« PreviousContinue »
5. Mill says, without hesitation, that' Eucherius had, in his copies of St. John's first epistle, the heavenly witnesses. But, in my opinion, that is far from being certain : indeed the text is found in the book of Spiritual Forms, or Scripture Phrases. But let us observe the questions taken out of St. John's epistle, one of which is : Again," John, in his epistle, says:
three that bear witness; water, blood, and spirit.” What does that mean? Answer. Here seems a reference to what the same John writes in his
gospel; “But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out water and blood. And he that saw it, bare record.” [ch. xix. 34, 35.] And he had before said; “ He bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.” [ver. 30.] Some therefore argue, that “the water," denotes baptism; " the blood,” martyrdom; and “ the spirit,” the soul; which at death goes to God: but the most, by a mystical interpretation, understand the Trinity itself. The “ water," they say, denotes the Father; the “ blood,” Jesus Christ, who died; and the “ spirit,” the Holy Ghost.
Eucherius, who ivrote this, had not the heavenly witnesses in his copy of St. John's epistle. The text, therefore, as cited in the forementioned place and book, did not come from him ; but has been made out, by some late transcriber, from modern copies of the New Testament. Eucherius had
Jam enim, sub annum Christi 434, ab Eucherio Lugdunensi citatam eam reperimus, lib. Formularum Spiritualis Intelligentiæ.' Cap. xi. 3, 4. Et sane mirum, haud exstitisse ipsam jam in aliis scriptis Patrum Occidentalium, &c. Prolegom. n. 938.
& Ad Trinitatem in Johannis epistolâ : • Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in cælo, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus. • Et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terrå, Spiritus, Aqua, et Sanguis.' Form. Spirit. cap. 11. n. 3. p. 838. E.
h Interr. Item in epistolâ suâ Johannes ponit : Tria sunt, quæ testimonium perhibent, aqua, sanguis, et spiritus.' Quid in hoc indicatur ? Resp. Simile huic loco etiam illud mihi videtur, quod ipse in evangelio suo de passione Christi loquitur, dicens : Unus militum lanceâ latus ejus aperuit, et continuo
exivit sanguis et aqua. Et qui vidit, testimoniuin perhibet.' In eodem ipse de Jesu supra dixerat : • Inclinato capite reddidit spiritum.' Quidam ergo ex hoc ita disputant. Aqua baptismum : Sanguis videtur indicare martyrium : Spiritus vero est, qui per martyrium transit ad Dominum. Plures tamen hic ipsam interpretatione mysticâ intelligunt Trinitatem, eo quod Perfecta ipsa perhibeat testimonium Christo. Aqua Patrem indicans, quia ipse de se dicit: • Me dereliquerunt, fontem aquæ vivæ.' (Jerem. ii. 13.] Sanguine Christum demonstrans, utique per passionis cruorem : Spiritu vero Sanctum Spiritum manifestans. Hæc autem tria de Christo testimonium ita perhibent, ipso in evangelio loquente: • Ego sum qui testimonium perhibeo de meipso.' [Joh. viii. 18.] Et item : ‘Cum autem.' (xv. 26.] Perhibet ergo testimonium Pater, cum dicit : Hic est Filius meus dilectus. (Matt. iij. 17.) Filius cum dicit : • Ego et Pater unum sumus.' (Joh. x. 30.] Spiritus Sanctus, cum de eo dicitur: Et vidit Spiritum Dei descendentem, sicut columbam venientem super se.' (Matt. iii. 16.] De Qu. N. T. ib. p. 853. B. C. D.
written : • And' in John's epistle : “ There are three that • bear witness; the “water, the blood, and the spirit :"'but some transcriber filled up the quotation out of his late copies. The reading, without the heavenly witnesses, does as well suit the design of the author, or better, than with them : for he is there explaining, or showing the mystery of numbers. • Number I.' be says, ' refers to the unity of • God: Number 11. refers to the two testaments of the di: vine law : Number III. to the Trinity. So, in John's epis| tle : “ There are three that bear witness: the water, the
blood, and the spirit.” So I think, Eucherius wrote: and in this manner the two places, in those two works, perfectly agree and harmonize.
I hope the account which I have here given of this matter, may be satisfactory to the reader.
Nevertheless, since writing what is above, I have observed, that J. A. Bengelius, referring to the book of · Spi* ritual Forms,' says, that the disputed text in St. John is * plainly quoted by Eucherius. And before that, referring to the books of the Questions out of the Old and New Testament, he says: "Eucherius, but different from him to be * afterwards mentioned, does not quote it :' what reasons Mr. Bengelius bas for thinking those two works to have been composed by two different authors, I cannot tell. Eucherius, bishop of Lyons, had two sons, Veranius, and Salonius, or Saloninus; to the former, he inscribed his book of Spiritual Forms;' to the other, the work of · Difficult • Questions.' About this there is no dispute among learned men, that I know of; however, I shall nowm refer to some other, beside those referred to at the beginning of this chapter.
The preceding argument, therefore, remains in full force, so far as I can perceive.
This whole chapter, as it now is, was finished by me be
I. Hic numerus ad unitatem Deitatis refertur.-II. Ad duo testamenta divinæ legis referuntur.—III. Ad Trinitatem, in Johannis epistolâ. -— Tres • sunt qui testimonium dant, Aqua, Sanguis, et Spiritus.' Formul. Spiritual. cap. 11. p. 838.
* Sect. xv. Et apertissime Eucherius Lugdunensis. Versum 7, et 8, distincte citat in libro Formularum Spiritualis Intelligentiæ : de numeris agens, Bengel. N. T. Gr. p. 753.
Non citat Eucherius, sed diversus ab illo, de quo, sect, xv. in Quest. N. T. Id. ibid. p. 750.
m De uxore duos filios suscepit, Veranium et Saloninum, quibus et libros nuncupavit; Veranio librum Formularum Spiritualis Intelligentiæ ; Salonino vero duos, priorem de Quæstionibus difficilioribus Veteris et N. T. posteriorem de Hebr. nominum interpretatione. S. Basn. ann. 441. n. v. Vid. et Hod. de Text. Orig. p. 397. et Pagi an. 441. n.
fore the publication of the second volume of Mr. Wetstein's New Testament: what he says of Eucherius Lugdunensis may be seen at
725 of the said volume.
1. FOR a particular account of CÆLIUS, or CÆCILIUS SEDULIUS, and the works ascribed to him, I refer to a several : he is inb Trithemius; and I would have transcribed his article, but that it is full of faults, and therefore not to be relied upon in any thing. Fabricius says, that Trithemius seems to have confounded three of that name : Sedulius the poet, who lived in the fifth century; and two others, of later ages. Therein he followsd Labbé, whom he quotes; whose account of Sedulius is also particularly commended by Bayle. It is commonly said, that Sedulius was a Scot; that is, a native of Ireland: but there is no proof of it in ancient authors.
2. Tillemont,' after having weighed what has been said by others, concludes, that Sedulius wrote between 425 and 450; I shall therefore place him, with Cave, at 434.
3. It is probable, that Sedulius was a presbyter, as he is called by: Isidore of Seville; and not a bishop, as some have supposed.
- Vid. Ph. Labb. Diss. de Scr. Ec. T. ii. p. 328, 329, 330, &c. Cav. H. L. T. i. Du Pin, Bib. Ec. T. ii. P. ï. p. 75. Tillem. Mem. T. xii. Fabric. Bib. Lat. I. iv. c. 2. p. 306, 307. et Bib. Ec. ad Isid. Hisp. c. 7. et ad Trithem. cap. 142. See likewise Sedulius, in Bayle's Dictionary. • De Ser. Ec. cap. 142.
c Videtur Trithemius in unum confundere tres Sedulios, poëtam seculo quinto clarum, et episcopum, qui A. C. 721, et auctorem Hibernum Collectaneorum in epistolas Pauli, qui centum post annis vixit. Fabr. ad Trith. cap. 142. Ap. Bib. Ec.
d An Sedulius poëta fuit Scotus ? Nullus id veterum dixit. Recentiores Ouwvvua delusi tres in unum Sedulios confuderunt, ac poëtam seculo quinto florentem cum episcopo, qui anno 721, et cum sacræ scripturæ interprete, seu Collectaneorum Auctore, qui centum post annis vivebat, Scotis temere accensuerunt. Nec ad rem faciunt quæ Usserius partim ex Trithemio, Labb. de Scr. Ec. T. Ü. p. 330.
See before, Labbé, in noted; and Sedulius, in Bayle's Dictionary, notec * See Sedulius, in his Mem. Ec. T. xii. p. 612. and note i. 8 De Scr. Ec. cap. 7.
4. The only two pieces rightly ascribed to him, and still extant, are entitled," A Paschal Poem, and A Paschal Work : or, A Paschal Work, in verse; and A Paschal Work, in prose. The former is sometimes divided into i four, at other times intok five books. The first book exbibits the most remarkable things in the Old Testament ; the three or four following, contain the history of our Lord, taken from the four gospels : and it is generally allowed that the poem bas in it a good deal of elegance. The Paschal Work, in five books, represents, in prose, the same things which had been before celebrated in metre, by the same author.
5. The two works of this ingenious presbyter bear testimouy to the four evangelists, and their gospels; whose names with their symbols, he particularly mentions," at the conclusion of his first book.
6. I do not observe in him the doxology at the end of the Lord's Prayer, which we now have in St. Matthew : it is probable that it was wanting in this author's copy. He has the address, or appellation, at the beginning, and the following petitions : and be distinctly paraphraseth all in each of his works, that in metre, and that in prose; but there is no notice taken in either, of a doxology at the end.
h Carmen Paschale : Opus Paschale.
Ap. Bib. PP. Max. T. 6. p. 460, &c.
k In edit. Cellarian. Hal. Magdeb. 1704. Ap. Bib. PP. ib. p. 472, &c.
Christe fave votis-
Ib. p. 462. D. D. Conf. p. 476. G. - Vid. ib. p. 464. et p. 481, 482.
1. I SHALL bere add some extracts out of a work of another SEDULIUS; certainly different from Sedulius the poet, of the fifth century. Hea seems to have been a Scot, of Ireland, and to have flourished in the ninth century, about the year 818. He wrote a Commentary upon St. Paul's fourteen epistles, which is called · Collectaneum ;' it being a collection out of Origen, Hilary, Jerom, Augustine, and other ancient writers. It appears, from this Commentary, that` Sedulius understood Greek ; and probably Hebrew,d likewise.
2. In Acts xx. 28. he read the church of the Lord,' where we have, in our copies, " the church of God.” And in the same place he observes, that they who, at ver. 17th of that chapter are called “ elders of the church” at Ephesus, at the 28th ver, are called “ bishops :” so that elders and bishops were then all one. But afterwards, he says, for preventing contention, it was appointed, that there should be but one bishop in a church; which last observation is again mentioned' in another place, as from Jerom.
3. At Rom. i. 32. This author seems to have read :
a Vid. Cav. H. L. T. i. in Sedulio, p. 425. Du Pin. T. 7. p. 177. Tillem. T. xii. Labbé de Scr. Ec. T. ii. p. 338. Pagi ann. 818. n. iii.
b Sedulii Scoti Hiberniensis in omnes S. Pauli epistolas Collectaneum. Ap. Bib. PP. Lugdun. T. vi. p. 494.-588.
Qui Sedulius, non ille quidem Cælius Sedulius, qui seculo quinto carmina quædam et alia opuscula edidit, sed alter Sedulius Scotus Hiberniensis, qui nono seculo floruit. Hunc ipsum esse, tum nomen cognomenque suadent, tum etiam peritia Græcæ linguæ, quam in Commentariis suis in epistolas Pauli, jamdiu editis, præfert Sedulius ille Scotus. Nam frequenter ibi de lectione Græcâ, nec prorsus indocte, disserit. Unde Commentarii pro illâ ætate inter præstantiores computandi sunt. Montfauc. Palaiogr. Gr. I. iii. c. 7. p. 236.
d Vid. in Rom. cap. i. p. 494. G. et alibi. é • Attendite vobis, et omni gregi, in quo vos Spiritus Sanctus posuit episcopos, pascere ecclesiam Domini, quam acquisivit per sanguinem suum. Et hic diligentius observato, quomodo unius civitatis Ephesi presbyteros vocans, postea episcopos dixerit. Hæc propterea, ut ostenderemus, apud veteres eosdem fuisse presbyteros quos episcopos. Paulatim vero, ut dissensionum plantaria evellerentur, ad unum omnium solicitudinem esse dilatam. Id. Ep. ad Tit.. cap. i. p. 579. A.
Hac causâ prohibitum est, duos episcopos esse in una civitate. In 1 Cor. i. ver. 12. p. 537. E.