S. Cornelius papa et martyr, Epistolae, et quae ad eum scriptae sunt

[The rendered foot is cut at the top: the start of the notes on this page (heading, any variant readings, and the beginning of note (46)) lies above the crop, and about two lines at the top of the right-hand note column are also cut. Check the full page.] (printed under page 419)

(46) ‹anchor: not visible› · call above the rendered foot (beginning not visible)

[…] attinentia tum didicisse se commemorat, quæ in illa non habentur. At Novatiani nomen in hac epistola consulto taceri, ejusque loco pronomen substitui, sequens, de cujus integritate nullus dubitat, fidem faciet, utpote in qua Cornelius eadem ratione se gerit. Hoc et subinde imitati sunt alii pontifices, nominatimque Cœlestinus erga Nestorium, necnon et Patres: vel quod in hæreseon ortu parcendum duxerint hæresiarcharum nominibus, vel quod ab iis appellandis abhorruerint. Neque certius Epistolam istam truncatam probant specialia quædam, quæ a Cypriano narrantur, nec in hac exprimuntur, de Nicostrato et Evaristo adjuncta: cum ea ille Nicephori ore potuerit ediscere. Huic porro in Africam festinanti primum sola tradita est hæc Epistola. Deinde cum in procinctu esset, ei et subsequens adjuncta est. Utramque vero simul pertulit. COUST. — Hæc epistola in omnibus fere codicibus antiquis dicitur esse Cypriani ad Cornelium. Ego esse Cornelii ad Cyprianum nuspiam reperi quam in Corbeiensi et in uno meo. In excerptis tamen ad me missis ex codice 199 bibliothecæ Vaticanæ lego eam scriptam esse a Cornelio ad Cyprianum hoc modo: « Epistola Cornelii ad Cyprianum de factione schismaticorum. Cornelius Cypriano salutem. Ne quid. » Itaque ambigi non potest quin vere sit Cornelii. Putavit autem Pamelius illam non esse integram et esse tantum fragmentum, Rigaltius esse sequelam vel additamentum potius alicujus ex præcedentibus. BALUZIUS.

[…] he records that he then learned things relating to [it], which are not in that letter. But the following letter, whose integrity no one doubts, will make it credible that Novatian's name is deliberately left unspoken in this letter and a pronoun put in its place, since in it Cornelius behaves in the same way. Other pontiffs soon imitated this, Celestine in particular towards Nestorius, and the Fathers too: either because, when heresies arose, they thought it best to spare the names of the heresiarchs, or because they shrank from naming them. Nor do certain particulars which Cyprian relates, and which are not expressed in this letter, prove any more surely that it is truncated, such as the details added about Nicostratus and Evaristus, since he could have learned these from Nicephorus's own mouth. This letter was at first handed to Nicephorus alone as he hurried to Africa; then, when he was ready to set out, the following one was added to it, and he carried both together. COUST. — In almost all the ancient codices this letter is said to be Cyprian's to Cornelius. I found it to be Cornelius's to Cyprian nowhere except in the Corbie codex and in one of my own. Yet in the excerpts sent to me from codex 199 of the Vatican library I read that it was written by Cornelius to Cyprian, thus: "Letter of Cornelius to Cyprian on the faction of the schismatics. Cornelius to Cyprian, greeting. Ne quid." So there can be no doubt that it is truly Cornelius's. Pamelius thought it was not complete but only a fragment; Rigault, that it was rather a sequel or appendix to one of the preceding letters. BALUZIUS.

(printed under page 419)

(47) ‹anchor: Hujus scelerati hominis› · call in col 735 (by position)

Hujus scelerati hominis. De vero isto ita Hieronymus, De Viris Ill., cap. 70: « Novatianus Romanæ urbis presbyter adversus Cornelium cathedram sacerdotalem conatus invadere, Novatianorum, quod Græce dicitur Καθάρων, dogma constituit, nolens apostatas suscipere pœnitentiales. » Plura videas in ea quæ mox sequitur, ad Fabium Cornelii Epistola: atque in pluribus Dionysii Alex. apud Eusebium epistolis. Maxime vero notabile est tacere semper Cornelium adversarii sui Novatiani nomen in epistolis quæ restant; de cujus quidem nominis varia scriptura aliquid hic dicam. Huic nimirum, pariter atque æquali ejus Novato Afro, verum nomen Novatum fuisse, fuse disputavit Cl. Larduerus De Fide Hist. Evang. p. II, vol. V, not. ad calcem, vol. in cap. 47, qui et nonnullos aucto- [… about two lines cut at the top of the right column …] quidem loco Ναυατιανῷ, non, ut vulgo legitur, Νοουάτῳ cum illud in Dionysii codicibus invenisset. Porro nil contrarium colligendum esse videtur ex derivato Novatiani, quasi a nomine Novato ductum illud fuerit, quum aliter asseclæ isti Novatianani dicendi essent. Hoc enim Scaligerum haud induxit, ut crederet hominem Novatum dictum fuisse. Vid. Animadv. ejus in Chronico Eusebii, pag. 236. Addendum quoque hic est Tatianos dictos esse a Tatiano apud Epiphanium in opere de Hæresibus, aliosque auctores similiter ac Novatianos a Novatiano, quos tamen Novatianenses appellat Cyprianus in Epist. ad Jubaianum, seu Ep. 75, sub. init. Hic denique lectorem monebo, nullam lucem hanc quæstionem mutuari sibi ex titulis duorum illorum operum De Trinitate, et De Cibis Judaicis, quæ Novatiano ascribi solent, quippe cum illa sic inscripta fuisse S. Hieronymi auctoritate, non ex fide ipsorum codicum manuscriptorum, videantur. Interea ductum est a nomine Novato Novatianus, quemadmodum a Fabio Fabianus, et a Basso Bassianus, imo vero Fabius Antiochenus episcopus Fabianus ab auctoribus sæpe nominatur. ROUTH.

"Of this wicked man." Of him Jerome writes thus, De viris illustribus, ch. 70: "Novatian, a presbyter of the city of Rome, having tried to seize the priestly chair against Cornelius, founded the doctrine of the Novatianists, called in Greek 'of the Pure', refusing to receive apostates who did penance." You may see more in the letter of Cornelius to Fabius that follows shortly, and in several letters of Dionysius of Alexandria in Eusebius. Most notable, though, is that Cornelius always keeps silent the name of his adversary Novatian in the letters that remain; and about the varying spelling of that name I will say something here. The learned Lardner, Credibility of the Gospel History, part II, vol. V, in the note at the foot on ch. 47, argued at length that the man's true name, like that of his contemporary Novatus the African, was Novatus; and he [cites] some authors [… lines cut …] in that place [reads] Ναυατιανῷ (Novatian), not, as commonly read, Νοουάτῳ (Novatus), since he had found the former in the codices of Dionysius. Further, nothing contrary seems to follow from the derived form "Novatiani", as if it came from the name Novatus, since otherwise those followers would have to be called "Novatianani". This did not lead Scaliger to believe the man was called Novatus; see his Animadversions on Eusebius's Chronicle, p. 236. It should also be added here that in Epiphanius's work on the Heresies, and in other authors, the Tatianists are called after Tatian, just as the Novatianists after Novatian, whom Cyprian nevertheless calls "Novatianenses" in his letter to Jubaianus, Letter 75, near the beginning. Finally I will warn the reader that this question borrows no light from the titles of the two works De Trinitate and De cibis Judaicis, usually ascribed to Novatian, since they seem to have been so titled on the authority of Saint Jerome, not on the evidence of the manuscript codices themselves. Meanwhile, "Novatianus" is derived from the name Novatus, as Fabianus from Fabius and Bassianus from Bassus; indeed Fabius, bishop of Antioch, is often named Fabianus by authors. ROUTH.

(printed under page 419)

(48) ‹anchor: Prostratus virtutibus Dei› · call in col 736 (by position)

Prostratus virtutibus Dei. Hoc est, ait Nathaniel Marshall Anglicus Cypriani interpres, sententiis adversus eum latis ecclesiasticis, quæ in cœlo ratæ esse habebantur. ROUTH.

"Laid low by the powers of God." That is, says Nathaniel Marshall, the English translator of Cyprian, by the church sentences passed against him, which were held to be ratified in heaven. ROUTH.

(printed under page 419)

(49) ‹anchor: Inde fuissent expulsi› · call in col 736 (by position)

Inde fuissent expulsi. Carthagine scilicet. Qua de re Cyprianus in superiore Epistola 1, sic præloquitur: « venerunt ad nos, f. c. missi a Novatiano Maximus presbyter, et Augendus diaconus, et Machæus quidam et Longinus, etc. Ibi autem eos non e civitate ejectos, sed a communicatione cohibitos, Cyprianus docet. Porro Maximus presbyter proxime memoratus, subinde a Novato Carthaginiensis pseudoepiscopus creatus fuit: atque alius est a Maximo presbytero confessore, qui primum a Novatiano seductus, aliquanto post Ecclesiam rediit. (Vid. Ep. proxime sequentem.) Neque etiam prædictus Augendus cum eo est confundendus, qui Cornelii ad Cyprianum litteras tulit. COUST. — Simile notat de Augendo Baluzius, hunc esse diversum ab Augendo diacono partis Novatiani, cujus mentio in Epistola IV.

"They had been driven out from there." From Carthage, that is. On which Cyprian speaks thus at the start of the preceding Letter 1: "There came to us, dearest brother, sent by Novatian, Maximus the presbyter and Augendus the deacon, and one Machaeus and Longinus," etc. But there Cyprian shows that they were not thrown out of the city but debarred from communion. Further, the Maximus the presbyter just mentioned was soon afterwards made pseudo-bishop of Carthage by Novatus; and he is a different man from Maximus the presbyter and confessor, who, first led astray by Novatian, returned to the Church some time later (see the next letter). Nor is the said Augendus to be confused with the one who carried Cornelius's letter to Cyprian. COUST. — Baluze notes the like about Augendus: that this one is different from Augendus the deacon of Novatian's party, mentioned in Letter IV. [The final words at the right margin are partly cut off in the image: "Ep. proxime sequente[m]", "Baluzi[us]", "par[tis]", "C[ar]thaginiensis", "a[tque]", "c[on]fundendus", "[tu]lit".]

(printed under page 419)

(50) ‹anchor: Prioribus litteris› · call in col 736 (by position)

Prioribus litteris. Non exstant. COUSTANT.

"In the earlier letter." It does not survive. COUSTANT.

(printed under page 419)

[RENDER DEFECT — RE-RENDER AND RE-SET THIS PAGE. Every image of page 420's left half (column thirds and foot) is cut along its left edge: the first one to eight letters of every line in col 737 and in the left note column are missing. The variant readings are also cut at the right edge of the column images, and the right-hand foot image is cut at the top (the opening lines of note 56 are missing). Below, […] marks letters or words cut off. Words in [square brackets with ?] are conjectures and must be checked against the page. Note numbers for the left column are not visible; they are fixed from the calls visible in col 737's text: (52) after "pervenisse", (53) after "patronae suae", (54) after "deposita", (55) after "schismatis", (56) after "plebi", (57) after "praefuerat", (58) after "designavit" (Q2a, 2026-10-26).]

[…]cum Bod. 1. ⁵⁰ Innotescant. Corb. ⁵¹ Cum aucto[re …] […] successorem, Manut. Veron. forte succussorem. Reti[…] […] ad Evaristum, sed ad Zetum huic suffectum refertu[r …] [⁵⁴?] […]nexplebili avaritia, qualia, Bod. 1. ⁵⁵ Sic Bod. 1[…]

[…] with Bod. 1. ⁵⁰ "Innotescant" ("let them become known"), Corbie. ⁵¹ "Cum auctore" ("with the author") […] "successorem" ("successor"), Manutius, Verona; perhaps "succussorem". Reti[…] […] refers not to Evaristus but to Zetus, appointed in his place […] [⁵⁴?] "inexplebili avaritia, qualia" ("by insatiable greed, such things as"), Bod. 1. ⁵⁵ So Bod. 1 […]

(printed under page 420; the variant calls ⁴⁹, ⁵⁰, ⁵¹, ⁵³, ⁵⁴ stand in col 737's text)

(51) ‹anchor: Dionysium› · call in col 736 or above the cut (number not visible)

[…]ionysium. In uno libro meo vetere scrip[…] Zoticum. Quo enim modo legi in uno Bod[…] […]estatur editio Anglicana. Sic etiam editio […] BALUZIUS.

"Dionysius." In one old book of mine is written "Zoticus". For [so] I read in one Bodleian [manuscript …], [as] the English edition attests. So also the edition […]. BALUZE.

(52) ‹anchor: illo jam pervenisse› · call in col 737 (visible)

[…]lo jam pervenisse. Hoc est Carthaginem. […]a fuit Cornelii opinio, si eam de tempore, […] scribebat, sed quo litteras suas Cypriano […]las judicabat, interpretemur. Pridie enim […]æc redderentur, illuc pervenerat secunda […]ni legatio. COUSTANT.

"That he had already arrived there." That is, at Carthage. [Such] was Cornelius's opinion, if we interpret it of the time, [not that at which] he was writing, but that at which he judged his letter [would be delivered?] to Cyprian. For the day before this was delivered, the second embassy [of Novatian?] had arrived there. COUSTANT.

(53) ‹anchor: Patronæ suæ› · call in col 737 (visible)

[P?]atronæ suæ. Hinc servum eum et manci[pium?] […]stitisse eruditus suspicatur: quod persua[…] facilius, si Cornelius dominæ non patronæ […]o usus esset. Hujus vero diaconi crimina ut […]rent, eo pluris intererat, quo ille amplius […]ris titulo gloriabatur, et inde vulgo impo[…] COUST. — Permittitur Canone 82 qui dicitur […]rum, etiam mancipiis cum dominorum […]u vel ad superiores ordines ecclesiasticos […]: et, ut significavit Coustantius, libertus, […]vus fuisse Nicostratus videtur, atque eo […] ab ecclesiastico ordine arcendus.

"Of his patroness." From this a learned man suspects that he had been a slave and chattel; which would be more easily believed if Cornelius had used the word ("[vocabul]o"?) "mistress" rather than "patroness". It mattered all the more that this deacon's crimes should [become known?], the more he gloried in the title of [confessor?] and so [imposed on?] the common people. COUST. — By the so-called Canon 82 [of the Apostles?], even slaves are permitted, with their masters' [consent?], [to be promoted?] to the higher church orders; and, as Coustant indicated, Nicostratus seems to have been a freedman, [not a sla]ve, and [not?] on that account to be barred from the church's ranks.

(54) ‹anchor: Ecclesiæ deposita› · call in col 737 (visible)

[…]Ecclesiæ deposita. Seu ecclesiasticas pecu[nias?] […]æ viduarum et pupillarum deposita cense[…] quia eorum sublevandorum gratia serva[…] ut ex subsequenti Epistola VII, II, I, […]e est (49, aliter 52. Ep. Cypr.). — « Nicos[tratus?] vero, diaconio sanctæ administrationis […] ecclesiasticis pecuniis sacrilega fraude […]tis, et viduorum ac pupillarum depositis denegatis, non tam in Africam, etc. » Nec […]erat diacono, cui pecuniarum illarum dis[…] credebatur, hujusmodi deposita fraudare. COUSTANT.

"The deposits of the Church." That is, the church funds, which are reckoned the deposits of widows and orphans, because they were kept for their relief, as [is clear?] from the following Letter VII, II, I (49, otherwise 52 of Cyprian's letters). — "But Nicostratus, [having lost] the diaconate of holy administration, [having made off with] church funds by sacrilegious fraud and having denied the widows' and orphans' deposits, [has gone] not so much to Africa," etc. Nor [was it lawful?] for a deacon, to whom the [management?] of those funds was entrusted, to defraud deposits of this kind. COUSTANT.

(55) ‹anchor: Auctorem schismatis› · call in col 737 (visible)

[A?]uctorem schismatis Colb. Ms. cum auctore […]tis. Evaristus auctor schismatis dicitur, qua[…]liis auctor fuit ut illud sequerentur, neque hac […]ne, etiam postquam de episcopatu dejectus […]titit. Quocirca, Cyprianus infra Epist. VII (49) […]t eum « veritatis ac fidei naufragum factum […]uosdam sui similes paria naufragia CONCI[…] Præterea si Evaristus iste, ut valde proba[…]t, Novatiani ordinator fuit, hæresis auctor merito appellatur, qui hac ordinatione locum et auctoritatem præbuit. COUST. — Pacia[…] epistola ad Symphronianum contra tractatus […]norum: « Ego nescio quod Novatianus egerit, quid Novatus admiserit, quid Evaristus tumuerit, quid Nicostratus nuntiarit. » Et infra ait illos […]varistum, qui Nicostratum receperunt, cæ[…]e ab Ecclesia recedentes, lingua, manu, […]s inquinatos. » Hunc porro Evaristum fuisse (continues)

"The author of the schism": the Colbert manuscript has "with the author of the schism". Evaristus is called the author of the schism because he was the instigator [for others?] to follow it, and did not [cease from this?], even after he had been deposed from his episcopate. So Cyprian below, Letter VII (49), [says] that he, "having himself made shipwreck of truth and faith, [is stirring up] the like shipwrecks in certain men like himself." Moreover, if this Evaristus, as is very probable, was Novatian's ordainer, he is rightly called the author of the heresy, since by this ordination he gave it occasion and authority. COUST. — Pacian, in his letter to Sympronian against the treatises of the [Novatia]ns: "I do not know what Novatian did, what Novatus committed, what Evaristus swelled with, what Nicostratus announced." And below he says that those [who received?] Evaristus, who received Nicostratus, […] withdrawing from the Church, [were] defiled in tongue, hand, [and …]. Further, that this Evaristus was (continues)

(printed under page 420)

(56) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 738 (by position; the note's opening lines are cut at the top of the image)

[…] et editiones. Angli, nescio qua auctoritate, posuerunt succensorem, nullo, ut arbitror, sensu, monentes interim legendum forte esse succursorem. Sed ego nescio ubi invenerint vocem succursorem alioqui valde inutilem in hoc loco. Ait enim Cyprianus Zetum in locum Evaristi episcopum esse constitutum et successorem plebi datum cui is ante præfuerat. BALUZ. — Succursorem, quod re ipsa conjecerat Fellus legendum, in sensum conciloris, seu concitatoris, videtur ab eo acceptum, nam Glossæ Vet. Succusso, κατασείω habent. Videsis Valesii Not. ad CONCIL. ANTIOCH. supra, vol II, pag. 502. ROUTH.

[…] and the editions. The English editors, on what authority I do not know, put "succensorem" (inflamer), with no sense, I think, while noting meanwhile that perhaps "succursorem" should be read. But I do not know where they found the word "succursorem", which is in any case quite useless in this place. For Cyprian says that Zetus was appointed bishop in Evaristus's place and given as successor to the people over whom he had presided before. BALUZ. — "Succursorem", which Fell had in fact conjectured should be read, seems to have been taken by him in the sense of "concilor" or "concitator" (inciter), for the Old Glosses have "Succusso" = κατασείω (I shake). See Valois's note on the Council of Antioch above, vol. II, p. 502. ROUTH.

(printed under page 420)

(57) ‹anchor: Plebi, cui ante præfuerat› · call in col 738 (by position)

Plebi, cui ante præfuerat, in Corb. ms. ante fuerat, tum a I manu Zelum, secundis curis Zenum, quod et Pamelius in Camberon. legisse se testatur. Præfert unus Anglic. Zoticum. (Erat hic Coustantius, nam Zoticum pro Dionysum legi ante ad lin. 14, Fellus notaverat.) Eorum qui Evaristum ab episcopatu removerant auctoritate successorem ipsi ordinatum fuisse hinc liquet. COUST. — Zetum. Hoc nomen deest in antiquis editionibus et in quibusdam veteribus libris. Habetur tamen Gestum. Corbeiensis, in quo primo scriptum fuit Zelum (confer Coustantium supra) habet ex emendatione Zenum. Quo etiam modo scriptum fuisse in Camberonensi testatur Pamelius. Zeli cujusdam. sed antiquioris, mentio est apud Propertium l. III, eleg. 8, et apud Horatium lib. I, ep. 18, item in quadam tragœdia Senecæ. BAL.

"To the people over whom he had presided before": in the Corbie manuscript "ante fuerat"; then, in the first hand, "Zelum", and by a second correction "Zenum", which Pamelius too testifies he read in the Cambron manuscript. One English manuscript gives "Zoticum". (Here Coustant erred, for Fell had noted that "Zoticum" was read in place of "Dionysum" earlier, at line 14.) It is clear from this that a successor was ordained for Evaristus by the authority of those who had removed him from his episcopate. COUST. — "Zetus." This name is missing in the old editions and in some old books. Yet "Gestum" is found. The Corbie codex, in which "Zelum" was first written (compare Coustant above), has "Zenum" by correction; and Pamelius testifies that it was so written in the Cambron codex as well. A certain Zelus, but of earlier date, is mentioned in Propertius, book III, elegy 8, and in Horace, book I, epistle 18, and also in one of Seneca's tragedies. BAL.

(printed under page 420)

(58) ‹anchor: Majora vero et graviora hic designavit› · call in col 738 (by position)

Majora vero et graviora hic designavit. Novatus vero ea hic designavit Bod. I. FELLUS. — De Evaristo Novatiani socio et adjutore hic agi videtur, vel pejus, ait Cornelius, Romæ quam in sede sua se gerente. Idem sentit Coustantius, quem intra habes de Evaristo hoc interpretantem. ROUTH.

"But he has here contrived greater and graver things." "But Novatus has here contrived them" Bod. I. FELL. — It seems that Evaristus, Novatian's associate and helper, is meant here, who, says Cornelius, behaved even worse at Rome than in his own see. Coustant thinks the same; you have him above ("intra", as printed) interpreting this of Evaristus. ROUTH.

(printed under page 420)

(59) [printed "(39)"] ‹anchor: Junctos habeat› · call in col 738 (by position)

Junctos habeat. Codex Colb. vinctos habeat. ac deinde, Bene valere semper, frater charissime, alii duo, Bene vale, frater charissime. COUSTANT.

"May he hold them joined." The Colbert codex has "vinctos habeat" (may he hold them bound); and then "Bene valere semper, frater charissime"; two others, "Bene vale, frater charissime". COUSTANT.

(—) ‹anchor: Opto te, frater charissime› · lemma without a number, call in col 738 (by position) Opto te, frater charissime, semper bene valere, etc. Istud addidimus ex fide codicis Remensis sancti Dionysii. In Fuxensi scriptum est bene valere semper, frater charissime. In uno meo simpliciter: Bene vale, frater charissime. BALUZ. — Similiter hoc legi in codd. Veron. et Bod. I. Notavit Fellus, qui tamen juxta atque priores Cypriani editores et (continues)

"I wish you, dearest brother, always to fare well," etc. We have added this on the authority of the Reims codex of Saint-Denis. In the Foix codex is written "bene valere semper, frater charissime"; in one of mine simply "Bene vale, frater charissime". BALUZ. — Fell noted that this is likewise read in the Verona codex and Bod. I; who nevertheless, just like the earlier editors of Cyprian and (continues)

(printed under page 420)

[The rendered foot is cut at the top: the start of the notes on this page (heading, any variant readings, and the beginning of note (60)) lies above the crop, and the top of the right-hand note column is probably cut too (the join between the two columns in note 62 does not run on). The right edge of the last lines of the right column is smudged. Check the full page.] (printed under page 421)

(60) ‹anchor: not visible› · call above the rendered foot (beginning not visible)

[…] antequam is proficisceretur, hæc adjuncta est, et ad eodem acolytho perlata. Si quis tamen hanc primo scriptam, eique superiorem adjunctam malit, concedat saltem necesse est, utramque ipsa profectionis Nicephori hora conscriptam esse. Quocirca utra prior ponatur, vel parum vel nihil interest. COUST. — Hæc epistola ante editionem Manutianam dicebatur esse Cypriani ad Cornelium. Manutius emendavit. Manutium secutus est Pamelius. Itaque falsum est quod ait Rigaltius Pamelium ita scripsisse ex conjectura. Nam et ipse Pamelius admonet se lectionem illam invenisse in codice Camberonensi et in editione Manutiana. Eadem exstat in libro Corbeiensi, in quo post verba ex illo allata a Rigaltio sequitur: Cornelius Cypriano salutem fratri. Eadem exstat etiam in libro Gratianopolitano et in uno meo vetere, in quo, ut in Corbeiensi scriptum est: Incipiunt rescripta Cornelii ad Cypranum de schismaticis. Octo illius vetera exemplaria habui. Angli unum tantum habuerunt ex bibliotheca Bodleiana. Cæterum nulla sancti martyris epistola gravius afflicta fuit per audaciam veterum librariorum quam ista. BALUZ. — Rigaltius ait, « huic epistolæ consimilis illa videtur, quam ad Fabianum a Cornelio scriptam fuisse refert Euseb. Hist. VI, cap. 43, ubi et fortissimis confessoribus adnumerantur Urbanus et Sidonius et Maximus. » FELLUS. — Epistola est, cujus excerpta mox sequuntur.

[…] before he set out, this one was added and carried by ("ad", as printed for ab) the same acolyte. If anyone, though, prefers that this was written first and the preceding one added to it, he must at least grant that both were written at the very hour of Nicephorus's departure. So it matters little or nothing which is placed first. COUST. — Before Manutius's edition this letter was said to be Cyprian's to Cornelius. Manutius corrected it, and Pamelius followed Manutius. So Rigault is wrong to say that Pamelius wrote it so by conjecture. For Pamelius himself points out that he found that reading in the Cambron codex and in Manutius's edition. It stands likewise in the Corbie book, in which, after the words quoted from it by Rigault, there follows: "Cornelius to Cyprian his brother, greeting." It stands likewise in the Grenoble book and in an old one of mine, in which, as in the Corbie, is written: "Here begin the replies of Cornelius to Cyprian ('Cypranum', as printed) on the schismatics." I had eight old copies of it; the English editors had only one, from the Bodleian Library. Besides, no letter of the holy martyr has been more badly damaged by the boldness of the old scribes than this one. BALUZ. — Rigault says: "That letter seems very like this one which Eusebius, History VI, ch. 43, reports Cornelius wrote to Fabianus, where Urbanus, Sidonius and Maximus are also counted among the bravest confessors." FELL. — It is the letter of which excerpts follow shortly.

(printed under page 421)

(61) ‹anchor: Sustinuimus› · call in col 739 (by position)

Sustinuimus. Codex Remensis sancti Dionysii, addit vel pudorem. BALUZIUS.

"We have endured." The Reims codex of Saint-Denis adds "or the shame". BALUZIUS.

(printed under page 421)

(62) ‹anchor: De iis confessoribus› · call in col 739 (by position)

De iis confessoribus. Maximo, Nicostrato, cæteris, quorum mentio est in Epistolis 41 et 42, Hunc autem Nicostratum valde puto diversum esse ab eo qui nominatur in Epistola 48. (Hæc est Cornelii Epistola, quam statim ante adduxi, numeros autem Pamelianos Baluzius secutus est.) BALUSIUT. — Non deerunt forte, qui hæc de Novato interpretentur, ubi legerint 1° in subjecta Cypriani epistola 7, n. 4, eumdem veteratorem appellari, 2° in epistola 8, n° 2, dici confessores illo incitante de Ecclesia recessisse, 3° et istud in Bucheriano catalogo scribi: Supervenit Novatus, et separavit de Ecclesia Novatianum et quosdam Confessores. Verum licet prima mali labes etiam in Urbe a Novato cœperit, non is tamen hic, sed Novatianus notatur Romanæ Eccle- [… lines probably cut at the top of the right column …] schismaticis quidem unquam in episcopum cooptatus est. De eo hic est sermo, cujus perfidia et loquacitate captiosa circumventi fuerunt Confessores. Atqui istud in Novatianum cadit, qui cum eloquentia polleret, ea ad seducendos pios viros abusus est, nec mendaciis ac perjuriis pepercit, ut eos falleret. Cum enim effrenata episcopatus cupiditate incenderetur, hanc intra se tegens, tremendis quibusdam sacramentis contestari non timuit, sese episcopatum nequaquam concupiscere, ut Cornelius epist. 9. n. 2. enarrat. Hinc veterator appellari meruit. Inde et in eadem epistola 9, Confessores ad Ecclesiam regressi esse dicuntur, cum cognovissent illum, et fraudem ejus ac versutiam, nec non mendacia et perjuria. Idcirco et Cornelius epistolam hanc claudens, eam ad ceteras ecclesias a Cypriano mittendam censet: ut omnes sciant schismatici hujus et hæretici (de quo ejus initio loquitur) DOLUM et prævaricationem de die in diem evacuari. Quocirca et Cypriano. epist-8. n. 2, rescribit, Nec quisquam jam facile poterit schismatici furentis verbis loquacibus decipi. Cum his tamen componi facile possunt quæ præmisimus; quia, ut Cyprianus in superiore epistola 3, loquitur, Confessores Novatiani ac Novati obstinatione seducti de Ecclesia recesserunt. COUSTANT.

"About those confessors." Maximus, Nicostratus and the rest, who are mentioned in Letters 41 and 42. But I am quite sure this Nicostratus is different from the one named in Letter 48. (This is the letter of Cornelius I cited just before; Baluze followed Pamelius's numbering.) BALUSIUT (so printed). — There will perhaps be some who interpret this of Novatus, when they read, first, that in Cyprian's Letter 7 below, n. 4, he is called "the old fox"; second, that in Letter 8, n. 2, the confessors are said to have left the Church at his instigation; and third, that in Boucher's catalogue is written: "Novatus came upon the scene and separated Novatian and certain confessors from the Church." But although the first taint of the evil began in the City too with Novatus, yet it is not he who is marked out here but Novatian, [who …] of the Roman Church [… lines cut …] was ever co-opted as bishop by schismatics. The talk here is of the man by whose treachery and captious loquacity the confessors were taken in. And that fits Novatian, who, being powerful in eloquence, abused it to lead devout men astray, and did not shrink from lies and perjuries to deceive them. For when he was burning with an unbridled desire for the episcopate, he hid it within himself and was not afraid to protest with certain dreadful oaths that he in no way coveted the episcopate, as Cornelius relates in Letter 9, n. 2. Hence he deserved to be called "the old fox". Hence too in the same Letter 9 the confessors are said to have returned to the Church "when they had come to know him, and his fraud and cunning, and his lies and perjuries as well." For that reason Cornelius too, closing this letter, judges it should be sent by Cyprian to the other churches, "so that all may know that the CRAFT and double-dealing of this schismatic and heretic" (of whom he speaks at its beginning) "is coming to nothing day by day." Accordingly Cyprian too replies, Letter 8, n. 2: "Nor will anyone now easily be deceived by the wordy talk of the raging schismatic." Yet what we said before can easily be reconciled with this, since, as Cyprian says in the preceding Letter 3, the confessors "left the Church led astray by the obstinacy of Novatian and Novatus." COUSTANT.

(printed under page 421)

(63) ‹anchor: Tanta lætitia affecti sumus› · call in col 740 (by position)

Tanta lætitia affecti sumus. Tantum lætitia adepti sumus. Corb. FELLUS. — Colb. ms. tantam lætitiam. Tum idem ms. adepti, Corb. adepti. COUSTANT. Ita idem codex Remensis et Fuxensis. In aliis sex et in vetustioribus editionibus scriptum est tantam lætitiam adepti sumus. Vide notas ad Epistolam 42. p. 452. BALUZIUS.

"We were filled with such joy." "Tantum lætitia adepti sumus" Corb. FELL. — The Colbert manuscript, "tantam lætitiam"; then the same manuscript "adepti", and Corb. "adepti". COUSTANT. So the Reims codex too and the Foix. In six others and in the older editions is written "tantam lætitiam adepti sumus" (we have obtained such joy). See the notes on Letter 42, p. 452. BALUZIUS.

(printed under page 421)

(64) ‹anchor: Gratias egimus, cum ii› · call in col 740 (by position)

Gratias egimus, cum ii. Retinuimus hanc lectionem quia bonum sensum habet. Introducta est in editione Manutiana, habetur autem etiam in codice Fuxensi. At sex libri veteres et editio Morelliana, quæ subsecuta est Manutianam præferunt « cum eos cognito suo errore intelligamus homini[s] maligni velut serpentis astutia venenata derelic[ta?] ad Ecclesiam unde exierant. » Sic etiam fere veteres editiones. BALUZIUS.

"We gave thanks, since they." We have kept this reading because it gives good sense. It was introduced in Manutius's edition, but is also found in the Foix codex. But six old books and Morel's edition, which followed Manutius's, give "since we understand that they, having recognized their error, [have returned], having abandoned the poisoned cunning of a malicious man, as of a serpent, to the Church from which they had gone out." So too, roughly, the old editions. BALUZIUS. [Line-ends smudged at the right edge: "homin[is]", "derelic[ta]".]

(printed under page 421)

(65) ‹anchor: Tumorem illum horum mollitum jam annuntiabant› · call in col 740 (by position)

Tumorem illum horum mollitum jam annuntiabant. Revocavimus veterem lectionem (tumorem illorum, horum mollitiem nuntiabant) quam Manutius eliminaverat, nescio quam ob causam. Est enim (continues)

"They were announcing that their swelling pride had now softened." We have restored the old reading ("they announced the swelling pride of those, the softening of these"), which Manutius had removed, for what reason I do not know. For it is (continues)

(printed under page 421)

[The rendered foot is cut at the top: the first line in each note column is only partly visible, and anything above it (heading, any variant readings, the earlier part of note 65 on this page) lies above the crop. Check the full page.] (printed under page 422)

(65) (continued) ‹anchor: Tumorem illum horum mollitum jam annuntiabant› · call on the previous page

[…] etiam octo antiqua exemplaria quibus nos utimur et Veronense, ex quo excerptæ variæ lectiones ascriptæ sunt margini editionis Manutianæ in meo exemplari. Sensus autem horum verborum is mihi videtur esse: cum ageretur apud Cornelium de venia lapsorum, ille autem dubitaret an vere et ex animo rediissent ad Ecclesiam, stantium vero fidem propterea interpellaret, ii retulerunt quosdam ex lapsis tumore inflatos esse, quia nimirum tormenta passi erant pro nomine Christi, adeoque hinc superbiam captabant, alios contra molles admodum esse, tristes, nimirum ob casum suum. Sunt enim molles in calamitate mortalium animi, ut scribit Tacitus. Hinc colligebat Cornelius testimonia non esse idonea ad probandum illos esse penitus mutatos. Itaque recte Rigaltius existimavit veram esse lectionem codicis Veronensis, in quo scriptum erat « fidem tamen non idoneam. » BALUZIUS. Coustantius ex ed. Manutiana, « tumorem illum horum mollitum jam annuntiabant. » Ego cum Editionem Oxon. in qua multa huic loco apposita est lectionis varietas, tum alias vetustiores illa editiones secutus sum, relicto hic quidem Baluzio, cujus rationes nihilo minus satisfecerant ROUTH, qui scribit tumorem illorum.

[…] the eight ancient copies that we use [have it] too, and the Verona codex, from which variant readings were excerpted and written in the margin of the Manutius edition in my copy. The sense of these words seems to me to be this: when the pardon of the lapsed was being discussed before Cornelius, and he was unsure whether they had truly and sincerely returned to the Church, and therefore appealed to the good faith of those who had stood firm, these reported that some of the lapsed were puffed up with pride, because, of course, they had suffered tortures for the name of Christ and so courted arrogance from it, while others, on the contrary, were very soft and sad, because of their fall, naturally. For "men's spirits are soft in calamity," as Tacitus writes. Hence Cornelius concluded that the testimonies were not adequate to prove that they were thoroughly changed. So Rigault rightly judged that the true reading is that of the Verona codex, in which was written "yet testimony not adequate". BALUZIUS. Coustant, from the Manutius edition: "they were announcing that their swelling pride had now softened". I have followed both the Oxford edition, in which much variety of reading is set beside this place, and other editions older than it, here leaving Baluze, whose reasons had nevertheless satisfied ROUTH (so printed), who writes "tumorem illorum".

(printed under page 422)

(66) ‹anchor: Fide tamen non idonea› · call in col 741 (by position)

Fide tamen non idonea, etc. Fide tamen non idonea haud facile nobis credere dabatur, illos repente esse mutatos. Cod. Veron. illos repente Bod. FELLUS, qui, ut Coustantius, aliique, in textu suo habet fides pro fide.

"Yet on inadequate evidence," etc. "Yet on inadequate evidence we were not easily given to believe that they had suddenly changed": Verona codex. "Illos repente" Bod. FELL, who, like Coustant and others, has "fides" for "fide" in his text.

(printed under page 422)

(67) ‹anchor: Maximum› · call in col 741 (by position)

Maximum. De quo pluribus actum est ad Epist. XL. Pamelius scripsit illum passum esse martyrium sub Maximo. At in martyrologiis scriptum est id evenisse sub Valeriano. Vide Baronium ad diem 19 novembris. BALUZ.

"Maximus." Of whom more was said on Letter XL. Pamelius wrote that he suffered martyrdom under Maximus. But in the martyrologies it is written that this happened under Valerian. See Baronius on 19 November. BALUZ.

(printed under page 422)

(68) ‹anchor: Sed quoniam multa præcesserant ab eis designata› · call in col 741 (by position)

Sed quoniam multa præcesserant ab eis designata. Id est, patrata et confecta. Quo intellectu de Evaristo in superiori Epistola dictum est, » Majora vero et graviora hic designavit. » Quocirca confessores mox a presbyteris rogati esse dicuntur de iis quæ gesserant. COUST.

"But since many things contrived by them had gone before." That is, carried out and accomplished. In this sense it was said of Evaristus in the preceding letter, "But he has here contrived greater and graver things." So the confessors are said soon after to have been questioned by the presbyters "about what they had done". COUST.

(printed under page 422)

(69) ‹anchor: Coepiscopis nostris› · call in col 741 (by position)

Coepiscopis nostris. Corb. ms. coepiscopo nostro. Retinendum coepiscopis nostris, qui scil. conventibus ad conciliis ea de causa congregatis interfuerant. Quippe initio pontificatus Cornelii, teste Eusebio, l. VI, c. 43, sexaginta episcopi, et presbyteri ac diaconi multo plures, cum in unum conve- [… a line or more cut at the top of the right column …] phanus, Afri episcopi, qui Cornelii ordinationi interfuerant. Cornelii litteræ hic commemoratæ non exstant. COUST.

"Our fellow bishops." The Corbie manuscript has "our fellow bishop". "Our fellow bishops" should be kept: those, that is, who had taken part in the meetings and ("ad", as printed) councils gathered for that cause. For at the start of Cornelius's pontificate, on Eusebius's testimony (book VI, ch. 43), sixty bishops, and many more presbyters and deacons, having come together [… lines cut …] [Pompeius? and Ste]phanus, African bishops, who had been present at Cornelius's ordination. Cornelius's letter mentioned here does not survive. COUST.

(printed under page 422)

(70) ‹anchor: Exigerentur› · call in col 742 (by position)

Exigerentur. Ingererentur Bob. I FELLUM. — Codex Gratianopolitanus, interrogarentur. Quæ lectio videtur esse melior. Sed alii codices et editiones repugnant. BALUZ.

"Were exacted." "Ingererentur" Bob. (so printed, for Bod.) I, according to Fell. — The Grenoble codex has "interrogarentur" (were questioned), which seems the better reading; but the other codices and the editions are against it. BALUZ.

(printed under page 422)

(71) ‹anchor: Hæresis auctores fuisse› · call in col 742 (by position)

Hæresis auctores fuisse. Hic quoque relinquendum esse censui Baluzium, qui hæreticis pro hæresis, ratione nulla data, in textu quidem suo repræsentat. Certe lectionem alteram præstant edd. Erasmi Manut. Rigalt. Oxon. Coustantiusque. « Hæresis sese jure damnandos esse hos vide confitentes (ait quidem Anglicus interpres), solum propterea quod sede plene novum episcopum constituissent, haud nacti causam ex deprivatione alterius. » Sed recte dubites, annon hic quoque opinio Novatiani de pœnitentia voce hæresis indicitur, sicut infra ubi eumdem Novatianum confessores isti « schismaticum et hæreticum hominem » appellant, tum vero fortasse in isto de iisdem confessoribus Cypriani loco: « Posteaquam vos de carcere prodeuntes schismaticus et hæreticus error excepit. » Ep. LI, al. 54. Confer Coustant. paulo infra ad p. 28, et ad. init. Epist. Cornelii ad Fabium. ROUTH.

"That they had been authors of heresy." Here too I thought Baluze should be left, who in his text puts "hæreticis" for "hæresis", giving no reason. Certainly the other reading is given by the editions of Erasmus, Manutius, Rigault, Oxford, and by Coustant. "See these men confessing that they deserved to be condemned for heresy" (says the English translator), "only because they had set up a new bishop in a see that was full, without having found cause in the deprivation of the other." But you may well doubt whether here too Novatian's opinion on penance is not indicated by the word "heresy", as below, where these confessors call the same Novatian "a schismatic and heretical man", and perhaps also in that passage of Cyprian about the same confessors: "After you came out of prison, schismatic and heretical error took you in." Letter LI, otherwise 54. Compare Coustant a little below at p. 28, and at the start of Cornelius's letter to Fabius. ROUTH.

(printed under page 422)

(72) ‹anchor: Ut paterentur et manus quasi in episcopatum imponi› · call in col 742 (by position)

Ut paterentur et manus quasi in episcopatum imponi, particula et loco voculæ ei perperam substituta. Pergit quippe Cornelius, ut in superiore Epistola, ita in hac. Novatiani consulto tacere nomen. Hunc superius hominis callidi et veteratoris, et mox, hominis maligni, vocabulis, nunc solo pronomine ei, calcem schismatici hujus et hæretici appellatione, nusquam eo nominato, designare satis habet.

"That they allowed hands to be laid, as it were, for the episcopate": the particle "et" wrongly put in place of the little word "ei" (on him). For Cornelius goes on, in this letter as in the preceding one, deliberately keeping silent Novatian's name. He is content to point to him above with the words "a crafty man and an old fox", and soon after "a malicious man", now with the bare pronoun "ei", and at the end ("calcem") with the title "this schismatic and heretic", never naming him.

(printed under page 422)

(73) ‹anchor: Contrahi presbyterium› · call in col 742 (by position)

Contrahi presbyterium. Tam Fellus quam Baluzius ait hunc fuisse presbyterorum ecclesiæ Carthaginiensis consessum; sed memoria utrorumque hoc exciderat, præ manibus se habere Cornelii Romani, non Cypriani Carthaginiensis epistolam. Ita et errat Baluzius infra ad pag. 29 et 32. ROUTH.

"That the presbytery be convened." Both Fell and Baluze say this was the assembly of the presbyters of the church of Carthage; but it had slipped both their memories that they had in hand a letter of Cornelius of Rome, not of Cyprian of Carthage. Baluze errs likewise below at pp. 29 and 32. ROUTH.

(printed under page 422)

(74) ‹anchor: Personam eorum› · call in col 742 (by position)

Personam eorum. Formam dicendi defendit Salmasius contra Miltonum solœcismi se accusantem. ROUTH.

"Their person." Salmasius defended this form of expression against Milton, who accused him of solecism. ROUTH.

(printed under page 422)

(75) ‹anchor: Tidonius› · call in col 742 (by position)

Tidonius. Pamelius addidit et Macarius, ex conjectura tantum, ut ipsemet fatetur, quia illum (continues)

"Tidonius." Pamelius added "and Macarius", by conjecture only, as he himself admits, because (continues)

(printed under page 422)

[The rendered foot is cut at the top: the first lines of each note column lie above the crop. The lines missing from note 75 (left) and note 78 (right) were read in QA (Q4a) from the column images c743_2 and c744_2, which show them whole.] (printed under page 423)

(75) (continued) ‹anchor: Tidonius› · call on the previous page

cum cæteris rediisse ad Ecclesiam patet ex tribus sequentibus Epistolis, Nos expunximus, quia Macarii nomen in nullo eorum veterum exemplarium reperimus quibus usi sumus, neque in editionibus quæ Pamelianam antecesserunt. BALUZ. — Ipsius tamen Baluzii textus, non totus ab eo quidem ipso curatus, et post mortem ejus in publicum editus retinuit et Macharius. Ego cum Constantio omisi.

[…] returned to the Church with the rest is clear from the three following letters. We have struck it out, because we found the name of Macarius in none of the old copies we used, nor in the editions before Pamelius's. BALUZ. — Yet Baluze's own text, not all of it seen through by him, and published after his death, kept "et Macharius". With Coustant ("Constantio", as printed) I have left it out.

(printed under page 423)

(76) ‹anchor: Adjunxerant› · call in col 743 (by position)

Adjunxerant. In ms. Corb. adjunxerunt. Quamvis hic plerique, qui confessorum auctoritate ad schisma defecerant, cum iis ad Ecclesiam rediisse dicantur, infra tamen et redeuntium verba et populi de illorum reditus gratulantis voces ad unos confessores attinent. Ita et Cyprianus infra Epist. VIII, de solo confessorum reditu rescribens loquitur. Hic præterea observamus, celebrem adeo cleri conventum, cui et quinque interfuerant episcopi, de proposita causa nihil nisi cum populi notitia decernere voluisse. Qua ex re id a Cornelio factum colligere est, quod a Cypriano Epist. VI, seu XIV, ad presbyteros et diaconos suos sibi propositum legimus: « Quando, inquit, ab initio episcopatus mei statuerim, nihil sine consilio vestro, et sine consensu plebis, mea privatim sententia gerere. COUST.

"They had joined." In the Corbie manuscript, "adjunxerunt". Although most of those who had defected to the schism on the confessors' authority are said here to have returned to the Church with them, yet below both the words of those returning and the cries of the people congratulating them on their return concern the confessors alone. So too Cyprian below, Letter VIII, speaks in his reply only of the confessors' return. We observe besides that so notable an assembly of the clergy, at which five bishops too were present, chose to decide nothing on the matter before it except with the people's knowledge. From this one may gather that Cornelius did what we read Cyprian, in Letter VI or XIV to his presbyters and deacons, had resolved for himself: "Since," he says, "from the start of my episcopate I determined to do nothing on my own private opinion without your counsel and without the consent of the people." COUST.

(printed under page 423)

(77) ‹anchor: Concursus factus est› · call in col 743 (by position)

Concursus factus est. Ad Ecclesiam, in qua recepti confessores sunt, ut censet Cl. Marshall.

"There was a rush together." To the church in which the confessors were received, as the learned Marshall thinks.

(printed under page 423)

(78) ‹anchor: Hodie› · call in col 743 (by position)

Hodie. Corb. ms, hoc die. Nil incommodi est in vocabulo hodie: quia Cornelius, ut infra testificatur, eadem hora, eodem momento, quo illa gesta sunt, hæc scripta ad Cyprianum transmitti curavit. Alia quadam ratione Cyprianus Epist. LI, seu LIV, iisdem confessoribus sic gratulatur: « Posteaquam vos de carcere prodeuntes schismaticus et hæreticus error excepit, sic res erat, quasi vestra gloria in carcere remansisset: illic enim resedisse vestri nominis dignitas cidebatur, quando milites Christi non ad Ecclesiam de carcere redirent, in quem prius cum Ecclesiæ laude et gratulatione venissent. » Ubi Cornelio concinens Cyprianus, confessores non tantum schismatico, sed et hæretico errore captos prædicat. Unde colligere est Novatiani hæresim circa pœnitentiam, ipsius schismate nequaquam posteriorem originem habuisse. COUST. — Et locis pluribus Epistolæ Cornelii ad Fabium, cujus fragmenta mox affero, hoc mihi persuasi, contraversiam de pœnitentia exstitisse, antequam de episcopatu Novatiani palam ageretur, quidquid ille de eo munere animo suo celaret; abditam enim fuisse eo tempore nec cognitam cupiditatem ejus, ipse quoque ait Cornelius, qui accusat.

"Today." The Corbie manuscript has "hoc die" (on this day). There is nothing awkward in the word "hodie", since Cornelius, as he attests below, had this account sent to Cyprian in the same hour, the same moment, in which those things were done. In a somewhat different way Cyprian, Letter LI or LIV, congratulates the same confessors thus: "After you came out of prison, schismatic and heretical error took you in; it was as if your glory had stayed behind in prison. For the dignity of your name seemed ("cidebatur", as printed) to have remained there, when the soldiers of Christ did not return from prison to the Church, into which they had gone before with the Church's praise and congratulation." Here Cyprian, in accord with Cornelius, declares that the confessors were caught by an error not only schismatic but heretical. From which one may gather that Novatian's heresy about penance had an origin in no way later than his schism. COUST. — From several passages of Cornelius's letter to Fabius, fragments of which I give shortly, I have also persuaded myself that the controversy about penance arose before Novatian's episcopate was openly in question, whatever he concealed in his mind about that office; for Cornelius himself, who accuses him, also says that his ambition was at that time hidden and unknown.

(printed under page 423)

(79) ‹anchor: Episcopum sanctissimæ catholicæ Ecclesiæ› · call in col 744 (by position)

Episcopum sanctissimæ catholicæ Ecclesiæ. Ecclesiam urbis Romæ hic signari extra dubium est. En verba ipsius Cornelii in epistola modo dicta. Ὁ ἐκδικητὴς οὖν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου (Novatianus) οὐκ ἠπίστατο ἕνα ἐπίσκοπον δεῖν εἶναι ἐν καθολικῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐν ᾗ οὐκ ἠγνόει (πῶς γάρ;) πρεσβυτέρους εἶναι μς΄, διακόνους ἑπτά, etc., § 3.

"Bishop of the most holy Catholic Church." That the Church of the city of Rome is meant here is beyond doubt. Here are Cornelius's own words in the letter just mentioned: "So this champion of the Gospel (Novatian) did not know that there must be one bishop in a catholic church, in which he was well aware (how could he not be?) that there are forty-six presbyters, seven deacons," etc., § 3.

(printed under page 423)

(80) ‹anchor: Electum a Deo› · call in col 744 (by position)

Electum a Deo, h. e. inspirante Deo Christoque ejus, et ad legum divinarum præscriptum, Ita de Cypriano suo scribit Pontius diaconus ejus, « judicio Dei et plebis favore ad officium sacerdotii et episcopatus gradum adhuc neophytus, et, ut putabatur, novellus electus est. » Et paulo post: « Non præteribo etiam illud eximium, quemadmodum cum in dilectionem ejus et honorem totus populus, aspirante Domino, prosiliret, humiliter ille secessit, antiquioribus cedens, et indignum se titulo tanti honoris exstimans, ut dignus magis fieret. P. 3. Vit Cypriani. » Ipse quoque Cyprianus in Epist. XL, al. XLIII, electionem suam vocat « suffragium plebis et Dei judicium. » Atque in Epist. LXVII, vel LXVIII, modus præterea ordinationum celebrandarum ab Ecclesia receptus, « secundum divina magisteria (quæ nimirum in divinis Scripturis exstant) et secundum Dei voluntatem, non secundum humanam præsumptionem, » statutus esse ostenditur. Etenim relatio illa ad Deum et fratres in S. Mathiæ electione inter hæc præcipue spectari videtur. (Act. I, 29, seq.) ROUTH.

"Chosen by God," that is, at the inspiration of God and his Christ, and according to the rule of the divine laws. So Pontius his deacon writes of his Cyprian: "By the judgement of God and the favour of the people he was chosen to the office of the priesthood and the rank of the episcopate while still a neophyte and, as it was thought, a novice." And a little after: "I will not pass over this outstanding thing either: when the whole people, by the Lord's inspiration, leapt forward in love and honour of him, he humbly withdrew, giving way to his seniors and thinking himself unworthy of the title of so great an honour, so that he might become the more worthy." (Life of Cyprian, p. 3.) Cyprian himself too, in Letter XL, otherwise XLIII, calls his election "the vote of the people and the judgement of God." And in Letter LXVII, or LXVIII, it is shown moreover that the manner of celebrating ordinations accepted by the Church was established "according to the divine teachings (those, namely, found in the divine Scriptures) and according to the will of God, not according to human presumption." For that reference to God and the brethren in the election of Saint Matthias seems especially to be in view among these. (Acts 1:29 ff., as printed.) ROUTH.

(printed under page 423)

(81) ‹anchor: Imposturam passi sumus› · call in col 744 (by position)

Imposturam passi sumus, Trebellius Pollio in Gallieno: « Idem cum quidam gemmas vitreas pro veris vendidisset ejus uxori, atque illa, re prodita, vindicari vellet, surripi quasi ad leonem jussit. Deinde e cavea caponem emittit: mirandibusque cunctis rem ridiculam, per curionem dici jussit: Imposturam fecit et passus est. » Ælius Lampridius tradit Veronium Turinum impostorem, qui multa fallendo promiserat, et pro vanis promissis ingentia præmia perceperat. Alexandri Severi jussu accusatum fuisse, et convictum, jussu illius alligatum ad stipitem et fumo apposito, quem ex stipulis atque humidis lignis fieri jusserat, necavisse, præcone dicente: Fumo punitur qui vendidit fumum. D. Nero clementior fuit erga Cæsellium Bassum. Vide Tacitum lib. XII Annalium. BALUZIUS.

"We have suffered an imposture." Trebellius Pollio in his Gallienus: "When a man had sold his wife glass gems as real ones, and she, the thing being found out, wanted him punished, he ordered him seized as if for the lion. Then he let a capon out of the cage; and as everyone marvelled at the absurd thing, he had the herald proclaim: 'He practised an imposture and has suffered one.'" Aelius Lampridius relates that Veronius Turinus, an impostor who had promised much by deceit and received huge rewards for empty promises, was accused and convicted at the order of Alexander Severus, and by his order tied to a stake and killed by smoke set beside him, which he had ordered made from straw and damp wood, while the herald proclaimed: "He who sold smoke is punished by smoke." D. (so printed) Nero was more lenient towards Caesellius Bassus. See Tacitus, Annals book XII. BALUZIUS.

(printed under page 423)

[RENDER DEFECT — RE-RENDER AND RE-SET THIS PAGE. Every image of page 424's left half (column thirds and foot) is cut along its left edge: roughly the first one to twelve letters of every line in col 745 and in the left note column are missing; the variant readings are also cut at the right edge of the column images. The right-hand foot image is cut at the top (note 85 runs on there through a partly cut line). […] marks letters or words cut off; [square brackets with ?] are conjectures to be checked. Note numbers 82–85 are not printed in the visible part of the foot; 84 and 85 are fixed by the calls visible in col 745's text ("episcopum (84) in catholica Ecclesia (85)"), 82 and 83 by the sequence. The opening of note 82 and the variant readings were re-read from the column-third image c745_1 (Q2a, 2026-10-26). The page foot also carries "PATROL. III." and the signature mark "24", which are not notes.]

[…]isse, certamen nostrum, Bod. 1. ⁶⁸ Dominum […] […] secundis curis in uno Anglic. Professione quis non […] […] Eadem hora, eodem momento, ad te scripta trans[…] […]avigandi destinatione, ad vos statim dimisimus, V[…] […]tim dimisi, Corb.

[…]"…isse, our contest", Bod. 1. ⁶⁸ "Lord" […] […] by a second hand in one English manuscript. "Who [would not be moved] by [their] profession" […] […] "At the same hour, the same moment, [we sent across?] what was written to you […] [having resolved to sail?], we sent [it] to you at once", V[…] […] "I sent at once", Corbie.

(printed under page 424; the variant calls ⁶⁷ and ⁶⁸ stand in col 745's text)

(82) ‹anchor: perfidiæ loquacitate captiosa› · call in col 744 or above (number not visible)

[…]fidiæ loquacitate captiosa. Ita veteres edi[…] […] quinque vetera exemplaria. Manutius […]erfidia et loquacitate captiosa » (sequen[…]altio, Fello. Coustantioque). Quatuor li[…]es pro captiosa habent factiosa, alii […]ensu amentes videbamur. » Remensis […]nysii, loquacitate capti, sensu amentes […]r. » BALUZIUS. — Corb. factiosa. Colb. […]ate capti, sensu amentes videbamur, » […] « perfidiæ loquacitate factiosa amentes.» […]l. anni 1520.

"[By the] captious loquacity of [per]fidy." So the old edi[tions and] five old copies. Manutius [reads] "[p]erfidy and captious loquacity" (followed by [Rig]altius, Fell and Coustant). Four [books?] have "factious" for "captious"; others "[…] we seemed out of our senses." The Reims [manuscript of St Dio]nysius: "captured by loquacity, we seemed out of our senses." BALUZIUS. — Corbie: "factious". Colbert: "[captured by loquacit]y, we seemed out of our senses," […] "maddened by the factious loquacity of treachery." [… edition?] of the year 1520.

(83) ‹anchor: […] hæretico› · call in col 745 (by position)

[…]hæretico. Ista desunt in antiquioribus […]is et in quatuor antiquis codicibus. Ha[…]nen in editione Manutiana et in duobus […] manuscriptis. Retinenda autem esse li[…]s quæ sequuntur. In uno libro meo ve[…]ur hæresiarcha, et in Gratianopolitano […]ho. BALUZIUS.

"[… and] heretic." These words are missing in the older [editions?] and in four ancient codices. They are found, however ("[ta]men"?), in Manutius's edition and in two [… ] manuscripts. They should be kept, though […] what follows. In one book of mine [is read?] "heresiarch", and in the Grenoble one […]. BALUZIUS.

(84) ‹anchor: […]um episcopum in catholica Ecclesia› · call in col 745 (visible)

[…]um episcopum in catholica Ecclesia. Hinc […] collegit Romani tum episcopi titulum […]nominaretur sanctissimæ catholicæ Eccle[…]copus, adeoque unum episcopum, id […]um, in Ecclesia esse debere. Verum hic […]rus sensus verborum Cypriani (Corne[…] tantum vult, ut sicut credimus unum […] unum Spiritum sanctum, ita credere de[…]um episcopum tantum in unaquaque […]sum sit episcopatus unus et indivisus […]m multorum concordi numerositate […]ujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur, […] in Epistola LII, pag. 73, et in libro de […]clesiæ, pag. 195. Vide notas nostras ad […]obardi de Privilegio et Jure sacerdotii, […]LUZIUS.— Porro optime verissimeque vir […]us Joan. Forbesius, Instruct. Historico-[…] . XVI, cap. 3, § 40, hæc scribit: « Non […]re intendunt confessores, nisi hanc esse […]holicæ Ecclesiæ, ut in una civitate non […]nus episcopus. Veteres phrasi sæculis […]liari, ecclesiam quamlibet peculiarem […]m vocabant Ecclesiam catholicam, ejus[…]opum indigitabant, catholicæ Ecclesiæ […]n, ut exempla superius allata, et alia […]clarant. » Sic Forbesius. Unum autem […]xemplorum sumpserat ille ex Epistola […] quæ supra posita est, Antiochenorum […]eb. lib. VII Hist. c. 37, ἠναγκάσθημεν […]unt, . . . . ἕτερον ἀντ' αὐτοῦ (h. e. loco […]iochiæ episcopi.) τῇ καθολικῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ […]. ἐπίσκοπον.

"[… one] bishop in the catholic Church." From this [someone] concluded that the title of the then Roman bishop was that he was called bishop of the most holy catholic Church, and so that there must be one bishop, that is […], in the Church. But here the [true?] sense of the words of Cyprian (Corne[lius?]) intends only that, as we believe in one [God …], one Holy Spirit, so we must believe [that there is] one bishop only in each [church …], since the episcopate is one and undivided [… spread out] in the harmonious multitude of many, of which a part is held by each in full ("in solidum"), [as Cyprian says] in Letter LII, p. 73, and in the book On the [Unity of the] Church, p. 195. See our notes on [Ag]obard, On the privilege and right of the priesthood. [BA]LUZIUS. — Further, that excellent and most truthful man […] John Forbes, Instructiones historico-[theologicae], [book] XVI, ch. 3, § 40, writes this: "The confessors mean nothing [else …] but that this is [the rule?] of the catholic Church, that in one city there should not be [more than o]ne bishop. The ancients, by a phrase [fami]liar to those ages, called any particular church the catholic Church, [and its bish]op they styled [bishop] of the catholic Church, as the examples cited above and others [de]clare." So Forbes. One of his examples he had taken from the letter […] given above, of the Antiochenes, [in Eus]ebius, History book VII, ch. 37: "we were compelled […] … another in his place (that is, in place of [Paul, bishop of Ant]ioch) … for the catholic Church […] bishop."

(85) ‹anchor: […] catholica Ecclesia› · call in col 745 (visible)

[…] catholica Ecclesia. Id est Romana. Vox […]deest in tribus vetustis exemplaribus. […]tem est veteres sæpe ita simpliciter locu[…]um de Ecclesia catholica loquerentur ut […]t nomen Ecclesiæ, nimirum quia vox […]mportabat Ecclesiam. Ea quippe secta […]est catholica non est Ecclesia, cum sit [… line cut at the top of the right column …] [con?]fessioni similis est ista Cypriani Epist. 40, seu 43, ad plebem suam: « Deus unus est, et Christus unus, et una Ecclesia, et una cathedra, super Petrum voce Domini fundata. » Et id quidem scribit Cyprianus, ut eos qui Felicissimi factioni adhærebant extra Ecclesiam esse probet. COUSTANT.— Coustantii quæstiunculam, quæ statim istic sequitur, omitto, ut lis omnis vitetur atque offensio ex facili ad eamdem responso. Cæterum exstat in fragmento DE CANONE NOVI TEST. quod mox editurus sum, hujus Hellenolexiæ exemplum, ubi alia præterea non ex uno tantum Latino scriptore adduxi.

"[In the] catholic Church." That is, the Roman. The word [catholica?] is missing in three old copies. [Note, however?], the ancients often spoke so simply [that, when they spoke of] the catholic Church, they [omitted?] the word "Church", namely because the word [catholica] implied "Church". For the sect that is [not] catholic is not the Church, since it is [… line cut …] to the [con]fession(?) is like this of Cyprian's, Letter 40, or 43, to his people: "God is one, and Christ is one, and the Church is one, and the chair is one, founded on Peter by the Lord's voice." And Cyprian writes this to prove that those who adhered to the faction of Felicissimus are outside the Church. COUSTANT. — I omit Coustant's little question that follows straight after there, so that all dispute may be avoided, and any offence arising from an easy answer to it. Besides, an example of this Hellenism ("Hellenolexia") stands in the fragment On the Canon of the New Testament, which I am about to publish shortly, where I have also adduced others, from more than one Latin writer.

(printed under page 424)

(86) ‹anchor: Quis—non moveretur› · call in col 746 (by position)

Quis—non moveretur. Sic ediderunt Benedictini; Baluzius tamen nihil de lectione istac notavit. Vulgo legitur, « Ista eorum professione non moveremur. Verum ait Fellus, legi in Bodl. I: « Ista eorum professione quis non moveretur? » atque secundis curis eamdem exhiberi lectionem in ms. Corb. annotavit Coustantius.

"Who—would not be moved." So the Benedictines printed it; yet Baluze noted nothing about this reading. The common reading is "We would not be moved by this profession of theirs." But Fell says that in Bodl. I is read "Who would not be moved by this profession of theirs?"; and Coustant noted that the same reading is given by a second correction in the Corbie manuscript.

(printed under page 424)

(87) ‹anchor: Locum suum agnoscere› · call in col 746 (by position)

Locum suum agnoscere. Hoc est, presbyteri honore atque gradu servato receptus est. Hoc exemplo et Nicæni Patres can. 8 Novatianis, et Afri in collatione Carthaginensi Donatistis ad Ecclesiam redeuntibus suos honores concesserunt, COUST. — Qua ratione Maximus in integrum fuerit restitutus, infra ad Epistolam LII, dicetur (scil. ad verba, « Evaristum de episcopo jam nec laicum remansisse,» hæc annotantur): Rigaltius ait: « Episcopo semel ab episcopatu deposito, quamvis pœnitenti, non reddebatur locus neque dignitas episcopi. Pœnitentia completa, reddebatur ei communio Christiana, sed laica, ita ut laicus in Ecclesia maneret. At Evaristus de episcopatu depositus in Ecclesia non remansit. » Notandum Ecclesiam aliquando de clero schismaticos in integrum restituisse. Sic Novatianos restituerunt Nicæni Patres Porro ipsos Arianos a Patribus Alexandrinis, salvis honoribus, receptos fuisse res satis nota est. Haud igitur mirum si Maximus ad Ecclesiam redux, locum suum agnoscere jussus sit: præsertim cum verisimile fuerit ipsum et socios ejus, ob confessionis honorem, Ecclesiæ censuris atque anathematis fulmini nondum fuisse subjectos. FELL., Infra ad CONCIL. CARTHAG. III, plura notabuntur sub init. de Clero pœnitenti.

"To recognize his place." That is, he was received with his presbyter's honour and rank preserved. Following this example, the Fathers of Nicaea (canon 8) granted their honours to the Novatianists, and the Africans at the Conference of Carthage to the Donatists, on their return to the Church. COUST. — How Maximus was restored in full will be told below at Letter LII (namely, at the words "that Evaristus, from being a bishop, did not even remain a layman", this is noted): Rigault says: "When a bishop had once been deposed from the episcopate, even if penitent, the place and dignity of a bishop were not given back to him. When his penance was complete, Christian communion was given back to him, but lay communion, so that he remained in the Church as a layman. But Evaristus, deposed from the episcopate, did not remain in the Church." Note that the Church sometimes restored schismatics from the clergy in full. So the Fathers of Nicaea restored the Novatianists. Further, it is well enough known that the Arians themselves were received by the Fathers of Alexandria with their honours intact. It is no wonder, then, if Maximus on returning to the Church was told to recognize his place, especially as it is likely that he and his companions, on account of the honour of their confession, had not yet been subjected to the Church's censures and the thunderbolt of anathema. FELL. — Below, at the Third Council of Carthage, more will be noted near the beginning, on penitent clergy.

(printed under page 424)

(88) [printed "(38)"] ‹anchor: Remisimus Deo omnipotenti› · call in col 746 (by position)

Remisimus Deo omnipotenti. Si quis ad communicationem reciperetur, externum hoc esset privilegium. Colligendum autem videtur sensisse ve- (continues)

"We have left to God almighty." If anyone was received into communion, this would be an outward privilege. It seems to follow, however, that the (continues)

(printed under page 424)

[The first line of each note column sits at the top edge of the image and is slightly cut, but still readable.] (printed under page 425)

(88) (continued) ‹anchor: Remisimus Deo omnipotenti› · call on the previous page

teres, nihil alio modo sibi rei fuisse cum foro interno, nisi ut peterent a Deo delinquentis absolutionem. MARSHAL, qui relegat lectorem ad notas suas in Cypriani Opuscula.

ancients thought they had nothing to do with the inner forum in any other way than to ask God for the offender's absolution. MARSHALL, who refers the reader to his notes on Cyprian's Opuscula.

(printed under page 425)

(89) ‹anchor: Ad te, per scripta› · call in col 747 (by position)

Ad te, per scripta. Sic edit. Benedictin. Vulgo abest per. Coustantius hæc notat: « In MS. Corb, ad te per scripta. In Cplb. ad te litteras perscriptas; mox in utroque, ut in uno Anglic., desideratur festinantem: sed proximum verbum descendere istud necessario postulat. Festinabat porro, quia superioris epistolæ cura ei demandata jam fuerat. » Fellus autem hanc attulit varietatem: « Eadem hora eodemque momento ad te scripta transmisimus, et Nicephorum acoluthum, descendere navigandi destinatione, ad vos statim dimisimus. Ver. descendere ad navigandum destinatione ad vos statim dimissi, Corb.» ROUTH.

"To you, in writing." So the Benedictine edition. Commonly "per" is missing. Coustant notes this: "In the Corbie manuscript, 'ad te per scripta'. In the Colbert ('Cplb.', as printed), 'ad te litteras perscriptas'; shortly after, in both, as in one English manuscript, 'festinantem' is missing; but the next word, 'descendere', necessarily requires it. And he was hurrying, because the care of the preceding letter had already been entrusted to him." Fell, though, gave this variant: "At the same hour and the same moment we sent the writing to you, and at once dispatched Nicephorus the acolyte to you, to go down with the intention of sailing": Ver. "To go down for sailing, with the intention, dispatched at once to you": Corb. ROUTH.

(printed under page 425)

(90) ‹anchor: Destinantem› · call in col 747 (by position)

Destinantem. Revocavimus lectionem veterum editionum quæ sola bona est, quam præterea comfirmant aliquot vetera exemplaria. Primus Erasmus eam tantisper mutavit, festinantem ponens pro destinantem. Sed tamen Erasmus non videtur fecisse absque auctoritate. Nam ita ego inveni scriptum in libro Corbeiensi, non eo modo quo refertur in editione Rigaltii et in Anglicana (vid. paulo supra. Hæ edit. in textu præstant, festinantem de statione ad vos. Ita etiam edidit Coustant.), sed eo modo quo legitur in illo veteri libro, in quo ipsissimis verbis legitur « descendere ad navigandum festinantem ad vos statim dimisi. » At Rigaltius ait in libro illo legi « ad navigandam destinatione ad vos statim dimissi. » Postea introducta est lectio quæ addit de statione. Duo illa vocabula non sunt sancti Cypriani (Cornelii), sed imperiti cujusdam librarii. Quod sic evenisse uti dicturus sum puto non posse ambigi. Primo observandum est illa non exstare in antiquis exemplaribus quæ habent vocem festinantem, neque in antiquioribus editionibus. Morellus illa primus induxit, haud dubie ex quodam veteri libro. Nam et ego tres vidi in quibus ea reperiuntur. Id vero vitium introductum est, ut antea monui, per imperitiam et oscitantiam cujusdam veteris librarii nescientis litteras: qui cum incidisset in exemplar male scriptum, non posset autem divinare quomodo scribendum esset vocabulum quod sequebatur post navigandum, eam vocem posuit quæ sibi venit in mentem, et ex festinantem seu potius destinantem fecit detestationem uti scriptum est in uno codice Vaticano et in Veronensi, eo videlicet modo quo in veteri codice Remensi sancti Dionysii legitur in Epistola 41, infestationem pro in statione. Hujusmodi errorum pleni sunt libri veteres. In codice igitur illo Vaticano et in Veronensi sic scriptus erat hic locus: « Nicephorum acolytum descendere ad navigandum destinationem ad vos statim dimisi. « Deinde alius librarius nihilo peritior pro destinationem posuit destinatione unico vocabulo, quemadmodum legitur in alio codice Vaticano et in uno meo. Atque hæc est lectio quæ, quamvis falsa. hodie obtinet in vulgatis editionibus. Porro etiam prava lectio horum codicum ostendit legendum esse destinantem pro festinantem. BALUZ. — Cum Baluzio quidem veterem revocante lectionem facio; si tamen scriptura de statione germana fuisset, tum vero recte ostenderet Coustantius ex Cypriani Epp. 4 et 42 (al. 44 et 45), stationem hoc loco perinde esse atque religiosum conventum in ecclesiis, in quibus soliti fideles ad sacra mysteria celebranda venire. In his porro stationibus post mysteria peracta, ut notat cl. Marshall, Anglicus interpres, eamdem Epist. Cypriani 44 laudans, res alias transigere consueverunt. ROUTH.

"Intending." We have restored the reading of the old editions, which alone is good, and which several old copies confirm besides. Erasmus was the first to change it, for the time being, putting "festinantem" (hurrying) for "destinantem" (intending). Yet Erasmus does not seem to have done so without authority. For I found it so written in the Corbie book, not in the form reported in Rigault's edition and in the English one (see a little above; these editions give in the text "festinantem de statione ad vos", and Coustant printed it so too), but in the form read in that old book, in which one reads in these very words: "I dispatched him at once to you, hurrying to go down to sail." But Rigault says that in that book one reads "ad navigandam destinatione ad vos statim dimissi." Later the reading adding "de statione" was introduced. Those two words are not Saint Cyprian's (Cornelius's), but some unskilled scribe's. That it happened as I am about to say I think cannot be doubted. First, note that they do not stand in the old copies that have the word "festinantem", nor in the older editions. Morel first brought them in, no doubt from some old book; for I too have seen three in which they are found. That fault was introduced, as I said before, by the unskill and carelessness of some old scribe who did not know his letters: having come upon a badly written exemplar, and being unable to guess how the word after "navigandum" should be written, he put the word that came into his head, and out of "festinantem", or rather "destinantem", made "detestationem", as is written in one Vatican codex and in the Verona codex; just as in the old Reims codex of Saint-Denis one reads in Letter 41 "infestationem" for "in statione". The old books are full of errors of this kind. So in that Vatican codex and in the Verona codex this place was written thus: "Nicephorum acolytum descendere ad navigandum destinationem ad vos statim dimisi." Then another scribe, no more skilled, put "destinatione" for "destinationem" as a single word, as one reads in another Vatican codex and in one of mine. And this is the reading which, though false, prevails today in the common editions. Further, the corrupt reading of these codices also shows that "destinantem" should be read for "festinantem". BALUZ. — I side with Baluze in restoring the old reading. Yet if the wording "de statione" had been genuine, then Coustant would rightly show from Cyprian's Letters 4 and 42 (otherwise 44 and 45) that "statio" in this place means the same as a religious assembly in the churches, to which the faithful used to come to celebrate the sacred mysteries. And in these stations, after the mysteries were completed, as the learned Marshall, the English translator, notes, citing the same Letter 44 of Cyprian, they used to transact other business. ROUTH.

(printed under page 425)