Volume 1

A dictionary of Christian antiquities : being a continuation of the 'Dictionary of the Bible' / edited by William Smith and Samuel Cheetham ; illustrated by engravings on wood.

Date:: [between 1890 and 1899?]

Credit: A dictionary of Christian antiquities : being a continuation of the 'Dictionary of the Bible' / edited by William Smith and Samuel Cheetham ; illustrated by engravings on wood. Source: Wellcome Collection.

1003/1096 (page 983)

$torture or death; others dedicated themselves to the service of confessors, others entered on penances of undefined duration (Cypr. Epp. 24, 21, 56). Many more relied on vicarious impu- tations of merit, by means of intercessions, always owned as availing for the individual before God (praerogativa eorum adjuvari apud Deum possunt, Ep. 18, cf Ep. 19, ii.), but now first used in subversion of church order. At first a letter from a martyr to the bishop only prayed that the case of a lapsed friend might be enquired into on the cessation of persecution; a period of penitence and the imposition of hands being understood to be necessary just as for other sins; some, like Saturninus, declined to venture even on this ; Mappalicus requested it only for his sister or mother (Cypr. Ep. 20). But the presbyters who composed at Capthage the faction hostile to Cyprian perceiving the effectiveness which might be given to the prac- tice, anticipated not only the bishop’s enquiry but even the death of martyrs, and “ offered the names” of lapsed persons (see Aubespine, (Jhss. Ecc. L. i. § vii., prefixed to Priorius’s Optatus, 1676, p. 40), and gave them communion as duly restored penitents {Ep. 34) upon receiving such letters from confessors without the bishop’s sanction. These libelli sometimes specified only one of a group to whom they were granted, “Communicet ille cum suis ” {Ep. 15). Then they were issued in the name of deceased con- fessors, and of confessors too illiterate to write themselves {Ep. 27), and this so copiously that some thousands were supposed to be circulating in Africa {Ep. 20). The chief authority in this issue, Lucianus, when remonstrated with by Cypidan, seems to have replied almost at once by promulgating in the name of “ all the con- fessors ” (compare the letter of airas papTvpcav from Nicomedia, end of cent. iii. Lucian ap. Routh, Eelli'iuiae, vol. iv.) an indul- gence to “ all the lapsed,” and requesting Cyprian himself to communicate it to the provincial bishops, the sole condition annexed being that their conduct since their fall should have been satisfactory. This extraordinary document is extant, as Cyp. EJp. 23. Cypriaji himself was prepared to concede some weight to these libelli in cases not undeserving of restitution, but the influence of the martyrs was ignored in the coun- cil {Garth. Sub. Cpp. i.) which regulated the terms of readmission. [African Councils, I. 38.] These seditious libelli of the martyrs seem to have had no existence at Rome. This was no doubt due to the influence in the exactly oppo- site direction of Novatian over the confessors, whom he commends for maintaining “ Evan- gelica disciplina ” {Ep. 30, iv. 4), and who at first adhei’ed to him, and not to the milder Cor- neliu.s. The Roman presbyters sympathise with the African episcopate, and deplore the similar revolts in Sicily, and in “ nearly all the wor d.” Thev say of Rome, “ We seem to have escaped so far the disorders vf the times.” The petition of Celerinus at Rome to the confessors of Car'hage for “ Peace ” to be granted to his sisters, implies that libelli could not practically be obtained at Rome {Ep. 22); accordingly the Roman con- fessors who correspond with Cyprian, urge humility on the Carthaginians, and go beyond him in strictness {Epp. 27, 31, 32). [E. W. B.] LIBER DIURNUS. The Liber Diurnus Pontificum Romanorum is a collection of for- mulae used in the correspondence and ordinary business, the “ negotia diurna,” of the Roman Curia. Its date is determined within certain limits by internal evidence. In c. ii. tit. ix. p. 28, Constantine Pogonatus is referred to as departed. The formula which contains this reference there- fore must have been drawn up or added to after the year 685. And Gamier argues that the book must have been compiled before the year 752, as it contains formulae of addresses to eparchs, which would, he thinks, not have been inserted after the date when eparchs were super- seded. He considers the Liber Diurnus to have been drawn up in the time of Gregory II. (715- 731), mainly on the ground, that in the second “ professio fidei ” of a newly-elected pope which it gives (p. 33 ff.), expressions and sentiments occur identical with some found in letters of that pope to the emperor Leo. Zaccaria, how- ever, has shewn that at any rate the MS. which Gamier used was almost certainly not written earlier than the time of Gregory iV., as it con- tains an allusion (c. ii. tit. 2, p. 13) to the date of that pontiff’s consecration (Nov. a.d. 827). And as it is very probable that many forms were left standing after they had ceased to be in actual use, no certain inference as to the date of the collection as a whole can be drawn from the fact, that forms are given for addresses to an exarch. It was made use of by the early canonists, as Ivo of Chartres, Anselm, Deusdedit, and Gratian (Dist. xvi. c. 8); but as in the course of time forms of proceeding changed, it gradually fell out of use, and copies became rare. Some time before the year 1650 the well- known Lucas Holstenius saw in the Cistercian monastery of S. Croce in Gerusalemme at Rome an ancient MS.* of the Liber Diurnus, and with some difficulty obtained from the abbat leave to have it transcribed — a task which is said to have been performed in a single night. While he was prejiaring to publish this, he heard of another MS. at Paris, in the possession of Sir- mond, which was sent to him at Rome (Sir- mondi Opera, iv. pp. 685 f. and 701). He does not appear how^ever to have made any use of this MS., for what reason we do not know. His edition was printed, and a copy is found in the Vatican Library with the following title-page in Holstenius’s own hand-writing: ^‘■Diurnus Pon- tificum, sive vetus Formularium, quo S. Rom. Ecclesia ante annos M utebatur. Lucas Hol- stenius edidit cum Notis. Romae typis Lud. Griniani, mdcl. 8vo.” The notes are wanting, but Zaccaria, towards the end of the last century, saw Holstenius’s preparations for them still pre- served at Rome. The sheets were ready then in 1650, but not issued. The same book exactly, with the exception of some slight variations in the last sheet, is found with the printed title, “ Liber Diurnus Romanorum Pontificum ex anti- quissimo codice ms. nunc primum in lucem editus Romae typis Josephi Vanmcci, 1658.” But the censors intervened, and the book was not pub- a This MS. is described by Pertz {Ital. Beise, in Archit fur ciltere Deutsche Geschichtskunde, v. 27) as an 8vo volume of parchment of (probably) the 8th century.$