PL 4 · cols. 393–396
Cyprianus, Epistolae LXIII-LXIX
Letter LXV
Migne Reading Room
PL 4 · cols. 393–396
Letter LXV
LECTIONES VARIANTES. (printed under page 190)
(a) ‹anchor: not visible on the page foot› · call in col 393
Qui se falsa Bod. 1. NC. 2.
"Who (deceive) themselves with false": Bodleian 1; New College 2.
(printed under page 190)
(b) ‹anchor: not visible on the page foot› · call in col 393
Imputabitur Lam. NC. 1. Bod. 2. Ebor.
"Will be imputed": Lambeth; New College 1; Bodleian 2; York.
(printed under page 190)
(c) ‹anchor: not visible on the page foot› · call in col 394
Ratum Erasm.
"Ratified": Erasmus.
STEPH. BALUZII NOTAE. (Baluze) ‹lemma: V. — Fallaci et mortali› · col 393 V. — Fallaci et mortali. Ita Erasmus et quatuor libri veteres. At vetustiores editiones et quatuor item libri veteres habent falsa et mortali seductione.
§5. "By a deceitful and deadly (seduction)." So Erasmus and four old books. But the older editions and likewise four old books have "by a false and deadly seduction."
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Seductione› · col 393 Seductione. Ita reponendum esse permotus sum auctoritate veterum editionum et omnium fere veterum librorum. Nam vocem circumventione, quam Erasmus invexit, non reperi nisi in tribus antiquis codicibus. Angli testantur illam non fuisse in suis.
"Seduction." I was moved to restore it so by the authority of the old editions and of nearly all the old books. For the word "circumventione" ("by deception"), which Erasmus brought in, I found in only three ancient codices. The English editors attest that it was not in theirs.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Desiderantissimi› · col 393 Desiderantissimi. Ista, quae exstant in undecim codicibus antiquis et in antiquis editionibus, quae vero Erasmus expunxit, ac postea alii omiserunt, ego restitui, eam etiam ob causam quod scio Cyprianum frequenter ea formula usum esse in scribendo. Praeter auctoritatem veterum exemplarium sancti Cypriani, in quibus semper vidi scriptum desiderantissimi, exstat apud Sponium pag 208, inscriptio vetus quae sic etiam habet. Item apud Julium Capitolinum in Albino, fratri amantissimo et desiderantissimo. In editionibus Epistolarum sancti Leonis Papae ad Eutychem legitur: Dilectissimo filio Eutycheti. At in codicibus Rustici diaconi legitur Desiderantissimo filio Eutychi; et in calce pro dilectissime fili legitur fili desiderantissime, ut monui in mea Conciliorum editione pag. 1011. Ibidem pag. 1514, legi desiderantissimis, in Epistola Cyrilli ad Monachos edita in actis concilii quinti, ubi vulgo scriptum est desiderantissimis. Et sane cum ista vox descendat a participio desiderans, necesse est ut scribamus desiderantissimus. Benedictini nostri ita interdum scripserunt in sua editione Operum sancti Augustini.
"Most longed-for." These words, which stand in eleven ancient codices and in the ancient editions, but which Erasmus struck out and others afterwards omitted, I have restored, also for the reason that I know Cyprian often used this formula in writing. Besides the authority of the old copies of Saint Cyprian, in which I have always seen "desiderantissimi" written, there is in Spon, page 208, an old inscription that also has it so. Likewise in Julius Capitolinus, in the Albinus: "to a most loving and most longed-for brother." In the editions of the Letters of Saint Leo the Pope to Eutyches one reads: "To his most beloved son Eutyches." But in the codices of Rusticus the deacon one reads "To his most longed-for son Eutyches"; and at the end, for "most beloved son," one reads "most longed-for son," as I noted in my edition of the Councils, page 1011. In the same, page 1514, I read "desiderantissimis" in the Letter of Cyril to the Monks published in the acts of the fifth council, where "desiderantissimis" is commonly written (so printed; the two forms are set identically). And indeed, since this word comes from the participle "desiderans," we must write "desiderantissimus." Our Benedictines wrote it so at times in their edition of the Works of Saint Augustine.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Epist. LXV› · cols 393–394 Epist. LXV. — Hanc Epistolam fere totam integram exscripsit et suam fecit Goffridus abbas Vindocinensis lib. IV, Epist. XXII, scribens ad Amblardum abbatem sancti Martialis Lemovicensis, mutatis mutandis. Nam quae istic de diacono superbo dicuntur, ea Goffridus transtulit ad monachum contumacem et contumeliosum in abbatem suum. Alterius diaconi superbi vocati Maximiani mentio est apud Augustinum in libro de Correctione Donatistarum, cap. 4, et in Epistola ad Bonifacium comitem.
Letter 65. Geoffrey, abbot of Vendôme, copied out almost the whole of this Letter and made it his own, in book IV, Letter 22, writing to Amblard, abbot of Saint Martial of Limoges, with the necessary changes. For what is said here of a proud deacon Geoffrey transferred to a monk stubborn and insulting towards his abbot. Another proud deacon, called Maximian, is mentioned by Augustine in the book On the Correction of the Donatists, chapter 4, and in the Letter to Count Boniface.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: De diacono› · col 394 De diacono. Retinuimus hanc inscriptionem, quam et veteres editiones praeferunt et omnes fere libri veteres. Quidam habent de diacono tantum, alii de diacono ejus, alli denique de diacano contumaci.
"Concerning the deacon." We have kept this heading, which both the old editions and nearly all the old books give. Some have only "concerning the deacon," others "concerning his deacon," others finally "concerning the stubborn deacon" (printed "diacano").
(Baluze) ‹lemma: I. — Rogatiano› · col 394 I. — Rogatiano. Episcopo Novensi in Mauritania. Interfuit concilio Carthaginensi sub Cypriano. Collationi Carthaginensi inter Catholicos et Donatistas adfuit Felix episcopus Novensis Catholicus. Alia fuit Nova in Moesia secunda, cujus episcopus Petrus nominatur in codice encyclio cap. 19, in editione nostra; cap. 12, in editione Harduini, qui sequi noluit nostram, sed turbavit ordinem institutum ab eo qui primus collegit Epistolas in codice encyclio contentas. Et tamen sciebat me conquestum esse de iis qui Romanae Conciliorum editioni praefuerunt quod mutassent ordinem veterem contra mentem ejus qui collegit Epistolas encyclias.
§1. "To Rogatian." Bishop of Nova in Mauretania. He attended the council of Carthage under Cyprian. At the Conference of Carthage between the Catholics and the Donatists Felix, Catholic bishop of Nova, was present. There was another Nova in Second Moesia, whose bishop Peter is named in the Codex Encyclius, chapter 19 in our edition; chapter 12 in Hardouin's, who would not follow ours but disturbed the order set by the man who first collected the Letters contained in the Codex Encyclius. And yet he knew that I had complained of those who presided over the Roman edition of the Councils for having changed the old order against the intention of the man who collected the encyclical Letters.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Collegae mei› · col 394 Collegae mei. Angli, qui vocem mei legebant in suis codicibus manuscriptis, illam tamen omiserunt in sua editione. Quod cur ita fecerint divinare non potui, nisi quod puto illos, ut saepe alias, voluisse retinere lectiones editionis Rigaltianae. Agnoscere tamen facile poterant erratum istic esse in editione illa, indicante etiam errorem Epistola sequenti, in cujus initio scriptum est: Graviter commoti sumus ego et collegae mei qui praesentes aderant. Caeterum vocem a Rigaltio et Anglis omissam praeferunt omnes editiones antiquae, XVIII libri nostri veteres, et etiam quidam Anglicani. Itaque si deest in aliquibus, qui sane sunt pauci, existimandum est id evenisse per indiligentiam et oscitantiam librariorum.
"My colleagues." The English editors, who read the word "my" in their manuscript codices, nevertheless left it out in their edition. Why they did so I could not guess, except that I think they wished, as often elsewhere, to keep the readings of Rigault's edition. Yet they could easily have recognised that there was an error here in that edition, the following Letter also pointing to the error, at whose beginning is written: "I and my colleagues who were present were gravely disturbed." For the rest, the word omitted by Rigault and the English is given by all the ancient editions, eighteen of our old books, and also some English ones. So if it is missing in some, which are indeed few, it must be thought to have happened through the carelessness and drowsiness of the copyists.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: De diacono tuo› · col 394 De diacono tuo. Si lectio libri Lamoniani et alius cum (continues)
"Concerning your deacon." If the reading of the Lamoignon book and of another, (continues)
(printed under page 190)
LECTIONES VARIANTES. (printed under page 191)
(a) ‹anchor: not visible on the page foot› · call in col 395
Ejus omit. Oxon.
"His": omitted in the Oxford edition.
(printed under page 191)
(b) ‹anchor: Et iterum› · call in col 395
Dicit add. Lam. Bod. 1, 2.
"He says": added in Lambeth; Bodleian 1, 2.
(printed under page 191)
(c) ‹anchor: et honorifica› · call in col 395
Et honora Bod. 1.
"And honour" (honora): Bodleian 1.
(printed under page 191)
(d) ‹anchor: respondit et dixit› · call in col 395
Respondit dicens Bod. 2, Lam.
"He answered, saying": Bodleian 2; Lambeth.
(printed under page 191)
(e) ‹anchor: not visible on the page foot› · call in col 396
Dignationem Bod. 1.
"Condescension": Bodleian 1.
(printed under page 191)
(f) ‹anchor: not visible on the page foot› · call in col 396
Subditus Lin.
"Subject": Lincoln.
(printed under page 191)
(g) ‹anchor: not visible on the page foot› · call in col 396
Testimonium improba Lam. Ebor. Bod. 2. NC. 1, 2.
"Reprove the testimony": Lambeth; York; Bodleian 2; New College 1, 2.
(printed under page 191)
(h) ‹anchor: oportet diaconum› · call in col 396
Oportet Cassium diaconum Lin.
"Cassius the deacon must": Lincoln.
STEPH. BALUZII NOTAE. (Baluze) ‹lemma: De diacono tuo, continued› · col 395
(continued) veteris in editione Anglicana laudati certa est, diaconus ille vocabatur Cassius. Concilio Carthaginensi sub Cypriano interfuit Cassius episcopus Macomadiensis.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Superbisse› · col 395 Superbisse. Hanc lectionem inveni in tribus tantum libris veteribus. Habetur tamen in antiquis editionibus. Manutius posuit superbi esse. Sic etiam septem libri nostri veteres et septem Anglicani. Morellius scripsit superbire.
"To have been proud." I found this reading in only three old books. It is found, however, in the ancient editions. Manutius put "to be of the proud." So too seven of our old books and seven English ones. Morel wrote "to be proud."
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Probaretur› · col 395 Probaretur. Ita duodecim libri nostri veteres et septem Anglicani. Veteres editiones ante Pamelianam habent probarentur. Ipse emendavit ex quatuor codicibus manuscriptis et veteri excuso pro eo quod Remboltus ediderat probarentur. In quo falsus est Pamelius. Nam editio quoque Spirensis et Veneta vetus habent eamdem lectionem; eamque nos etiam invenimus in octo exemplaribus manuscriptis.
"Should be proved." So twelve of our old books and seven English ones. The old editions before Pamelius's have "probarentur" (plural). He corrected it from four manuscript codices and an old printed copy, in place of what Rembolt had printed, "probarentur." In this Pamelius was mistaken. For the Speyer edition and the old Venetian also have the same reading; and we too found it in eight manuscript copies.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: II. — Populi tui› · col 395 II. — Populi tui. Septem libri veteres habent plebis tuae. At in Epistola LV, pag. 80, et in Epistola LXIX, pag. 122, et lib. III Testimoniorum, cap. 12, scriptum est populi tui. Sic etiam legitur in editione vulgata Novi Testamenti, cap. XXIII Actorum. Vide supra pag. 454.
§2. "Of your people" (populi). Seven old books have "plebis tuae." But in Letter 55, page 80, and in Letter 69, page 122, and book III of the Testimonies, chapter 12, "populi tui" is written. So too one reads in the Vulgate edition of the New Testament, chapter 23 of Acts. See above, page 454.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Dominus etiam› · cols 395–396 Dominus etiam. Hunc locum valde decurtatum et mutilum refert Juo parte V, cap. 355, et Gratianus dist. 93. Correctores Romani suppleverunt ex Epistola Cypriani.
"The Lord also." Ivo (printed "Juo"), part V, chapter 355, and Gratian, distinction 93, quote this passage much shortened and mutilated. The Roman Correctors filled it out from Cyprian's Letter.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Sub ictu passionis› · col 396 Sub ictu passionis. Tertullianus in libro de Oratione dixit sub instantia passionis, ut recte monuit Rigaltius, qui refert locum similem ex sermone VIII sancti Leonis de Passione Domini. At Pamelius edidit substantia passionis. Quo etiam modo scriptum est in libro Agobardi bibliothecae regiae.
"Under the stroke of the passion." Tertullian in the book On Prayer said "under the pressing of the passion," as Rigault rightly noted, who quotes a similar passage from Saint Leo's eighth sermon On the Lord's Passion. But Pamelius printed "substance of the passion." That is also how it is written in the Agobard book of the royal library.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Exprobra› · col 396 Exprobra. Sic etiam in Epistola LXIX, ad Florentium pag. 122. Apud Hieronymum lib. II, adversus Pelagianos legitur argue de zelo seu de peccato.
"Reproach." So too in Letter 69, to Florentius, page 122. In Jerome, book II against the Pelagians, one reads "rebuke for zeal or for sin."
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Quae omnia› · col 396 Quae omnia. Vide notas nostras ad Agobardum pag. 107.
"All which things." See our notes on Agobard, page 107.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: III. — Diaconi.... Apostoli constituerunt› · col 396 III. — Diaconi.... Apostoli constituerunt. Vide Tertullianum in libro de Exhortatione Castitatis.
§3. "Deacons.... the Apostles appointed." See Tertullian in the book On the Exhortation to Chastity.
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Ascensum› · col 396 Ascensum. Ita sexdecim libri veteres. Editione santiquae et etiam Morelliana habent ascensam, eo modo quo Tertullianus et Cyprianus scribere solent defensam pro defensione et remissam pro remissione. Verum vocem ascensam istic non reperi nisi in quatuor antiquis codicibus. Unus habet ascensionem.
"Ascent" (ascensum). So sixteen old books. The ancient editions (printed "Editione santiquae") and Morel's too have "ascensam," in the way Tertullian and Cyprian are wont to write "defensa" for "defensio" and "remissa" for "remissio." But the word "ascensam" I found here in only four ancient codices. One has "ascensionem."
(Baluze) ‹lemma: Et honorem sacerdotis› · col 396 Et honorem sacerdotis. Codex Beccensis, et ut honorem sacerdotis agnoscat. Carnotensis, ut honorem sacerdotis agnoscat. Metensis sancti Arnulphi, et honorem sacerdotis agnoscat.
"And the honour of the bishop." The Bec codex: "and that he acknowledge the honour of the bishop." The Chartres: "that he acknowledge the honour of the bishop." The Metz codex of Saint Arnulf: "and let him acknowledge the honour of the bishop."
(printed under page 191)