was not written by Novatus after his episcopal ordination, and after his separation from the church; consequently, after the middle of the year 251. I allow it was written in some time of trouble, and in a place of retreat or banishment; but what was that time does not appear; whether the persecution of Decius, or Gallus, or Valerian: therefore the date of it must be left uncertain. Du Pin' says, it appears probable to him that this piece was written after that Novatus was become the head of a party, during the persecution of Gallus and Volusian. 2. There is also still extant the treatise, Of the Trinity, or, Of the rule of faith, which Jerom calls a large volume. I think this book is now generally allowed by learned men to be the work of our Novatus: and it is the largest piece of his now remaining. Concerning the time of writing it Mr. Jackson mentions two opinions; the first, Pamelius's and his own, that it was written before the schism, which began in 251; the other, that of Dr. Cave; who supposed that this work was composed after the schism, not before the year 257; here being notice taken of the heresy of Sabeflius, which appeared about that time. Mr. Jackson might have mentioned a third opinion, that of Baronius; who thought this book was not published by Novatus till about the year 270, as supposing him not only to argue against Sabellius, whom he mentions by name, but also against Paul of Samosata, whom he does not name. And Tillemont thinks this opinion not improbable, though not certain. g Let us consider Mr. Jackson's arguments. In the first place he asks; How will Cave prove that Sabellius was not known in the world for his heresy before 257? But to this there is an obvious answer at hand, that Cave is not singular in his supposition. It is the opinion of very many learned men, that Sabellius did not publish his particular sentiments till 254 or 255, or thereabout, as I have observed in another place. And secondly, it is very easily proved that Sabellianism was not known long before the year 257: for in that year Dionysius of Alexandria sent Pope Xystus or Sixtus the second an account of what he had said and written in that controversy, which had its rise in Ptolemais in Egypt; and therefore probably had not been on foot above a year or two, or three at the most. Therefore Sabellianism was not known in the West before the year 255, or 256, or 257. This argument needs not to be enlarged upon. I should think that any man may perceive from the history of the third century, particularly from what we have written concerning Novatianism, that, supposing Sabellianism to have appeared before 250, and allowing it likewise to have been at all different from the common and prevailing sentiment of Christians at that time, such was the vigilance of the bishops of the church, Dionysius would have sent an account of it to Rome long before 257. What a noise did Novatianism make; how many deputies were there sent to and fro? what a number of letters and treatises were there written upon that subject in the space of a very few years? I think then that Dionysius's account. of the rise of Sabellianism is an invincible argument that it did not appear in Egypt before 254, or 255, or 256. Therefore this book of Novatus could not be written before 256, or 257. It is not very unlikely that, soon after the first intelligence of this doctrine came to Italy from Dionysius, or from some other person, Novatus, much disliking it, composed this treatise of the Trinity: and possibly he was as well qualified to treat the subject as any man in the West. If this argument needed any farther enlargement, it might be added, that the catholics of Pentapolis, who disliked some expressions of Dionysius in his writings against Sabellius, laid their charges against him before his namesake of Rome, whose episcopate begun in 259: therefore Dionysius had but lately written in this controversy. If his work had been published long ago, these offended catholics would not have deferred their accusations till 259, or 260, nor have chosen to bring them to Dionysius of Rome, the ancient and honoured friend and correspondent of him of Alexandria. Nevertheless, Mr. Jackson thinks that the heresy of Sabellius began about 220, that is, 30 a Bibl. des Auteurs Ecc. Novat. p. 182. b See Du Pin. Bibl. Novatien. Baron. Ann. 272, xv. Tillem. Les Novatiens, Art. 3. • Statuendum restat (quantum possumus) quo tempore conscripsit Novatianus librum de Trinitate. Et cum Pamelio omnino arbitror ego illum hoc opus composuisse, antequam in schisma incideret, quod fuit inceptum 251. Aliter quidem judicat doctiss. Cavius, hac ductus ratione, quod hæreseos Sabellianæ meminit, quæ (ut dicit Cavius) circa annum 257 exorta est. Jackson. Præf. p. xii. xiii. d Baron. Ann. 272, n. xv. * See Tillem. Les Novatiens, Art. iii. p. 89. Sed quomodo probaverit Cavius Sabellium propter hæresin non esse notum ante an. 257? Hæc est mera viri docti conjectura, &c. Ib. p. 13. See before, Vol. i. p. 616. p.v h Et tandem exhinc apparet, triginta circiter esse annos inter schisma Novatiani et incoeptam hæresin Sabellii; et Cavius ratione temporis erravit fere triginta et septem annos. Ib. p. 18. years before the schism at Rome; consequently Cave is mistaken no less than thirty and seven years concerning the time of Sabellius. b Mr. Jackson would support his opinion by the chronicles of Isidore of Seville, and Ado, which place Sabellius about the year 220: but chronicles written, one in Spain in the seventh, the other in Gaul in the ninth century, are cf little authority against Dionysius, a contemporary upon the spot. It is likely those chroniclers mean Noetus; who might appear, or be famous, about that time: they might confound these two persons, their opinions agreeing in the main, as is supposed; and Sabellius being more known than Noetus, as we are informed by the learned * Augustine, who is certainly a good witness in this matter, and assures us that even in his time Noetus was known to very few, and that these two heresies were reckoned one and the same. It is an additional argument that these chroniclers mean Noetus, or confound him and Sabellius, in that they make no distinct mention of the former. There is the more reason to think Ado means Noetus when he speaks of Sabellius, because he joins Hippolytus with him; and it is generally supposed that Hippolytus wrote against Noetus in his book against all heresies, and that this was the last heresy in that work. In short, Noetianism and Sabellianism were confounded, and reckoned one and the same heresy, by the Latins in the time of Augustine and afterwards: and the best use that can be made of these two chroniclers is to confirm the common supposition, that Noetus either appeared, or was condemned, about the year 220, or soon after. d Lastly, Mr. Jackson says, it is not likely that Novatus should write so good a book, in all things conformable to the catholic doctrine, after he had fallen into his detestable schism, and an opinion so contrary to the divine goodness and mercy, How detestable his schism was I cannot say, though I do not justify his conduct: for, whatever pretensions he might have to the chair of Rome, on account of his eminent learning, or uncommon services, or the expectations given him, possibly by a large number of the clergy and people of that church; yet, when another was chosen, as Cyprian observes, it might be his duty to acquiesce. Nor is it unlikely that as good books as this of Novatus upon the Trinity have been written by men who have had false apprehensions of the divine goodness and mercy insome respects. Finally, I wonder why Mr. Jackson should make a question of Novatus writing, at any time, a book upon the catholic principles about the Trinity, when there appear not any traces of a difference upon this point between him and his followers and the catholics of that time. It is not unlikely that Novatus was from the beginning, and always continued to be, as orthodox in that, and most other matters, as Christians generally were in that age. Upon the whole, I believe there are very few but must be of opinion that this treatise, the principal remaining work of Mr. Jackson's author, was not written till some while after his detestable schism, as Mr. Jackson calls it. I cannot forbear observing here, though it is not necessary, that several of the ancient writers concerning heresies confirm the more common opinion of the time of Sabellianism, particularly Epiphanius and Augustine: their order is this; Noetians, Valesians, Novatians, Angelics, Apostolics, Sabellians. They supposed therefore that Novatianism sprang up in the space of time between Noetus and Sabellius. From what has been said, the conclusion is very evident; that the earliest probable date of this work is that assigned by Cave, which is the year 257, several years after the author's episcopal ordination. hoc diserto testimonio confirmat Isidorus Hispalensis, qui in chronico ad annum a mundo condito 5419, sive anno Domini 221, sub imperio Aurelii Antonini Heliogabali scribit ortum fuisse Sabellium hæresiarchum. Ib. p. 18. b Huic vero convenit Ado Viennensis, quo auctore, Sabellius erat hæresiarches anno circiter 220, imperante Aurelio Heliogabalo, sub cujus imperio simul cum Hippolyto vixisse tradit Ado. Verba illius sunt in chronico ab. an. 220, ad an. 224. Sabellius hæresiarches oritur. Hippolytus episcopus, multorum conditor opusculorum, temporum canonem conscripsit, et huc usque perduxit.' Id. ibid. Sabelliani ab illo Noëto, quem supra memoravimus, defluxisse dicuntur.Sed quâ causâ duas hæreses eas Epiphanius computet, nescio; cum fieri potuisse videamus, ut fuerit Sabellius iste famosior, et ideo ex illo celebrius hæc hæresis nomen acceperit. Noctiani enim difficile ab aliquo 3. Beside these two treatises, which we suppose to be the same that are mentioned by Jerom, there is extant a letter of the Roman clergy to Cyprian, written during the vacancy of the see, after the death of Fabian, in August 250. It is allowed that Novatus drew up this epistle, and it is much commended. C 4. There is still another letter, written before the end of the same year to Cyprian. These two letters are among Cyprian's. But it is not so certain that Novatus had the chief hand in penning this, as the former. Mr. Jackson, however, has done well in publishing it together with the other things ascribed to Novatus. 5. In these pieces there is not, that I remember, any thing concerning the particular sentiment which Novatus is supposed to have maintained after his episcopal ordination; or relating to the differences between him and some other Christians: yet surely there must have been such things. It may be argued from Cyprian's letters: and Jerom speaks of epistles of Novatus that were schismatical. g d с f 6. St. Jerom in his Catalogue, among other works of Novatus, mentions two with these titles, Of Easter, Of circumcision. And, in the appendix to St. Jerom's works, there are two treatises, or epistles, without the name of the author; one entitled, Of the celebration of Easter; the other, Of the true circumcision. The former of these is now allowed to be St. Augustine's and is published among his letters: as for the other, it is generally allowed to be the work of some later author than Novatus, forasmuch as here is express mention made of the Manicheans and Arians: nor is there any good reason to take it for a work of St Jerom: it must therefore be looked upon as the composition of some anonymous writer: whose time is uncertain. I shall take notice of a few things observable in it. h 1. Here are many quotations of the books of the Old and New Testament, or references to them. 2. The author several times quotes the first chapter of St. Matthew's gospel. k 3. He takes notice of the enrolment of Cyrenius, or Cyrinus, as he calls him, in Luke ii. 1-5. 4. He also expressly quotes' the beginning of St. John's gospel. m 5. He cites Rom. ix. 4, 5, very remarkably in this manner: "To whom pertaineth the adoption and the glory, and the covenant, and the giving of the law, and the service and the promises; of whom also is Christ according to the flesh, who is blessed for ever." 6. In this piece is likewise cited" the beginning of St. John's first epistle; and there are passages out of many other books of scripture, as before observed: but I do not think it needful to take any farther notice of particular citations in this work. VI. I do not draw the character of Novatus: I am not satisfied to make such an attempt upon the ground of those few writings of his that remain, when there were so many more, and the history we have of him is so imperfect. I find, however, that learned moderns do allow a Additum est etiam, Novatiano tunc scribente, et, quod scripserat, suâ voce recitante, &c. Cypr. ad Antonian. Ep. 55 [al. 52] p. 102. Mense Augusto exeunte, clerus Romanus scribit ad Cy*prianum.- -Sunt autem hæc cleri Romani literæ præclare scriptæ, et literis ipsius Cypriani pene æquandæ ex quibus de ingenio et eloquentiâ Novatiani judicium ferri potest. Ille enim hanc epistolam exaravit. Pearson. Ann. Cypr. 250, n. xvi. Conf. Pagi Crit. 230. n. xii. Ap. Cypr. Ep. 30, 36, [al. 30, 31.] Sed enim supervenerunt postmodum aliæ literæ tuæ, in quibus animadverti animum tuum Novatiani literis motum nutare cœpisse, &c. Cypr. ad ant. Ep. 55 [al. 52] p. 101. et passim. esimulque epistolas Novatiani, ut, dum schismatici hominis venena cognoscimus, libentius sancti martyris Cypriani bibamus antidotum. Hieron. ad Paul. Concord. Ep. 10. [al. 21] p. 17, in Ed. Bened. Ego Origenem propter eruditionem sic interdum legendum arbitror, quomodo Tertullianum, Novatum, Arnobium, Apollinarium; &c. Id. ad Tranquill. Ep. 56 [al. 76], 589. f. Vid. Martian. Annotat. ap. Hieronym. T. v. p. 175. h Vid. Censuram epistolæ de verâ circumcisione, apud Hieron. T. v. p. 150. Liber generationis De Verâ CircumForis scribitur per Foris scriptus est, cum evangelista ait: Jesu Christi, filii David, filii Abraham. cisione, ap. Hieron. T. v. p. 153, m. Matthæum: Christi autem generatio sic erat: Cum esset desponsata mater ejus Maria Joseph. Ib. infra. med. pag. k Rogo hic, ubi sub Oyrino censûs investigatio? ubi edictum Cæsaris? ubi necessitas profitendi? Ib. p. 162. in. 1 Intus scribitur, cum per Joannem dicitur: In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Ib. p. 153. infr. m. m Quorum adoptio est filiorum, et gloria, et testamentum, et legislatio, et obsequium, et promissa: ex quibus etiam est Christus secundum carnem, qui est benedictus in secula. Ib. p. 151. in. n Cum beatus Joannes invisibilem et visibilem, Deum et hominem, brevi quasi charactere signaverit. Sic enim ait: Quod fuit ab initio, fratres, quod audivimus. Ecce libri illius interiorem partem. Quod sequitur: Et vidimus oculis nostris, et manus nostræ palpaverunt de verbo vitæ. Ecce libri pars exterior, &c. p. 154. init. • Novatianus Stoicorum philosophorum scita profitebatur, him wit, or good natural parts; learning and eloquence, or a fine pen: and Jerom of old, who was better qualified to judge than we are, in several respects, especially because he had more of this writer's works than we have, in a letter to pope Damasus, speaking of Tertullian and Novatus, calls them very eloquent men. a The sentiment of Novatus upon church discipline is often spoken of by ancients and moderns, as contrary to the divine goodness and mercy. Upon this account he has been called " a man of a most cruel disposition, and has been said to charge God himself with cruelty. Nevertheless, in his book of the Trinity he appears to have had honourable sentiments of the Deity, saying that God excels all other beings in benevolence, goodness, justice and mercy. Nor did he deny the power or will of God to pardon great sins after baptism; though he would not allow such a power in the church, or to be lodged with the ordinary ministers of the gospel. d I would add, that he may be thought to have one advantage, in that all his litigious and controversial writings, if there were any such, are lost: for, next to the happiness of escaping dis'putes and controversies, may be reckoned the having them buried in oblivion: but though this may be esteemed an advantage to him, I cannot tell whether it be so to us. It is not unlikely that, if more of his works were in being, we, as well as Jerom, should be willing to read them. Since he is upon record, as author of a fact that subsisted for several ages, it might be desirable to know from himself the grounds he went upon. The writings of catholic authors, it is to be hoped, would afford a sufficient preservative against infection: and, together with the venom of his erroneous doctrine, there might have been conveyed to us somewhat healing and nourishing. I have given above the true reason why I decline drawing the character of Novatus. As Du Pin saw no occasion to be so scrupulous, it is by no means fit my readers should be deprived of the commendation he has given the founder of the Novatian sect. This author,' says he, had abundance of wit, learning, and eloquence: his style is pure, neat, and polite: his expressions are chosen, his thoughts natural, and his reasonings just: he is full of citations of texts of scripture, that are much to the purpose: moreover, there is a great deal of method and order in those treatises of his which we have: and he always expresseth himself with mildness and 'moderation.' What greater character could be desired by a catholic writer! e 6 VII. Though the pieces of Novatus, and especially the treatise of the Trinity or the Rule of faith, abound with texts of the Old and New Testament, there are not many books of either cited expressly and by name. Him,' says he, 1. A great number of passages are quoted out of St. Matthew's gospel. the ancient prophecies, as well as the gospels, testify to be the son of Abraham, and the Son of David.' Here is probably a reference to the first chapter of St. Matthew's gospel. The words of Matt. i. 23, are quoted by him in another place. Once more: So Christ himself "Lo I am with you unto the end of the world:" chap. xxviii. 20. g h says; 2. To St. Mark's gospel there are very few, if any, references. However, we may take a passage or two to be considered. If it belong to God only to forgive sins, Christ forgiveth sins:' see Mark ii. 5, 6, 7. God is not worshipped by the belly, nor with meats, which the Lord says * perish, and are purged in the draught, according to the course of nature: See Mark vii. 19. 3. They also urge and insist upon what is said in the gospel of Luke: "The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God:" chap. i. 35. homo acerrimi ingenii, multijugæ doctrinæ, nec facundiæ vulgaris. Admon. in Ambros. libr. de Poenit. T. ii. p. 385. ed. Bened. a Non quod non potuerim et ad illas aliquid respondere, sed quod ab eloquentissimis viris, Tertulliano nostro scilicet et Novatiano, Latino sermone sint editæ. Hieron. Ep. 125. T. ii. p. 563. Bened. Quis ante crudelissimum Novatianum crudelem Deum dixit, eo quod mallet mortem morientis quam ut revertatur et vivat? Vincent. Lir. Comm. p. 335. Paris. 1669. cet omnibus divitiis ditior, omni prudentiâ prudentior, et omni benignitate benignior, omni bonitate melior, omni justitia justior, omni clementiâ clementior. De Reg. Fid. cap. 2. p. 24. Jackson. 4 See before, note, p. 60. Biblioth. p. 182. f Hunc enim Abrahæ filium, hunc David, hunc non minus et vetera prædicta et evangelia testantur. De Regula Fidei, cap. 9, p. 58. 8 Et vocabitis nomen ejus Emmanuel, quod est interpretatum, Nobiscum Deus. Ib. cap. 24 [al. 19], p. 186. Sic Christus ipse dicit, Ecce ego vobiscum sum usque ad consummationem seculi. cap. 12, p. 87. i Quod si, cum nullius sit, nisi Dei, peccata dimittere, idem Christus peccata dimittit. De Reg. Fid. c. 13. p. 97, 98. * Deus ventre non colitur, nec cibis, quos Dominus dicit perire, et en secessu naturali lege purgari. De Cib. Jud. cap. 5, pe 275. 1 Proponunt enim atque illa prætendunt, quæ in evangelio Lucæ relata sunt,- -Spiritus Sanctus veniet in te.- De Reg. Fid. cap. 24 [al. 19]. p. 186. 4. For, And the word," says John, "was made flesh, and dwelled among us:" Johni. 14. This gospel is expressly quoted as John's several times by this writer. b C 5. The book of the Acts of the apostles is no where expressly quoted, or very plainly referred to, in the remaining pieces of Novatus: but it may be reckoned probable that he has an eye to the history contained in the first chapters of that book when he says; The Holy Spirit, the comforter, whom Christ had promised to the disciples, is he who explained to them the evangelic mysteries, and illuminated them with the knowledge of divine things; by whom being confirmed, they endured bonds and imprisonments for the name of the Lord, and triumphed over 'the powers of the world, and over all torments.' I place in the margin another passage, in which he quotes the words of Joel: which are also alleged by St. Peter, Acts ii. 16, 17. See Joel ii. 28. 6. I proceed to St. Paul's epistles. d 1. The epistle to the Romans is often quoted as St. Paul's by this presbyter of the church of Rome, who was afterwards chosen bishop by a part of the same church. 'The apostle Paul writes in his epistle: "Whose," says he, "are the fathers, of whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is over all God blessed for ever." Rom. ix. 5. In the epistle penned by Novatus, sent to Cyprian by the presbyters and deacons of the church of Rome in 250, it is said: Otherwise the apostle had not so commended us, saying: "That your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.' Rom. i. 8. f g 2. Lastly, the apostle Paul knew this harmony and unity, with a distinction of persons; for, writing to the Corinthians, "I," says he, "have planted, Apollo watered, but God gave the increase:" intending intending 1 Cor. iii. 6, 7, 8. 3. Lastly the apostle Paul: " Having," says he, "the same spirit, as it is written, I believed, therefore have I spoken: we also believe, and therefore speak." 2 Cor. iv. 13. i 4. And in another place [the apostle Paul:] "Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one." Gal. iii. 20. Words of this epistle are several times cited by this writer as the apostle Paul's. 5. Of whom the apostle Paul: "He that descended is the same that ascended above all heavens, that he might fill all things." Eph. iv. 10. 1 6. But why should we pass by that place in the apostle?" Who being in the form of 'God, did not earnestly seek to be like God;" or, "to be equal with God." Philip. ii. 6-12, That Novatus understood this text after that manner, was shewn " formerly. n m 7. "For whether, says the apostle, they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers, things visible and invisible, by him all things consist." Col. i. 16, 17. 8. There are not in Novatus any passages taken out of the first or second epistle to the Thessa lonians. 9. The apostle Paul also: "Who only," says he, says he, "hath immortality, and dwelleth in the light which no man can approach unto." 1 Tim. vi. 16. • Nam et Verbum, inquit Joannes, caro factum est, et inhabitavit in nobis. Ib. c. 10. p. 74. Ac sic Joannes nativitatem Christi describens. De Reg. Fid. cap. 13. init. Si enim Joannes dicit, Omnia per ipsum facta sunt. cap. 17 [al. 25], init. et passim. c Hic est enim- qui evangelica sacramenta distinxit, qui in ipsis inluminator rerum divinarum fuit, quo confirmati pro nomine Domini nec carceres nec vincula timuerunt; quinimo ipsas seculi potestates et tormenta calcaverunt. Ib. c. 29, p. 220. Est enim per Joëlem prophetam repromissus, sed per Christum redditus: In novissimis, inquit, diebus effundam de Spiritu meo super servos et ancillas meas. Ib. p. 218. eQuod si et apostolus Paulus, Quorum, inquit, patres, et ex quibus Christus secundum carnem, qui est super ornnia Deus benedictus in secula, in suis literis scribit. cap. 13. P. 99. Quoniam nec tantas de nobis laudes apostolus protulisset, dicendo: Quia fides vestra prædicatur in toto mundo. p. 289. 8 Denique novit hanc concordiæ unitatem, cum personarum tamen distinctione. Nam, cum ad Corinthios scriberet, Ego, inquit, plantavi, &c. de Reg. Fid. cap. 27 [al. 22.] Denique apostolus Paulus, Habentes, inquit, eumdem spiritum. cap. 29. p. 219. i Et alio in loco: Mediator autem unius non est, Deus autem unus est. cap. 30. p. 230. * De quo apostolus Paulus: Qui descendit, ipse est qui ascendit super omnes cœlos. cap. 17, [al. 25] p. 134. Cur autem- -illum prætereamus apud apostolum locum? Qui cum in formâ Dei esset, non rapinam arbitratus est æqualem se Deo esse. De Reg. Fid. cap. 22, [al. 17] p. 173, 174, 175. Hic ergo, quamvis esset in formâ Dei, non est rapinam arbitratus æqualem se Deo esse. p. 176. vid. etiam quæ ibidem sequuntur, et p. 177, 178. m See p. 21. "Sive enim, inquit apostolus, throni, sive dominationes, sive virtutes, sive potestates, visibilia et invisibilia, omnia per ipsum constant. cap. 13. p. 94. • Apostolus quoque Paulus: Qui solus, inquit, habet, inmortalitatem, &c. cap. 30. p. 230. |