Easter Cycle 1 part 2/4

Under his episcopate Novatus, outside the Church, ordained Novatian in the city of Rome, and Nicostratus in Africa. This done, the confessors who had separated themselves from Cornelius, together with the priest Maximus who had been with Moyses, returned to the Church. After this he was banished to Centumcellae, and there received his falling-asleep in glory. Lucius, three years, eight months, ten days. He lived in the times of Gallus and Volusianus, down to the third of Valerian and the second of Gallienus. He was an exile, and afterward, by God's will, returned to the Church. (He died) on the third day before the Nones of March, in the consulship aforesaid. Stephanus, four years, two months, twenty-one days.

He lived in the times of Valerian and Gallienus, from the consulship of Volusianus and Maximinus, down to the third of Valerian and the second of Gallienus. Sixtus, two years, eleven months, six days. He began from the consulship of Maximus and Glabrio, down to that of Tuscus and Bassus, and he suffered on the eighth day before the Ides of August (and the priests presided), from the consulship of Tuscus and Bassus to the day twelve before the Kalends of August, in the consulship of Aemilianus and Bassus. Dionysius, eight years, two months, four days. He lived in the times of Gallienus, from the eleventh day before the Kalends of August, in the consulship of Aemilianus and Bassus, to the seventh day before the Kalends of January, in the consulship of Claudius and Paternus. Felix, five years, eleven months, twenty-five days.

He lived in the times of Claudius and Aurelian, from the consulship of Claudius and Paternus, to the second consulship of Aurelian and that of Capitolinus. Eutychianus, eight years, eleven months, three days. He lived in the times of Aurelian, from the third consulship of Aurelian and that of Marcellinus, to the seventh day before the Ides of December, in the consulship of Carus (his second) and Carinus. Caius, twelve years, four months, seven days. He lived in the times of Carus and Carinus, from the sixteenth day before the Kalends of January, in the consulship of Carus (his second) and Carinus, to the tenth day before the Kalends of May, in the consulship of Diocletian (his sixth) and Constantius (his second). Marcellinus, eight years, three months, twenty-five days.

He lived in the times of Diocletian and Maximian, from the day before the Kalends of July, from the consulship of Diocletian (his sixth) and Constantius (his second), to the consulship of Diocletian (his ninth) and Maximian (his eighth). At which time there was a persecution, and the episcopate ceased for four years, six months, twenty-five days. Marcellus, one year, seven months, twenty days. He lived in the times of Maxentius, from the consulship of Maximian Herculius (his tenth) and Maximian Galerius (his seventh), to after the tenth and seventh consulship. Eusebius, four months, sixteen days, from the fourteenth day before the Kalends of May to the sixteenth day before the Kalends of September.

Miltiades, three years, six months, nine days, from the sixth day before the Nones of July, from the consulship of Maximian (his eighth) alone—which was in the month of September—to that of Volusianus and Rufinus, down to the third day before the Ides of January, in the consulship of Volusianus and Annianus. Silvester, twenty-one years, eleven months. He lived in the times of Constantine, from the consulship of Volusianus and Annianus, from the day before the Kalends of February, to the day before the Kalends of January, in the consulship of Constantine and Albinus. Marcus, eight months, twenty days. He lived in the times of Constantine, in the consulship of Nepotianus and Facundus; from the fifteenth day before the Kalends of February to the day of the Nones of October, in the consulship aforesaid. Julius, fifteen years, two months, six days.

He lived in the times of Constans, from the consulship of Felicianus and Titianus, from the eighth day before the Ides of February, to the day before the Ides of April, in the consulship of Constantius (his fifth) and Constantius Caesar. He made many structures: a basilica on the Portuensian Way, at the third milestone; a basilica on the Flaminian Way, at the second milestone, which is called Valentini's; the Julian Basilica, which is in the seventh region, beside the forum of the deified Trajan; a basilica across the Tiber, in the fourteenth region, beside Callistus; a basilica on the Aurelian Way, at the third milestone, near Callistus. Liberius lived in the times of Constantius, from the eleventh day before the Kalends of June, to the day..... from the consulship of Constantius (his fifth) and Constantius Caesar. Antiquitas Ecclesiae Illustrata, vol. I, page 402.

According to the more ancient catalogue of the Imperial Library, after the manuscript exemplar and the edition of Cuspinian. In the reign of Tiberius Caesar, our Lord Jesus Christ suffered, in the consulship of the two Gemini, on the eighth day before the Kalends of April; and after His ascension the most blessed Peter received the episcopate. From that time it was set down by succession who was bishop, for how many years he presided, and under whose reign. Peter, twenty-five years, one month, nine days. He lived in the times of Tiberius Caesar, of Caius, of Tiberius Claudius, and of Nero, from the consulship of Vinicius and Longinus to that of Nero and Verus: and he suffered, together with Paul, on the third day before the Kalends of July, in the consulship aforesaid, under the reign of Nero. Linus, twelve years, four months, twelve days.

He lived in the times of Nero, from the consulship of Saturninus and Scipio to that of Capito and Rufus. Clement, nine years, eleven months, twelve days. He lived in the times of Galba and Vespasian, from the consulship of Trachalus and Italicus to the seventh of Vespasian and the consulship of Titus. (Clement is placed third, Cletus fourth, but for what reason is unknown: whereas the canon of the Mass sets forth the Tradition of the Roman Church in these words: 'Linus, Cletus, Clement.') Cletus, six years, two months, ten days. He lived in the times of Vespasian and Titus and at the beginning of Domitian, from the eighth consulship of Vespasian and the fifth of Domitian, to the ninth of Domitian and the consulship of Rufus. Anacletus, twelve years, ten months, three days.

He lived in the times of Domitian, from the consulship of Domitian (his tenth) and Sabinus, to the seventeenth of Domitian and the consulship of Clemens. Evaristus, thirteen years, seven months, two days. He lived in the latest times of Domitian, and of Nerva, and of Trajan, from the consulship of Valens and Verus to that of Gallus and Bradua. Alexander, seven years, two months, one day. He lived in the times of Trajan, from the consulship of Palma and Tullus to that of Aelianus and Verus. Sixtus, ten years, three months, twenty-one days. He lived in the times of Hadrian, from the consulship of Niger and Apronianus to that of Veronius and Ambibulus. Telesphorus, eleven years, three months, three days. He lived in the times of Antoninus Macrinus, from the consulship of Titianus and Gallicanus to that of Caesar and Albinus.

Hyginus, twelve years, three months, six days. He lived in the times of...... Anicetus, ... years, from the consulship of Gallicanus and Verus to that of Praesens and Rufinus. Pius, twenty years, four months, twenty-one days. He lived in the times of Antoninus Pius, from the consulship of Clarus and Severus to that of the two Augusti. Under his episcopate his brother Hermas wrote a book, in which is contained the command that the Angel gave him when he came to him in the garb of a shepherd. Soter, nine years, three months. He lived in the times of...... Eleutherius, ... years. He lived in the times of Antoninus Commodus, from the consulship of Verus and Herennianus to that of Paternus and Bradua.

Victor, ten years, two months, ten days...... Zephyrinus, ... years, from the consulship of Saturninus and Gallus to that of Praesens and Extricatus. Callistus, five years, two months, ten days. He lived in the times of Macrinus and Heliogabalus, from the consulship of Antoninus and Adventus, to the third of Antoninus and the consulship of Alexander. Urbanus, eight years, eleven months, twelve days. He lived in the times of Alexander, from the consulship of Maximus and Aelianus to that of Agricola and Clementinus. Pontianus, five years, two months, seven days. He lived in the times of Alexander, from the consulship of Pompeianus and Pelignianus.

At that time Bishop Pontianus and the Presbyter Hippolytus were deported as exiles to the noxious island of Sardinia, in the consulship of Severus and Quintinus; on that same island Pontianus was deposed on the fourth day before the Kalends of October, and in his place Anteros was ordained on the eleventh day before the Kalends of December, under the consuls named above. Anteros held the office one month and ten days. He died on the third day before the Nones of January, in the consulship of Maximinus and Africanus. Fabianus held it fourteen years, one month, and ten days. He lived in the times of Maximinus, Gordianus, and Philippus, from the consulship of Maximinus and Africanus down to that of Decius (second time) and Gratus. He suffered martyrdom on the thirteenth day before the Kalends of February. He divided the regions among the deacons, and ordered many structures to be built throughout the cemeteries.

After his martyrdom, the Presbyters Moyses and Maximus and the Deacon Nicostratus were arrested and cast into prison. At that time Novatus arrived from Africa and separated Novatianus from the Church, together with certain confessors, after Moyses had died, who had been there eleven months and eleven days. Cornelius held the office two years, three months, and ten days, from the consulship of Decius (fourth time) and Decius (second time) down to that of Gallus and Volusianus. Under his episcopate Novatus, outside the Church, ordained Novatianus in the city of Rome and Nicostratus in Africa. When this had been done, the confessors who had separated themselves from Cornelius along with the Presbyter Maximus, who had been with Moyses, returned to the Church.

After this, having been expelled to Centumcellae, he there received his rest in glory. Lucius held the office three years, eight months, and ten days. He lived in the times of Gallus and Volusianus, down to Valerianus (third time) and Gallienus (second time). He was an exile, and afterwards, by the will of God, returned unharmed to the Church. He died on the third day before the Nones of March, under the consuls named above. Stephanus held the office four years, two months, and twenty-one days. He lived in the times of Valerianus and Gallienus, from the consulship of Volusianus and Maximinus down to that of Valerianus (third time) and Gallienus (second time). Sixtus held it two years, eleven months, and six days. He began from the consulship of Maximus and Glabrio down to that of Tuscus and Bassus, and suffered martyrdom on the eighth day before the Ides of August.

From the consulship of Tuscus and Bassus down to the twelfth day before the Kalends of August, in the consulship of Aemilianus and Bassus. Dionysius held the office eight years, two months, and four days. He lived in the times of Gallienus, from the eleventh day before the Kalends of August, in the consulship of Aemilianus and Bassus, down to the seventh day before the Kalends of January, in the consulship of Claudius and Paternus. Felix held it five years, eleven months, and twenty-five days. He lived in the times of Claudius and Aurelianus, from the consulship of Claudius and Paternus down to the consulship of Aurelianus (second time) and Capitolinus. Eutychianus held the office eight years, eleven months, and three days. He lived in the times of Aurelianus (third time) and Marcellinus, down to the fourth day before the Ides of December, in the consulship of Carus (second time) and Carinus.

Caius held the office twelve years, four months, and seven days. He lived in the times of Carus and Carinus, from the sixteenth day before the Kalends of January, in the consulship of Carus (second time) and Carinus, down to the tenth day before the Kalends of May, in the consulship of Diocletianus (sixth time) and Constantius (second time). Marcellinus held it eight years, three months, and twenty-five days. He lived in the times of Diocletianus and Maximianus, from the day before the Kalends of July, from the consulship of Diocletianus (sixth time) and Constantius (second time) down to the consulship of Diocletianus (ninth time) and Maximianus (eighth time). At that time there was the persecution, and the episcopate ceased for seven years, six months, and twenty-five days. Marcellus held the office one year, six months, and twenty days.

He lived in the times of Maxentius, from the consulship of Maximianus Herculeus (tenth time) and Maximianus Galerius (seventh time), down to after the consulship of those tenth and seventh terms. Eusebius held the office four months and sixteen days, from the fourteenth day before the Kalends of May down to the sixteenth day before the Kalends of September. Miltiades held it three years, six months, and eight days, from the sixth day before the Nones of July; from the consulship of Maximianus (eighth time) alone, which fell in the month of September, in the consulship of Volusianus and Rufinus, down to the third day before the Ides of January, in the consulship of Volusianus and Anianus. Sylvester held the office twenty-one years and eleven months. He lived in the times of Constantinus, from the consulship of Volusianus and Anianus, and from the day before the Kalends of February, down to the day before the Kalends of January, in the consulship of Constantinus and Albinus. Marcus held the office eight months and twenty days.

He lived in the times of Constantinus, in the consulship of Nepotianus and Facundus, from the fifteenth day before the Kalends of February down to the day of the Nones of October, under the consuls named above. Julius held the office fifteen years, one month, and eleven days. He lived in the times of Constantinus, from the consulship of Felicianus and Titianus, from the eighth day before the Ides of February to the day before the Ides of April, in the consulship of Constantius (fifth time) and Constantius Caesar. He built many structures: a basilica on the Via Portuensis at the third milestone; a basilica on the Via Flaminia at the second milestone, which is called the basilica of Valentinus; the Basilica Julia, which is in the seventh region, beside the Forum of the deified Trajan; a basilica across the Tiber, in the fourteenth region, beside the cemetery of Calixtus; and a basilica on the Via Aurelia at the third milestone, near Calixtus.

Liberius lived in the times of Constantius, from the eleventh day before the Kalends of June, down to the day... in the consulship of Constantius (fifth time) and Constantius Caesar. After having set this catalogue before the reader's eyes, the learned Benedictines append the following: This is the Chronicle of the Roman Pontiffs known under the name of the Liberian catalogue. Before establishing its authority, we must first examine the period in which it would have been compiled, and the author to whom it might be attributed. Of all the scholars who have concerned themselves with this monument, we know of none but Dodwell who has sought to make it more recent than the epoch of Liberius, and he was refuted by Tillemont himself.

Not to mention the argument that one must naturally draw from the coincidence of date of this monument with the four other little works that accompany it in the various manuscripts, a circumstance which alone suffices to fix its epoch, since there is nothing in the text of the catalogue to contradict this antiquity, does not this chronicle bear irrefutably the date of its composition in these last lines: 'Liberius lived in the times of Constantius, from the eleventh day before the Kalends of June, down to the day... in the consulship of Constantius (fifth time) and Caesar'?

'This ending,' as Tillemont says, 'suits far less a copyist halted by some mishap than an author who knew the beginning of Liberius's pontificate but did not know its end, because that end had not yet come' (a). But there is another argument still more invincible. Besides the catalogue of the Popes called the Liberian, there exists another one composed in the sixth century and stopping at Felix IV.

Now this second catalogue, which Dodwell would have pass for the more ancient, while that of Liberius would be only its abridgement (b)—this second one, we say, inserts textually the consular fasti established in the first for the years of each Pope, and, having reached the epoch of Liberius, it ceases to give them, supplies them in no way, and only resumes them more than a century after the epoch at which the Liberian Chronicle stops. Why, if not because the monument it was transcribing did not extend beyond the consulship of Constantius the fifth time and Constantius Caesar? Now, what can this monument be, if not the very one that is the object of the present discussion?

It is therefore prior to the Chronicle of Felix IV, whose strange lacuna it alone can even explain. Pearson did not fear to make this remark (c), and Tillemont, almost as severe in examining Catholic traditions, judiciously observes that Dodwell's conjectures, which would make the Liberian catalogue a mere abridgement of sixth-century monuments, are overturned by the experience of critics, who, he says, have always observed that works of this kind tend rather to grow than to diminish, as one sees by experience (d). The question of who is the author of the Liberian catalogue is far from being as easy to clarify.

Henschenius claimed that the first part of the Chronicle, which goes from Saint Peter to Saint Urban, would have been compiled by Saint Anteros, and the rest down to Liberius by Saint Damasus. Papebroch, in his Conatus Chronico-historicus ad Catalogos Romanorum Pontificum, went even further, seeking to prove that the second part of this Catalogue shows traces of four different hands. Schelstrate vigorously combats this system (e), which seems to us also to grant far too much to conjecture.

But although we are inclined to follow this author when he shows that one cannot name with precision the redactors of this Catalogue, nor multiply them thus at will, without running the risk of proceeding somewhat at random, it seems to us that his arguments for proving the identity of style in all the parts of this Chronicle are far from being conclusive. When one looks closely, it is difficult not to perceive in the different parts a great diversity of form; but would it not be possible to explain this by regarding this monument as the assemblage, the compilation of notes or memoirs drawn up at several epochs?

Nothing more closely resembles a series of inscriptions recorded one after another than this Catalogue, which presents unity only in the thought that presided over its arrangement in the manner of a Chronicle. Now, who would have been the redactor, the compiler, of this whole? Tillemont and Pagi would willingly attribute the honour of it to Saint Damasus, and we are very much inclined to range ourselves on that side. However, we do not base our opinion on the two famous letters, one of which is attributed to this holy Pope and the other to Saint Jerome, and which have stirred in various directions the scholars who have judged them.

They appear today abandoned by everyone; and yet, in our view, the arguments that Ciampini produces in their favour in his Examen Libri Pontificalis are far from contemptible. Be that as it may, we abstain from citing them in this discussion, contenting ourselves with placing them in a note before the reader's eyes, so as to omit nothing of all that may render more complete our work on the origins of the Papacy (f).

If, then, we attribute to Saint Damasus the composition of the Liberian catalogue, it is not on the strength of these two letters, but on the testimony of a number of authors who, since about the seventh or eighth century, have not ceased to regard this Pope as the author of a Chronicle of the Roman Pontiffs. Since we cannot make Saint Damasus the author of the Liber Pontificalis, nor even of the Catalogue of Felix IV—monuments of a style too different from his own—one is essentially led to leave him the Chronicle of Liberius. Here again, though by a wholly different route, we shall meet with Tillemont, who expresses himself thus, in the passage we have cited above:

'I do not see why one says that it is wrongly that this catalogue is attributed to Saint Damasus, and why he could not have drawn it up, being a deacon in 353, when Pope Liberius was banished, and the catalogue appears to have been made in the year 354, under Pope Liberius' (a). It is in vain that Dom Ceillier objects that, in the notice of Saint Damasus's writings, Saint Jerome does not name this Catalogue (b); for this Catalogue, which moreover seems to have been compiled only in a local interest, is not truly a book, and it is natural to suppose that it did not penetrate as far as the East, where Saint Jerome was writing, when one sees that even in the West itself people only began to concern themselves with it in the sixteenth century.

The other difficulty raised by Dom Ceillier, that Saint Damasus did not put his name to this little work, as he put it to almost all his epigrams and inscriptions, is no more serious. First, it is already to admit that he did not put it to everything that came from his pen; next, how would Saint Damasus have thought of putting his name at the head of a Chronicle which is nothing but the compilation, in two pages, of a series of notes and inscriptions? Let us conclude, then, that the opinion which makes this holy Pope the author of the Liberian Chronicle rests upon solid foundations.

Another question, of an altogether more grave nature—that of the truth of the facts contained in this catalogue—now demands all our attention. The facts contained in the Liberian Catalogue are simply the consular fasti corresponding to the accession and death of each Pope, the reckoning of the years, months, and days of his pontificate, and finally a few historical details, few in number and very succinct, as one could note above. We are going to examine in turn what degree of authority we ought to give to these various details. Let us begin with the consular fasti.

The antiquity of the Liberian Catalogue once established, it seems evident to us that one must recognise a genuine authority in the indications of consuls that it contains, unless one can demonstrate two things, namely: that the Christians of Rome—who, as cannot be doubted from all that we have proved in the preceding chapters, had preserved the names of their bishops—did not make use of the consular fasti to mark the years of their see; and, in the second place, that, even if they did so use them, it would have been impossible in 354 to gather the monuments of this kind drawn up by them during the first three centuries.

Now we defy anyone whatsoever to furnish the slightest proof in support of these two assertions, and yet one would have to begin by demonstrating them before attacking the authority of the Liberian Catalogue regarding the truth of the consular reckonings it contains. Meanwhile, we hope to prove that the two opposite theses are certain. First, the Christians of Rome made use of the consular fasti to count the years of the Popes. Our readers cannot be unaware that, throughout the whole duration of the Roman empire, the most usual and most national way of measuring time and of classifying historical events was to do so by the consuls.

Not only was this usage received for matters concerning public order, but the circumstances of private life were subject to it; contracts between private persons, everything down to the most familiar details of the household, received this sanction just as much as the very acts of the governing power. Thus had the laws and custom together established it; and perhaps this usage was the more willingly observed in that, while it offered a means of recalling facts less abstract than reckoning by figures, it flattered the pride of private persons, by associating in a manner the facts of their existence with the destinies of the empire.

Christianity found this practice established when it appeared in the world; and since it presented nothing contrary to its dogmas or its morality, the first faithful, who were accustomed to employ it in civil life to give authority to their acts, must naturally have transferred it, with all its advantages, into the reckonings of religion. Indeed, what could have been for them more important, more worthy of memory, than the succession and the years of the successors of Saint Peter, in whom this apostle continued ever to teach and to govern the Church?

Was there a subject more worthy of stirring that sentiment of national feeling which a society always experiences the more, in proportion to the degree of spiritualism it professes, than the desire to keep pure and certain the annals of those Pontiffs so humble, so obscure, and yet the depositaries of an authority whose effects—as one may see in several examples in Eusebius—resounded even to the extremities of the East, and whose power, buried though it was beneath the arches of subterranean Rome, rose, from the third century onward, rival enough to the Caesars for a Decius to dread it as much as a competitor for the empire (a)?

Let us not doubt it: the Christians did well, to preserve the memory of the heads of the Church, what they did every day in the interest of their domestic affairs; and even were the last traces of it today effaced, let us not be so ignorant of human nature as to believe that the first Christians would have let so much glory—and a glory so pure—pass by without doing anything to preserve the memory of it. Will it be said that this manner of counting by the consuls would have seemed to them too profane, too secular, even contrary to the austere dignity of a religion which took note of the particulars of the present life only in order to despise them?

To this we shall reply that, far from it, Christianity made it for them a kind of duty to employ this mode of reckoning. No one, doubtless, is unaware of the sovereign respect which the first faithful had for the Holy Scriptures, of the zeal with which they reproduced their spirit and their circumstances in their habits and in their language. Not only did the ceremonies of worship take their origin therein, but the usages of private life were as it were impregnated with them: they thought, they expressed themselves, only through these divine books.