PL 5 · cols. 99–110

De sancto Dionysio Romano pontifice prolegomena

Editors' preface

PL 5:99

DE SANCTO DIONYSIO ROMANO PONTIFICE PROLEGOMENA.

PROLEGOMENA ON SAINT DIONYSIUS, ROMAN PONTIFF.

ARTICULUS PRIMUS.

ARTICLE ONE.

Ejus vitae historia.

The history of his life.

Dionysius origine Graecus, et patria Calaber vulgo creditur. De ejus rebus gestis usque ad annum 256 Jesu Christi nihil certi compertum habemus. Ea tempestate romanae presbyterum agebat Ecclesiae, quem Epistolis suis adiit Dionysius Alexandrinus. Ex illa, quae quarta erat de Baptismo, « hunc ipsum Romanum Dionysium eruditissimum, planeque admirandum fuisse, testimonio Dionysii Alexandrini licet cognoscere. » Stephano faverat Dionysius; siquidem ipse ac Philemon Firmilianum et Helenum haereticorum baptismum rejicientes a communione segregandos

Dionysius is commonly believed to have been a Greek by origin and a Calabrian by country. Of his deeds up to the year 256 of Jesus Christ we have found out nothing certain. At that time he was acting as presbyter of the Roman Church, and Dionysius of Alexandria approached him by his Letters. From that one which was the fourth on Baptism, "one may learn by the testimony of Dionysius of Alexandria that this very Roman Dionysius was most learned and altogether admirable." Dionysius had favoured Stephen; for he himself and Philemon judged that Firmilian and Helenus, who rejected the baptism of heretics, were to be separated from communion

Editors' notes and page, col. 99

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: vulgo creditur› · call in col 99

Cave, Hist. litterar., t. I, pag. 133; Joan. Georg. Walch., Hist. Eccles., pag. 1001. Liber Pontificalis, monachum fuisse tradit, quod est longe falsissimum.

Cave, Historia litteraria, vol. I, p. 133; Johann Georg Walch, Historia ecclesiastica, p. 1001. The Liber Pontificalis records that he was a monk, which is utterly false.

(printed under page 54)

(2) ‹anchor: de Baptismo› · call in col 99

Euseb., Hist. Ecclesiast., lib. VII, cap. 7; et apud Galland., tom. III, Ep. 8, p. 523, in not. 5.

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book VII, ch. 7; and in Gallandi, vol. III, Ep. 8, p. 523, in note 5.

(printed under page 54)

Page

running head: 99 DE SANCTO DIONYSIO ROM (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A bono animo esse jussi; B I. Praeterea Dionysius aliam; C Dionysius origine Graecus
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: a full-width band stands across cols 99/100 in mid-page: the 3 paragraph(s) above it in col 100 are set here, after the 4 above it in col 99 (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.
running head: 99 DE SANCTO DIONYSIO ROMANO PONTIFICE 100
marginal letters: A bono animo esse jussi (upper, previous piece); B I. Praeterea Dionysius aliam ad Sixtum scripsit (previous piece); C Dionysius origine Graecus, et patria Calaber vulgo; D (none)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:100

cum Stephano papa censebant. Sed de sententia Stephani discessit postmodum, sive haereticos cum Cypriano baptizandos esse judicarit, sive durius Stephani Afros vel excommunicantis, vel saltem excommunicationem minitantis factum improbarit. Id docet Dionysius Alexandrinus ad Sixtum Dionysii Romani decessorem epistola, quae est secunda de Baptismo: « Sed et charissimis fratribus et compresbyteris nostris Dionysio et Philomeni, qui prius idem cum Stephano senserant, antea quidem breviter, nunc vero pluribus verbis scripsi. » Horum igitur duorum Romanae Ecclesiae Presbyterorum Sapientia, inquit Cl. Maranus, nec immerito mitigatum existimamus

along with Pope Stephen. But afterwards he departed from Stephen's opinion, whether he judged with Cyprian that heretics were to be baptized, or disapproved the rather harsh act of Stephen in either excommunicating the Africans or at least threatening them with excommunication. Dionysius of Alexandria shows this in the letter to Sixtus, the predecessor of Dionysius of Rome, which is the second on Baptism: "But to our most dear brothers and fellow presbyters Dionysius and Philemon also, who formerly had held the same view as Stephen, I wrote before briefly, but now at greater length." By the wisdom, therefore, of these two Presbyters of the Roman Church, says the distinguished Maran, we consider that, not undeservedly, there was softened

Editors' notes and page, col. 100

Footnotes

(3) ‹anchor: Stephano papa censebant› · call in col 100

Vide Coutantii not. 6, in Ep. 6, quae est secunda de Baptismo ad Sixtum II, in hoc tomo, supra.

See Coustant's note 6 on Ep. 6, which is the second On Baptism, to Sixtus II, in this volume, above.

(printed under page 54)

(4) ‹anchor: baptizandos esse judicarit› · call in col 100

Ita quidem censet Launoyus, tom. VIII, pag. 603. Sed perpaucos fore, inquit Cl. Maranus, in Vita S. Cypriani, § 30, pag. 100, edit. Venet. 1758, in fol., arbitror, qui Launoii conjecturam non explodant.

So indeed Launoy judges, vol. VIII, p. 603. But there will be very few, I think, says the renowned Maran in his Life of St Cyprian, § 30, p. 100, Venice edition of 1758, in folio, who would not reject Launoy's conjecture.

(printed under page 54)

(5) ‹anchor: inquit Cl. Maranus› · call in col 100

Maran., loco citat., pag. CI.

Maran, in the place cited, p. CI.

(printed under page 54)

Page

running head: DIONYSIO ROMANO PONTIFICE 100
marginal letters: A ‹προσιέναι. ὁ δὲ οὔτε›; B ‹adeoque, si Pontii›; C ‹Cypriano baptizandos esse›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the 3 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 99 (reading order, moved on receipt)
running head: 99 DE SANCTO DIONYSIO ROMANO PONTIFICE 100
marginal letters: A προσιέναι. ὁ δὲ οὔτε πενθῶν (upper, previous piece); B adeoque, si Pontii assecutus est mentem (previous piece); C Cypriano baptizandos esse judicarit (letter printed in the gutter); D (none)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:101

edictum Stephani adversus rebaptizantes.

the edict of Stephen against the rebaptizers.

Sanctus Dionysius quo tempore pontifex factus. — Sixto II, seu Xysto, in Valeriani persecutione extincto, Dionysius noster in sede romana successit. Quando et quamdiu sederit sanctus Dionysius, inter eruditos controvertitur. Notante doctissimo Petro Coutantio, sibi non cohaeret Anastasius vulgatus seu Pontificalis liber, in quo Xystus VIII idus augusti capite truncatus, et Dionysius XI kalendas augusti ordinatus ponitur: ac nihilominus scribitur romana sedes a Xysti morte tantum triginta quinque dies cessasse. Eam autem Valeriani persecutione prohibente, ne Xysto successor daretur, ab VIII idus augusti a consulatu Tuscii Bassiusque in diem XII kalendas augusti Aemiliano et Basso consulibus, hoc est a die 6 mensis augusti anni 258, ad diem 21 mensis julii anni 259, adeoque menses undecim ac dies quindecim vacasse verius ex Bucheriano Catologo aliisque comperimus. Per hoc intervallum romanam Ecclesiam presbyteri hujus Ecclesiae cum diaconis, ut id moris erat, administrarunt. Postmodum vero anno 259 XI kalendarum augusti, seu 22 die mensis julii feria sexta, romanae civitatis antistes electus est Dionysius, qui Xysto pontifice inter hujus Ecclesiae presbyteros eminebat. « Fuit, » ut Bucheriani catalogi verba exscribam, « temporibus Gallieni, ex die XI kalendarum augusti Aemiliano et Basso consulibus, usque in diem VII kalendas januarii consulibus Claudo et Paterno, » adeoque a 22 die mensis julii 259, ad 26 diem mensis decembris anni 269. Unde sequitur, ut annos decem, menses quinque, dies quatuor (emortuali nempe excluso) Ecclesiae regimen tenuerit. Inde et falsi convincitur Pontificalis liber, in quo, cum descripta sint superiora Bucheriani Catalogi verba, Dionysius tamen annos sex, menses duos, dies quatuor, sedisse dicitur. Neque etiam ab errato immunis est ipse Bucherianus Catalogus, in quo eidem Papae anni dumtaxat octo, menses duos, dies sex, adscribuntur. In pervetusto indiculo depositionis episcoporum romanorum, quem Bucherius pag. 267 edidit. Dionysii depositio seu sepultura consignatur in hunc modum: VI kalendas januarii Dionysius in Callisti.

At what time Saint Dionysius was made pontiff. — When Sixtus II, or Xystus, had been put to death in the persecution of Valerian, our Dionysius succeeded him in the Roman see. When and for how long Saint Dionysius sat is disputed among the learned. As the most learned Pierre Coustant notes, the common Anastasius, or Pontifical Book, is not consistent with itself, for in it Xystus is set down as beheaded on the eighth day before the Ides of August, and Dionysius as ordained on the eleventh day before the Kalends of August; and nevertheless it is written that the Roman see was vacant for only thirty-five days after the death of Xystus. But we find more truly, from the Bucherian Catalogue and other sources, that, since the persecution of Valerian prevented a successor from being given to Xystus, it was vacant from the eighth day before the Ides of August in the consulship of Tuscus and Bassus to the twelfth day before the Kalends of August, Aemilianus and Bassus being consuls, that is, from the 6th day of the month of August of the year 258 to the 21st day of the month of July of the year 259, and so for eleven months and fifteen days. During this interval the presbyters of this Church, together with the deacons, as was the custom, administered the Roman Church. Afterwards, however, in the year 259, on the eleventh day before the Kalends of August, that is, on the 22nd day of the month of July, a Friday, Dionysius was elected bishop of the Roman city, who, while Xystus was pontiff, was eminent among the presbyters of this Church. « He was [bishop], » to copy out the words of the Bucherian catalogue, « in the times of Gallienus, from the eleventh day before the Kalends of August, Aemilianus and Bassus being consuls, until the seventh day before the Kalends of January, in the consulship of Claudius and Paternus, » and so from the 22nd day of the month of July 259 to the 26th day of the month of December of the year 269. From this it follows that he held the government of the Church for ten years, five months and four days (the day of his death, that is, being excluded). Hence the Pontifical Book is also convicted of falsehood, in which, although the above words of the Bucherian Catalogue are copied out, Dionysius is nevertheless said to have sat for six years, two months and four days. Nor indeed is the Bucherian Catalogue itself free from error, in which only eight years, two months and six days are ascribed to the same Pope. In the very ancient little list of the depositions of the Roman bishops which Bucherius published on page 267, the deposition or burial of Dionysius is recorded in this manner: on the sixth day before the Kalends of January, Dionysius in [the cemetery] of Callistus.

Consecratum fuisse Dionysium a Maximo episcopo ostiensi habent acta sancti Laurentii prope finem

That Dionysius was consecrated by Maximus, bishop of Ostia, the acts of Saint Lawrence state near the end

Editors' notes and page, col. 101

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: Petro Coutantio› · call in col 101

Coutant., Epist. Rom. Pontif., pag. 269 et seq.

Coustant, Epistolae Romanorum Pontificum, p. 269 and following.

(printed under page 55)

(2) ‹anchor: regimen tenuerit› · call in col 101

Ita Chronotaxin Pontificatus S. Dionysii ordinant Pagius in Critic. ad Baron., Annal., ad annum 271, pag. 9; Basnage ad ann. 259, in Annal. Polit. eccles., pag. 400; et Benedictini in opere: l'Art de vérifier les dates, pag. 243. Alias sententias videsis in diversis editionibus Pontificalis apud Schelstratenum, pag. 434 et 435, tom. I Antiquitatis Ecclesiae illustratae.

So the chronology of St Dionysius's pontificate is arranged by Pagi in his Critica on Baronius's Annals, at the year 271, p. 9; by Basnage at the year 259, in the Annales politico-ecclesiastici, p. 400; and by the Benedictines in the work L'Art de vérifier les dates, p. 243. For other opinions see the various editions of the Pontifical in Schelstrate, pp. 434 and 435, vol. I of the Antiquitas Ecclesiae illustrata.

(printed under page 55)

(3) ‹anchor: episcopo ostiensi› · call in col 101

Baron., ad ann. 261, § II.

Baronius, at the year 261, § 2.

(printed under page 55)

(4) ‹anchor: sanctus Augustinus› · call in col 102

Sunt haec verba Augustini in memorato Breviculo Collat. diei III, cap. 16: « Nec Romanae Ecclesiae (episcopum) ordinat aliquis episcopus metropolitanus, sed de proximo ostiensis episcopus. Quod, ut docet Mabillonius, cap. 18 (Comment. in ordinem romanum, pag. 119), non ita accipiendum, quasi hic solus fuerit, sed praecipuus romani pontificis vice metropolitani consecrator. »

These are Augustine's words in the Breviculus Collationis already mentioned, on the third day, ch. 16: "Nor does any metropolitan bishop ordain (the bishop) of the Roman Church, but the bishop of Ostia, from close by." Which, as Mabillon teaches, ch. 18 (Commentary on the Ordo Romanus, p. 119), is not to be taken as if he were the only one, but as the chief consecrator of the Roman pontiff in the place of a metropolitan.

(printed under page 55)

(5) ‹anchor: ecclesias divisit› · call in col 102

Baron., ad ann. 265, § 31, 33, 34, 51.

Baronius, at the year 265, §§ 31, 33, 34, 51.

(printed under page 55)

Page

running head: 101 PROLEGOMENA.
marginal letters: A stimamus edictum Stephani; B sis augusti anni 258; C annos decem, menses quinque; D (1) Coutant., Epist. Rom. Pontif. (footnote line)
old-edition numerals: (none)
misprints kept as printed (Q5): "Catologo" (for Catalogo); "Claudo" (for Claudio, the consul; English gives Claudius).

PL 5:102

apud Surium die X augusti. Sane quidem antiqui moris fuisse, ut romanus episcopus consecraretur ab episcopo ostiensi, auctor est sanctus Augustinus in Breviculo collationum cum donatistis. Hinc presbyteris ecclesias divisit, et coemeteria et parochias, dioeceses constituit. Apud hunc antistites pentapolitani accusarunt Dionysium Alexandrinum, « perinde atque id de Filio Dei sentiret, quod postea Arius sensit. Quibus ille auditis una scripsit, et contra Sabellii sectatores et contra eos, qui ejus essent sententiae, quam cum post Arius protulisset, ab Ecclesia est ejectus. Misit quoque ad Dionysium (Alexandrinum) litteras, ut indicaret, qua de re accusatus ab illis fuisset. Concilium inde Romae celebravit, in quo idem Dionysius episcopus alexandrinus, cum per epistolam aperuisset sententiam suam, ac purgasset objectum crimen, omnis exors culpae magno consensu declaratus est. Idem pontifex creditur in eadem urbe habuisse synodum contra Paulum Samosatenum episcopum antiochenum abrogantem Christo divinitatem. Sed qui ita credunt, eos decipi loco sancti Athanasii non recte intellecto, docet Pagius ad annum 264, § 4. Sub eodem pontifice anno circiter 262, vult Harduinus, celebratum in Africa concilium, in quo sancitum est, haereticos non esse rebaptizandos, quemadmodum testatur Hieronymus in Dialogo adversus luciferianos, cap. VIII, his verbis : « Denique illi ipsi episcopi, qui rebaptizandos haereticos cum eo (Cypriano) statuerant, ad antiquam consuetudinem revoluti novum emisere decretum. » Verum istud ab uno Hieronymo discimus; alibi enim novi hujusce decreti mentionem fieri nullam invenias; quin et ipsa disputatio inter donatistas et sanctum Augustinum tale nihil penitus novit. Pamelius sanctum Dionysium alexandrinum testem hujus rei adducit; at judice novissimo editore operum sancti Hieronymi cum Baronio hallucinatur.

in Surius on 10 August. That it was indeed an ancient custom for the Roman bishop to be consecrated by the bishop of Ostia, St Augustine is the authority, in the Breviculus of the conference with the Donatists. Next, he divided the churches among the presbyters, and established cemeteries and parishes [and] dioceses. Before him the prelates of the Pentapolis accused Dionysius of Alexandria, "as though he held the same view concerning the Son of God as Arius later held. When he heard these things, he wrote at the same time both against the followers of Sabellius and against those who were of that opinion for which Arius, when he afterwards put it forward, was cast out of the Church. He also sent a letter to Dionysius (of Alexandria), that he might show on what matter he had been accused by them. He then held a council at Rome, in which the same Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, having set out his opinion by letter and cleared himself of the charge brought against him, was declared free of all fault by great consensus. The same pontiff is believed to have held a synod in the same city against Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch, who denied the divinity of Christ. But that those who believe so are deceived by a passage of St Athanasius not rightly understood, Pagi shows at the year 264, § 4. Under the same pontiff, about the year 262, Hardouin holds, a council was held in Africa, in which it was decreed that heretics are not to be rebaptized, as Jerome testifies in the Dialogue against the Luciferians, chap. 8, in these words: "Finally, those very bishops who had decided with him (Cyprian) that heretics were to be rebaptized, returning to the ancient custom, issued a new decree." But this we learn from Jerome alone; for elsewhere you will find no mention made of this new decree; indeed even the disputation itself between the Donatists and St Augustine knows nothing at all of the kind. Pamèle adduces St Dionysius of Alexandria as a witness of this matter; but in the judgement of the most recent editor of the works of St Jerome he is mistaken, together with Baronius.

E vita migravit sanctissimus pontifex Dionysius anno Domini 269, 26 decembris, secundum Pagium, Basnagium et auctores l'Art de vérifier les dates. Perdoctus P. Berti post Baronium censet, Dionysium ad plures primum anno 271 abiisse, eo Baronii

The most holy pontiff Dionysius departed this life in the year of the Lord 269, on 26 December, according to Pagi, Basnage and the authors of L'Art de vérifier les dates. The very learned P. Berti, following Baronius, holds that Dionysius went to join the majority only in the year 271, Baronius's

Editors' notes and page, col. 102

Footnotes

(6) ‹anchor: dioeceses constituit› · call in col 102

Liber Pontificalis, cujus verba Baronius ad ann. 270, § 17, explanat in hunc modum: « Dionysii opus fuit, parochias a Decessoribus suis distinctas limitibus certis, Presbyterisque divisas, quas persecutio Valeriani turbaverat, iterum dividere, ac pro ratione distribuere, coemeteriaque singulis consignare. » Vide Blanchinum, in notis ad Anastasium Bibliothecarium, tom. II, pag. 230 et 231.

The Liber Pontificalis, whose words Baronius at the year 270, § 17, explains in this way: "It was Dionysius's work to divide again the parishes that had been marked out with fixed bounds by his predecessors and divided among the presbyters, which the persecution of Valerian had thrown into disorder, and to distribute them in due proportion, and to assign cemeteries to each." See Bianchini, in his notes on Anastasius the Librarian, vol. II, pp. 230 and 231.

(printed under page 55)

(7) ‹anchor: ab Ecclesia est ejectus› · call in col 102

S. Hilarius, lib. IV de Trinitate, § 12: « Sabellius ipsum dicit Filium, quem et Patrem. »

St Hilary, On the Trinity, book IV, § 12: "Sabellius calls the same one Son whom he also calls Father."

(printed under page 55)

(8) ‹anchor: accusatus ab illis fuisset› · call in col 102

S. Athanasius, in Epist. de Sententia Dionysii, § 13, pag. 252 edit. Paris., Montfauconii, tom. I, part. I, pag. 198 edit. Patavinae, 1777, in-fol.

St Athanasius, Letter on the Opinion of Dionysius, § 13, p. 252 of Montfaucon's Paris edition; vol. I, part I, p. 198 of the Padua edition, 1777, in folio.

(printed under page 55)

(9) ‹anchor: declaratus est› · call in col 102

Apud Mansi, Collect. Concilior., tom. I, pag. 1015. Harduinus ad annum 260 in suo concilior. indice refert hanc synodum romanam.

In Mansi, Collection of the Councils, vol. I, p. 1015. Hardouin, in the index to his councils, places this Roman synod at the year 260.

(printed under page 55)

(10) ‹anchor: habuisse synodum› · call in col 102

Baron., ad ann. 265, § 4, 10.

Baronius, at the year 265, §§ 4, 10.

(printed under page 55)

(11) ‹anchor: his verbis› · call in col 102

Hieronym., Dialog. adv. Luciferianos, num. 23, pag. 196, edit. Venet., in 4, de anno 1767, tom. II.

Jerome, Dialogue against the Luciferians, no. 23, p. 196, Venice edition in quarto of 1767, vol. II.

(printed under page 55)

(12) ‹anchor: doctus P. Berti› · call in col 102

Berti, Hist. eccl., sive Dissertationes historicae, tom. II, Dissert. I de Rom. Epp., saec. III, § XVIII, pag. 330, edit. August. Vindel., 1761, in 8.

Berti, Historia ecclesiastica, or Dissertationes historicae, vol. II, Dissertation I on the Roman bishops, third century, § 18, p. 330, Augsburg edition, 1761, in octavo.

(printed under page 55)

(13) ‹anchor: post Baronium› · call in col 102

Baron., ad ann. 272, § 21.

Baronius, at the year 272, § 21.

(printed under page 55)

Page

running head: PROLEGOMENA. 102 (left part cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹apud Surium die X augusti›; B ‹stolam aperuisset sententiam suam›; C ‹ronymo discimus; alibi enim›; D ‹buere, coemeteriaque singulis› (beside footnote 6 at the page foot, below the text block)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:103

argumento inductus, quod secunda synodus adversus Paulum Samosatenum Antiochiae celebrata sit defuncto jam Claudio Augusto, qui decessit Aureliano. Nos vero vitam adhuc retinente Claudio, synodi epistolam ad Dionysium Romanum et alios episcopos scriptam fuisse anno 269 censemus.

argument having induced him, namely that the second synod against Paul of Samosata was held at Antioch when Claudius Augustus, who gave way to Aurelian, was already dead. We, however, judge that the synod's letter to Dionysius of Rome and the other bishops was written in the year 269, while Claudius was still alive.

Elogium S. Dionysii Romani. — Eruditionis singularis laudem, quam Eusebius, libro VII, cap. 7, Hist. eccles., Dionysii Alexandrini testimonio fultus Dionysio nostro adtribuit (eruditissimum planeque admirandum virum eum appellans); vel quod ex ejus scriptis superest fragmentum, illi satis superque conciliat. In eo dum sabelliana profligare studet commenta, simul et Arii et tritheitarum placita praevertit atque pervertit, ac nicaenae synodo, quam postea sequeretur, caeterisque sequendam decerneret, fidem praemonstravit. In hoc praeterea prudentiam patefecit suam, quod in Dionysium Alexandrinum quantumvis graviter accusatum, nihil asperi vel dixit, vel gessit: verum non dissimulans, quam grave esset, unde accusaretur, patienter sustinuit, quoad iste praesul abunde satisfaceret, injectamque de se suspicionem penitus depelleret. Adhaec a divo Basilio vocatur sanctus Dionysius noster celeberrimus cum ob fidem, tum ob virtutes reliquas egregias: praesertim vero multis commendatur propter charitatis, misericordiaeque in captivos opera. Siquidem Asiam minorem, barbarorum cum primis incursionibus evastatam, non litteris modo suis, sed et aere, quo christianorum plurimi in libertatem adserti sunt, recreavit. Divus Athanasius eum recenset inter

Eulogy of St Dionysius of Rome. — The praise of singular learning which Eusebius, in book 7, chapter 7, of the Ecclesiastical History, relying on the testimony of Dionysius of Alexandria, attributes to our Dionysius (calling him a most learned and wholly admirable man), even the fragment that survives of his writings secures for him amply and more than amply. In it, while he strives to overthrow the Sabellian fictions, he at the same time forestalls and overturns the tenets of Arius and of the tritheists, and showed in advance to the Nicene synod the faith which it was afterwards to follow and to decree must be followed by the rest. In this, moreover, he displayed his prudence, that against Dionysius of Alexandria, however gravely accused, he neither said nor did anything harsh: but, not concealing how grave the matter was of which he was accused, he bore it patiently until that prelate should give abundant satisfaction and drive away entirely the suspicion cast upon him. Besides this, our holy Dionysius is called by the divine Basil most renowned both for his faith and for his other excellent virtues; but above all he is commended by many for his works of charity and of mercy towards captives. For Asia Minor, laid waste by the very first incursions of the barbarians, he relieved not only by his letters but also with money, by which very many Christians were restored to liberty. The divine Athanasius lists him among

Editors' notes and page, col. 103

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: anno 269 censemus› · call in col 103

Videsis observat. Pagii in Critic. ad ann, 271, n. 2 et seqq.; et apud Mansi, in Collect. Concilior., tom. I, pag. 1091 et seqq.

See Pagi's observations in the Critica at the year 271, no. 2 and following; and in Mansi, Collection of the Councils, vol. I, p. 1091 and following.

(printed under page 56)

(2) ‹anchor: catur› · call in col 103

Omnino autem nihil exposcimus novi, sed quod et caeteris olim beatis ac Deo dilectis viris usitatum et praecipue vobis (romanis pontificibus, ita Damasium papam alloquitur sanctus Basilius) Novimus enim ex serie memoriae, a patribus nostris interrogatis, et litteris etiamnum apud nos asservatis edocti, Dionysium, beatissimum illum episcopum, qui apud vos et recta fide, et reliquis virtutibus enituit, invisisse ecclesiam nostram caesariensem, et patres nostros per litteras consolatum esse, ac misisse, qui fratres captivos redimerent (S. Basiil., Ep. LXX, al. CCXX, pag. 164, edit. Paris. Benedictor). Observat in hunc S. Basilii locum perdoctus editor Julianus Garnier, quod, quae Basilius de romanorum episcoporum in alias ecclesias beneficentia narrat, testimoniis confirmetur et Dionysii Corinthiorum Episcopi apud Eusebium, Hist. eccles., lib. IV, cap. 23, et Dionysii Alexandrini lib. VII, cap. 5, et ipsius etiam Eusebii, qui hunc morem in postrema persecutione servatum a Romanis fuisse declarat lib. IV, cap. 23. Memorata autem a Basilio calamitas sub Gallieno contigit, cum Scythae Cappadociam, et finitimas regiones vastarent, uti testatur Sozomenus lib II, cap. 6. Atque ex tantis malis magnum hoc bonum eruit Deus, ut christiani a barbaris abducti victores suos caperent, et ad Christum adducerent. Unde Basilius in Epist. 164, prima pietatis semina apud Gothos e Cappadocia pullulasse ait opera beati Eutychetis.

We ask for nothing at all that is new, but what was customary both with the other blessed and God-beloved men of old and above all with you (the Roman pontiffs; so St Basil addresses Pope Damasus). For we know from the succession of memory, taught by our fathers when we asked them and by letters still preserved among us, that Dionysius, that most blessed bishop who shone among you both in right faith and in the other virtues, visited our church of Caesarea, consoled our fathers by letter, and sent men to ransom the captive brethren (St Basil, Ep. 70, otherwise 220, p. 164, Paris Benedictine edition). The very learned editor Julien Garnier observes on this passage of St Basil that what Basil relates of the Roman bishops' generosity towards other churches is confirmed by the testimonies of Dionysius, bishop of the Corinthians, in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book IV, ch. 23, and of Dionysius of Alexandria, book VII, ch. 5, and of Eusebius himself, who declares in book IV, ch. 23, that this custom was kept by the Romans in the last persecution. The calamity Basil mentions happened under Gallienus, when the Scythians were laying waste Cappadocia and the neighbouring regions, as Sozomen attests, book II, ch. 6. And out of such great evils God drew this great good: that the Christians carried off by the barbarians took their captors captive and led them to Christ. Hence Basil, in Epist. 164, says that the first seeds of godliness sprang up among the Goths from Cappadocia through the work of the blessed Eutyches.

(printed under page 56)

(3) ‹anchor: recreavit› · call in col 103

S. Basilius insuper in libro de Spiritu sancto, cap. XXIX, n. 72, pag. 60, edit. Benedictin., Paris. Sancti Dionysii Romani auctoritate utitur ad confirmandas praecipuas religionis veritates.

St Basil, moreover, in the book On the Holy Spirit, ch. 29, no. 72, p. 60, Benedictine edition, Paris, uses the authority of St Dionysius of Rome to confirm the chief truths of religion.

(printed under page 56)

Page

running head: 103 DE SANCTO DIONYSIO ROMAN[O …] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹argumento inductus›; B ‹stea sequeretur›; C ‹recreavit (3). Divus Athanasius›; D ‹in alias ecclesias beneficentia narrat› (in the footnotes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
misprints kept as printed (Q5): footnote (2) "Basiil." (for Basil.).

PL 5:104

eos patres, quorum doctrinam, immo phrases et verba concilium nicaenum usurpavit.

those Fathers whose doctrine, indeed whose phrases and words, the Nicene council took over.

ARTICULUS II.

Article II.

De scriptis S. Dionysii Romani Pontificis tum genuinis, supposititiis, ac praesertim de Fragmento Epistolae ad sanctum Dionysium Alexandrinum seu potius adversus Sabellianos.

On the writings of St Dionysius, Roman Pontiff, both genuine and spurious, and especially on the Fragment of the Letter to St Dionysius of Alexandria, or rather against the Sabellians.

Magno Ecclesiae damno sancti Dionysii romani episcopi scripta fere omnia injuria temporum periere. Librum edidit de Duplici Haeresi. Nec semel de viri magni lucubrationibus mentionem egit Athanasius: « Ex Dionysii Romani operibus, inquit, contra eos, qui filium Dei opus asseverant, ostenditur ariorum haeresim olim ab omnibus damnatam fuisse. » Verba quoque Dionysii affert libro de Decretis Synodi Nicaenae, tom. I, pag. 275, vet. edit. et Benedictinor., Paris., § 26, pag. 231 et seqq.

To the great loss of the Church, almost all the writings of St Dionysius, bishop of Rome, have perished through the injury of time. He published a book On the Twofold Heresy. More than once Athanasius made mention of the great man's labours: "From the works of Dionysius of Rome," he says, "against those who assert that the Son of God is a work, it is shown that the heresy of the Arians was long ago condemned by all." He also cites words of Dionysius in the book On the Decrees of the Synod of Nicaea, vol. I, p. 275, old edition, and in the Benedictines' edition, Paris, § 26, p. 231 ff.

Epistolae I. Dionysii papae ad Dionysium Alexandrinum notitia. Caussa et occasio exponitur ex Athanasio. — Dionysius Alexandrinus antistes, ubi apud Ptolemaidem Pentapoleos urbem exortam audivit Sabellii haeresim, quae sanctae Trinitatis personas confundebat, de hac Xystum papam certiorem facere, et quasdam ea de causa epistolas a se conscriptas ei mittere festinavit. Teste autem Eusebio, a Dionysio Alexandrino « Epistolae contra Sabellium scriptae sunt ad Ammonem Berenicensem (in Pentapoli) Episcopum, una ad Telesphorum, ad Euphranorem altera, et alia rursus ad Ammonem et Euporum. » Nominatim vero epistolis ejus ad Ammonem et Euphranorem non nulli moti illum ad romanum pontificem detulerunt. Dionysius vero Romanus rem satis gravem duxit, ut Alexandrinum, prius concilio habito, commonere non differret.

Account of the first letter of Pope Dionysius to Dionysius of Alexandria. Its cause and occasion are set out from Athanasius. — Dionysius, prelate of Alexandria, when he heard that the heresy of Sabellius, which confounded the Persons of the Holy Trinity, had arisen at Ptolemais, a city of the Pentapolis, hastened to inform Pope Xystus of it and to send him certain letters he had written on that account. According to the testimony of Eusebius, "letters against Sabellius were written" by Dionysius of Alexandria "to Ammon, Bishop of Berenice (in the Pentapolis), one to Telesphorus, another to Euphranor, and yet another to Ammon and Euporus." Moved in particular by his letters to Ammon and Euphranor, some persons reported him to the Roman pontiff. Dionysius of Rome, for his part, judged the matter grave enough that he did not delay, after first holding a council, to admonish the Alexandrian.

Epistolae illius causam et occasionem Athanasius in Epistola de sententia Dionysii, n. 13, exponit in hunc modum: « Cum Dionysius Alexandrinus contra Sabellii haeresim ad Ammonem et Euphranorem studio religionis permotus scripsisset, quidam ex Ecclesia fratres, sanae quidem doctrinae homines, non sciscitati tamen eum (Dionysium Alexandrinum) qua de causa ita scripsisset, Romam se contulere,

Athanasius, in the Letter on the opinion of Dionysius, n. 13, sets out the cause and occasion of that letter in this way: "When Dionysius of Alexandria, moved by zeal for religion, had written against the heresy of Sabellius to Ammon and Euphranor, certain brethren of the Church, men indeed of sound doctrine, yet without asking him (Dionysius of Alexandria) for what reason he had written so, betook themselves to Rome,

Editors' notes and page, col. 104

Footnotes

(4) ‹anchor: usurpavit› · call in col 104

Athanas., Epist. de Synodis, n. 43, edit. Patavinae, tom. I, part. II, pag. 605. A. B.; et edit. Paris., Montfaucon., tom. I, pag. 737.

Athanasius, Letter on the Synods, no. 43, Padua edition, vol. I, part II, p. 605 A B; and Montfaucon's Paris edition, vol. I, p. 737.

(printed under page 56)

(5) ‹anchor: de Duplici Haeresi› · call in col 104

Basnage, Annal. Polit. Eccles., tom. II, ad ann. 259, n. VIII, pag. 400, nullo citato auctore aut antiquo monumento pro hoc libro Dionysii de duplici Haeresi. Forte is liber nil aliud est, quam epistola ad Dionysium Alexandrinum, in qua duplicem haeresim et tritheitarum, et Sabellii confutavit Romanus Dionysius.

Basnage, Annales politico-ecclesiastici, vol. II, at the year 259, no. 8, p. 400, citing no author or ancient record for this book of Dionysius On the Twofold Heresy. Perhaps that book is nothing other than the letter to Dionysius of Alexandria, in which Dionysius of Rome refuted the twofold heresy, both of the tritheists and of Sabellius.

(printed under page 56)

(6) ‹anchor: inquit› · call in col 104

Athanasius, tom. I, Opp., edit. Paris., 1627, pag. 558 et 918; et edit. Patavinae, 1777, tom. II, part. I, de Sententia Dionysii, pag. 198 et seqq., n. 13, et part. II, n. 43, pag. 605.

Athanasius, Works, vol. I, Paris edition, 1627, pp. 558 and 918; and Padua edition, 1777, vol. II, part I, On the Opinion of Dionysius, p. 198 and following, no. 13, and part II, no. 43, p. 605.

(printed under page 56)

(7) ‹anchor: hunc modum› · call in col 104

Athanas., de Sent. Dionys., n. 13, pag. 198 et seqq., cit. edit. Patav.

Athanasius, On the Opinion of Dionysius, no. 13, p. 198 and following, in the Padua edition cited.

(printed under page 56)

(8) ‹anchor: Romam› · call in col 104

Subinde Julius I, Epist. I, n. 22, cum eusebianis quod se inscio Athanasius alexandrinum episcopum condemnasset, expostulavit his verbis: « Cur autem de alexandrina ecclesia potissimum nihil (continues)

Afterwards Julius I, Epist. I, no. 22, remonstrated with the Eusebians for having condemned Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, without his knowledge, in these words: "But why, above all in the case of the church of Alexandria, nothing (continues)

(printed under page 56)

Page

running head: …ONYSIO ROMANO PONTIFICE 104 (left part cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A eos patres, quorum doctrinam; B tis Synodi Nicaenae, tom. I; C non nulli moti illum; D beside footnote (4) "Montfaucon., tom. I, pag. 737" (footnote line, not set)
old-edition numerals: (none)
note (Q2): footnote (8) prints "Athanasius ... condemnasset" (nominative, singular verb) where the sense requires "Athanasium ... condemnassent"; set as printed, English follows the sense.

PL 5:105

illumque apud cognominem Dionysium Romanum Episcopum accusarunt, » quod nimirum, ut et Athanasius, ibid. num: 4, prodit, in praedicta Epistola, n. 4, dixisset: « Opus et rem factam esse Filium Dei, non natura proprium, sed alienum a Patre secundum substantiam, qualis est agricola a vite, et faber a scapha: etenim cum sit res facta, non erat, antequam fieret. Quibus auditis », inquit Athanasius, num. 13, « Dionysius Romae episcopus scripsit, et contra Sabellii sectatores, et contra eos, qui ejus essent sententiae (cujus Dionysius Alexandrinus assertor putabatur), et: Ob quam Arius postea ab Ecclesia ejectus est. Scripsit quoque ad Dionysium (Alexandrinum) litteras, ut explanaret ea, de quibus ab illis (fratribus supra memoratis) accusatus fuerat. » De iisdem litteris idem Athanasius, lib. de Synodis, n. 43, haec memoriae commendavit: « Cum autem quidam ad Romanum Episcopum de Alexandrino detulissent, quod Filium rem factam et Patri non consubstantialem affirmaret, Romana Synodus rem indigne tulit; Romanus autem Episcopus scriptis ad cognominem suum litteris, omnium (ea de re) sententiam notam ei fecit. »

and accused him before his namesake Dionysius, Bishop of Rome," namely because, as Athanasius also reports, ibid. no. 4, he had said in the aforesaid Epistle, no. 4: "That the Son of God is a work and a thing made, not proper [to the Father] by nature, but alien from the Father in substance, as the husbandman is from the vine and the shipwright from the boat: for since He is a thing made, He was not before He was made. When he had heard these things," says Athanasius, no. 13, "Dionysius, bishop of Rome, wrote both against the followers of Sabellius and against those who were of that opinion (of which Dionysius of Alexandria was thought to be the champion), and: On account of which Arius was afterwards cast out of the Church. He also wrote a letter to Dionysius (of Alexandria), that he might explain those things of which he had been accused by them (the brethren mentioned above)." Of the same letter the same Athanasius, in the book On the Synods, no. 43, recorded this: "When certain men had reported to the Roman Bishop concerning the Alexandrian that he affirmed the Son to be a thing made and not consubstantial with the Father, the Roman Synod took the matter ill; and the Roman Bishop, having written a letter to his namesake, made known to him the opinion of all (on that matter)."

Athanasiana verba expenduntur. Potior Baronii sententia distinguentis scriptum Dionysii Romani contra Sabellium ab ejusdem Epistola Dionysio Alexandrino inscripta. — Scriptum illud cujus priore loco meminit Athanasius, ab Epistola ad Dionysium, quam exinde ille memorat, distinguendum esse Baronius censet: alii de hac re dubitant. Sed potior nobis

The words of Athanasius are weighed. The opinion of Baronius is preferable, who distinguishes the writing of Dionysius of Rome against Sabellius from his Epistle addressed to Dionysius of Alexandria. — Baronius judges that the writing which Athanasius mentions in the first place is to be distinguished from the Epistle to Dionysius which he mentions thereafter: others are in doubt on this matter. But preferable to us

Editors' notes and page, col. 105

Footnotes

(8) ‹continued from col 104› · call in col 104

scriptum est? An ignoratis hanc esse consuetudinem, ac primum scribatur nobis, et hinc quod justum est decernatur? » Haec autem consuetudo num Dionysii temporibus antiquior sit, ignoramus; hic certe Athanasius alexandrini episcopi delatores non culpat, quod nomen ejus ad romanum pontificem detulerint, sed quod prius quae vera esset illius sententia sciscitari neglexissent.

was written to us? Or do you not know that this is the custom, that word should first be written to us, and that what is just should then be decreed from here?" Whether this custom is older than the times of Dionysius, we do not know; here at any rate Athanasius does not blame the accusers of the bishop of Alexandria for having reported his name to the Roman pontiff, but for having neglected first to ascertain what his opinion really was.

(printed under page 57; continues footnote (8) of col 104)

(1) ‹anchor: Romae episcopus scripsit› · call in col 105

Graece ἐπέστειλε δὲ καὶ Διονυσίῳ δηλῶσαι περὶ ὧν εἰρήκασι κατ' αὐτοῦ; ubi Pearsonius δηλώσας pro δηλῶσαι, legendum esse conjectat; adeoque Dionysium Romanum Alexandrino scripsisse, ut quae adversus ipsum dicta fuerant, nota ei faceret. Et ea quidem conjectura cum Athanasii narratione satis cohaeret, eoque veri videtur similior, quod ignorabat Dionysius Alexandrinus, quae adversum se prolata essent, nec aliunde nisi scriptis ex urbe missis comperire poterat. Sed quia non alia de causa curavit Dionysius Romanus Alexandrino, quae contra ipsum dicta fuerant, indicare, nisi ut is suam super illis mentem ac sententiam explicaret, nihil est periculi utramvis lectionem quis sequatur. Verum quod Dionysius Alexandrinus exinde praestitit, ea, quae sibi objecta fuerant diluens, vulgatam lectionem quodam modo confirmat.

In Greek, "and he wrote to Dionysius too, to make known what they had said against him"; where Pearson conjectures that δηλώσας ("making known") should be read for δηλῶσαι ("to make known"), and so that Dionysius of Rome wrote to the Alexandrian to make known to him what had been said against him. That conjecture fits Athanasius's account well enough, and seems the more likely because Dionysius of Alexandria did not know what had been alleged against him, and could learn it from nowhere but writings sent from the City. But since Dionysius of Rome took care to inform the Alexandrian of what had been said against him for no other reason than that he might set out his mind and opinion on those matters, there is no danger whichever reading one follows. What Dionysius of Alexandria then did, however, in clearing away the charges brought against him, in a way confirms the common reading.

(printed under page 57)

(2) ‹anchor: Scripsit quoque› · call in col 105

Athanas., lib. de Synod., n. 43, tomo I, part. II, pag. 605. edit. patav.

Athanasius, book On the Synods, no. 43, vol. I, part II, p. 605, Padua edition.

(printed under page 57)

(3) ‹anchor: Romana Synodus› · call in col 105

Hinc comprobatur hactenus constans usus, quo romani pontifices de rebus ad se delatis nihil pronuntiare sine synodo solebant. Eum quoque morem, quo synodi decreta nomine suo mittere ac nota facere iidem pontifices consueverant, firmat Athanasius, cum litteras ad alexandrinum episcopum e synodo missas Dionysio papae adscribit.

This confirms the custom, constant up to then, by which the Roman pontiffs used to pronounce nothing on matters referred to them without a synod. Athanasius also confirms the custom by which the same pontiffs used to send out and make known the decrees of a synod in their own name, when he ascribes to Pope Dionysius the letter sent from the synod to the bishop of Alexandria.

(printed under page 57)

(4) ‹anchor: dubitant› · call in col 105

Videsis Tillemont, Mémoires, tom. IV, pag. 142, sur S. Denis, pape, édit. Bruxell.; Ceillier, Hist. génér., tom. III, pag. 327, in not. a.

See Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. IV, p. 142, on St Dionysius, pope, Brussels edition; Ceillier, Histoire générale, vol. III, p. 327, in note a.

(printed under page 57)

Page

running head: 105 DE SANCTO DIONYSIO ROMANO (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A illumque apud cognominem Dionysium Romanum; B De iisdem litteris idem Athanasius, lib. de Synodis; C scriptum est? An ignoratis hanc esse consuetudinem (footnote area); D dicta fuerant, indicare, nisi ut is suam super illis (footnote area)
old-edition numerals: (none)
signature line: PATROL. V. (printed below the foot of col 105)
misprints kept as printed (Q5): "ibid. num: 4" (colon for full stop).
note (Q5): the foot of col 105 opens with the end of footnote (8) of col 104 ("scriptum est? … neglexissent."); set above as its continuation. n104 still ends that note with "(continues)".

PL 5:106

videtur Baronii sententia. Primo enim Athanasius Dionysii Romani contra sabellianos opus simplici verbo ἔγραψε designat; ac inde adjicit: ἐπέστειλε δὲ καὶ Διονυσίῳ: ubi particulae δὲ καὶ distinctum quid notant, verbum ἐπέστειλε, Epistolam scripsit proprie sonat, ac subjecta vox Διονυσίῳ, cui inscripta erat Epistola illa, indicat. Ipsa etiam decori ratio, immo et aequitas postulabat, ut romanus pontifex tantae sedis antistiti, qualis erat alexandrinus, tanti meriti, tamque arcta cum romanis praesulibus amicitia devincto, qualis erat Dionysius, ea, quae adversus illum dicta fuerant, et quae de iis esset sententia romana, privatis litteris, non publico scripto nota faceret. Praeterea Dionysius Romanus in opere contra sabellianos non unum singularem episcopum, sed plures alloquitur. Denique in Dionysium seu Romanum, seu Alexandrinum minime convenit subnexi fragmenti exordium, in quo Dionysius Romanus tres Deitates a quibusdam induci praefatus, statim adjungit: « Audio enim quosdam, qui divinum Verbum apud vos praedicant, et docent, hujus opinionis magistros esse. » Non enim is amicum vagis ac generalibus hujusmodi verbis arguebat, sed speciales ipsi mittebat sententias ex scriptis illius excerptas, et ut eas explanaret, admonebat.

seems the opinion of Baronius. For first, Athanasius designates the work of Dionysius of Rome against the Sabellians by the simple word ἔγραψε [he wrote]; and then he adds: ἐπέστειλε δὲ καὶ Διονυσίῳ [and he also sent a letter to Dionysius]: where the particles δὲ καὶ mark something distinct, the verb ἐπέστειλε properly means 'he wrote a letter', and the word subjoined, Διονυσίῳ, indicates to whom that letter was addressed. The very principle of propriety, indeed even equity, required that the Roman pontiff should make known to the prelate of so great a see as the Alexandrian was, a man of such merit and bound by so close a friendship with the Roman bishops as Dionysius was, the things that had been said against him, and what the Roman judgement concerning them was, by private letter, not by public writing. Moreover, Dionysius of Rome in the work against the Sabellians addresses not one single bishop but several. Finally, the opening of the subjoined fragment by no means suits Dionysius, whether the Roman or the Alexandrian, in which Dionysius of Rome, having stated beforehand that three Deities are being introduced by certain persons, at once adds: 'For I hear that some who preach and teach the divine Word among you are teachers of this opinion.' For he did not reproach a friend with vague and general words of this kind, but sent him specific statements extracted from his writings, and admonished him to explain them.

Epistolae II, seu operis Dionysii papae adversus Sabellianos Fragmenti notitia. — Insigne fragmentum Epistolae contra sabellianos a Dionysio Romano exaratae debemus Athanasio, a quo in Epistola de Decretis nicaenae synodi num. 26, sic laudatur: « Dionysius quoque Romae Episcopus scribens contra sabellianos, adversus illos, qui talia... (scilicet Verbum factum et creatum esse) audent dicere, indignatur his verbis. » Ex eo opere excerptum est, quod idem Athanasius, epistola de sententia Dionysii, num. 13, contra sabellianos, et eos, qui ejus essent sententiae, ob quam Arius ab Ecclesia postea ejectus est, scriptum dicit, quodque ab epistola ejusdem pontificis ad Dionysium Alexandrinum simul missa distinguendum esse, in superioris epistolae notitia probavimus. In hoc opere Dionysius tritheitarum dogma, cui Alexandrinus praesul favere videbatur, ita refellit, ut et sabellianorum sententiam, quam impugnabat idem Antistes, simul confutet. Eaque agendi ratione defensoribus Ecclesiae magno documento fuit, quo contra haereses ea prudentia sibi decertandum, esse scirent, ut et oppositas non modo caverent, verum etiam simul debellarent. Fragmenti hujus stylus epistolam sapit, tractatus ac disceptationis fusioris more conscriptam, quales Dionysius Alexandrinus scribens ad Xystum, fuisse docet epistolas, quas adversus nascentem Sabellii haeresim miserat. Vel ad eas Pentapoleos ecclesias, in quibus orta et prop⟨a⟩gata erat Sabellii haeresis, vel ad ipsam alexandrinam, cui praeerat Dionysius, vel ad ejus

Notice of the second Letter, or of the Fragment of the work of Pope Dionysius against the Sabellians. — The notable fragment of the Letter against the Sabellians composed by Dionysius of Rome we owe to Athanasius, by whom it is cited thus in the Letter on the Decrees of the Nicene synod, no. 26: 'Dionysius also, Bishop of Rome, writing against the Sabellians, against those who dare to say such things... (namely, that the Word was made and created), is indignant in these words.' From that work was excerpted what the same Athanasius, in the letter on the opinion of Dionysius, no. 13, says was written against the Sabellians and those who were of that opinion on account of which Arius was afterwards cast out of the Church; and that it is to be distinguished from the letter of the same pontiff sent at the same time to Dionysius of Alexandria, we have proved in the notice of the preceding letter. In this work Dionysius refutes the doctrine of the tritheists, which the Alexandrian prelate seemed to favour, in such a way that he at the same time confutes the opinion of the Sabellians, which the same Bishop was attacking. And by this manner of proceeding he was a great lesson to the defenders of the Church, from which they might know that they must contend against heresies with such prudence that they not only guard against opposite ones but also overthrow them at the same time. The style of this fragment savours of a letter written in the manner of a treatise and a rather extended disputation, such as Dionysius of Alexandria, writing to Xystus, shows were the letters that he had sent against the nascent heresy of Sabellius. Either to those churches of the Pentapolis in which the heresy of Sabellius had arisen and spread, or to the Alexandrian [church] itself, over which Dionysius presided, or to his

Editors' notes and page, col. 106

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: Epistolae II› · call in col 106

Haec epistola in nostra editione facta est prima, cum epistola quae prima exhibita fuerit a D. Coustantio, in hac ipsa extet notitia, hujus artic. II initio.

This letter has been made the first in our edition, since the letter that D. Coustant presented as the first stands in this very account, at the beginning of this article II.

(printed under page 57)

(2) ‹anchor: sic laudatur› · call in col 106

Athanas., tom. I, part. I, de Decret. Nic., n. 26, pag. 182, edit. Patavinae.

Athanasius, vol. I, part I, On the Decrees of Nicaea, no. 26, p. 182, Padua edition.

(printed under page 57)

Page

running head: [cut off at left] ONYSIO ROMANO PONTIFICE. 106
marginal letters: A videtur Baronii sententia; B quitur. Denique in Dionysium; C « Dionysius quoque Romae Episcopus; D mento fuit, quo contra haereses
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:107

delatores probabiliter missa est. Ad initium pontificatus Dionysii una cum superiore videtur referenda, utpote cui occasionem dedit accusatio, quam litterae Xysto papae missae pepererunt. Hactenus perdoctus P. Coutantius monachus benedictinus e congregatione S. Mauri, tomo I Epistolarum romanorum pontificum, pag. 272 et seqq.

accusers it was probably sent. It seems it should be assigned, together with the one above, to the beginning of the pontificate of Dionysius, since the occasion for it was given by the accusation which the letter sent to Pope Xystus produced. Thus far the very learned Father Coutant, a Benedictine monk of the Congregation of St Maur, in volume 1 of the Letters of the Roman Pontiffs, p. 272 ff.

Editiones hujus epistolae Dionysianae fragmenti. — Fragmentum epistolae seu operis Dionysiani adversus sabellianos a Coutantio editum, reimprimi curavit P. Mansi, tomo I Collect. ampl. concilior. una cum observationibus eruditissimi hujus monachi benedictini, a pag. 1009-1016. Idem fragmentum indefessus Gallandius, tomo III bibliothecae suae SS. veterum patrum inseruit, atque in eo edendo Coutantium V. C. sibi sequendum constituit. Christianus Fridericus Roslerus laudatum Fragmentum dionysianum graece tantum additis quibusdam in vernacula lingua observationibus ex Athanasii epistola de Decretis synodi nicaenae juxta editionem Montfauconii Parisiensem de anno 1698, exhibet in sua Bibliotheca vett. patrum, parte II, Lipsiae, 1777, in-8°, pag. 381-384. Denique indefessus P. Dominicus Schramm, tomo VI Analysis SS. Patrum, anno 1784, Augustae Vindelicorum impresso latine tantum praefatum Fragmentum reimprimi curavit a pag. 415-417.

Editions of this fragment of the letter of Dionysius. — The fragment of the letter or work of Dionysius against the Sabellians edited by Coutant was reprinted by Father Mansi in volume 1 of the Ampler Collection of the Councils, together with the observations of this most learned Benedictine monk, at pp. 1009-1016. The tireless Galland inserted the same fragment in volume 3 of his Library of the Holy Ancient Fathers, and in editing it he resolved to follow Coutant, that most distinguished man. Christian Friedrich Rösler presents the said Dionysian Fragment in Greek only, with some observations added in the vernacular tongue, from the letter of Athanasius on the Decrees of the Synod of Nicaea according to Montfaucon's Paris edition of the year 1698, in his Library of the Ancient Fathers, part 2, Leipzig, 1777, octavo, pp. 381-384. Finally the tireless Father Dominic Schramm had the aforesaid Fragment reprinted in Latin only in volume 6 of the Analysis of the Holy Fathers, printed at Augsburg in the year 1784, at pp. 415-417.

Epistola Dionysii Romani ad Caesarienses in Cappadocia deperdita. — Sanctus Basilius paulo superius allegatus testatur, Dionysium papam unam ad ecclesiam Caesareae in Cappadocia perscripsisse epistolam, ut eam consoletur de incursione Barbarorum, qua vexata fuerat; cujus αὐτογράφον in illius Ecclesiae archivio magna cura adservatum ipse oculis suis viderat; verum sequioribus temporibus amissum dolemus.

The lost letter of Dionysius of Rome to the Caesareans in Cappadocia. — Saint Basil, cited a little above, testifies that Pope Dionysius wrote a letter to the church of Caesarea in Cappadocia to console it over the incursion of the Barbarians by which it had been harassed; its autograph he had seen with his own eyes, preserved with great care in the archive of that Church; but we lament that in later times it was lost.

Epistolae duae illustri Dionysii papae nomine ornatae circumferuntur. Prior ad Urbanum praefectum, hortatur eum, « sapienter disponere, et judicare quae illi commissa sunt. » Data est IV nonas Februarii, Aureliano et Basso viris clarissimis consulibus. Posterior Severo scribitur episcopo: de Ecclesiis parochianis, ut singulae singulis dentur presbyteris, et ut nullus alterius parochiae terminos, vel jus invadat. Data est V id. septembr. Claudio et Paterno viris clarissimis coss. Subditas esse Dionysio epistolas, docent et stylus, Dionysio viro doctissimo indignus, et inscriptiones. Annum CCLXXI, aperuere Aurelianus et Bassus, quo tempore Dionysius ad fata venerat; Claudii quidem et Paterni consulatu epistolam scribere Dionysius potuit. Ad Severum tamen non scripsisse, eo constat, quod ignoraverit larvatus auctor epistolae, Paterni collegam Claudium imperatorem fuisse, quod verum Dionysium latere, non potuit. Initium epistolae impostori foeneravit Leonis epistola XXIV: « Olim et ab initio tantam percepimus a B. Petro apostolorum principe fiduciam. » Locos etiam inseruit ex Gregorio Magno. Consulantur et libri IV, epistola 52, et libri VII, epistola 113, S. Gregorii Magni epistolarum. Ambae extant in noviss. Collectione conciliorum apud Mansi, tomo I, pag. 1004-

Two letters adorned with the illustrious name of Pope Dionysius are in circulation. The former, to Urbanus the prefect, exhorts him "to arrange wisely, and to judge the things which have been committed to him." It is dated on the fourth day before the Nones of February, Aurelian and Bassus, most distinguished men, being consuls. The latter is written to Bishop Severus: concerning parish churches, that each be given to one presbyter each, and that no one invade the boundaries or the right of another's parish. It is dated on the fifth day before the Ides of September, Claudius and Paternus, most distinguished men, being consuls. That the letters were foisted on Dionysius is shown both by the style, unworthy of Dionysius, a most learned man, and by the inscriptions. Aurelian and Bassus opened the year 271, at which time Dionysius had met his end; in the consulship of Claudius and Paternus, indeed, Dionysius could have written a letter. That he did not write to Severus, however, is established by this, that the masked author of the letter did not know that Paternus' colleague Claudius was the emperor, which could not have escaped the real Dionysius. The beginning of the letter was lent to the impostor by Leo's letter 24: "Of old and from the beginning we received so great a confidence from blessed Peter, prince of the apostles." He also inserted passages from Gregory the Great. Let book 4, letter 52, and book 7, letter 113, of the letters of St Gregory the Great be consulted. Both are extant in the newest Collection of the Councils by Mansi, volume 1, pp. 1004-

Editors' notes and page, col. 107

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 108 (printed at the foot of col 108; col 107 has no footnotes)

Ludov. Jac., Bibliothec. pontific., lib. II, pag. 62.

Louis Jacob, Bibliotheca pontificia, book II, p. 62.

(printed under page 58)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 108 (printed at the foot of col 108; col 107 has no footnotes)

Cave, Hist. litterar., tom. I, pag. 133.

Cave, Historia litteraria, vol. I, p. 133.

(printed under page 58)

Page

running head: 107 DE SANCTO DIONYSIO ROMAN[...] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A delatores probabiliter missa est; B V. C. sibi sequendum constituit; C ut eam consoletur de incursione Barbarorum; D et inscriptiones. Annum CCLXXI
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: editors' matter: whole column is editors' dissertation prose (Delatores probabiliter missa est; Editiones hujus epistolae; Epistola Dionysii Romani ad Caesarienses; Epistolae duae illustri Dionysii). Column begins mid-sentence. Last word "1004-" is broken across the column break (continues in the next column with 1008). Mark over the u of "utpote" taken as damage. Greek accent of αὐτογράφον UNSURE, set as it appears. Right-hand column (108) not set.

PL 5:108

1008. Easdem falsitatis convictas videre est in Blondelli Pseudo-Isidoro, pag. 349, seq. et apud Schelstratum, Antiquit. illustrat., tom. II.

1008. The same [letters], convicted of falsity, may be seen in Blondel's Pseudo-Isidorus, p. 349 ff., and in Schelstrate, Antiquitas illustrata, vol. II.

Alia opera S. Dionysio male adscripta.— Ludovicus Jacobus a sancto Carolo, varia opuscula Dionysio Romano adscribit: nimirum ex fragmentis Commentitii Luitprandi ticinensis librum de Situ Orbis; sed est error satis manifestus, quando ipsi tribuitur liber de situ orbis, cum toto coelo et majore, quam saeculi intervallo differat ab episcopo hoc Dionysio Dionysius Periegetes ethnicus, cujus carmen graecum insigne hujus argumenti habemus. Similiter ferri non potest, quod ab eodem auctore « Commentarius adversus arianas haereses Dionysio papae tribuitur, cujus tempore Arii haeretici nomen nondum erat auditum, quod fieri primum coepit ab anno 316. Neque « adversus Paulum Samosatenum scripsit Dionysius papa, uti praefatus scriptor putat, sed Dionysius alexandrinus Episcopus, sicut a Caveo jam bene notatum video.

Other works wrongly ascribed to St Dionysius.— Louis Jacob of Saint-Charles ascribes various small works to Dionysius of Rome: namely, on the basis of the fragments of the spurious Liutprand of Pavia, a book On the Situation of the World; but it is a quite manifest error when a book on the situation of the world is attributed to him, since Dionysius Periegetes, a pagan, whose notable Greek poem on this subject we possess, differs from this bishop Dionysius by the whole breadth of heaven and by an interval greater than a century. Likewise it cannot be allowed that by the same author « a Commentary against the Arian heresies is attributed to Pope Dionysius, in whose time the name of the heretic Arius had not yet been heard, which first began to happen from the year 316. Nor did Pope Dionysius write « against Paul of Samosata, as the aforesaid writer supposes, but Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, as I see has already been well noted by Cave.

ARTICULUS III.

Article III.

Doctrina S. Dionysii Romani Pontificis.

The Teaching of St Dionysius, Roman Pontiff.

§ 1. — De sanctissima Trinitate.

§ 1. — On the Most Holy Trinity.

Refutantur a S. Dionysio Tritheitae et Marcionitae. Tres divinae Personae propter naturae Unitatem inseparabiles sunt.— Sicuti marcionitae quodammodo tres Deos constituebant, dum in tres substantias alienigenas, et inter se omnino segregatas sanctam Unitatem dispartiebantur; hinc sanctus Dionysius appellat doctrinam hanc futilem ac diabolicam: « Nam futilis, inquit, Marcionis doctrina... diabolica est. » Subjungit deinde, hanc non esse doctrinam verorum Christi discipulorum, et acquiescentium Salvatoris praeceptis: « Illi enim, » videlicet Christiani, « Trinitatem quidem non ignorant in divina Scriptura praedicari; tres autem esse Deos, nec in veteri, nec in novo Testamento doceri. Itaque, » concludit sanctus Pontifex, « admirabilis divinaque Unitas in tres divinitates non est separanda. » Tradit paulo superius idem sanctus Dionysius, divinum Verbum Deo Patri unitum esse, et Spiritum sanctum in Deo manere et habitare, et Trinitatem reduci et colligi in unum Deum omnipotentem, Dominum universorum. « Necesse est enim, divinum Verbum Deo universorum esse unitum, et Spiritum sanctum in Deo manere ac habitare, ac denique divinam Trinitatem in unum... Deum universorum omnipotentem... reduci et colligi. » Quae verba apertissime ostendunt unum Deum in tres distinctum Personas; adeoque tres divinae Personae ex allata doctrina sunt ejusdem essentiae, ejusdemque naturae.

The Tritheists and Marcionites are refuted by St Dionysius. The three divine Persons are inseparable because of the Unity of nature.— Just as the Marcionites in a certain manner set up three Gods, while they divided the holy Unity into three substances foreign to one another and wholly separated from each other, so St Dionysius calls this doctrine futile and diabolical: « For futile, » he says, « is the doctrine of Marcion... it is diabolical. » He then adds that this is not the doctrine of the true disciples of Christ and of those who rest in the precepts of the Saviour: « For they, » that is, the Christians, « are indeed not ignorant that a Trinity is proclaimed in divine Scripture, but that there are three Gods is taught neither in the Old nor in the New Testament. Therefore, » the holy Pontiff concludes, « the wonderful and divine Unity is not to be separated into three divinities. » A little earlier the same St Dionysius teaches that the divine Word is united to God the Father, and that the Holy Spirit remains and dwells in God, and that the Trinity is brought back and gathered into one omnipotent God, the Lord of all things. « For it is necessary that the divine Word be united to the God of all things, and that the Holy Spirit remain and dwell in God, and finally that the divine Trinity be brought back and gathered into one... omnipotent God of all things. » These words show most plainly one God distinct in three Persons; and so, according to the teaching adduced, the three divine Persons are of the same essence and of the same nature.

Nec nisi perperam detorqueri possent recitata

Nor, except wrongly, could there be twisted the quoted

Editors' notes and page, col. 108

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: a sancto Carolo› · call in col 108

Ludov. Jac., Bibliothec. pontific., lib. II, pag. 62.

Louis Jacob, Bibliotheca pontificia, book II, p. 62.

(printed under page 58)

(2) ‹anchor: a Caveo› · call in col 108

Cave, Hist. litterar., tom. I, pag. 133.

Cave, Historia litteraria, vol. I, p. 133.

(printed under page 58)

(3) ‹anchor: inquit› · call in col 108

Dionys. Rom., apud S. Athanas., lib. de Decret. Synod., tom. I, pag. 231 et 232, edit. Montfauc., Paris., 1698, et tom. I, part. I, pag. 182, n. 26, edit. Patavinae, 1777; item apud Mansi, tom. I, Concil., pag. 1011 et seqq.; et apud Galland., tom. III, Bibl. PP., pag. 538 et seqq.

Dionysius of Rome, in St Athanasius, book On the Decrees of the Synod, vol. I, pp. 231 and 232, Montfaucon's edition, Paris, 1698, and vol. I, part I, p. 182, no. 26, Padua edition, 1777; likewise in Mansi, Councils, vol. I, p. 1011 and following; and in Gallandi, Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. III, p. 538 and following.

(printed under page 58)

Page

running head: ONYSIO ROMANO PONTIFICE. 108 (cut at left edge)
marginal letters: A ‹1008. Easdem falsitatis›; B ‹quod fieri primum coepit›; C ‹inquit, Marcionis doctrina›; D ‹tare, ac denique divinam Trinitatem›
old-edition numerals: (none)
note (Q2): the section numeral before "De sanctissima Trinitate" may be printed as Roman "I." (the next is "§ II."); not settled at this scan's resolution, set as "1.". Footnote (3) "pag. 231" may read "251" on the page; not settled. "Illi enim" may be printed "Ili enim"; not settled.

PL 5:109

S. Dionysii verba in confirmationem erroris sabellianorum, cum certum indubitatumque sit, non minus accuratum eum fuisse, cum de Personarum Trinitate, quam cum de Unitate naturae disseruit. « Ita scilicet, » inquit, « divinae Trinitati, et sanctae Monarchiae praedicatio integra servabitur. » Deinde impiam appellat doctrinam Sabellii, qui dicebat Patrem esse Filium, et vicissim. « Illius enim (Sabellii), » ipsissima sunt S. Dionysii verba, « in eo consistit impietas, quod dicat Filium esse Patrem, et vicissim. » Nullum igitur dubium suboriri potest de orthodoxa fide sancti hujus pontificis quoad mysterium sanctissimae Trinitatis.

words of St Dionysius in confirmation of the error of the Sabellians, since it is certain and undoubted that he was no less precise when he discoursed on the Trinity of Persons than when he discoursed on the Unity of nature. "Thus indeed," he says, "will the preaching be preserved whole for the divine Trinity and for the holy Monarchy." Next he calls impious the doctrine of Sabellius, who said that the Father is the Son, and conversely. "For his (Sabellius's)," these are the very words of St Dionysius, "impiety consists in this, that he says that the Son is the Father, and conversely." No doubt, therefore, can arise concerning the orthodox faith of this holy pontiff as regards the mystery of the most holy Trinity.

§ II. — De Consubstantialitate Verbi.

§ II. On the Consubstantiality of the Word.

Verbum est Patri consubstantiale. — Eadem ratione dubitare nemo potest de catholica ejusdem papae fide quoad consubstantialitatem Verbi, quoniam qui catholicam doctrinam tradit de Trinitate, catholicam eodem tempore tradit doctrinam de consubstantialitate Verbi. Verum ut propositam veritatem magis magisque deprehendamus, probat sanctus Dionysius, quae superius docuerat de unione Filii cum Patre, duobus sancti Joannis Evangelistae oraculis, quae ex ipsins Evangelio sunt deprompta; quae sic habent: Ego et Pater unum sumus (Joan., X, 30); et ego in Patre et Pater in me est (Joan., XIV, 10). Haec sunt momenta, quibus permotus S. Dionysius scribit, Verbum unitum Patri esse unione inseparabili, ita ut duae istae personae sint una eademque Divinitas.

The Word is consubstantial with the Father. By the same reasoning no one can doubt the catholic faith of the same pope as regards the consubstantiality of the Word, since he who hands down the catholic doctrine concerning the Trinity hands down at the same time the catholic doctrine concerning the consubstantiality of the Word. But so that we may grasp the proposed truth more and more, St Dionysius proves what he had taught above concerning the union of the Son with the Father by two utterances of St John the Evangelist, which are drawn from his Gospel; they read thus: I and the Father are one (John 10:30); and I am in the Father and the Father is in Me (John 14:10). These are the grounds moved by which St Dionysius writes that the Word is united to the Father by an inseparable union, so that these two persons are one and the same Godhead.

Verbum non est formatum vel factum, sed genitum ab omni aeternitate. — Qua posita veritate, nemo absque culpa asserere potest Filium Dei factum vel creatum fuisse, « cum divina Scriptura illum genitum esse..., non autem formatum et factum esse testetur: igitur non levis, sed maxima impietas

The Word is not formed or made, but begotten from all eternity. This truth being laid down, no one can without fault assert that the Son of God was made or created, "since divine Scripture testifies that He was begotten..., but not that He was formed and made: therefore not a light but the greatest impiety

est Dominum aliquo modo manufactum dicere. Nam si factus est Filius, erat tempus, quando non erat; atqui fuit semper, si utique est, ut ipse declarat, in Patre, et si Christus Verbum, Sapientia et Virtus est. » Nemo sane potest majori praecisione tueri aeternitatem, divinitatem ac consubstantialitatem Verbi; et non nisi jucundissimum esse poterit catholicis intueri primarias has religionis veritates perspicue ac validissime assertas ab iis Ecclesiae patribus, qui ante exortam Arii haeresim floruerunt.

is to say that the Lord was in some way made by hand. For if the Son was made, there was a time when He was not; but He always was, if indeed He is, as He Himself declares, in the Father, and if Christ is Word, Wisdom and Power." No one, surely, can defend with greater precision the eternity, the divinity and the consubstantiality of the Word; and it can be nothing but most delightful for Catholics to behold these primary truths of religion asserted clearly and most forcefully by those Fathers of the Church who flourished before the heresy of Arius arose.

Divinitas Spiritus sancti. — Caeterum S. Dionysius romanus episcopus tuebatur etiam in particulari divinitatem Spiritus sancti, quoniam S. Basilius Magnus ejusdem auctoritatem allegat, ut laudatam divinitatem Spiritus sancti probet adversus eam impugnantes : nullum autem recitat S. Dionysii Romani textum. Verum eamdem Spiritus sancti divinitatem e duobus locis praelaudati fragmenti adversus sabellianos licet colligere : ait enim primo « Spiritum sanctum in Deo manere et inhabitare. » Et dein statuit : « Credendum esse in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, et in Christum Jesum ejus Filium, et in Spiritum sanctum. »

The divinity of the Holy Spirit. — Moreover, St Dionysius, bishop of Rome, also defended in particular the divinity of the Holy Spirit, since St Basil the Great adduces his authority in order to prove the said divinity of the Holy Spirit against those who attack it; yet he quotes no text of St Dionysius of Rome. But the same divinity of the Holy Spirit may be gathered from two passages of the above-mentioned fragment against the Sabellians: for he says first “that the Holy Spirit abides and dwells in God.” And then he lays down: “that one must believe in God the Father almighty, and in Christ Jesus His Son, and in the Holy Spirit.”

Tamdem observandum, sanctum Dionysium Romanum locum Proverbiorum, VIII, 22 : ἐν ἀρχῇ ἐποίησέ με., in principio fecit, interpretari in hunc modum : Principem me fecit Dominus, praefecit me... operibus suis. Et hac interpretandi ratione ab usitata veterum Patrum hujus loci expositione omnino discessit.

Finally it should be observed that St Dionysius of Rome interprets the passage of Proverbs 8:22, ἐν ἀρχῇ ἐποίησέ με, “in the beginning He made”, in this way: “The Lord made me a prince, He set me... over His works.” And by this manner of interpreting he departed altogether from the exposition of this passage customary among the ancient Fathers.

Editors' notes and page, col. 109

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: Monarchiae› · call in col 109

Dionys. Rom. loc. cit. in fine fragmenti adversus Sabellium.

Dionysius of Rome, in the place cited, at the end of the fragment against Sabellius.

(printed under page 59)

(2) ‹anchor: Dionysius scribit› · call in col 109

Dionys. Rom., in frag. advers. Sabellian., n. 2, pag. 1013, apud Mansi.

Dionysius of Rome, in the fragment against the Sabellians, no. 2, p. 1013, in Mansi.

(printed under page 59)

(3) ‹anchor: testetur› · call in col 109

His concinens nicaena synodus in symbolo Filium genitum, non factum profitetur. Athanasius autem Epist. de sententia Dionysii Alexandr., n. 13, professionem illam primum ab hac synodo excogitatam non esse hinc recte probat. Cum enim, inquit, « Dionysius Romanus episcopus adversus eos etiam scripserit, qui Filium Dei rem creatam et factam dicant, liquido constat, non nunc primum, sed olim ab omnibus anathemate damnatam esse inimicorum Christi arianam haeresim. »

In agreement with this, the synod of Nicaea in its creed professes the Son begotten, not made. And Athanasius, in the Letter on the Opinion of Dionysius of Alexandria, no. 13, rightly proves from this that that profession was not first devised by this synod. "For since," he says, "Dionysius, bishop of Rome, wrote also against those who say that the Son of God is a thing created and made, it is plainly established that the Arian heresy of the enemies of Christ was condemned with anathema by all, not now for the first time, but long ago."

(printed under page 59)

Page

running head: 109 DIONYSII PAPAE ADVERSUS SABELLIA (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹S. Dionysii verba in confirmationem›; B ‹dubitare nemo potest›; C ‹Verbum non est formatum›; D ‹dicant, liquido constat› (in the footnote block)
old-edition numerals: (none)
misprints kept as printed: "ipsins" (for ipsius); "Tamdem" (for Tandem, col 110 text set under this rail)
other: editors' matter set (dissertation on Pope Dionysius: ‹S. Dionysii verba in confirmationem›), continuing from the previous column and running on into the right-hand column. Full-width title lines ‹EPISTOLAE ...› and ‹SEU OPERIS DIONYSII PAPAE ADVE...› are cut off at the image edge and not set. ‹FRAGMENTUM.› is centred across the page but fully visible, so it is set as a caption. ‹LECTIONES VARIANTES› and its entry are omitted as apparatus. Heavy blotting makes these readings unsure: 'cum certum' (could be read 'eum'), 'Filium esse Patrem', 'Verbum non est', 'absque', 'illum', and in the fragment 'Jam', 'monarchiam' and 'praedicatio'.
other: a full-width band stands across cols 109/110 in mid-page: the 3 paragraph(s) above it in col 110 are set here, after the 4 above it in col 109 (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 FRAGMENTUM. (another unit); not set here
note (Q2): the blotted first lines may print "eum certum ... eum de Personarum" (c/e unclear); kept as "cum", not settled at this scan's resolution.

PL 5:110

Editors' notes and page, col. 110

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: quando non erat› · call in col 110 (in the text above the band, set under col 109)

Etiam hic praedamnat Dionysius celebre Arii effatum, ac praecludit nicaeno concilio, ad symboli sui calcem anathematizanti τοὺς λέγοντας· Ἦν ποτε, ὅτε οὐκ ἦν. Quocirca cum Valens Arimini in Ecclesia clamasset: « Si quis dixerit, erat tempus quando non erat Filius, anathema sit. » Hoc audito, inquit Hieronymus, Dialogo adv. Luciferianos, « Cuncti episcopi et tota simul Ecclesia plausu quodam et tripudio Valentis vocem exceperunt, rati videlicet eum plane arianam haeresim, quae Filium creatum volebat, his verbis ejurare. »

Here too Dionysius condemns in advance Arius's famous saying, and forestalls the Council of Nicaea, which at the foot of its creed anathematizes "those who say: There was when he was not." So when Valens at Rimini had cried out in the church, "If anyone says there was a time when the Son was not, let him be anathema," on hearing this, says Jerome in the Dialogue against the Luciferians, "all the bishops and the whole Church together received Valens's words with applause and rejoicing, supposing, of course, that by these words he was plainly abjuring the Arian heresy, which held the Son to be created."

(printed under page 59)

(2) ‹anchor: adversus eam impugnantes› · call in col 110 (in the text above the band, set under col 109)

Basil., de Spiritu sancto, cap. 29, n. 72.

Basil, On the Holy Spirit, ch. 29, no. 72.

(printed under page 59)

(3) ‹anchor: manere et inhabitare› · call in col 110 (in the text above the band, set under col 109)

Dionys. Rom., in fragm. adv. Sabellianos, num. 1, apud Mansi, pag. 1012.

Dionysius of Rome, in the fragment against the Sabellians, no. 1, in Mansi, p. 1012.

(printed under page 59)

(4) ‹anchor: Et dein statuit› · call in col 110 (in the text above the band, set under col 109)

Ibid., num. 3, pag. 1016.

Ibid., no. 3, p. 1016.

(printed under page 59)

(5) ‹anchor: operibus suis› · call in col 110

Id., ibid., num. 2

The same, ibid., no. 2.

(printed under page 59)

(a) ‹anchor: τοὺς διαιροῦντας› · call in col 110 (Lectiones variantes, under the Fragmentum)

Codex Reg. καταδιαιροῦντας. Montfaucon. Qui deerat editis articulus, fide hujus codicis nixus in textum recepi. Routh.

The Royal manuscript reads καταδιαιροῦντας ("dividing up"). Montfaucon. The article, which was missing in the printed editions, I have taken into the text, relying on this manuscript. Routh.

(printed under page 59)