibus nunc fuit Paulus; legendum putavit Pamelius de quibus nunc, sed manifestum est hellenismus, τούτοις τοῖς ἐπισκόποις τοῖς νῦν, his episcopis nunc exsistentibus. Haec ille, quae quidem haud prohibent ne sentiam reponendum esse qui sunt nunc, pro isto quibus nunc, cum absit praepositio de ante quibus a codd. scriptis, quod sciam omnibus. ROUTH.

"At Iconium." Dionysius of Alexandria, in his third letter to Philemon of Rome, records that this council of Iconium, and that at Synnada, decreed that heretics must be dipped again. His words in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History VII, 7, are these: "I have learned this too, that it is not only now that those in Africa introduced this, but long before, in the time of the bishops before us, in the most populous churches and at the synods of the brethren, at Iconium and Synnada and among many, this was decided," etc. That this question was raised at Iconium chiefly because of the baptism of the Montanists is clear from Firmilian's words below, in chapter 13. ROUTH. — Prudent Maran says in the Life of Saint Cyprian prefixed to Baluze's edition, § XXXI, p. CXVIII: "Unless it were by these bishops to whom Paul now [belonged]: Pamelius thought one should read 'de quibus nunc', but it is plainly a Hellenism, 'to these present bishops', that is, to these bishops now existing." So he; which does not prevent me from thinking that "qui sunt nunc" should be restored for "quibus nunc", since the preposition "de" before "quibus" is missing from the manuscripts, from all of them, so far as I know. ROUTH.

(printed under page 656)

(79) ‹anchor: quibus nunc› · call in col 1210

Quibus nunc. Praepositio deest in omnibus exemplaribus antiquis et in editione Morelliana. Illam Pamelius adjecit ex conjectura, quia existimabat sensum absque ea non posse constare. BALUZ.

"To whom now." The preposition is missing in all the ancient copies and in Morel's edition. Pamelius added it by conjecture, because he thought the sense could not stand without it. BALUZE.

(printed under page 656)

(80) ‹anchor: At quis est in Ecclesia perfectus› · call in col 1210

At quis est in Ecclesia perfectus. Optime Novi Collegii codex, ut qui est in Ecclesia perfectus et sapiens hoc aut defendat aut credat. In tribus quoque codd. scriptis in edit. Oxon. nominatis qui pro quis legitur, et qui ante hoc abest. Quapropter posthabita Pamelii lectione, quae fortasse ex Cauchii conjectura tantum orta est, Morellianam istam revocavi; posito tamen ex fide codicis Novi Collegii aut pro autem ante verbum defendat. Caeterum paulo ante pro poterit priorem lect. potuerit revocavi. ROUTH. — At quis est. Ita emendavit Pamelius ex libro Cauchii. Nam in editione Morelliana, quae prima est, legitur: Perfecti sunt, ut qui est in Ecclesia perfectus et sapiens. Hoc autem defendat et credat, etc. In tribus antiquis codicibus scriptum est: Perfecti sunt, (continues)

"But who is perfect in the Church." The New College manuscript reads best: "so that he who is perfect and wise in the Church may either defend or believe this." In the three manuscripts named in the Oxford edition too, "qui" is read for "quis", and "qui" before "hoc" is missing. Therefore, setting aside Pamelius's reading, which perhaps arose only from Cauchie's conjecture, I have restored that of Morel; putting, however, on the authority of the New College manuscript, "aut" for "autem" before the verb "defendat". Moreover, a little before, I have restored the earlier reading "potuerit" for "poterit". ROUTH. — "But who is." So Pamelius emended from Cauchie's book. For in Morel's edition, which is the first, one reads: "They are perfect, as he who is perfect and wise in the Church. But let him defend and believe this," etc. In three ancient manuscripts it is written: "They are perfect, … (continues)

(printed under page 656)

(printed under page 657)

(43) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211

Sine Spiritu sancto Lam. Ebor. Bod. 2.

"Without the Holy Spirit": Lam., Ebor., Bod. 2.

(printed under page 657)

(44) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211

Et per invocationem Ar. Invocatione sua Routh.

"And through the invocation": Ar. "By his invocation": Routh.

(printed under page 657)

(45) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211

Iste sacramento Bod 2.

"That … by the sacrament": Bod. 2.

(printed under page 657)

(46) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211

Rei addend. conj. Routh.

"Rei" (of the thing) to be added: Routh's conjecture.

(printed under page 657)

(47) ‹anchor: ut et per› · call in col 1211

Ut et per Lam. Ebor. N C. 1.

"So that also through": Lam., Ebor., NC. 1.

(printed under page 657)

(48) ‹anchor: insueto malo› · call in col 1211

Inopinato malo Bod. 2.

"By an unexpected evil": Bod. 2.

(printed under page 657)

(49) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211 or 1212

Relinquentibus: erat enim Bod. 2.

"Leaving: for there was": Bod. 2.

(printed under page 657)

(50) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211 or 1212

Sic Ar. Lam. Ebor. N C. 1. Bod. 2. In exstasi Oxon.

So Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2. The Oxford edition reads "in exstasi" (in ecstasy).

(printed under page 657)

(51) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211 or 1212

Daemonum Ar. Lam. Ebor. N C. 1.

"Of demons": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1.

(printed under page 657)

(52) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211 or 1212

Perficiens, terram se movere Lam. Ebor. N C. 1. Bod. 2.

"Bringing it about that she moved the earth": Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2.

(printed under page 657)

(80) (continued) ‹anchor: not visible› · call on the previous page

ut qui est in Ecclesia perfectus et sapiens hoc autem defendat. Sic etiam alii libri veteres, nisi quod pro et sapiens habent aut sapiens, BALUZ.

… "as he who is perfect and wise in the Church; but let him defend this." So too other old books, except that for "et sapiens" they have "aut sapiens". BALUZE.

(printed under page 657)

(81) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211

Ante viginti annos. Vide Annales Cyprianicos ad annum 256. BALUZ.

"Twenty years ago." See the Annales Cyprianici at the year 256. BALUZE.

(printed under page 657)

(82) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211

Acerbus et dirus. Sic Lactantius, cap. 13, de Moribus Persecutorum, Flaccillum vocat non pusillum homicidam. BALUZ.

"Harsh and dreadful." So Lactantius, chapter 13 of On the Deaths [printed "Moribus"] of the Persecutors, calls Flaccillus "no petty murderer". BALUZE.

(printed under page 657)

(83) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211

Quaedam mulier. Vide Reginonem lib. II, cap. 364, et notas nostras pag. 592. BALUZ.

"A certain woman." See Regino, book II, chapter 364, and our notes, p. 592. BALUZE.

(printed under page 657)

(84) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211

Terram movere. Duo libri veteres, etiam movere se terram pollicceretur. Quatuor Anglicani, perficiens terram se movere. BALUZ.

"To move the earth." Two old books: "she would even promise that she would move the earth." The four English ones: "bringing it about that she moved the earth." BALUZE.

(printed under page 657)

(85) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1211

Vi sua. Ita unus codex regius et Beccensis; quae est vera lectio. Quatuor libri veteres habent visu. Ita etiam Divionensis, nisi quod supra lineam habet scriptum vel nisu. Morellius edidit nisu, Pamelius et alii jussu. BALUZ.

"By her own force." So one royal manuscript and the Bec manuscript, which is the true reading. Four old books have "visu" (by sight). So too the Dijon manuscript, except that it has "or nisu" written above the line. Morel printed "nisu" (by effort), Pamelius and others "jussu" (by command). BALUZE.

(printed under page 657)

(53) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1212

Diceret quocunque Bod. 2.

"Should say wherever": Bod. 2.

(printed under page 657)

(86) ‹anchor: presbyteris Rusticum› · call in col 1212

Rusticum. Morellius edidit rusticum, tanquam non esset nomen hominis, sed vocabulum quo simplex homo significaretur. Pamelius et post eum Rigaltius scripserunt Rusticum, putantes nomen esse presbyteri de quo istic loquitur Firmilianus. Angli aliter censuerunt et reposuerunt lectionem quae est in editione Morelli argumento ducto ex epistola Cornelii ad Fabium Antiochenum apud Eusebium, in qua Cornelius ait Novatum accivisse ex Italia tres episcopos simplicissimos et omnium ignaros, ut vertit Rufinus, a quibus fieret episcopus, Ego in ea opinionum diversitate, cum viderem lectionem Pamelii et Rigaltii posse esse bonam et nihil adversus eam confici ex comparatione horum episcoporum Italorum, retinui quod magis placuisse videbam Pamelio et Rigaltio. De Ursicino, qui sedem apostolicam invasit post electionem Damasi, testatur Rufinus, lib. XI, cap. 10, illum episcopum factum fuisse a quodam satis imperito et agresti episcopo. BALUZ. — Unum de presbyteris rusticum. Sic edidit in hujus epistolae edit. principe Morellius, tanquam si rusticus nomen appellativum fuerit; sed quasi nomen proprium, Pamelius et Rigaltius. Aliter Fellus. Dubitat Baluzius. Fortasse significat hoc loco vox rusticus, non agrestem, ut opinatur Fellus, sed ruralem, ἐπιχώριον. Ἐπιχώριοι πρεσβύτεροι, presbyteri ruris, in Canone decimo tertio Concilii Neocaesareae memorantur. Sed Graece scripsisse Firmilianus ἀγροικικόν videtur, cum in decimo septimo Chalcedonensi ἀγροικικὰς παροικίας ἢ ἐγχωρίους habeas. ROUTH.

"Rusticus." Morel printed "rusticum" as though it were not a man's name but a word signifying a simple man. Pamelius and after him Rigault wrote "Rusticum", thinking it the name of the presbyter of whom Firmilian speaks there. The English judged otherwise and restored the reading of Morel's edition, arguing from the letter of Cornelius to Fabius of Antioch in Eusebius, in which Cornelius says that Novatus summoned from Italy three bishops, most simple and ignorant of everything, as Rufinus translates, by whom he might be made bishop. Amid this diversity of opinions, since I saw that the reading of Pamelius and Rigault could be good and that nothing was proved against it by the comparison with those Italian bishops, I kept what I saw had pleased Pamelius and Rigault more. Of Ursinus [printed "Ursicino"], who invaded the apostolic see after the election of Damasus, Rufinus testifies, book XI, chapter 10, that he was made bishop by a certain bishop quite unskilled and boorish. BALUZE. — "One of the presbyters, a rustic." So Morel printed it in the first edition of this letter, as if "rusticus" were a common noun; but Pamelius and Rigault took it as a proper name. Fell otherwise. Baluze is in doubt. Perhaps the word "rusticus" here means not "boorish", as Fell thinks, but "rural", ἐπιχώριον. "Country presbyters", presbyters of the countryside, are mentioned in the thirteenth canon of the Council of Neocaesarea. But Firmilian seems to have written ἀγροικικόν in Greek, since in the seventeenth canon of Chalcedon you have "rural or country parishes". ROUTH.

(printed under page 657)

(printed under page 658)

(54) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213 or 1214

Ad revincendum conj. Routh.

"For refuting": Routh's conjecture.

(printed under page 658)

(55) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213 or 1214

Adversum Ar. Lam.

"Against" (adversum): Ar., Lam.

(printed under page 658)

(56) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213 or 1214

Sanctificare se pacem Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Bod. 2. Mich. Vict.

"To sanctify … peace": Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2, Mich., Vict.

(printed under page 658)

(57) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213 or 1214

Non sine Oxon.

"Not without": Oxford edition.

(printed under page 658)

(58) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213 or 1214

Videremur. Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Bod. 2.

"We should seem": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2.

(printed under page 658)

(59) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213 or 1214

Baptismata Bod. 2. Vict.

"Baptisms": Bod. 2, Vict.

(printed under page 658)

(60) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213 or 1214

Sanctum add. Ar. NC. 1, Lam. Ebor.

Ar., NC. 1, Lam., Ebor. add "Holy".

(printed under page 658)

(61) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213 or 1214

Non ducit conjic. Routh.

"Does not lead": Routh's conjecture.

(printed under page 658)

(87) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213

Qui prius sanctus. Frequenter accidit ut hypocritae imponerent Ecclesiae, id est ut multi post mortem suam crederentur esse sancti quorum mores non responderant tam bonae famae, uti pluribus exemplis ostensum a nobis est in oratione quam Parisiis in collegio regio habuimus die 15 Aprilis 1692, cum illic interpretaremur titulum Decretalium de reliquiis et veneratione sanctorum. BALUZ.

"Who earlier [was thought] holy." It has often happened that hypocrites imposed on the Church, that is, that many were believed after their death to be saints whose conduct had not matched so good a reputation, as I showed by several examples in the oration I gave at Paris in the Royal College on 15 April 1692, when I was there expounding the title of the Decretals on the relics and veneration of the saints. BALUZE.

(printed under page 658)

(88) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213

Panem. Quatuor libri nostri et quatuor item Anglicani praeferunt pacem. In Divionensi quoque scriptum est pacem, et supra lineam vel panem. Certum est hic agi de pane Eucharistiae. In comoedia Queroli legitur: Solum hoc est quod sequuntur atque observant unice, panem Domini. Ubi quidam vir eruditus, cujus manum non bene novi, sed puto esse Petri Danielis aut Desiderii Heraldi, in suo exemplari edito scripsit in margine panem Deum, id est Eucharistiam. Examinabunt theologi an haec interpretatio sit bona. BALUZ.

"Bread." Four of our books and likewise four English ones show "pacem" (peace). In the Dijon manuscript too "pacem" is written, with "or panem" above the line. It is certain that the bread of the Eucharist is meant here. In the comedy Querolus one reads: "This alone is what they follow and observe singly, the bread of the Lord." There a certain learned man, whose hand I do not know well, but I think it is Pierre Daniel's or Didier Hérault's, wrote in the margin of his printed copy "bread, God, that is, the Eucharist". Theologians will judge whether this interpretation is sound. BALUZE.

(printed under page 658)

(89) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1213

Sine sacramento. Non sine sacramento solitae praedicationis. Fellus ait hanc esse veram lectionem (nam omissa est particula non in mss. et editt. omnibus praeter illam ab ipso Fello adornatam) ex contextu satis est manifestum; subjungitur enim, baptizaret quoque multos, usitata et legitima verba interrogationis usurpans, ut nil discrepare ab ecclesiastica regula videretur. Et quidem vis argumenti periret, si verba solemnia, Eucharistiae administrationi praestituta, non fuissent retenta. Praedicatio solita videtur ista ἀνάμνησις, quam Dominus fieri mandabat, et de qua D. Paulus (I Cor. II, 27) καταγγέλλετε τὸν θάνατον τοῦ Κυρίου De הגדה Paschali supra in Epist. ad Caecil. dictum. Rem hanc exsequi videtur Justinus Martyr Apol. 2, ubi dicit: Προσφέρεται τῷ προεστῶτι τὸν ἄρτον καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος καὶ κράματος, καὶ οὗτος λαβὼν αἶνον καὶ δόξαν τῷ Πατρὶ τῶν ὅλων διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου ἀναπέμπει, etc. Rigaltius ait: Legendum videtur: Sive sacramentum solitae precationis offerret. Sacramentum precationis dicit, quemadmodum Tertullianus, sacramentum orationis. FELLUS. — Eruditissimum hunc virum sequi par fuit, cui et in hac re obtemperavit Tillemontius, Mem. Eccl. in Vita Firmiliani, tom. IV pag. 129, ed. Bruyel. Particulam igitur negativam, quae in textu Baluziano perperam omissa est, verbis praemisi, cum in voce antecedente Domino olim absorpta fuisse eadem videretur. Verumtamen cl. Marano in vit. sua Cypriani ex imitatione Graecorum orta locutio videtur. Is ibidem opponens se Rigaltio, qui pro vocibus, sine sacramento solitae praedicationis, voluerat ponere sive sacrrmentum solitae precationis, ex Basilio M. monere pergit: Preces in sacrificio fieri solitae vocantur apud Basil. epist. 210, ἐκκλησιαστικὰ κηρύγματα, predicationes ecclesiasticae, p. CXVIII. ROUTH.

"Without the sacrament." "Not without the sacrament of the customary proclamation." Fell says that this is the true reading (for the particle "non" is missing in all the manuscripts and editions except the one prepared by Fell himself), as is clear enough from the context; for there follows: "she also baptized many, using the customary and lawful words of the interrogation, so that she might seem to depart in nothing from the Church's rule." And indeed the force of the argument would be lost if the solemn words prescribed for the administration of the Eucharist had not been kept. The customary proclamation seems to be that "remembrance" which the Lord commanded to be made, and of which Saint Paul says (I Cor. II [sic], 27) "you proclaim the death of the Lord". Of the Passover haggadah it was said above, on the letter to Caecilius. Justin Martyr seems to set this out, Apology 2, where he says: "There is brought to the one presiding bread and a cup of water and mixed wine, and he, taking them, sends up praise and glory to the Father of all through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," etc. Rigault says: "It seems one should read: Or she offered the sacrament of the customary prayer. He says 'the sacrament of prayer' as Tertullian says 'the sacrament of prayer'." FELL. — It was right to follow this most learned man, whom Tillemont too obeyed in this matter, Mémoires ecclésiastiques, in the Life of Firmilian, vol. IV, p. 129, Bruyel edition. So I have put the negative particle, wrongly left out in Baluze's text, before the words, since it seemed to have been swallowed long ago in the preceding word "Domino". Yet to the distinguished Maran, in his Life of Cyprian, the expression seems to have arisen from imitating the Greeks. In the same place, opposing Rigault, who for the words "without the sacrament of the customary proclamation" had wished to put "or the sacrament [printed "sacrrmentum"] of the customary prayer", he goes on to point out from Basil the Great: "The prayers customarily made in the sacrifice are called by Basil, letter 210, 'ecclesiastical proclamations'," p. CXVIII. ROUTH.

(printed under page 658)

(90) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1214

Baptizaret quoque. Vide concilium Carthaginense IV, can. 99 et 100, BALUZ.

"She also baptized." See the Fourth Council of Carthage, canons 99 and 100. BALUZE.

(printed under page 658)

(91) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1214

Defendunt. Multa variant in hoc loco libri veteres. Quidam habent defendunt, alii asserunt, alii deserunt vel deferunt. Nos retinuimus lectionem quam putavimus esse meliorem; nam paulo post legitur: Interrogandi sunt a nobis qui haereticos defendunt. BALUZ.

"They defend." The old books vary a great deal at this place. Some have "defendunt", others "asserunt", others "deserunt" or "deferunt". I have kept the reading I thought better; for a little later one reads: "Those who defend heretics must be questioned by us." BALUZE.

(printed under page 658)

(92) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1214

Christo Spiritum induit. Haec scripsit in loco plus semel memorato cl. Maranus: Cum existimaret Firmilianus adversarios suos in baptismo foris ab adultis suscepto Christo gratiam agnoscere, sic eos refellit. Nam si non mentitur. — Spiritus sanctus. Illud nisi si a Christo Spiritum induit, idem valet ac post Christum; nec probabilis est conjectura Cauchii et Pamelii, qui legendum putant: Nisi a Christo Spiritum non induit. Quae Marani mihi quidem haud satisfaciunt. Quid si non ducit latet in voce induit? ROUTH.

"Puts on the Spirit with Christ." The distinguished Maran wrote this in the passage more than once cited: "Since Firmilian thought that his opponents acknowledged grace for Christ in a baptism received outside by adults, he refutes them thus: For if he does not lie — the Holy Spirit. The phrase 'unless he puts on the Spirit from Christ' means the same as 'after Christ'; nor is the conjecture of Cauchie and Pamelius probable, who think one should read: 'Unless he does not put on the Spirit from Christ'." These words of Maran do not satisfy me, at least. What if "non ducit" lies hidden in the word "induit"? ROUTH.

(printed under page 658)

(printed under page 659)

(62) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215

Non haereticis, sed fidei computandi sunt Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Mich.

"They are to be reckoned not to the heretics but to the faith": Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Mich.

(printed under page 659)

(63) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215

Multae sunt sponsae Mich. Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Bod. 2. Routh.

"There are many brides": Mich., Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2, Routh.

(printed under page 659)

(64) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215

Populum tuum Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. Bod. 2.

"Your people": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC., Bod. 2.

(printed under page 659)

(65) ‹anchor: adversus me est› · call in col 1215

Contra me est Ar.

"Is against me" (contra): Ar.

(printed under page 659)

(66) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215 or 1216

Intus clausus. Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1.

"Shut within": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1.

(printed under page 659)

(67) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215 or 1216

Sic et nos similiter. Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Bod. 2.

"So we too likewise": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2.

(printed under page 659)

(68) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215 or 1216

Quoniam quia Lam. Ebor. NC. 1.

"Since that": Lam., Ebor., NC. 1.

(printed under page 659)

(69) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215 or 1216

Sic Ar. Ebor. Lam. CN. 1. Et salvati omitt. Oxon.

So Ar., Ebor., Lam., CN. [sic] 1. The Oxford edition omits "et salvati" (and saved).

(printed under page 659)

(93) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215

Interrogandi sunt. In quatuor codicibus antiquis scriptum est: Quid interrogandi. Ut hinc colligi debeat aut possit ista respicere ad epistolam quae a Cypriano missa erat ad Firmilianum. BALUZ.

"They must be questioned." In four old manuscripts it is written: "What … to be questioned." So that one should or could conclude from this that these words look back to the letter Cyprian had sent to Firmilian. BALUZE.

(printed under page 659)

(94) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215

Filius Dei. Ego non dubito quin haec lectio bona sit. Et tamen in quinque libris veteribus legitur fidei: in meo, sed fideles. BALUZ.

"Son of God." I do not doubt that this reading is good. And yet in five old books one reads "fidei" (of faith); in mine, "sed fideles" (but the faithful). BALUZE.

(printed under page 659)

(76) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215 [numbered (76) as printed; in sequence it is note 95]

Virginem castam Morelius edidit virginem sanctam castam. Pamelius expunxit vocem sanctum, quia eam non inveniebat in manuscriptis, et quia non reperitur apud Apostolum. Ego tamen illam inveni in sex manuscriptis. Sed deest in aliis quatuor. Tres vero qui habent vocem sanctam non habent castam. Alterutram autem oportet auferri. Retinuimus eam quae est apud Apostolum. BALUZ.

"A chaste virgin." Morel printed "a holy chaste virgin". Pamelius struck out the word "holy", because he did not find it in the manuscripts and because it is not found in the Apostle. I, however, found it in six manuscripts. But it is missing in four others. Three, indeed, that have the word "holy" do not have "chaste". One or the other must be removed. We have kept the one that stands in the Apostle. BALUZE.

(printed under page 659)

(96) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215

Fons signatus. Ista habentur etiam in epistola LXXIV, et in epistola LXXVI. BALUZ.

"A fountain sealed." These words are found also in letter LXXIV and in letter LXXVI. BALUZE.

(printed under page 659)

(97) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1215 or 1216

Sic et nos similiter. Textum sacrum, Cyprianique codices quinque in Var. Lectt. edit. Oxon. commemoratos, secutus nos pro vos imprimendum curavi. ROUTH.

"So we too likewise." Following the sacred text and the five manuscripts of Cyprian recorded in the various readings of the Oxford edition, I have had "nos" (we) printed for "vos" (you). ROUTH.

(printed under page 659)

(printed under page 659)

(70) ‹anchor: per poenitentiam convertantur› · call in col 1216

Conversi Ar.

"Converted": Ar.

(printed under page 659)

(71) ‹anchor: quando in solos› · call in col 1216

Evangelio in solo Ar. Lam.

"In the Gospel on the only …": Ar., Lam.

(printed under page 659)

(72) ‹anchor: Accipite Spiritum sanctum› · call in col 1216

Sanctum: cujus Ar.

"Holy: whose": Ar.

(printed under page 659)

(98) ‹anchor: per poenitentiam convertantur› · call in col 1216

Convertantur. De celebri quaestione hoc unum monebo; exsistere argumenta ab altera parte temporibus illis allata, quibus Firmiliani suorumque rationes convelluntur, et baptismus nomine S. Trinitatis a quovis administro celebratus firmatur, cum alibi tum in admotationibus S. Augustini ad Carthaginense septimum concilium. Hae in libris ejusdem Patris de Baptismo legi possunt. ROUTH.

"Let them be converted." On this famous question I will note this one thing: that there exist arguments brought by the other side in those times, by which the reasonings of Firmilian and his party are overthrown and baptism celebrated in the name of the Holy Trinity by any minister whatever is upheld, both elsewhere and in Saint Augustine's notes [printed "admotationibus"] on the Seventh Council of Carthage. These can be read in the same Father's books On Baptism. ROUTH.

(printed under page 659)

(99) ‹anchor: supra petram› · call in col 1216

Ecclesia… super petram. Paulo post dicet fundamenta Ecclesiae super Petrum collocata fuisse. Vide librum de Unitate Ecclesiae, ubi ista explicantur. BALUZ.

"The Church … upon the rock." A little later he will say that the foundations of the Church were laid upon Peter. See the book On the Unity of the Church, where these things are explained. BALUZE.

(printed under page 659)

(printed under page 660)

(73) ‹anchor: habere profitetur› · call in col 1217

Habere confitetur. Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Routh.

"Confesses [them] to have": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Routh.

(printed under page 660)

(74) ‹anchor: ut dicat eos› · call in col 1217

Dicat eis Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Bod. 2.

"Should say to them": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2.

(printed under page 660)

(75) ‹anchor: qui aliud agit› · call in col 1217

Quid aliud agit Ar. Lam. Ebor NC. 1. Bod. 2,

"What else does he do": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2.

(printed under page 660)

(76) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1217 or 1218

Quicunque et ubicunque Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Bod. 2.

"Whoever and wherever": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2.

(printed under page 660)

(77) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1217 or 1218

Caetera quoque apud haereticos, justa Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Bod. 2.

"The other things too among the heretics, just": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2.

(printed under page 660)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1217

Ordinatione vicaria. Vide notas nostras ad epistolam LXXXIV, Lupi Ferrariensis. BALUZ.

"By vicarious ordination." See our notes on letter LXXXIV of Lupus of Ferrières. BALUZE.

(printed under page 660)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1217

Pari cum eis mote. Ita restituimus ex fide unius codicis antiqui bibliothecae Regiae. Hanc porro restitutionem esse legitimam ostendere videntur etiam alia vetera exemplaria, quae habent pari cum eis perierunt. Quinque et editiones praeferunt pariter. BALUZ.

"By an equal death [printed "mote"] with them." So we have restored it on the authority of one old manuscript of the Royal Library. That this restoration is legitimate other old copies also seem to show, which have "perished equally with them". Five, and the editions, show "pariter" (equally). BALUZE.

(printed under page 660)

(3) ‹anchor: qui aliud agit› · call in col 1217

Quid aliud agit. Et istum quoque locum supplevimus ex fide quatuor veterum exemplarium. BALUZ.

"What else does he do." This place too we have filled out on the authority of four old copies. BALUZE.

(printed under page 660)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1217

Et ubicunque Miror ista excidisse in editione Rigaltii, cum exstent in Morelliana et in Pameliana et in omnibus antiquis codicibus. Magis miror omissa esse ab Anglis, qui ignorare non poterant illa haberi in duabus editionibus a me commemoratis et in quinque codicibus suis antiquis. Vide quae notavi supra ad epistolam LXXIII, BALUZ.

"And wherever." I wonder that these words dropped out of Rigault's edition, since they stand in Morel's and Pamelius's and in all the old manuscripts. I wonder more that they were omitted by the English, who could not be unaware that they were in the two editions I have mentioned and in five of their own old manuscripts. See what I noted above on letter LXXIII. BALUZE.

(printed under page 660)

(78) ‹anchor: quod, relicta› · call in col 1218

Rejecta Forsan. Routh.

"Rejected": perhaps so, Routh.

(printed under page 660)

(79) ‹anchor: et ab apostolis› · call in col 1218

Apostolis. Lam. NC. Ebor.

"Apostles" (without "ab"): Lam., NC., Ebor.

(printed under page 660)

(80) ‹anchor: Patrem et Filium› · call in col 1218

Filium et Sp. sanctum Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. Bod. 2.

"The Son and the Holy Spirit": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, Bod. 2.

(printed under page 660)

(5) ‹anchor: non ut nos› · call in col 1218

Non ut nos. Hanc lectionem, quam puto esse optimam, inveni in uno libro meo vetere. Morellius posuit non vos; eamque lectionem ego reperi in quatuor codicibus antiquis. Pamelius emendavit ex conjectura et scripsit novos prophetas, tum quia conjecturam suam confirmatam reperit auctoritate codicis Anglicani quo ipse utebatur, tum quod antea Firmilianus novarum prophetiarum meminerit. Itaque ex editione Pamelii emersit vulgaris. Videtur autem Firmilianus respexisse ad haeresim Marcionitarum, quos Epiphanius ait repudiasse legem ac prophetas. Monet praeterea Pamelius in codice suo Anglicano legi et Spiritum sanctum post Patrem et Filium. Quod ego in nullo eorum veterum exemplarium reperi quibus usus sum in hac epistola re- (continues)

"Not as we [do]." This reading, which I think the best, I found in one old book of my own. Morel put "non vos" (not you); and I found that reading in four old manuscripts. Pamelius emended by conjecture and wrote "novos prophetas" (new prophets), both because he found his conjecture confirmed by the authority of the English manuscript he was using, and because Firmilian had earlier mentioned the new prophecies. So the common reading arose from Pamelius's edition. But Firmilian seems to have had in view the heresy of the Marcionites, who, Epiphanius says, rejected the law and the prophets. Pamelius notes further that in his English manuscript "and the Holy Spirit" is read after "the Father and the Son". This I found in none of the old copies I used in re[vising] this letter … (continues)

(printed under page 660)

(printed under page 661)

(81) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1219 or 1220

Non modicum conjic. Routh. Vide. not.

"No small": Routh's conjecture. See the note.

(printed under page 661)

(82) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1219 or 1220

Ut non abluti, communicatione continguant Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1.

"So that, unwashed, they may by communion [stain]": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1.

(printed under page 661)

(5) (continued) ‹anchor: not visible› · call on the previous page

censenda. Rejecit autem Pamelius hoc additamentum, quia Cataphrygae non eumdem Spiritum sanctum cum catholicis agnoscebant, utpote qui non illud sed Montanum esse paracletum a Christo promissum dicerent. BALUZ. Statuenti hic Baluzio respexisse Firmilianum ad Marcionitas recte opponas, veteres Patres id semper solitos esse pro certo statuere, alium ac diversum Deum agnoscere Marcionitas, qui Christi Patrem negarent creavisse mundum. Audi Tertullianum adhuc catholicum in hac ipsa de Baptismi quaestione idem suggerentem. Non debeo, inquit, in illis (haereticis) agnoscere quod mihi est praeceptum, quia non idem Deus est nobis et illis, nec unus Christus, id est, idem: de Baptismo, cap. 15. Itaque veterem revocavi lectionem, quae cum melior apparet, tum exstat in codice Bodleiano atque illo Novi Collegii, caeterisque fortasse mss., qui in editione Oxon. afferri solent, quippe cum nulla sit varietas lectionis ibidem notata. Caeterum additamentum illud, et Spiritum sanctum in codd, quinque repertum fuisse novimus ex ead. editione. Ostendit vero hic ipse Firmiliani locus recte sensisse de Patre Filioque hos quidem Montanistas. ROUTH.

… [is] to be reckoned. Pamelius rejected this addition because the Cataphrygians did not acknowledge the same Holy Spirit as the Catholics, since they said that not he but Montanus was the Paraclete promised by Christ. BALUZE. Against Baluze's view here that Firmilian had the Marcionites in mind, you may rightly object that the old Fathers always used to state as certain that the Marcionites acknowledged another and a different God, since they denied that the Father of Christ created the world. Hear Tertullian, still a Catholic, suggesting the same on this very question of baptism: "I ought not," he says, "to acknowledge in them (the heretics) what is commanded to me, because the God is not the same for us and for them, nor is there one Christ, that is, the same": On Baptism, chapter 15. So I have restored the old reading, which both appears better and stands in the Bodleian manuscript and that of New College, and perhaps in the other manuscripts usually adduced in the Oxford edition, since no variant reading is noted there. Moreover, we know from the same edition that the addition "and the Holy Spirit" was found in five manuscripts. This very passage of Firmilian, indeed, shows that these Montanists at least thought rightly of the Father and the Son. ROUTH.

(printed under page 661)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1219

Perfide. Ita Morellius et quatuor libri veteres: alii quatuor habent per fidem, BALUZ.

"Faithlessly." So Morel and four old books; four others have "per fidem" (through faith). BALUZE.

(printed under page 661)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1219

In eorum numero… habentur. Sic restituimus hunc locum auctoritate vetusti codicis Compendiensis et Michaelini, in quibus vox habentur est transposita, sed tamen cum nota veteri, quae ostendit ubi ponenda sit, nimirum post vocem numero. Itaque cadit conjectura Rigaltii hunc locum emendantis. BALUZ. — Edd. omnes, non modo dicunt. Sed recipienda videbatur conjectura Prudentio Marano (Vita Cypr. § 31 extr.) et Routhio communis (scilic. non modicum dicunt). GOLDHORN. — Cum post verbum obierunt posita esset ante Baluzii mutationem vox habentur, Rigaltius locum sic emendandum voluit, habent non modo dicunt emolumentum. Affert vero Fellus longam sed satis contortam interpretationem verborum, non modo dicunt emolumentum Ausim ergo reponere, non modicum emolumentum; Graece, Οὐ μέτριον κέρδος ἀληθείας καὶ πίστεως. Exstant voces, non modicam supra § 12. Et postquam haec scripsi, visis Marani verbis gavisus sum, quod ante me eodem fere modo locum corrigere voluisset, « Alium locum, inquit, longe difficiliorem emendare conabor. de iis qui foris baptizati sine novo baptismo in Ecclesia obierunt, sic statuit Firmilianus Si de saeculo non sunt morte praeventi Existimat Rigaltius verbum habent reponendum post habentur, et sic emendat: habent non modo discunt emolumentum veritatis et fidei: sed multo aptius legi posset: habent non modicum emolumentum, pro non modo dicunt aut non modo discunt. » Haec Maranus in Vit. S. Cypriani, § 31, p. 118. Sed haud necesse esse ut addatur habent, opinor. ROUTH.

"Are held … in their number." So we have restored this place on the authority of the old manuscripts of Compiègne and Saint-Mihiel, in which the word "habentur" is transposed, but with an old mark showing where it should go, namely after the word "numero". So Rigault's conjecture emending this place falls. BALUZE. — All the editions: "non modo dicunt". But the conjecture shared by Prudent Maran (Life of Cyprian § 31, end) and Routh seemed worth accepting (namely "non modicum dicunt"). GOLDHORN. — Since, before Baluze's change, the word "habentur" stood after the verb "obierunt", Rigault wanted the place emended thus: "habent non modo dicunt emolumentum". Fell offers a long but rather twisted interpretation of the words "non modo dicunt emolumentum". I would venture, then, to restore "non modicum emolumentum" (no small gain); in Greek, "no moderate gain of truth and faith". The words "non modicam" occur above, § 12. And after I had written this, on seeing Maran's words I was glad that before me he had wished to correct the place in almost the same way: "I shall try," he says, "to emend another place, far more difficult. Of those baptized outside who died in the Church without a new baptism Firmilian decides thus: If they have not been overtaken by death from the world … Rigault thinks the word 'habent' should be put back after 'habentur', and emends thus: 'they have not only … learn the gain of truth and faith'; but one could read much more aptly: 'they have no small gain', for 'non modo dicunt' or 'non modo discunt'." So Maran in the Life of Saint Cyprian, § 31, p. 118. But I do not think it necessary to add "habent". ROUTH.

(printed under page 661)

(printed under page 661)

(83) ‹anchor: et Deum Christi› · call in col 1220

Dominum Christum Ar. NC. 1.

"The Lord Christ": Ar., NC. 1.

(printed under page 661)

(8) ‹anchor: contingant› · call in col 1220

Contingunt. In editione Pameliana perperam, per errorem videlicet typographi, et dein in Rigaltiana et in Anglicana scriptum est continguant, sed non in editione Goulartii. Sane hanc pravam lectionem Angli scribunt se invenisse in quatuor codicibus antiquis. Sed istud non probat illam esse retinendam, cum prava sit omnino et minime Latina. BALUZ.

"They touch." In Pamelius's edition, wrongly, by a printer's error evidently, and then in Rigault's and the English one, "continguant" is written, but not in Goulart's edition. Indeed the English write that they found this faulty reading in four old manuscripts. But that does not prove it should be kept, since it is altogether faulty and not Latin at all. BALUZE.

(printed under page 661)

(9) ‹anchor: coactus succubuit› · call in col 1220

Necessitate persecutionis coactus succubuit. Hic, quod constat ex superioribus, clericus designatur. Clericus autem lapsus ordine sacro moveri solitus est, neque ei licuit ut baptizandi ritum administraret. ROUTH.

"Forced by the necessity of persecution, he gave way." Here, as is clear from what precedes, a cleric is meant. A cleric who lapsed was customarily removed from sacred orders, and he was not permitted to administer the rite of baptism. ROUTH.

(printed under page 661)

(10) ‹anchor: et Deum Christi› · call in col 1220

Deum Christi. Ista sic ponuntur tanquam si Deus esset conditor Christi et totius mundi. Videndum igitur an lectio veteris libri Remigiam et duorum Anglicanorum praeferenda sit, qui pro Christi habent Dominum nostrum. At si ea lectio placet, tollenda est conjunctio. In uno meo legitur Domini Christi. BALUZ. — Ex edit. Oxon. constat exstare verba Dominum Christum, non, ut ait Baluzius (continues)

"The God of Christ." These words are so placed as though God were the maker of Christ and of the whole world. We must see, then, whether the reading of the old Saint-Remi book and of two English ones should be preferred, which for "Christi" have "Dominum nostrum" (our Lord). But if that reading is approved, the conjunction must be removed. In one of mine one reads "Domini Christi". BALUZE. — From the Oxford edition it is clear that the words "Dominum Christum" stand, not, as Baluze says, … (continues)

(printed under page 661)

(printed under page 662)

(84) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1221 or 1222

Sic Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1. MR. Qui ipsi Rig.

So Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1, MR. Rigault reads "qui ipsi" (who themselves).

(printed under page 662)

(85) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1221 or 1222

Quia adversus hostes Dei asserit Lam.

"Because he asserts against the enemies of God": Lam.

(printed under page 662)

(86) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1221 or 1222

Contendit forte, Routh.

"Contends": perhaps so, Routh.

(printed under page 662)

(10) (continued) ‹anchor: not visible› · call on the previous page

Dominum nostrum in codd. et Novi Collegii. Ab hoc quidem ms., sicut a cod. Bodleiano, haud male abest particula et ante vos totius mundi. Ad verba autem quod attinet, Patrem et Deum Christi, similiter locutus est Dominus ipse ad Mariam Magdalenam in S. Joannis Evangelio XX, 17. Similiter scripserunt apostoli ejus. Confer. Rom. XV, 6; II Cor. XI, 3; Ephes., I, 3, 17; Coloss., I, 3; Hebr., I, 9; I Pet., I, 3. ROUTH.

… "Dominum nostrum" in the manuscripts, including that of New College. From this manuscript indeed, as from the Bodleian, the particle "et" before the words "totius mundi" is, not wrongly, absent. As for the words "the Father and God of Christ", the Lord himself spoke in like manner to Mary Magdalene in Saint John's Gospel XX, 17. His apostles wrote in like manner. Compare Rom. XV, 6; II Cor. XI, 3; Eph. I, 3, 17; Col. I, 3; Heb. I, 9; I Pet. I, 3. ROUTH.

(printed under page 662)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1221

Qui cum ipsi. Qui ipsi in omnibus peccatis sint constituti. Veterem lectionem restitui. Primus eddidit Fellus post codices scriptos qui cum ipsi pro qui ipsi, quod quidem ex duplici lectione ortum videtur. Posuit autem Pamelius sunt pro sint ex Cauchii vel codice vel conjectura ejusdem. ROUTH.

"Who, though themselves." "Who themselves are set in all sins." I have restored the old reading. Fell was the first to print [printed "eddidit"], following the manuscripts, "qui cum ipsi" for "qui ipsi", which seems indeed to have arisen from a double reading. Pamelius put "sunt" for "sint" from Cauchie's manuscript or conjecture. ROUTH.

(printed under page 662)

(42) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1221 [numbered (42) as printed; in sequence it is note 12]

Ab aqua aliena. Adnotat editio Anglicana textum hunc frustra alibi requiri quam in versione Graeca, niminum abesse a codicibus Hebraeis et vulgato Latino, haberi tamen in Syriaca, Arabica, et Armenica interpretatione, et hinc confici posse eamdem versionem Graecam, etiam illic ubi ab Hebraeo disceditur, ubique terrarum invaluisse. Tertullianus, lib. I adversus Marcionem: Non putem impudentiorem quam qui in alieua aqua alii deo tingitur. Vide notas ad epistolam LXXIII, Ecclesia paradisi instar. BALUZ.

"From strange water." The English edition notes that this text is sought in vain anywhere but in the Greek version, being absent, namely [printed "niminum"], from the Hebrew manuscripts and the Latin Vulgate, but found in the Syriac, Arabic and Armenian translations; and that from this it can be concluded that the same Greek version, even where it departs from the Hebrew, prevailed everywhere in the world. Tertullian, book I Against Marcion: "I should not think anyone more shameless than one who is dipped in another's water [printed "alieua"] for another god." See the notes on letter LXXIII, "The Church like a paradise". BALUZE.

(printed under page 662)

(13) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1221

Justius. Non possum omittere quin admoneam septem vetera exemplaria praeferre injustius. Sequi tamen placuit editionem Morellii, quam confirmant tria vetera exemplaria. ID.

"More justly." I cannot omit to point out that seven old copies show "injustius" (more unjustly). Yet I chose to follow Morel's edition, which three old copies confirm. THE SAME [Baluze].

(printed under page 662)

(14) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1221

Adversus eum qui, Ita Morellius et tres libri veteres. Omnes alii omittunt cum qui, etiam unus Anglicanus. ID.

"Against him who." So Morel and three old books. All the others omit "cum [sic] qui", even one English one. THE SAME.

(printed under page 662)

(15) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1221

Imperitos etiam animosos. Quintilianus I, I, c. 1: Nihil enim pejus est iis qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras progressi, falsam sibi scientiae persuasionem induerunt: nam et cedere praecipiendi peritis indignantur, et velut jure quodam potestatis, quo fere hoc hominum genus intumescit, imperiosi atque interim saevientes stultitiam suam perdocent. Vide etiam lib. VI, cap. 4, et lib. VIII, cap. 2. Joannes Saresberiensis, lib. VII. de Nugis Curialium, cap. 9: Ille tamen contradicit citius et pertinacius qui in paucitate rerum addiscenda consumpsit aetatem, et tanta angustia premitur, ut, si verbum unum aut duo subduxeris, elinguis fiat et quavis statuae taciturnior. Vitruvius in praefatione libri III: Animadverto potius indoctos quam doctos gratia superare. Hieronymus, in Apologia adversus Rufinum: Animosus inhonestus est. Nonius Marcellus: Animosi dicuntur iracundi. Augustinus sermone 164 de verbis Apostoli: Humanum fuit errare; diabolicum est per animositatem in errore manere. Agobardus in libro de Granine et Tonitruis, notat imperitos loqui confidenter. Animosus tamen apud Latinos accipiebatur pro magno viro et forti animo praedito, animositas vero pro vehementia et impetu animi. ID.

"The unskilled, and hot-tempered too." Quintilian I, I, ch. 1: "For nothing is worse than those who, having advanced a little beyond their first letters, have put on a false conviction of knowledge: for they disdain to yield to those skilled in teaching, and, as if by some right of authority, with which this kind of man commonly swells, domineering and at times raging, they teach their own folly through and through." See also book VI, chapter 4, and book VIII, chapter 2. John of Salisbury, book VII of the Nugae curialium, chapter 9: "Yet he contradicts more quickly and more stubbornly who has spent his life learning a few things, and is pressed by such narrowness that, if you take away one word or two, he becomes tongueless and more silent than any statue." Vitruvius, in the preface to book III: "I observe that the unlearned rather than the learned prevail in favour." Jerome, in the Apology against Rufinus: "The hot-tempered man is dishonourable." Nonius Marcellus: "The angry are called animosi." Augustine, sermon 164 on the words of the Apostle: "To err was human; to remain in error through animosity is diabolical." Agobard, in the book On Hail [printed "Granine"] and Thunder, notes that the unskilled speak confidently. Yet among the Latins "animosus" was taken to mean a great man endowed with a strong spirit, and "animositas" to mean vehemence and impetuosity of spirit. THE SAME.

(printed under page 662)

(16) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1222

Consilii et sermonis. Fositan scripserat Firmilianus, συνέσεως καὶ λόγου. ROUT.

"Of counsel and speech." Perhaps [printed "Fositan"] Firmilian had written "of understanding and speech". ROUTH.

(printed under page 662)

(17) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1222

Parat lites. Ita scriptum est in sex libris antiquis; tres alii habent parit. Mihi autem prior lectio videtur esse melior, quia in capite XXIX Proverbiorum, ex quo sumptus est hic locus, legitur vir iracundus provocat rixas. Apud Cassianum, lib, VIII, cap. 1, scriptum est: Vir animosus parat rixas.

"Prepares quarrels." So it is written in six old books; three others have "parit" (begets). But the former reading seems better to me, because in chapter XXIX of Proverbs, from which this passage is taken, one reads "an angry man stirs up strife". In Cassian, book VIII, chapter 1, it is written: "A hot-tempered man prepares quarrels."

(printed under page 662)

(printed under page 663)

(87) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223 or 1224

Qui est super omnia Lam. Ebor.

"Who is above all": Lam., Ebor.

(printed under page 663)

(88) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223 or 1224

Salubria Ar. Lam. Ebor. NC. 1.

"Healthful things": Ar., Lam., Ebor., NC. 1.

(printed under page 663)

(18) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223

Quid enim humilius. Simili ironia Lactantius, cap. 23, de Moribus Persecutorum, usus est loquens de crudelitate Maximiani adversus mendicos, quos congregari omnes jussit et exportatos naviculis in mare mergi. Ait ergo Lactantius: Adeo hominem misericordem, qui providerit ne quis illo imperante miser esset BALUZ.

"For what is more humble?" Lactantius used a like irony in chapter 23 of On the Deaths [printed "Moribus"] of the Persecutors, speaking of Maximian's cruelty to beggars, whom he ordered all to be gathered, carried out in boats and drowned in the sea. So Lactantius says: "So merciful a man, who saw to it that no one should be miserable while he reigned!" BALUZE.

(printed under page 663)

(19) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223

A quibus legatos episcopos, etc. Haud dubium videtur quin ab Afris, potius quam ob Orientalibus, Romam missi sint legati. Contrarium tamen affirmant Baronius in Annalibus, et Natalis Alexander Hist. eccles. Sed hoc in Afros gestum a Stephano fuisse, post Pearsonium retulerunt Pagius, Tillemontius, Basnagius. « Quid ex illorum verborum serie lucidius (inquit Pearsonius in Annalibus Cyprianicis, ad ann. LVI) quam legatos eos episcopali honore conspicuos, non ab Orientalibus, sed ab iis qui in Meridie erant, hoc est Afris, missos fuisse? neque alter haec Firmiliani verba (quae citata praecedunt), intelligenda esse sentio. Nisi quod non gratiam referre Stephano in isto possumus, quod per illius inhumanitatem nunc effectum sit, ut fidei et sapientiae vestrae experimentum caperemus (supra, p. 222). Illa enim inhumanitas nihil aliud erat quam legatorum rejectio, per quam nec confabulatio jam posset esse, aut sermo communis, Illi legati in synodo Carthaginensi secunda missi. » § VII, ROUTH.

"From whom bishops as envoys," etc. There seems no doubt that the envoys were sent to Rome by the Africans rather than by [printed "ob"] the Easterners. Yet Baronius in the Annals and Noël Alexandre in the Ecclesiastical History affirm the contrary. But that this was done by Stephen against the Africans, Pagi, Tillemont and Basnage reported after Pearson. "What is clearer from the sequence of those words," says Pearson in the Annales Cyprianici at the year [2]56, "than that those envoys, distinguished by episcopal rank, were sent not by the Easterners but by those who were in the South, that is, the Africans? Nor do I think these words of Firmilian (quoted before) are to be understood otherwise: Except that we cannot but thank Stephen in this, that through his inhumanity it has now come about that we have had proof of your faith and wisdom (above, p. 222). For that inhumanity was nothing other than the rejection of the envoys, by which there could no longer be conversation or common speech. Those envoys were sent at the second synod of Carthage." § VII. ROUTH.

(printed under page 663)

(20) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223

Nec ad sermonem admitteret. Id est, ne in conspectum quidem suum venire permitteret. Eodem modo humanitatis et urbanitatis usus est comes Flandriae erga legatos Clementis papae VII, qui tantum abfuit ut audirentur, inquit Radulphus de Rivo, ut ne admissi quidem fuerint. sed rejecti ac facessere jussi, nisi sibi vincula mallent exspectare. Emendabo autem, data occasione, locum ex panegyrico quem Nazarius dixit ad Constantinum post devictum Maxentium, cum modestia Caesaris erga illum laudatur. Ubi sic inter alia legitur in omnibus antiquis codicibus et editionibus: Vocas ad societatem. Appetitum tuum refugit, aversatur, horrescit. Vox appetitum, hic loco non suo posita, exercuit industriam criticorum; quorum nonnulli censuerunt reponendum esse affectum, alii amicum. Miror autem veram lectionem, quae facilis et obvia est, nemini eorum in mentem venisse. Reponendum est itaque aspectum, ut sit sensus: Vocabas Maxentium ad societatem imperii. At ille, ut erat natura ferox et superbus, nedum id quod offerebas amplecti voluit, sed etiam aspectum tuum refugit, aversatus est, horruit, sed etiam ultro lacessivit quem ambire debuerat, ut legitur paulo post. BALUZ.

"Nor would he admit them to speech." That is, he would not even let them come into his sight. The count of Flanders showed the same kind of humanity and courtesy to the envoys of Pope Clement VII, who, says Radulph de Rivo, were so far from being heard that they were not even admitted, but were rejected and ordered to be gone, unless they preferred to expect chains. I shall take the occasion to emend a passage from the panegyric which Nazarius spoke to Constantine after the defeat of Maxentius, where the Caesar's moderation towards him is praised. There, among other things, one reads in all the old manuscripts and editions: "You call him to partnership. He flees your appetite [appetitum], turns away, shudders." The word "appetitum", here out of place, has exercised the ingenuity of the critics; some of them judged that "affectum" should be restored, others "amicum". I wonder that the true reading, which is easy and obvious, came to the mind of none of them. So "aspectum" must be restored, giving the sense: You called Maxentius to partnership in the empire. But he, fierce and proud by nature as he was, not only would not embrace what you offered, but even fled your sight, turned away, shuddered, and even went on to provoke the one he ought to have courted, as one reads a little later. BALUZE.

(printed under page 663)

(21) ‹anchor: ipsa anima› · call in col 1223

Fortasse ipsa anima. Recentior Remigianus, apud quem fortasse una anima est sic lubrica ID.

"Perhaps the very soul." The more recent Saint-Remi manuscript: "with whom perhaps one soul is so slippery." THE SAME.

(printed under page 663)

(52) ‹anchor: baptisma (call printed "(2s)" in the text)› · call in col 1224 [numbered (52) as printed; in sequence it is note 22]

Unum baptisma. Nescio quo modo factum est ut ista, quae exstant in Epistola Pauli ad Ephesios, omissa sint istic in octo exemplaribus antiquis. ID.

"One baptism." I do not know how it came about that these words, which stand in Paul's Letter to the Ephesians, were left out here in eight old copies. THE SAME.

(printed under page 663)

(23) ‹anchor: Si Dominus unus est (call printed "(52)" in the text)› · call in col 1224

Dominus unus est. Hoc membrum omissum est in editione Rigaltii, restitutum in Anglicana. Sed nescio quonam modo factum est ut Angli absque ullius libri veteris auctoritate, contra fidem veterum exemplarium et editionis Morellianae scripserint consequens est qua unitas est; nisi si maluerunt amplecti conjecturam Pamelii, qui monuerat in margine suae editionis legendum esse unitas, vel auctoritatem Goulartii, qui eam vocem posuit in contextu, nulla Pamelii mentione. Reinhartus in sua editione reposuit unus. ID. — Exstat in Novi Coll. codice quia unus est, quod edidit Baluzius. Legerim, quia Deus unus est, id quod sequentia verba suadent. Quia pro quod apud hos scriptores poni solet. ROUTH.

"There is one Lord." This clause is omitted in Rigault's edition and restored in the English one. But I do not know how it came about that the English, without the authority of any old book, against the testimony of the old copies and of Morel's edition, wrote "it follows that there is unity"; unless they preferred to embrace the conjecture of Pamelius, who had noted in the margin of his edition that "unitas" should be read, or the authority of Goulart, who put that word in the text with no mention of Pamelius. Reinhart in his edition restored "unus". THE SAME. — The New College manuscript has "quia unus est", which Baluze printed. I would read "quia Deus unus est" (because God is one), which the following words suggest. "Quia" is commonly used for "quod" by these writers. ROUTH.

(printed under page 663)

(24) ‹anchor: Cyprianum pseudo-Christum› · call in col 1224

Pseudo-Christum. Imitatum est istud ex capite undecimo Epistolae II Pauli ad Corinthios. Hinc patet, inquit Pamelius, vehementiam epistolae Stephani papae in causa fuisse cur tam vehementer etiam contra eum scriberent Cyprianus et Firmilianus. Recte sane. Non enim aliud causae exstitit, (continues)

"A false Christ." This is imitated from the eleventh chapter of Paul's Second Letter to the Corinthians. "Hence it is clear," says Pamelius, "that the vehemence of Pope Stephen's letter was the reason why Cyprian and Firmilian also wrote so vehemently against him." Quite right. For no other cause arose, … (continues)

(printed under page 663)

(24, continued) ‹anchor: Cyprianum pseudo-Christum (col 1224)› · call in col 1224 [continues from page 663; runs on from the left half of the Variorum notae into the right half, under col 1226] cur Firmilianus, qui in tota epistola summum amorem unitatis declarat, sic tamen in Stephanum invehatur, ut eum disputationis aestu abreptum fuisse pateat. Nihil lenius ac placabilius Cypriano, ejusque animi moderatio cum in omnibus aliis rebus, tum maxime in hac de Baptismo controversia enituit; sed tamen eum interdum a summa illa lenitate ad vehementiorem causae defensionem transiisse perspicitur ex epistola ad Pompeium. Videtur autem Cyprianum et Firmilianum illud in primis offendisse, quod Stephanus putaret abstinendos rebaptizantes. Propter haec autem verba, quae putat non esse Stephani, dubitare se ait Christianus Lupus in scholiis suis ad librum Tertulliani de Praescriptionibus adversus haereticos, an epistola Firmiliani sit vera. Tamen nemo hactenus ante Lupum id sibi sumpsit, ut dicere auderet eam esse falsam aut de ejus auctoritate dubitaret. Et certe ista facilitas accusandi falsitatis scripta veterum valde temeraria est et periculosa. Nam si cuique liceat inanes ejusmodi conjecturas sequi: nullum erit antiquitatis monumentum, quod iniquas suspiciones effugiat. BALUZ. — Ita Baluzius. Haud interea mihi visus est voluisse hoc scribere Christianus Lupus, Firmiliani epistola an germana sit, se dubitare; de appellationibus autem probrosis Cypriano a Stephano attributis, an hae ab eo revera prolatae fuerint, se haesitare. Vid Scholia ejus ad Tertulliani c. 4, pag. 121, At cogitandum, quibus dicteriis ipsum, ut videtur, Cyprianum lacessiverit vetus quidam Stephanianae de haereticorum baptismo sententiae stator, qui est auctor de Rebaptismate, ad fin. op. S. Cypriani. Conferas quae de Firmiliani epistola supra annotantur. ROUTH.

… why Firmilian, who throughout the letter declares the highest love of unity, nevertheless inveighs against Stephen in such a way that it is plain he was carried away by the heat of the dispute. Nothing was gentler or more placable than Cyprian, and the moderation of his mind shone out in all other matters, and most of all in this controversy about baptism; yet it is seen from the letter to Pompeius that he sometimes passed from that supreme gentleness to a more vehement defence of his cause. And what seems above all to have offended Cyprian and Firmilian is that Stephen held that those who rebaptize should be excluded from communion. Because of these words, which he thinks are not Stephen's, Christianus Lupus says in his scholia on Tertullian's book On the Prescription against Heretics that he doubts whether Firmilian's letter is genuine. Yet no one before Lupus had ever taken it upon himself to dare to say that it is false, or to doubt its authority. And surely this readiness to accuse the writings of the ancients of forgery is very rash and dangerous. For if anyone may follow empty conjectures of this kind, there will be no monument of antiquity that escapes unjust suspicion. BALUZE. — So Baluze. Meanwhile, Christianus Lupus does not seem to me to have meant to write that he doubts whether Firmilian's letter is genuine, but that he hesitates over the abusive names attributed to Cyprian by Stephen, whether they were really uttered by him. See his Scholia on Tertullian, ch. 4, p. 121. But one must consider with what gibes Cyprian himself, as it seems, was assailed by a certain old upholder of Stephen's opinion on the baptism of heretics, the author of On Rebaptism, at the end of the works of St Cyprian. Compare what is noted above on Firmilian's letter. ROUTH.

(printed under page 664, in the Variorum notae above the PROLEGOMENA band; "Vid" without a full stop as printed)

(25) ‹anchor: Qui omnia› · call in col 1225

Qui omnia. Quae omnia legendum olim duxi, prius quam sic se habere novissem editionem principem, siquidem postea Pamelius qui pro quae, ex ms. suo edidit, aliis, fateor, libris scriptis consentientibus. Sed fortasse Graece scripserat Firmilianus vel ἅ δὴ πάντα, vel τάδε δὲ πάντα. ID.

"He who … all." I once judged that "quae omnia" (all which things) should be read, before I knew that the first edition has it so; for Pamelius afterwards printed "qui" for "quae" from his manuscript, with other written books, I admit, agreeing. But perhaps Firmilian had written in Greek either ἅ δὴ πάντα or τάδε δὲ πάντα. THE SAME.

(printed under page 664, right half of the Variorum notae)

(26) ‹anchor: quae ipse› · call in col 1225

Quae ipse. In recentiore codice Remigiano et in Anglicano Pamelii legitur, quae ei immerito objici deberent. Sic etiam in quatuor antiquis in editione Anglicana laudatis.

"Which he himself." In the more recent Remigian manuscript and in Pamelius's English one the reading is "which ought undeservedly to be cast at him". So too in four old manuscripts cited in the English edition.

(printed under page 664, right half of the Variorum notae)

(27) ‹anchor: omnibus nobis› · call in col 1225

Omnibus nobis. Haec mihi videntur esse luxata. Quid si legatur charissime frater, errore irrepente ex ignorantia notarum, ut etiam adnotavit Hieronymus in epistola ad Avitum de erroribus Origenis, ubi ait difficile esse notarum posse servare compendia. Simon Goulartius monuit in codice episcopi Acconensis scriptum fuisse: Bene te valere cum universis qui in Africa sunt episcopis et cunctis clericis et omni fraternitate optamus. Quam lectionem, ut meliorem, posuit Reinhartus. Et nihilominus ego praefero conjecturam meam. Nihil tamen ausus sum mutare, destitutus auctoritate veterum exemplarium.

"All of us." These words seem to me to be dislocated. What if one were to read "dearest brother", the error having crept in through ignorance of the shorthand signs, as Jerome also noted in his letter to Avitus on the errors of Origen, where he says that it is difficult to preserve the abbreviations of shorthand? Simon Goulart noted that in the manuscript of the bishop of Acco there was written: "We wish you well, with all the bishops who are in Africa and all the clergy and the whole brotherhood." Reinhart set this reading as the better. And nevertheless I prefer my own conjecture. Yet I have not dared to change anything, lacking the authority of the old copies.

(printed under page 664, right half of the Variorum notae)

(none in this unit; the PROLEGOMENA band, ARTICULUS I and the prose below it belong to PL003/de_rebaptismate and are set there)

(none in this unit; the Variorum notae printed under this column (the end of note 24, and notes 25–27) answer calls in cols 1224–1225 and are set in n1225.md; the page-foot notes (4) and (5) belong to PL003/de_rebaptismate)