A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

TITUS of Bostra.

TITUS, Bishop of Bostra, a City of Arabia Petr••a, wrote a Treatise against the Manichees, and some other Works, in the time of the Emperours Julian and Jovian. Julian, who perse∣cuted * 1.1 all the Bishops who had any Reputation, did all that lay in his Power, to drive this Bishop out of his Country, and to render him odious to his People.

He wrote to him, that if any trouble happened in the City of Bostra, he should impute it to himself and to his Clergy. This Bishop answered him, That he kept his People in Peace by his Exhortations, and that tho' he had as many Christians as Pagans in his City, yet he so ordered the Matter, that there was no Contention amongst them.

Julian laid hold on this Occasion, to write to the Inhabitants of Bostra against their Bishop, endeavouring maliciously to persuade them, that his Answer reproached them, because it supposed that without his Exhortations, they would not have continued in their Duty. However this ill-natur'd Accusation of the Emperour Julian, did not hinder them from putting Confidence in their Bishop, so that he continued in his See till the time of the Emperour Valens, under whose Reign he died, about the Year 370. He assisted at the Council of Meletius, held at Antioch, under the Reign of Jovian, in the Year 364.

The Book of Titus of Bostra, against the Manichees, was written in Greek, and divided into Four Parts: There is nothing now extant, but the Version of three of those Books made by Turrianus, and Printed in Canisius's Collection of Ancient Pieces, and in the Bibliotheca Patrum. To the Text of the Author, there are perfixed the Arguments of the Four Books translated out of Greek, which inform us what is the Subject of them.

The first Book, says the Author of those Arguments, contains a Refutation of the principal Points of Doctrine taught by the Manichees, which contradict common Sense, and the Principles of natural Reason. The second is intended to show, That Man is not addicted to Sin by a Principle that is Eternal and without Beginning, or by a Being that is contrary to the True God: That there is no Substance of Evil in the World; That there is not in us two sorts of Natures, one Good, and the other Evil; That 'tis Folly and Impiety to Condemn and Reprehend the manner of Governing the Universe. In short, This Book con∣tains all that can be said of Providence, and invincibly proves, That 'tis no wise necessary to

admit a Second Principle contrary to God. The Third Book is intended to defend the Law and the Prophets, and to show that God is the Author of the Old Testament; That there is nothing of Evil to be found in it; That it does in every thing agree with the New, and therefore there is no need for the Explication of it to have recourse to a Second Principle contrary to God. The Fourth Book defends the New Testament against the Blasphemies of the Hereticks: There he shews that there is nothing in the Gospel which favours their Error; That they abuse some Passages of Scripture to prove their Impiety to no purpose; and that the Diabolical Explications which they give of them cannot help to establish what they say against God.

In the First Book, he propounds the Doctrine of the Manichees, and detects the Absurdities of it by Metaphysical Arguments. In the Second he shows, That there is but one God only, and that he is the only Principle; That he is not the Author of Sin; That he made Man free and capable of doing Good and Evil; and so 'tis not God but Man who is the Author of Sin, which proceeds not from the Nature of Man, but from his Will. He explains the great difficulty that's urg'd by the Manichees, why the Just are so often Unhappy, and the Wicked Happy in this World; and shews that the Just are always Happy and the Wicked Un∣happy, because Innocence is the chief Happiness. He adds, That Afflictions are useful to prove and to exercise Vertue. He maintains, That Death is not an Evil, because 'tis the End of sinning to the Wicked, and the Beginning of Recompence to the Good. In short, having survey'd all things in this World, and all the occurrences of this Life, he proves that they are easily reconcil'd to the Providence of God.

In the Third Book he shows, That the Old and New Testament agree very well together, and that one and the same God is the Author of them both.

There are in these Books much Metaphysicks and Logick; the Arguments are solid and subtil; the Stile is fine and clean enough for a Work of this Nature. It is indeed a surprizing thing that he never makes use of Original Sin for the explaining all the Difficulties objected by the Manichees: which might have serv'd as one general Solution to almost all their Objections. For when once Original Sin is admitted, there is no difficulty in understanding, Why a Man is addicted to Sin; Why he suffers Affliction; Why he is subject to Hunger, to Pain, to Diseases, to Miseries, and to Death; and yet he never urges it to explain those Questions, but examines them as a Philosopher. He says not one word of the Grace of Jesus Christ, and seems to suppose, That Man could do Good of himself as well as Evil.

There is a Commentary upon the Gospel of St. Luke, which is attributed to Titus of Bostra; but this can be none of his Book, since he who is the Author of it, cites St. Jerom, St. Isidore Pelusiota, and St. Cyril of Alexandria, who had not written till after the Death of this Titus of Bostra, whom we now speak of. Yet this is a very good literal Commentary upon St. Luke, and seems to me to be very ancient. There was a Version of it publish'd by Peltanus, and printed by Sartorius at Ingolstadt in the Year 1579. Since that, Fronto Ducaeus publish'd the Greek from a Manuscript out of the King's Li∣brary, and it was printed in Greek and Latin in the Supplement to the Bibliotheca Patrum: 'Tis said, That there is a Commentary of the same Author upon St. Matthew, and there is some probability for it, because in the Commentary on St. Luke, he never attempts to explain any thing in this Evangelist but what is not to be found in the Gospel of St. Matthew. In short, Father Combefis has publish'd in his Auctarium to the Bibliotheca Patrum, a Sermon upon Palm-Sunday, which bears the Name of Titus of Bostra, but is not written by the true Titus of Bostra, nor by the Author of the Commenta∣ries upon St. Luke, it having no affinity with the Air and Stile of either of those two Writers.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Titus of B••stra.