CYPKIANUS

CYPRIANUS

745

reserve an outline of it to a later point. Mes-sengers to Cornelius (Primitivus, Mettius,Nicephobus acolyte) then convey full accounts ofthe procedure, and inform him of his generalrecognition as bishop. 6

Simultaneously appeals, which were ultimatelysuccessful, were addressed by Cyprian to theRoman confessors to detach themselves from theschism in which they found themselves involved(Movses, Maximus). The original work beforethe council, the restoration of the lapsed, hadbeen facilitated by the two episodes, which hadcleared off the extreme parties on either side.They now listened to Cyprian’s treatise on thelapsed; but they inclined to a course even milderthan he suggested, while they were less disposedthin he to give the “Martyres” any voice inthe decisions/

Their encyclical is lost, but the particulars areextricable from his Letter to Antonian ( Ep . 55),which, since it treats only of the restoration ofthe libellatici, not of the lapsed, must be earlierthan the second council, a.d. 252, and from theverbal resemblance of Ep. 54 (3) to 55 (v.) mustbe very near the event. We thence gather thatthey resolved—I. On an individual examination ofthe libellatici; II. Episcopal restoration of non-sacrificers after penance (Ep. 55 v.); III. Ofsacrifices if penitents at death (55, xiv.); IV.No restoration of those who deferred penance tilldeath (55, xix.).

A Roman synod was held in June or July sby 60 bishops of Italy, who accepted these de-cisions, and excommunicated Novatian. Cor-uelius announced the facts in four (so Tillemontcorrectly) Greek (so Valois correctly) letters toAntioch (Eus. vi. 43), with two (non-extant) ofCyprian.

Briefly to sum the constitutional results ofthis First Council of Carthage: 1. The views ofthe primate are submitted to those of thecouncil; he admits the change (Ep. 55, iii.). 2.The intercession and merits of the martyrs, asaffecting the conditions of restoration, are setaside entirely. 3. On the other hand (as againstNovatian), no offences are considered to be beyondthe regular power of the church to remit. 4(against Felicissimus). No power except that ofthe authentic organisation can fix terms of com-munion. It will be at once seen that the freecouncil of bishops had taken position as a Chris-tian institution, exercising supreme governmentalfunctions, and had laid clear lines as to wherechurch authority resided. They further ruled thatthere could be no subsequent canvassing of the

e There is no reason to suppose with Lipsius (p.204n.)that any correspondence is lost, except the synodic epistleabout Felicissimus, for Ep. 44 says expressly that thedetails will be given viva voce.

f Ep. 54, iii. 55 v. 3. To postpone the appearance ofthe De Lapsis to November, as Pearson does, or to anymoment alter the council was over, is to attribute toCyprian a publication quite out of date and recommenda-tions already disposed of. Therefore, if ‘ ultio,’ c. 1. is to bepressed to mean the death of Declus (which is not neces-sary in spite of the consensus for it), it only shews thatours is a second edition.

s The old date, October, is due to the mistake as toCornelius s election. Jerome calls this synod “ RomansItalics Africans,” as if it were one with the Cartha-gitiiun Synod, (De Scr. Ecc. 66, Labbe, i. pp. 865-8,) andfrom this phrase Earonius has imagined three councils.

claims of a bishop once ordained. And the reso-lutions were issued in the name of the bishopsonly.

The Reconciliation of the Novatianist Confessorsat Rome. —A second embassy of Novatianistsfollowed the report of the first, in order to pressCyprian home ; Primus, Dionysius, Nicostkatus,Evaristus, and above all, Novatus ; to whoseleaving Rome Cyprian does not hesitate partly toascribe his own next success (Ep. 52 (2), ii.) Cy-prian’s letters to the Novatianist confessors areamong the most beautiful and skilful in the col-lection ; and Augustine cites no less than threetimes a passage from the letter on their return asembodying the absolute scriptural answer to puri-tan separations. It is the first exposition of theparable of the Tares, and St. Paul’s image of theGreat House. Prevailed on by the arguments usedto them, and shocked by the consequences of theiraction, the whole party, with numerous adhe-rents, returned to the Catholic side, and werepublicly and magnanimously received, like theleaders of the same sect at Nicaea, and theDonatists at Carthage, and the Arians at Alex-andria, without forfeit of dignity (Epp. 49, 52,53, 46,54, 51). To Cyprian this was more thanan occasion of Christian joy. It was the triumphof his theory (Ep. 51 ad fin.). The Date of thisevent may be accurately determined as beingafter the Carthaginian Council, (since Cypriandoes not mention this as sitting, in his letters onthe confessors, and he read the account of theirrecantation to the church (Ep. 51), not to thebishops,) but prior to the Roman council, or elsethey would have been excommunicated by it,which they evidently were not; and since Cypriansays they recanted on the departure of Novatus,it was after the second embassy had left Rome.

Treatise on Unity. —The principles of thistreatise, read in the council, and sent to theRoman confessors (Ep. 54), so shape all Cyprian’spolicy, that it is best here to notice it. It indi-cates its date minutely by allusions to thesevere party (Novatian’s) (iii. ministros &c. viii.uno in loco &c. ix. feritas x. confessor xi. episcopinomen xiii. aemuli), and by the absence of al-lusion to the lax party (Felicissimus), whoseschism must have been noticed in such apaper if the question had not been concluded.In c. v. its original form as an address to bishopsis traceable. The first appearance of Cyprian’scharacteristic error about baptism occurs inc. xi.

Its first problem is the existence of schism(as distinct from heresy), “ altar against altar,”with freedom from corrupt doctrines and lives.The sole security is the ascertainment of theseat of authority and bond of unity. This is in-dicated by Christ’s commission given once to Peteralone, yet again to all the apostles in the sameterms. The oneness of the commission and theequality of the commissioned were thus empha-sised. The apostleship, continued for ever in theepiscopate, is thus universal, yet one : each

bishop’s authority perfect and independent, yetnot forming with the others a mere agglomerate,but being a full tenure on a totality, like that ofa shareholder in a joint-stock property. “ Episco-patus unus est cujus a singulis in solidum parstenetur.” It is in the above definition, ch. iv.,that the famous interpolation has been made,which Roman author'lies (Mgr. Freppel, late Pro*