Bellarmine · De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis · On the Ecclesiastical Writers
Chapter 4: The First Century: Linus, Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Dionysius, Martial, Abdias, the Priests of Achaia
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. XII, De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, of the New Testament, first century. 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).
St. Linus. 70
Like the narrative of Prochorus is the narrative extant under the name of St. Linus in the Library of the Holy Fathers. For that author tells many things of the acts of St. Peter which are either false or doubtful; nor has this little work of St. Linus any testimony from the ancients. Among other things the author writes that Agrippa was prefect of the City at the time of St. Peter's passion, and that St. Peter was put to death by this Agrippa without the consent of the emperor Nero, by whom it was afterwards even disapproved. But it is neither certain that Agrippa was then prefect of the City, and that the killing of St. Peter displeased Nero is against all the old Fathers. In the same narrative the author writes that the wife of Albinus, according to the teaching of St. Peter, refused her husband's bed for love of chastity, against her husband's will and protest. But this cannot be the teaching of St. Peter, since it is against the teaching of his fellow apostle Paul, 1 Corinthians 7. I grant indeed that Acts of St. Peter were written by St. Linus, or rather Acts of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, as some say, and as is read of the Acts of St. Peter in the Roman Breviary; but we think that they are not extant, and that what is now extant was put in their place.
St. Clement of Rome. 92
Clement of Rome, who was crowned with martyrdom in the third year of Trajan, after sitting nine years in the Apostolic see, is said to have written many things, namely:
Two letters to the Corinthians
Two to James the brother of the Lord
Three to various persons
Ten books of Recognitions
Eight books of the Apostolic Constitutions
The Canons of the Apostles
The Itinerary of St. Peter
The Disputation of St. Peter with Apion; and a liturgy.
The first letter to the Corinthians is not extant; yet the old Fathers mention it everywhere, as a most weighty letter and very like the letter of St. Paul to the Hebrews. See St. Irenaeus book 3, chapter 3; Clement of Alexandria, Stromata book 7; Eusebius, History book 2 [3?], chapter 12 [16?]; and St. Jerome in the book On Ecclesiastical Writers. The second letter to the Corinthians is neither extant nor approved by the Churches, as St. Jerome testifies in the place noted. The five letters that are now extant are not without scruple. For it is certain that St. James, to whom two letters are written, died long before St. Peter; and yet in them the death of St. Peter is told to James. But perhaps the letters were written to Simeon the brother of James, not to James himself. In the fifth letter the community of all things, and even of wives, is praised; and this whole passage is taken from book 10 of the Recognitions, where these things are said by Faustinianus the heathen and refuted by St. Clement. But perhaps these things crept in; and they are not found in the Vatican codex. That Clement wrote other letters too besides that famous one to the Corinthians St. Jerome testifies, book 1 against Jovinian, where he says that Clement in his letters weaves almost his whole discourse on the purity of Virginity; which praises of Virginity we do not find in the letters that are extant.
Of the Recognitions of the same Clement I have nothing certain. Though they contain not a few useful lessons, and are sometimes cited by learned men, yet I think it probable either that they are not Clement's, or that they are the same work as that which some call the Itinerary, or Circuits, of Peter; of which work, on the witness of Epiphanius, heresy 30, Clement himself testifies that the Circuits of Peter written by him were corrupted by heretics. For truly in the Recognitions the journeys of St. Peter and St. Clement are described, and disputations drawn from the middle of Plato's philosophy are mixed in, which it is in no way credible are St. Peter's. And if the Recognitions and the Itinerary are the same work, it will be clear enough that it is apocryphal. For the Itinerary is counted among the apocrypha by St. Athanasius in the Synopsis, by St. Gelasius in the Roman Council, whence comes the chapter Sancta Romana, distinction 15 [“13” printed], and by Leo IX in the letters against Nicetas. It is true that the books of the Recognitions are counted ten and those of the Itinerary eight; but it was easy for corrupters to add, or take away, or change.
Of the books of the Apostolic Constitutions, which are attributed to Clement as author, almost the same judgement must be made as of the books of the Recognitions. For there are many useful things in them, and they are made much of by the old Greeks; but in the Latin Church they have almost no name; and the later Greeks themselves in the Council in Trullo, canon 2, disapprove these constitutions as corrupted by heretics. I hear that the Ethiopians use these constitutions as truly Apostolic, and for that cause are in errors about the keeping of the sabbath and of the Lord's day, and about the minister of the sacrament of Baptism, and certain other dogmas. For in book 7, chapter 24, they command the day of the sabbath and of the Lord's day to be kept; and in book 5 [3?], chapter 10, it is forbidden absolutely that lay people baptize; and in book 6, chapter 15, they command those baptized by heretics to be rebaptized, for the reason that heretics are not priests. And lest it should be objected that Philip the Deacon baptized, as is said in Acts 8, in the same constitutions, book 6, chapter 7, it is said that the Philip who baptized Simon Magus was an Apostle; which is manifestly false. There are in the same constitutions not a few other things that seem far from the truth: as that in book 3, chapter 2, they call fourth marriages manifest fornication; in book 5, chapter 6, they distinguish Mary Magdalene from Mary the sister of Lazarus; in book 8, chapter 14, they will not have James the brother of the Lord be an Apostle of the twelve; and in the same book, chapters 26, 27 and 28, they will have hands laid on the Subdeacon, the Reader, and even the Deaconess when they are ordained; and in the same book, chapter 32, they say that Exorcists are not ordained; and in chapter 38 they say that a slave-woman who serves her master alone is received, but if she has been incontinent with others, is rejected.
Of the Canons of the Apostles written by Clement there is greater difficulty. For on the one side Tertullian in the book against Praxeas writes that the canons of the Apostles were handed down to us. St. Athanasius too in the Synopsis counts them among the hagiographa. The Synod in Trullo, chapter 2, receives eighty-five canons of the Apostles. Lastly St. John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith book 4, chapter 18 [17], seems to put them among the sacred Scriptures. But on the other side Pope Gelasius in the Roman Council, whence comes the chapter Sancta Romana, distinction 15, says expressly, the book of the canons of the Apostles, apocryphal; and the same is confirmed in distinction 16, canons 1 and 2. But these can be reconciled if we say that only the first fifty canons are lawful, and the rest are not lawful, though they are received by the Greeks. For so Urban II, in Gratian, distinction 32, canon Praeter, section Sciendum, says that the canons of the Apostles are received wholly by the Greeks, in part by the Latins; and Cardinal Humbert says the same more clearly, whose testimony Gratian gives under the name of Leo IX, distinction 16, canon Clementis: “The Fathers,” he says, “count the canons of the Apostles among the apocrypha, except fifty chapters, which the teachers of the Orthodox faith decreed should be added.” Hincmar too, as Francisco Torres testifies in book 1 for the decretal letters, chapter 15, writes that only fifty canons of the Apostles have been handed down to us by the Church; and before all these Dionysius Exiguus put only fifty canons of the Apostles in his collection. Lastly, in the old codices of the Councils, no canons of the Apostles are found except fifty. And truly the canons that savour of error and seem added by heretics are the later ones, as canon 65 on not fasting on the sabbath, and 67 [“6, 7” printed; 68?] on those baptized or ordained by heretics, and 84 [“8, 4” printed; 85?] on the number of the sacred books, in which canon there are many manifest errors. What Gratian says at the beginning of the sixteenth distinction, that the canons of the Apostles by the authority of Pope Zephyrinus are sixty, is perhaps an error in the number by the fault of copyists.
Of the Disputation of St. Peter with Apion, and of the Itinerary of the same St. Peter, which is not extant, unless perhaps (as we said above) the Itinerary and the Recognitions are the same, there is no need to labour much; for from the beginning they are read to have been rejected, both in St. Jerome in the book On Ecclesiastical Writers and in St. Athanasius in the Synopsis. Of the liturgy of St. Clement almost the same must be said as of the liturgy of St. James: that it is truly Clement's, but enlarged by later men. And it is credible that Clement composed the liturgy not from his own judgement but from the rite he had seen kept by St. Peter; just as St. Peter himself did nothing else in offering the Eucharistic sacrifice than what the Lord himself had commanded to be done. The liturgy of St. Clement is mentioned by Proclus, Patriarch of Constantinople, book 7 [as printed] on the tradition of the divine Mass; by Nicholas, Bishop of Methone, in the book on the truth of the body of Christ; and by Cardinal Bessarion in the book on the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
St. Ignatius. 71
St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch after St. Peter the Apostle and St. Evodius, began to sit in the year of the Lord 71, sat 40 years, and suffered at Rome in the eleventh year of Trajan, on the witness of St. Jerome in the book On Ecclesiastical Writers. He wrote most useful Letters, as St. Polycarp his contemporary testifies, who says in the letter to the Philippians that he had gathered as many letters of Ignatius as he could find. Eusebius, History book 3, chapter 30 [36], lists seven letters of St. Ignatius, as does St. Jerome in the place cited: one to the Ephesians, a second to the Magnesians, a third to the Trallians, a fourth to the Romans, a fifth to the Philadelphians, a sixth to the Smyrnaeans, a seventh to Polycarp. Besides these, five others are found: one to Mary of Cassobola, a second to the Antiochenes, a third to the Tarsians, a fourth to the Philippians, a fifth to Hero. And these five letters, though they did not reach the hands of Eusebius and Jerome, yet because of the likeness of style and their truly Apostolic spirit are received altogether by learned men. Three others are carried about, one to the Blessed Virgin Mother of God and two to St. John the Evangelist, to which is added a letter of the Blessed Virgin to Ignatius. Of these the first (so far as I know) to make mention is St. Bernard, sermon 7 on the Psalm Qui habitat; but they are neither found in the Greek codices, nor do they wholly breathe the weight of St. Ignatius's eloquence. One thing seems to need warning in this place: that great faith is not to be put in the Greek codices now extant when they differ from the Latin; for the Latin codices are often found more correct than the Greek. That this is true will be understood by whoever compares the testimonies which St. Athanasius in the letter to Epictetus and Theodoret in the dialogues cite from Ignatius with the words of the same Ignatius now found in the Latin and Greek codices.
St. Polycarp. 71
St. Polycarp, Bishop and martyr, wrote one excellent letter to the Philippians, which is carried about with the letters of St. Ignatius. St. Jerome mentions his letter in the book On Ecclesiastical Writers, and Eusebius, History book 3, chapter 30, otherwise 36. He lived in the time of St. Ignatius, but survived to the empire of M. Antoninus, as the same St. Jerome testifies in the same place.
St. Dionysius the Areopagite. 71
St. Dionysius the Areopagite was a disciple of St. Paul the Apostle, on the witness of St. Luke, Acts 17. And though some say he suffered martyrdom under Domitian, others think otherwise, because St. Dionysius himself in the book On the Divine Names, chapter 4, cites by name the words of St. Ignatius from the letter to the Romans; which letter it is certain was written in the seventh year of Trajan, in which year St. Ignatius was crowned with martyrdom. “And the divine Ignatius writes,” says the Areopagite, “My love is crucified”; and these words are read in the letter to the Romans. How then can Dionysius have died in the time of Domitian, who came before Trajan, if he cites a letter written in the seventh year of Trajan? We think, then, that St. Dionysius was indeed a contemporary of Saints Ignatius and Polycarp, but survived to the empire of Hadrian. [Here the year of Ignatius's death is given as Trajan's seventh; in the entry just above, as his eleventh; both as printed.]
The works of St. Dionysius now extant are these:
On the Celestial Hierarchy, 1 book
On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, 1
On the Divine Names, 1
On Mystical Theology, 1
Letters: to Gaius, 4; to Dorotheus, 1; to Sosipater, 1; to Polycarp, 1; to Demophilus, 1; to Titus, 1; to Apollophanes, 1; to St. John the Apostle, 1.
Of the other works learned and Catholic men have no doubt. Only the Lutheran heretics, and certain of their fellows, Erasmus, Valla and a few others, deny that the works listed above are St. Dionysius the Areopagite's. But (to leave other things aside now) it should be enough to win authority for these works that they are approved by St. Gregory the Pope, homily 34 on the Gospels; by St. Martin, Pope and martyr, in the Roman Council; by St. Agatho the Pontiff in the letter to the emperor Constantine IV; and by Nicholas I in the letter to the emperor Michael. Likewise by the fourth general Council, act 4 [as printed], and by the seventh Council, act 2. Lastly by very many holy Doctors, who wrote commentaries on these works as genuine works of St. Dionysius the Areopagite, like St. Maximus the Monk, St. Thomas and others. And that before St. Gregory of Rome no one mentioned these works under the name of St. Dionysius the Areopagite, the cause seems to be that they lay hidden somewhere, as many other things often lie hidden a long time, and were found about the times of St. Gregory. For what some say, that these works are cited by name by Origen in a certain homily on the first chapter of John, and by Athanasius in the questions to Antiochus, question 8, proves nothing: for in that homily the Arians are named, who arose long after Origen; and in the questions to Antiochus authors later than Athanasius himself are named; from which it follows that those testimonies cannot be Origen's or Athanasius's, but those of more recent authors. Liberatus the Abbot in the Breviary, chapter 10, and Anastasius the Librarian in the letter to the emperor Charles the Bald write indeed that Dionysius the Areopagite is cited by John Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria; but what they cite is not found in the places cited.
St. Martial, Bishop of Limoges
St. Martial, the first Bishop of Limoges, is said to have written two letters, one to the people of Bordeaux, the other to the people of Toulouse, which are extant in the Library of the Holy Fathers. But there are many things that seem to show these letters to be forged. First, the author of these letters says that he lived with Christ before he was crucified; but Martial, the first Bishop of the people of Limoges, was sent to that city in the consulship of Decius Augustus and Gratus, in the year of the Lord 251, as Gregory of Tours testifies, History book 1, chapter 10 [30]; so it must be either that Martial lived nearly 300 years, or that the title of the letters is false which bears as author Martial Bishop of Limoges, or that the Letters are made up. Next, in the second letter, chapter 8, the author writes that king Stephen was baptized by him, and a certain other tyrant with his Satraps. But in the time of the Apostles, and even in the time of the emperor Decius, Gaul had no kings, but was subject to the Roman empire. For all historians testify that the first king in Gaul, after the Romans were driven out, was Clodio the Long-haired, son of Pharamond, after the year of the Lord 400: Gregory of Tours, book 2, chapter 9, who calls him Chlogio, Ado of Vienne, the Abbot of Ursperg, Aimoin, Paulus Aemilius, Robert Gaguin, Papire Masson and others. Third, the same author says in the same place that the temples of the idols were overthrown and churches built by royal authority in his own time; which seem manifestly false, and certainly conflict with the histories of Gregory of Tours, Ado and others. Fourth, in the same letter, chapter 9, words of the Scripture of Genesis are cited according to St. Jerome's version, which is seen everywhere in both letters too; and that is a most open sign of newness. Fifth, in the same letter, chapter 13, the author writes that he was present with the other disciples when Judas betrayed the Lord with a kiss. But this seems against the Gospel; since Mark, chapter 14, and Luke, chapter 22, say that Christ kept the last supper with the twelve, and with the same went into the garden and then went to meet Judas. Sixth, in the same letter, chapter 8, he says that a certain Valeria was crowned with martyrdom in Gaul itself. But this is against Sulpicius, Sacred History book 2, and Gregory of Tours, History of the Franks book 1, chapter 28, who write that martyrdoms were first seen within Gaul in the times of M. Antoninus. There are many other things that seem to take credit from these letters. Otherwise they are pious, and not a few dogmas of the Church could be confirmed from them against the heretics of our time, if it were quite clear at what time they were written.
Abdias of Babylon
Abdias of Babylon is said to have been one of the disciples of the Lord. But the lives of the Apostles carried about under his name are more like fables than a true narrative. Nor do I find in the ancients any mention of this Abdias or of his book.
The Priests of Achaia, who wrote the passion of St. Andrew
There is extant a passion of St. Andrew the Apostle under the name of the Priests of Achaia, who say they wrote what they were present at. I once heard a certain great man calling this history into doubt. But certainly it does not seem possible to deny that it is a true, ancient and useful history. Peter Damian, who flourished six hundred years ago, speaks thus of this history in sermon 2 on St. Andrew: “Not undeservedly has it been taken up into a singular citadel of authority, since those who saw wrote it, and were ministers of the word.” St. Bernard too, in the sermon on St. Andrew on his vigil, and in the two he gave on the feast day, extols with wonderful praises the words of St. Andrew to the cross, which are found word for word in this book. John of Louvain, a man of much learning and judgement, in his censure of the passions of the saints, which is found in the martyrology of Molanus, approved this history as genuine. The same was done by Aloysius Lippomano, a most weighty man, who wrote out the lives of the saints from approved authors. Lastly in the Roman breviary lately revised this history, after it had been sharply disputed among learned and weighty men, kept its place, approved by the consent of all.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
De sancto Lino. 70. Similis narrationi Prochori est narratio, quae sub nomine S. Lini exstat in bibliothe¬ ca S. Patrum. Narrat enim auctor ille multa de actis S. Petri, qua; vel falsa vel dubia sunt ; neque testimonium habet hoc opuscu¬ lum S. Lini a veteribus. Inter alia scribit auctor, Agrippam fuisse praefectum Urbis tempore passionis S. Petri, atque ab isto Agrippa fuisse S. Petrum occi¬ sum, sine consensu imperatoris Neronis, a quo etiam id factum postea fuisse improba¬ tum. Sed neque constat praefectum Urbis tunc fuisse Agrippam : et necem S. Petri Neroni displicuisse, repugnat omnibus veteribus Patribus. In eadem narratione scribit auctor, uxo¬ rem Albini secundum doctrinam S. Petri, repudiasse thorum viri sui ob amorem casti¬ tatis, invito et reclamante marito. Haec vero doctrina S. Petri esse non po¬ test, cum repugnet doctrinae coapostoli ejus Pauli, I Corinth. vii. "Fateor quidem a S. Lino conscripta fuisse Aqta S. Petri, vel po¬ tius Acta Sanctorum Apbstolorum Petri, et Pauli, quod aliqui dicunt, et de Actis S. Petri in Romano Breviario legitur : sed ea non exstare, et loco eorum supposita fuisse, quae nunc exstant arbitramur. De S. Clemente Romano. 92. Clemens Romanus, qui anno tertio Traja¬ ni martyrio coronatus est, cum sedisset in Apostolica sede annos novem, multa scri¬ psisse fertur, videlicet, Epistola duas ad Corinthios. Duas ad Jacobum fratrem Domini. Tres ad diversos. Libros decem recognitionum, 358 DE SCRIPTORIBUS ECCLESIASTICIS Libros viii. constitut. Apostolicarum. Canones Apostolorum. Itinerarium S. Petri. Disputationem S. Petri cum Apione : et liturgiam. Epistola prior ad Corinthios non exstat ; ejus tamen mentionem faciunt passim vete¬ res Patres, ut epistolae gravissimae, et epi¬ stolae S. Pauli ad Hebraeos perquam simil¬ limae. Yide S. Irenaeum lib. m. cap. 3., Clementem Alexandrinum lib. vii. Stromat., Eusebium lib. n. hist. cap. 12. et S. Hiero¬ nymum in libro de Script. Eccles. Epistola posterior ad Corinth., neque ex¬ stat, neque ab Ecclesiis probatur, ut S. Hie¬ ronymus testatur loco notato. Epistolae quinque quae nunc exstant, non carent scrupulo. Nam constat, S. Jacobum, ad quem scribuntur duae epistolae, obiisse multo ante S. Petrum, et tamen in iis signi¬ ficatur Jacobo mors S. Petri. Sed forte epi¬ stolae scriptae sunt ad Simeonem fratrem Jacobi, non ad ipsum Jacobum. In epistola quinta laudatur communitas omnium rerum, et am uxorum : et totus hic locus desum¬ ptus est ex lib. x. Recognitionum, ubi haec dicuntur a Faustiniano Ethnico, et a Sancto Clemente refutantur. Sed forte haec irrepse¬ runt, et in codice Vaticano non inveniuntur. Scripsisse Clementem alias quoque episto¬ las, praeter illam celebrem ad Corinthios, testatur S. Hieronymus in lib. i. adversus Jovinianum, ubi dicit, Clementem in suis epistolis, omnem pene sermonem de Virgi¬ nitatis puritate contexere ; quas laudes Vir¬ ginitatis in epistolis, quae exstant, non repe- rimus. De recognitionibus ejusdem Clementis non habeo aliquid certi, quamvis non pauca uti¬ lia documenta contineant, et a viris doctis aliquando citentur : tamen probabile existi¬ mo, vel non esse Clementis, vel esse idem opus cum eo, quod itinerarium, vel circui¬ tus Petri aliqui vocant : ad quod opus, teste Epiphanio haeres. 30. Clemens ipse testatur, circuitus Petri a se conscriptos, ab Haereticis depravatos fuisse. Vere enim in recognitio¬ nibus describuntur itinera S. Petri et Sancti Clementis, et admiscentur disputationes ex media Platonis philosophia depromptae , quas nullo modo credibile est S. Petri esse. Quod si recognitionum et itinerarii idem ^sit opus, satis constabit, esse apocryphum. Itinerarium enim inter apocrypha retule¬ runt, Sanctus Athanasius in Synopsi , Sanctus Gelasius in Concilio Romano, unde exstat caput, Sancta Romana, dist. 13- et Leo IX, in epistolis adversus Nicetam. Verum quidem est, recognitionem numerari libros decem, et itinerarii libros octo : sed facile fuit corruptoribus addere, vel minue¬ re, vel mutare. De libris constitutionum Apostolicarum, quee Clementi auctori tribuuntur : idem fere judicium heri debet, ac de libris recognitio¬ num. Multa enim in illis utilia sunt, et u Gree- cis veteribus magni fiunt: sed in Ecclesia Latina nullum fere nomen habent : et ipsi etiam posteriores Grseci in Concilio Trullano can. 2. improbant has constitutiones, ut ab Hsereticis depravatas. Audio vEthiop es his constitutionibus uti, ut vere Apostolicis, et ea de causa in erroribus versari circa cultum sabbati, et diei Domini¬ cae ; et circa ministrum Sacramenti Bapti¬ smi, et aliis quibusdam dogmatibus : nam lib. vn. cap. 24. jubent servari diem sab¬ bati, et Dominicae, et lib. v. constit. cap. 10, prohibetur absolute, ne laici baptizent, et lib. vi. cap. 15. jubent rebaptizari eos, qui baptizantur ab Haereticis, ea de causa, quia haeretici non sunt Sacerdotes. Ac ne forte objiceretur quod Philippus Diaconus baptizabat, ut dicitur Act. viii. in iisdem constitutionibus lib. vi. cap. 7. dici¬ tur, Philippum, qui' baptizavit Simonem magum, fuisse Apostolum. Quod manifeste falsum est. Habentur in iisdem constitutionibus alia non pauca, quae abhorrere videntur a veri¬ tate, ut quod lib. m. cap. 2, quartas nuptias appellent manifestam fornicationem, lib. v. cap. 6. distinguant Mariam Magdalenam a Maria sorore Lazari, lib. viii. c. 14. Jacobum fratrem Domini non velint esse Apostolum ex duodecim, et lib. eodem cap. 26. et 27. 28. velint imponi manum Subdiacono, et Lectori, et ipsi etiam Diaconissae, dum ordi¬ nantur : et lib. eodem cap. 32. dicant. Exor¬ cistas non ordinari : et cap. 38. dicant an¬ cillam soli domino obsequentem recipi : si cum aliis intemperans fuerit, rejici. De canonibus Apostolorum a Clemente scriptis major est difficultas ; nam ab una parte Tertullianus in libro adversus Praxeam scribit, canones Apostolorum esse nobis per manus traditos. Sanctus quoque Athanasius in synopsi eos numerat inter agiographa. Synodus Trullana c. 2. recipit canones Apo- stolorurA octoginta quinque. Denique S. AB ANNO DOM. 1. AD 100. 359 Joannes Damascenus lib. iv. de fide Ortho¬ doxa cap. 18. videtur eos ponere inter sacras Scripturas. At contra Gelasius Papa in Concilio Ro¬ mano, unde exstat caput, Sancta Romana, dist. 15, expresse dicit, liber canonum Apo¬ stolorum apocryphus : et hoc idem confir¬ matur distinet. 16. can. 1. et 2. Sed haec conciliari possunt, si dicamus, canones legi¬ timos esse solum quinquaginta priores : reliquos non esse legitimos, quamvis a Grae¬ cis recipiantur. Sic enim Urbanus II. apud Gratianum dist. 32, can. praeter, § Scien¬ dum, dicit, canones Apostolorum ex toto a Graecis, ex parte a Latinis recipi : et Hum- bertus Cardinalis clarius idem dicit, cujus testimonium sub nomine Leonis IX, ita re¬ fert Gratianus dist. 16. can. Clementis. « Apostolorum, inquit, canones numerant Patres inter apocrypha, exceptis capitulis quinquaginta, quae decreverunt Orthodoxae fidei tractatores adjungenda. » Hincmarus quoque, ut testatur Franeiscus Turrianus lib. i. pro epistolis decretalibus cap. 15. scribit, canones Apostolorum ab Ecclesia nobis traditos esse solum quinquaginta : et ante hos omnes Dionysius Exiguus quinqua¬ ginta solum canones Apostolorum in sua collectione posuit. Denique in antiquis codicibus Concilio¬ rum, non inveniuntur canones Apostolorum, nisi quinquaginta. Et vere canones qui erro¬ rem sapiunt, et ab Haereticis superadditi videntur, sunt canones posteriores, ut can. 6, 5. de sabbato non jejunando, et 6, 7. de baptizatis, vel ordinatis ab Haereticis, et 8, 4. de numero librorum sacrorum : in quo canone multa sunt errata manifesta. Quod vero Gratianus dicit initio distinctionis sextae decimae, canonas Apostolorum auctoritate Zephyrini Papae esse sexaginta : fortasse vitio librariorum erratum est in numero. De disputatione S. Petri cum Apione, et de itinerario ejusdem S. Petri, quod non exstat, nisi forte (uf supra diximus) idem sint itinerarium, et recognitiones ; non est multum laborandum : ab initio enim repro¬ bata leguntur, tum apud Sanctum Hierony¬ mum in libro de Scriptor. Eccles., tum apud Sanctum Athanasium in synopsi. De liturgia S. Clementis idem fere dicen¬ dum occurrit, quod de liturgia S. Jacobi, eam vere Clementis esse, seda postexi oribus auctam : credibile autem est, Clementem non ex proprio judicio, sed ex ritu, quem observari viderat a Sancto Petro, liturgiam composuisse ; quemadmodum et ipse San¬ ctus Petrus nihil aliud faciebat in offerendo sacrificio Eucharistico, nisi quod ipse Domi¬ nus fieri jusserat. Meminerunt liturgiae S. Clementis Proclus Patriarcha Constantino- politanus lib. vn. de traditione divinse Missae, et Nicolaus Episcopus Methonensis in libro de veritate corporis Christi, et Ressarion Cardinalis in libro de Saciwnento Euchari¬ stiae. De Sancto Ignatio. 71. Sanctus Ignatius .Episcopus Antiochenus, post Sanctum Petrum Apostolum, et Sanctum Evodium, sedere coepit anno Domini 71. et sedit annis 40. et Romae est passus anno' un¬ decimo Trajani, teste sancto Hieronymo in li¬ bro de script. Eccles. Scripsit Epistolas uti¬ lissimas, ut testatur Sanctus Polycarpus ejus aequalis, qui in epistola ad Philippenses di¬ cit, se collegisse epistolas Ignatii quotquot invenire potuit. Eusebius lib. nr. hist. cap. 30 septem ' enumerat epistolas Sancti Ignatii, ut etiam Sanctus Hieronymus loco citato, unam ad Ephesios, altei’am ad Magnesianos, tertiam ad Trallianos, quartam ad Romanos, quin- qam ad Philadelphios, sextam ad Smyrnaeos, septimam adPolycarpum. Praeter has inve¬ niuntur aliae quinque ad Mariam Cassabolitam una, ad Antiochenos altera, ad Tai^senses tertia, ad Philippenses quarta ad Heronem quinta. Atque hae quinque epistolae, quamvis ad manus Eusebii et Hieronymi non perve¬ nerint ; tamen ob styli similitudinem, et spi¬ ritum vere Apostolicum a viris doctis omni¬ no recipiuntur. Tres aliae circumferuntur, ad B. Virginem Deiparam una, et ad Sanctum Joannem Evangelistam duae, quibus additur epistola B. Virginis ad Ignatium. Harum, primus (quod sciam) meminil Sanctus Bernardus ser. 7. in Psalmum, Qui habitat ; sed ne¬ que in codicibus Graecis habentur, neque gravitatem eloquii S. Ignatii omnino redolent. Unum hoc loco admonendum videtur, non esse magnam fidem habendam codicibus Graecis, qui nunc exstant, quando discrepant a Latinis : saepe enim emendatiores inve¬ niuntur codices Latini, quam Graeci : quod verum esse intelliget, qui confei*et testimo¬ nia, quae ex Ignatio citant Sanctus Athana- sius in epistola ad Epictetum, et Theodore- 360 t DE SCRIPTORIBUS ECCLESIASTICIS tus in dialogis, cum verbis ejusdem Ignatii^ quse nunc habentur in codicibus Latinis, et Graecis. De Sancto Polycarpo. 71. Sanctus Polycarpus Episcopus et martyr, unam scripsit epistolam egregiam ad Philip¬ penses, quae cum epistolis Sancti Ignatii cir cumfertur; ejus epistolae meminit Sanctus Hieronymus in lib. de script. Eccles. et Eu- sebius lib. m. hist. cap. 30. alias 36. Yixit tempore S. Ignatii, sed supervixit usque ad imperium M. Antonini, ut idem S. Hierony¬ mus in eodem loco testatur. DeS. Dionysio Areopagita. 71. Sanctus Dionysius Areopagita S. Pauli Adostoli discipulus fuit, teste Sancto Luca. Act. xvii. Quamvis autem a nonnullis dica¬ tur martyrium subiisse sub Domitiano ; con¬ tra tamen sentiunt alii, quoniam ipse idem Sanctus Dionysius in libro de divinis nomi¬ nibus cap. 4. nominatim allegat S. Ignatii verba ex epistola ad Romanos : quam epi¬ stolam scriptam esse constat anno septimo Trajani, quo anno Sanctus Ignatius martyrio coronatus est. Scribit autem (inquit Areopa¬ gita) et divinus Ignatius, « Amor meus cru¬ cifixus est, » haec autem verba in epistola ad Romanus leguntur; quomodo igitur potest Dionysius obiisse tempore Domitiani, qui Trajanum praecessit, si citat epistolam scri¬ ptam septimo anno Trajani ? Existimamus igitur Sanctum Dionysium fuisse quidem Sanctorum Ignatii et Polycarpi aequalem, sed supervixisse usque ad imperium Adriani. Opera Sancti Dionysii, quae nunc exstant, haec sunt : De coelesti Hierarchia, lib. 1 De Ecclesiastica Hierarchia, t Item epistolae ad Caium, 4 Ad Dorotheum, 1 Ad Sosipatrum, 1 Ad Polycarpum, 1 De divinis nominibus, 1 De mystica theologia, i Ad Demophilum, 1 Ad Titum, 1 Ad Apollophanem, 1 Ad S. Joannem Apostolum, 1 De caeteris operibus viri docti et Catholici nihil dubitant. Soli haeretici Lutherani, et quidam sciali, Erasmus, Valla, et pauci alii, opera supra numerata negant esse Sancti Dionysii Areopagitae. Sed (ut alia nunc omittam) ad auctorita¬ tem his operibus conciliandam satis esse debet, quod haec opera probentur a Sancto Gregorio Papa hom. 34. in Evangelio, a Sancto Martino Papa, et martyre, in Conci¬ lio Romano, a Sancto Agathone Pontifice, in epistola ad imperatorem Constantinum IV et a Nicolao I in epist. ad Michaelem Impe¬ ratorem. Item a Concilio IV. generali Act. iv. et a Concilio VII. Act. n. Denique a Sanctis Doctoribus plurimis, qui in haec opera, tamquam germana Sancti Dionysii Areopa¬ gitae, commentaria scripserunt, ut a Sancto Maximo Monacho, a S. Thoma, et aliis. Quod autem ante Sanctum Gregorium Romanum nemo horum operum nomine S. Dionysii Areopagitae meminerit : causa vi¬ detur esse, quod alicubi latuerint, ut multa alia saepe longo tempore delitescunt; et cir¬ ca tempora Sancti Gregorii reperte fuerint. Quod enim quidam dicunt, citari nomina¬ tim haec opera ab Origene homilia quadam in primum caput Joannis, et ab Athanasio in quaestionibus ad Antiochum quaest. 8. ni¬ hil efficit ; nam in homilia illa nominantur Ariani, qui diu post Originem exorti sunt : et in quaestionibus ad Antiochum nominan¬ tur auctores ipso Athanasio posteriores : ex quo sequitur ut illa testimonia esse non pos¬ sint Origenis, vel Athanasii, sed recentiorum auctorum. Scribunt quidem Liberatus Abbas in Bre¬ viario cap. 10. et Anastasius bibliothecarius in epist. ad Carolum Calvum imper. citari Dionysium Areopagitam a Joan. Chrysosto- mo, et Cyrillo Alexandrino, sed quae illi ci¬ tant, non inveniuntur in locis citatis. De S. Martiale Episcopo Lemovicensi. Sanctus Martialis primus Episcopus Le- movicensis, dicitur scripsisse duas epistolas, unam ad Burdegalenses, alteram ad Tolo¬ sanos, quae exstant in bibliotheca sanctorum Patrum. Sed multa sunt, quae eas epistolas supposititias esse indicare videantur. Primum 'enim auctor harum epistolarum dicit, se cum Christo vixisse, antequam cru¬ cifigeretur : Martialis autem Episcopus pri¬ mus Lemovicensium missus fuit ad eam ur¬ bem, Decio Augusto' et Grato Coss. anno Dom. 251. ut Gregorius Turonicus testatur lib. i. hist. cap. 10. quare necesse est, vel Martialem vixisse ferme 300. annis, vel titu¬ lum epistolarum esse falsum, qui auctorem AB ANNO DOM. i. AD 100. 36! praefert Martialem Episcopum Lemovicen- sem, vel Epistolas esse confictas. Deinde in secunda epistola cap. 8. scribit auctor a se baptizatum Stephanum regem, et quemdam alium tyrannum cum Satrapis suis. Atqui tempore Apostolorum, et etiam tempore Decii imperatoris, non habuit Gal¬ lia ullos reges, sed imperio Romano subjecta erat. Primum enim regem , Romanis expulsis, fuisse in Gallia Glodionem Co¬ matum Pharamundi filium post annum Dom. 400. testantur omnes historici, Gregorius Turronicus lib. n. cap. 9. qui eum vocat Clogionem. Ado Viennensis, Abbas Urspen- gensis, Aimoinus, Paulus ^Emilius, Rober- tus Gaguinus, Papirius Massonius, et alii. Tertio, dicit idem auctor eodem loco , templa idolorum eversa fuisse, et Ecclesias sedifioatas auctoritate regia ipso suo tem¬ pore : qnae videntur manifeste falsa ; certe pugnant cum historiis Gregorii Turonici , Adonis et aliorum. Quarto, in epistola eadem cap. 9. citantur verba Scripturae Geneseos secundum S. Hieronymi versionem, quod etiam in utra¬ que epistola passim cernitur. Id vero signum est apertissimum novitatis. Quinto, in eadem epistola cap. 13. scribit auctor se interfuisse cum aliis discipulis quando Judas osculo Dominum prodidit. Atqui hoc videtur repugnare Evangelio : siquidem Marcus, cap. xiv. et Lucas, cap. xxii, dicunt Christum cum duodecim ulti¬ mam coenam celebrasse, et cum eisdem in hortum ingressum, ac deinde Judae obviam ivisse. Sexto, in epistola eadem, cap. 8. dicit, Valeriam quamdam in ipsa Gallia martyrio coronatam. Id vero repugnat Sulpitio lib. n. sacrae historiae, et Gregorio Turonico, lib. i. cap. 28. hist. Francorum, qui scribunt, temporibus M. Antonini primum intra Gal- lias martyria visa. Multa sunt alia, quae his epistolis fidem detrahere videntur. Alioqui autem piae sunt, et ex iis non pauca dogmata Ecclesiastica confirmari possent adversus nostri temporis Haereticos, si de tempore, quo scriptae sunt, plane constaret. De Abdia Babylonio . Abdias Babylonius, unus ex discipulis Do¬ mini fuisse dicitur. Sed vitae Apostolorum, quae sub nomine ejus circumferuntur, fabu¬ lis similiores sunt, quam verae narrationi. Sed neque ejus Abdiae, aut libri ejus ullam in veteribus mentionem invenio. • De Presbyteris Achaiae , qui Sancti Andrex passionem scripserunt. Exstat passio S. Andreae Apostoli sub no¬ mine Presbyterorum Achaiae, qui dicunt se scripsisse ea quibus ipsi interfuerunt. Audi¬ vi aliquando magnum quemdam virum eam historiam in dubium revocantem. Sed certe non videtur negari posse, quin vera et an¬ tiqua, et utilis historia sit. Petrus Damiani, qui ante sexcentos annos floruit, in serm. 2. de Sancto Andrea, de hac historia sic loquitur : « Non immerito in singularem auctoritatis arcem suscepta est, quam qui viderunt, scripserunt, et ministri fuerunt sermonis. » Sanctus etiam Bernar- dus in serm. de Sancto Andrea, in vigilia ejus, et in duobus, quos habuit in die festo, miris laudibus effert verba S. Andreae ad crucem, quae in hoc libro ad verbum inve¬ niuntur. Joannes a Lovanio, vir multae doctrinae, et judicii, in censura de passionibus sancto¬ rum, quae habetur in martyrologio Molani, hanc historiam, ut legitimam, probavit. Idem fecit Aloysius Lippomanus, vir gra¬ vissimus, qui ex probatis auctoribus vitas sanctorum descripsit. Denique in breviario Romano, nuper recognito, historia haec, cum de ea inter viros doctos et graves acri¬ ter disputatum esset, omnium consensu ap¬ probata locum suum retinuit.