Pseudo-Cornelius, Appendix prima: epistolae S. Cornelio falso ascriptae (ad Lupicinum Viennensem archiepiscopum; ad S. Cyprianum)

Variae lectiones.

Variant readings.

(printed under page 484) (¹) ‹anchor: ARCHIEPISCOPO› · call in col 865 Episcopo Baron.

"Bishop" Baronius.

(printed under page 484) (²) ‹anchor: beatissime› · call in col 865 Carissime Baron.

"Dearest" Baronius.

(printed under page 484) (³) ‹anchor: praefectus› · call in col 865 Imperator Baron.

"Emperor" Baronius.

(printed under page 484)

(1) ‹anchor: EPISTOLA I› · call in col 865

Ex archivo Viennensis ecclesiae eruta, et Joannis a Bosco opera in Bibliotheca Floriensi edita postomodum a Baronio ad ann. 355, et inter concilia recusa est: sed nihilo majorem prae se fert sinceritatis speciem, quam superiores ex eodem archivo descriptae. Primo quidem in ipsa salutatione Lupicinus, contra morem hujus saeculi, archiepiscopus appellatur. Id quidem Baronius emendare curavit. et pro archiepiscopo, substituit episcopo: sed cum nullius veteris codicis auctoritate correctionem suam fulciverit, manet ipsa suppositionis nota. Neque magis eodem aevo usitatum est Missae nomen, uti jam in supposititias Pii epistolas est observatum. Quis etiam ante persecutionem, qua interiit Cornelius, Missas publice agere Christianis licuisse largiatur? Hoc tamen sonant, quae in subnexa epistola Cornelii nomime scribuntur. Praeterea secundum Joannem a Bosco Florentius Lupicini decessor tempora Gordiani, Philippi, Decti Galli et Volusiani decucurrit. » Atqui Volusianus tantum anno 252 ante Julii mensis exitum creatus est Augustus, et Cornelius medio mense Septembre anni ejusdem vivendi finem fecit, cum aliquanto antea comprehensus, Deum confessus, ac relegatus fuisset; adeo ut Cypriano professionem ejus rescire, et gratulatorias de illa litteras ad ipsum scribere licuerit. Quandonam igitur scribi haec epistola potuit? aut cur Cornelius nihil in ea de comprehensione et confessione sua, nihil de recenti Lupicini ordinatione loquitur?

Brought out from the archive of the church of Vienne, and published by the labour of Jean du Bois in the Bibliotheca Floriacensis, it was afterwards reprinted by Baronius under the year 355, and among the councils; but it shows no greater appearance of genuineness than the earlier letters copied from the same archive. First, in the very salutation Lupicinus is called archbishop, against the usage of that age. Baronius did indeed take care to emend this, and put bishop for archbishop; but since he supported his correction by the authority of no old manuscript, the mark of forgery itself remains. Nor was the name Mass any more in use in that same age, as has already been observed on the spurious letters of Pius. And who would grant that, even before the persecution in which Cornelius died, Christians were allowed to celebrate Masses publicly? Yet that is what is implied by what is written under Cornelius's name in the letter appended. Further, according to Jean du Bois, Florentius, Lupicinus's predecessor, lived through the times of Gordian, Philip, Decius [printed "Decti"], Gallus and Volusianus." But Volusianus was made Augustus only in the year 252, before the end of the month of July, and Cornelius ended his life in the middle of September of that same year, having been arrested some while before, confessed God, and been banished; so that Cyprian was able to learn of his confession and to write him a letter of congratulation on it. When, then, could this letter have been written? Or why does Cornelius say nothing in it of his arrest and confession, nothing of Lupicinus's recent ordination?

(printed under page 484)

- AD S. CORNELIUM APPENDICES. / APPENDIX PRIMA. / EPISTOLAE IPSI FALSO ASCRIPTAE. — Migne's headings printed across the top of cols 865/866; set once, full_width, at the head of the unit in parts/c865_a.md (Q1).

- text: LUPUCINO (for LUPICINO), in the salutation - text: afflici (for affligi) - note (1): postomodum (for postmodum) - note (1): nomime (for nomine) - note (1): Decti (for Decii)

(⁵) ‹anchor: maculare› · call in col 866 (no variant 4 is printed; the text's call in col 866 at "maculare" reads ⁶) Audeas quae vides forte.

"You would dare [to say] what you see," perhaps.

Variorum notae.

Notes of various editors.

(printed under page 484)

(2) ‹anchor: CORNELII PAPAE AD CYPRIANUM› · call in col 866

In novissima Cypriani editione Steph. Baluzii studio 840 adornata primum ex mss. Bohieriano et Remigiano prodiit. Mirum est eam ab erudito viro vel ut dubiam proponi potuisse, cum nullum veri characterem prae se ferat. Indigna est amicitia, quae Cornelio cum Cypriano ad mortem usque fuit. Neque minus pugnat cum historica veritate, ex qua controversiam de Baptismo haereticorum tantum post Cornelii mortem inter Romanum pontificem et Carthaginensem natam esse, atque ex epistolae secundae Cypriani ad Stephanum papam occasione fuisse excitatam. vel ex Cyprianicae hujus epistolae lectione liquet. Ubi igitur Rufinus, lib. VII c. 2, controversiam de Baptismo haereticorum sub Cornelii pontificatu coepisse scribit, contra temporum accuratam notitiam, quod insolens ei non est, peccare dicendus est. Eum vero illic id quod Stephani est, Cornelio tribuere, sola verborum illius relatione omnibus palam fiet. Cumque. inquit, id a Cypriano et caeteris pene omnibus per Africam sacerdotibus oportere fieri (id est haereticos rebaptizari) decerneretur; Cornelius et caeteri omnes per Italiam sacerdotes hujusmodi decretum manente concordia, refutarunt, statuentes antiquitus a patribus super hoc traditam regulam debere servari: quae continebat, post abjectionem pravi et confessionem recti dogmatis, sola eos manus impositione purgandos. Ibi enim si Cornelii loco substituatur Stephanus, cum Cypriani, Augustini, aliorumque Scriptorum dictis Rufinus prorsus concordabit, (continues)

It first appeared from the Bohier and Remi manuscripts in the latest edition of Cyprian, prepared by the labour of Stephen Baluze [840] . It is surprising that a learned man could put it forward even as doubtful, since it bears no mark of genuineness. It is unworthy of the friendship that Cornelius had with Cyprian until death. Nor is it less at odds with historical truth, from which it is clear, even from reading this letter among Cyprian's, that the controversy over the baptism of heretics arose between the Roman pontiff and the bishop of Carthage only after Cornelius's death, and was stirred up on the occasion of Cyprian's second letter to Pope Stephen. Where Rufinus, then, in book VII, ch. 2, writes that the controversy over the baptism of heretics began under Cornelius's pontificate, he must be said to err against an accurate knowledge of the dates, which is not unusual for him. And that he there attributes to Cornelius what belongs to Stephen will be plain to all from the mere quotation of his words. "And when," he says, "it was being decreed by Cyprian and almost all the other bishops throughout Africa that this ought to be done (that is, that heretics be rebaptized), Cornelius and all the other bishops throughout Italy rejected a decree of this kind, while concord remained, laying down that the rule handed down from of old by the fathers on this matter must be kept: which held that, after renouncing the wrong doctrine and confessing the right, they were to be cleansed by the laying on of hands alone." For there, if Stephen is put in Cornelius's place, Rufinus will agree entirely with the words of Cyprian, Augustine and the other writers, (continues)

(printed under page 484)

(2) In novissima Cypriani editione Steph. Baluzii studio adornata primum ex mss. Bohieriano et Remigiano prodiit. Mirum est eam ab erudito viro vel ut dubiam proponi potuisse, cum nullum veri characterem prae se ferat. Indigna est amicitia, quae Cornelio cum Cypriano ad mortem usque fuit. Neque minus pugnat cum historica veritate, ex qua controversiam de Baptismo haereticorum tantum post Cornelii mortem inter Romanum pontificem et Carthaginensem natam esse, atque ex epistolae secundae Cypriani ad Stephanum papam occasione fuisse excitatam. vel ex Cyprianicae hujus epistolae lectione liquet. Ubi igitur Rufinus, lib. VII c. 2, controversiam de Baptismo haereticorum sub Cornelii pontificatu coepisse scribit, contra temporum accuratam notitiam, quod insolens ei non est, peccare dicendus est. Eum vero illic id quod Stephani est, Cornelio tribuere, sola verborum illius relatione omnibus palam fiet. Cumque. inquit, id a Cypriano et caeteris pene omnibus per Africam sacerdotibus oportere fieri (id est haereticos rebaptizari) decerneretur; Cornelius et caeteri omnes per Italiam sacerdotes hujusmodi decretum manente concordia, refutarunt, statuentes antiquitus a patribus super hoc traditam regulam debere servari: quae continebat, post abjectionem pravi et confessionem recti dogmatis, sola eos manus impositione purgandos. Ibi enim si Cornelii loco substituatur Stephanus, cum Cypriani, Augustini, aliorumque Scriptorum dictis Rufinus prorsus concordabit, (continues)

(2) In the most recent edition of Cyprian, prepared by the labour of Stephen Baluze, it first came out from the Bohier and Remigius manuscripts. It is surprising that it could have been put forward by a learned man even as doubtful, since it bears no mark of genuineness. It is unworthy of the friendship which Cornelius had with Cyprian right up to his death. Nor does it conflict any less with historical truth, from which it is plain that the controversy over the baptism of heretics arose between the Roman pontiff and the Carthaginian only after the death of Cornelius, and was stirred up on the occasion of Cyprian's second letter to Pope Stephen, or as is plain from the reading of this letter of Cyprian's. Where, therefore, Rufinus, book VII ch. 2, writes that the controversy over the baptism of heretics began under the pontificate of Cornelius, he must be said to err against an accurate knowledge of the chronology, which is not unusual for him. But that he there attributes to Cornelius what belongs to Stephen will be made plain to all by the mere quotation of his words. "And when," he says, "it was decreed by Cyprian and almost all the other bishops throughout Africa that this ought to be done" (that is, that heretics be rebaptized), "Cornelius and all the other bishops throughout Italy rejected a decree of this kind, concord remaining unbroken, laying down that the rule handed down from antiquity by the fathers on this matter ought to be kept: which held that, after the casting off of the depraved doctrine and the confession of the right one, they were to be cleansed by the imposition of hands alone." For there, if Stephen be put in the place of Cornelius, Rufinus will agree entirely with the statements of Cyprian, Augustine and the other writers, (continues)

<!-- note: No earlier ep_866.md existed, so there was no partial note with a "(continues)" mark to extend. The whole of Variorum note (2) as far as it stands in the right-hand column of the Variorum notae at the foot of page 484 (cols 865–866) is set here. It begins "(2) In novissima" and stops at "concordabit," with a comma at the foot of the column, so it runs over to page 485 (col 867, outside this unit), which was not seen (Q2: corrected from "concordabit."). The original-edition page number "840", printed in bold after "studio", is omitted. Cyprian's c[o]episse is set as coepisse; the scan is unclear at that point. To the left stand Variorum note (1) and, above it, the Variae lectiones; neither is set here. Q2: this copy duplicates the Footnotes entry above; note (2) is foot apparatus, not editors' prose. -->

- note (2): "Cumque." (full point printed for a comma before inquit) - note (2): "excitatam. vel" (full point printed for a comma)