PL 5 · cols. 343–350

De Magnete presbytero notitia historica, cum fragmento, ex Lumper desumpta

Editors' preface

PL 5:343

DE MAGNETE PRESBYTERO NOTITIA HISTORICA, CUM FRAGMENTO, EX D. LUMPER DESUMPTA.

On Magnes the Presbyter: a historical notice, with a fragment, taken from D. Lumper.

ARTICULUS PRIMUS.

ARTICLE I.

Ejus Vitae Synopsis.

Synopsis of his Life.

Magnes qui et Macarius Magnes, quo tempore claruit.

Magnes, who is also Macarius Magnes; at what time he flourished.

Editors' notes and page, col. 343

Footnotes

(continued) ‹anchor: not visible› · call on an earlier page

a proposito deduci religione prohiberer, libenter ita restituissem : Mille annorum regnum arbitror aeternum esse, aut si non ita sentiendum est, etc.

(continued) …were I not kept by scruple from being drawn away from what was set down, I would gladly have restored it thus: I judge the reign of a thousand years to be eternal, or if it is not to be understood so, etc.

(printed under page 174)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call on an earlier page

Adveniendi. Venturi, seu adveniente, opinor legi oportere.

Adveniendi ("of coming"). I think it ought to read venturi ("who is to come"), or adveniente ("as he comes").

(printed under page 174)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call on an earlier page

Tutaverunt. Pro tutati sunt positum esse existimo. Nos cum meliorem lectionem non haberemus, quam in veteri exemplari invenimus, etiam si minime nobis illa probaretur, reliquimus, ut eruditiores aut conjecturam nostram reciperent, aut locum ipsi suo arbitrio inquinatum castigarent. Obsoleta verba mutare nolui, ut ab antiquo codice quam minime possem declinarem. Ego in his annotationibus quae tuto castigare potui, bona fide praestiti : neque sum, si quis opinionem meam improbaverit, continuo illi succensurus, tantum ille meliorem certioremque afferat; quam tantum abest ut rejiciam, ut ejusdem me defensorem sim sincere professurus : libellus certe ita male a librariis acceptus est, ut vix omni diligentia restitui posse videretur : quo fit, ut minus culpandi simus, si conjecturam alicubi maluimus sequi, quam contaminati exemplaris auctoritatem.

Tutaverunt ("they protected"). I think it is put for tutati sunt. Since we had no better reading than the one we found in the old copy, we left it, even though it hardly satisfied us, so that more learned men might either accept our conjecture or themselves correct the corrupted passage at their own judgement. I chose not to change obsolete words, so as to depart as little as I could from the ancient manuscript. In these annotations I have done in good faith what I could safely correct; nor, if anyone disapproves my opinion, shall I at once be angry with him, provided only that he brings something better and surer; far from rejecting it, I shall sincerely declare myself its defender. Certainly the little book has been so badly handled by the copyists that it seemed scarcely restorable by any diligence; hence we are the less to be blamed if here and there we have preferred to follow conjecture rather than the authority of a contaminated copy.

(printed under page 174)

Page

running head: 345 DE MAGNETE PRESB[...] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ligatus est diabolus. Qui vero vitiis et dogmatibus; B Hoc jam ad judicium novissimum pertinet, et; C portas ejus de singulis margaritis, ternas portas ex; D (1) Adveniendi. Venturi, seu adveniente, opinor (in the Commentarius, not set)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the running head's column number reads 345, not 343, UNSURE whether that is a misprint or a misreading of the scan; "adveniendi" and "tutaverunt" kept as printed (the Commentarius discusses both readings); "ostendit" in para 16 looks like "ostendlt", taken as damaged type; Commentarius at the foot of the page not set (later pass); full-width lines "DE MAGNETE PR...", "NOTITIA HISTORICA, CUM..." and "EX D. LUMPER DESU..." stand between the Commentarius and ARTICULUS PRIMUS, cut off at the image edge, not set; editors' matter set: ARTICULUS PRIMUS. / Ejus Vitae Synopsis. / Magnes qui et Macarius Magnes; last word "cla-" split at the column break (claruit)
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): coelo | caelo
other: a full-width band stands across cols 343/344 in mid-page: the 1 paragraph(s) above it in col 344 are set here, after the 4 above it in col 343 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
other: the column opens with the end of the previous work (another unit); not set here: the unit begins at ARTICULUS PRIMUS.
other (QA Q1, 2026-11-01): the English of "claruit" (joined here from "cla-|ruit.") now stands at the end of this column ("at what time he flourished."); col. 344's English still opens with a stray "flourished." that belongs here and should be dropped there (not written by Q1). The full title band (DE MAGNETE PRESBYTERO / NOTITIA HISTORICA, CUM FRAGMENTO, / EX D. LUMPER DESUMPTA.) is confirmed on the foot images, above ARTICULUS PRIMUS.; still to be set by the settle step.
running head: 343 DE MAGNETE PRESBYTERO 344
marginal letters: A ligatus est diabolus; B Hoc jam ad judicium; C portas ejus de singulis; D (1) Adveniendi (all four in the previous unit's text above the title band)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:344

Presbyter Hierosolymitanus fuisse traditur. An etiam Episcopus? — Magnes, sive Magnetes, vel potius Macarius Magnes, desinente saeculo tertio floruisse

He is said to have been a presbyter of Jerusalem. Was he also a bishop? — Magnes, or Magnetes, or rather Macarius Magnes, is thought to have flourished at the close of the third century.

Editors' notes and page, col. 344

Page

running head: GNETE PRESBYTERO 344 (cut off at left edge)
marginal letters: A a vera fide dissolvi; B sensus cogitare nec lingua; C nes contra fidem eorum; D probaverit, continuo illi (in the Commentarius, not set)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the Commentarius at the page foot (quam minime possem declinarem. Ego in his annotationibus...) not set; full-width title lines (...TE PRESBYTERO / ...RICA, CUM FRAGMENTO, / ...LUMPER DESUMPTA.) printed across both columns after the Commentarius, cut off at the left edge, not set; editors' matter set: historical notice on Macarius Magnes (ruit. Presbyter Hierosolymitanus...), opening sentence in italics; its first word "ruit." completes "cla-ruit" broken from column 343 (the page foot image shows col. 343's italic line ending "quo tempore cla-"), so "claruit" stands whole at the end of c343 and "ruit." is not repeated here; last word "flo" is broken at the column break (hyphen not visible in image) and stands whole here as "floruisse" (joined on receipt)
other: the 1 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 343 (reading order, moved on receipt)
other: the word floruisse was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 345
running head: 343 DE MAGNETE PRESBYTERO 344
marginal letters: (none)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the column ends on the broken "flo-", joined on receipt with its tail in col. 345 as "floruisse"; the English "flourished" depends on the governing verb in col. 345 and is to be checked across the break there. The opening "ruit." of this column belongs to "claruit", which is set whole at the end of c343.

PL 5:345

existimatur. Ita quidem prae caeteris doctissimus Tillemontius, qui de isto Ecclesiae scriptore, obscuri nominis licet, ipsiusque litterarum monumentis satis diligenter edisserit. Guilielmus autem Caveus non solum auctoris aetatem antehac incompertam, sed quo etiam charactere fuerit insisignitus, expiscari sibi demum licuisse profitetur. Sic enim ille: Germanus patriarcha constantinopolitanus in Dogmatico ad Anthimum ms. apud cl. Galeum, ubi de synodo antiochena adversus Samosatenum agit, haec habet. Intererant, inquit, Concilio Antiocheno contra Paulum Samosatenum Gregorius Thaumaturgus, Leo Tarsensis (legendum judice Caveo Ἕλενος pro Λέων, levi mutatione, is enim erat hoc tempore tarsensis episcopus, uti diserte habent Eusebius, Syncellus et Nicephorus) Maximus Bostrensis, καὶ Ἱεροσολύμων Μάγνης τις ἱερεὺς καὶ τῆς ἡμετέρας Καππαδοκίας Φιρμιλιανὸς ὁ Θαμάσιος, Theotecnus, Photinus, Marcellus, etc. Claruit igitur anno 265, quo habita est adversus Paulum Antiochiae synodus; saltem anno uno alterove sequenti. Episcopos enim hac occasione κατὰ καιρὸν διαφόρως καὶ πολλάκις in unum coïisse refert Eusebius lib. VII, cap. 28, quod, vel de diversis synodis vel de diversis ejusdem synodi sessionibus intelligendum est. Quidquid sit, vix de alia synodo, quam quae anno 265, habita est, intelligi potest Germanus, cum hoc circiter anno Gregorius Thaumaturgus obiisse dicitur. Cum igitur sacerdos fuerit hierosolymitanus Magnes noster, Hymenaeum episcopum suum eo comitatus est. Plures enim presbyteri et diaconi huicconcilio interfuerunt. Hucusque Caveus.

So, indeed, thinks above all others the most learned Tillemont, who discusses quite diligently this writer of the Church, though of obscure name, and the literary monuments of the man himself. William Cave, however, declares that he has at last been able to fish out not only the author's age, hitherto unknown, but also with what rank he was distinguished. For he speaks thus: Germanus, patriarch of Constantinople, in the Dogmatic [treatise] to Anthimus, in manuscript in the possession of the famous Gale, where he treats of the synod of Antioch against the Samosatene, has the following. There were present, he says, at the Council of Antioch against Paul of Samosata Gregory Thaumaturgus, Leo of Tarsus (one should read, in Cave's judgement, Helenus for Leo, by a slight change, for he was bishop of Tarsus at this time, as Eusebius, Syncellus and Nicephorus expressly state), Maximus of Bostra, and a certain Magnes, priest of Jerusalem, and Firmilian the admirable of our Cappadocia, Theotecnus, Photinus, Marcellus, etc. He flourished, therefore, in the year 265, in which the synod against Paul was held at Antioch; at least in one or another of the following years. For Eusebius, book 7, chapter 28, reports that the bishops on this occasion came together at various times and often, which is to be understood either of different synods or of different sessions of the same synod. Be that as it may, Germanus can hardly be understood to mean any other synod than that which was held in the year 265, since Gregory Thaumaturgus is said to have died about this year. Since, then, our Magnes was a priest of Jerusalem, he accompanied his bishop Hymenaeus thither. For many presbyters and deacons were present at this council. Thus far Cave.

De ipsius Magnetis litterarum monumentis. — Verum ad presbyteralem Magnetis dignitatem quod attinet, observandum cum Tillemontio, ejus nomen Episcopi titulo fuisse praenotatum (ἱεράρχης) in operis exemplari ab eo litteris consignati, quod sub initium saeculi noni fuit detectum ab orthodoxis, qui cum Iconomachis decertabant. Narrat Photius, uti advertit Lequienius inter Praesules, qui adversus Chrysostomum in Synodo ad Quercum Chalcedonis suburbium convenere, adstitisse quoque Macarium Magnesiae, sive Magnetum Episcopum, delatorem Heraclidae, quem ipsemet Chrysostomus Ephesi Episcopum creaverat. Hinc fortasse sive fraude, sive ignorantia, Episcopi titulum addiderit librarius, Magnetis vetustioris opus exscribens.

On the literary monuments of Magnes himself. — But as regards the presbyteral rank of Magnes, it is to be observed with Tillemont that his name was headed with the title of Bishop (hierarch) in a copy of the work committed by him to writing, which was discovered about the beginning of the ninth century by the orthodox who were contending with the Iconomachs. Photius relates, as Le Quien points out, that among the prelates who assembled against Chrysostom in the Synod at the Oak, a suburb of Chalcedon, there was also present Macarius, Bishop of Magnesia, or of the Magnetes, the accuser of Heraclides, whom Chrysostom himself had created Bishop of Ephesus. Hence perhaps, whether by fraud or by ignorance, a copyist, writing out the work of the older Magnes, added the title of Bishop.

Libri V Responsionum adversus Theosthenem Damasceni aevo notissimi. — Utut est, scripsit Macarius Magnes libros V Ἀποκριτικῶν, seu responsionum adversus Theosthenem ethnicum, Evangelium calumniantem. Atque hos quidem libros Damasceni aevo fuisse notissimos, annotavit modo laudatus Lequienius.

Five books of Replies against Theosthenes, very well known in the age of Damascene. — However that may be, Macarius Magnes wrote five books of Apocritica, or replies, against Theosthenes the pagan, who was slandering the Gospel. And that these books were very well known in the age of Damascene was noted by the just-praised Le Quien.

Editors' notes and page, col. 345

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: diligenter edisserit› · call in col 345

Tillemont., Memoir. seu Hist. des Emper., tom. IV, pag. 308-311, dans la Vie de Constantin le Grand, artic. XCIII, edit. Bruxell., pag. 127 et seqq.

Tillemont, Mémoires, or Histoire des Empereurs, vol. IV, pp. 308–311, in the Life of Constantine the Great, article 93; Brussels edition, p. 127 ff.

(printed under page 175)

(2) ‹anchor: Sic enim ille› · call in col 345

Cave, Hist. litterar., ad an. 265, tom. I, p. 136.

Cave, Historia litteraria, under the year 265, vol. I, p. 136.

(printed under page 175)

(3) ‹anchor: Narrat Photius› · call in col 345

Phot. Bibl. Cod. LIX.

Photius, Bibliotheca, codex 59.

(printed under page 175)

(4) ‹anchor: uti advertit Lequienius› · call in col 345

Lequien. Or. Christ. tom. II, pag. 698. Ne verbulum hoc in loco de Magnete occurrit, falsa citatio Gallandii. Sed haec habentur in Nota (5).

Le Quien, Oriens Christianus, vol. II, p. 698. Not a single word about Magnes occurs in this place; Galland's citation is false. But these things are found in note (5).

(printed under page 175)

Page

running head: 345 NOTITIA HISTOR (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹ruisse existimatur›; B ‹Eusebius, Syncellus et Nicephorus) Maximus Bostren-›; C ‹et diaconi huicconcilio interfuerunt›; D ‹gnetis vetustioris opus exscribens›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other (QA Q2, 2026-11-01): misprints kept as printed: "insisignitus" (insi-|signitus across a line break, for insignitus); "huicconcilio" (no space, for huic concilio); "Θαμάσιος" (for Θαυμάσιος; the English renders "the admirable"), UNSURE on the last at this resolution

PL 5:346

Complura vero eorumdem Apocriticorum ἀποσπασμάτια extare noscuntur in Nicephori patriarchae constantinopolitani libris Antirrheticis adversus Iconomachos; quae ineunte hoc saeculo vir clarus Anselmus Bandurius monachus et abbas benedictinus ex regiis codicibus descripta, fere a se in lucem emittenda viris eruditis receperat: additis praeterea nonnullis fragmentis commentarii ejusdem Macarii Magnetis in Genesim, ex ms. codice ottoboniano desumptis.

Several small extracts (ἀποσπασμάτια) of the same Apocritica, moreover, are known to be extant in the books Antirrhetici against the Iconomachi of Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople; these, copied from the royal manuscripts, the distinguished Anselm Banduri, monk and Benedictine abbot, had at the beginning of this century promised learned men that he would very nearly be bringing to light, adding besides some fragments of a commentary of the same Macarius Magnes on Genesis, taken from an Ottoboni manuscript codex.

Jamque antea integrum librum excerptorum ex scriptoris nostri apocriticis detexerat eruditissimus Joannes Bovinius in Nicephori Antirrheticis inscriptum: de Testimoniis Macarii Magnetis, uti ipsemet testatur.

And already before this the most learned John Boivin had discovered in the Antirrhetici of Nicephorus an entire book of excerpts from the Apocritica of our writer, entitled On the Testimonies of Macarius Magnes, as he himself testifies.

Dum vero ab his duumviris evulganda ejusmodi pretiosa scriptoris vetustissimi monumenta solliciti exspectabamus, spem fecit deinceps Magnus Crusius nos ab se tandem eadem excerpta propediem fuisse accepturos, quae nimirum cum eo communicarit ispemet Bovinius. Petita sunt ea, inquit, ex libro IV Apocriticorum, ubi auctor ad veritatem religionis christianae stabiliendam imprimis agit contra graecum quemdam philosophum; speciatimque de monarchia divina, ejusdemque majestate contra idololatriam gentilium disputat. Subditque: Accedent huic operi etiam fragmenta commentarii ejusdem Macarii Magnetis in Genesim; in quibus de Adami creatione, de benedictione diei septimae, de plantatione horti Eden, de impositione nominum singulis bestiarum generibus ab Adamo facta, de adjutorio feminae ab ipso Deo instituto, de seductione serpentis, et lapsu primorum parentum, et denique de tunicis pelliceis a Deo fabrefactis disseritur. Hucusque cl. Crusius. Utinam vero vel integrum Macarii Magnetis Apocriticorum opus, vel saltem illius excerpta, Graecis latinisque litteris aliquando prodeant.

But while we were anxiously awaiting such precious monuments of a most ancient writer, to be published by these two men, Magnus Crusius afterwards gave hope that we should shortly receive from him at last those same excerpts, which, namely, Boivin himself had communicated to him. They have been taken, he says, from book 4 of the Apocritica, where the author, in order to establish the truth of the Christian religion, deals above all against a certain Greek philosopher; and in particular he disputes concerning the divine monarchy and its majesty against the idolatry of the gentiles. And he adds: There will be added to this work also fragments of a commentary of the same Macarius Magnes on Genesis; in which there is discussion of the creation of Adam, of the blessing of the seventh day, of the planting of the garden of Eden, of the imposition of names on each kind of beasts made by Adam, of the help of the woman instituted by God Himself, of the seduction of the serpent and the fall of the first parents, and finally of the tunics of skins fashioned by God. Thus far the celebrated Crusius. Would that either the entire work of the Apocritica of Macarius Magnes, or at least its excerpts, might at some time come forth in Greek and Latin letters!

Fragmentum Magnetis de Eucharistia olim a Turriano editum a Gallandio iterum evulgatum. — Atque integrum sane illud opus prae manibus habuisse perhibetur Franciscus Turrianus: ex eo siquidem multa passim delibavit, quibus adversus novatores summa fidei capita propugnaret. Imprimis autem eo usus est vir doctus in tractatu de sanctissima Eucharistia; quem vulgavit adversus Andream Volanum Polonum, Calvini discipulum; ubi luculentissimum Magnetis testimonium profert de reali praesentia corporis et sanguinis Christi in sacramento eucharistico Altaris, ex ejus libro III Apocriticorum desumptum.

A fragment of Magnes on the Eucharist, formerly published by Torres, issued again by Gallandi. — And indeed Francisco Torres is said to have had that entire work in his hands: for from it he culled many things here and there, with which to defend the chief heads of the faith against the innovators. Above all, the learned man made use of it in the treatise On the Most Holy Eucharist, which he published against Andrzej Wolan, a Pole, a disciple of Calvin; where he brings forward a most splendid testimony of Magnes concerning the real presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharistic sacrament of the Altar, taken from his book 3 of the Apocritica.

Quem quidem locum ex prima illius tractatus editione florentina anno 1575 descriptum excudendum curavit indefessus Andreas Gallandius in Bibliothecae Veterum Patrum tomo III, a pag. 541-542, et recte quidem; nam editio parisiensis anni 1577, unde

This passage indeed, copied from the first Florentine edition of that treatise, of the year 1575, the indefatigable Andrea Gallandi took care to have printed in volume 3 of the Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum, at pp. 541-542, and rightly so; for the Paris edition of the year 1577, from which

Editors' notes and page, col. 346

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 346

Tom. I, pag. 271, operum S. Damasceni. Lequien in Not. ad opp. Damasceni, tom. I, pag. 271.

Vol. I, p. 271, of the works of St John Damascene. Le Quien, in his notes on the works of Damascene, vol. I, p. 271.

(printed under page 175)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 346

Fabric., Bib. Graec., tom. V, pag. 641-683.

Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca, vol. V, pp. 641–683.

(printed under page 175)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 346

Bovin., in not. ad Nicephor. Gregoram. p. 794.

Boivin, in the notes on Nicephorus Gregoras, p. 794.

(printed under page 175)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 346

Crus., Dissert. Epistol., § II, pag. 8-11.

Crusius, Dissertatio epistolica, § 2, pp. 8–11.

(printed under page 175)

Page

running head: NOTITIA HISTORICA. (initial N cut off at the image edge; printed with column number 346)
marginal letters: A nius (1). Complura vero; B Dum vero ab his duumviris; C bestiarum generibus ab Adamo; D Calvini discipulum; ubi
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:347

illum hausit, ediditque Fabricius, minus emendata esse comperitur. Subjecit insuper novus editor Gallandius graeca quaedam ab Allatio exhibita in exercitationibus adversus Creyghtonum: eaque insuper addidit, quae protulit Zacharias Cretensis in responsionibus ad Guisium cardinalem Lotharingicum haud ita pridem a Joanne Lamio evulgatis. Tandem alia etiam quaedam loca a laudato Turriano ex eodem Magnete relata in libris pro Epistolis Pontificum, quae Gallandius serius detexit, in prolegomenis, cap. XIII, pag. 34, in medium proferre operae pretium esse duxit, ne quid ex pervetusti ecclesiastici scriptoris fragmentis evulgatis, suae Patrum antiquorum collectioni deesse videatur, donec alicunde prodeant Nicephori CP. libri Antirrhetici adversus Iconomachos, ex quibus ad Ecclesiae praesidium atque ornamentum multo plura nostri Magnetis excerpta prostabunt. — Sunt autem sequentia loca: Magnetes, inquit Turrinianus auctor antiquissimus, lib. in Apologetico contra Theosthenem: «Alia enim, inquit, mactabantur spiritibus aeris, alia terrenis, alia subterraneis. Spiritibus aeris immolabantur volucres: ἐπιχθονίοις, id est, terrenis, quadrupedes nigri, quia sit terra natura nigra: ὑποχθονίοις, id est, subterraneis, item quadrupedes nigri in scrobibus, sive foveis.» Hactenus Magnetes.

Fabricius drew it and edited it, is found to be less correct. The new editor Gallandius further appended certain Greek passages presented by Allatius in his exercises against Creyghton; and he further added those which Zacharias of Crete brought forward in his responses to Cardinal Guise of Lorraine, published not long ago by Giovanni Lami. Finally, he thought it worth the effort to bring into public view, in his prolegomena, chap. 13, p. 34, also certain other passages reported from the same Magnes by the aforementioned Turrianus in his books on behalf of the Letters of the Pontiffs, which Gallandius discovered rather late, lest anything from the published fragments of a very ancient ecclesiastical writer should seem to be lacking from his collection of the ancient Fathers, until the Antirrhetic books of Nicephorus of Constantinople against the Iconomachs come forth from somewhere, from which many more excerpts of our Magnes will be available for the defence and adornment of the Church. — Now the passages are the following: Magnes, says Turrianus, a most ancient author, book, in the Apologeticus against Theosthenes: "For some things were sacrificed to the spirits of the air, others to the earthly, others to the subterranean. To the spirits of the air birds were immolated; to the epichthonioi, that is, to the earthly ones, black quadrupeds, because the earth is black by nature; to the hypochthonioi, that is, to the subterranean ones, likewise black quadrupeds in trenches or pits." Thus far Magnes.

Et infra: «Magnetes, vetustissimus scriptor ecclesiasticus, lib. II et V, quos contra Theosthenem gentilem, discrepantiam evangelistarum et alia nobis falso in Evangelio objicientem, scripsit, ait: Pro eo quod unus evangelistarum dixit, calamo spongiam circumponentes, dixisse alium, propter similitudinem arbusti hyssopo circumponentes, cum dicendum, inquit, esset calamo. «Item, quod unus Evangelista dixit, vinum; rursum dictum esse acetum in cruce (ex eodem enim vase posito hauserunt, cum perventum est ad Calvariam, et in cruce) praesertim,» inquit, «cum legem historiae Evangelistae servarent; nihilque ultra scriberent, quam quod tunc dicebatur in illo tumultu ac furore. Sic enim existimarunt, ut historia omni suspicione careret, εἰ μὴ περιεργότερον ἀλλ' ἄπλαστον εὑρεθείη τῆς ἱστορίας τὸ γράμμα:» Id est, «si littera historiae non curiosa, sed simplex reperiretur.»

And below: "Magnes, a most ancient ecclesiastical writer, in books 2 and 5, which he wrote against Theosthenes the pagan, who falsely objected to us the discrepancy of the evangelists and other things in the Gospel, says: Whereas one of the evangelists said, putting a sponge about a reed, another said, on account of the likeness of the shrub, putting it about hyssop, when, he says, 'reed' ought to have been said. "Likewise, that one Evangelist said wine, and again it was said to be vinegar on the cross (for they drew from the same vessel set there, when they had come to Calvary, and on the cross), especially," he says, "since the Evangelists kept the law of history, and wrote nothing beyond what was then being said in that tumult and fury. For they judged thus, so that the history might be free of all suspicion, if the letter of the history were found not over-elaborate but unfabricated:" that is, "if the letter of the history were found not curious, but simple."

Atque alibi: «Idem Magnetes, quem supra memini, in libro IV Apologiarum contra Theosthenem, Evangeliorum calumniatorem, reddit rationem, cur se hoc loco Paulus alioqui viventem mortuis annumeraverit:

And elsewhere: "The same Magnes, whom I mentioned above, in book 4 of the Apologies against Theosthenes, the slanderer of the Gospels, gives the reason why in this place Paul, though otherwise living, numbers himself among the dead:

Editors' notes and page, col. 347

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: ediditque Fabricius› · call in col 347

Fabric., in Delectu argum., pag. 70-72.

Fabricius, Delectus argumentorum, pp. 70–72.

(printed under page 176)

(2) ‹anchor: adversus Creyghtonum› · call in col 347

Allat., contra Creyght., pag. 563.

Allatius, Against Creyghton, p. 563.

(printed under page 176)

(3) ‹anchor: cardinalem Lotharingicum› · call in col 347

Zachar. Cretens, Respons., pag. 77.

Zacharias of Crete, Responsiones, p. 77.

(printed under page 176)

(4) ‹anchor: a Joanne Lamio evulgatis› · call in col 347

Lamy, ad Nicetae enarrat. in Epist. I ad Corinth., part. I, pag. 72 et seqq.

Lami, on Nicetas's exposition of 1 Corinthians, part I, p. 72 ff.

(printed under page 176)

(5) ‹anchor: inquit Turrinianus› · call in col 347

Turrian., Epist. Pontif. et Canonibus Apostol. adv. Centuriat. Magdeburg., Colon., 1573, lib. I, cap. 5, pag. 21.

Torres (Turrianus), On the Papal Letters and the Apostolic Canons, against the Magdeburg Centuriators, Cologne, 1573, book I, chap. 5, p. 21.

(printed under page 176)

(6) ‹anchor: Et infra› · call in col 347

Id., ibid., lib. II, cap. 3, pag. 165.

The same, same work, book II, chap. 3, p. 165.

(printed under page 176)

(7) ‹anchor: evangelistarum dixit› · call in col 347

Marc., XV, 36.

Mark 15:36.

(printed under page 176)

(8) ‹anchor: dixisse alium› · call in col 347

Joan., XIX, 29.

John 19:29.

(printed under page 176)

(9) ‹anchor: Evangelista dixit› · call in col 347

Marc., XV, 23.

Mark 15:23.

(printed under page 176)

(10) ‹anchor: rursum dictum esse› · call in col 347

Matt., XXVII, 48; Luc., XXIII, 36; Joan., XIX. 29.

Matthew 27:48; Luke 23:36; John 19:29.

(printed under page 176)

(11) ‹anchor: Atque alibi› · call in col 347

Turrian., loc. cit., lib. II, cap. 13, pag. 211.

Torres (Turrianus), in the place cited, book II, chap. 13, p. 211.

(printed under page 176)

Page

running head: 347 DE MAGNETE PRESBYTERO NOTI (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹illum hausit, ediditque Fabricius›; B ‹tici adversus Iconomachos›; C ‹quod unus evangelistarum dixit›; D ‹mini, in libro IV Apologiarum›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other (QA Q2, 2026-11-01): misprint kept as printed: "Turrinianus" (for Turrianus; the English gives Turrianus). UNSURE: "lib. in Apologetico" — the word after "lib." may be the small-capital numeral III (three strokes, as "in" also is) rather than "in"; not resolvable at this resolution; source and English left as they stand, to be checked at higher zoom

PL 5:348

Οὕτω γὰρ ἄν τις Φιλαίτερός καὶ τῶν ὁμοστοίχων ἀγαπῶν τὴν συγγένειαν δοκεῖ. Quia sic » inquit « fit, ut videatur aliquis amicos quibus se annumerat, eosque qui sui ordinis sunt; diligere. » Haec ex Magnete Turrianus, iis addenda, inquit Gallandius; quae infra suo loco retulimus.

For thus one would seem to be fond of his comrades and to love the kinship of those of the same rank. "Because thus," he says, "it comes about that someone seems to love the friends among whom he numbers himself, and those who are of his own order." These things Turrianus gives from Magnes, to be added, says Gallandi, to those which we have reported below in their proper place.

ARTICULUS II.

Article II.

Magnetis Fragmentum ex libro III Apologiae evangeliorum adversus Theostenem ethnicum apud Franc. Turrianum Tract. de sanctissima Eucharistia contra Volanum Polonum, pag. 93, edit. Florentinae, 1575.

A Fragment of Magnes from Book III of the Apology for the Gospels against Theostenes the Heathen, in Francisco Turrianus, Treatise on the Most Holy Eucharist against Volanus the Pole, page 93, Florentine edition, 1575.

I. « Quod vero non sit hoc ξένον, καὶ φρικῶδες, id est, inauditum et horrendum, considerare licet puerum infantem, quomodo nisi manducet carnem et sanguinem matris; non vivit: natura enim sanguinis est secundum veritatem lac. Ut autem clarius dicam, naturale aliquid narrabo, ne hoc fabulam putes. Ex terra nati sumus secundum corpus, et quodam modo carne ejus et sanguine alimur, id est, frumento et vino. Audi nunc attente. Principio creavit Filius Dei ⟨t⟩erram: ex terra hominem formavit: ex homine carnem sumpsit ipse. Si igitur de corpore praedicatur terra ratione originis antiquae; erat autem terra ratione creationis propria Christi creatura; et ex hac panis et vinum exstiterunt; ex ipsa rursus corpus hominis; hoc autem corpus Christus induit: merito cum accepisset panem et vinum, dixit: Hoc est Corpus meum (Matth., XXVI, 26; I Cor., XI, 34).

I. "But that this is not ξένον καὶ φρικῶδες, that is, unheard of and horrifying, one may consider from an infant child, how unless it eats the flesh and blood of its mother, it does not live: for milk is in truth of the nature of blood. And to speak more clearly, I shall relate something natural, lest you think this a fable. We are born from the earth according to the body, and in a certain manner we are nourished by its flesh and blood, that is, by grain and wine. Hear now attentively. In the beginning the Son of God created the earth: from the earth He formed man: from man He Himself took flesh. If therefore earth is predicated of the body by reason of its ancient origin; and the earth was, by reason of its creation, Christ's own creature; and from it bread and wine came into being; and from it again the body of man; and this body Christ put on: rightly, when He had taken bread and wine, did He say: This is My Body (Matt. 26:26; 1 Cor. 11:24).

II. Deinde subjungit. « Οὐ γὰρ τύπος σώματος οὐ δὲ τύπος αἵματος, ὥς τινες ἐρραψῴδησαν πεπηρωμένοι, ἀλλὰ κατ' ἀλήθειαν αἷμα καὶ σῶμα Χριστοῦ. Id est: Non enim figura est corporis aut sanguinis, ut quidam

II. Then he adds: "For it is not a figure of the body nor a figure of the blood, as some maimed in mind have babbled, but in truth the blood and body of Christ. That is: For it is not a figure of the body or of the blood, as certain

Editors' notes and page, col. 348

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 348

Quod vero, etc. Praeclaro huic fragmento Turrianus ista praemittit : « Converiam heic e graeco, quae Magnetes ecclesiasticus auctor, et valde vetus, libro tertio Apologiarum adversus Theostenem Evangeliorum calumniatorem scripsit. Dicebat ergo iste idem, quod Capharnaitae illi : Durus est hic sermo; et quis potest audire eum? Respondet Magnetes : Quod vero, etc. »

Quod vero ("But what…"), etc. Before this splendid fragment Torres sets the following: "I shall here translate from the Greek what Magnes, a church writer and a very old one, wrote in the third book of his Apologies against Theosthenes, the slanderer of the Gospels. This same man said, then, what those men of Capernaum said: This is a hard saying; and who can hear it? Magnes answers: But what…, etc."

(printed under page 176)

(2) ‹anchor: Si igitur› · call in col 348

Si igitur de corpore. Ab his verbis usque ad finem Turrianum exscripsit Coccius, suppresso ejus nomine : Thes. Cathol., t. II, p. 607 seq.

If then of the body. From these words to the end Coccius copied Torres, suppressing his name: Thesaurus Catholicus, vol. II, p. 607 f.

(printed under page 176)

(3) ‹anchor: Χριστοῦ.› · call in col 348

Οὐ γάρ..... Χριστοῦ. Repetit hunc ipsum locum Turrianus, ad lib. V, Constit. Clem., c. 13, sub finem : ex eoque, ut videtur, Bulengerus, Diatrib. III, ad Casaub. Exerc., p. 164. Lequienius, item V. C. eadem recitat ex Turriani loc. cit., ad Joan. Damasc. de Fide orthod., lib. IV, p. 271, ubi observat Damasceni aevo notissimos fuisse libros Macarii Magnetis contra Theosthenen ethnicum, neque praeterire licet illustre testimonium Zachariae Cretensis in Responsionibus ad reverendiss. Claudium Guisium cardinalem Lotharingium, quas haud ita pridem edidit vir doctissimus Joannes Lamius ad Nicetae enarrat. in epist. I ad Corinth., parte I, p. 72 et seqq. Sic igitur ille, p. 77 : Ὁ δὲ Μάγνης διδάσκαλος ἀρχαῖος ὤν, οὕτως ἐν ἀπολογία τοῦ εὐαγγελίου πρὸς Θεοσθένην φησί, Ὅτι ἡ εὐχαριστία ἀληθῶς σῶμα, καὶ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ· οὐ τύπος σώματος καὶ αἵματος, ὥς τινες ῥαψῳδήσαντες πεπηρωμένοι τὸν νοῦν ἔλεγον. Magnes autem, qui antiquus magister est, ita in Evangelii Apologia adversus Theosthenem ait : quod Eucharistia vere corpus et sanguis Christi est, non figura corporis et sanguinis, ut quidam fabulantes mente excaecati dixerunt. »

Not…… of Christ. Torres repeats this very passage on book V of the Clementine Constitutions, chap. 13, near the end; and from him, it seems, Boulenger, Diatribe III on Casaubon's Exercitationes, p. 164. Le Quien, likewise a most distinguished man, quotes the same from Torres in the place cited, on John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith, book IV, p. 271, where he observes that in Damascene's age the books of Macarius Magnes against Theosthenes the pagan were very well known; nor may we pass over the notable testimony of Zacharias of Crete in his Replies to the most reverend Claude de Guise, Cardinal of Lorraine, which the most learned Giovanni Lami published not long ago on Nicetas's exposition of 1 Corinthians, part I, p. 72 ff. He writes thus, p. 77: "Magnes, being an ancient teacher, says thus in the apology for the Gospel addressed to Theosthenes: that the Eucharist is truly the body and blood of Christ; not a figure of the body and blood, as some, rhapsodizing with blinded minds, have said." [Latin:] "And Magnes, who is an ancient teacher, says thus in the Apology for the Gospel against Theosthenes: that the Eucharist is truly the body and blood of Christ, not a figure of the body and blood, as certain men telling tales with darkened minds have said."

(printed under page 176)

Page

running head: [PRE]SBYTERO NOTITIA HISTORICA. 348 (start cut off at left edge)
marginal letters: A ‹raverit: Οὕτω γὰρ›; B ‹sanguinem matris; non vivit›; C ‹τύπος αἵματος, ὥς τινες›; D ‹beside footnote line "saub. Exerc., p. 164"›
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:349

stupida mente nugati sunt, sed potius vere corpus et sanguis Christi. » Pergit adhuc philosophari : «Quandoquidem vero, » inquit, corpus ex terra existit, ex terra autem panis et vinum ; quomodo non est alius ausus dicere : Caro mea vere est cibus, sanguis meus vere est potus (Joan., VI, 56)? Nempe, quia nullus est creator terrae, nisi hic : nullius est creatura, nisi Filii Dei. Idcirco dixit : Hoc est corpus meum : mea enim, et non alterius, est creatura terrae. Omnes enim post terram geniti sunt, corpus a me accipientes ; ego vero ante terram, a nullo hanc accipiens : ex hac corpus, id est, ex mea creatura accepi, sumens carnem. Ex meo igitur propono vobis charisma. Ex terra vobis panis ad alendum exstitit : terra vero creatura mea est : ex terra similiter exstitit corpus, et haec mea massa. Ex unione igitur, qua unitus sum, sanctus cum terreno, do panem et vinum, jubens esse corpus meum et sanguinem. »

with a stupid mind have talked nonsense, but rather truly the body and blood of Christ." He goes on still to philosophize: "Since indeed," he says, "the body exists from the earth, and from the earth the bread and the wine; how is it that no other has dared to say: My flesh is truly food, My blood is truly drink (John 6:56)? Clearly, because there is no creator of the earth except this One: it is the creature of no one except the Son of God. Therefore He said: This is My body: for the creature of the earth is Mine and not another's. For all were begotten after the earth, receiving a body from Me; but I [was] before the earth, receiving it from no one: from it I received a body, that is, from My creature, taking flesh. From what is Mine, therefore, I set before you the gift. From the earth bread came into being for you for nourishment: but the earth is My creature: from the earth likewise the body came into being, and this is My lump. From the union, therefore, by which I am united, the holy with the earthly, I give bread and wine, ordering them to be My body and blood."

III. «Etenim si Abraham, aut alius quispiam ex justis ac sanctis dixisset : Caro mea est cibus, et sanguis meus potus, valde mentiri ausus esset, aut si dixisset, hoc est corpus meum, hic est sanguis meus : non enim hoc ipsius, sed alterius esset substantia, neque manducata vitam manducantibus praeberet. Siquidem quod non habet verbum vivens unitum cum corpore, quod fuit terrenum, ad aeternam vitam edentes non adduceret. Christus ergo proprium corpus et sanguinem dedit credentibus, immisso eis vitali pharmaco divinitatis. Deinde subjungit : Ἄρτον γοῦν λέγων τὴν σάρκα καὶ οἶνον τὸ αἷμα, ἐπαίδευσεν ἡμᾶς εὐλόγως ἐκ γῆς εἶναι τὸ σῶμα. Id est : cum igitur eam, quae caro est, vocat panem, et eum, qui sanguis, vocat vinum ; docuit nos convenienter rationi, ex terra esse corpus similiter et panem, et unius generis substantiam in corpore et pane.

III. "For if Abraham, or any other of the just and holy, had said: My flesh is food, and my blood drink, he would have dared to lie grievously, or if he had said, this is my body, this is my blood: for this would not be the substance of himself but of another, nor, when eaten, would it afford life to those eating it. For that which does not have the living Word united with the body, which was earthly, would not lead those eating it to eternal life. Christ therefore gave His own body and blood to believers, having infused into them the life-giving medicine of the Godhead. Then he adds: Calling the flesh bread, then, and the blood wine, He taught us reasonably that the body is from the earth. That is: since therefore He calls that which is flesh bread, and that which is blood wine, He taught us, in accordance with reason, that the body is from the earth just as the bread is, and that there is a substance of one kind in the body and in the bread.

IV. «Caeterum panis communis ex terrae cultura elaboratus, etsi caro quaedam terrae est, tamen vitam aeternam praebere non promittit, sed breve solatium praebentibus tribuit, cito eo extincto sine divino spiritu. Panis vero in beata Christi terra virtute divinitatis unitae confectus, solo gustu immortalitatem homini affert. Mysticus enim panis cum benedictionem patris habeat inseparabilem, illam dico, quae in corpore et sanguine ejus facta est, unit comedentem corpus Christi, eumque membra Christi efficit. Ut enim charta vim, quam per litteras magistri accepit, discipulo tradit, et per eam cum magistro illum unit : sic corpus quod ille panis mysticus est, et sanguis,

IV. "Moreover, common bread, worked up from the cultivation of the earth, although it is a certain flesh of the earth, yet does not promise to afford eternal life, but grants a brief comfort to those who supply it, being soon extinguished without the divine spirit. But the bread made in the blessed earth of Christ by the power of the united Godhead brings immortality to man by the taste alone. For the mystical bread, since it has the inseparable blessing of the Father, that one, I mean, which was made in His body and blood, unites the one eating it [to] the body of Christ, and makes him members of Christ. For as a sheet of paper hands on to the pupil the force which it received through the master's letters, and through it unites him with the master: so the body which that mystical bread is, and the blood,

qui illud vinum, immortalitatem intemereratae divinitatis participanti tribuunt αὐτόθεν; id est, e suo, sive ex se ipsis; et per eam ad mansionem incorruptibilem creatoris reducunt. Caro enim Salvatoris manducata non corrumpitur uec sanguis hic potatus consumitur: quin potius qui edit, ad incrementum virium venit; qui vero editur, consumi non potest: quia omnis consumptio ratione quadam naturae cognata est. »

which that wine is, grant to the one partaking the immortality of the undefiled divinity αὐτόθεν, that is, from their own, or from themselves; and through it they lead [him] back to the incorruptible dwelling of the Creator. For the flesh of the Saviour, when eaten, is not corrupted, nor is this blood, when drunk, consumed: rather, he who eats comes to an increase of strength; but that which is eaten cannot be consumed, because all consumption is in a certain manner akin to nature."

Hoc ipsum fragmentum indefessus et doctissimus D. Pater Dominicus Schrammius in tomo VI Analysis operum SS. patrum et scriptorum ecclesiasticorum typis Augustanis 1784, a pag. 418-420, reimprimi curavit, omissis tamen Gallandianis notis ex Allatio, Zacharia Cretensi et Lequienio depromptis. Caeterum optandum esset, ut integrum Macarii Magnetis Apocriticorum opus publici aliquando juris fieret; sperandum quippe esset, ex scriptoris vetustissimi documentis fidei orthodoxae atque disciplinae ecclesiasticae lucem magnam fore adfundendam. Elapso equidem saeculo cl. Albertinus et hoc opus vellicavit, ipsiusque auctoris aetatem et veritatem inficiatus est his verbis: « Verum, inquit, ad populum phaleras. Quis enim veterum, immo etiam recentiorum per novem aut decem saecula Magnetis hujus, vel quoad nomen tantum meminerit? Fictitius prorsus auctor est, aut saltem novus aliquis ac nuperus Graeculus, cujus scriptorum certitudo tota est penes Turrianum exigui judicii virum, fideique valde suspectae. Et audent adversarii absque verecundia ejusmodi quisquilias pro veterum monumentis in medium adducere. Proh Dei atque hominum fidem. » Verum quam temerarium fuerit Albertini hac de re judicium, et perdoctus Caveus observat, et ex hucusque dictis abunde constat.

This very fragment the tireless and most learned Dom Father Dominic Schramm had reprinted in volume 6 of his Analysis of the works of the holy Fathers and ecclesiastical writers, printed at Augsburg in 1784, at pp. 418-420, omitting, however, Galland's notes drawn from Allatius, Zacharias of Crete and Le Quien. For the rest, it were to be wished that the whole work of Macarius Magnes, the Apocritica, might at some time be made public; for one might hope that great light would be shed on orthodox faith and ecclesiastical discipline from the documents of a most ancient writer. In the past century, indeed, the celebrated Albertinus also carped at this work, and denied both the age and the genuineness of its author, in these words: "But," he says, "trappings for the populace! For who among the ancients, or indeed among the more recent writers, through nine or ten centuries, has made mention of this Magnes, even so much as of his name? The author is altogether fictitious, or at least some new and recent Greekling, the whole certainty of whose writings rests with Turrianus, a man of slight judgement and of very suspect good faith. And our adversaries dare without shame to bring forward such trash as monuments of the ancients. O the faith of God and men!" But how rash Albertinus's judgement on this matter was, both the very learned Cave observes, and it is abundantly clear from what has been said up to this point.

Editors' notes and page, col. 349

Footnotes

(printed under page 177)

(1) ‹anchor: non corrumpitur› · call in col 350

Caro enim Salvatori smanducata. Graeca hujus loci exhibet Allatius in Exercit. contra Creygthonum. p. 563. Οὔτε σὰρξ τοῦ Σωτῆρος τρωγομένη φθείρεται, οὔτε ἐξαναλίσκεται τὸ αἷμα πινόμενον, ἀλλ' ὁ τρώγων μὲν εἰς αὔξησιν θείων δυνάμεων αἴρεται· τὸ δὲ τρωγόμενόν ἐστιν ἀδαπάνητον, ἐπειδὴ τοῖς ἀδαπανήτου φύσεως λόγῳ τινὶ συγγενὲς ὑπάρχει καὶ ἀχώριστον. « Neque vero caro Salvatoris manducata corrumpitur, neque sanguis potatus consumitur : sed qui edit, divinis virtutibus augescit; quod vero editur, consumi non potest : quoniam rei consumptibili naturae cognatum quodammodo est, minime ab ea separabile. » Eadem ex Allatio repetit Lequienius, loc. cit., p. 273.

For the flesh of the Saviour, when eaten. Allatius gives the Greek of this passage in his Exercitationes against Creyghton, p. 563: "Neither is the flesh of the Saviour corrupted when it is eaten, nor is the blood used up when it is drunk; but he who eats is raised to the increase of divine powers, while what is eaten is not consumed, since by a certain reason it is akin and inseparable from those of an inexhaustible nature." [Latin:] "Nor indeed is the Saviour's flesh corrupted when eaten, nor the blood consumed when drunk; but he who eats grows by divine powers, while what is eaten cannot be consumed, since it is in some way akin to a consumable nature [so the Latin], in no way separable from it." Le Quien repeats the same from Allatius, in the place cited, p. 273.

(printed under page 177)

Page

running head: 349 DE ARNOBIO AFRO NOTITI[A] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹stupida mente nugati sunt›; B ‹est : ex terra similiter exstitit›; C ‹divinitatis. Deinde subjungit›; D ‹corpore et sanguine ejus facta est›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: full-width heading "DE ARNOBIO AFRO NOTITIA HIS[TORICA]" stands below the rule after "et sanguis," and is cut off at the image edge, so it is not set; "SYNOPSIS." is centred across the page but fully visible, so it is set as a caption; editors' matter set: synopsis item ‹I. Arnobius Siccae in Africa›; the D marker sits between "quae in" and "corpore et sanguine", placement approximate; the column ends mid-sentence at "sanguis,"
other: a full-width band stands across cols 349/350 in mid-page: the 2 paragraph(s) above it in col 350 are set here, after the 3 above it in col 349 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
other: the column continues with SYNOPSIS. (another unit); not set here

PL 5:350

Editors' notes and page, col. 350

Footnotes

(2) ‹anchor: inficiatus est› · call in col 350

Albertin., de Sacram. Eucharist., lib. II, p. 400.

Aubertin (Albertinus), On the Sacrament of the Eucharist, book II, p. 400.

(printed under page 177)

(3) ‹anchor: abunde constat› · call in col 350

Cave, Hist. litter., t. I, 135.

Cave, Historia litteraria, vol. I, 135.

(printed under page 177)

Page

running head: …O AFRO NOTITIA HISTORICA. 350
marginal letters: A qui illud vinum, immortalitatem; B Allatio, Zacharia Cretensi; C penes Turrianum exigui judicii; D tatus consumitur (in the footnotes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the 2 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 349 (reading order, moved on receipt)
other: the text of this column below the full-width band belongs to the next unit; not set here (rail-only part)
other (QA Q1, 2026-11-01): footnote (1) "Caro enim Salvatori smanducata" is filed in n349 with anchor "not visible"; its call is printed in this column, after "non corrumpitur" (para 1). n349's anchor should read ‹non corrumpitur› · call in col 350 (not written by Q1).
other (QA Q1, 2026-11-01): English to fix in this column's para 1, which stands in parts/c349_a.md (not written by Q1): "qui illud vinum" is the relative clause of "sanguis" ("and the blood, which that wine is"), not "partaking of that wine"; read "…so the body which that mystical bread is, and the blood, which that wine is, grant to the one partaking the immortality of the undefiled Godhead αὐτόθεν, …".
other (QA Q1, 2026-11-01): checked against the page: in para 1 "intemereratae" and "uec" are kept as printed; footnote calls (1), (2), (3) are dropped from the text, as elsewhere in the unit; the page prints a space before the colons at "consumitur :", "potest :" and "his verbis :", which c349_a.md closes up (spacing only, not changed).