Part 8

In the first Year of the Pontificate of _Zephyrinus_, who succeeded _Victor_, a dreadful Persecution was raised against the Christians by the Emperor _Severus_, and carried on with great Cruelty in all Parts of the Empire. _Zephyrinus_, however, had the good Luck to escape it, and to see the Church, by the Death of that Prince, happily delivered from the Evils, which the Rage of her foreign Enemies had brought upon her. [Sidenote: Zephyrinus _opposes the_ Theodotian _Heretics_.] But her domestic Enemies gave her no Respite; the _Theodotian_ Heretics continued sowing, and not without Success, their pestilential Errors at _Rome_. _Zephyrinus_, it seems, opposed them with great Vigour and Zeal; for they reproached him, as we read in _Eusebius_[291], as the first who had betrayed the Truth, by maintaining against them the Divinity of _Christ_: hence he is ranked, by _Optatus_, with _Tertullian_, _Victorinus_, &c. among those who have successfully defended the Catholic Church[292]. _Baronius_, to extol _Zephyrinus_, ascribes to him the first Condemnation of _Praxeas_[293], which was followed by a solemn Retractation under his own Hand. But it was in _Africa_, and not at _Rome_, that _Praxeas_ was condemned, as appeared plain to me, from the Words of _Tertullian_[294], before I had seen either _Pamelius_ or _Moreau_, who understood them in that Sense. _Praxeas_, as we have observed above, had done an eminent Piece of Service to the Church of _Rome_, by reclaiming Pope _Victor_ from the Heresy of _Montanus_: but the Good he had done on that Occasion was over-balanced by the Mischief his new Heresy occasioned both at _Rome_ and in _Africa_; for in both Places he gained many Proselytes. [Sidenote: _The Heresy of_ Praxeas.] He denied all Distinction of Persons in the Godhead, so that the Father being, according to his Doctrine, the same Person with the Son, it was he who took upon him human Nature, and suffered on the Cross; whence his Followers were called _Patropassians_[295].

[Sidenote: Origen _at_ Rome.]

In the Pontificate of _Zephyrinus_, and, as _Eusebius_ seems to insinuate, in the Beginning of the Reign of _Caracalla_, that is, towards the Year 211 or 212. came to _Rome_ the celebrated _Origen_, being desirous, as he himself declared, to see that Church, so venerable for its Antiquity and Renown; but, after a very short Stay there, he returned to _Alexandria_[296]. [Sidenote: _Famous Dispute, at_ Rome, _between_ Caius _and_ Proclus.] About the same time happened, at _Rome_, the famous Dispute between _Caius_, a Presbyter of that Church and _Proclus_, a leading Man among the _Montanists_[297]. _Caius_ committed to Writing the Reasons and Arguments on both Sides[298]: but that Piece has not reached our Times, though it was well known to _Eusebius_, who styles it a Dialogue[299] and likewise to _Theodoret_[300].

[Sidenote: Tertullian _falls off from the Church_.]

It was during the Pontificate of _Zephyrinus_ that _Tertullian_, the great Defender of the Christian Religion, fell off from the Catholic Church. His Fall, which was lamented by all the Faithful as a common Loss, is ascribed, by St. _Jerom_, to the Envy and ill Usage he met with from the _Roman_ Clergy[301]. [Sidenote: _The Titles of_ High Pontiff, _&c. whether, and in what Sense, given by_ Tertullian _to the Bishop of_ Rome.] But how ill soever he was used by them in those Days, he has perhaps met with worse Treatment at their Hands in latter Times; for they call upon him as an Evidence, to witness the Pope’s universal Jurisdiction, and to confirm to him the haughty Titles, which he assumes; but with how little Reason, will appear from the following Relation: A Catholic Bishop had, by a public Declaration, admitted Persons guilty of Adultery and Fornication to a Place among the Penitents. As _Tertullian_ was a strict Observer of Rites and Discipline, and a most zealous Asserter of the greatest Rigours of Religion, he could not brook so much Moderation and Indulgence: and therefore, in his Book _De Pudicitia_, which he wrote on that Occasion, he extols the Severity of the antient Discipline, aggravates the Greatness of those Offences, undertakes to confute the Arguments for Remission and Indulgence; and, speaking of the above-mentioned Declaration, he calls it _a peremptory Decree_, and styles the Bishop, who made it, _high Pontiff_, and _Bishop of Bishops_[302]. Hence the Advocates for the See of _Rome_ infer, that, even in those early Times, such Titles were given to the Bishop of _Rome_, and that his Decrees were even then deemed peremptory[303]. But in the first Place, it is uncertain whether that Declaration was published by the Bishop of _Rome_, or by some other great Bishop, perhaps of _Carthage_, of _Alexandria_, or _Antioch_; for no Bishop is named by _Tertullian_. In the second Place, it is evident from the Context, that, in the above-mentioned Passage, _Tertullian_ speaks ironically; and consequently all that can be inferred from thence is, that he gave those Titles to the Catholic Bishop, whoever he was, by way of Derision; or if the Bishop had assumed them in his Declaration, he took from thence Occasion to expose his Vanity and Ambition. _Baronius_, and the Flatterers of the Bishops of _Rome_, triumph in this Passage of _Tertullian_; from which however nothing can be inferred in Favour of that See, unless they prove, which they can never do, that the above-mentioned Declaration or Decree was published by the Bishop of _Rome_; that those Titles, which raise him above other Bishops, were Part of the Decree; and lastly, that _Tertullian_ mentioned them as due to him, and not by way of Sarcasm, ironically reflecting on his Pride and Ambition.

As to the Actions of _Zephyrinus_, the Antients have left us quite in the Dark; and we cannot depend on what we read in the modern Writers. [Sidenote: Zephyrinus _not a Martyr_.] He governed about Seventeen Years, and died in the first Year of _Heliogabalus_, and 218. of the Christian Æra[304]. In the _Roman_ Martyrology he has a Place among the Martyrs, which puts _Baronius_ himself to a Stand[305], since the Church enjoyed a profound Tranquillity from the Death of _Severus_ to the End of his Pontificate.

Footnote 291:

Euseb. l. 5. c. 28.

Footnote 292:

Opt. l. 1. c. 37.

Footnote 293:

Bar. ad ann. 196. n. 20.

Footnote 294:

Tert.in Prax. c. 1. p. 634.

Footnote 295:

Caten. Græc, Patr. c. 53.

Footnote 296:

Euseb. l. 6. c. 14.

Footnote 297:

Euseb. l. 6. c. 14. Hier. vir. ill. c. 59.

Footnote 298:

Idem ib. c. 20.

Footnote 299:

Idem, l. 3. c. 31.

Footnote 300:

Theod. hæret. fab. l. 3. c. 2.

Footnote 301:

Hier. vir. ill. c. 53.

Footnote 302:

Tert. de Pudic. c. 1.

Footnote 303:

Bar. ad ann. 216. n. 5, 6, &c.

Footnote 304:

Euseb. l. 6. c. 21. & chron.

Footnote 305:

Bar. ad ann. 221. n. 1, 2.

HELIOGABALUS, CALLISTUS, ALEXANDER SEVERUS. _Fifteenth_ BISHOP _of_ Rome.

[Sidenote: Year of Christ 219. ]

_Zephyrinus_ was succeeded by _Callistus_, or _Callixtus_, as he is styled by _Optatus_[306], and St. _Austin_[307]. In his Time the Church enjoyed a long, happy, and uninterrupted Peace, as _Tertullian_ calls it[308], which lasted from the Death of _Severus_ in 211. to the Reign of _Maximinus_ in 235. as did also the State from the Death of _Macrinus_ in 218. to the Year 233. [Sidenote: _The Emperor_ Alexander _favourable to the Christians_.] _Alexander_, who succeeded _Heliogabalus_ in 222. proved extremely favourable to the Christians, and even allowed them, if I mistake not the Meaning of a profane Writer, the free Exercise of their Religion[309]: it is at least certain, that he adjudged to them, against the Tavern-keepers, a Piece of Ground, which it is pretended they had usurped upon the Public, laying, when he gave Sentence in their Favour, that it was better God should be served on it in any Manner, than that it should be occupied by Tavern-keepers[310]; which was giving them Leave to serve God on it after their own Manner. On this Spot of Ground _Baronius_ supposes _Callistus_ to have built a Church in Honour of the Virgin _Mary_, known at present by the Name of _Santa Maria in Trastevere_, that is, _Saint Mary beyond the Tyber_[311]. But the Pontifical of _Damasus_, upon which alone he sounds his Opinion, deserves no Credit, as I shall shew in the Life of that Pope. _Callistus_ is said by _Anastasius_[312] to have inclosed a large Piece of Ground on the _Appian_ Way, to serve as a Burying-place for the Christians. [Sidenote: Callistus_’s Burying-place_.] This Ground is frequently mentioned in the Martyrologies, and described at Length by _Arringhus_, who tells us, that 174,000 Martyrs, and 46 Popes, were buried in it[313]. Though _Alexander_ was of all the Pagan Emperors the most favourable and indulgent to the Christians, as is evident from all the antient Writers, both Christians and Pagans, yet he is represented in the Martyrologies, and in the Acts of some Martyrs, especially of _Callistus_, to which _Bede_ gave an intire Credit[314], as the most barbarous and inhuman Tyrant that ever shed Christian Blood. [Sidenote: _The Acts of_ Callistus _deserve no Credit_.] If we reject these Acts, and we must either reject them, or the Authority of the most unexceptionable Writers among the Antients, we expunge at once above 300 Martyrs out of the Catalogue of Saints worshiped to this Day by the Church of _Rome_, upon the bare Authority of such Acts. [Sidenote: _Many Saints out to be expunged out of the Catalogue._] Among these are the Consul _Palmatius_, with his Wife, his Children, and Forty-two of his Domestics; the Senator _Simplicius_, with his Wife, and Sixty-eight of his Domestics: and, what will be an irreparable Loss, the so much celebrated St. _Cæcilia_, in whose Honour Churches have been erected in every Christian Kingdom. _Baronius_, not presuming on one Side to question the Emperor _Alexander_’s Kindness to the Christians, which would be giving the Lye to all the Antients, but, on the other, looking upon it as a Sacrilege to rob the Church of so many valuable Reliques, ascribes the cruel Usage they are supposed to have met with in that Prince’s Reign, not to him, but to _Ulpian_ the celebrated Civilian, who flourished under him[315]. But in those Acts the Martyrs are said to have suffered unheard of Torments, there minutely described, by the express Command of the Emperor _Alexander_. Besides, could _Alexander_ be said to have favoured the Christians, could the Christians be said to have enjoyed a happy Tranquillity under him, had one of his Officers persecuted them with the utmost Cruelty in his Name, and by his Authority? _Baronius_, not remembring, it seems, that in this Place he had charged _Ulpian_ with all the Cruelties against the Christians, supposes elsewhere[316] several Martyrs to have suffered in the Reign of _Alexander_, after the Death of _Ulpian_. _Bede_, 'tis true, has followed these Acts; but they are not on that Account at all the more credible, since he often follows Pieces which are now universally given up as supposititious. The very first Words of these Acts are sufficient to make us suspect the Truth of them; for they begin thus; _in the Time of_ Macrinus _and_ Alexander--How come these two Princes to be joined together? _Macrinus_ reigned with his Son _Diadumenus_, and _Heliogabalus_ between them and _Alexander_. Soon after the Consul _Palmatius_ is said to have been condemned without any Form of Judgment, without so much as being heard; whereas _Herodian_ assures us, that _Alexander_ was a strict Observer of the Laws; and that no Criminal was condemned in his Reign, but according to the usual Course of Law, and by Judges of the greatest Integrity[317]. _Callistus_, if we give Credit to his Acts, was kept a long time Prisoner in a private House, where he was every Day cruelly beaten by the Emperor _Alexander_’s Orders, and at last thrown headlong out of the Window into a Well. [Sidenote: Callistus _not a Martyr_.] The Acts are evidently fabulous, but _Callistus_ nevertheless is worshiped among the Martyrs; and the Waters of the Well, which is to be seen at _Rome_ in the Church that bears his Name, are said to cure all sorts of Diseases to this Day. He governed the Church Five Years, and died in the Latter-end of the Year 223[318]. the Third of the Emperor _Alexander_. His Body is exposed to public Adoration on the Tenth of _May_, in the Church of St. _Mary_, beyond the _Tyber_, at _Rome_[319] and in that of our Lady at _Rheims_[320]. Two Decretals are ascribed to _Callistus_, and likewise the Institution of the Ember-Weeks, but without the lean Foundation.

Footnote 306:

Opt. l. 2. p. 48.

Footnote 307:

Aug. ep. 53.

Footnote 308:

Tert. de cor. mil.

Footnote 309:

Lamprid. in vit. Alex. p. 121.

Footnote 310:

Idem ib. p. 131.

Footnote 311:

Bar. ad ann. 224. n. 4, 5.

Footnote 312:

Anast. in vit. Call.

Footnote 313:

Arring. l. 3. c. 11.

Footnote 314:

Bed. Martyr. 10 Maii, 14 Oct.

Footnote 315:

Bar. ad ann. 226. n. 4.

Footnote 316:

Idem ad ann. 232. n. 11.

Footnote 317:

Herod. l. vi. p. 575. 588.

Footnote 318:

Euseb. l. 6. c. 21. & in chron.

Footnote 319:

Bolland. 10. Maii, 498, 499.

Footnote 320:

Arring. l. 2. c. 12. Theod. l. 4. c. 1, 2. 6. 8.

ALEXANDER. URBANUS, _Sixteenth_ BISHOP _of_ Rome.

[Sidenote: Year of Christ 223. _The Acts of_ Urbanus _fabulous_.]

All I can find in the Antients concerning _Urban_, the Successor of _Callistus_, is, that, during the whole Time of his Pontificate, both Church and State enjoyed a profound Peace under the Emperor _Alexander_; that he held the Chair near Seven Years, and died about the Middle of the Year 230[321]. Great and wonderful Things are related of him in his Acts, and in those of St. _Cecilia_, but such Acts[322] are evidently fabulous, since, in Opposition to all the Antients, they represent the Emperor _Alexander_ as a most cruel Persecutor of the Christian Name. _Urban_ himself is supposed to have suffered under him, and placed accordingly by the Church of _Rome_ among her Martyrs. His Body is now worshiped in an Abbey of his Name in the Diocese of _Chalons_ on the _Marne, and in the Church of St._ Cæcilia _at_ Rome[323].

Footnote 321:

Euseb. l. 6. c. 26.

Footnote 322:

Bed. Martyr. & Boll. 25 Maii.

Footnote 323:

Eric. l. 1. c. 12. Bolland. 25 Maii.

ALEXANDER, PONTIANUS, MAXIMINUS. _Seventeenth_ BISHOP _of_ Rome.

[Sidenote: Year of Christ 230. ]

_Pontianus_ succeeded _Urban_ in 230. and governed, according to the Pontifical of _Bucherius_[N4], Five Years, Two Months, and Seven Days; that is, from the 22d of _July_ 230. to the 28th of _September_ 235[324]. [Sidenote: Origen _deposed_.] In the Second Year of his Pontificate, the famous _Origen_ was deposed and excommunicated by _Demetrius_ Bishop of _Alexandria_, and the Sentence approved of by most other Bishops, especially by the Bishop of _Rome_, who assembled, it seems, his Clergy on that Occasion: For what else could St. _Jerom_ mean, by telling us, that _Rome assembled her Senate against Origen_[325]? [Sidenote: _The Persecution of_Maximinus.] The calm and quiet Days, which the Church had for some Years enjoyed, especially under _Alexander_, expired almost with the Pontificate of _Pontianus_; for that excellent Prince being assassinated in the Month of _May_ 235. _Maximinus_, who succeeded him, out of Hatred to him, began to persecute with great Cruelty the Christians, whom he had so much favoured, especially the Bishops[326]. [Sidenote: Pontianus _banished to_ Sardinia.] _Pontianus_ among the rest was banished _Rome_, and confined to the unwholsome Island of _Sardinia_[327], where he died the same Year on the 28th of _September_, but of what Kind of Death is not well known[328].

Footnote N4:

This Pontifical, well known to _Cuspinian_, _F. Petau_, and other Chronologers, was published by _Bucherius_ the _Jesuit_, in 1633. with the _Paschal Cycle of Victorius_. It is a Catalogue of the Bishops of _Rome_, from the Foundation of that See to the Time of _Liberius_, who was chosen in 352. As the Election of _Liberius_ is marked, and not his Death, the Catalogue is supposed by some to have been written in his Time. His Election is marked thus; _Liberius fuit temporibus Constancii ex die_ xi. _Kalendas Junias in diem--a Consulibus Constantio_ V. _& Constantio Cæsare_--By _Constantius Cæsar_ is meant _Gallus_, the Son of _Julius Constantius_, who, by his Father _Constantius Chlorus_, was Half-brother to _Constantine the Great_. _Gallus_ was raised by the Emperor _Constantius_ to the Dignity of _Cæsar_ in the Year 351. on which Occasion he gave him his own Name[N4.1], and the following Year took him for his Collegue in his Fifth Consulship, as appears from _Idatius_, from _Prosper_, and from the _Alexandrian_ Chronicle. The above-mentioned Pontifical is very faulty in the Times preceding the Pontificate of _Pontianus_, who was chosen in 230. nay, if we believe _Bucherius_, _Anicetus_, _Eleutherius_, and _Zephyrinus_, are omitted in it. I said, _If we believe_ Bucherius; for _Bollandus_, another _Jesuit_, who perused the same Manuscript, assures us, that he found there the Names of those three Bishops, which _Bucherius_ assures us were not to be found there[N4.2]. Which of the two _Jesuits_ is the honester is hard to determine in any Case, but impossible in this, unless the original Manuscript should be produced, which both perused. F. _Pagi_, the _Franciscan_, seems to favour _Bucherius_; for he complains of _Bollandus_ for interpolating the Manuscript, and not publishing it with all its Faults and Charms, as _Bucherius_ had done. But then he does not tell us, that he had seen the original Manuscript. _Bollandus_ on the other hand complains of _Bucherius_ for undervaluing such an unvaluable Piece; and settles by it his whole Chronology of the Popes, pretending it to have been sent by Pope _Damasus_ to St. _Jerom_[N4.3]. But for this the only Ground he has are some Letters from _Damasus_ to St. _Jerom_, and from _Jerom_ to _Damasus_, which, by the best Judges, are all thought supposititious. But even allowing it to have been sent by _Damasus_ to St. _Jerom_, that ought not to recommend it more to our Esteem than it did to his; and he seems to have paid very little Regard to it: for in his Book of _Illustrious Men_, which he wrote after the Death of _Damasus_, he places _Clement_ after _Anacletus_, though that Pontifical puts _Anacletus_ after _Clement_[N4.4]. What I have hitherto said is to be understood with respect to the Times preceding the Pontificate of _Pontianus_; for, from his Time, the Pontifical of _Bucherius_ is almost quite exact to the End, that is, to the Election of _Liberius_; and the more exact, the nearer it comes to his Time. I said _almost_, for it is not even thenceforth free from all Faults; but it has fewer than any other antient Record that has reached us; and it is on this Consideration that, from the Time of _Pontianus_, I have preferred it to all others. With respect to his Predecessors, I have adopted the Chronology of _Eusebius_, where it does not appear that he was mistaken; for that he was mistaken in some Points, is but too plain; and, for aught we know, he may have been so in many others. But as in those dark Times we have no authentic Records, no indisputable Authorities, to depend on, I thought it more adviseable to tread in the Footsteps of so famous and antient a Writer, than, by attempting to open a new Way, perplex and confound both myself and the Reader, as _Pearson_, _Dodwell_, and _Pagi_, have done. And it was not, I must own, without some Concern, that I found a Man of Dr. _Pearson_’s Learning reduced, by undervaluing the Authority of _Eusebius_, to take for his Guide a Writer of no Authority at all, _viz._ _Eutychius_ of _Alexandria_, who flourished so late as the Tenth Century, and is only famous for his Blunders, even in what relates to his own Church. To the Pontifical were annexed, in the same antient Manuscript, several other small Pieces; _viz._ 1. A List of the Consuls from the Year 205. to 354. with the Epacts, Bissextile Years, and the Day of the Week, with which each Year began. There are some Mistakes in the Epacts, but the rest is done with great Exactness. 2. Another List of the Consuls and Governors of _Rome_, from the Year 254. to 354. 3. A short Necrology of the Bishops of _Rome_, in which are marked, according to the Order of the Months, the Day on which each of them died, and the Place where he was buried. It begins with _Lucius_, and ends with _Julius_. In this List, _Sixtus_ II. and _Marcellus_ are omitted; the latter probably by a Mistake of the Transcriber, confounding him with his Predecessor _Marcellinus_; and the former, perhaps, because he is set down in the Calendar of Martyrs annexed to the Necrology. These Pieces, as well as the Pontifical, all end at the Year 354. whence Cardinal _Noris_[N4.5] and others are of Opinion, that they were written that Year.

Footnote N4.1:

Aurel. Vict. p. 518. Socr. l. 2. c. 28.

Footnote N4.2:

Bolland. Apr. t. 1. p. 22-24.

Footnote N4.3:

Bolland. ib. p. 3. n. 10.

Footnote N4.4:

Hier. de vir. illustr. c. 15.

Footnote N4.5:

Fast. consular. p. 23.

Footnote 324:

Bolland. April. t. 1. p. 25.

Footnote 325:

Ruf. in Hier. l. 2. p. 225.

Footnote 326:

Oros. l. 7. c. 19.

Footnote 327:

Vide Hallo. vit. Orig. p. 20.

Footnote 328:

Vide Boll. Apr. t. 1. p. 25.

MAXIMINUS. ANTERUS, _Eighteenth_ BISHOP _of_ Rome.

[Sidenote: Year of Christ 235. ]

_Anterus_, the Successor of _Pontianus_, presided only One Month and Ten Days, and died on the 3d of _January_ 236[329]. Some modern Writers place one _Cyriacus_ between him and _Pontianus_; but their Opinion, founded on the Authority of the fabulous Acts of St. _Ursula_, is sufficiently confuted by _Eusebius_[330], _Optatus_[331], St. _Augustin_[332], and _Nicephorus_[333], who all Name _Anterus_ as the immediate Successor of _Pontianus_. [Sidenote: Anterus _probably dies a Martyr_.] The Shortness of his Pontificate, and the cruel Persecution carried on by _Maximinus_, give us room to believe, that he died a Martyr, which Title is given him in the Martyrologies of St. _Jerom_ and _Bede_[334].

Footnote 329:

Boll. pont. p. 28-32.

Footnote 330:

Euseb. l. 6. c. 22.

Footnote 331:

Opt. contr. Par. l. 2.

Footnote 332:

Aug. eg. 165.

Footnote 333:

Niceph. chron.

Footnote 334:

Vide Flor. p. 995-997.

MAXIMINUS, FABIANUS, PHILIP, GORDIAN, _Nineteenth_ BISHOP _of_ Rome DECIUS.

[Sidenote: Year of Christ 236. ]