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.

St. DIONYSIUS of Alexandria.

DYONYSIUS, a 1.1 who had formerly been a Disciple of Origen, and Catechist of the Church of Alexandria, succeeded Heraclas in the Episcopal See of that Church, in the Third b 1.2 Year of the Empire of Philippus, and 247 of the Nativity of our Saviour. He was one of the most Learned and most Illustrious Bishops of his Age; and being consulted from all parts upon matters of Religion, wrote a vast number of Letters to the most famous Bishops of the Church, besides several Works against the Hereticks, and some Treatises of Divinity and Discipline. St. Jerome has composed a Catalogue of all his Works, and Eusebius has enriched his History with several Passages that he has

borrowed out of him. The Fragments that are yet ext••nt in Eusebius and St. Athanasius, make us greatly regret the Loss of his Writings, as Works that would have been of infinite Advantage and Use * 1.3 in the Explication of the Doctrine of the Church. The Catalogue of them, as it is set down by St. Jerom, being without any order, we shell therefore endeavour to make another of all the Volumes of this Dionysius, whereof we have any knowledge, according to the order of time in which they were written, not forgetting at the same time to take notice of those Fragments that are to be found in Eu¦sebius and in St. Athanasius.

The first Letter which he wrote, is directed to Febius Bishop of Antioch, immediately after the Per∣secution of the Emperor Decius; that is to say, at the end of the year 250. Eusebius has preserved two Fragments of it in the Sixth Book, Chap. 41. & 44. of his History. In the first, he gives an Ac∣count of the horrid Cruelty of the Persecutors that fell so severely upon the poor Christians of Alex∣andria, as well towards the end of the Empire of Bhilippus, as also after Decius had published his Edict against them; and he gives us a Narrative of the Martyrdom of several Persons. In the Second, he relates the History of an Old Man, whose Name was Serapion, who having fallen away in the timeof Persecution, was ejoyn'd a course of Penance, till being ready to die, he sent a Young Boy to fetch him the Body of Jesus Christ, that he might die in the Communion of the Church.

He describes the Persecution of Decius in his Letter against Germanus, though it was not writ till long after; and he particularly relates what happen'd to himself; how, having been forcibly hurried away out of Alexandria by some Soldier•• against his Will, he was conducted to a Town called Tapo∣firis, where being rescued by a Company of Country Fellows that fell upon his Guards, he was obli∣ged to abscond for a while, being only accompanied by some Priests.

c 1.4 This is that Persecution, which is mentioned in the Fragment of a Letter to Domitius and Didy∣mus, related by Eusebius towards the end of the Eleventh Chapter of his History, Lib. 6. It was also about the end of this Persecution, when he was as yet in Exile, that he wrote a Letter concerning Penance to the Brethren in Aegypt, wherein he delivered his own Opinion, as to the manner with which they ought to treat those that had fallen away and he there distinguishes between the different degrees of Offences. He likewise wrote at the same time a Book upon the same occasion to Conon Bishop of Her∣mopolis, a Letter to his Clergy at Alexandria, one to the Christians of Laodece••, where Thelymidres was Bishop, and one to the Armenians, over whom Meruzanes was Pastor, which treated of Penance; and a small Treatise of Martyrdom to Origen.

After Peace was restored to the Church in the Year 251. Dionysius having received a Letter from Cornelius Bishop of Rome against Novatian, who had also written to him himself, he answered both one and the other. His Letter to Novatian, whom he calls Novatus, is taken notice of by Etisebius in his 7th Book, Chap. 45. He advises him, if he had a mind to perswade the World that he was Or∣dained against his Will, as he publickly affirmed, to return back to his Duty, and use all his Endeavours to re-establish Peace and Concord. His Letter to Cornelius is plainly what they called in the Language of those times, a Letter of Communion. He informs him, that he was summoned to a Synod of An∣tioch, by Helenus Bishop of Tarsus, by Firmilian of Cappadocia, and Theoctistus of Palaestine, in which they resolved to confirm the Discipline of Novatus; that word was sent him, that Fabius Bishop of Antioch was dead, and Demetrian elected in his room; that Alexander Bishop of Jerusalem died in Prison. To these Letters he added one to the Christians at Rome, concerning Peace and Penance; and another to the Confessors to disswade them from the Faction of Novatian. Afterwards he wrote ano∣ther to the Romans, which he sent by Hippolytus, wherein he discourses of the Duty and Function of Dea∣cons; and two more to the Confessors of Rome, after they had entred into the Unity of the Church. These are the Letters which he wrote under the Pontificate of Cornelius, and are mentioned by Eusebius in the last Chapter of his Sixth Book.

Under the Pontificate of Pope Stephen, that succeeded Cornelius in the beginning of the Year 255. Di∣onysius wrote a Letter to him, in which he acquaints him, That all the Eastern Churches were at last agreed to condemn the rigorous Novelty of Novatus, and speaks to him of the Question concerning the Validity of the Baptism of Hereticks, that was in Agitation between him and St. Cyprian. After the Death of Stephen, which happened in the Year 257. he wrote another upon the same Subject to Sixtus his Successor, and begs of him to consider the Consequence of that business, and not to pursue it with the heat of his Predecessor, who had written Letters to Helenus, to Firmilian, and to all the Bishops of Cappadocia and Cicilia, wherein he sent them word, that he would not Communicate any more with them, because they re-baptized Hereticks; which, he says, was determined in the Councils of the Bishops. In the same Letter, he speaks against the Error of the Sabellians, that arose in Ptolemais a City of Pentapolis; against which, as he tells him there, he had written a long Letter, or rather a Discourse which he sent him. He wrote likewise to Dionysius and Philemon, Presbyters of the Church of Rome, about the Baptism of Hereticks. In his Epistle to Philemon, he tells him, That his Prede∣cessor Heraclas caused the Hereticks to abjure their Errours without Baptizing them a-new; that this was the Custom of his Church; but nevertheless that he had been informed, that the Africans had for a

long time observed the contrary, and that it was Established in the East in a very numerous Assembly of Bishops held at Iconium and Synnada, and in many other places; that matters standing thus, his Ad∣vice was, that their Customs and Decrees ought not to be reversed, since it is written, That we must not remove the Land mark vvhich our Fathers have given us. This is the true Opinion of Dionysius concerning this matter, and St. Jerome wrongfully accuses him to have been of St. Cyprian's Party, since he tells us in express Terms, That we ought to follow the Judgment of the Church in this Point. He says the same thing in his Letter to Dionysius, who was afterwards Bishop of Rome, and delivers his Sentiments there very boldly against Novatian. ••ostly, He wrote a Letter, which is his Fifth, to Sixtus, concerning the Baptism of Hereticks, in which he maintains, That if a Man has been Baptized amongst Hereticks, with Ceremonies wholly different from those of the Church, and comes at last to discover it, after he has continued in the Church a long time, participating of the Prayers, and Communicating as others, without having been Baptized, he needs not be Baptized a new, since he has received the Body of Jesus Christ several times, and answered Amen with the rest of the Faithful. Eusebius seems to mention a sixth Letter, written upon the same occasion to the same Pope; where, as he tells us, he has examined this Question more copiously, though perhaps it is not different from this last.

After Sixtus's Death, Dionysius of Alexandria wrote a Letter concerning Lucian, to Dionysius that succeeded Pope Sixtus, towards the end of the Year 258. 'Twas in this, or rather in the follovving Year, that he wrote his Letter against Germanus; in vvhich, after he has described the Persecution he suffered in the time of Decius, he relates what happened to him under that of Vaterian; how the Pre∣fect Aemilianus prohibited him to hold any more Assemblies of Christians; how having refused to obey his Orders, he was sent along with his Presbyters, to a Village near Cephro in Lybia; hovv these Proceedings did not hinder the Christians from holding their ordinary Assemblies. Lastly, how he preached the Gospel, and converted great Numbers of Pagans to Christianity, whilst he rarried at Cephro.

While he continued in this Exile, he wrote some Paschal Letters; that is to say, Letters in form of Homilies upon the Festival of Easter; in which, according to the ancient Custom, he ascertains the time of that Feast. He sent one of them to Flavius, another to Domitius and Didymus, which I ima∣gine to be different from the first that is addressed to the same Persons; wherein he proves, That the Feast of Easter ought not to be celebrated till after the vernal Equinox. He composed a Canon or Table of Eight Years. He likewise vvrote another to the Church of Alexandria, and to many others. Peace was no sooner restored to the Church, but the returned back to Alexandria; tho' he was immedi∣ately obliged to depart from thence, by reason of a Sedition that arose in that City d 1.5

It was during this Retreat, that he wrote a Letter to Hierax, a Passage out of which Eusebius has borrowed, that gives an Account of a Riot that happened at that time. He likewise wrote another Letter to his Church, which he sent to them on Easter-day.

A Pestilence e 1.6 that succeeded this War, obliged St. Dionysius to comfort and encourage his Congre∣gation with another Letter, in which he describes that admirable Charity wherewith the Christians re∣lieved and buried those that were seized with the Plague, in a very lively manner.

In short, during the whole time of his Retirement, he never ceas'd to write to his Brethren, and did them more good by his Letters, than he could have done by his Presence. Eusebius mentions another Paschal Letter of his concerning the Sabbath, and one concerning Spiritual Exercises, and a third to Hermammon, written in the Seventh Year of Galienas, which fell out in the Year 264. some Fragments of which he has preserved in Lib. 7. c. 1. 10. and 23. And yet St. Dionysius was not only content to exhort, or instruct the Faithful by his Letters; but he applied himself vigorously to confute and ex∣tinguish the Errours that sprung up in his time.

An Aegyptian Bishop named Nepos, understanding the Promises of the Gospel in a gross sence, and maintaining the Reign of Jesus Christ upon Earth for a Thousand Years, with an inflexible Obstinacy composed a Book which he Entituled, A Confutation of the Allegorists, where he endeavoured to prove his Opinion out of the Apocalypse. He brought over abundance of People to this Opinion in that part of Aegypt that was called Arsinoe, which unhappily proved an occasion of Schism and Division in those Churches. Dionysius happening to be there, judged it expedient to examine this Doctrine pub∣lickly: And because they generally set up Nepos's Book as an unanswerable Treatise, he confuted it Viva voce, and afterwards wrote two Books against it, Entituled, Of the Divine Promises. In the First, he delivers his own Opinion upon this Question. In the Second, he answers all the Reasons ur∣ged by Nepos, and his Testimonies drawn out of the Revelations. Saying upon this last Head, That some Persons have rejected the Apocalypse, as being the Book of the Heretick Cerinthus, who admitted of no other Beatitude, but that which consisted in carnal Pleasures; that as for himself, he durst not entirely reject it, since it was esteemed by a great many Christians, but that he was perswaded it

hid a ••idden meaning; which could not be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by any body; that he acknowledged that Book to be written by an Author inspired by the Holy Ghost, though he did not believe it to have been written by St. John the Evangelist, but by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the ••••me Name; as he endeavours to prove by the difference of the Style and Though•••• Eusebi••s has preserved considerable Fragments of this book, from whence we have drawn the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Passages. See the Third Book of his History, Chap. 28. and l. 7. Ch. 24. and 25.

Another Errour, that Dionysius of Alexandria opposed and 〈◊〉〈◊〉, if I may use the Expression in its Cradle, was much more considerable. T•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Bishops in Pentapolis that embraced the Errour of Sabellian, who 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Th•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Holy Trinity. This Opinion was so deeply rooted and established in those Quarters, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Son of God was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 mentioned in their Churches. Dionysius, to whom this Province belonged, by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Preheminence of the Patriarchal See of Alexandria, to preside and watch over all 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉〈◊〉; sent his Legates to that place to undeceive the People that were in an 〈◊〉〈◊〉; but being not able to go thither him∣self in Person, he was constrained to write to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to confute this 〈◊〉〈◊〉. His 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Letter was ad∣dressed to Ammon Bishop of Berenice, the Se•…•… to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and Euphranor, and the Last to Am∣mon and Euporus. The End which he proposed to himself in writing these Letters, was to perswade these People, who had not been very well instructed, that the Father was not the Son, and that He was not the Father, but the Son that was Incarnate and Died for 〈◊〉〈◊〉. But that happened to Dionysius in this Affair, that usually happens to most Men, that while he opposed and attack'd one Errour, he spoke very favourably of the contrary: Thus going about to prove, that the Son was a distinct Per∣son from the Father, he chanced to say, That he was the Work of the Father; That he was with re∣spect to the Father what a Vine is to the Vine dresser, a Ship to the Builder. And lastly, That the Son did not exist before he was made. These Expressions, that seemed to establish an opposite Errour to that of Sabellius, which afterwards was taken up by Arius, gave occasion to some well-affected Ca∣tholick Persons, to carry a Complaint to Dionysius Bishop of Rome, against the Bishop of Alexandria. But he being advertised of the matter, wrote Four Books which he presented to the Pope; vvherein he refutes not only the Errour of the Sabellians, but also that which vvas attributed to himself; and ha∣ving desired the Pope to send him all the Objections that were urged against him, he wrote a Treatise vvhich he called, A Refutation and an Apology; because he refutes the Errours of other Men, and like∣wise Justifies himself. St. Athanasius, from whom I have borrowed this Account, relates divers other Passages, that were extracted out of this Work, in a Book which he wrote about the Opinion of Di∣onysius of Alexandria; in vvhich, he invincibly proves against the Arians, who had the Confidence to make use of his Authority, That his Notions of the Trinity were very conformable to those of the Church, though he did not much approve of the term Consubstantial.

To conclude, Dionysius of Alexandria a little before his Death, defended the Divinity of Jesus Christ against Paulus Samosatenus Bishop of Antioch: For, being invited to the Synod that was held at Antioch against that Heretick in the Year 264 and not being able to go thither, by reason of his Old Age and Infirmity, he wrote several Letters to the Church at Antioch, wherein he explains his own Opinion, and refutes the Errour of Paulus Samosatenus, whom he looked upon as so great a Criminal for advancing this Errour, that he would not even condescend to Salute him in his Letter, considering him already as an Heretick, and one that was separated from the Church; as we find it observed by the Fathers of the Council of Antioch, and by Eusebius after them, in his Seventh Book, Chap. 27. and 29.

Baronius thinks that this Letter of Dionysius, is the same with that which Turrianus published, which is inserted in the first Volume of the last Edition of the Councils P. 850. But he is mistaken; for that Letter, which the Fathers of the Council of Antioch speak of, was written to the Church of Antioch; whereas we find this is addressed to Paulus Samosatenus, as appears by these first words: We Answer what you de∣mand of us, that we may oblige you to speak your Thoughts plainly and openly. From whence it is manifest, That this Letter, if it is not Supposititious, was written soon after the First Synod of Antioch, when Paulus Samosatenus promised to renounce his Opinion; and in all appearance seem'd to have chang'd it effectually. But it's probable enough, that this Letter, which is cited by none of the Ancients, and which was unknown to the World before Turrianus's time was never written by Dionysius of Alexan∣dria. For in the first place, The Fathers of the Second Council of Antioch tell us plainly, That Di∣onysius of Alexandria would by no means salute Paulus Samosatenus: What reason is there therefore to imagine, that he wrote to him twice, as this Letter supposes? Secondly, The Style of this Letter is ex∣tremely different from that of the other Letters writ by Dionysius. In the Third place, the Author of this Letter approves of the Word Consubstantial, and expresly tells us, That the Fathers called the Son of God by that Name. Now it is certain, that both Dyonysius of Alexandria, and the Synod of An∣tioch, disallowed that term; and in the time of St. Dionysius, a Man could not say, that the Fathers commonly made use of it. And if St. Dionysius of Alexandria had ever used it, is it to be believed that St. Athanasius would have forgotten or omitted so memorable a Passage, when he was writing in his Defence.

It is not to be imagined, that we have given a Catalogue of all the Works of Dionysius of Alexandria; for he composed so great a number, that notwithstanding all the Diligence that Eusebius used in draw∣ing a perfect Catalogue, he is forced to say at last, and several other Letters. Now the Letters of this Father were Treatises, and his Treatises were written in the way of Letters; for after this man∣ner he wrote some Books concerning Nature, to a young Gentleman named Timotheus; a Book of Temptations to Euphranor, and several Letters to Basilides; in one of which, he tells him that he had

composed a Commentary upon the beginning of Ecclesiastes. We have only now one of his Letters to Basilides, Printed in the first Tome of the Councils, where he treats of some matters relating to Disci∣pline. * 1.7 'Tis divided into Four Canons; in the First of which, he discourses about the Fast, which the Ancient Christians observed before Easter; and tells us, That some Christians fasted Six days before Easter; others Two, others Three, after an extraordinary manner; That we ought not to break our Fast before Midnight; and that those that were able to hold on till Easter-morning, were more ge∣nerous; That there were some Persons, who, though they did not fast at all, nay, had spent the Four first days of the last Week in sumptuous and delicate Entertainments, yet imagined they did Wonder∣ful things in fasting only two days: But that they were not to be compared with those that fasted seve∣ral. In the second Canon he says, That Women ought not to enter into the Church, or receive the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ while they have their Courses, but to offer their Prayes to God at Home; since none by right ought to enter the Sanctum Sanctorum, that is not pure in Body and Spirit. In the Third, he particularly Counsels those that are superannuated, to abstain from the use of Mar∣riage, that they may the better attend their Devotions. In the Fourth, he leaves those Persons that have had an Illusion in the Night-time, at liberty to receive or forbear the Eucharist; following the Dictates and Motions of their own Conscience.

Anastasius of Nice, in his 23d Question upon Genesis, cites a Passage drawn out of a Book of Dionysius of Alexandria against Origen; but there is no ground to believe that it was written by our Dionysius, who was so far from being his Adversary, that he was both his Disciple and Defender. He died in the Year 264, after he had held the See of Alexandria Seventeen years, and had one Maximus for his Suc∣cessor. The Style of this Author is Pompous and Lofty; he is excellent in his Descriptions and Ex∣hortations; in his Polemical Discourses he falls upon his Adversaries with all the Vigour imaginable; he perfectly well understood the Opinion, the Discipline and Precepts of the Church; he had sound piercing Judgment; he was very moderate, very discreet, and ready to take Advice. In short, the Loss of his Works is one of the most considerable Losses we could have sustain'd in this kind.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Dyonysius.] He is Surnamed the Great, by the Ancients. Euseb. St. Basil. Ep. ad Amphil. Maximus and Metaphrastes give him this Name. He had for∣merly been a Rhetorician, if we may believe Maxi∣mus, upon the fifth Chapter of the Hierarchia Coe∣listis. He was unquestionably descended of a good Family. See Eusebius, Lib. 7. Ch. 11. and the Notes of Valesius.
• b 1.2

  The third Year.] 'Tis so set down in Eusebius's History, Lib. 6. Chap. 35. and in his Chronicon 'tis the Fifth. But the Account of his History is the truest; for he supposes in his Chronicon, that Philip reigned Seven years, whereas he was Em∣perour but Five,
• * 1.3

  St. Diony∣sius.
• c 1.4

  This is that Persecution.] Eusebius refers it to the Persecution under Valerian; but the Cir∣cumstances agree with what happened to him un∣der the Persecution of Decius, and not what he suffered under the Persecution of Valerian, in which he was not carried away by Violence. One needs only consulting the two Fragments of his Letter to Germanus, where he gives an Account of vvhat befell him in these tvvo Persecutions, to be per∣svvaded in the matter.
• d 1.5

  Arose in that City.] 'Tis undoubtedly that Commotion, that was occasioned by Aemilianus, Governour of Alexandria, who caused that City, and likewise all Aegypt, to revolt from the Empe∣ror Galienus; as Pollio reports it. This Aemilianus was a different Person from him that took up Arms in Maesia, and marched against Gallus and Volustanus some years before. These two Aem••lians are distinguished in the Epitome of Aurelius Victor.
• e 1.6

  A Pestilence.] This Pestilence began in the time of Gallus and Volusianus, but it broke afresh under Gallus; as it is observed by Aurelius Victor and Pollio. Dionysius of Alexandria speaks of the latter Pestilence, and St. Cyprian of the former. Thus those Persons that imagined they spoke of the same Infection, are mistaken.
• * 1.7

  Theognostus