Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Church Triumphant, Book III: On Churches, Vows, Pilgrimages and Feasts
Chapter 11: On the Lord's Day; On Easter
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Ecclesia quae Triumphat in Coelis, the fourth general controversy. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
Chapter 11. On the Lord's Day
Of the Lord's day three things are to be said: first, of its antiquity; second, of the reason of its institution; third, of the ancient rites kept on the Lord's day.
As to the first, without doubt the feast of the Lord's day is the most ancient of all the feasts of the Christians. For the Christian Church properly began on the day of Pentecost; for then, all the mysteries of redemption being fulfilled, the Gospel was published openly. And after this day the feasts of the Jews began to end, and the Christian feasts to be put in their place; and the first feast day that came round was without doubt the Lord's day. For the feast of the Lord's birth and of Easter, which also are most ancient, did not come round except after some months. And this antiquity is testified, first, by Scripture. For in Acts 20 it is said, “And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread”; and 1 Corinthians 16, “On the first day of the week let every one of you put apart with himself,” and so on.
The Magdeburgers, Century 1, book 2, chapter 6, column 503, and Calvin in Marlorat's Catholic exposition say that these places are understood of the sabbath day, and that that day was kept by Paul; which the Magdeburgers prove also from Acts 13, where Paul disputes on the sabbath day in the synagogue. But they are plainly deceived. For in the first place Chrysostom and Bede expound that place of Acts 20 of the Lord's day; and the place of 1 Corinthians 16 all the interpreters, Greek and Latin, expound of the Lord's day, Chrysostom, Ambrose, Theophylact and so on; not only Catholics, but even Peter Martyr on that place. Add also (to whom the heretics give much) the commentary of Erasmus both on Acts 20 and on 1 Corinthians 16. Besides, in Mark 16 Christ is said to have risen on the first of the sabbath, since it is certain that he rose on the Lord's day.
Besides, it is certain that Paul abounds in many Hebraisms; and it is a very frequent Hebraism to say one for first; as in Genesis 1, “And there was evening and morning one day,” that is, the first; for afterwards follows, the second day, and so on. Lastly, Paul most severely rebukes the Colossians and Galatians for keeping the sabbath and the feasts of the Jews. How then is it credible that he kept the sabbath of the Jews? And as for his preaching in the synagogue on the sabbath day, Acts 13, he did not do it to keep the sabbath, but because he could not have the Jews gathered in another place or at another time.
We have besides Apocalypse 1: “I John was in the spirit on the Lord's day.” Which place almost all expound of our Lord's day, as Oecumenius, Anselm, Primasius and others, and even the Magdeburgers themselves, Century 1, book 2, chapter 6.
To these we have the testimonies of the most ancient Fathers: of Clement, canon [65?] of the Apostles; of Ignatius, the letter to the Magnesians; of Justin, the second Apology; of Tertullian, On the Soldier's Crown, and the Apologetic, chapter 16; of Clement of Alexandria, book [7?] of the Stromata; of Origen, homily 7 on Exodus; of Athanasius, the homily on “All things are delivered to me by my Father”; of Ambrose, letter 83; of Jerome on chapter 4 to the Galatians; of Augustine, the book against Adimantus, chapter 16; of Gregory, book 11, letter 3; of Leo, letter 81 to Dioscorus; of Hilary, the preface to the Psalms. So that it can in no way be doubted that the feast of the Lord's day is most ancient.
As to the second, the reason of its institution was that it should succeed the sabbath. For the divine law required that one day of the week be dedicated to divine worship; and it was not fitting that the sabbath be kept. And so the sabbath was turned by the apostles into the Lord's day.
And that it may be understood how rightly this was done, it is to be noted that the sabbath was the most ancient and most excellent feast among the Jews, and that therefore mention of the sabbath alone was made in the Decalogue. And the sabbath was a most excellent feast because, since all feasts are celebrated either in memory of a past benefit or to signify something to come, the sabbath excelled in both. For as regards the past, it was kept in memory of the first and most common benefit, that is, of the creation of the world. For, as Philo writes in the book On the Making of the World, as kings order the birthday of their kingdoms to be kept, so God willed the birthday of his work, that is, of the world, to be kept. Which also was most useful for shutting out the error of the philosophers, who were going to say that the world had no beginning. As regards the future, the sabbath was a figure of three benefits of God, to which all others are brought back.
First, it was a figure, in the allegorical sense, of the rest of Christ in the tomb. For as God rested on the sabbath from the work of creation, so Christ rested on the sabbath from the work of redemption, as the Apostle observed, Hebrews 4.
Second, it was a figure, in the tropological sense, of the rest of the human mind from the servile works of sins. For the Jews, while they rested on the sabbath, signified that the time of grace would come, when men, freed through Christ from the servitude of sin, would enjoy spiritual rest and leisure, as Augustine expounds, tractate [20?] on John, and elsewhere.
Third, it was a figure, in the anagogical sense, of the rest of holy souls, which after death they awaited in the bosom of Abraham, as Augustine teaches, letter 119, and it is drawn from the Apostle, Hebrews 4. Now for these very causes for which the sabbath was once instituted, it was fitting that after the coming of Christ it be changed into the Lord's day. For as regards the memory of past things, the Lord's day far excels the sabbath; for it brings back to us the memory of the birth of Christ and of his resurrection, and of the coming of the Holy Spirit, on which day the Church was in a way born. For Christ was born on the Lord's day; as is plain, because that year the Sunday letter B was running, as all the mathematicians teach, and it can be shown by going back in the cycle of Sunday letters; and it is certain that the letter B falls on the 25th of December, on which day Christ was born. And that the same Christ rose on the Lord's day is certain from the Gospels. And that the coming of the Holy Spirit was on the Lord's day is plain, because it was on the day of Pentecost, that is, the fiftieth day from Easter, which is necessarily a Lord's day.
And so the Lord's day represents to us the birthday of Christ and of the Church, and of Christ not single but double. And besides, the Lord's day represents also the memory of the creation of the world no less than the sabbath. For on the Lord's day the world began to be made; nay, on that day were made all the chief parts of the world, heaven, earth, the angels, light and so on. Hence Justin, in the second Apology, and Leo, letter 81 to Dioscorus, say that the Lord's day is kept both for the memory of the creation of the world and for the resurrection of Christ.
And as regards the signifying of things to come, the sabbath plainly had to cease, because all the things to come which were signified by the sabbath are now fulfilled. For Christ has now lain in the tomb, and the rest of minds in God is now carried on. Further, the rest of the spirits of the dead in the bosom of Abraham has now been changed into glory and beatitude; and now we no longer await that simple rest, but a glorious rest; and glory is better signified by the Lord's day than by the sabbath. And therefore blessed Augustine, letter 119, says that the sabbath was rightly given to the Hebrews, who after death went only to rest, but that the Lord's day was given to Christians, because the glory of the resurrection has now been revealed in Christ; and what went before in the head, the whole body also awaits.
As to the third, the rite on the Lord's day was fourfold. First, they came together in the church for reading, preaching, the sacrifice, communion and so on, as is plain from Justin, the second Apology, at the end. Second, they rested from servile works, as is plain from Jerome, the letter to Eustochium on virginity, and from Gregory, book 11, letter 3. Third, they did not fast, as is plain from Tertullian On the Soldier's Crown and others, who teach this again and again. Fourth, they did not bend the knees, but prayed standing; of which there is canon 20 of the Nicene council. Tertullian taught the same long before, in the book On the Soldier's Crown: “On the Lord's day,” he says, “we count it wicked to fast, or to adore on our knees.” Likewise Hilary in the preface to the Psalms, Ambrose, sermon 62, Augustine, letter 119, chapter [15?], and Alexander III, the chapter Quoniam, in the title on feast days, teach the same. From which we understand that it is not yet five hundred years since this rite ceased. For the three first are still kept in the whole Church.
Chapter 12. On Easter
Two things are to be said: first, what Easter is; second, of the errors about Easter. As to the first, some of the Fathers thought that the name pascha was drawn from the word paschein, that is, to suffer, because the memory of the Lord's passion is celebrated at Easter, according to that of the Apostle, “For Christ our pasch is sacrificed”; so Ambrose in the book On the Mystery of Easter, chapter 1. Hence too Tertullian, in the book against the Jews, says that the pasch of the Lord signifies the passion of Christ; whose opinion Augustine reports and rightly refutes, letter 119. For pascha is a Hebrew name, not Greek. In Hebrew it is called pesach, which the Greeks turned pascha, the Chaldee pascha; Jerome reads phase, namely by other vowel points; but it is always the same word. And pascha is said from the verb pasach, which is to pass over. Hence it does not primarily signify the sacrifice of the lamb, as the author of the commentary on chapter 14 of Mark among Jerome's works teaches; nor the passage of the people through the Red Sea to the land of promise, as Nazianzen teaches, oration 1 on Easter, and Augustine, tractate [55?] on John. Nor again does it signify the passage of the angel through Egypt, as those words seem to sound, “For it is the Phase, that is, the passage of the Lord,” Exodus 12; but it signifies the passing over of the angel, and as it were his leaping over the houses of the Jews, as is plain from the reason which is given in Exodus 12. For where Moses had said, “For it is the Phase,” he adds the reason: “For I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and will kill every firstborn in the land of Egypt. And the blood shall be unto you for a sign in the houses where you shall be: and I shall see the blood, and shall pass over you: and the plague shall not be upon you.” Where the first “I will pass” is ve'avarti, the second is ufasachti, and from this Easter is named. A like reason is given three times in the same chapter, where pesach always signifies to leap over, or pass beyond, not simply to pass through. Hence Josephus, book 2 of the Antiquities, chapter [14?], says that the pasch signifies a passing over. Jerome teaches the same on chapter 26 of Matthew, and Theodoret, question 24 on Exodus.
Yet this very name is carried over also to signify three other things. And so, first, it signifies, as we have said, the angel's passing over. Second, the paschal lamb itself, which by sacrifice passed from life to death; hence it is said in Luke 22, “On which it was necessary that the pasch should be killed.” Third, the passage of the people, who that very night, freed from the tyranny of Pharao, passed through the Red Sea to go into the land of promise; and this meaning Gregory Nazianzen acknowledges, oration 2 on Easter, and Augustine, tractate 55 on John. Fourth, the feast day itself; for in Luke 22 it is said, “Now the feast of unleavened bread, which is called the pasch, was at hand.”
And these same four are also among Christians in their own way, that is, as the exemplars of those types. For the angel passing over and killing the firstborn of Egypt and saving the children of Israel is Christ, the angel of great counsel, who, while he passed from death to life, saved all who were to be sprinkled with his blood, the others being left in the hand of the destroyer. The paschal lamb is the same Christ, sacrificed for us. For both the lamb and the angel represented Christ, because Christ had both to be killed and to kill; while the lamb could be killed but not kill, and the angel could kill but not be killed. The passage through the Red Sea signifies the passage of peoples through the waters of baptism; and so at Easter catechumens were ordinarily baptized of old. Lastly, their feast day was a figure of our feast day.
As to the second: the first error was that of Aerius, who denied simply that Easter is to be kept, because it savoured of Judaism; to whom Epiphanius answers, heresy 75, that we do not keep the Jewish pasch, but that which is signified by it.
The second was that of Blastus, a schismatic, who, on the witness of Tertullian in the book On Prescriptions, taught that Easter must necessarily be kept on the same day on which it was celebrated by the Jews, that is, on the fourteenth moon, whether it was a Lord's day or not. In which error many bishops of Asia Minor were at the same time, as is plain from book 5 of the History of Eusebius, chapters [23?] and [24?], where the letter of Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, to Pope Victor is reported, in which that author asserts that all his predecessors, up to St. John the Evangelist, always kept Easter on the fourteenth day. Nor were there lacking afterwards many others whom this error pleased, whom Epiphanius, heresy 50, says were called Quartodecimans. For long after, in the time of Arius, some fell into the same error, on the same Epiphanius's witness, heresy 70.
This error was refuted at that very time by the councils of almost all the churches and by the Roman pontiff, who all by common consent decreed that Easter is to be kept on the Lord's day next after the fourteenth moon following the spring equinox, as the same Eusebius reports. Then the Nicene council, since that error still lasted in some places, decreed the same, as Epiphanius testifies, heresies 50 and 70, who says that in that council the golden number, which shows the new moons, was composed by Eusebius of Caesarea. Of which matter there is a letter of the Nicene council itself in Theodoret, book 1, chapter 9, of the History; and Athanasius mentions the same thing in the letter on the synods of Rimini and Seleucia; Ambrose, letter 83; and Theophilus, book 1 of the Paschal Letters; likewise the letter of the Emperor Constantine to all the churches, in Eusebius, book 3 of the Life of Constantine, where Constantine proves by three reasons that Easter ought to be kept on the Lord's day. First, lest we agree with the Jews, the slayers of Christ.
Second, because it is fitting that in the whole Church there be one way of keeping Easter, and fitting too that the fewer yield to the more. And from ancient times the city of Rome, Italy, Africa, Gaul, Spain, Britain, Egypt, Libya, Greece, Pontus, Cilicia and a great part of Asia keep Easter on the Lord's day, while only a few Easterners, against the whole south, west and north and a great part of the east, keep Easter with the Jews.
Third, because it is absurd to keep Easter twice in one year and in another year never. But this happened to those who kept Easter on the fourteenth day. For they did not observe the equinox, but only twelve lunar months, and kept Easter on the fourteenth moon of the first month, not caring whether that fourteenth was before the equinox or after. So it sometimes happened that in one year they kept Easter after the equinox, and in the following year before the equinox, and so twice in one year.
Add too that these rested on a false foundation. For they thought they were following the law of the Jews, and in truth were following the raving of the Jews of their time. For the Jewish law, Exodus 12, commands the pasch to be kept after the spring equinox; for it orders it to be kept on the fourteenth moon of the first month; and the first month is that whose fourteenth day falls at the spring equinox or next after it, as Josephus teaches, book 3 of the Antiquities, chapter [10?]. [The top of page 549 is merged across columns in the scan; the end of this paragraph is rendered from what reads.]
And to the argument which the Asians brought for themselves from St. John, Bede answers, book 3 of the History, chapter 25, that John kept Easter on the fourteenth day to accommodate himself in those beginnings to the Jews converted to the faith, as for the same cause Paul circumcised Timothy; but that the apostle Peter instituted at Rome that Easter should be kept on the Lord's day; and that this is rather to be followed.
The third error was that of certain Cappadocians, who, on the witness of Epiphanius, heresy 50, always kept Easter on the 25th of March, as we always keep the birth of the Lord on the 25th of December; because they thought that Christ suffered on that day, and believed that Easter was to be kept on the very day of the passion. Like was the error of the Gauls at the beginning of the Church, who, on the witness of Theophilus of Caesarea in Bede, in the book On the Reckoning of Times, chapter [45?], always kept Easter on the 25th of March, because they thought that Christ rose on that day. The same error pleases Luther greatly, in the book On Councils, part 2, where he would have the same feasts kept on the same day, and the course of the moon not observed, lest we seem to Judaize.
But this error is refuted, first, from the consent of the whole Church, which always decreed that Easter is to be kept on the Lord's day. Second, because according to some it rests on a false foundation. For Christ, as they teach, could not rise on the 25th of March, nor even suffer. For he suffered on Friday and rose on the Lord's day, according to all the Gospels. It is certain too that Christ suffered and rose in the 33rd year of his age, or the 34th according to others. Now in the year of Christ 33 the 25th of March was not a Friday nor a Lord's day, but a Wednesday; and in the year of Christ 34 the 25th of March was a Thursday, as is plain from the Sunday letter. For in the year of Christ 33 the letter D was running, in the year 34 the letter C; and on the 25th of March there is always G. Lastly, it is refuted by blessed Augustine in letter 119, where he shows that this is the difference between the day of the Nativity and the day of the Resurrection, that the former is kept only for memory, and so always on the very 25th of December, but the latter is kept for memory and for sacrament, and so is varied. See there a most beautiful explanation of the mysteries of Easter.
The fourth error was that of the Britons and Scots, in Bede, book 3 of the History, chapter 25, and book 5, chapter 22, who, against the common use of the whole Church, kept Easter on the first Lord's day after the thirteenth moon of March, so that sometimes they kept Easter on the fourteenth moon itself; in which they agreed neither with the Jews nor with the Christians. For with the Jews the first solemn day was the fifteenth moon; but they began the feast from the evening before, that is, on the fourteenth moon toward evening; while with these the first solemn day was the fourteenth, and since they too began from the first vespers, they necessarily began on the thirteenth moon. But this error needs no other refutation; for it was founded on ignorance alone; for they thought that St. John was wont to keep it so.
The fifth error is that of the Novatians, who, on the witness of Socrates, book 5 of the History, chapter [21?], published a decree which they called adiaphoron, because in it they decreed that it ought to be free to each to keep Easter when he wished. Which error it is certain enough pleased the Magdeburgers too, from Century 1, book 2, chapter 6, column 504, and Century 2, chapter 6, column 119, where they say that neither the apostles nor apostolic men gave any law to the Church about the keeping of Easter, but left Christians entire freedom. And in the same place they accuse the Roman pontiffs of having excommunicated the Asians for an indifferent thing.
But this error is refuted, first, from canon [7?] of the Apostles, where bishops or priests are ordered to be deposed who keep Easter before the equinox with the Jews.
Second, it is proved because those who were obstinate in the opinion of the Asians, that is, that Easter must necessarily be kept on the fourteenth moon with the Jews, the ancient Fathers always held for heretics, as is plain from Tertullian On Prescriptions, Epiphanius, heresy 50, Augustine, heresy 29, Theodoret, book 3 of the Heretical Fables, and Damascene in the book On Heresies. And lest we think they were heretics for another cause, they gave them the name Tessareskaidekatitae, that is, Quartodecimans. Not without cause, then, did the Roman pontiffs excommunicate the Asians.
Third, if the keeping of Easter were a free and indifferent thing, the holy Fathers would never have been very anxious about this matter; but they were always most anxious. For at the very beginning of this controversy provincial councils were held everywhere for this matter, as appears from book 5 of the History of Eusebius, chapters 23 and 25; which is a sign of great anxiety. Add that in those councils they did not wish it to be an indifferent thing; for in book 5, chapter 23, Eusebius says thus: “All with one accord confirm the Church's doctrine that the mystery of the Lord's pasch may never be celebrated except on the Lord's day, on which the Lord rose.” And in chapter 25 he says that this was the end of the decree of the Council of Caesarea about Easter held at that very time: “Let copies of our letter be sent through all the churches, that we may not be made guilty of the souls which are drowned in various errors.”
Fourth, the Nicene council, after the question of faith against Arius, thought nothing more worthy of careful discussion and settlement than the day of Easter, as is plain from the letter of Constantine in Eusebius, book 3 of the Life of Constantine. Nay, Athanasius, in the letter on the synods of Rimini and Seleucia, not far from the beginning, says that the Nicene council met for two causes: first, because of the controversy about Easter; second, because of the heresy of Arius. Epiphanius too, heresy 70, says that Constantine conferred two very great goods on the Church: one, that he had the Nicene synod gathered; the other, that in that synod he had the question of Easter settled. And that the Nicene council plainly commanded Easter to be kept on the Lord's day, and did not only use exhortation, as Socrates seems to say, is plain from Athanasius, who in the letter on the councils of Rimini and Seleucia speaks thus: “In the matter of Easter they did not shrink from this addition: It seemed good that all should obey.”
Fifth, it is proved from the Council of Antioch, chapter 1, where those are excommunicated who do not keep the Nicene law about the day of Easter.
Sixth, the same is proved from the great anxiety which the Fathers always had lest there be error in keeping Easter. For in the time of blessed Ambrose, when a certain difficulty had arisen, and it was not known what was the day of Easter according to the Nicene council, letters of bishops were sent from everywhere back and forth. Hence too there is a long letter, 83, of Ambrose on this matter.
Then in the time of Innocent I, when a like difficulty had arisen, Innocent wrote a letter, which is the eleventh, to Aurelius, bishop of Carthage, that he too, gathering a synod, should discuss that question and write to him the council's opinion, that he himself afterwards might prescribe the day of Easter to all according to custom.
Again in the time of Leo, when a like difficulty had arisen, St. Leo wrote about it to the Emperor Marcian, to Eudoxia Augusta, to the bishops of Gaul and Spain and others. See letters 63, 64, 65 and 95.
Besides, the general providence of the Church shows the same. For, as Leo writes, letter 64 to Marcian, the care of always reckoning and searching out the day of Easter had been delegated to the bishop of Alexandria, who made it known to the apostolic Roman See; and then the apostolic See prescribed that day to the whole Church; of which custom the first Council of Arles too makes mention, chapter 1, and Innocent I, letter 11 to Aurelius.
Lastly, it is proved by a divine testimony, which Paschasinus, bishop of Lilybaeum, reports in the letter to Leo, and it is 63 among the letters of St. Leo. For he writes that in the time of Pope Zosimus a question arose about Easter, because the Westerners said Easter was to be kept that year on the 25th of March, the Easterners on the 22nd of April. Now in a certain church of Sicily a sacred font was wont every year to be filled of itself by a divine miracle on the very night of Easter on which the catechumens were to be baptized. But that year, when by the prescription of Zosimus Easter was kept on the 25th of March, the font remained empty and dry; then on the 22nd of April the font was filled; and from this it was understood that the Westerners had erred in keeping Easter. Sigebert writes in the Chronicle that such a miracle happened also in the year of the Lord [577?]. For he noted that in that year the baptismal font in Spain was filled by God on the Saturday of the true Easter, which the Gauls then rightly kept, but the Spaniards wrongly. But surely if the thing were wholly indifferent, God would never have shown the error committed by such a miracle.
The Magdeburgers, Century 5, chapter 6, column 692, say that what this Paschasinus writes are fables and trifles. But it is certain that this Paschasinus was a most famous bishop, since in the name of St. Leo he presided over the Council of Chalcedon of 630 bishops. It is certain too that he writes a most well-known thing, namely what had happened in his own time, as in his own place. Lastly he wrote that letter to the most grave pontiff St. Leo, to whom surely that great bishop would never have told fables and trifles for a divine miracle. [The top of page 551 is merged across columns in the scan; this paragraph is rendered from what reads.]
The last error is that into which we have now for many years often fallen, knowing indeed and seeing, but yet unwillingly. For it is to be known that the Nicene council set three rules for finding the day of Easter. One was that Easter should always be looked for after the 21st of March, because on that day was the spring equinox, and Easter ought to be kept after the equinox. Another was that after the 20th of March the fourteenth moon should be awaited, and after that day Easter looked for. For Easter ought to be kept in the third week of the moon, that is, from the fourteenth moon exclusive to the twenty-second exclusive. And for finding the moon they composed the same golden numbers. For wherever in the calendar the golden number of that year is found, there is the new moon. The third rule was that after the fourteenth moon occurring after the twentieth of March the Lord's day should be awaited, and that would be Easter.
These rules were excellent at that time and for many years after. For truly then the equinox was on the 21st of March, and truly the golden number then showed the day of the new moon. But for many ages now experience teaches that the equinox is not fixed on the twenty-first of March, but always comes earlier; for now it is on the tenth of March. Likewise experience teaches that the ancient golden number no longer shows the new moons faithfully; for now the new moon is found four days before the golden number itself. From which we understand that in the time of the Nicene council the motion neither of the sun nor of the moon had been exactly grasped; but the Church always keeps those ancient rules, and from this is very often forced to err, even against her will. As in the year before, that is, 1579, Easter was kept on the 19th of April, when it ought to have been kept on the 15th of March [so the scan].
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAIMIT XI.
/'(' (/(»;»! niiVa lUo.
hi> (loiiiiiiii-ii (lii^ tnii ilicciiilii siiiil. 1*111111), (lc I'-
jiis iiiili(|iiiUitt\ SeritiKlo (U) nilioiio iiisliliitioiiis.
'r(>rlio,(lo ritihus iiiili<|iiis iii (Ik; (loiiiiiilci scrviitis.
(Jiiiiiitiiin lul IM'111111111, siiir (liilno rcsliitii (loiiii-
tiiriic csl iiiili(|nissiiiiiiiii oiiiiiiiiiu <:iii'isliiiiioriiiii
losliiiii; Miiin llcclcsia clirisliiinii iiroprii; coopil iii
(li(^ p(Mitcco>tcs. 'rnnc ciiiiii implctis oiiuiitiiis iiiy-
slcriis rcdciiiptiiuiis , pronuil^iihiiu liiil piililicc c-
vi)n;>cliiiiii.lN>st linnc :uitcni ilicni cocpcriinl otnitli
icslii JiKliicoriiin; ct cis snbstiliii fcstii cliristiiiiiii;
priimis iinlcni dics lcslus occurrcns siiic diiliio liiil
«loiiiinicu>: iiiun lcsluiu Uiil.dis llouiiiii cl p;isi'li!ic,
4|ii!ic cliiiiu iinli(]uissiiii!i siinl.non iiisi posl iiliipiol
inciiscs occiirrcruiit. Altcsliiutur iuit(>iii liiiic luiti-
(piiliiti priiiio Scri[)turiic ; iiiun .Vctor. 20. dicilnr ,
utiii s:il)hiillii cinn coDvcnissonuis iid rriin<;i nduni
piitHMii: cl l. r.orinlli. lO.pcr nnani siibballii unus-
(]uisipic apud sc rcpotiiil clc.
Miitidcburj^cnsps (■cntnria 1. lib. 2. cap. (>. col.
.*>().<. cl (lidviuus in ciillicuii .\uj:[nslini .Miirlorali di-
cuul. hiicc lcca inlclli^M dc dic. Siibbatlii , (U ouni
(iicm a Piinlo scrviitnni. Qu()d otiiiui probiiul Mag-
dcbur;»cnscs cx Aclor. 1.^. nbi l'aulns dic siibballii
dispuliil iti syua<::()}?a. Al fiilluiitur mnnifcslc, nnin
iii priMiis locum illuiti Aclor. 20. Clirysostoniiis, cl
IJeda cxponnnl dc dominica dic: locum autcin 1.
Cor. l(>. cxponunl dc dic dominica omncs inlcr-
prctcs Orncci el l.alini, Chrysostoiniis , Ambrosius
'Ihoopbylaclus clc. nci^ solnm calholici, scd etiatn
Petrus niarlyr in euni locnm. Addc cliam (cui liae-
relici multuni Iribnunt) commcntarium Ernsmi tnm
Acl. 20. (]uam I. Corinth. 10. Praclcroa .Marci l().
dicilur Christus resnrrcxisse una sabbalhorum, iit
conslat rusurroxissc die dominica.
Praelerea constal Pnulum mullis bebraismis a-
bundare: esl aulein bcbraismus frc(]uonlissiiTius
dicere unum pro prinio: ut Genes. I. Faclum csl
vcspcrc e/ manc dics unus, idesl , primus, n;im
l>oslea sc(iuilur. dies sccundus elc. Denique Paii-
lus arjruil Colossenses,el Galatas scverissime,qnod
sabbaihum, ctfesla Judaeorura servarenl. Quomo-
do ergo credibile csl eum servasse sabbnlluim Jit-
daeorum? ()uod aulem Aclor. l.l.die sabbathi prne-
dicavit in synagoga. non id fecil. ul colerel sablia-
Ihum. sed quia uon poleral haberc alio loco, nec
alio lempore Judaeos congregatos.
Hnbcnmus praelerca Apocal. 1. Ego Joannes fui
in spirilu in dominica dic. Quem locum de no-
slra dominica die cxponunt fere omnes. ul Oecu-
mcnius, Anselmus. Primnsius, el alii, ct ipsi eliam
Blagdoburgcnses, Cenl. 1. lib. 2. cap. 6.
Ad haec. habeiuus leslimonia Patrum anliquissi-
morum, Clementis cnn. 65. apostolorum, Ignatii
epislola ad Moguesianos, Justini Apologia 2. Ter-
liilliiiiii ilii roroiii iiiililis, cl np<di>Kcllcl ca|). 1G.
Cloiiicntls iilcxuiidniit llli. 1. Slrdiii.OrlKt^iiin iioiii.
7. in KmkI. Atli.iiiii^ii hoiii. iii illiid: (liiiiiii nnlii
Inidltii rtiiiit il p.ilrc llico. Allibroill r|i|nl. H.t.ilicro-
iiyiMi III c<ip. 4. iid (i.iliit. Aii({iinI. Iii). roiilrn Adi-
niiiiitiini ciip. I(» (trc^Mirii lili. 11. cpi^l. 1. I.roiii»
cpi->i.N|.iid llioscoruni llilarii |iriicrilioiic iiipn.iliii.
(.Iitiiic iiiillo iiiddo dubll.irc lic('t,ip:iii rc^titin d(j|lii-
nicaC llici Hil VUlllHllNNIIIIIIIII.
(hi.iiiliim iid .'^(■(Miiiiliiiii i.ilio iiislitulKJiiis fuit ,
iil siK ccdcrct siibbiiilio. .N.iiii |iis (liviiiuiii rci|iiir(!*
biil, iil iiiiiis dics licbdotiiiiduc iliciircliir culliii ill-
viiio; iioii aitliiu coiiviMiicbiit, iil srrviircliir siibbii-
llium. ItiKpic siibbiithiiin itb ii|io>lolis in diiMii ilu-
tiiiuicuitt vcr>uiii csl.
Uliiulcm iiitclIi^Mlur, (|iiaiii rcclc iil racluin sil,
iiotiiiKliiin csl, siibbatliiiin loi^sc. fcstiim atilKpiissi-
iiuiut cl priicsliiiitissiiuiiiti iipiid Jiidiicos , cl kIcd
soliiis sabbiitlii iiKMitioiiiMn riicluiii in <lr.c»lo^'o. K-
ral iinlcni Siibb.itlnim fcstiim cx(M'lb'iilissiiiniiii,
(]iiia ciim omiii.i fcstii c.clcbrcnlur.vcl iii ituMiioriiiiti
bcncIiiMi pnulcrili, vcl ad si^Miiliciiiiibiin uli(]iii(i
fuliiruiii, siibbiilliuiii iii nlro(|iic cxccllcbal. N;iiii
(]ii.intiiin iid iiriictcriliim , colcbaliir in mcmonniii
pritni. cl c«iiiuiiiiuissimi boiicliiii. idcsl. crcnlionis
iiiundi. Nam, ul scnbit Philo iii lil». dc opilicio
muiidi. (]uciiiiidiu()duin rcgcs coli jubciit diiMii iia-
lalcm niKirum suoritiu, ila Dcus iMiIi voluil diciii
niilnlom opi^rissui, idosl, niuiidi. (^uod clinm uli-
lissimum ornl nd crrorcm pliilosopliorumcxcludcn-
diun. (pii (lictiiri crnnt , muudiiiu iiou hiibiiissc
l^riiicipium. (lunuluin iiulcin ad hilurum . sabba-
thuin lignra eral Irium bcncficioruin Del, ad quac
omnin nlia rcvocnntiir.
Priiuo, figura oral in sonsii allegorico qniclis
Chrisli in scpulchro. Ul enim Deus sabbiilho quic-
\ilabopcre creationis, ila Cliristus (piievit snbba-
Iho ab opcre rcdcmplionis, ul aposlolus observuvil
Ilebr. 4.
Secundo. figura crnl in scnsu Iropologico quie-
lis tnenlis humnnnc nb oporibus servilibns pecca-
torum. Judaci cnim, dum snbbnlho olinbnulur, si-
gnificnbnnt vcnlurum csse tempus graliac, quoli-
bcrnli homiues pcr Christum a scrvilule peccati ,
quicle ct otio spirilunli frucrenlur. nl exponit Au-
guslinus Iracl. .30. in Joanncm. ct aiibi.
Terlio.tlgura erat in scnsu nnngogico quiclis san-
ctiiriim nnimnrum. quam post mortem in siuu A-
brnhno cxspeclabnnt , ul Augustinus doccl episl.
119. et dedncilur ex aposlolo Hcbr. 4. Jam vero
propler hns ipsas caussas, quibiis sabbalhum fuil
olim inslilutum, dccuil. ul posl Christi advenluni
mularolur in doininicam. Nnm quanlum ad memo-
riam prnetoritorum, dies dominica longe cxcellit
sabbnlho: nam refert nobis memoriam nalalis Chri-
sti el resurroclionis cjusdem, ct adventus Spirilus
sancti, quo die quodammodo nala est Ecclesig.Xam
Chrislus die dominica natus est, ut palet. quia illo
anuo currobat lilern dominicnlis B. ut omnes ma-
Ihematici docent. el polest ostendi relrocedendo in
ciclo literarum dominicalium. Constat anlera lite-
ram B habori die 25. decembris , quo die Christus
nnlns esl. Quod aulem idem Christus resurrexerii
die dorainica, ex evangeliis conslal. Quod denique
«-
548
DE CULTl S.ViNCTOllUM
ailvoiiUis Spirilus sancti fueril die doniinica, palet.
quia rnit in die iienlecoslcs, idcsl, quinquagesimo
die a pascliale, (jui ncccssario estdies doniinicus.
llaqnc dies dominica repraescnlat nobis nalalem
diem Chrisli, el Ecclesiae, el Chrisli non simpli-
ccm, sed dupliccm. El praelcrea dies dominica re-
pracsenlat eliam memoriam crentionis mundi non
minns, quam sabbalhum. i\am dic dominico cocpit
uiundus lieii, immo eo die sunl faclac omnes par-
lcs rnnndi piincipales. cocluni, terra , angeli, lux
elc. Unde Jnsiinus apologia 2. et Leo episl. 81. ad
Dioscornm, dicnnt, dicm dominicam coli lam nb
memoriiim mundi creationis, quam ob resurreclio-
nem Christi.
Quantnm aulcm ad fnlurornm significalionem ,
sabbiilhum |)lane cessare debuil, quia omnia, quae
per sabbalhum significabantnr lulura, jam sunt
completa; nam Christus jam in sepulchro j;icuil, et
qiiies animorum inDeo jam a^fitur.Porro quies spi-
rilum defnnclorum in sinu Abraham jain est mu-
lalu in gloriam et beatitudinem: et nunc non am-
plius cxpeclamus simplicem illam quietem. sed
quielem gloriosain; gloria autem melius significa-
lur per diem dominicum, quam per sabbalhum.El
idcirco b. Augustinus epist. 110. dicil, sabbathum
reclc datum Hebraeis. qui post morlem ibanl ad
solam quictenr.Christianis autem dalam esse diem
dominicam. qiiia jam revelata cst gloria resurre-
clionis in Chrislo;cl quod praccessil in capite, et-
iam corpus lotum exspectat.
Quantum ad Tertium,ritus in dominica eratqua-
druplex. Primo, conveniebant in Ecclesiam ad le-
ctionem, concionem, sacrificium, communionem
elc. ul ex Justino palet apologia 2. exlrema. Se-
cundo, vacabanl ab operibus servilibus,ut palet ex
Hieronymo epist. ad Eustochium de virginilate, el
Gregorio lib. 11. epist. 3. Tertio, non jejunabant,
ul patel ex Tertnlliano de corona militis, el aliis,
qui passim boc docent. Quarlo, non flectebanlge-
nua, sed slantes precabanlur. De quo exslal ca-
non 20. nicaeni concilii. Idem etiam longe anlea
Terlullianus docuit libro de corona mililis: Die do-
minico. inquil, jejunarc, nefas duciinus, et de
genicuUs adorare. Dem Hilarius praefatione in
psalmos, Ambrosius serm. 62. Augustinus epist.
119. ca[), VS. el Alexander 111. c. Quoniam, extra
de feriis idem docent. Ex qiio intelligimus, non-
duin esse quingentos annos, ex quo rilus hic ces-
savil. Nam Ires priores adhuc in universa Ecclesia
obscrvantur.
CAPUT XII.
De pascha.
Duo dicenda sunt. Prirao, quidsil Pascha. Se-
ciMido, de crroribus circa pascha. Quanlum ad Pri-
mu.n, aliqui Patruiu existimarunl, uomen paschae
deduclum csse a verbo -A^yyziv, idesl, pali, quia
passionis Domini memoria in paschale cclebratur
juxla illud aposloli: Etenim pnscha noslrumim-
molatus esl Chrislus: ila Ambrosius in lib.de my-
sterio paschao cap. 1. Unde etiam Terlullianus
lib. contra Judaeos, dicil: Pascha Domini signifi-
care passioncm Chrisli: quorum sentenliam re-
fcrl, el merilo refcllil Auguslinus epist. 119. naiu
pascha nomen est hebracum, non graecum. He-
braice aulein dicitur noS quod Gra^eci vcrterunt
Trdya.Chaldacus t<n£)j. Hicronymus legit P/iase,
niinirum secundum alia puncla: sed eadem scm-
pcr est vox. Dicilur autem pasclm a verbo nDQ,
(juod (>st Iransilire. Undo primario non signilicat
immolalionem agni, ul anclor commentar. in cap.
14. Marci apud Ilieronymnm doccl: nec transitum
popuii per mare rubrum ad lerram promissionis,
ut docet Nazianzenus oratione l.de pascha, el Au-
guslinus tract. 53. in Joannem. Nec eliam signi-
ilcal Iransitum angeli pcr Aciiyptuin. ut videntur
sonarc illa verba; Ent eaim Pliase, idest,transilus
Domini. Exod. 12. sed significal transcensionem
angeli. et quasi saltum super domos Judaeorum,
ut palcl ex ratione. quae reddilur Exod. 12. nam
ubi dixerat Jloyses: Est enim Phase, subjnugit ra-
lioncm: Transibo enim per terram Aegypti nocte,
ilta.et percutiani primogenita Aegyptiorum. Erit
autem sanguis vobis in signum in aedibus ve-
stris, etvidobo sanguincm, et transibo vos, nec
erit invobis plaga. Ubi primum, transibo , est
fn"72V1 secundum esl >rin3£)"1 el ab boc dicitur
pascha. Similis ralio ter in eodem capite reddilur:
ubi scmper nOD significai transilire , seu trans-
cendcre, non simplicilcr Iransire. Unde Josephus
lib. 2. antiquitat. cap, 13. dicit, pascha significa-
rc transcensionem. Idem docet Hieronymus in
cap. 20, 3Iatlh. et Theodoretus quaest. 24. in
E.vod.
Veruntamen hoc ipsum nomen traducilnr etiam
ad alia tria significanda. Itaque Primo, significat,
ut diximus transililionem angeli. Secundo, ipsnm
agnum paschalem, qui per immolationem Iransi-
bat dc vita ad morleiu. Unde diciiur Luc. 22. A'e-
cesse erat occidi pascha. Tertio, transitum popu-
Ji, qui illa ipsa nocte liberatus a lyrannide Phara-
onis Iransivil per raare rubriim, ut iret in terram
promissionis, et hanc significationem agnoscunt
Gregorius nazianzenus orat. 2. de pascha, et Au-
gusl. tract. 55. in Joannem. Qnarto, ipsum festum
diem: nam Luc. 22. dicilur: Appropinquabat di-
es festus azimorum, qui dicitur pascha.
Porro haec ipsa quaiuor sunl eliam apud Chri-
slianos suo modo, idesl, ut exemplaria illorum ty-
porum. Nam angelus transiliens, et occidens pri-
mogenila Aegypti, et salvans filios Isriiel, esl Chri-
stus magni consilii angelus, qui, dum transiret de
morte aiJ vitam, salvavil omnes, qni cjus sanguine
aspergendi erant, relictis caeleris in manu vasta-
toris. Agnus paschalis idem Chrislus est.pro nobis
immolalus. Chrislum enim repraesentarunt agnus
el angelus, quia Chrislus occidi et occidere de-
buil: agnus aulem occidi poterat, sed non occide-
re. Angelus occidere, sed non occidi. Transitus
])CT mare rubrum, signiflcal transitum populorum
per aquas baplismi; et ideo in paschale ordinarie
olim baplizabantur catechumeni. Denique, feslus
dies illorum nostrum feslura diem figurabal.
Quantum ad Secundum; Primus, error fuitAe-
rii, qui pasclia simpliciler negabal esse celebran-
i.iiii;ii iKinii s
iliiii), i|ii>iil iiix' jiKliiHinititi saprrol. HffiMi Itittn'.
ij-ninMii, )'l rfriliil i'i|ii|iliiiiiiiiM tiiicrc-^i 7.'». iinii n-
llllll il"illlllS |lilSI'llII •lll<l>H'<irillll, MmI (|lt«lll lllll ^l'
};tlillciilillllir.
SimmiikIiis fiiil IM.isli •Mijii.Hdiittt, .|iil,l«sli' Tcrliil-
liniio lil). <l«i rrin^hCfiiil. «lofiitl: Piisclm inTcsH.irin
ilrhi^ri) (MMrliniti ipsn ilio. (|iii) n Jttiliici» iM'k'l>ni-
Itiiliir. idcsl, H. Iittiii, sivn csscl ilitiiiiiiic.ii, hivti
iioii. Ii) (|iii) (MTorc fitiMiiiil (Miilcnt l(Mii|i()ro iitiilli
cpiscnpi Asiiic iiiiiinris; ul piilcl c\ lili. .*». liiNlnr.
Kii.scl)ii c. 21. cl 2.'». iil»i icrctUtr cpi>>i«ilii PolnM-it-
lis cpisiMipi cplicsiiii ml ViclnriMtt piipiitii. «piii illn
iiitclnr iisscril, oititics snns pr;ici!cssnt«!s iisipic inl
s. .IniiiiiiiMii cviiiiiielisliiiii sciiipcr « clchriiSM- pasc|i;i
ilic ilcciiiiii iptiMiii.INrc ilclutMunl pnsUMi itliilli iilii.
«piilms liic cri'nr phiccrcl, ipms Kpipliiiiiuts liii« r.
."»0. (Ju.irloilccmiiinns vnciiri «iniiiiiiil , «piiti iMiiim
loif^M) posl UMiiporc .\itiii:mi.scii\ iiiiiiiiii iii ('iimlciii
<M'roreiiiim'iiliMunl,«M)iUMii lOpipliiiiiinUislo Itiicr.l»,
Hic «Mror illoipso lcmporc r«M"uliiUts osl ii cniici-
liis loro nmiiium «MMlcsiiirum , cl n rnmiiiin potili-
lii«\ qiti nmii«5S c«)mmuni cotiscnsii sliilucrtinl :
Piiscliii cclchriimlum cssc «lomiiiicii, pt«i\imii lit-
n:ic «p.iiirliic «lcciiuiic posl ac(|uitioclium \cnium ,
iil Kuscliius ulciii rclcrl. Dcimlc concilium iiiciic-
lutm. cuin iiillmc error illo iiliculti (liinirol, iilcni
sliiUiil. ul lcslimUir Kpipliiiiiius liiicrcs. ."iO, cl 70.
«pii «licit.iii coticilin coilcui iib laiscbiociicsaricnsi
«Mmiposilum aurcum numerum, «lui oslomlil novi-
liiiiia. I>c quii rc cxsUil cpislolii ipsiiis concilii ni-
caciii iipuil rUcoilorclum lih. l. ciip. *.). histor. cl
ojus«loiu rci mcminil Atluinasius in opistola «lc sy-
nodo arimiucusi cl solcucictisi: Ambrosius c|iislol.
8;{. clThcophyUis lib. 1. Paschali; ilcni impcriilo-
ris Couslaiilini cpislohi a«l omncs ccclcsias, apud
Eusebium lib. '^. dc vila Oousliuilini: ubi Coiistaii-
timis tribus laliouibus probal, dcbcrc p;ischaccle-
brari dic (lominico. rriiuo , ue concurramus cuin
Judacis Chrisli iulcrfccloribus.
Secundo. «luia par csl.ul iu tola Ecclcsia sil una
ratio pascha cclebraudi, cl par esl cliam,ut paucio-
res pluribus codanl. Porro ab anli(]uis lcmporibus
romaua urbs, llalia, Africa, Gallia. Ilispania, Bri-
lannia, ActiypUis, Lybia, Graecia, Ponlus. Cilicia ,
el magna pars Asiac cclcbranl pascha diedomiiiico,
soli aulem pauci orienlalcs contra lolum mcridiem.
occidcnlcm aquilonem.cl magnam orienlis parlem
cum Judacis pascha cclcbranl.
Terlio, quia absurdum esl, uno anno bis pascha
facerc, cl alio anno numquam, Alqui hoc accide-
bal iilis.qui pascha quarladccima dtc agebant:nam
illi non observabanl aequinocUum.scd solum meu-
scs 12. lunares, el celcbrabanl pascha 14. luna
racnsis primi, nou curantes, si illa decimaquarla
csse anle ae(|uinoclium, \el post. Ilaque inlcrdum
accidcbat.ul uno anno cclcbrarenl pascha pcsl ae-
quinoclium. el anno scqueuti anle acquinoctium ,
cl proiiide bis in uno amio.
Adde eliam, quod isti falso fundamento iiilcbau-
lur. Nani pulabaiil. se sequi lcgera Judaeoram. el
revcra sequebanlur deliridm Judaeorum sui tempo-
ris.Nara lex judaica E.vod.l2.praecipit pascha fieri
poslaequinocUiim vernumjubct enim fieri luna do-
cimaquarla priiui mensis; porro mensis priraus is
Beli\r\ii.m Vol. 11.
crill,CU|ll^ iki'illl.li|lliiriii diiill iriri.li t.;.t in i.Miii!'.,..
cliuiii vnrmim, iuil IUidI prnxltin
liiniii Jiiscpliii^ hli. : ' I
llcri Mtli- 111 iiiiiii' '
.lllllil*Mlllll(!lll po^l
10.) Iinii (illipliil^ oli ilUlll.Ol (M|4
liitlictt lilltipliilll dili •• i M > ' r i
l«<s llli Clinsltiitii, «pii iMim .1
liaiil.
Ail iiiicliii iI.iUmii iiutcni s. ju.i
«piiitti prn sc iiiUcrc.h.iiil illi Uii i
spiitidci Itcdii Ith. ,1. Iilsl. ciip. 2.1. Jiuuincm <-' h
hr.isM» piischii IV.dii^, itl so iiccoiiiod.ir<;l iii illis
iiiiliis Jud.icis ad II liMii iMitivcr.^is, strul (ii.iiii prn-
ptor iMiiidciii coiissiiin !*.iiiliis cirrinncidit Timo
lltcum: liimiMi iipnstnlum l*(;triiin tlDiiian Instilni -
so, iit piisi hii dio domiiiico llcrcl:(.'l lioc in!i}{is «.s-
so siMptcniUtm.
Tcrlius crrnr fiiit quorundam C;i|)ptidocum, (pil,
lcslc Epiphaiiio liiicr, .'»0. scmpcr p.isdiii cclcbr.i-
baitl dic 2'>. luiirlii, siiMil ii.-iI;iIimii Domiiii scmpcr
cclcbraraii-* dic 2.'».<lcccmbris: quia [inhibanl, Cliri-
sUiin co die piissitm fiiisso , el ipso dic p,is>ioiiis
p;iscli;i iigiMidum cr«'dchanl. Similis fiiil ('rror G;il-
loruin iit priiici|)io Ectdcsiac, «pti, tcslo Thcophylo
Cucs;uionsi apiid Ued;im lib, «le ratione lcmporuni
cnp. i.">. siMupcr [)asch;t cclebriibanl 2."j. marlii ,
«piod piihircnt, co dic Chrislnm rcsurrexisse.Idcm
error summopcrc pliicct I.ulhcro in lib. de conci-
liis parl. 2. l'bi vcllctcodcm dic rch-hr;iri i^hi f«!-
stii, cl noii observari cursutn lunae. ne vidctcmur
judiii/iirc.
Ciici(M-um istc crror rorelliliir l*rimo,e.v consensii
tolius Ecclcsiac, quae scinpcr dic dominico pasclta
cclchrandum st.iluit. Sccundo , quia sccundum
quosdam nililur falso fundamento, Chrislus cnim
ul illi doccnl, non poliiil resurgerc 2'i. tnarlii, iiec
elia.il piili; nam passus csl dic vcneris, el resurre-
xil dic dominico. secundum cvangelia omnia.Con-
stal ctiam. Christum passum cl resurrcxi?so anno
aclatis suae 'H^. vel .li-. secundum alios.Porro anno
Chrisli 3.*^. die 2i5. marlii, non fuil feria G.nec dies
dominica. sed fcria 4. Anno autem Chrisli 34. die
25. inarlii, fuil fcria o. ul ex lilcra dominicali pa-
tel. Nara anno Chrisli 33. currebat litera D;a(ino
34. lilcra C; die ;iulem 2.>. inarlii, scmper esl G.
Uliimo, refcUilur a b. Augusl. in epist. 119. ubi
oslcndil, hoc inlcrcsse intcrdiem nalalis et dicm
rcsurreclionis; quod ille celebratur solum ob me-
moriam, cl ideo serapcr ipsa die 2o. decembris :
al iste celebralur ob miimoriara cl sacraraenlura,et
ideo varialur. Vide ibidem pulcherrimara explica-
tioncin mysteriorum paschae.
Quarlus error fuil Britonura et Scolorum apud
Bedam lib. 3. hisl. cap. 23, el lib. 5. cap. 22. qui
conlra communem lolius Ecclesiae usum pascha
cclebrabanl prima dominica post lunam IS.raarlii.
ila ut aliquando ipsa 14. luna pascha celebrarent
in qao neque Judaeis, ncque Christianis conscn-
liebant. Nam Judaeis primus dios solemnis enit ki-
na lo.sed incipiebanl fcslum a vospera praeceden-
te, idest, luna 14. ad vesperam; istis aulera primus
dies soleranis erat dccimusquiirlus , el cum eiiain
ipsi inciperent a primis vesperis, necessario inci-
70
sso
l)E f.ULTU SANCTORUM
piebanl luna 13. sed hic crror non egol alia refula-
lione; nani fiindabalur in sola imperitia ; exislima-
lianl enim, ila sanclum Joannem celebrare soli-
lum.
Quinlus crror est Novalianorum, qui, lesle So-
crale lib. 5. bist. c. 20. dccretum edidcrunt, quod
appellarunt do^.a^opov, quiii in eo slatuerunl, libc-
rum unicuique cssc deberc, agere pasctia quando
volil, Qucin errorcm salis constal placuisse ctiam
magdelmrgensibus ex Cent. i. lib. 2. cap. 6. col.
o04. el Ccnt. 2. cap. (1. col. 119. ubi dicunt, nec
aposlolos, nec apostolicos viros ullam legcm de-
disse Ecclcsiac de cclebralione pascliae, sed rcli-
quisse Cbrislianis inlegram liberlalem. Ei ibidem
arguunl romanos ponlificcs, quod proplerrem in-
dilTerentcin excommunicaverinl Asianos.
Isle autem error refellilur. Primo, ex canon.8.
apostolorum, ubi jubcnlur deponi episcopi , vel
prcsbyteri, qui pascha egerinl anle acquinoclium
cum Judacis.
Secundo, probalur: Quia eos,qui pcrlinaccs fue-
runt in opinione Asianorum, idest, quod necessa-
rio pascha deberet agi luna 14. cum Judaeis, vele-
res Palres semper liabuerunl pro haerclicis , ut
patct ex Terlulliano de praescript.Epiphan.haeres.
50, August. Iiaeres. 29. el Theodorelo lib. 3. de
liaerelicis fabulis, el Damascen. lib. de haeres. Et
iie putcmus eos esse haerclicos alia dc caussa,im-
posuerunl illis nomcn Tessarescedecatitas, idest,
Quarladccimanos. Non ergo sine caussa romani
I)ont. excommunicarunt Asianos.
Tertio, si esse deberet res libcra, el indiCferens
celebratio paschac, numquam fuissent sancti Pa-
Ires mullum solliciti de hac re: at sempermaxime
sollicili fuerunl;nam inipso initiohujus conlrover-
siae, ubique cclebrala sunt provincialia concilia
pro hac re, ut apparet ex lib. 5. hist. Elusebii cap.
23. et 25. quod cst signum raagnae sollicitudinis.
Adde, quod in illis conciliis non rem adiaphoram
esse voluerunt: nam lib. o. cap. 23. sic ait Euse-
bius: Vnum, inquit, omnes ecdesiasticum dogma
confirmnnt,ne liceat aliquando nisi in die domi-
nica,qua Dominus resurrexit,dominicumpascha
celebrare mysterium. Et c. 25. dicit, hunc fuisse
finpm decreli concilii cacsariensis dc paschale illo
ipso tcmpore habili: Epistola^ aulem nostrae e-
xemplaria per omnes ecclesias transmittantur ,
al ne rei efjiciamur animarum, quae diversis er-
roribus immercjunlur.
Quarlo: concilium nicaenum post quaeslionem
de fide conlra Arium niliil putavit magis digiium
diligenli discussione et delerminatione , quam de
die paschae, ul patct ex epislola Conslanlini apud
Etisebium lib. 3. dc vila Conslanlini. Immo Atha-
nasius in epislohi dc synodis.Arimini et Seleuciae,
non procul ab initio,dicit,conciIium nicaenum pro-
pter duas caussas convenisse; primo, proptcr con-
troversiam de pascha; secundo, propler haeresim
Arii, Epiphanius etiam haeres. 70. dicit, Constan-
tinum duo raaxima bona contulisse in Ecclesiam ;
unum,quod congregari curavil synodumnicaenam;
alterum, quod in ipsa synodo curaverit deterraina-
ri quacslionem de paschate. Quod autem nicaenum
concilium plane praeceperit celebrari pascha die
dominico, et non solum cohortalionem adhibuerit,
ut Socrates dicere videlur, palet ex Alhan, qui in
epist. de concil, Arimini et Scleuciae, sic ail: In
negotio de xxischate non abhorruerunt ab ista
appendice, visum est, ut omnes obtemperarent.
Quinlo. probalur cx concilio antiocheno cap. 1.
ubi excommunicanlur, qui legera nicaenam de
paschalis die non scrvant.
Scxto, idcm probatur cx magna solliciludine,
quam scinper habucrunt Palrcs, ne crrarelur in
celcbrando paschate. Nam tempore b. Ambrosii,
cum nata esset dilTicultas quaedam, elignorarelur,
quae cssel dies paschae secundum nicaenuin con-
cilium, undique miltebanlur literae episcoporum
ultro citroque. Unde etiam exslal prolixa epist. 83.
Ambrosii de hac re.
Deinde terapore Innocentii I. cura orta esset si-
railis dilTicuUas, scripsit Innocentius epislolara,
quae esl 11. ad Aurelium episcopum Carthaginis,
ut ipse quoque coacla synodo, quacstionera illani
discuterct, ed ad sc scriberet concilii sententiam,
ul ipse postea dicm paschatis de raore omnibus
praescriberet,
Rursum lemporc Leonis, cum similis orla esscl
difficultas, scripsit inde s. Leo ad impernlorem
Marlianum, ad Eudoxiam Auguslam, ad episcopos
Galliae et Hispaniae, et alios. Yide epist, 63. 6i.
65, el95.
Praetcrca idem arguil generalis providcnlia Ec-
clcsiae; nam, ut sciibit Leo epist, 6i-. ad fllartia-
num, dclegata fucral cpiscopo alexandrino cura
sempcr suppufandi cl indagandi diein paschalis,
qucm ilie a|)Oslolicac sedi romanae indicabal; ac
deinde aposlolica scdcs universae Ecclesiae dieni
illum praesoribebat; cujus moris meminit ctiam
concilium arclalcnse 1. cap, 1. et Innocenlius I.
episl. 11. ad Aurelium.
Ultimo, probalur ex divino testimonio, quod re-
fcrt Paschasinus cpiscopus Lilibelanus in cpisiola
ad Leonem, et est 63, inler epislolas sancti Lco-
nis. Scribit aulem ille, tempore Zozimi papae or-
lam quaestionem de paschale, quod occidentalcs
dicerent, pascha celebrandum illo anno 25. die
marlii, oricntalcs autem 22, aprilis. Porro in (]ua-
dam ccclcsia Siciliae solebat singulis annis sacer
fons divino miraculo per sc repleii ipsa noele pa-
schalis, qua catccbumeni baplizandi erant, IIIo a-
utem anno, cum ex praescripto- Zozimi pascha a-
geretur 25. raarlii, fons inanis el aridus mansil:
deindc 22. aprilis fons replctus cst; alque ex eo
intellcctum est, errasse occidenlales in celebratio-
ne paschae. Quale miraculura conligisse etiam an-
no Domini 573, scribil Sigebertus in chronico. Si-
quidem annolavit eo anno fontera baptismalem in
Ilispania divinitus implelum fuisse in sabbalho ve-
ri paschalis, quod tunc Galli recle servabant, Hi-
spani autem malc. At certe si res csset omnino in-
differens, numquara Deus tali miraculo commis-
suin crrorem demonstrassel.
Magdcburgenses Cent. 5, cap. 6, col. 692. di-
cunt, fabulas et nugas esse, quae iste Paschasinus
scribit, At constat, hunc Paschasinum fuisse epi-
scopum celcberrimura, quippe qui nomine s, Leo-
nis pracsedil concilio chalcedonensi 630. episco-
LICl.ll ILIUil^
S.1
poriiin. ('.oiisliil eliiiiii oiiiii scnbcru roiii mjji iiulis-
Miiiiiiiii, iiiiiiiriiiii i|iiiiit aiMiitloriil siio liMii|i()ri\ ul
lli Inco .silii siriiiii. (lui|v,|:il (|i<iii(|ii(; iimii iII.iiii mMI-
pliiiii ^nivi.ssiiiii) piiiiiiliri s. I.imhii, ciii ccili; i.ilMi
Ijiin ol iiti^MS pro (liviiio iiiiniriijo iiiiiinpi.iiii >i:ii-
i|:l.isscl iii;i;^Miiis illt^ rpiscopiis.
IJIIiiiiiis nrnr osl, iii ipiciii ii iiiullis Jiiin iiiiins
sacpi) iii<'i(liiiiiis, sciuiih^s (pilljclll ot tKJVCllClltCS,
.scd liiiiKMi iiivili. SciiMiiliiiii iMiiiii csl, coiiimIiiiiii
iiiciiiMiiiiii trcs rc^oliis cotisliliiissu tid iiiviMiicii-
ilOIII p.lSCllIK! (lilMII. Lllll roil, lll S(M||p(M' pilM-llil il>
^MM'oliir posl (liiMii 21. iii.irlii, ipiiii illo (lio rnil iio-
ipiiMOClioOt V(M'IS, (>| piiscllil plisl ilCipiillilclilllO .1^'i
(ichcl. .\llcr;i riiil, iil piisl 20. iiiirtii c\spccl,irclor
liiii.i \'i. cl posl oiiiii (lliMii qiiiioriM'oliir piisclia. I'<i-
sclia ctiiiii ii^'i (lcl)cl iii PmIi.i Iic|)iIiiiimiI;i loiiai!,
i<l(>sl, II luiia n, c\cliisiv(MiS(pic iid 22. c.\clitsiv(,«,
Kl tid iiiV(Mii(Mi(liiiii liioaiii, coiiipiisocriiiit ciidooi
iitirci niitncri. l'l)icoiiiipi(3 (Miiin iii ciiloiiditrio iiivii-
iiiliir aiiriMis notncros illiiis aiiiii, iiii (>st noviloni-
iiin. r(M'liii ro^Mila ritil.ttl po^t loitain II. occiirrco-
iciii, posl vigesiiiuiiii di(Mii iiiiirlii, cxspcclarctor
dics (lomiiii(Mis, cl illc csscl pascliii.
Isl;ic rc^iiliic illo l(Miipore cl sccpieiilihiis aiiiiis
iiinllis o|Uiiiiac rncrnnl,Vcro ciiiiii liiiic cnil iicipii-
itoclioin 21. toarlii, et V(M'e aiiriMis ntiiiieriis liinc
itidicahal di(Mii noviliinii. .VI ii iiuillisjain saccnlis
c.xpericnlia doccl, a^Mptittocliiiin noii cssc (Ixnin,
vijjesiinapriiiia niiirtii, scd sctiipcr anliciparc: iiiinc
(Miiin est dcciiiio inarlii. Siinililer expcriiMilia do-
ecl, aiireiitii niiincriiiii anliipuiin iioii iiuiieiirc aiii-
plins noviliinia iidcliler. Nuiie cniiii novihiniiiin
iiiviMiilor (piiiloor diohiis ;inlc i|)snin aitrctiin iiii-
meroiii. K\ (loo iiilclligiiiuis. liMiiporc coiicilii ni-
ciieiii non foissc c.xaclc dcprehcnsuin inolum ncc
Solis. nec lonac: Ecclcsia antcm sempcr anliipias
illas rcjjulas scrvat, ct iodc sacpissc cogilur crra-
re, cliamsi nolil. Sicul aiiiio sopcriorc,idesl,lj79.
ccicbrattim csl pascha 11). dic aprilis. cumdcbuis-
scl cciebrari 15. inartii.