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.

The NINTH TOME.

THE Ninth Volume of St. Augustin's Works, containeth his Treatises against the Dona∣tists. * 1.1

The First is a Hymn which St. Augustin composed in vulgar, and popular Terms, to teach the most unlearned the State of the Question betwixt the Catholicks, and the Donatists, and to exhort these to a Re-union with the Catholicks. This Writing, which consists but of Two Leaves, is proper, as St. Augustin himself observes, for none but very ordinary People.

In 393. he wrote a Book against Donatus his Epistle; and in 398. Two Books against the Donatists: But both these Treatises are lost.

We are therefore to begin St. Augustin's VVorks against the Donatists, from the Three Books against the Epistle of Parmenianus, who succeeded Donatus in the See of Carthage. There he refutes the Letter which that Schismatick wrote to Tychonius, wherein he accused the whole Church of being defiled, for communicating with Persons that were guilty of several Crimes. St. Augustin having proved, That Caecilian, and the greatest part of the others, who were ac∣cused by the Donatists, had been declared Innocent; addeth, That though the Crimes, whereof they accused particular Men, were proved, yet the Church would still be the true Church, tho' she had not cut them off from her Communion because she is made up of good and bad Men, and that even these may be tolerated for Peace sake. These Books were compos'd about the Year 400. We must not forget to observe, That there is in this Edition, chap. 3d. of the First Book, a very important Correction of a Passage which had much perplexed Historians. S. Augustin speaks there of the Roman Council which condemned the Donatists: and they made him say in the common Editions, and in most Manuscripts, that this Council consisted of Two Hundred Bishops. Usque adeo dementes sunt homines, ut ducentos judices, apud quos victi sunt, victis litigatoribus credat: and because this was not sence, they added against the Authority of the MSS. esse postponendos. It being certain that S. Augustin speaketh in this Place of the Coun∣cil of Rome, and that there met but 19 Bishops; they thought that 19 were to be put instead of 200. But the restoration made here upon the Credit of the Vatican Manuscript, resolves all the Difficulty, and clears the Sence, without adding any thing. Neither 19 nor 200, are men∣tioned

in the Text. Thus it runs, Usque adea dementes sunt homines, ut CONTRA judices vi∣ctis litigatoribus credat. It appears at the first sight, that this is the true Sence, which all the Con∣jectures * 1.2 of the Learned could not find out. They took the Contra, made short with Two C. C. for the Cypher of 200, and they had writ ducentos instead of this Cypher at all Adventures; and because the Text was then not Sence, the Louvain Doctors added Esse Postponendos after Credat. One single Manuscript discovers presently those Mistakes, and gives the true Sence. And now let Men say, That there is no need of comparing the Authors to be published with ancient Ma∣nuscripts. But to return to our Subject.

The Seven Books Of Baptism were composed by St. Augustin at the same time. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 under∣takes there to refute the Donatists, who used St. Cyprian's Authority, to defend their Opinion concerning the Nullity of Baptism administred by Hereticks. He shews, That if that Saint seems to favour them in that Point, yet his Practice and Doctrine condemn'd their Separation. He refutes also the Reasons which that Saint and his Collegues urged to prove, That those were to be re-baptized, who had been baptized by Hereticks. There he handleth several Questions touching the Necessity, Validity, Effect, and other Circumstances of Baptism.

After the Books Of Baptism, St. Augustin placeth a Treatise which he composed against a cer∣tain Book brought by Centurius from the Donatists. But that Discourse is lost: And so imme∣diately after the Books of Baptism, follow Three Books against a Letter of Petilianus Bishop of the Donatists at Cirta. The First of these Books is written in the form of a Letter to the Church: Therein he refutes the First Part of Petilianus's Letter. But having received after∣wards the whole Letter, he thought himself obliged to answer every Proposition by it self. Whil'st this was doing, Petilianus having seen the Letter that St. Augustin writ at first, returned an Answer; to which, St. Augustin opposed a Third Book, wherein without insisting upon Pe∣tilianus's reproachful Language, he discovers the weakness of the Answers that he brought in defence of his Party. The First of these Books, which is rather a Letter than a Book, was com∣posed about the Year 400. both the others are of 402.

The next Book is likewise written against Petilianus, and is intituled in the Manuscripts, A Letter from St. Augustin to the Catholicks concerning the Sect of the Donatists: And Possidius seems to have mention'd it under this Title, in the Third Article of his Index. It is likewise cited under this Title, and ascribed to St. Augustin in the Fifth Council, Collat. 5. Yet St. Augustin does not mention it in his Retractations. It may be answered, That this Book being written in the form of a Letter, he reserved to speak of it in the other part of his Retractations, which was to contain his Sermons and Letters. And yet we see that St. Augustin speaks of Dogmatical Treatises that were long, though composed in the form of Letters, in this Part; so that it is un∣likely that he should have forgot to mention this, when he spoke of his other Letters against Petilianus. The Benedictines have made some other Observations upon this Treatise, which may make us doubt whether it is St. Augustin's, or no. They observe, That the Salutation in the beginning, Salus quae in Christo est, is extraordinary, and that St. Augustin never used it. They find improper forms of Speech, Transitions, Figures and Expressions, not very elegant, which do not agree to St. Augustin's Stile. Nay, besides they take notice of a Point of Doctrine different from St. Augustin's. For the Author of this Book teaches in the 13th. Chapter, That the Separation of the Ten Tribes from Judah, was no Heresie; but St. Augustin affirms in the 23d. Epistle, and in his First Book against Cresconius, Chapter 31st. That the Samaritans made a Schism, a Sect, and an Heresie. And lastly, They have Collected some Passages of Scripture which are not of that Translation, which St. Augustin uses in other places. They add. That the Author of this Book, Chapter 24th. doubts whether the Water that issued out of our Saviour's Side, was a figure of Baptism; which St. Augustin sets down for a certain Truth in several places of his Writings.

These Objections are not unanswerable: St. Augustin hath not mention'd all his Works in his Retractations, and particularly, those that are in the form of Letters. We have already taken notice of some that he has omitted. This is found in Possidius's Catalogue, and the Author de∣clares in the beginning, That he had written already against Petilianus's Letter; The Stile, in∣deed, is not so Elegant as of some other of St. Augustin's Works; but it is no wonder, because it is a Letter that was to be seen and understood by all Mankind. For the same reason, the Hymn against the Donatists might be rejected, which is much flatter, and containing more bar∣barous Expressions. The Salutation agrees very well to the Subject, and is not unworthy of St. Augustin: And if he never used it in other places, it doth not follow that he should forbear it in this. When St. Augustin reckoned the Samaritans among the Heretical Jews, he did not speak of the ancient Inhabitants of Samaria, immediately after the division of the Tribes, but of the later Samaritans, who were real Hereticks among the Jews. Lastly, It is no extraordinary thing for St. Augustin to cite some places of Scripture in other terms than he had used in other places; or that he should doubt here of some things, whereof he speaks more affirmatively at other times.

Though these Answers should not be sufficient to remove all suspicion, yet it is certain, That this Book was written in St. Augustin's time; and all that can be said is, That it might have been drawn up by some of his Friends, and directed in his Name to the Donatists. It was written in 402. after the Second Book against Petilianus, and before the Third; It is a new Challenge which he sendeth to this Bishop to defend his own Party, and to shew that the true

Church is on his side. He describes the Marks of the true Church, and proves, That they do not agree with the Donatists Party, but with that of the Catholicks; and then answereth those Passages which the Donatists urged for themselves, and the Accusations which they formed against the Church.

One Cresconius, a Grammarian, of the Donatists Party, undertook to defend Petilianus against St. Augustin's first Writing. As soon as he saw his Letter, he refuted it in three Books, and re∣torted upon him all his Arguments, by retorting in a Fourth Book the business of the Maxi∣mianists. These Books were written about the Year 406.

Here should have been placed Three other Treatises against the Donatists, which he mentions in his Retractations, but they are lost. These were, A Book of Proofs and Testimonies against the Donatists; A Treatise against a Donatist; And an Advice to the Donatists about the Business of the Maximianists.

The Book of one Baptism, against Petilianus, was written after the Conference at Carthage. The Principal Question treated of by St. Augustin, is concerning the Validity of Baptism admi∣nistred by Hereticks.

St. Augustin being willing to Publish an Account of the Conference of Carthage, wrote a Bre∣viary of what was said in the three Days Conference, in 412.

He wrote a Book likewise directed to the Donatists, with the same Design; wherein he makes several Reflections upon the Conference of Carthage, that he might perfectly undeceive that Party, and shew that they were seduc'd and deceived by their Bishops. He likewise answereth their Cavils against the Judgment of Marcellinus. This Book is of the Year 413.

The Treatise to Emeritus a Donatist Bishop, who was one of the principal Defenders of that Party in the Conference at Carthage, is lost. St. Augustin had collected there the main Points, wherein they had been baffled, as he says, in the 49th. Chapter of the Second Book of his Retra∣ctations. After this he went to Caesarea, a City of Mauritania, where he met with Emeritus, before whom he Preached a Sermon to perswade him to reconcile himself to the Church; but not prevailing by this means, he held a Conference with him, about those things which had been done in the Conference at Carthage; and then pressed him so hard upon the Quarrel of the Maximianists, that Emeritus had nothing to say: This Conference was held in the presence of the Bishops, Clergy, and People, the 20th. of September 413. or 418. for the Manuscripts do not well agree about the Consul's Names.

At last, Gaudentius one of the Seven Donatist Bishops who defended their Party in the Con∣ference at Carthage, being pressed by the Threatnings of Dulcitius, writ two Letters, which St. Augustin answers in his First Book against this Donatist Bishop; which is particularly to ju∣stifie the severity exercised towards them. Gaudentius willing to answer something, wrote a Discourse; wherein, without meddling with the Contest betwixt them, he justified his Party, and calumniated the Church. St. Augustin answereth this Treatise in the Second Book. Both these Books of St. Augustin are of the Year 420.

There is a Sermon attributed to St. Augustin, concerning one Rusticianus, a Sub-deacon, who was Re-baptized by the Donatists, and then Ordained Deacon; but this Discourse does not agree to St. Augustin, as it is proved in the Preface. This Volume ends with a Catalogue of St. Au∣gustin's Works against the Donatists, which are in the other Volumes of St. Augustin's Works. We have not spoken particularly of the Matters handled by St. Augustin, in every Book against the Donatists; because he commonly repeateth the same Arguments, and so we should have been obliged to say often the same things, and for which Reason it was put off to this place; that so I might give an Abridgment of his Doctrine, and a Breviary of his chief Reasons all at once.

It has been observ'd already, That the Donatists began their Schism by a Separation of some African Bishops, who accused Caecilian of several Crimes, whereof they had been convicted them∣selves. Though they had been condemned in the Council of Rome, in that of Arles, and at last by Constantine's Judgment, yet they remained firm to their own Opinions, and would by no means be reconciled to the Church. Their Party also was much strengthned by the great num∣ber of Bishops whom they ordained, almost in every Church of Africa, and by the Multitudes of People whom they drew after them: So that in St. Augustin's time, their Party was very near as strong in Africa, as that of the Catholicks. But they held no Communion with all the other Churches in the World, which acknowledged Caecilian, his Successors, and those of that Party, for the true Church.

The Donatists in their own defence affirm'd, That Caecilian, Felix of Aptungis, who ordained him, Miltiades that absolved him, and several others of his Brethren, having been convicted of certain Crimes, ought to be deposed and expelled out of the Church; That their Crime made them cease to be Members of the Church, which ought to be pure and without blemish; That as many as defended them and had Communicated with them, were become Accessaries to their Crime by approving it; and that so, not only the Churches of Africa, but even all the other Churches in the World, which held Communion with the Churches of Caecilian's Party, having been defiled, ceased to be Parts of the true Church of Jesus Christ, that was then reduced to the small number of those who would not partake with Prevaricators; but kept themselves in the Primitive Purity. Besides this, They charged the Church with another great Crime, as they esteemed it; which was, That they made Application to the Emperor's Authority to Persecute

their Party; and that they caused several Violences to be exercised against them. Now, they persisting in the Opinion of St. Cyprian, and of the ancient Bishops of Africa; who held, That Baptism by Hereticks and Schismaticks was invalid, and ought to be renew'd; a necessary Con∣sequence of their Principles, was the Rebaptizing of the Catholicks that came over to their Party.

These are the Grounds on which the Schism of the Donatists stood.

There were two ways to deal with them; either by denying the Matter of Fact, or by oppo∣sing the Matter of Right: Those who first writ against the Donatists, insisted most upon the Matter of Fact; that is, The Justification of Caecilian, Felix of Aptungis, and the rest. Neither doth St. Augustin omit this; for he often proves Caecilian's Innocency, by the Judgments given in his behalf; First, At Rome, by Pope Miltiades, and other Bishops; Secondly, In the Council of Arles; and at last, By the Judgment of Constantine. He adds, as an absolute Justification, the consent of all the Churches in the World, which had approved and followed the Judgment of those Councils. He likewise produces the Acts that were made to justifie Felix of Aptungis: He defends Miltiades and Hosius, against the Calumnies laid upon them. And shews at last, That the Donatists had no Proofs of what they alledged against the Catholick Bishops. But he doth not think this to be the main Point, and therefore he passes to the Matter of Right, and maintains, That though Caecilian, and the rest of his Brethren, had been guilty of the Crimes laid to their Charge; yet that was not a sufficient Ground for a Separation from the Church; and that the Church did not cease to be the Church, because it Communicated with wicked Men, since either she did not know them; or else, she bore with them to preserve Peace: which brings him to that great Question, Whether the Church here below is made up only of Saints and Righteous Men, or composed of Good and Bad. St. Augustin affirms, That there was always in the Church Chaff and Corn; that is, both good and wicked Men; and that such will be to the Day of Judgment, which shall divide the good from the bad; That sometimes the number of the latter exceeds that of the former; That many cannot be driven out of the Church, because they are not known, and because it is convenient to tolerate some for quietness sake, to prevent a Schism which might be occasioned by cutting off from the Communion those Persons who might draw along with them several of the Faithful; That it is great rashness to condemn all the Churches in the World, for the Crime of one or two; That the Catholick Church ought to be diffused over the whole Earth, and not confined to a small part of the World, as in a Corner of Africa. Here St. Augustin triumphs over his Adversaries, proving by Prophecies, and other Passages both of the Old and New Testament, That the Catholick Church was to have a considerable Extent.

These are properly the main Points in Controversie betwixt the Church and the Donatists; but there are other Secundary Questions.

The First, is concerning the Persecutions, which the Donatists imputed to the Church as a Crime. St. Augustin defends the Church very Modestly, either by disapproving such Violences, or by shewing that it was lawful to make use of the Imperial Laws, and of some sort of Seve∣rity to bring the Donatists back to the bosom of the Church. He chargeth them likewise with the same things; objecting the Cruelties, Violencies, Sacrileges and Murders committed by those of their Party called Circumcellians, and authorized thereunto by Optatus Gildonianus.

The other accessary Question, which St. Augustin looks upon as a principal one, is about the Validity of the Baptism of Hereticks. St. Augustin needed only to prove that his Party was the true Church, and so Condemn by a necessary Consequence the Donatists, for Rebaptizing those that had been baptized before by Catholicks, since it was agreed on both sides, that the Baptism of the true Church was valid. But St. Augustin undertook besides, to prove the validity of the Baptism of Hereticks and Schismaticks; And that though his Party were not the Church, yet the Donatists were not to baptize them a second time. He confesses, That St. Cyprian, and most of the African Bishops in his time were of a contrary opinion; That Agrippinus his Pre∣decessor, had appointed Hereticks to be Rebaptized; That St. Cyprian and the Councils held in Africa at that time, confirmed Agrippinus's Decree; That this Question remained long undeci∣ded, or rather variously decided in divers places. But that at last the thing was decided in a Plenary Council of the whole Church, (in all likelihood he means that of Arles) and that after such Determination, it was not permitted to doubt, because the Provincial or National Councils must give place to the Authority of Plenary Councils. That St. Cyprian was to be excused for not taking the right side of so hard a Question, which was not yet cleared or decided, and so much the rather, because he defended his own Opinion without making a Schism, and with the Spirit of Peace and Unity: However, That the Letters and Writings of the Saints were not to be rely'd upon, as the Apostles Epistles, and the other Books of the Holy Scripture.

Now to explain St. Augustin's Opinion touching Baptism more particularly, we are to ob∣serve as he doth, That Baptism may be said to be of two sorts; The one administred in the Name of the Trinity, that is, by invoking of the Trinity; and the other performed without naming the Three Divine Persons. The latter, St. Augustin confesses to be null; but affirms the other to be valid, whosoever he be that administers it. So that it matters not who baptizeth, provided that Baptism be in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Two things are likewise to be distinguished in Baptism, the Sacrament, and the Effect of the Sacrament: The Sacrament is found in those that are baptized by Hereticks; but because they have not Faith, they are deprived of the Effect: For, that Baptism may be complete, both as a

Sacrament, and as to its Effect, the Sacrament must be intire; that is, the Person must be bap∣tized outwardly in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and he that receives must believe and be converted. The Sacrament is often found without Faith, and Faith without the Sacrament. Children have the Sacrament without Faith. The good Thief had Faith without the Sacrament. God supplies in Children the Faith they want, and he sup∣plied in the good Thief the Sacrament which he could not receive. But when either of these is wanting, by the Man's own Fault, he cannot be excused; and he receiveth not the Effect of Baptism. When the Sacrament is found without Faith, and without Conversion, it is not ne∣cessary to be reiterated: It is sufficient only to supply what is wanting; as when one is already converted, it is enough to receive the Sacrament. The difference lieth in this, That the Adult cannot be saved without Faith and Conversion, though they may be saved without the Sacra∣ment, if so be that they do not want it through Contempt or Neglect, but because they lay under an impossibility of receiving it.

From these Principles, St. Augustin draws the following Conclusions: 1. That Baptism con∣ferred by Hereticks in the Name of the Trinity, is good and valid as it is a Sacrament, and ought not to be repeated. 2. That neither the Minister's Faith, as to Religion, nor his Sanctity avail any thing to the Validity of Baptism. 3. That it is God, and not the Minister who gives the Holy Spirit, and worketh the Remission of Sins. 4. That Baptism produces this Effect, but in them alone that are well-disposed by Faith and Conversion of the Heart. 5. That the Prayers of the Church, which consists of Saints and Righteous Men; supplies the Actual Faith, which Children cannot have. 6. That the Adult who have Faith and are Converted, may be saved with∣out actual receiving of the Sacrament, but not without the Sacramental Vow.

As for some other Questions which might be made about Baptism administred by Infidels, or some impious Persons that are Excommunicated or in jest. St. Augustin saith, in the Seventh Book of Baptism, Chap. 53d. thus,

It is asked, saith he, whether that Baptism is to be ap∣proved, which is administred by an unbaptized Person, who out of Curiosity hath learned the way of baptizing among Christians? It is asked further, Whether it be necessary for the Validity of Baptism that he, who either administers or receives it, be sincere? And if they should be only in jest, Whether Baptism ought to be administred again in the Church? Whether Baptism conferred in Derision, as that would be, which should be administred by a Comedian, might be accounted Valid? Whether it is more Criminal to receive Baptism in jest in the Church, or to receive it with the same Spirit, in Heresie or Schism? Whether Baptism administred by an Actor, may become Valid, when he that receives it is well-disposed.

St. Augustin answers to these and such-like Questions, That the securest way is to return no Answer to Questions that never were decided in any Council, General, or National. But he adds, Should any man, meeting with me at such Council, ask my Advice about these Que∣stions, and that it were my turn to declare my Opinion, having not heard other Mens Opi∣nions, which I might preferr before mine own, and if I perceiv'd in my self the same Dispo∣sitions that I am now in, I should without difficulty acknowledge, That they all receive Baptism truly in any place whatsoever, and by whomsoever administred, if on their part they receive it with Faith, and with Sincerity. I am apt also to believe, That such as receive Bap∣tism in the Church, or in what is supposed to be the Church, are truly baptized as to the Sacramental part of the Action whatsoever be their intention. But as for Baptism admini∣stred and received out of the Church, in Raillery, Contempt, and to make Sport; I could not approve the same without a Revelation.

These are St. Augustin's Opinions concerning the Validity or Invalidity of Baptism. As to the Answers which he makes to the Arguments of St. Cyprian, and the other Bishops of his Opi∣nion, they are grounded for the most part upon the Comparison between concealed Hereticks and Evil Ministers, with known Hereticks and Schismaticks. For since the Baptism of the for∣mer is Valid and not to be renewed; why should not the same thing be said of the latter, since all the Reasons that are alledged for the nullity of the Baptism of Hereticks may also belong to Evil Ministers? It is said, for example, That to give the Holy Ghost one must have it; That Hereticks have it not; and consequently that they cannot give it. Why may we not reason after the same manner concerning Baptism conferred by concealed Hereticks, or by wicked Priests? Have they the Holy Ghost to give? Thus St. Augustin overthrows the Reasons and Testimonies brought in by St. Cyprian and his Collegues against the Validity of the Baptism of Hereticks, by shewing, That whil'st they prove too much, they prove nothing.

But his great Argument to destroy the Donatists, which he particularly insisteth upon in his last Book against Cresconius, is an Argument taken from their Conduct in a Schism that was risen up amongst themselves, betwixt Maximianus, upheld by some other Bishops of their Sect, and Primianus another Bishop of their Party at Carthage; They accused one another of several Crimes, and condemned one another; but Primianus's Party being the stronger, prevailed and held a Plenary Council at Bagais, wherein they condemned Maximianus, and his Adherents, in very reproachful terms, and got this Judgment to be confirmed by the Emperor's Letters. Now, according to the Donatists Principles, Persons thus Condemned were out of the Church; all that Communicated with them were out of the Church; all whom they baptized, were to be baptized again. And yet the Primianists behaved themselves quite otherwise; for they kept

Communion with some of the condemned Bishops, and owned them for lawful Bishops; they acknowledged those that were Baptized by the Maxim ianists, to be truly Baptized; and they admitted into their Communion those that were of the Maximianists Party. St. Au∣gustin compares this their Conduct, with their Behaviour towards the Scripture and the Uni∣versal Church; and by that Argument convinceth them, That it was only Prejudice and Ob∣stinacy which kept them in their Separation from the Chruch.

The Supplement that is added to this Ninth Volume, contains not only the Book against Fulgentius the Donatist, falsely attributed to St. Augustin, concerning which the Censure of the Louvain Doctors, and of Vindingus, set before it, may be consulted; but also Extracts from ancient Pieces concerning the History of the Donatists, taken out of Optatus, Eusebius, St. Augustin, the Conference at Carthage, the Councils of Carthage, and the Imperial Laws against the Donatists. And that all that St. Augustin writ against the Donatists might be published together, they copied out what he said in the Conference of Carthage. This Collection is the more useful, because there are considerable Restitutions of several Passages of Optatus, from a Manuscript in the Library at St. Germains des Prez. Here is one of the principal. There is a Passage in the First Book of Optatus, where it is said, That Eunomius and Olympius were sent into Africa to Ordain a Bishop, and to Degrade Caecilian and Optatus: Utremotis duobus unum ordinarent! This Passage obliged Albaspinaeus to affirm, That Donatus of Casae Nigrae had been Bishop of Carthage. He likewise draws from it great Advantages in favour of the Church of Rome: yet this Period is not in the St. Germains Copy, and it signifies nothing either for that which goes before, or for that which comes after. If we read the Passage, we may judge: Tunc duo Episcopi ad Africam missi sunt, Eunomius, & Olympius. Venerunt, & apud Carthagi∣nem fuerunt per dies quadraginta, vel quinquaginta, ut pronunciarent ubi esset Catholica. Hoc seditiosa pars Donati fieri passa non est. This Place is clear and plain: whereas, if this Period be inserted, Ut remotis duobus unum ordinarent, the sence is alter'd, and it will be contradictory. There is likewise, some Lines before, another Restitution, which is confirmed by St. Augustin's Testimony, in the Conference at Carthage. Donatus petiit, ut ei reverti licuisset, & nec ad Carthaginem accederet. Whereas they read before, Ut ei reverti Carthaginem contingeret. In the Extract out of the Third Book of Optatus, they distinguish Three Persecutions against the Donatists; and the Governors are named by whose Orders they were raised. This is not to be found in the ordinary Editions of Optatus. I shall not mention several other Corrections, which may make us wish that a new entire Edition of this Author were undertaken.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Tom. IX.
• * 1.2

  St. Au∣gustin. Tome IX.