📜 Verbum · 聖言
原文誦讀聖經與教父文獻

← 回書卷目次 · 拉丁教父 › 簡史

迦太基的利貝拉圖斯

簡史 第 12 章 第 2/2 段

拉丁文原文.8 節.部分字詞可點開查義.本章太長已分段,此段為 12:39–12:46(全章共 46 節)

← 第 11 章第 13 章 →
← 上一段
12:39
« Ego quidem, inquit, nec cessavi increpans ea quae scripserunt, nec cessabo: quoniam vero oportebat et contradictiones scriptas esse apud eos, inspectis Theodori et Diodori libris, quos scripserunt. non de incarn:tione Unigeniti, sed magis contra Incarnationem, posui aliqua capitulorum, et quo potui modo conlradixi eis, declarans ubique abominationis plenam esse sectam eorumDuo vel tres.] In editis libris, duo vel tria, nullo penitus sensu, quippe cum numerales voces ad capitula referri nequeant;
他說:「我實在未曾停止責備他們所寫的,也必不停止:但因為必須將反駁也寫下來駁斥他們,我察看了狄奧多若與提阿多若所寫的書卷——他們所寫的並非論到獨生子的成肉身,反倒是駁斥成肉身——便擺出他們其中若干章節,並盡我所能地反駁他們,到處宣告他們的宗派充滿了可憎之事。」兩三章。] 在印行的書中作「兩章或三章」,全然不通,因為這些數詞無法指向那些章節;
'I indeed,' he says, 'have neither ceased rebuking the things which they wrote, nor will I cease: but since it was fitting that contradictions also should be written down against them, having inspected the books of Theodore and Diodore, which they wrote not concerning the Incarnation of the Only-Begotten, but rather against the Incarnation, I set down some of their chapters, and in what way I could I contradicted them, declaring everywhere that their sect is full of abomination.' Two or three.] In the printed books, 'two or three,' with no sense at all, since indeed the numeral words cannot be referred to the chapters;
12:40
certum enim est capitula longe plura duobus aut tribus ex Theodori 1 bris esse excerpta, siquidem ea ij sa sunt quæ, vel multa in synodo v, vel pauciora a Mercatore referuntur atque a Cyrillo arguuntur. In epistola sua.] Data est ad S. Cyrillum, cujus inter opera habetur lom. V descripta ex lihro VIII Facundi Hermianensis, dignissima lectu ad historiam. Intrantes regiam urbem.] Quid si Eutychem ipsum errores illi corruperint, Id probabiliter admodum quispiam conjecerit Inde enim facile intelligentur sequentia, quomodo nempe quorumdam utentes patrocinio terruerint minis clericos, cic.;
因為確定的是,從提阿多若的書卷中所摘錄的章節遠多於兩三章,因為這些正是那在第五次大公會議中或為數較多、或經墨爾喀托所報導為數較少、並被區利羅所責難的章節。在他的書信中。] 它是致聖區利羅的,見於其著作第五冊,乃自赫米安的法昆都斯第八卷抄錄而來,極值得為歷史而讀。那些進入王城的人。] 假如那些謬誤敗壞了優提克斯本人,又當如何?有人或許頗有可能作此推測。因為由此便容易明白下文,就是他們如何藉某些人的庇護,以恐嚇威脅眾教士,等等;
for it is certain that chapters far more than two or three were excerpted from Theodore's books, since indeed they are the very ones which, either in greater number in the fifth synod, or fewer by Mercator, are reported and are censured by Cyril. In his letter.] It was addressed to St. Cyril, and is found among his works in volume V, copied from book VIII of Facundus of Hermiane, most worthy of reading for history. Those entering the royal city.] What if those errors corrupted Eutyches himself? Someone might quite probably conjecture this. For from there the following may be easily understood, namely how, using the patronage of certain persons, they terrified the clerics with threats, etc.;
12:41
patrocinium enim illud procul dubio fuit Chrysaphi, qnem de sacro fonte Eutyches propter sanctitatis opinionem susceperat, quique propter imperatoris graham nihil non poterat: addc quod unius naturae opinio Cyril o tribuehatur ab aulicis, parum quidem intelligentibus, Cyrillo tamen adhærentibus, ut constat ex Cyrilli commonitorio ad Eulogium. Rescripto suo. ] Hæc ine verba olim, cum notas scriberem in secundam partem operum M. Mercatoris, imprudentem abduxerunt ut crederem Cyrillum in responsione ad Joannem Antiochenum meminisse symboli a Theodoro scripti, cum tamen id nonnisi in epistola 2 ad Acacium Melitenensem reipsa præstet.
因為那庇護無疑就是克利沙非烏的;優提克斯曾因他享有聖潔之名而從聖洗的水中作了他的教父,而他憑著皇帝的恩寵無所不能:再加上一性的見解被宮廷中人歸於區利羅,這些人雖不甚明白,卻附從區利羅,正如區利羅致歐羅吉烏的備忘錄所清楚顯示的。憑他的批覆。] 從前我為《馬里烏斯·墨爾喀托著作》第二部分寫註釋時,正是這些話輕率地把我引入歧途,使我以為區利羅在答覆安提阿的約翰時提到了提阿多若所寫的信經,然而事實上他只在致米利田的亞迦修的第二封書信中才如此行。
for that patronage was without doubt that of Chrysaphius, whom Eutyches had taken up from the sacred font on account of his reputation for sanctity, and who on account of the emperor's favor could do anything: add that the opinion of one nature was attributed to Cyril by the courtiers, who understood it but little, yet adhered to Cyril, as is clear from Cyril's memorandum to Eulogius. By his rescript.] These very words once, when I was writing notes on the second part of the works of Marius Mercator, imprudently led me astray, so that I believed that Cyril in his response to John of Antioch made mention of the creed written by Theodore, whereas in fact he does this only in his second letter to Acacius of Melitene.
12:42
Hæc et alia fecerunt, ut postea credulitatis pœnitens diligentius inquirerem iu verba et fidem punicam Liberati; ipse igitur si rescripti nomine unas intellexit litteras quibus Cyrillus Joanni respondit, lapsus cst memoria; tria enim Cyrillus tribus epistolis, singula singulis, prosecutus csL: sentenliam de Theodoro, episto a ad Joannem; judicium de monachis, epistola ad Patres monachorum, quæ expositio concilii Nicæni; memoriamsymboli, epistoia ad Acacium Melitenensem. De symbolo in concilio sibi oblato.] Unus istud symbolum Marius Mercator opere singulari refellit, nos autem de ipsius auctore historiam, adversus Facundum aliosque plures, exposuimus in notis ad posteriorem partem M.
這些以及別的事使我後來悔悟自己的輕信,便更加勤勉地查考利伯拉圖的言辭與其腓尼基式的(不可靠的)信實;所以他本人,若以「批覆」一詞理解為區利羅答覆約翰的那一封信,便是記憶有誤;因為區利羅以三封信追究三件事,各信各論一事:論提阿多若的見解,在致約翰的信中;論眾修士的判斷,在致眾修士之父的信中,那就是《尼西亞會議釋義》;論信經的記憶,在致米利田的亞迦修的信中。論在會議中呈交給他的信經。] 唯有馬里烏斯·墨爾喀托在一部專著中駁斥了那信經,而我們則駁斥法昆都斯及其他許多人,在《墨爾喀托著作》後一部分的註釋中陳述了關於其作者的歷史。
These and other things brought it about that afterwards, repenting of my credulity, I more diligently inquired into the words and the Punic faith of Liberatus; he himself therefore, if by the name 'rescript' he understood one single letter by which Cyril replied to John, was slipping in memory; for Cyril pursued three matters in three letters, each in its own: the opinion concerning Theodore, in the letter to John; the judgment concerning the monks, in the letter to the Fathers of the monks, which is the exposition of the Council of Nicaea; the memory of the creed, in the letter to Acacius of Melitene. Concerning the creed presented to him in the council.] Marius Mercator alone refuted that creed in a special work, but we have set forth the history concerning its author, against Facundus and many others, in the notes to the latter part of M.
12:43
Mercatoris, ex quibus, ut et ex aliis in pejorem partem non nemo, cujus nomen consulto silendum puto, profecit, quantum ipse fasIus est. Ob tesseracædecatitas.] Erat in vulgatis editionibus Tessera decadas factas, etc. Venimus, monstrante viam historia, in vcram lectionem: nam symbolum de quo agitur a presbyteris duobus Anastasii, qui Nestorianæ impietatis in Di iparam administer fuit, emissariis propositum fuit Tesseracædecatitis hæresim ejurantibus subscribendum. Lege actionem 6 concilii Ephesini. Mortuo Cyrillo] Non mediocris conversio rerum facta est, vita functis in Oriente patriarchis tribus. Obiit Cyrillus anno 444, Joannes Antiochenus 441, Proclus 447;
墨爾喀托——某人從中(也從別的事中)——其名字我認為應當有意隱去——獲益於更壞之途,正如他自己變得何等自高。為著「十四日派」之故。] 在通行版本中作「Tessera decadas factas」等等。我們既有歷史指引道路,便得到了正確的讀法:因為所論的那信經,乃是安納斯塔修——他是涅斯托留褻瀆神之母不敬之事的幫手——手下兩位長老所差遣的使者,向那些正棄絕其異端的「十四日派」所提出,要他們簽署的。請讀以弗所大會第六次會議。區利羅既死。] 當東方三位宗主教相繼去世時,局勢起了不小的變化。區利羅卒於444年,安提阿的約翰卒於441年,普羅克勒斯卒於447年;
Mercator, from which (as also from other things), some person—whose name I think should be deliberately kept silent—profited for the worse, as much as he himself became puffed up. On account of the Tessarescaedecatitae.] In the common editions it was 'Tessera decadas factas,' etc. We have come, with history showing the way, to the true reading: for the creed in question was proposed by emissaries of two presbyters of Anastasius—who was a minister of Nestorian impiety against the Mother of God—to the Tessarescaedecatitae who were abjuring their heresy, to be subscribed. Read the sixth session of the Council of Ephesus. Cyril having died.] No small change of affairs took place, when three patriarchs in the East had departed this life. Cyril died in the year 444, John of Antioch in 441, Proclus in 447;
12:44
Cyrillo Dioscorus, Joanni Domnus, Proclo Flavianns successit. Cyrilli hæedes.] Jubet Baronius hoc exemplo absterreri clericos a bonis ecclesiasticis profundendis in consanguineos, qui, ut fit, ditescant patrimonio pauperum, et luxurientur in Christo: saeculo nequam ! Ibam Edessenum episcopum.] De Iba, cujus causa fuit unum de tribus famosis capitulis, haec aceipe. Fnit Ephesi cum haberetur concilium, ut testatur in epistola ad Marim: nondum erat episcopus, facit enim mentionem epi copi tunc Edessenam sedem tenentis. Successit Rabulae vel ann. 436 inilio, vel sub finem præcedentis; neque enim prius, cum Rabulas ann.
狄奧斯科若繼承區利羅,多努斯繼承約翰,弗拉維安繼承普羅克勒斯。區利羅的承嗣者。] 巴羅尼烏吩咐,當以此為鑑,使眾教士不要將教會的財物揮霍於自己的親屬身上;這些親屬照例靠著窮人的家業致富,並在基督裡奢華度日:禍哉,這邪惡的世代!以得撒的主教以巴斯。] 論到以巴斯——他的案件乃是那三章中有名的一章——請聽以下。當以弗所大會舉行時他在那裡,正如他在致馬里斯的信中所證明的:那時他尚未作主教,因為他提到當時掌管以得撒教座的主教。他繼承拉布拉,或在436年初,或在前一年末;因為不會更早,因為拉布拉在那一年
Dioscorus succeeded Cyril, Domnus succeeded John, Flavian succeeded Proclus. The heirs of Cyril.] Baronius bids that clerics be deterred by this example from squandering ecclesiastical goods upon their kinsmen, who, as happens, grow rich on the patrimony of the poor and live luxuriously upon Christ: woe to the wicked age! Ibas bishop of Edessa.] Concerning Ibas, whose case was one of the three famous Chapters, receive this. He was at Ephesus when the council was held, as he testifies in his letter to Maris: he was not yet bishop, for he makes mention of the bishop then holding the see of Edessa. He succeeded Rabbula either at the beginning of the year 436, or toward the end of the preceding year; for not before, since Rabbula in the year
12:45
435 adhuc viveret, et Armenis Cyrilloquc scriberet, post sparsa Theodori excerpta; non poste. rius, quia anno 436, sub finem, aut initio sequentis, Proclus in litteris ad Joannem Ibae meminit tanquam Edesseni episcopi. Litteras a Theodoreto accepit ann. 441, de Cœlestiaco Carthaginensi. Ann. 446, apud Domnum Antiochenum Joannis successorem a suis quatuor clericis accusatus est, non hæreseos tantum, sed etiam ordinationum præpostere factarum et depraedationis bonorum Ecclesiæ. Connivente Domno, appellatus imperator, anno 447, jussit Tyri judicium exerceri: illud inchoatum est Tyri anno 448, mense Februario, peractum Beryti eodem anno mense Septembri; res amice composita.
435年仍然在世,並在提阿多若的摘錄被散布之後,致函於亞美尼亞人與區利羅;又不會更晚,因為在436年末、或次年初,普羅克勒斯在致約翰的信中提到以巴斯為以得撒的主教。他在441年從提阿多熱接到關於迦太基的塞勒斯提亞古的書信。446年,在約翰的繼任者、安提阿的多努斯面前,他被自己手下四位教士控告,不僅控告異端,也控告其授任程序失序,以及侵吞教會財物。多努斯既縱容此事,案件便上訴於皇帝;447年,皇帝下令在推羅進行審判:審判於448年二月在推羅開始,同年九月在貝魯特結束;此事便友好地了結了。
435 was still alive, and was writing to the Armenians and to Cyril, after Theodore's excerpts had been scattered abroad; and not later, because in the year 436, toward the end, or at the beginning of the following year, Proclus in his letter to John mentions Ibas as bishop of Edessa. He received letters from Theodoret in the year 441, concerning Coelestiacus of Carthage. In the year 446, before Domnus of Antioch, successor of John, he was accused by four of his own clerics, not only of heresy, but also of ordinations made in disorderly fashion and of plundering the goods of the Church. With Domnus conniving, the emperor being appealed to, in the year 447, ordered that the trial be conducted at Tyre: it was begun at Tyre in the year 448, in the month of February, completed at Beirut in the same year in the month of September; the matter was settled amicably.
12:46
Verum non quiescentibus clericis, iterum in Ephesino Latrocinio anno 449, mense Augusto, accusatus est, cum abesset, atque depositus, Sub funem anni recepit literas consulatorias a Theodoreto ejusdem sortis partieipe. Anno 450, libellos querelarum offert Marciano imperatori. Anno 451, restituitur in sedem a conciito Chalcedonensi, actione 10. Ascensionis], non I idest resurreclionis seu ascensionis e sepulcro, non item ascensionis in coelum, ex Tbeodoreto, epist. 87.
但因眾教士不肯罷休,他便在449年八月以弗所的「強盜會議」中,於缺席之際再次被控告,並遭罷黜。那年將終時,他從同遭此命運的提阿多熱接到安慰的書信。450年,他向皇帝馬爾基安呈遞控訴的陳情。451年,他在迦克墩大會第十次會議中被恢復其教座。論「升」一字],並非指從墳墓中的復活或升起,也非指升入天上,乃出自提阿多熱第87封書信。
But since the clerics would not rest, he was again accused, in the Ephesine Robber-Council in the year 449, in the month of August, while he was absent, and was deposed. Toward the end of the year he received consoling letters from Theodoret, a sharer in the same lot. In the year 450, he offers petitions of complaint to the emperor Marcian. In the year 451, he is restored to his see by the Council of Chalcedon, in session 10. Of the Ascension], not of, that is, the resurrection or ascension from the tomb, nor likewise of the ascension into heaven, from Theodoret, letter 87.
← 上一段
← 第 11 章第 13 章 →
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728