P. Coustant, Monitum in subjecta fragmenta

Notice

On the fragments below.

1. The work from which the fragments below have been copied is cited by Athanasius in his book On the Synods, no. 44, in his letter On the Decrees of the Synod of Nicaea, no. 25, and throughout his letter On the Opinion of Dionysius. Basil also mentions it in his book On the Holy Spirit, chap. 29, and Jerome, On Ecclesiastical Writers, chap. 79. But these two Doctors do not refer to it in the same way. For Jerome states that it was divided into four books, whereas Basil quotes certain words of it as from the second letter to Dionysius his namesake. But in truth it is clear from Athanasius both that it was divided into books and that the name of a letter fits it: for in the same letter On the Opinion of Dionysius, at no. 13, he says: « Dionysius, as soon as possible, for the sake of clearing himself, published books, which he entitled Refutation and Defence, » and at no. 14 he speaks thus of the same writing: « He entitled his letter with the title of Refutation and Defence. » It was therefore a letter divided into four books, and accordingly one of those which Dionysius calls composed by himself at greater length and in the manner of one treating a subject, "explaining more didactically" (Letter 1, to Xystus). It was not sent by him immediately upon his being informed of the accusation against him. For, lest he should seem to be failing to meet the accusation if he put off writing back to the Roman bishop too long, he sent ahead of it a letter, which he mentions below, at no. 6, addressing Dionysius of Rome himself in these words: "and I wrote to you also by another letter." Therefore it is not wrongly called by Basil not only a Letter, but even the second letter to Dionysius his namesake. At the same time it is also a Refutation and a Defence: a Refutation, namely, of the adversaries and accusers of Dionysius, who are convicted and confuted in this work, and a Defence of Dionysius himself, who in the same work strives to clear himself of the errors laid against him. Since he accomplished this successfully, Athanasius rightly charges the Arians with shameless calumny, in that they did not blush to peddle as Dionysius' own those things which he had openly and plainly rejected.

II. This defence of Dionysius is of all the greater importance in that it serves us as a specimen of what the other Fathers earlier than the Council of Nicaea would have done, from whom there slipped certain expressions akin in appearance to the Arian impiety, if a like necessity had compelled them to set out their mind more openly. For from this anyone is easily led to believe that there would have been none of them who would not, just as Dionysius did, have condemned the same perfidy. Which things from this work he judged were to be copied out, and which passed over, Athanasius, no. 14, explains in this manner: « Omitting, on account of the length of the books, very many of his words, in which he weighs the matters brought into question, or draws conclusions from the reasonings adduced, or refutes his adversaries by questioning them, or accuses his detractors, I shall set forth only those which will seem necessary for washing away the charges. » In the passages which he copies out, however, he by no means keeps the order of the books, but as the matters treated required, he now brings forward one or two fragments from the first book, then another from the second, after that a fourth again from the first, to which he joins another from the fourth. But since it is our purpose to gather accurately the remains of this same work, inasmuch as it was written to the Roman pontiff, it has seemed better to present the individual fragments in that order which the books from which they were copied keep among themselves. Finally, if we weigh the sequence of the events which preceded this work, we shall be able in some measure to arrive at the time about which it was composed. Namely, certain letters of Dionysius of Alexandria against the Sabellians, published while Xystus was pontiff, gave occasion to the accusation against him. Stirred by this, some Catholics, without the knowledge of the Alexandrian bishop himself, hastened to Rome and reported to the Roman pontiff the things in his writings which displeased them. Dionysius of Rome at once admonished Dionysius of Alexandria. He, for his part, strove to satisfy him first by a brief letter, and soon by a longer one, "as soon as possible," as Athanasius notes. Therefore nothing prevents us from judging that this defence of Dionysius belongs to the year 262. The learned Tillemont also thinks that it can be assigned to the end of this year. COUSTANT.