Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Saint Cyprian of Carthage
Patrology.Net ^ | 1999 | John Chapman,Michael T.Barrett

Posted on 09/16/2002 7:39:49 PM PDT by Lady In Blue

Saint  Cyprian  of  Carthage

(Thaschus Cæcilius Cyprianus).

                     Bishop and martyr. Of the date of the saint's birth and of his early life nothing is
                     known. At the time of his conversion to Christianity he had, perhaps, passed
                     middle life. He was famous as an orator and pleader, had considerable wealth,
                     and held, no doubt, a great position in the metropolis of Africa. We learn from his
                     deacon, St. Pontius, whose life of the saint is preserved, that his mien was
                     dignified without severity, and cheerful without effusiveness. His gift of eloquence
                     is evident in his writings. He was not a thinker, a philosopher, a theologian, but
                     eminently a man of the world and an administrator, of vast energies, and of
                     forcible and striking character. His conversion was due to an aged priest named
                     Caecilianus, with whom he seems to have gone to live. Caecilianus in dying
                     commended to Cyprian the care of his wife and family. While yet a catechumen
                     the saint decided to observe chastity, and he gave most of his revenues to the
                     poor. He sold his property, including his gardens at Carthage. These were
                     restored to him (Dei indulgentiâ restituti, says Pontius), being apparently bought
                     back for him by his friends; but he would have sold them again, had the
                     persecution made this imprudent. His baptism probably took place c. 246,
                     presumably on Easter eve, 18 April.

                     Cyprian's first Christian writing is "Ad Donatum", a monologue spoken to a friend,
                     sitting under a vine-clad pergola. He tells how,until the grace of God illuminated
                     and strengthened the convert, it had seemed impossible to conquer vice; the
                     decay of Roman society is pictured, the gladiatorial shows, the theatre, the
                     unjust law-courts, the hollowness of political success; the only refuge is the
                     temperate, studious, and prayerful life of the Christian. At the beginning should
                     probably be placed the few words of Donatus to Cyprian which are printed by
                     Hartel as a spurious letter. The style of this pamphlet is affected and reminds us
                     of the bombastic unintelligibilty of Pontius. It is not like Tertullian, brilliant,
                     barbarous, uncouth, but it reflects the preciosity which Apuleius made
                     fashionable in Africa. In his other works Cyprian addresses a Christian audience;
                     his own fervour is allowed full play, his style becomes simpler, though forcible,
                     and sometimes poetical, not to say flowery. Without being classical, it is correct
                     for its date, and the cadences of the sentences are in strict rhythm in all his
                     more careful writings. On the whole his beauty of style has rarely ben equalled
                     among the Latin Fathers, and never surpassed except by the matchless energy
                     and wit of St. Jerome.

                     Another work of his early days was the "Testimonia ad Quirinum", in two books.
                     It consists of passages of Scripture arranged under headings to illustrate the
                     passing away of the Old Law and its fulfillment in Christ. A third book, added
                     later, contains texts dealing with Christian ethics. This work is of the greatest
                     value for the history of the Old Latin version of the Bible. It gives us an African
                     text closely related to that of the Bobbio manuscript known as k (Turin). Hartel's
                     edition has taken the text from a manuscript which exhibits a revised version, but
                     what Cyprian wrote can be fairly well restored from the manuscript cited in
                     Hartel's notes as L. Another book of excerpts on martyrdom is entitled "Ad
                     Fortunatum"; its text cannot be judged in any printed edition. Cyprian was
                     certainly only a recent convert when he became Bishop of Carthage c. 218 or the
                     beginning of 249, but he passed through all the grades of the ministry. He had
                     declined the charge, but was constrained by the people. A minority opposed his
                     election, including five priests, who remained his enemies; but he tells us that he
                     was validly elected "after the Divine judgment, the vote of the people and the
                     consent of the bishops".

                                       THE DECIAN PERSECUTION

                     The prosperity of the Church during a peace of thirty-eight years had produced
                     great disorders. Many even of the bishops were given up to worldliness and gain,
                     and we hear of worse scandals. In October, 249, Decius became emperor with
                     the ambition of restoring the ancient virtue of Rome. In January, 250, he
                     published an edict against Christians. Bishops were to be put to death, other
                     persons to be punished and tortured till they recanted. On 20 January Pope
                     Fabian was martyred, and about the same time St. Cyprian retired to a safe
                     place of hiding. His enemies continually reproached him with this. But to remain
                     at Carthage was to court death, to cause greater danger to others, and to leave
                     the Church without government; for to elect a new bishop would have been as
                     impossible as it was at Rome. He made over much property to a confessor
                     priest, Rogatian, for the needy. Some of the clergy lapsed, others fled; Cyprian
                     suspended their pay, for their ministrations were needed and they were in less
                     danger than the bishop. Form his retreat he encouraged the confessors and
                     wrote eloquent panegyrics on the martyrs. Fifteen soon died in prison and one in
                     the mines. On the arrival of the proconsul in April the severity of the persecution
                     increased. St. Mappalicus died gloriously on the 17th. Children were tortured,
                     women dishonoured. Numidicus, who had encouraged many, saw his wife burnt
                     to alive, and was himself half burnt, then stoned and left for dead; his daughter
                     found him yet living; he recovered and Cyprian made him a priest. Some, after
                     being twice tortured, were dismissed or banished, often beggared.

                     But there was another side to the picture. At Rome terrified Christians rushed to
                     the temples to sacrifice. At Carthage the majority apostatized. Some would not
                     sacrifice, but purchased libelli, or certificates, that they had done so Some
                     bought the exemption of their family at the price of their own sin. Of these
                     libellatici there were several thousands in Carthage. Of the fallen some did not
                     repent, others joined the heretics, but most of them clamoured for forgiveness
                     and restoration. Some, who had sacrificed under torture, returned to be tortured
                     afresh. Castus and AEmilius were burnt for recanting, others were exiled; but
                     such cases were necessarily rare. A few began to perform canonical penance.
                     The first to suffer at Rome had been a young Carthaginian, Celerinus. He
                     recovered, and Cyprian made him a lector. His grandmother and two uncles had
                     been martyrs, but his two sisters apostatized under fear of torture, and in their
                     repentance gave themselves to the service of those in prison. Their brother was
                     very urgent for their restoration. His letter from Rome to Lucian, a confessor at
                     Carthage, is extant, with the reply of the latter. Lucian obtained from a martyr
                     named Paul before his passion a commission to grant peace to any who asked
                     for it, and he distributed these "indulgences" with a vague formula: "Let such a
                     one with his family communicate". Tertullian speaks in 197 of the "custom" for
                     those who were not at peace with the Church to beg this peace from the martyrs.
                     Much later, in his Montanist days (c. 220) he urges that the adulterers whom
                     Pope Callistus was ready to forgive after due penance, would now get restored by
                     merely imploring the confessors and those in the mines. Correspondingly we find
                     Lucian issuing pardons in the name of confessors who were still alive, a manifest
                     abuse. The heroic Mappalicus had only interceded for his own sister and mother.
                     It seemed now as if no penance was to be enforced upon the lapsed, and
                     Cyprian wrote to remonstrate.

                     Meanwhile official news had arrived from Rome of the death of Pope Fabian,
                     together with an unsigned and ungrammatical letter to the clergy of Carthage
                     from some of the Roman clergy, implying blame to Cyprian for the desertion of
                     his flock, and giving advice as to the treatment of the lapsed. Cyprian explained
                     his conduct (Ep. xx), and sent to Rome copies of thirteen of the letter he had
                     written from his hiding-place to Carthage. The five priests who opposed him were
                     now admitting at once to communion all who had recommendations from the
                     confessors, and the confessors themselves issued a general indulgence, in
                     accordance with which the bishops were to restore to communion all whom they
                     had examined. This was an outrage on discipline, yet Cyprian was ready to give
                     some value to the indulgences thus improperly granted, but all must be done in
                     submission to the bishop. He proposed that libellatici should be restored, when
                     in danger of death, by a priest or even by a deacon, but that the rest should await
                     the cessation of persecution, when councils could be held at Rome and at
                     Carthage, and a common decision be agreed upon. Some regard must be had for
                     the prerogative of the confessors, yet the lapsed must surely not be placed in a
                     better position than those who had stood fast, and had been tortured, or
                     beggared, or exiled. The guilty were terrified by marvels that occurred. A man
                     was struck dumb on the very Capitol where he had denied Christ. Another went
                     mad in the public baths, and gnawed the tongue which had tasted the pagan
                     victim. In Cyprian's own presence an infant who had been taken by its nurse to
                     partake at the heathen altar, and then to the Holy Sacrifice offered by the bishop,
                     was though in torture, and vomited the Sacred Species it had received in the holy
                     chalice. A lapsed woman of advanced age had fallen in a fit, on venturing to
                     communicate unworthily. Another, on opening the receptacle in which, according
                     to custom, she had taken home the Blessed Sacrament for private Communion,
                     was deterred from sacrilegiously touching it by fire which came forth. Yet another
                     found nought within her pyx save cinders. About September, Cyprian received
                     promise of support from the Roman priests in two letters written by the famous
                     Novatian in the name of his colleagues. In the beginning of 251 the persecution
                     waned, owing to the successive appearance of two rival emperors. The
                     confessors were released, and a council was convened at Carthage. By the
                     perfidy of some priests Cyprian was unable to leave his retreat till after Easter (23
                     March). But he wrote a letter to his flock denouncing the most infamous of the
                     five priests, Novatus, and his deacon Felicissimus (Ep. xliii). To the bishop's
                     order to delay the reconciliation of the lapsed until the council, Felicissimus had
                     replied by a manifesto, declaring that none should communicate with himself who
                     accepted the large alms distributed by Cyprian's order. The subject of the letter
                     is more fully developed in the treatise "De Ecclesiae Catholicae Unitate" which
                     Cyprian wrote about this time (Benson wrongly thought it was written against
                     Novatian some weeks later).

                     This celebrated pamphlet was read by its author to the council which met in
                     April, that he might get the support of the bishops against the schism started by
                     Felicissimus and Novatus, who had a large following. The unity with which St.
                     Cyprian deals is not so much the unity of the whole Church, the necessity of
                     which he rather postulates, as the unity to be kept in each diocese by union with
                     the bishop; the unity of the whole Church is maintained by the close union of the
                     bishops who are "glued to one another", hence whosoever is not with his bishop
                     is cut off from the unity of the Church and cannot be united to Christ; the type of
                     the bishop is St. Peter, the first bishop. Protestant controversialists have
                     attributed to St. Cyprian the absurd argument that Christ said to Peter what He
                     really meant for all, in order to give a type or picture of unity. What St. Cyprian
                     really says is simply this, that Christ, using the metaphor of an edifice, founds
                     His Church on a single foundation which shall manifest and ensure its unity. And
                     as Peter is the foundation, binding the whole Church together, so in each
                     diocese is the bishop. With this one argument Cyprian claims to cut at the root
                     of all heresies and schisms. It has been a mistake to find any reference to Rome
                     in this passage (De Unit., 4).

                                            CHURCH UNITY

                     About the time of the opening of the council (251), two letters arrived from Rome.
                     One of these, announcing the election of a pope, St. Cornelius, was read by
                     Cyprian to the assembly; the other contained such violent and improbable
                     accusations against the new pope that he thought it better to pass it over. But
                     two bishops, Caldonius and Fortunatus, were dispatched to Rome for further
                     information, and the whole council was to await their return-such was the
                     importance of a papal election. Meantime another message arrived with the news
                     that Novatian, the most eminent among the Roman clergy, had been made pope.
                     Happily two African prelates, Pompeius and Stephanus, who had been present at
                     the election of Cornelius, arrived also, and were able to testify that he had been
                     validly set "in the place of Peter", when as yet there was no other claimant. It
                     was thus possible to reply to the recrimination of Novatian's envoys, and a short
                     letter was sent to Rome, explaining the discussion which had taken place in the
                     council. Soon afterwards came the report of Caldonius and Fortunatus together
                     with a letter from Cornelius, in which the latter complained somewhat of the delay
                     in recognizing him. Cyprian wrote to Cornelius explaining his prudent conduct.
                     He added a letter to the confessors who were the main support of the antipope,
                     leaving it to Cornelius whether it should be delivered or no. He sent also copies of
                     his two treatises, "De Unitate" and "De Lapsis" (this had been composed by him
                     immediately after the other), and he wishes the confessors to read these in order
                     that they may understand what a fearful thing is schism. It is in this copy of the
                     "De Unitate" that Cyprian appears most probably to have added in the margin an
                     alternative version of the fourth chapter. The original passage, as found in most
                     manuscripts and as printed in Hartel's edition, runs thus:

                          If any will consider this, there is no need of a long treatise and of
                          arguments. 'The Lord saith to Peter: 'I say unto thee that thou art
                          Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of
                          hell shall not prevail against it; to thee I will give the keys to the
                          kingdom of heaven, and what thou shalt have bound on earth shall
                          be bound in heaven, and what thou shalt have loosed shall be
                          loosed in heaven.' Upon one He builds His Church, and though to
                          all His Apostles after His resurrection He gives an equal power and
                          says: 'As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you: Receive the
                          Holy Ghost, whosesoever sins you shall have remitted they shall
                          be remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins you shall have
                          retained they shall be retained', yet that He might make unity
                          manifest, He disposed the origin of that unity beginning from one.
                          The other Apostles were indeed what Peter was, endowed with a
                          like fellowship both of honour and of power, but the commencement
                          proceeds from one, that the Church may be shown to be one. This
                          one Church the Holy Ghost in the person of the Lord designates in
                          the Canticle of Canticles, and says, One is My Dove, My perfect
                          one, one is she to her mother, one to her that bare her. He that
                          holds not this unity of the Church, does he believe that he holds
                          the Faith? He who strives against and resists the Church, is he
                          confident that he is in the Church?

                     The substituted passage is as follows:

                          . . . bound in heaven. Upon one He builds His Church, and to the
                          same He says after His resurrection, 'feed My sheep'. And though
                          to all His Apostles He gave an equal power yet did He set up one
                          chair, and disposed the origin and manner of unity by his authority.
                          The other Apostles were indeed what Peter was, but the primacy is
                          given to Peter, and the Church and the chair is shown to be one.
                          And all are pastors, but the flock is shown to be one, which is fed
                          by all the Apostles with one mind and heart. He that holds not this
                          unity of the Church, does he think that he holds the faith? He who
                          deserts the chair of Peter, upon whom the Church is founded, is he
                          confident that he is in the Church?

                     These alternative versions are given one after the other in the chief family of
                     manuscripts which contains them, while in some other families the two have
                     been partially or wholly combined into one. The combined version is the one
                     which has been printed in man editions, and has played a large part in
                     controversy with Protestants. It is of course spurious in this conflated form, but
                     the alternative form given above is not only found in eighth- and ninth-century
                     manuscripts, but it is quoted by Bede, by Gregory the Great (in a letter written
                     for his predecessor Pelagius II), and by St. Gelasius; indeed, it was almost
                     certainly known to St. Jerome and St. Optatus in the fourth century. The
                     evidence of the manuscripts would indicate an equally early date. Every
                     expression and thought in the passage can be paralleled from St. Cyprian's
                     habitual language, and it seems to be now generally admitted that this alternative
                     passage is an alteration made by the author himself when forwarding his work to
                     the Roman confessors. The "one chair" is always in Cyprian the episcopal chair,
                     and Cyprian has been careful to emphasize this point, and to add a reference to
                     the other great Petrine text, the Charge in John, xxi. The assertion of the equality
                     of the Apostles as Apostles remains, and the omissions are only for the sake of
                     brevity. The old contention that it is a Roman forgery is at all events quite out of
                     the question. Another passage is also altered in all the same manuscripts which
                     contain the "interpolation"; it is a paragraph in which the humble and pious
                     conduct of the lapsed "on this hand (hic) is contrasted in a long succession of
                     parallels with the pride and wickedness of the schismatics "on that hand" (illic),
                     but in the delicate manner of the treatise the latter are only referred to in a
                     general way. In the "interpolated" manuscripts we find that the lapsed, whose
                     caused had now been settled by the council, are "on that hand" (illic), whereas
                     the reference to the schismatics -- meaning the Roman confessors who were
                     supporting Novatian, and to whom the book was being sent -- are made as
                     pointed as possible, being brought into the foreground by the repeated hic, "on
                     this hand".


                     The saint's remonstrance had its effect, and the confessors rallied to Cornelius.
                     But for two or three months the confusion throughout the Catholic Church had
                     been terrible. No other event in these early times shows us so clearly the
                     enormous importance of the papacy in East and West. St. Dionysius of
                     Alexandria joined his great influence to that of the Carthaginian primate, and he
                     was very soon able to write that Antioch, Caesarea, and Jerusalem, Tyre and
                     Laodicea, all Cilicia and Cappadocia, Syria and Arabia, Mesopotamia, Pontus,
                     and Bithynia, had returned to union and that their bishops were all in concord
                     (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., VII, v). From this we gauge the area of disturbance.
                     Cyprian says that Novatian "assumed the primacy" (Ep. lxix, 8) and sent out his
                     new apostles to very many cities; and where in all provinces and cities there
                     were long established, orthodox bishops, tried in persecution, he dared to create
                     new ones to supplant them, as though he could range through the whole world
                     (Ep. lv, 24). Such was the power assumed by a third-century antipope. Let it be
                     remembered that in the first days of the schism no question of heresy was raised
                     and that Novatian only enunciated his refusal of forgiveness to the lapsed after he
                     had made himself pope. Cyprian's reasons for holding Cornelius to be the true
                     bishop are fully detailed in Ep. lv to a bishop, who had at first yielded to Cyprian's
                     arguments and had commissioned him to inform Cornelius that "he now
                     communicated with him, that is with the Catholic Church", but had afterwards
                     wavered. It is evidently implied that if he did not communicate with Cornelius he
                     would be outside the Catholic Church. Writing to the pope, Cyprian apologizes
                     for his delay in acknowledging him; he had at least urged all those who sailed to
                     Rome to make sure that they acknowledged and held the womb and root of the
                     Catholic Church (Ep. xlviii, 3). By this is probably meant "the womb and root
                     which is the Catholic Church", but Harnack and many Protestants, as well as
                     many Catholics, find here a statement that the Roman Church is the womb and
                     root. Cyprian continues that he had waited for a formal report form the bishops
                     who had been sent to Rome, before committing all the bishops of Africa,
                     Numidia, and Mauretania to a decision, in order that, when no doubt could
                     remain all his colleagues "might firmly approve and hold your communion, that is
                     the unity and charity of the Catholic Church". It is certain that St. Cyprian held
                     that one who was in communion with an antipope held not the root of the
                     Catholic Church, was not nourished at her breast, drank not at her fountain.

                     So little was the rigorism of Novatian the origin of his schism, that his chief
                     partisan was no other than Novatus, who at Carthage had been reconciling the
                     lapsed indiscriminately without penance. He seems to have arrived at Rome just
                     after the election of Cornelius, and his adhesion to the party of rigorism had the
                     curious result of destroying the opposition to Cyprian at Carthage. It is true that
                     Felicissimus fought manfully for a time; he even procured five bishops, all
                     excommunicated and deposed, who consecrated for the party a certain
                     Fortunatus in opposition to St. Cyprian, in opposition to St. Cyprian, in order not
                     to be outdone by the Novatian party, who had already a rival bishop at Carthage.
                     The faction even appealed to St. Cornelius, and Cyprian had to write to the pope
                     a long account of the circumstances, ridiculing their presumption in "sailing to
                     Rome, the primatial Church (ecclesia principalis), the Chair of Peter, whence the
                     unity of the Episcopate had its origin, not recollecting that these are the Romans
                     whose faith was praised by St. Paul (Rom., i, 8), to whom unfaith could have no
                     access". But this embassy was naturally unsuccessful, and the party of
                     Fortunatus and Felicissimus seems to have melted away.

                                             THE LAPSED

                     With regard to the lapsed the council had decided that each case must be
                     judged on its merits, and that libellatici should be restored after varying, but
                     lengthy, terms of penance, whereas those who had actually sacrificed might after
                     life-long penance receive Communion in the hour of death. But any one who put
                     off sorrow and penance until the hour of sickness must be refused all
                     Communion. The decision was a severe one. A recrudescence of persecution,
                     announced, Cyprian tells us, by numerous visions, caused the assembling of
                     another council in the summer of 252 (so Benson and Nelke, but Ritsch and
                     Harnack prefer 253), in which it was decided to restore at once all those who
                     were doing penance, in order that they might be fortified by the Holy Eucharist
                     against trial. In this persecution of Gallus and Volusianus, the Church of Rome
                     was again tried, but this time Cyprian was able to congratulate the pope on the
                     firmness shown; the whole Church of Rome, he says, had confessed
                     unanimously, and once again its faith, praised by the Apostle, was celebrated
                     throughout the whole world (Ep. lx). About June 253, Cornelius was exiled to
                     Centumcellae (Civitavecchia), and died there, being counted as a martyr by
                     Cyprian and the rest of the Church. His successor Lucius was at once sent to
                     the same place on his election, but soon was allowed to return, and Cyprian
                     wrote to congratulate him. He died 5 March, 254, and was succeeded by
                     Stephen, 12 May, 254.

                                        REBAPTISM OF HERETICS

                     Tertullian had characteristically argued long before, that heretics have not the
                     same God, the same Christ with Catholics, therefore their baptism is null. The
                     African Church had adopted this view in a council held under a predecessor of
                     Cyprian, Agrippinus, at Carthage. In the East it was also the custom of Cilicia,
                     Cappadocia, and Galatia to rebaptize Montanists who returned to the church.
                     Cyprian's opinion of baptism by heretics was strongly expresses: "Non abluuntur
                     illic homines, sed potius sordidantur, nec purgantur delicta sed immo
                     cumulantur. Non Deo nativitas illa sed diabolo filios generat" ("De Unit.", xi). A
                     certain bishop, Magnus, wrote to ask if the baptism of the Novatians was to be
                     respected (Ep. lxix). Cyprian's answer may be of the year 255; he denies that
                     they are to be distinguished from any other heretics. Later we find a letter in the
                     same sense, probably of the spring of 255 (autumn, according to d'Ales), from a
                     council under Cyprian of thirty-one bishops (Ep. lxx), addressed to eighteen
                     Numidian bishops; this was apparently the beginning of the controversy. It
                     appears that the bishops of Mauretania did not in this follow the custom of
                     Proconsular Africa and Numidia, and that Pope Stephen sent them a letter
                     approving their adherence to Roman custom.

                     Cyprian, being consulted by a Numidian bishop, Quintus, sent him Ep. lxx, and
                     replied to his difficulties (Ep. lxxi). The spring council at Carthage in the following
                     year, 256, was more numerous than usual, and sixty-one bishops signed the
                     conciliar letter to the pope explaining their reasons for rebaptizing, and claiming
                     that it was a question upon which bishops were free to differ. This was not
                     Stephen's view, and he immediately issued a decree, couched apparently in very
                     peremptory terms, that no "innovation" was to be made (this is taken by some
                     moderns to mean "no new baptism"), but the Roman tradition of merely laying
                     hands on converted heretics in sign of absolution must be everywhere observed,
                     on pain of excommunication. This letter was evidently addressed to the African
                     bishops, and contained some severe censures on Cyprian himself. Cyprian
                     writes to Jubainus that he is defending the one Church, the Church founded on
                     Peter-Why then is he called a prevaricator of the truth, a traitor to the truth;? (Ep.
                     lxxiii, 11). To the same correspondent he sends Epp. lxx, lxxi, lxxii; he makes
                     no laws for others, but retains his own liberty. He sends also a copy of his newly
                     written treatise "De Bono Patientiae". To Pompeius, who had asked to see a
                     copy of Stephen's rescript, he writes with great violence: "As you read it, you will
                     note his error more and more clearly: in approving the baptism of all the heresies,
                     he has heaped into his own breast the sins of all of them; a fine tradition indeed!
                     What blindness of mind, what depravity!" -- "ineptitude", "hard obstinacy" -- such
                     are the expressions which run from the pen of one who declared that opinion on
                     the subject was free, and who in this very letter explains that a bishop must
                     never be quarrelsome, but meek and teachable. In september, 256, a yet larger
                     council assembled at Carthage. All agreed with Cyprian; Stephen was not
                     mentioned; and some writers have even supposed that the council met before
                     Stephen's letter was received (so Ritschl, Grisar, Ernst, Bardenhewer). Cyprian
                     did not wish the responsibility to be all his own. He declared that no one made
                     himself a bishop of bishops, and that all must give their true opinion. The vote of
                     each was therefore given in a short speech, and the minutes have come down to
                     us in the Cyprianic correspondence under the title of "Sententiae Episcoporum".
                     But the messengers sent to Rome with this document were refused an audience
                     and even denied all hospitality by the pope. They returned incontinently to
                     Carthage, and Cyprian tried for support from the East. He wrote to the famous
                     Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, Firmilian, sending him the treatise "De
                     Unitate" and the correspondence on the baptismal question. By the middle of
                     November Firmilian's reply had arrived, and it has come down to us in a
                     translation made at the time in Africa. Its tone is, if possible, more violent than
                     that of Cyprian. (See FIRMILIAN.) After this we know no more of the controversy.

                     Stephen died on 27 August, 257, and was succeeded by Sixtus II, who certainly
                     communicated with Cyprian, and is called by Pontius "a good and peace-loving
                     bishop". Probably when it was seen at Rome that the East was largely
                     committed to the same wrong practice, the question was tacitly dropped. It
                     should be remembered that, though Stephen had demanded unquestioning
                     obedience, he had apparently, like Cyprian, considered the matter as a point of
                     discipline. St. Cyprian supports his view by a wrong inference from the unity of
                     the Church, and no one thought of the principle afterwards taught by St.
                     Augustine, that, since Christ is always the principal agent, the validity of the
                     sacrament is independent of the unworthiness of the minister: Ipse est qui
                     baptizat. Yet this is what is implied in Stephen's insistence upon nothing more
                     than the correct form, "because baptism is given in the name of Christ", and "the
                     effect is due to the majesty of the Name". The laying on of hands enjoined by
                     Stephen is repeatedly said to be in poenitentiam, yet Cyprian goes on to argue
                     that the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands is not the new birth, but
                     must be subsequent to it and implies it. This has led some moderns into the
                     notion that Stephen meant confirmation to be given (so Duchesne), or at least
                     that he has been so misunderstood by Cyprian (d'Alès). But the passage (Ep.
                     lxxiv, 7) need not mean this, and it is most improbable that confirmation was
                     even thought of in this connection. Cyprian seems to consider the laying on of
                     hands in penance to be a giving of the Holy Ghost. In the East the custom of
                     rebaptizing heretics had perhaps arisen from the fact that so many heretics
                     disbelieved in the Holy Trinity, and possibly did not even use the right form and
                     matter. For centuries the practice persisted, at least in the case of some of the
                     heresies. But in the West to rebaptize was regarded as heretical, and Africa
                     came into line soon after St. Cyprian. St. Augustine, St. Jerome, and St. Vincent
                     of Lérins are full of praise for the firmness of Stephen as befitting his place. But
                     Cyprian's unfortunate letters became the chief support of the puritanism of the
                     Donatists. St. Augustine in his "De Baptismo" goes through them one by one.
                     He will not dwell on the violent words quae in Stephanum irritatus effudit, and
                     expresses his confidence that Cyprian's glorious martyrdom will have atoned for
                     his excess.

                                          APPEALS TO ROME

                     Ep. lxviii was written to Stephen before the breach. Cyprian has heard twice from
                     Faustinus, Bishop of Lyons, that Marcianus, Bishop of Arles, has joined the
                     party of Novatian. The pope will certainly have been already informed of this by
                     Faustinus and by the other bishops of the province. Cyprian urges:

                          You ought to send very full letters to our fellow-bishops in Gaul, not
                          to allow the obstinate and proud Marcianus any more to insult our
                          fellowship...Therefore send letters to the province and to the people
                          of Arles, by which, Marcianus having been excommunicated,
                          another shall be substituted in his place...for the whole copious
                          body of bishops is joined together by the glue of mutual concord
                          and the bond of unity, in order that if any of our fellowship should
                          attempt to make a heresy and to lacerate and devastate the flock
                          of Christ, the rest may give their aid...For though we are many
                          shepherds, yet we feed one flock.

                     It seems incontestable that Cyprian is here explaining to the pope why he
                     ventured to interfere, and that he attributes to the pope the power of deposing
                     Marcanus and ordering a fresh election. We should compare his witness that
                     Novatian usurped a similar power as antipope.

                     Another letter dates perhaps somewhat later. It emanates form a council of thirty
                     seven bishops, and was obviously composed by Cyprian. It is addressed to the
                     priest Felix and the people of Legio and Asturica, and to the deacon Ælius and
                     the people of Emerita, in Spain. It relates that the bishops Felix and Sabinus had
                     come to Carthage to complain. They had been legitimately ordained by the
                     bishops of the province in the place of the former bishops, Basilides and
                     Martialis, who had both accepted libelli in the persecution. Basilides had further
                     blasphemed God, in sickness, had confessed his blasphemy, had voluntarily
                     resigned his bishopric, and had been thankful to be allowed lay communion.
                     Martialis had indulged in pagan banquets and had buried his sons in a pagan
                     cemetery. He had publicly attested before the procurator ducenarius that he had
                     denied Christ. Wherefore, says the letter, such men are unfit to be bishops, the
                     whole Church and the late Pope Cornelius having decided that such men may be
                     admitted to penance but never to ordination; it does not profit them that they have
                     deceived Pope Stephen, who was afar off and unaware of the facts, so that they
                     obtained to be unjustly restored to their sees; nay, by this deceit they have only
                     increased their guilt. The letter is thus a declaration that Stephen was wickedly
                     deceived. No fault is imputed to him, no is there any claim to reverse his decision
                     or to deny his right to give it; it is simply pointed out that it was founded on false
                     information, and was therefore null. But it is obvious that the African council had
                     heard only one side, whereas Felix and Sabinus must have pleaded their cause
                     at Rome before they came to Africa. On this ground the Africans seem to have
                     made too hasty a judgment. But nothing more is known of the matter.


                     The empire was surrounded by barbarian hordes who poured in on all sides. The
                     danger was the signal for a renewal of persecution on the part of the Emperor
                     Valerian. At Alexandria St. Dionysius was exiled. On 30 August, 257, Cyprian
                     was brought before the Proconsul Paternus in his secretarium. His interrogatory
                     is extant and forms the first part of the "Acta proconsularia" of his martyrdom.
                     Cyprian declares himself a Christian and a bishop. He serves one God to Whom
                     he prays day and night for all men and for the safety of the emperor. "Do you
                     persevere in this?" asks Paternus. "A good will which knows God cannot be
                     altered." "Can you, then, go into exile at Curubis?" "I go." He is asked for the
                     names of the priests also, but replies that delation is forbidden by the laws; they
                     will be found easily enough in their respective cities. On September he went to
                     Curubis, accompanied by Pontius. The town was lonely, but Pontius tells us it
                     was sunny and pleasant, and that there were plenty of visitors, while the citizens
                     were full of kindness. He relates at length Cyprian's dream on his first night there,
                     that he was in the proconsul's court and condemned to death, but was reprieved
                     at his own request until the morrow. He awoke in terror, but once awake he
                     awaited that morrow with calmness. It came to him on the very anniversary of the
                     dream. In Numidia the measurers were more severe. Cyprian writes to nine
                     bishops who were working in the mines, with half their hair shorn, and with
                     insufficient food and clothing. He was still rich and able to help them. Their
                     replies are preserved, and we have also the authentic Acts of several African
                     martyrs who suffered soon after Cyprian.

                     In August, 258, Cyprian learned that Pope Sixtus had been put to death in the
                     catacombs on the 6th of that month, together with four of his deacons, in
                     consequence of a new edict that bishops, priests, and deacons should be at
                     once put to death; senators, knights, and others of rank are to lose their goods,
                     and if they still persist, to die; matrons to be exiled; Caesarians (officers of the
                     fiscus) to become slaves. Galerius Maximus, the successor of Paternus, sent for
                     Cyprian back to Carthage, and in his own gardens the bishop awaited the final
                     sentence. Many great personages urged him to fly, but he had now no vision to
                     recommend this course, and he desired above all to remain to exhort others. Yet
                     he hid himself rather than obey the proconsul's summons to Utica, for he
                     declared it was right for a bishop to die in his own city. On the return of Galerius
                     to Carthage, Cyprian was brought from his gardens by two principes in a chariot,
                     but the proconsul was ill, and Cyprian passed the night in the house of the first
                     princeps in the company of his friends. Of the rest we have a vague description
                     by Pontius and a detailed report in the proconsular Acts. On the morning of the
                     14th a crowd gathered "at the villa of Sextus", by order of the authorities. Cyprian
                     was tried there. He refused to sacrifice, and added that in such a matter there
                     was no room for thought of the consequences to himself. The proconsul read his
                     condemnation and the multitude cried, "Let us be beheaded with him!" He was
                     taken into the grounds, to a hollow surrounded by trees, into which many of the
                     people climbed. Cyprian took off his cloak, and knelt down and prayed. Then he
                     took off his dalmatic and gave it to his deacons, and stood in his linen tunic in
                     silence awaiting the executioner, to whom he ordered twenty-five gold pieces to
                     be given. The brethren cast cloths and handkerchiefs before him to catch his
                     blood. He bandaged his own eyes with the help of a priest and a deacon, both
                     called Julius. So he suffered. For the rest of the day his body was exposed to
                     satisfy the curiosity of the pagans. But at night the brethren bore him with
                     candles and torches, with prayer and great triumph, to the cemetery of
                     Macrobius Candidianus in the suburb of Mapalia. He was the first Bishop of
                     Carthage to obtain the crown of martyrdom.


                     The correspondence of Cyprian consists of eighty-one letters. Sixty-two of them
                     are his own, three more are in the name of councils. From this large collection
                     we get a vivid picture of his time. The first collection of his writings must have
                     been made just before or just after his death, as it was known to Pontius. It
                     consisted of ten treatises and seven letters on martyrdom. To these were added
                     in Africa a set of letters on the baptismal question, and at Rome, it seems, the
                     correspondence with Cornelius, except Ep. xlvii. Other letters were successively
                     aggregated to these groups, including letters to Cyprian or connected with him,
                     his collections of Testimonies, and many spurious works. To the treatises
                     already mentioned we have to add a well-known exposition of the Lord's Prayer; a
                     work on the simplicity of dress proper to consecrated virgins (these are both
                     founded on Tertullian); "On the Mortality", a beautiful pamphlet, composed on the
                     occasion of the plague which reached Carthage in 252, when Cyprian, with
                     wonderful energy, raised a staff of workers and a great fund of money for the
                     nursing of the sick and the burial of the dead. Another work, "On Almsgiving", its
                     Christian character, necessity, and satisfactory value, was perhaps written, as
                     Watson has pointed out, in reply to the calumny that Cyprian's own lavish gifts
                     were bribes to attach men to his side. Only one of his writings is couched in a
                     pungent strain, the "ad Demetrianum", in which he replies in a spirited manner to
                     the accusation of a heathen that Christianity had brought the plague upon the
                     world. Two short works, "On Patience" and "On Rivalry and Envy", apparently
                     written during the baptismal controversy, were much read in ancient times. St.
                     Cyprian was the first great Latin writer among the Christians, for Tertullian fell into
                     heresy, and his style was harsh and unintelligible. Until the days of Jerome and
                     Augustine, Cyprian's writings had no rivals in the West. Their praise is sung by
                     Prudentius, who joins with Pacian, Jerome, Augustine, and many others in
                     attesting their extraordinary popularity.


                     The little that can be extracted from St. Cyprian on the Holy Trinity and the
                     Incarnation is correct, judged by later standards. On baptismal regeneration, on
                     the Real Presence, on the Sacrifice of the Mass, his faith is clearly and
                     repeatedly expressed, especially in Ep. lxiv on infant baptism, and in Ep. lxiii on
                     the mixed chalice, written against the sacrilegious custom of using water without
                     wine for Mass. On penance he is clear, like all the ancients, that for those who
                     have been separated from the Church by sin there is no return except by a
                     humble confession (exomologesis apud sacerdotes), followed by remissio facta
                     per sacerdotes. The ordinary minister of this sacrament is the sacerdos par
                     excellence, the bishop; but priests can administer it subject to him, and in case
                     of necessity the lapsed might be restored by a deacon. He does not add, as we
                     should at the present day, that in this case there is no sacrament; such
                     theological distinctions were not in his line. There was not even a beginning of
                     canon law in the Western Church of the third century. In Cyprian's view each
                     bishop is answerable to God alone for his action, though he ought to take
                     counsel of the clergy and of the laity also in all important matters. The Bishop of
                     Carthage had a great position as honorary chief of all the bishops in the
                     provinces of Proconsular Africa, Numidia, and Mauretania, who were about a
                     hundred in number; but he had no actual jurisdiction over them. They seem to
                     have met in some numbers at Carthage every spring, but their conciliar decisions
                     had no real binding force. If a bishop should apostatize or become a heretic or fall
                     into scandalous sin, he might be deposed by his comprovincials or by the pope.
                     Cyprian probably thought that questions of heresy would always be too obvious
                     to need much discussion. It is certain that where internal questions of heresy
                     would always be too obvious to need much discussion. It is certain that where
                     internal discipline was concerned he considered that Rome should not interfere,
                     and that uniformity was not desirable -- a most unpractical notion. We have
                     always to remember that his experience as a Christian was of short duration,
                     that he became a bishop soon after he was converted, and that he had no
                     Christian writings besides Holy Scripture to study besides those of Tertullian. He
                     evidently knew no Greek, and probably was not acquainted with the translation of
                     Irenaeus. Rome was to him the centre of the Church's unity; it was inaccessible
                     to heresy, which had been knocking at its door for a century in vain. It was the
                     See of Peter, who was the type of the bishop, the first of the Apostles. Difference
                     of opinion between bishops as to the right occupant of the Sees of Arles or
                     Emerita would not involve breach of communion, but rival bishops at Rome would
                     divide the Church, and to communicate with the wrong one would be schism. It is
                     controverted whether chastity was obligatory or only strongly urged upon priests
                     in his day. The consecrated virgins were to him the flower of his flock, the jewels
                     of the Church, amid the profligacy of paganism.


                     A short treatise, "Quod Idola dii non sint", is printed in all editions as Cyprian's. It
                     is made up out of Tertullian and Minucius Felix. Its genuineness is accepted by
                     Benson, Monceaux, and Bardenhewer, as it was anciently by Jerome and
                     Augustine. It has been attributed by Haussleiter to Novatian, and is rejected by
                     Harnack, Watson, and von Soden. "De Spectaculis" and "De bono pudicitiae"
                     are, with some probability, ascribed to Novatian. They are well-written letters of
                     an absent bishop to his flock. "De Laude martyrii" is again attributed by Harnack
                     to Novatian; but this is not generally accepted. "Adversus Judaeos" is perhaps
                     by a Novatianist and Harnack ascribes it to Novatian himself. "Ad Novatianum" is
                     ascribed by Harnack to Pope Sixtus II. Ehrhard, Benson, Nelke, and Weyman
                     agree with him that it was written in Rome. This is denied by Julicher,
                     Bardenhewer, Monceaux. Rombold thinks it is by Cyprian. "De Rebaptismate" is
                     apparently the work attributed by Genadius to a Roman named Ursinus, c. 400.
                     He was followed by some earlier critics, Routh, Oudin, and lately by Zahn. But it
                     was almost certainly written during the baptismal controversy under Stephen. It
                     comes from Rome (so Harnack and others) or from Mauretania (so Ernst,
                     Monceaux, d'Arles), and is directed against the view of Cyprian. The little homily
                     "De Aleatoribus" has had quite a literature of its own within the last few years,
                     since it was attributed by Harnack to Pope Victor, and therefore accounted the
                     earliest Latin ecclesiastical writing. The controversy has at least made it clear
                     that the author was either very early or not orthodox. It has been shown to be
                     improbable that he was very early, and Harnack now admits that the work is by
                     an antipope, either Novatianist or Donatist. References to all the brochures and
                     articles on the subject will be found in Ehrhard, in Bardenhewer, and especially in
                     Harnack (Chronol., II, 370 sqq.).

                     "De Montibus Sina et Sion" is possibly older than Cyprian's time (see Harnack,
                     and also Turner in Journal of Theol. Studies, July 1906). "Ad Vigilium Episcopum
                     de Judaica incredulitate" is by a certain Celsus, and was once supposed by
                     Harnack and Zahn to be addressed to the well-known Vigilius of Thapsus, but
                     Macholz has now convinced Harnack that it dates from either the persecution of
                     Valerian or that of Maxentius. The two "Orationes" are of uncertain date and
                     authorship. The tract "De Singularitate clericorum" has been attributed by Dom
                     Morin and by Harnack to the Donatist Bishop Macrobius in the fourth century.
                     "De Duplici Martyrio ad Fortunatum" is found in no manuscript, and was
                     apparently written by Erasmus in 1530. "De Paschâ computus" was written in
                     the year preceding Easter, 243. All the above spuria are printed in Hartel's edition
                     of Cyprian. The "Exhortatio de paenitentia" (first printed by Trombelli in 1751) is
                     placed in the fourth or fifth century by Wunderer, but in Cyprian's time or
                     Monceaux. Four letter are also given by Hartel; the first is the original
                     commencement of the "Ad Donatum". The others are forgeries; the third,
                     according to Mercati, is by a fourth-century Donatist. The six poems are by one
                     author, of quite uncertain date. The amusing "Cena Cypriani" is found in a large
                     number of Cyprianic manuscripts. Its date is uncertain; it was re-edited by
                     Blessed Rhabanus Maurus. On the use of it at pageants in the early Middle
                     Ages, see Mann, "History of the Popes", II, 289.

                     The principal editions of the works of St. Cyprian are: Rome, 1471 (the ed.
                     princeps), dedicated to Paul II; reprinted, Venice, 1471, and 1483; Memmingen,
                     c. 1477; Deventer, c. 1477; Paris, 1500; ed. by Rembolt (Paris, 1512); by
                     Erasmus (Basle, 1520 and frequently; the ed. of 1544 was printed at Cologne). A
                     careful critical edition was prepared by Latino Latini, and published by Manutius
                     (Rome, 1563); Morel also went to the manuscripts (Paris, 1564); so did Pamele
                     (Antwerp, 1568), but with less success; Rigault did somewhat better (Paris,
                     1648, etc.). John Fell, Bishop of Oxford and Dean of Christ Church, published a
                     well-known edition from manuscripts in England (Oxford, 1682). The dissertations
                     by Dodwell and the "Annales Cyprianici" by Pearson, who arranged the letters in
                     chronological order, make this edition important, though the text is poor. The
                     edition prepared by Etienne Baluze was brought out after his death by Dom
                     Prudence Maran (Paris, 1726), and has been several times reprinted, especially
                     by Migne (P.L., IV and V). The best edition is that of the Vienna Academy
                     (C.S.E.L., vol. III, in 3 parts, Vienna, 1868-1871), edited from the manuscripts by
                     Hartel. Since then much work has been done upon the history of the text, and
                     especially on the order of the letters and treatises as witnessing to the
                     genealogy of the codices.

                     A stichometrical list, probably made in 354, of the Books of the Bible, and of many works of St.
                     Cyprian, was published in 1886 from a manuscript then at Cheltenham by MOMMSEN, Zur lat.
                     Stichometric; Hermes, XXI, 142; ibid. (1890), XXV, 636, on a second MS. at St. Gall. See SANDAY
                     and TURNER in Studia Biblica (Oxford, 1891), III; TURNER in Classical Review (1892), etc.), VI,
                     205. On Oxford MSS., see WORDSWORTh in Old Lat. Biblical Texts (Oxford, 1886), II, 123; on
                     Madrid MSS., SCHULZ, Th. Lit. Zeitung (1897), p. 179. On other MSS., TURNER in Journal of Th.
                     St., III, 282, 586, 579; RAMSAY, ibid., III, 585, IV, 86. On the significance of the order, CHAPMAN,
                     ibid., IV, 103; VON SODEN, Die cyprianische Briefsammlung (Leipzig, 1904). There are many
                     interesting points in MERCATI, D'alcuni nuovi sussidi per la critica del testo di S. Cipriano (Rome,

                     On the life of St. Cyprian: PEARSON, Annales Cyprianici, ed. FELL; Acta SS., 14 Sept;
                     RETTBERG, Th. Caec. Cyprianus (Gottingen, 1831); FREPPEL, Saint Cyprien et l'Eglise d'Afrique
                     (Paris, 1865, etc.); PETERS, Der hl. Cypr. v. Karth. Ratisbon, 1877); Freppel and Peters
                     occasionally exaggerate in the Catholic interest. FECHTRUP, Der hl. Cyprian (Munster, 1878);
                     RITSCHL, Cyprian v. K. und die Verfassung der Kirche (Gottingen, 1885); BENSON, Cyprian, his
                     life, his times, his work (London, 1897). (This is the fullest and best English life; it is full of
                     enthusiasm, but marred by odium theologicum, and quite untrustworthy when controversial point
                     arise, whether against Nonconformists or against Catholics.) MONCEAUX, Hist. litt. de l'Afrique
                     chret. (Paris, 1902), II, a valuable work. Of the accounts in histories, encyclopedias, and patrologies,
                     the best is that of BARDENHEWER, Gesch. der altkirchl. Lit. (Freiburg, 1903), II. PEARSON's
                     chronological order of the letters is given in HARTEL's edition. Rectifications are proposed by
                     RITSCHL, De Epistulis Cyprianicis (Halle, 1885), and Cyprian v. Karthago (Gottingen, 1885); by
                     NELKE, Die Chronologie der Korresp. Cypr. (Thorn, 1902); by VON SODEN, op. cit.; by BENSON
                     and MONCEAUX. These views are discussed by BARDENHEWER. loc. cit., and HARNACK,
                     Chronol., II. BONACCORSI, Le lettere di S. Cipriano in Riv. storico-critica delle scienze teol. (Rome,
                     1905), I, 377; STUFLER, Die Behandlung der Gefallenen zur Zeit der decischen Verfolgung in
                     Zeitschrift fur Kathol. Theol., 1907, XXXI, 577; DWIGHT, St. Cyprian and the libelli martyrum in
                     Amer. Cath. Qu. Rev. (1907), XXXII, 478. On the chronology of the baptismal controversy, D'ALES,
                     La question baptismale au temps de Saint-Cyprien in Rev. des Questions Hist. (1907), p. 353.

                     On Cyprian's Biblical text: CORSSEN, Zur Orientierung uber die bisherige Erforschung der klass.
                     Altertumswiss. (1899); SANDAY in Old Latin Bibl. Texts (1886), II; TURNER in Journ. Theol. St., II,
                     600, 610; HEIDENREICH, Der ntl. Text bei Cyprian (Bamberg, 1900); MONCEAUX, op. cit.;
                     CORSSEN, Der cypr. Text der Acta Ap. (Berlin, 1892); ZAHN, Forschungen (Erlangen, 1891), IV, 79
                     (on Cyprian's text of the Apoc.). A new edition (Oxford Univ. Press) is expected of the Testimonia by
                     SANDAY and TURNER. Tentative prolegomena to it by TURNER in Journal Theological Studies
                     (1905), VI, 246, and (1907), IX, 62. The work has been interpolated; see RAMSAY, On early
                     insertions in the third book of St. Cyprian's Text in Journal of Theol. St. (1901), II, 276. Testimonies
                     of the ancients to Cyprian in HARNACK, Gesch. der altchristl. Lit., I; GOTZ, Gesch. der
                     cyprianischen Literatur bis zu der Zeit der ersten erhaltenen Handschriften (Basle, 1891). On the
                     Latin of St. Cyprian an excellent essay by WATSON, The Style and Language of St. Cyprian in
                     Stud. Bibl. (Oxford, 1896), IV; BAYARD, Le Latin de Saint Cyprien (Paris, 1902). The letters of
                     Cornelius are in Vulgar Latin (see MERCATI, op. cit.), and so are Epp. viii (anonymous) and xxi-xxiv
                     (Celerinus, Lucian, Confessors, Caldonius); they have been edited by MIODONSKI, Adversus
                     Alcatores (Erlangen and Leipzig, 1889). On the interpolations in De Unitate Eccl., see HARTEL,
                     Preface; BENSON, pp. 200-21, 547-552; CHAPMAN, Les interpolations dans le traite de Saint
                     Cyprien sur l'unite de l'Eglise in Revue Benedictine (1902), XIX, 246, 357, and (1903), XX, 26;
                     HARNACK in Theo. Litt. Zeitung (1903), no. 9, and in Chronol., II; WATSON in Journal Theol. St.
                     (1904), p. 432; CHAPMAN, ibid., p. 634, etc. On particular points see HARNACK in Texte und
                     Untersuch., IV, 3, VIII, 2; on the letters of the Roman clergy HARNACK in Theol. Abhandl. Carl v.
                     Weisacker gewidmet (Freiburg, 1896).

                     On Cyprian's theology much has been written. RITSCHL is fanciful and unsympathetic, BENSON
                     untrustworthy. GOTZ, Das Christentum Cyprians (Giessen, 1896). On his trust in visions, HARNACK,
                     Cyprian als Enthusiast in Zeitschr. fur ntl. Wiss. (1902), III, ibid. On the baptismal controversy and
                     Cyprian's excommunication, see GRISAR in Zeitschr. fur kath. Theol. (1881), V; HOENSBROECH,
                     ibid. (1891), XV; ERNST, ibid., XVII, XVIII, XIX. POSCHMANN, Die Sichtbarkeit der Kirche nach der
                     Lehre des h. Cypr. (Breslau, 1907); RIOU, La genese de l'unite catholique et la pensee de Cyprien
                     (Paris, 1907). To merely controversial works it is unnecessary to refer.

                     The above is only a selection from an immense literature on Cyprian and the pseudo-Cyprianic
                     writings, for which see CHEVALIER, Bio-Bibl., and RICHARDSON, Bibliographical Synopsis. Good
                     lists in VON SODEN, and in HARNACK, Chronol., II; the very full references in BARDENHEWER are
                     conveniently classified.

                     John  Chapman
                     Transcribed by Michael T. Barrett
                     Dedicated to JoAnn Smull

                                       The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IV
                                    Copyright © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company
                                    Online Edition Copyright © 1999 by Kevin Knight
                                        Nihil Obstat. Remy Lafort, Censor
                                   Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York

The Catholic Encyclopedia:

TOPICS: Catholic; History
KEYWORDS: 3rdcenturymartyr; catholiclist

1 posted on 09/16/2002 7:39:49 PM PDT by Lady In Blue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *Catholic_list; father_elijah; Salvation; nickcarraway; NYer; JMJ333; IGNATIUS
2 posted on 09/16/2002 7:44:21 PM PDT by Lady In Blue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue
Another great post.
3 posted on 09/16/2002 9:35:52 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
4 posted on 09/16/2002 10:18:49 PM PDT by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue
Thanks for all the hard work, LIB. And as usual, I enjoyed the post.
5 posted on 09/16/2002 11:11:28 PM PDT by JMJ333
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue
Double duty bump! Great post. We can learn a lot from the saints.
6 posted on 09/17/2002 9:38:49 AM PDT by Salvation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue

BTTT on September 16, 2004, Memorial of St. Cyprian.

7 posted on 09/16/2004 6:51:53 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue

BTTT on the Memorial of Sts. Cornelius and Cyprian, September 16, 2005!

8 posted on 09/16/2005 6:20:29 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue
A letter of St Cyprian
A faith that is alert and unshaken
Cyprian to his brother Cornelius.
My very dear brother, we have heard of the glorious witness given by your courageous faith. On learning of the honour you had won by your witness, we were filled with such joy that we felt ourselves sharers and companions in your praiseworthy achievements. After all, we have the same Church, the same mind, the same unbroken harmony. Why then should a priest not take pride in the praise given to a fellow priest as though it were given to him? What brotherhood fails to rejoice in the happiness of its brothers wherever they are?
Words cannot express how great was the exultation and delight here when we heard of your good fortune and brave deeds: how you stood out as leader of your brothers in their declaration of faith, while the leader’s confession was enhanced as they declared their faith. You led the way to glory, but you gained many companions in that glory; being foremost in your readiness to bear witness on behalf of all, you prevailed on your people to become a single witness. We cannot decode which we ought to praise, your own ready and unshaken faith or the love of your brothers who would not leave you. While the courage of the bishop who thus led the way has been demonstrated, at the same time the unity of the brotherhood who followed has been manifested. Since you have one heart and one voice, it is the Roman Church as a whole that has thus born witness. Dearest brother bright and shining is the faith which the blessed Apostle praised in your community. He foresaw in the spirit the praise your courage deserves and the strength that could not be broken; he was heralding the future when he testified to your achievements; his praise of the fathers was a challenge to the sons. Your unity, your strength have become shining examples of these virtues to the rest of the brethren. Divine providence has now prepared us. God’s merciful design has warned us that the day of our own struggle, our own contest, is at hand. By that shared love which binds us close together, we are doing all we can to exhort our congregation, to give ourselves unceasingly to fastings, vigils and prayers in common. These are the heavenly weapons which give us the strength to stand firm and endure; they are the spiritual defences, the God-given armaments that protect us.
Let us then remember one another, united in mind and heart. Let us pray without ceasing, you for us, we for you; by the love we share we shall thus relieve the strain of these great trials.

9 posted on 09/16/2008 4:41:18 PM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson