« 上一页继续 »
bishops and presbyters of the neighbouring cities and villages about Antioch, and "' ofhis being beloved and admired by others: than h indeed they ascribe that respect for him to the presents he had made those persons. Since, then, Paul was of an active temper, and a man of popular gifts, as it seems, and his episcopate was chiefly under the mild governments of Odenatus, and his wife and successor Zeuobia, it may be concluded, he had in that time made a considerable number of proselytes. And, very probably, he at first found some christians in his diocese of the same sentiments.
Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, affirms that“ Lucian, who afterwards suffered martyrdom in 312, adhered to Paul, and separated from the church ; or was held excommunicated from the church during the time of three bishops of Antioch. One might be almost apt to suspect, from Alexander’s words, that he thought Lucian had succeeded Paul in the episcopal care and oversight of those who were in Paul’s sentiments at Antioch.
The council at'Nice, in one of their canons,o appoint, that the Panlianists should be rebaptized when they return to the catholic church. St. Augustinel’ has taken particular notice of that canon. And yet it appears from ‘1 Athanasius, that the Paulians baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The Pauliansr are mentioned with others in an edict of Constantine against heretics. St. Chrysostom' often argues against the Pauliaus, and, I think, as then in being. Theodoret writes about 450, thatt there were then no remains of them. And Pope Innocent the first, about 414, as “ Tillemont observes, speaks of them asv if they subsisted no longer. However, St. Augustine, as we have seen, mentions them as if they were in being in his time, but the people of that sentiment were then oftener called Photinians than Paulians.
P Istos sane Paulianos baptizandos esse in ecclesia catholica Niczeno concilio constitutum est. Aug. de Haer. ib.
q 051'") Mflwxawh Kai ¢pv7m mu 01 re Sayouarmg paenral, fa outgara Myer/rig, 85w firrov tum! aipenxm. Ath: Orat. 2. contr. Arian. p. 510. .
' Euseb. de Vit. Constant. L. iii. cap. 64. ' Vid. Chrysost. in Pa. viii. T. iii. p. 120. B. C. et T. v. Serm. 20. p. 300. Serm. 24. p. 347. Ed. Front. Duc. ‘ Vid. Theod. H. Fab. 1. 2. cap. xi. de Photino. “ See Paul de Samosates, Art. vi.
' Quia Pauliauistae in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritfis Sancti minime baptizabant. Innocent. i. Ep. 22. ap. Labb. Cone. T. ii. p. 1275. B.
Neither Eusebius, nor the council of Antioch, nor Athanasius, that I remember, have any where charged Paul, directly or indirectly, with rejecting any books either of the Old or the New Testament. Epiphanius expressly says, that “' Paul endeavoured to support his doctrine by texts of scripture. Vincentius Lirinensis speaks ofx this as a common method of heretics; andY says particularly of the works of Paul, and some others, that there was scarce a page without citations out of the Old or New Testament. Paul then, and the Paulians, used the same scriptures with other christians.
This is a summary account of what the ancients write of Paul and his followers. It ought to be observed, that I have made no use of Z the epistle to Paul ascribed to Dionysius, nor of the questions and answers joined with that epistle. If my account therefore of Paul’s opinions appears defective, when compared with that given by ‘1 Tillemont, or some other modems, I had rather it should do so, than run the hazard of deceiving my readers by borrowing from suspected or manifestly spurious pieces, whose testimony is not to be relied upon.
There can be no question but Paul was an author. It is ver likely he would publish some vindications of himself an his opinions. Vincentius actually makes mention of his writings, as we observed just now. But, as I take the above-mentioned questions to be spurious, I suppose none of his works to be now remaining.
As we have not now before us any of Paul’s writings, and have his history from adversaries only, we cannot propose to judge distinctly of his talents, nor draw his character at length: however, from the several articulars before put down, and collected from divers aut ors, some things may he concluded; and 1 apprehend that, laying aside for the present the consideration of his heterodoxy, we shall not mistake much if we conceive of him after this manner: he had a great mind,with a mixture of haughtiness, and too much affection for human applause. He was generally well respected in his diocese, and by the neighbouring
"’ Epiph. ib. p. 608. B. " ch fortasse aliquis interroget, an et hasretici divinae scripturae testimoniis utantur P Utuntur plane, et vehementer quidem. Nam videas eos volare per singula quaeque sancta: legis volumina—Vincent. Comm. cap. 35. p. 356. Ed. Baluz. Paris. 1669.
Y Lege Pauli Samosateni opuscula, Priscilliani, Eunomii, Joviniani, reliquarumque pestium: cemas infinitam exemplorum congeriem, prope nullam omitti paginam, qua! non Novi aut Veteris Testamenti sententi‘ fucata et colorata sit. 1d. ibid. ' Ap. Labbei Concil. T. i. p. 8 9—893.
“ Vid. Paul de Samosates, Art. ii. Mem. Ecc. T. iv. P. ii. p. 615, &c.
bishops; in esteem with the great, and beloved by the common people. He preached frequently, and was a good speaker. And from what is said byb the fathers of the council, ofc his rejecting or laying aside some hymns, as modern, and composed by moderns, it may be argued, that he was a critic; which is a valuable accomplishment at all times, especially when uncommon.d
I have now given a snfiicient history of the controversies of those times, and of the part Dionysius had in them.
IX. I need not enlarge in the account of Dionysius’s works, several learned men having already composed catalogues of them, so far as we are informed of their titles by ancient authors; as (law in his Apostolici, or Lives of the Primitive Fathers, vol. i. and in his Historia Literaria; and Fabricius in his° Bibliotheca Greeca; both dividing his works into treatises and epistles, and the latter disposing his epistles in the alphabetical order ofthe names of the persons or people to whom they are directed. Tillemont f likewise, as usual, is exact and particular upon this head. Bastiageg digests our author’s works in the order of time, which also is “ Du Pin’s method. And Pagii hasjudicious observations relating to the time of some of Dionysius’s writings.
b See before, p. 676.
c Possibly those hymns were partly ancient, partly modern ; having been altered and interpolated since their first original: and some of them might be entirely modern. Dionysius speaks of the many hymns [mg 1roMm; \l/aMtw— dtag] composed by Nepos, with which many of the brethren were mightily pleased. Busch. 1. vii. cap. 24. Dionysius does not expressly say that those hymns were sung in the public assemblies of christians; but it is very probable they were. And so Cave supposeth; for thus he writes, Hist. Lit. P. i. p. 86. de Nepote: Scripsit adhuc Nepos in ecclesiae usum psalmos atque hymnos quam plurimos, pios admodum et ab ipso Dionysio celebratos. And in his Apostolici, p. 194, in the Life of Dionysius, he says of Nepos; ‘ That he was ‘ a man eminent for his skill in the holy scriptures, and for the many psalms ‘ and hymns he had composed, which the brethren sung in their public meet‘ ings.‘ Conf. Vales. An. ad. Ens. 1. vii. c. 24. p. 153. C. Such hymns as these, composed by private persons, are the hymns which Paul rejected, or laid aside, that is, would not allow to be used in public worship. And the 59th canon of the council of Laodicea forbids that any psalms or hymns composed by private persons should be sung in the church. So that what was reckoned in Paul to be a great fault, afterwards obtained general approbation.
d A learned writer among the modems, whom Idid not think of when I drew the above character, confirms almost every part of it; for he allows Paul to have possessed the third see in the church, and to have had the patronage of a great princess, an appearance of piety, reputation for learning, flowing eloquence, and the favour of the multitude. Ex infimaa sortis homine factus est Antiochenus episcopus, et tertium ecclesiaa thronum iisdem artibus conscendit, quibus haeretici solent, feminae principis potentia, specie pietatis, doctrinae fama, dicendi facilitate, et multitudinis factiOsae gratia. J. Garner. Diss. i. de Hear. et Li. Nestor. cap. iii. sect. iii. p. 307.
' T. v. p. 263—267. r Mem. Ecc. T. iv. p. ii.
5 Ann. P. E. 247. n. vii. _
I have quoted several of his epistles, and mentioned some others, observing likewise sometimes the most robable date of them. It is necessary, however, that l a d here a few things.
I. Particularly I would transcribe a passage of Eusebius, following what was formerly taken from him concerning Dionysius’s writings against Sabellius. Says Eusebius; ‘ And k beside these he wrote many other epistles, still extant, ‘ and1 some large treatises in an epistolary form: as the ‘ books concerning nature, inscribed to his son Timothy, and ‘ the book of Temptations, inscribed to the fore-mentioned ‘ Euphranor. Moreover, in a letter to Basilides, bishop of ‘ one of the churches of Pentapolis, he mentions “‘ a Com‘ mentary he had written upon the beginning of the book of ‘ Ecclesiastes. And there are many other letters of Diony‘ sins to the same Basilides.’
From this passage it appears, that many of Dionysius’s letters were of a great length; indeed they were properly treatises inscribed to friends, or others; and in some of' them be displayed his copious learning without reserve, though without ostentation. His two books concerning the Promises, mentioned abOVe, the fragments of which are to be transcribed hereafter, were “ letters, or written in an epistolary form.
2. In Eusebius’s Evangelical Preparationo are large and noble fragments of the books concerning Nature, which show the author’s excellent capacity, and his great learning, and intimate acquaintance with the Greek poets and philoso hers, as well as with the scriptures of the Old and New estament. If there were nothing else remaining, this fragment alone would be sufficient to show that Dionysius was a fine writer.
3. St. Jerom confirms what Eusebius writes of the Commentary upon Ecclesiastes; for, enumerating this bishop’s works, he says, ‘ therep were many letters to Basilides, in ‘ one of which he tells him, he had begun to write a Coni‘ mentary upon the Ecclesiastes.’ In another place Jerom mentions Dionysius, with several others, who, he says, had ‘1 largely explained the first epistle to the Corinthians.
I“ Nouv. Bib. T. i. p. 187, &c.
‘ Vid. Pagi Crit. 257. 11. iv. k H. E. 1. vii. c. 26.
’ Kat (it sat wohvnretg Aoyot w emqohng xapairrqpt ypa¢wrsg' oi; oi 1rept ¢voswg Ttpoezw rip 1ratdt 1rpodrrt¢¢uvnluvon ib. B. 277. A. B.
m @1700! s’avrov Hg r1111 apxml eEnyno'w 1511011109111 1's Exxhqamqa. ib. B.
" Conf. Euseb. 1. vii. cap. 26. in. ct cap. 25. Vid. Vales. Annot. p. 154. B.
° L. xiv. cap. 23—27. p. 772—784.
P Ad Basilidem quoque multaa epistolae: in quarum una se asserit etiam in Ecclesiasten coepisse scribere commentaries. De V. i. cap. 69. ‘
4. We still have one letter to Basilides, now generally called a canonical epistle. It is supposed to have been writtenr about the year 262. Fleury“ says; ‘ Of all the ‘ writings of St. Dionysius of Alexandria, the only one that ‘ remains entire and unquestionable is the canonical epistle ‘ to Basilides the bishop, who had consulted him upon several ‘ points of discipline.’ But perhaps we may add to this the epistle to Novatus, which, as recorded in ‘ Eusebius, seems to be entire. I shall make use of that epistle to Basilides by and by, when I come to observe our author’s testimony to the scriptures.
In the mean time, as the conclusion of it is too signal a proof of prevailing humility to be omitted, it shall be here transcribed. ‘ You ‘1 asked those questions, my dear son, ‘ not through ignorance, but only to do honour to us, and to ‘ cultivate our unanimity and friendship. And I, for my ‘ part, have declared my opinion, not as a teacher, but mak‘ ing use of that freedom with which it becomes us to speak ‘ to each other. Do you jud e according to the under‘ standing that is in on : and write me word what is best ‘in your opinion.’ ionysius writes thus, saysv Flenry, out of humility : for indeed his authority was very great, on account of the dignity of his see, his age, and the glory of his having been twice a confessor, as well as on account of his virtues and learning.
5. Eusebius has preserved W large and valuable fragments of a letter of Dionysius to or against one Germanus, a bishop of those times : who had calumniated Dionysius, as ifhe had not taken due care of his people, or not shown sufficient courage in time of persecution. This obliged Dionysius, in defence of himself, to relate his own sufferings at several times. This letter, according to Basnage’s" computation, was written in the year 259. l have made use of the fragments of it in the history I have given of Dionysius.
I would here put down a passage of Eusebius not yet transcribed. ‘ Beside Y the fore-mentioned letters, in that ‘ time [the persecution under Valerian, and Dionysius’s
‘1 Origenes, Dionysius, Pierius, Eusebius Casariensis, Didymus, Apollinaris, latissime hane epistolam interpretati sunt. Ep. 31. [aL 52.] p. 243. fin. Bened.
' Vid. Basn. a. 247. n. vii. ' Fleury’s Ecclesiastital Hist. B. vii. ch. 56. Vol. i. p. 470. in the English edition. ‘ Bus. 1. vi. cap. 45. " Ap. Labb. Cone. T. i. p. 836. D. E. ' Ib. Vol. i. p. 471. " Ens. H. E. 1. vi. cap. 40. 1. vii. c. l. " Dum exulem agit Dionysius,
A. 259, ab [Emiliano pulsus, adversus Germannm scripsit epistolam, qua: gmvia passusest, complectentem. Basn. ibid. Y Lib. vii. cap. 20.