ON ST. AURELIUS OF CARTHAGE, BISHOP,
ABOUT THE YEAR 429.
HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.
Aurelius, bishop and confessor, at Carthage. (S.)
BY J. V. H.
§ I. The Saint wrongly omitted by our predecessors; his diaconate and pontificate in the Church of Carthage; the celebration of councils.
Our predecessors formerly omitted to publish the Acts of St. Aurelius, bishop of Carthage, supposing that his memory was nowhere celebrated. St. Aurelius, omitted by our predecessors at the 20th day of July, The memory of Aurelius, they say at the 20th day of July among those passed over Acta SS. vol. V of July, p. 3., bishop of Carthage in Africa, successor of St. Genethlius, contemporary of St. Augustine, Chastelain has in so many words attached to the Saints on this day, under what leader, or on what authority, I do not know, since I have found his memory expressed nowhere in the sacred Calendars. But one of the following Hagiographers, in the copy which I use, has added a note, written by hand. Aurelius, he says, is found in the very ancient Calendar of Carthage in Mabillon's Analecta Vet. Analect. 164., from which several have been passed over. Then in the Annotations to the Life of St. Augustine, published by St. Possidius Acta SS. vol. VI of Aug. p. 432., they promise that they will give his Acts in a supplement to the Work. We have thought it better to make a gleaning of the omitted ones, as they occur. The same Saint was also passed over by Stefano Morcelli in the Martyrology of the African Church which he compiled, attached at the foot of the second volume Afric. Christ. vol. II p. 459.. Nevertheless there is no reason why the cult of St. Aurelius should be called into controversy, since his name is found in the Calendar of Carthage, edited by Mabillon, in these words under the 13th before the Kalends of August (the 20th of July) Vet. Analect p. 164.: The burial of St. Aurilius, bishop. In a note subjoined to the text Mabillon adds: Of Carthage, a very celebrated man, contemporary of St. Augustine, whose name I do not find in the Martyrologies. And that this Martyrology is very ancient is manifest even from this, that it records no memory of St. Fulgentius of Ruspe, who died in the year 533, and that no feast of the Mother of God occurs, on whom there is no treatise or sermon in St. Augustine. Finally that the cult of the Saints recorded in the Calendar was truly liturgical is shown by the title written at its head, namely: here are contained the days of the birthdays of Martyrs and the burials of bishops whose anniversaries the Church of Carthage celebrates Ibid. p. 163.. Since the name of St. Aurelius is found in it at the 20th day of July, no doubt can remain of his lawful cult, and we must interpret the silence of the remaining Martyrologists from the scanty communication which thereafter existed between Africa and the rest of the West on account of the Vandals and then of the Saracens.
[2] was first a deacon of the Church of Carthage; Of the deeds of St. Aurelius before his episcopate we know one thing, that he was a deacon of the Church of Carthage. St. Augustine teaches us this in epistle XXII (otherwise LXIV) directed to him Migne, Patrol., vol. XXXIII, col. 90., in which he himself, still a presbyter, exhorts the bishop to forbid by his authority revellings over the tombs of Martyrs, because just as it seems a matter of audacity to try to change what the Church of Carthage holds, so it is of great impudence to wish to keep what the Church of Carthage has corrected. And for this matter what other bishop was to be desired, than one who as a deacon execrated those things. But although St. Aurelius was a deacon of the Church of Carthage, yet it is not established that he had his origin at Carthage. For it was the singular privilege of this Church that the bishop of Carthage, who, say the fathers in the Council of the year 400 Labbe, vol. II, conc. col. 1647., sustained the solicitude of all the Churches, might take to himself clerics from wherever he wished. Further, so great was the dearth of clerics through Africa at that time that in the same council of Carthage of the year 400 an embassy was decreed to the Roman Pontiff Anastasius and to the prelate of Milan Venerius, so that they might out of their abundance relieve the penury of the Africans; for many Churches were so deserted that they were found to have not even one deacon or illiterate cleric (that is, lector) … But if the ministry of a deacon was not easily found, much more could those of the higher honours not be found Ibid., col. 1643.. From these things it becomes wholly manifest that clerics were summoned from everywhere; and so the homeland of St. Aurelius, though he was a deacon of Carthage, is hidden from us.
[3] he is made bishop between the years of Christ 390 and 393; It is not sufficiently established in what year St. Aurelius ascended the chair of Carthage. Emmanuel Schelstrate indicates the year of Christ 390 Eccles. Afric., p. 274.; Stefano Morcelli, the year 391 or even the following Afric. Christ., vol. I, p. 53; vol. II, p. 307.. This is certain, that in the year 390 Genethlius of Carthage on the 14th before the Kalends of June celebrated in his see a synod, commonly called the Second Council of Carthage Labbe, vol. II, Conc. col. 1159.; likewise that his successor, our Aurelius, presided at the Council assembled at Hippo Regius in the year 393, on the 8th before the Ides of October Ibid., col. 1641.: the beginning of our saint's episcopate, then, is to be fixed between the years 390 and 393; and we cannot define anything closer. Now the Church of Carthage was as it were the mother of all Christian Africa. I, says St. Aurelius himself in canon 55 in the Code of canons of the African Church Ibid, col 1080. Cf. Schelstrate, Eccles. Afric. Dissert. I, ch. 5., by the condescension of God sustain, as you know, brethren, the solicitude of all the Churches. To which words, as is read in the same place, the bishops gave their assent. For this reason also it is decreed in canon 52 of the Council of Carthage of the year 401 that letters to be dictated in council should be subscribed by the bishop of Carthage in the name of all Ibid., col. 1654.. And the remaining provinces (for besides the Proconsular, of which Carthage was the metropolis, there were five others, namely Numidia, Byzacena, Mauretania Caesariensis, Mauretania Sitifensis and Tripolitana Morcelli, Afric. Christ., vol. I, p. 32 and following.), although they had a metropolis, were subject to the senior of the province, who bore the title of Primate; whence the jurisdiction of the primate was ambulatory. Thus in canon 53 of the Council commonly called African it is decreed Labbe, vol. II, Conc. col. 1655.: It has pleased all the bishops who have subscribed in this council that the register and archive of Numidia be both at the first see and in the metropolis, that is, Constantina. Of this matter the already often-cited Emmanuel Schelstrate treats more fully Eccles. Afric., Dissert. I, ch. 4..
[4] at which time Parmenian the Donatist sat at Carthage: Bishop St. Aurelius had as competitor for his see Parmenian the Donatist, who seems to have lived until the year 394, in which Primian was elected, who himself also, a new schism having arisen among the schismatics, had as competitor Maximinus; whence there were thereafter among the Donatists those who were called Primianists and Maximinists, according as they were followers of one faction or the other. It is not the business of this Commentary to write more laboriously the history of the Donatists, which the Ecclesiastical Annals present everywhere and which our Willem Cuypers has sketched in the Commentary on the Acts of St. Augustine, § XIX Acta SS., vol. VI of Aug., p. 262.. But when Primian had died, the Donatists ceased to have a bishop of Carthage; for no other appears after him; in Numidia they went on longer.
[5] St. Aurelius founds a monastery; St. Aurelius seems, from the beginning of his pontificate, to have commended himself to the prayers of Augustine, whom he loved exceedingly, and to have given a piece of land near Carthage, that the disciples of Augustine, still a presbyter, might lead their life there. For the holy Doctor says this openly in epistle XXII, to others LXIV Migne, Patrol., vol. XXXIII, col. 90.. That first thing, he says, that you believe yourself to be helped by my prayers, I not only do not shun, but even gladly embrace. For thus, if not by mine, yet by yours our Lord will hear me … So the whole company of brethren, which has begun to grow together with us, is bound to you by so great a prerogative, that in places of the earth so far separated you have so taken thought for us, as one most present in spirit. Wherefore we apply ourselves to prayer as much as we can, that the Lord may deign to sustain with you the flock committed to you, and not to desert you anywhere, but to be present as a helper in due time, dealing with his Church in mercy through your priesthood, such as spiritual men importune him with tears and groans to do. At the end of the same epistle he adds that he desires to see the piece of land which he had learned was given to his brethren by the provision and liberality of Aurelius.
[6] most friendly to St. Augustine, In the same epistle the holy Doctor had admonished Aurelius about removing the abuse of the revellings that took place at the tombs of the Martyrs. Revellings, he says, and drunkenness are so held to be allowed and lawful that even in honour of the most blessed Martyrs they are celebrated not only on solemn days (which itself let him see as not to be mourned who beholds these things not with the eyes of the flesh) but even daily. He then proposes the example of the Churches overseas, in which they were partly never held, partly, whether they had arisen or grown old, were extinguished and blotted out by the diligence of holy bishops truly thinking of the future life. He then exhorts Aurelius that so great a pestilence be wholly healed by the authority of a council. Or, he goes on, if the medicine is to begin with one Church; just as it seems a matter of audacity to try to change what the Church of Carthage holds, so it is of great impudence to wish to keep what the Church of Carthage has corrected. Bishop St. Aurelius complied with the admonition of the presbyter St. Augustine. For in Sermon CCCXI on St. Cyprian the holy Doctor has Ibid., vol. XXXVIII, col. 1415.: Not very many years ago even this place had been invaded by the pestilence and wantonness of dancers. This so holy place, where the body of so holy a Martyr lies, as many remember who have
age, this place, I say, so holy, had been invaded by the pestilence and wantonness of dancers. Through the whole night wicked songs were sung here and they danced to the singers. When the Lord willed, through our holy brother, your bishop, from the time when holy vigils began to be celebrated here, that plague, after struggling a little, afterwards yielded to diligence, blushed before wisdom.
[7] by whom he is luminously praised: St. Augustine also praises the wonderful abstinence of St. Aurelius and his mind despising worldly things. For when he had said in sermon CCCLV Ibid., col. 1572.: Whoever wishes, disinheriting his son, to make the Church his heir, let him seek another to accept it, not Augustine: indeed, God being gracious, may he find no one; he adds: How laudable the deed of the holy and venerable Aurelius, bishop of Carthage! how he filled the mouth of all who know of it with the praises of God! A certain man, as he had no sons and did not hope for them, gave all his property to the Church, retaining the usufruct for himself. Sons were born to him, and the bishop returned to him, who was not expecting it, what he had given. It was in the bishop's power not to return it; but by the law of the forum, not by the law of heaven. The excellent deed of Aurelius is cited in the Decree of Gratian, canon 43, cause XVII, question 4. But it may be doubted whether it was in the bishop's power not to return the inheritance by the law of the forum or civil law. There exists certainly in the Theodosian Code a law, namely law 3, on the revocation of gifts (bk. VIII, tit. 13), by which it is decreed: If ever a patron, not having sons, has bestowed on freedmen by donation all his goods or some part of his means, and afterwards has received children, the whole of whatever he has bestowed shall return, to remain in the discretion and control of the same donor.
[8] especially on account of his abstinence from temporal things: Jacques Godefroy in his continuous Commentary on the Theodosian Code asks Vol. II, p. 658. Leipzig edition of Johann Ritter, year 1737. whether all childless donors of all their goods or a part of them enjoy the benefit of this law, if after the donation they have received children. Some affirm it, and their opinion, he says, has passed into common use and practice. Yet Godefroy himself inclines to the negative opinion, and brings forward various reasons for it. 1st, Because the supervening of children is nowhere adduced as a cause of revocation. 2nd, Because the persons of whom the law treats were joined by a tight bond of relationship, so that freedmen were compelled to support their patrons and their children out of their own means: whence it seemed absurd to despoil the children of those goods which the freedmen, in whose favour the donation was made, would then have to spend on the children. 3rd, In the law brought forward the matter concerns not only all goods, but also a part of the means: whence if the law were extended to all donees, it would follow that any donation whatever is revocable, which is absurd. From these and other arguments Godefroy concludes that St. Augustine rightly said that it was in the power of Bishop Aurelius not to return the inheritance by the law of the forum. But in that Augustine denies that this can be done by the law of heaven, the canonists say that this pertains not to the obligation of justice, but to honourableness and charity Cf. Ludwig Engel, Collegium univ. juris, tit. D. Donat., number 18..
[9] he celebrates various councils: that of Hippo, We have already said at number 3 that St. Aurelius presided at the council of Hippo, celebrated in the year 393. Now this council was notable not only for the throng of fathers from all the Churches of the whole of Africa, but was also as it were a model for the others, whose canons most synods then followed: so that it is to be regretted that its whole acts have not come down to our age: for this reason which canons were decreed and in what order is by no means ascertained Morcelli, Afric. Christ., vol. II, p. 312.. In the following year, that is, 394 of Christ, Aurelius held a council at Carthage, in the consulate of Arcadius for the 3rd time and Honorius for the 2nd, in which the proconsular bishops were directed as legates to the council of Hadrumetum of the province of Byzacena Labbe, vol. II, Conc. col. 1065.: what else was done we do not know. Then in the year 395 Augustine, recently ordained bishop, and Alypius of Thagaste congratulated St. Aurelius in epistle XLII (otherwise LXXVII) Migne, Patrol., vol. XXXIII, col. 158. on the decision by which, contrary to the custom prevailing in Africa, he permitted his presbyters to speak to the people in church in his presence, a decision they call a holy thought, which, by the help of the Lord who inspired it, he brought to effect. Indeed the discipline concerning the preaching of presbyters varied through various Churches; thus at Antioch St. John Chrysostom, even in the absence of Bishop Flavian, gave almost daily discourses to the people, as is established from the very sermons preserved to this day.
[10] that of Carthage, in which A reason also for entrusting this ministry was perhaps the frequency of councils, and so the absence of bishops, who, leaving their own sees, had to betake themselves to the city appointed for the council to deliberate on the gravest matters. For in the year 397, on the Ides of August, a council was celebrated at Carthage, in which the canons of the council of Hippo are briefly set forth: there is subjoined also an epistle of Aurelius and Musonius to the bishops of Numidia, of both Mauritanias, of Tripolis and of the Proconsular province, in which the execution of the canons of Hippo is urged Labbe, vol. II, Conc. col. 1179.. But shortly afterwards, that is, on the Kalends of September of the same year, under the presidency of our Aurelius, a more celebrated synod was assembled, which is commonly called the Third Council of Carthage Ibid, col. 1167.. In it many things were decreed for reforming the morals of the clergy and people. In canon I it is decided that the paschal observance, that is, the day on which Easter is to be celebrated every year, is to be received from the Church of Carthage: by which ordinance the principal authority of this Church is shown. Canon XXXVIII has this also as something special, that Cresconius, bishop of Villa Regia, having deserted his people, had seized the Church of Tubunae; that often canonically admonished he had persisted in his usurpation. They ask, then, that, necessity itself compelling, they may be free to go to the governor of the province against him according to the statutes of the most glorious princes. Aurelius replied: The form of discipline being preserved, it will not be judged ambition, if, modestly summoned by your charity, he shall have refused to withdraw, when he shall have been, through his own contempt and contumacy, summoned even by judicial authority. By all the bishops it was said: It is just, it is pleasing.
[11] the ordination of bishops is treated Under canon XXXIX a complaint had been brought that two bishops of Numidia had presumed to ordain a bishop. They wished, then, that ordinations of bishops should be held to be celebrated by twelve. Our Aurelius again intervened as moderator, and said: The ancient form shall be kept, that not fewer than three shall suffice, who have been appointed for ordaining a bishop. And why he does not require the number twelve for the consecration of a bishop he himself sets forth the reason, namely the difficulty of gathering twelve bishops, both because there are provinces in which there is no such number, and he cites the province of Tripolitana, in which there are only five bishops; and because, even if there are more, it will still be difficult to complete the number twelve, the bishops being otherwise occupied: whence he concludes that it would be an impediment to ecclesiastical advantage, and so that this very thing cannot be observed. In the year 398 there came together at Carthage under Aurelius 214 fathers and they celebrated on the 6th before the Ides of November the Fourth Council of Carthage, which is also called universal Ibid., col. 1196.. Among the hundred and four canons, all of which aim at keeping discipline in clergy and people sound and whole, one is worthy of note, as the germ of those institutions by which the education of women is entrusted to nuns; namely canon XII Ibid., col. 1201.: Widows or nuns, who are chosen for the ministry of women to be baptized, should be so instructed for the office that they can teach, with apt and sound speech, unskilled and rustic women, at the time when they are to be baptized, how when questioned they should answer the baptizer, and how they should live after receiving baptism.
[12] and of widows and nuns. These widows, of whom the preceding canon treats, and who performed the office of deaconesses, seem to have been of the number of those who, as canons 101, 102 and 103 determine, were supported at the expense of the Church whose widows they were, so that it pertained to the guilt of the bishop or of the presbyter who presided over the parish, if for the sake of sustaining the present life younger widows or nuns were subjected to the familiarities of clerics, but for this reason also widows who were supported by the stipend of the Church had to be so assiduous in the works of God that they might help the Church both by their merits and by their prayers. On Deaconesses Jean Pien published a special treatise at the threshold of volume I of September. About the same time St. Aurelius, who was wholly occupied in ordering ecclesiastical affairs, determined that psalms should be sung in the sacrifice of the Mass: But a certain Hilarus, says St. Augustine Migne, Patrol., vol. XXXII, col. 634., a man of tribunician rank, a Catholic layman, irritated, tore with slanderous reproach wherever he could the custom which had then begun at Carthage, that hymns from the book of Psalms should be said at the altar either before the oblation or when what had been offered was being distributed to the people, asserting that it ought not to be done. Against him, at the bidding of the brethren, St. Augustine wrote, but this book has perished. Nor is there any doubt that this custom was introduced by our Aurelius, since during the whole time that St. Augustine held the pontificate, St. Aurelius sat at Carthage.
§ II. A temple of the goddess Caelestis is dedicated as a church; the temples of idols are overthrown; the right of asylum; clerics are called from Italy; the case of the Donatists; St. John Chrysostom is defended by the African bishops; the Pelagians are condemned; the question of Easter; the presbyter Leporius is commended to the Gallic fathers; the death of the holy prelate.
He dedicates the temple of Caelestis; The author of the book on the Promises and Predictions, which was formerly attributed to St. Prosper of Aquitaine, but is ascribed by sharper-eyed critics to a certain anonymous African, reports the following in bk. III, ch. 38 Ibid., vol. LI, col. 835.: In Africa, at Carthage, they said there was an exceedingly large temple of Caelestis, surrounded by the shrines of all their gods. Its courtyard, adorned with a mosaic pavement and precious columns and walls, extended nearly two thousand paces. When, long closed through neglect, thorny thickets surrounded and overwhelmed it, and the Christian people wished to claim it for the use of the true religion, the pagan people clamoured that there were serpents and asps there to guard the temple. The more were the Christians kindled with fervour, and they removed these unharmed, with the same ease with which they consecrated the temple to their true heavenly king and lord. For when the solemn festival of holy Easter was being kept, a multitude of many priests being gathered there and arriving from all sides, with all curiosity, the father and prelate worthy to be named with memory, Aurelius, now a citizen of the heavenly homeland, both held and sat in a chair there in the place of Caelestis. I myself was then present with companions and friends; and (as the impatient age of youth was turning itself round about) while we curiously inspected each thing according to its greatness, something wonderful and incredible presented itself to our sight: a title written in larger bronze letters on the front of the temple: AURELIUS PONTIFEX DEDICAVIT Aurelius the pontiff dedicated this. Reading this the peoples wondered. Things done then by a prophetic spirit, which the foreknowing order of God had concluded in that sure end. And when by someone
of the pagans a false prophecy, as of the same Caelestis, was brought forward, that both the road and the temples would be restored once more to the ancient rite of sacrifices: He, he, I say, the true God, whose prophetic oracles know not how to lie or deceive, under Constantine and Augusta Placidia, whose son Valentinian, pious and Christian, now reigns, the tribune Ursus pressing the matter, brought all those temples down to the ground and left the land for the burial, that is, of the dead, and that very road the Vandal band has now overturned, leaving no memory of it. The destruction of the temple of the goddess Caelestis Morcelli refers to the year of Christ 420 Afric. Christ., vol. III, p. 101..
[14] the temples of idols are overthrown, But indeed that in the year 399, in which Easter fell on the 4th before the Ides of April, the 10th day of the month, the Christians celebrated this triumph, we have as witness St. Augustine, who in bk. XVIII of the City of God, ch. 54 Migne, Patrol., vol. XLI, col. 620., teaches that in the consulate of Manlius Theodorus, that is, in the year of Christ 399, … in the most noted and eminent city of Carthage in Africa, Gaudentius and Jovius, counts of the emperor Honorius, on the fourteenth before the Kalends of April overthrew the temples of the false gods and broke the images. That Gaudentius did not overthrow all the temples is clear from the dedication of the temple of the goddess Caelestis, made on the 10th day of April; the place, that is, was purged with the greatest speed, for from the 14th before the Kalends of April to the 4th before the Ides only twenty-two days intervene. Moreover the imperial laws restrained devastations: for on the 3rd before the Kalends of September of the year 399, in the consulate of Manlius Theodorus, Arcadius and Honorius to Apollodorus, procurator of Africa, law 18, Theodosian Code, On Pagans (XVI, 10): Let no one attempt to overthrow temples, empty of unlawful things by the benefit of our sanctions: for we decree that the condition of the buildings shall be intact. Then in law 19 of the same title it is decreed that the very buildings of the temples, which are in cities or towns or outside towns, should be claimed for public use; let altars be destroyed in all places.
[15] and the traces of paganism are blotted out; Nevertheless canon 58 of the code of canons of the African Church decrees Labbe, vol. II, Conc., col. 1085. that the emperors be asked to order the remains of idols to be wholly cut away through all Africa: for in most maritime places and various possessions the iniquity of that error still flourishes; that these themselves be ordered to be blotted out, and that their temples, which, established in the fields or in hidden places, have no ornament, be ordered to be destroyed in every way. Certainly three things chiefly induced them to destroy the temples that were in the fields. In the first place, the superstition could scarcely be abolished otherwise; which persisted longer in the fields and villages, whence the name of pagans: next, by a destruction of this kind scarcely anything was taken away: finally there was little or no fear of a tumult of the people in the fields, whereas in the cities a rebellion of the common people had greatly to be guarded against. The princes admitted the petition of the bishops: for by law 25 of the same title all shrines, temples and sanctuaries of the idols, if any even then remained intact, were to be destroyed by order of the magistrates, and expiated by the placing of the sign of the venerable Christian religion. This law I so interpret that the temples should either be destroyed, or, expiated by the sign of the cross, be deputed for Christian worship.
[16] the right of asylum is established; On the occasion of the dedication of the temple, once of the goddess Caelestis, many bishops had come together at Carthage, as the text cited above from the book on the Promises has it. This throng of bishops was in all likelihood the reason why St. Aurelius decided to celebrate a council before the fixed day and month. Therefore the holy prelate, when he had then waited seventeen days, until those should come who had kept that feast in their Churches, began the synod on the 5th before the Kalends of May. Its Acts have been lost: one thing we know, which is read in the code of canons of the African Church, canon 56, namely: After the consulate of the most glorious emperor Honorius Augustus for the 4th time and of Eutychian, the most illustrious man, on the 5th before the Kalends of May, that is, in the year of Christ 399, at Carthage in the sacristy of the basilica Restituta. In this council the bishops Epigonius and Vincent undertook an embassy, that for those fleeing to a church, involved in whatever guilt, they might obtain a law from the most glorious princes, that no one should dare to drag them away. About two months later there was given law 24, On bishops and clerics, Theodosian Code (XVI, 2): If the privileges of the venerable Church shall have been violated by anyone's rashness or neglected by concealment; the offence shall be punished by a fine of five pounds of gold (as was also previously established). If, therefore, anything against Churches or clerics shall have been obtained contrary to the laws, by surreptitious means, either by heretics or by men of this kind, let it be condemned by the authority of this sanction. Given on the 7th before the Kalends of July at Brescia, Theodorus, most illustrious man, being consul. Godefroy in his Commentary on this law judges that, though directed to Sapidianus, vicar of Africa, it is by no means to be derived from the African embassy; since this could scarcely have reached Brescia in the space of two months. But in the summer season there was certainly time enough for the legates to reach Honorius. The law of Honorius Gratian inserted in his decree, Cause XXV, question 2, canon 20.
[17] another council of Carthage is celebrated. But the learned dispute whether St. Aurelius celebrated any council in the year of Christ 400: for the First African seems to have to be deferred to the following year 401, since indeed it is said to have been celebrated after the consulate of Flavius Stilicho, the most illustrious man, on the 16th before the Kalends of July Ibid., col. 1241.. It is established further that the council of Carthage, commonly called the Third African, was assembled on the Ides of September in the same year, namely under Vincent and Flavita, who held the consulate in the year of Christ 401 Labbe, col. 1242.. But Stefano Morcelli judges that two councils were not celebrated at Carthage in the same year, because for the sake of the twin Council the bishops would have been forced to stay at Carthage for four months, leaving their Churches, which they especially wished to benefit, and their hosts being exhausted by the long stay, to whom they were ordered by law not to be a burden Afric, Christ. vol. II, p. 350.. But as to the synod being noted as held after the consulate of Stilicho, the cited Morcelli says that this comes from the fact that a suffect consul had then succeeded Stilicho, but of this matter there is, so far as I know, no testimony. Pagi at the year 398, § XIII, with Emmanuel Schelstrate in the African Church, Dissert. III, ch. 9, judges that the words after the consulate etc. are additions; and so the council celebrated on the 16th before the Kalends of July is conveniently placed in the year of Christ 400.
[18] in which it is decreed that clerics are to be summoned from Italy; For the rest, whether this council was celebrated in the year 400 or in any other, its Acts are not to us on all sides genuine, but rather pieced together from various councils. For in the Prologue it is said Labbe, vol. II Conc. col. 1641. that an embassy is to be sent to Anastasius, bishop of the apostolic see, and to Venerius, priest of the Church of Milan: a little below, in canon 14 Ibid., col. 1644., the fellow priests Siricius and Simplicianus are to be consulted, the former bishop of the apostolic see, the latter of the Church of Milan. But Siricius died in the year of Christ 398, and Simplicianus in the year 400 Sassi, Archiep. Mediol., vol. I, p. 97.: while Pope Anastasius sat from the year 398 to 401; Venerius, the successor of St. Simplicianus, ruled the people of Milan as bishop from the year 400 to 408 Ibid., p. 108.. Now it cannot be that in the same synod there should be treated both of sending an embassy to Anastasius and Venerius and of holding a consultation with Siricius and Simplicianus. Unless, then, there is an error in the names, which can be shown by no argument, it is necessary that the canons of various councils grew together into one collection, which was then called the council of Carthage. Moreover these canons were framed under the presidency of our St. Aurelius: some of them belong to the year 400, unless it be said that there was no synod in that year, which is foreign to the customs of the African Church of that age. Besides the things we brought forward at number 2 on the jurisdiction of the see of Carthage, canon 11 is worthy of note Labbe, vol. II, Conc., col. 1644., by which it is decreed that sacred virgins, when they have been deprived of the parents by whom they were guarded, should by the providence of the bishop or of the presbyter, where the bishop is absent, be commended to a monastery of virgins or to more dignified women, so that dwelling together they may guard each other, lest by wandering about they injure the reputation of the Church. By more dignified women I understand those who performed the office of deaconesses. Then in canon 14 it is decreed Ibid., l. c. that, Siricius and Simplicianus having been consulted, access to the ministry of the sacred altar may lie open only to those baptized among the Donatists as infants, because they did not do it by their own judgment and the error of their parents ought not to hinder them. That is to say, already at that time the sons of non-Catholics were kept from sacred orders.
[19] In this plenary synod, which, the bishops from all the African provinces sitting in it, in the year 401 it is decreed that the Donatists are to be treated more kindly, Aurelius assembled at Carthage, in the consulate of Vincent and Flavita, that is, in the year of Christ 401, on the Ides of September Labbe, vol. II Conc., col. 1651., before all else there was recited the epistle of Anastasius, the Roman Pontiff, by which he warns the Africans to beware of the plots and wickednesses of the heretic and schismatic Donatists Ibid., l. c.. Nevertheless the fathers of that synod in canon 35 of the Collection of canons resolved Ibid., l. c. that letters should be sent to their fellow bishops and especially to the apostolic see, that it might become known to them that Africa has great need, for the sake of the peace and tranquillity of the Church, that of the Donatists themselves whatever clerics, having corrected their purpose, might wish to pass over to Catholic unity, should, according to the will and counsel of each Catholic bishop, if this should seem profitable, be received in their honours. And they show that this method of acting rests on the tradition of the African Church, which so proceeded in the earlier times of division or schism. Hence it is manifest that the fathers prolonged the indulgence which, as we saw in the preceding number, they wished to be extended to boys baptized in the sect, who had been entangled in the schism not so much by their own judgment as by the error of their parents.
[20] and that fugitive monks are not to be promoted to the clergy; What the monastic origins were in the African Church there is no need for us to inquire laboriously: this is certain, that at the beginning of the fifth century the monastic institute greatly flourished. There were also then monks who were weary of a more austere life, and who were canvassing to be enrolled in the clergy for the sake of a freer life. Wherefore in the same council, in canon 47, it had been decreed Ibid., col. 1654. that a bishop who should have promoted a monk from another's monastery to the clerical state or appointed him superior in his own monastery should be separated from communion, and that the man so promoted should remain neither cleric nor provost. Nevertheless Donatus and his brother, monks of Hippo, St. Augustine, as he himself writes in epistle 60 to Aurelius Migne, Patrol., vol. XXXIII, col. 228., resisting as much as he could for their salvation, had of their own accord deserted the monastery; and our Aurelius, thinking that by the will of Augustine, to his fellow countrymen
they would be useful, they had withdrawn from the monastery, had enrolled Donatus in the clergy of Carthage; St. Augustine also excuses the primate of Carthage, because, that is, he had promoted Donatus; before, he says, we had determined anything on this matter in the council (of the year 401).
[21] a conference is instituted in the case of the Donatists; The council of Carthage of the year 401 was followed in the next year, on the sixth before the Kalends of September, by that of Milevis, also under the presidency of St. Aurelius Labbe, vol. II Conc., col. 1654.. In it the chief treatment was of the ordination of various bishops, whose names are not to be reviewed here, nor their controversies repeated: otherwise we should have to rehash the history of the African Church. Moreover St. Aurelius, perhaps under the leadership and impulse of St. Augustine, was always active in all ecclesiastical business. Then in the council of Carthage of the year 403, celebrated on the 8th before the Kalends of September Ibid., col. 1656., the absence of some of the provincial bishops having been excused, who should have been present at least through some colleagues as legates, the Donatists were treated of in canon 59, who were to be invited to a colloquy, in which whatever of question separated the Donatists from the communion of the Catholics should be discussed in peace Labbe, col. 1658.. But for a whole eight years labour was required for that conference to be celebrated: namely, when, under the pressure of the edicts of the emperors recently passed, the Donatists could not evade the debate. For when in the following year, that is, 404 of Christ, the bishops had again come together at Carthage on the 16th before the Kalends of July Ibid., l. c., it was decreed that, since the episcopal and peaceful office of a friendly conference had been fulfilled, which the Donatists not only spurned, but, turned to monstrous violence, overwhelmed many bishops and many clerics (to say nothing of laymen) by ambushes, and also seized some churches and likewise tried to seize others Ibid., vol. II Conc. 1659., the fathers should have recourse to the emperors for a suitable remedy. The remaining proceedings in the case of the Donatists we do not judge should be set out more broadly, since they are explained in detail in the Acts of St. Augustine at the 28th day of August, §§ XXX–XXXIII, in which St. Aurelius, bishop of the first see, plays his part excellently.
[22] the cause of St. Chrysostom is vindicated, Nor did St. Aurelius fail in his part, when almost all the bishops of the West pressed both before Pope Innocent and before the emperor Honorius that John Chrysostom should be recalled from exile and restored to his see of Constantinople [Cf. Baron. at the year 405, §13 and following.]. Of this matter we have as witness epistle 149, given by Chrysostom to our Aurelius about the year [ ], as Bernard de Montfaucon reports. In it the holy confessor praises Migne, Patrol. gr. vol. LII, col. 700. the noble mind of Aurelius, as one who, separated by so great a distance of journey, as if present, he says, and living with us, you have taken us and bound us to you. For the ardour of your charity, and that sweetness of fragrance which flows from your freedom of speech and piety, has penetrated even to us, who are placed in the furthest recess of the world. Therefore, he goes on, we call you blessed, because, having undertaken great labour and sweat for all the Churches of the earth, you have laid up for yourself the greatest crowns with the kindly God … I would have you consider how great a reward you yourself will receive, who free so many disturbed Churches by excellent zeal and diligence of this kind from tumults and disturbances, and strive to bring them into the tranquil harbour of peace.
[23] especially before St. Innocent the pope; From these words it becomes manifest that St. Aurelius applied excellent effort to bring help to Chrysostom in exile. But while he was commending his diligence to other Churches, he was by no means idle in averting the evils threatening Africa. While the tumult of the Donatists was still raging, a new error was creeping and spreading, carried from furthest Britain into Africa: namely the Pelagian heresy. For some time Augustine had loved Pelagius as an upright and thoroughly Catholic man, but as soon as he perceived his evil arts, he not only shrank from the heretic, but undertook to refute him in every way by voice and writings. He writes to St. Paulinus of Nola in epistle 186, otherwise 106 Patrol. lat. vol. XXXIII, col. 816.: Pelagius, who, we believe, in order to be distinguished from him who is called Pelagius of Tarentum, was surnamed the Briton, whom we know you have loved as a servant of God: but how you love him now, we do not know. For we too not only have loved, but also love him: but we love him now otherwise than we once loved him. For then it was because he seemed to be of the right faith: but now, that from those things which he is said to think hostile and adverse to the grace of God he may be freed by his mercy. In this contest for the true faith St. Aurelius was intimately, entirely and constantly joined with St. Augustine, the vindicator of divine grace, both in councils and in epistles. Which has been broadly set forth in the Acts of St. Augustine at the 28th day of August, §§ XXXIV–XXXVI Acta SS. vol. VI of August p. 306 and following..
[24] deceived to some extent by the Pelagians, St. Aurelius, Yet I shall notice two things which look more nearly to our Aurelius. In the first place for some time he seemed to be deceived by the arts of Caelestius, the leader of the Pelagians, to such an extent that the latter stole into the honour of the presbyterate. For St. Augustine writes these things in epistle CLVII, number 22, to Hilary, dealing with the Pelagian heresy that was running riot, which the African fathers had tried to root out Migne, Patrol. vol. XXXIII, col. 685.: Yet I do not think that some (Pelagians) are lacking here, especially at Carthage: but they now mutter secretly, fearing the most firmly founded faith of the Church. For one of them, by name Caelestius, in the Church of the same city had already begun to steal into the honour of the presbyterate: but by the most faithful freedom of the brethren, on account of these very disputations against the grace of Christ, he was brought before the episcopal judgment. Secretly, then, and cautiously did Caelestius scatter his poison, so that he was able to deceive the vigilance of the prelate of Carthage. But as soon as the error became clear, condemnation followed. For as the African fathers, among whom was St. Aurelius, write in the year 416 to St. Innocent, Pope, I Labbe, vol. II, Conc., col. 1534., they asked that there should be reviewed what, nearly five years before (and so about the year of Christ) 411), had been discussed concerning the name of Caelestius in the Church of Carthage. When this had been recited (say the fathers), as your holiness will be able to observe from what is subjoined, although the judgment stood manifest, because at that time it was evident that this so great wound had been cut out by episcopal judgment, nevertheless we have resolved by common deliberation that the authors of this persuasion, although the same Caelestius is said also to have afterwards attained to the presbyterate, unless they most openly anathematize these things, must themselves be anathematized, so that if not of them, at least of those who have been deceived or can be deceived, when the sentence passed against them is known, the healing may be procured.
[25] he soon came to his senses: But although the masked modesty of Caelestius deceived our Aurelius, yet he never drank in even a little drop of the Pelagian error; and as soon as he knew it he shuddered at it. Certainly Pope Innocent I in various epistles praises the acts of the African prelates in the case of Pelagius, but especially in particular epistles he extols the skill and vigilance of Aurelius, Augustine, Alypius, Evodius and Possidius, inasmuch as they had the principal parts in that contest. Indeed after the Pontiff had given a common letter to these bishops, at the same time, namely in the year 417, on the sixth before the Kalends of February, he directed a special epistle to St. Aurelius, namely XXXII Migne, Patrol. vol. XX. col. 597.: In familiar writings, he says, true love consists. For the firmer right of charity better purchases its offices apart. Wherefore through our brother Julius I have been eager to reply to the epistle sent from outside, lest perhaps there should remain with me the offence of a particular greeting denied. By which words Pope Innocent abundantly shows how highly he regarded the bishop of Carthage, both on account of his eminent sanctity of life, and on account of his excellent constancy in defending the Catholic faith.
[26] the frequency of councils is limited; In the council of Hippo, at which, as we said at n. 3, St. Aurelius presided at the beginning of his pontificate, namely in the year 393, it had been decreed that every year there should be a plenary council of Africa, not only here at Carthage, but also through the various provinces in their order … But this seemed laborious to all the brethren Labbe, vol. II, Conc., col. 1113.. These last words are altogether to be referred to the year 407, when in all likelihood complaints arose about the manifold absence of bishops, running together from every side to the annual synod. It pleased, then, say the fathers Ibid., l. c., that the yearly necessity should no longer weary the brethren, but that as often as a common cause, that is, of the whole of Africa, should demand it, and a letter on this matter should be given to this see from wherever it might be, a synod should be gathered in that province where opportunity should persuade: but causes which are not common should be judged in their own provinces.
[27] the paschal question is raised; It is well enough known that in the first centuries after the council of Nicaea there was entrusted to the Church of Alexandria the care of indicating each year the month and day on which the paschal festival was to be celebrated, as among others St. Cyril of Alexandria teaches us Cf. Migne. Patrol. gr. vol. LXXVII, col. 385.. But when in the year of Christ 414 the day of celebrating Easter seemed doubtful, Innocent, leaving aside Theophilus of Alexandria, struck by apostolic censure, consulted Aurelius of Carthage. When, he says Patrol. lat. vol. XX, col. 517., on the eleventh before the Kalends of April the moon is reckoned almost the 16th (for it is something less), and likewise when on the fourth before the same Kalends the twenty-third comes; I have thought that the paschal feast should be celebrated on the 11th of the said Kalends; since we know that on the twenty-third moon no Easter has ever been held before now. I have set forth and declared the tenor of my opinion. It will now be for your prudence, my brother and partner, with our unanimous fellow priests, to treat this very matter again in a most religious synod: so that if nothing opposes our disposition, you may write back to us most fully and openly, whereby we may prescribe beforehand by letter, as is the custom, the determined paschal day to be observed in its time. For the paschal solemnity to be prescribed for the 11th before the Kalends of April, that is, the 22nd of March, it was necessary that the 15th moon should fall on the preceding Saturday; in which case there was not one opinion, some retaining Easter on the 22nd day of March, others transferring it to the following Sunday, as in fact in that year St. Cyril of Alexandria delayed Easter a whole week. The reason for this diversity we have set forth in the Commentary on the Acts of St. Berchar under the 16th day of October, numbers 86 and following Acta SS. vol. VII of October p. 1005.. We do not know further what Aurelius and the other bishops replied to Pope Innocent.
[28] [Leporius, a Gallic monk, by the intercession of the African bishops, is reconciled with his bishop,] In the year 427, as Morcelli has it Afr. Christ. vol. III p. 122., Leporius, presbyter and monk, had arrived in Africa from Gaul, where the bishops, on account of various heresies,
had condemned him. He, brought to a better mind both by the writings of Augustine and by the exhortations of other bishops, had professed himself ready before St. Aurelius to condemn all that he had previously taught, and by confession of his error to implore openly the indulgence of the Church and the mercy of the prelates. It was of the greatest importance, then, that most learned bishops should be present at this momentous profession, to weigh it, to examine the opinions, to regulate all the words. There exists indeed the booklet of Leporius Labbe, vol. II, Conc. col. 1678., to which he himself with his own hand subscribed with two followers, Domninus and Bonus, and which the bishops confirmed, Aurelius of Carthage, Augustine of Hippo Regius, Florentius of Hippo Diarrhytus and Secundus of Aquae or Megarmita. The said bishops added moreover a letter to their fellow priests Proculus (perhaps of Marseilles) and Cylinnius or Quillenius (to some, of Fréjus Gall. Christ. vol. I, col. 420.), by which their mercy is implored. Through you, they say Labbe, vol. II, Conc. col. 1677., (God) struck the swollen man, through us he has healed the grieving one … Let us not, then, give glory to ourselves, but to his mercy, in whose hand are both we and our words. And as our humility has praised your ministry in our son aforesaid, so also let your sanctity congratulate our ministry. With a paternal and fraternal heart, then, receive from us one corrected by merciful severity. For though one thing was done through us, another through you, yet one charity has made both necessary for a brother's salvation. What advantage and solace Leporius received from the epistle of the African bishops we do not know; yet we scarcely doubt that Proculus and Cylinnius restored their peace to the lapsed and amended Leporius.
[28] St. Aurelius dies holily. And what has been said so far suffices for us to reckon the holy prelate of Carthage, both on account of his doctrine and on account of the sanctity of his life, among the most deserving bishops of the fifth century. We could accordingly lay down the pen, did not one question remain, namely at what time St. Aurelius closed his last day. In the Acts of St. Quodvultdeus, number 24, it was said that there are two opinions, that of Emmanuel Schelstrate, who attaches his death to the year 426, and that of Antoine Pagi and Stefano Morcelli, who attach it to the year 429. To us indeed the opinion of the latter is rather approved. In the first place the business of the presbyter Leporius, of which in the preceding number, is connected with the year 427 or, as others have it, the year 426; at that time certainly our Aurelius was occupying the see of Carthage: next, if he had died in the year 426, his successor Capreolus would have been for four years the colleague of St. Augustine, who died in the year 430, without any trace being found of any common action of Capreolus and Augustine, the leader and chief of ecclesiastical affairs. On the other hand we know that in the year 430 or 431 Capreolus was called to the great Council of Ephesus, as is established from his epistle directed to the Fathers of Ephesus. So the death of St. Aurelius is to be placed between the year 427 and 430: accordingly it is not rashly asserted that the Saint's death took place about the year 429, which we have recorded at the head of these acts. And certainly Aurelius was already an old man when St. Augustine gave his sermon CXI (otherwise XXXII) to the people of Carthage, for at its end he says Migne. Patrol. vol. XXXVIII, col. 643.: We suggest what your charity knows. The anniversary day of the ordination of the lord old man Aurelius dawns tomorrow; he asks and admonishes your charity through my humility, that you should deign most devoutly to come together at the basilica of Faustus. Thanks be to God.