CIPRIANO DI CARTAGINE, saint — De catholicae Ecclesiae unitate, chapter 4, in the two recensions, both attributable to the same C. From left to right: 1) Séguier’s manuscript (seguierianus) of the 6th century, short recension — Paris, National Library, ms. lat. 10592, fol. 34; 2) Troyes manuscript of the 8th–9th century, long recension — Troyes, library, ms. 281. As for the priority of the two recensions, the critics are not in agreement: some maintain that the short recension is earlier, whereas others give precedence to the longer one, directed against the Novatianist party in Rome (251).
to that of the manuscript tradition, and perhaps to Epistle 76 and the catalogue discovered by Mommsen in the library of Philip of Cheltenham, dating back to an archetype of 359, in which 12 treatises and a considerable number of letters are listed.
The treatises are as follows: 1) Ad Domatum (246), a work that is partly autobiographical and partly polemical, with a strongly rhetorical colouring, in which the author, recently converted, extols the benefits that Christianity brings to man by causing him to be reborn into a new life, which he contrasts with the corruption of the pagan world. 2) De habitu virginum (249), addressed primarily to virgins consecrated to the Lord, reminds them of their duty to please him alone and to manifest their detachment from earthly affections even in their outward appearance, by renouncing luxury, adornments, and profane amusements. 3) De lapsis (251), dedicated to the confessors of the faith, whose fortitude it praises, deplores the fall of many during the persecution, distinguishing between those who apostatized in the face of torments and those who withdrew from the struggle. Caution must be exercised in admitting apostates to reconciliation. The libellatici too must do penance, as must those who fell only in their hearts. 4) De catholicae Ecclesiae unitate is a pastoral letter written on the occasion of the Novatianist schism (251). Heresies are deplored as attacks upon the unity of the Church willed by Christ, who built his Church upon Peter, symbolized in the Old Testament and announced by St. Paul. It is absolutely necessary to remain united to the Church; outside it, not even martyrdom contributes to salvation (on chapter 4, V. below). 5) De dominica oratione (251–52): after an introduction on the excellence of this prayer and on prayer in general, C. comments on the individual petitions of the Pater noster. Further reflections follow on this prayer as a whole and on the need to pray with recollection, to add fasting and almsgiving to prayer, and to pray assiduously. 6) Ad Demetrianum (252) is addressed to a pagan, in order to refute, in a tone of vehement invective, the accusation that the calamities afflicting the world are punishments sent by the gods because the Christians have abandoned them. He replies that they instead result from the fact that the world has by now grown old; and, turning the accusation back upon its authors, he asserts that the cause of such disasters is the unbelief and vices of the pagans, and especially their persecutions of the Christians. The gods are nothing but demons. Even if Christians are involved in the common misfortunes, these are not an evil for them, since they look toward the future reward. The pagans should therefore convert to the true God. 7) De mortalitate (252–53) is a consolatory pastoral letter to the people, cast down by the plague raging in Cartagine and throughout the empire. The Christian must not fear death, since it is a gain. Nor should the fact that Christians and pagans share the same misfortune be a cause of scandal: the Christian must be ready to endure every pain. Once again, grounds for consolation in the face of death and illness are recalled, and sufferers are invited to look with longing toward Paradise, our homeland. 8) De opere et eleemosynis (252–53): charitable giving and almsgiving are means of wiping away sins, comparable to Baptism, and inculcated by Scripture. There is no reason to fear that almsgiving will impoverish the giver or deprive the giver’s children of what is necessary. Whoever gives alms stages before God a wondrous spectacle, opposed to the worldly spectacles that are the work of the devil. In view of the sentence of the final judgment, and remembering the example of the first Christians, one must devote oneself ardently to the practice of these holy works. 9) De bona patientiae (256): in this treatise, written during the baptismal controversy, C. explains, drawing his ideas from Tertullian, the difference between true Christian patience and that of the philosophers, presenting God and Christ as exemplars of this virtue. He then argues for the necessity of patience from the condition of man and of the Christian, and extols its merits, urging that it be practiced even during persecutions. 10) De zelo et livore (256–57), likewise occasioned by the controversy over the Baptism of heretics, demonstrates, through biblical examples and sayings, the wickedness of envy and its sad consequences, inculcating the duty of charity. 11) Ad Fortunatum de exhortatione martyrii (257): as the persecution of Valerian raged, C. sent Fortunatus, who had expressed this desire, a collection of biblical passages arranged to demonstrate certain theses and accompanied by commentary, warning that he did not intend to compose a treatise, but to provide material for preparing the soldiers of Christ for battle. The fundamental subjects are the vanity of idols, the divine threats against their worshippers, faith in Christ, and the purpose of persecutions; he concludes by extolling the beauty of martyrdom. 12) Ad Quirinum (Testimoniorum libri III) is likewise a collection of scriptural passages, directed in the first two books against the Jews (ca. 248). Book I proposes 24 theses, grouping around each of them biblical texts that demonstrate the wrongs and errors of the Jews; in Book II, 30 theses, together with their supporting texts, expound the divinity of Christ and his mission; Book III, added later, presents in 120 theses, demonstrated by biblical passages, the moral duties of the Christian. 13) Quod idola di non sint (ca. 246), of disputed authenticity because of the silence of the catalogues of Pontius and Mommsen, the scanty manuscript tradition, and its lack of originality, since it is entirely a plagiarism from Minucius Felix and Tertullian’s Apologeticum. It first refutes polytheism, then demonstrates the unity of God, and finally treats of Christ.
The Epistolary comprises 81 letters, including 16 from correspondents, generally arranged in chronological order. Following Schanz, besides 4 undatable letters on various ecclesiastical questions, the following groups may be distinguished: 1) Letters from the period of retirement, in which he justifies his flight and deals especially with the question of the lapsi, and later with the schism of Felicissimus. A group of 13 letters was sent to the Church of Caringine, 12 to the clergy of Rome or to individual members thereof, and 11, preceding the schism, to various recipients; 3 concern the aforementioned schism of Felicissimus. 2) 20 letters exchanged with the bishops of Rome, Cornelius and Lucius, again concerning the question of the lapsi, then the Novatianist schism and the persecution of Decius. 3) 9 letters from the time of Pope Stephen, with the Pope and with others, almost all concerning the Baptism of heretics. 4) 5 letters from the final exile. At least 11 letters are lost. C.’s Epistolary is of extraordinary importance for the historical information it provides concerning major events in the life of the Church, for the richness of its dogmatic and disciplinary content, and for the prominence with which the writer’s personality emerges from II. The style is always polished and suited to the subject. Among the letters of the correspondents, 5 are in Vulgar Latin, with frequent errors of morphology and syntax.
The manuscripts have transmitted under C.’s name a series of treatises by uncertain authorship, some of which were composed in C.’s time and milieu, while others are much later. Each is mentioned in its proper place, under its respective title.
III. THOUGHT
C., much more a pastor than a theologian, presents no particular speculative developments of the various dogmas, which he simply reports according to tradition; only practical necessity led him to investigate two doctrinal points in greater depth: the Sacraments (especially Baptism) and the Church. Since conversions from the numerous heresies were frequent, the question arose whether Baptism received in heresy should be considered valid or not, and consequently whether converts should be rebaptized. C., following the tradition prevailing in the African Churches, maintains that such Baptism is invalid. In addition to appealing to tradition, he advances two arguments: first, the minister of the Sacrament cannot confer the Grace that he himself does not possess: « But how can one who is himself unclean and does not have the Holy Spirit within him cleanse and sanctify water, when the Lord says in Numbers: And everything that an unclean person touches shall be unclean (Num. 19, 22)? How can one who baptizes give remission of sins to others, when outside the Church he cannot free himself from his own sins?» (Ep. 70, 1). The second argument is the unity of Baptism deriving from the unity of the Church: «We do not pronounce our judgment as something new, but share what was already established by our predecessors and observed in full agreement by us and by you: namely, we think and hold as certain that no one can be baptized outside the Church, since the Baptism established in the holy Church is one» (ibid.). «Therefore, since only the Church possesses the living water and the power to baptize and wash a person, let whoever says that someone can be baptized or sanctified among the Novatians first demonstrate and teach that Novatian is in the Church or at the head of the Church» (Ep. 69, 3; PL 4, Ep. 76).The doctrine of the unity of the Church, which truly stands at the center of C.’s teaching and practical activity, is set forth at length in the tract De catholicae Ecclesiae unitate and frequently recurs in the letters. In the tract, C. asserts that the threat to the unity of the Church is more to be feared than persecution (chaps. 1–3). It is an illusion to believe that one can preserve the faith without preserving the unity of the Church (chap. 4). The Church, while remaining one, extends so as to embrace a multitude of people, just as one light gives many rays, one tree many branches, and one spring many streams (chap. 5); she is Christ’s undefiled bride and our mother. «He cannot have God as his father who does not have the Church as his mother»; «whoever does not preserve this unity does not preserve God’s law, does not preserve the faith of the Father and the Son, does not preserve life and salvation» (chap. 6). The symbol of this unity is Christ’s seamless tunic (chap. 7). Not even martyrdom benefits one who is not in the Church (chap. 14). «There is one God and one Christ, his Church is one, its faith is one, the people are one, held together in the firm unity of the body by the bond of concord. Unity cannot be divided, nor can one body be separated by tearing apart its structure or being cut to pieces by rending its entrails» (chap. 33).
The first bond of the Church’s unity is the episcopate: «We bishops, who govern the Church, must preserve and defend this unity with firmness above all, so as to demonstrate that the episcopate too is one and undivided. The episcopate is one, and each of us holds a part of it in solidarity» (chap. 5). The Church is constituted upon the bishops, and every act of the Church is regulated through those placed over her (Ep. 33, 1; PL 4, Ep. 27). In turn, the episcopate has its center of unity in the chair of Peter. Decisive for the primacy of the pope is chap. 4 of the De cat. Eccl. unit., which in its first recension (the longer recension), composed during the schism of Novatian (as Bèvenot demonstrated after Chapman on the basis of the manuscripts), reads as follows: «And the same one, after his Resurrection, says to him: Feed my sheep (Io. 21, 15–17). Upon him he builds the Church and entrusts the sheep to him to feed. And although he grants equal power to all the apostles, nevertheless he established one chair and by his authority determined the origin and nature of unity. Certainly, what Peter was, the others were also, but primacy is given to Peter, and one Church and one chair are set before us. All are shepherds; but one flock alone is shown to us, which must be fed by all the apostles in unanimous agreement. Does he who does not preserve this unity [of the Church; the expression Pauli unitatem is due to a copyist’s blunder] believe that he is preserving the faith? Does he who abandons the Chair of Peter, upon which the Church is founded, presume to be in the Church?» This clear profession of the primacy of Peter and his successors was subsequently attenuated in the second recension of the tract, made by C. himself during the baptismal controversy; but it is also sufficiently clear in other passages: «There is one God and one Christ, and there is one Church and one Chair founded upon Peter by the voice of the Lord» (Ep., 43, 5; PL 4, Ep. 40). «They [the heretics] dare to cross the sea and carry to the Chair of Peter and to the principal Church (Ecclesiam principalem), whence the unity of the episcopate (unitas sacerdotalis) originated, letters from schismatics and profane persons. They do not reflect that these are the Romans, whose faith was openly praised by the Apostle, and to whom perfidy cannot gain access» (Ep., 59, 14; PL 4, Ep. 55). There nevertheless remain obscure points in C.’s doctrine, owing to the difficulty of reconciling these passages with others in which an episcopalian conception emerges, according to which each bishop is independent and responsible only before God; above all, there remains the difficulty of reconciling those explicit admissions of the primacy with the conduct maintained by C. toward Pope Stephen during the baptismal controversy, in which he firmly opposed the bishop of Rome and appealed for the collective intervention of the episcopate to correct his decisions. Certainly, C. did not know how to draw the natural theoretical and practical consequences from that truth.
Studies: On the manuscripts, besides Hartel, cf. H. V. Soden, Die Cyprianische Briefsammlung (Texte und Untersuchungen, new series, 10, III). Leipzig 1904. For the De unitate: D. Van Den Eynde, La double édition du « De unitate » de s. Cyprien, in Revue d'hist. ecclés., 29 (1933), pp. 5–24; M. Bévenot, St. Cyprian's De Unitate Chap. 4 in the light of the manuscripts (Analecta Gregoriana, 11), Rome 1938 (with further bibliography, especially the works of D. Chapman). In general: P. Monceaux, Histoire littéraire de l'Afrique chrétienne, II, Paris 1902; Bardenhewer, II (1914), pp. 442–517; Moricca, I, pp. 367–456; Schanz-Krüger, III; A. d’Alès, La théologie de s. Cyprien, Paris 1922, pp. 333–92; H. Koch, Cyprianische Untersuchungen, Bonn 1926; S. Colombo, S. C. di Cartagine, l'uomo e lo scrittore, in Didaskaleion, new series, 6 (1928), pp. 1–80; P. Godet, Cyprien, in DThC, III, cols. 2459–70; H. Koch, Cathedra Petri, Giessen 1930; R. Poschmann, Ecclesia principalis, ein kritischer Beitrag zur Frage des Primats bei Cyprien, Breslau 1933; P. de Labriolle — G. Bardy, Histoire de la littérature latine chrétienne, 3rd ed., Paris 1947, pp. 196–247. On the language: L. Bayard, Le latin de s. Cyprien, Paris 1901; P. A. H. J. Merck, Zur Syntax der Kasus und Tempora in den Trachtaten des hl. Cyprien, Nijmegen 1930; I. Schrijnen-Chr. Mohrmann, Studien zur Syntax der Briefe des hl. Cyprien, 2 vols., ibid. 1936–37; M. J. Ball, Nature and the Vocabulary of Nature in the works of s. Cyprien (Cathol. Univ. Patristic Studies, 75), Washington 1946. Michele Pellegrino