Letter
XV.
To Turribius, Bishop of
Asturia
137
, upon the errors of the
Priscillianists.
Leo, bishop, to Turribius, bishop, greeting.
I.
Introductory.
Your laudable zeal for the truth of the catholic
Faith, and the painstaking devotion you expend in the exercise of your
pastoral office upon the
Lord’s
flock is
proved by your letter, brother, which your deacon has handed to us, in
which you have taken care to bring to our knowledge the nature of the
disease which has burst forth in your district from the remnants of an
ancient plague. For the language of your letter, and your
detailed statement, and the text of your pamphlet
138
, explains clearly that the filthy puddle
of the Priscillianists again teems with life amongst you
139
. For there is no dirt which has not
flowed into this dogma from the notions of all sorts of heretics:
since they have scraped together the motley dregs from the mire of
earthly opinions and made for themselves a mixture
140
which they alone may swallow whole, though others have tasted little
portions of it.
In fact, if all the heresies which have arisen
before the time of Priscillian were to be studied carefully, hardly any
mistake will be discovered with which this impiety has not been
infected: for not satisfied with accepting the falsehoods of
those who have departed from the Gospel under the name of Christ, it
has plunged itself also in the shades of heathendom, so as to rest
their religious faith and their moral conduct upon the power of demons
and the influences of the stars through the blasphemous secrets of the
magic arts and the empty lies of astrologers. But if this may be
believed and taught, no reward will be due for virtues, no punishment
for faults, and all the injunctions not only of human laws but also of
the Divine constitutions will be broken down: because there will
be no criterion of good or bad actions possible, if a fatal necessity
drives the impulses of the mind to either side, and all that men do is
through the agency not of men but of stars. To this madness
belongs that monstrous division of the whole human body among the
twelve signs of the zodiac, so that each part is ruled by a different
power: and the creature, whom
God
made
in His own image, is as much under the domination of the stars as his
limbs are connected one with the other. Rightly then our fathers,
in whose times this abominable heresy sprung up, promptly pursued it
throughout the world, that the blasphemous error might everywhere be
driven from the Church: for even the leaders of the world so
abhorred this profane folly that they laid low its originator, with
most of his disciples, by the sword of the public laws. For they
saw that all desire for honourable conduct was removed, all
marriage-ties undone, and the Divine and the human law simultaneously
undermined, if it were allowed for men of this kind to live anywhere
under such a creed. And this rigourous treatment was for long a
help to the Church’s law of gentleness which, although it relies
upon the priestly judgment, and shuns blood-stained vengeance, yet is
assisted by the stern decrees of Christian princes at times when men,
who dread bodily punishment, have recourse to merely spiritual
correction. But since many provinces have been taken up with the
invasions of the enemy
141
, the carrying out of
the laws also has been suspended by these stormy wars. And since
intercourse came to be difficult among
God’s
priests and meetings rare, secret treachery
was free to act through the general disorder, and was roused to the
upsetting of many minds by those very ills which ought to have
counteracted it. But which of the peoples and how many of them
are free from the contagion of this plague in a district where, as you
point out, dear brother, the
minds even of certain priests have
sickened of this deadly disease: and they who were believed the
necessary quellers of falsehood and champions of the Truth are the very
ones through whom the Gospel of
God
is
enthralled to the teaching of Priscillian: so that the fidelity
of the holy volumes being distorted to profane meanings, under the
names of prophets and apostles, is proclaimed not that which the Holy
Spirit has taught, but what the devil’s servant has
inserted. Therefore as you, beloved, with all the faithful
diligence in your power, have dealt under 16 heads with these already
condemned opinions
142
, we also subject
them once more to a strict examination; lest any of these blasphemies
should be thought either bearable or doubtful.
II. (1)
The Priscillianists’
denial of the Trinity refuted.
And so under the first head is shown what unholy
views they hold about the Divine Trinity: they affirm that the
person of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost is one and the same,
as if the same
God
were named now Father, now
Son, and now Holy Ghost: and as if He who begot were not one, He
who was begotten, another, and He who proceeded from both, yet another;
but an undivided unity must be understood, spoken of under three names,
indeed, but not consisting of three persons. This species of
blasphemy they borrowed from Sabellius, whose followers were rightly
called Patripassians also: because if the Son is identical with
the Father, the Son’s cross is the Father’s passion
(
patris-passio
): and the Father took on Himself all that
the Son took in the form of a slave, and in obedience to the
Father. Which without doubt is contrary to the catholic faith,
which acknowledges the Trinity of the Godhead to be of one essence
(
ὁμοούσιον
)
in such a way that it believes the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost
indivisible without confusion, eternal without time, equal without
difference: because it is not the same person but the same
essence which fills the Unity in Trinity.
III. (2)
Their fancy about virtues
proceeding from
God
refuted.
Under the second head is displayed their foolish
and empty fancy about the issue of certain virtues from
God
which he began to possess, and which were posterior to
God
Himself in His own essence. In this
again they support the Arians’ mistake, who say that the Father
is prior to the Son, because there was a time when He was without the
Son: and became the Father then when He begot the Son. But
as the catholic Church abhors them, so also does it abhor these who
think that what is of the same essence was ever wanting to
God
. For it is as wicked to speak of Him as
progressing as it is to call Him changeable. For increase implies
change as much as does decrease.
IV. (3)
Their account of the
epithet “Only Begotten” refuted.
Again the third head is concerned with these same
folk’s impious assertion that the Son of
God
is called “only-begotten” for this reason
that He alone was born of a virgin. To be sure they would not
have dared to say this, had they not drunk the poison of Paul of
Samosata and Photinus: who said that our
Lord
Jesus Christ did not exist till He was born of the
virgin Mary. But if they wish something else to be understood by
their tenet, and do not date Christ’s beginning from His
mother’s womb, they must necessarily assert that there is not one
Son of
God
, but others also were begotten of
the most High Father, of whom this one is born of a woman, and
therefore called only-begotten, because no other of
God’s
sons underwent this condition of being
born. Therefore, whithersoever they betake themselves, they fall
into an abyss of great impiety, if they either maintain that Christ the
Lord
took His beginning from His mother, or do
not believe Him to be the only-begotten of
God
the Father: since He who was
God
was
born of a mother, and no one was born of the Father except the
Word.
V. (4)
Their fasting on the
Nativity and Sunday disapproved of.
The fourth head deals with the fact that the
Birth-day of Christ, which the catholic Church thinks highly of as the
occasion of His taking on Him true man, because “the Word became
flesh and dwelt in us
143
,” is not
truly honoured by these men, though they make a show of honouring it,
for they fast on that day, as they do also on the
Lord’s
day, which is the day of Christ’s
resurrection. No doubt they do this, because they do not believe
that Christ the
Lord
was born in true
man’s nature, but maintain that by a sort of illusion there was
an appearance of what was not a reality, following the views of Cerdo
and Marcion, and being in complete agreement with their kinsfolk,
the
Manichæans. For as our
examination has disclosed and brought home to them, they
144
drag out in mournful fasting the
Lord’s
day which for us is hallowed by
the resurrection of our Saviour: devoting this abstinence, as the
explanation goes, to the worship of the sun: so that they are
throughout out of harmony with the unity of our faith, and the day
which by us is spent in gladness is past in self-affliction by
them. Whence it is fitting that these enemies of Christ’s
cross and resurrection should accept an opinion (like this) which
tallies with the doctrine they have selected.
VI. (5)
Their view that the soul is
part of the Divine being refuted.
The fifth head refers to their assertion that
man’s soul is part of the Divine being
145
, and
that the nature of our human state does not differ from its
Creator’s nature. This impious view has its source in the
opinions of certain philosophers, and the Manichæans and the
catholic Faith condemns it: knowing that nothing that is made is
so sublime and so supreme as that its nature should be itself
God
. For that which is part of Himself
is Himself, and none other than the Son and Holy Spirit. And
besides this one consubstantial, eternal, and unchangeable Godhead of
the most high Trinity there is nothing in all creation which, in its
origin, is not created out of nothing. Besides anything that
surpasses its fellow-creatures is not
ipso facto
God
, nor, if a thing is great and
wonderful, is it identical with Him “who alone doeth great
wonders
146
.” No
man
is truth,
wisdom, justice; but many are partakers of truth, wisdom, and
justice. But
God
alone is exempt from
any participating: and anything which is in any degree worthily
predicated of Him is not an attribute, but His very essence. For
in the Unchangeable there is nothing added, there is nothing
lost: because “to be
147
” is
ever His peculiar property, and that is eternity. Whence abiding
in Himself He renews all things
148
, and receives
nothing which He did not Himself give. Accordingly they are
over-proud and stone-blind who, when they say the soul is part of the
Divine Being, do not understand that they merely assert that
God
is changeable, and Himself suffers
anything that may be inflicted upon His nature.
VII. (6)
Their view that the devil
was never good, and is therefore not
God’s
creation, refuted.
The sixth notice points out that they say the
devil never was good, and that his nature is not
God’s
handiwork, but he came forth out of chaos and
darkness: because I suppose he has no instigator, but is himself
the source and substance of all evil: whereas the true Faith,
which is the catholic, acknowledges that the substance of all creatures
spiritual or corporeal is good, and that evil has no positive
existence
149
; because
God
, who is the Maker of the Universe, made
nothing that was not good. Whence the devil also would be good,
if he had remained as he was made. But because he made a bad use
of his natural excellence, and “stood not in the truth
150
,” he did not pass into the opposite
substance, but revolted from the highest good to which he owed
adherence: just as they themselves who make such assertions run
headlong from truth into falsehood, and accuse nature of their own
spontaneous delinquencies, and are condemned for their voluntary
perversity: though of course this evil is in them, but is itself
not a substance but a penalty inflicted on substance.
VIII. (7)
Their rejection of
marriage condemned
.
In the seventh place follows their condemnation of
marriages and their horror of begetting children: in which, as in
almost all points, they agree with the Manichæans’
impiety. But it is for this reason, as their own practices prove,
that they detest the marriage tie, because there is no liberty for
lewdness where the chastity of wedlock and of offspring is
preserved.
IX. (8)
Their disbelief in the
resurrection of the body has been already condemned by the
Church.
Their eighth point is that the formation
151
of men’s bodies is the device of the
devil, and that the seed of conception is shaped by the aid of demons
in the wombs of women: and that for this reason the resurrection
of the flesh is not to be believed because the stuff of which the body
is made is not consistent with
the dignity of the soul. This
falsehood is without doubt the devil’s work, and such monstrous
opinions are the devices of demons who do not mould men in
women’s bellies, but concoct such errors in heretics’
hearts. This unclean poison which flows especially from the fount
of the Manichæan wickedness has been already
152
arraigned and condemned by the catholic Faith.
X. (9)
Their notion that “the
children of promise” are conceived by the Holy Ghost is utterly
unscriptural and uncatholic.
The ninth notice declares that they say the sons
of promise are born indeed of women but conceived by the Holy
Spirit: lest that offspring which is born of carnal seed should
seem to share in
God’s
estate.
This is repugnant and contrary to the catholic Faith which acknowledges
every man to be formed by the Maker of the Universe in the substance of
his body and soul, and to receive the breath of life within his
mother’s womb: though that taint of sin and liability to
die remains which passed from the first parent into his descendants;
until the sacrament of Regeneration comes to succour him, whereby
through the Holy Spirit we are re-born the sons of promise, not in the
fleshly womb, but in the power of baptism. Whence David also, who
certainly was a son of promise, says to
God
: “Thy hands have made me and fashioned
me
153
.” And to Jeremiah says the
Lord
, “Before I formed thee in the womb
I knew thee, and in thy mother’s belly I sanctified thee
154
.”
XI. (10)
Their theory that souls
have a previous existence before entering man refuted.
Under the tenth head they are reported as
asserting that the souls which are placed in men’s bodies have
previously been without body and have sinned in their heavenly
habitation, and for this reason having fallen from their high estate to
a lower one alight upon ruling spirits
155
of
divers qualities, and after passing through a succession of powers of
the air and stars, some fiercer, some milder, are enclosed in bodies of
different sorts and conditions, so that whatever variety and inequality
is meted out to us in this life, seems the result of previous
causes. This blasphemous fable they have woven for themselves out
of many persons’ errors
156
: but all of
them the catholic Faith cuts off from union with its body, persistently
and truthfully proclaiming that men’s souls did not exist until
they were breathed into their bodies, and that they were not there
implanted by any other than
God
, who is the
creator both of the souls and of the bodies. And because through
the transgression of the first man the whole stock of the human race
was tainted, no one can be set free from the state of the old Adam save
through Christ’s sacrament of baptism, in which there are no
distinctions between the re-born, as says the Apostle: “For
as many of you as were baptized in Christ did put on Christ:
there is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor
free: there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one
in Christ Jesus
157
.” What
then have the course of the stars to do with it, or the devices of
destiny? what the changing state of mundane things and their restless
diversity? Behold how the grace of
God
makes all these unequals equal, who, whatever their labours in this
life, if they abide faithful, cannot be wretched, for they can say with
the Apostle in every trial: “who shall separate us from the
love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or
famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written,
‘For thy sake we are killed all the day long, we are accounted as
sheep for the slaughter.’ (
Ps. xliv. 22
.) But in all these things we
overcome through Him that loved us
158
.”
And therefore the Church, which is the body of Christ, has no fear
about the inequalities of the world, because she has no desire for
temporal goods: nor does she dread being overwhelmed by the empty
threats of destiny, for she knows she is strengthened by patience in
tribulations.
XII. (11)
Their astrological
notions condemned.
Their eleventh blasphemy is that in which they suppose
that both the souls and bodies of men are under the influence of fatal
stars: this folly compels them to become entangled in all the
errors of the heathen, and to strive to attract stars that are as they
think favourable to them, and to soften those that are against
them. But for those who follow such pursuits there is no place in
the catholic Church; a man who gives himself up to such convictions
separates himself from the body of Christ altogether.
XIII.
(12)
Their belief that certain powers rule the soul and the
stars the body, is unscriptural and preposterous.
The twelfth of these points is this, that they map
out the parts of the soul under certain powers, and the limbs of the
body under others: and they suggest the characters of the inner
powers that rule the soul by giving them the names of the patriarchs,
and on the contrary they attribute the signs of the stars to those
under which they put the body. And in all these things they
entangle themselves in an inextricable maze, not listening to the
Apostle when he says, “See that no one deceive you through
philosophy and vain deceit after the tradition of men, after the
rudiments of the world, and not after Christ; for in Him dwells all the
fulness of the Godhead bodily, and in Him ye are made full, who is the
head of every principality and power
159
.”
And again: “let no man beguile you by a voluntary humility
and worshipping of angels, treading on things which he hath not seen,
vainly puffed up by the senses of his flesh, not holding fast the Head
from whom all the body, being supplied and knit together through the
joints and bands, increaseth with the increase of
God
160
.”
What then is the use of admitting into the heart what the law has not
taught, prophecy has not sung, the truth of the Gospel has not
proclaimed, the Apostles’ teaching has not handed down? But
these things are suited to the minds of those of whom the Apostle
speaks, “For the time will come when they will not endure sound
doctrine, but having itching ears, will heap to themselves teachers
after their own lusts: and will turn away indeed their hearing
from the truth, and turn aside unto fables
161
.” And so we can have nothing in
common with men who dare to teach or believe such things, and strive by
any means in their power to persuade men that the substance of flesh is
foreign to the hope of resurrection, and so break down the whole
mystery of Christ’s incarnation: because it was wrong for
Christ to take upon Him complete manhood if it was wrong for Him to
emancipate complete manhood.
XIV. (13)
Their fanciful division
of the Scriptures rejected.
In the thirteenth place comes their assertion that
the whole body of the canonical Scriptures is to be accepted, under the
names of the patriarchs
162
: because
those twelve virtues which work the reformation of the inner man are
pointed out in their names, and without this knowledge no soul can
effect its reformation, and return to that substance from which it came
forth. But this wicked delusion the Christian wisdom holds in
disdain, for it knows that the nature of the true Godhead is inviolable
and immutable: but the soul, whether living in the body or
separated from the body, is subject to many passions: whereas, of
course, if it were part of the divine essence, no adversity could
happen to it. And therefore there is no comparison between
them: One is the Creator, the other is the creature. For He
is always the same, and suffers no change: but the soul is
changeable, even if not changed, because its power of not changing is a
gift, and not a property.
XV. (14)
Their idea that the
Scriptures countenance their subjecting of the body to the starry
influences denied.
Under the fourteenth heading their sentiments upon
the state of the body are stated, viz., that it is, on account of its
earthly properties, held under the power of stars and constellations,
and that many things are found in the holy books which have reference
to the outer man with this object, that in the Scriptures themselves a
certain opposition may be seen at work between the divine and the
earthly nature: and that which the powers that rule the soul
claim for themselves may be distinguished from that which the
fashioners of the body claim. These stories are invented that the
soul may be maintained to be part of the divine substance, and the
flesh believed to belong to the bad nature: since the world
itself, with its elements, they hold to be not the work of the good
God
, but the outcome of an evil author:
and that they might disguise these sacrilegious lies under a fair
cloak, they have polluted almost all the divine utterances with the
colouring of their unholy notions.
XVI. (15)
Their falsified copies of
the Scriptures, and their apocryphal books prohibited.
And on this subject your remarks under the fifteenth
head make a complaint, and express a well-deserved abhorrence of their
devilish presumption, for we too have ascertained this from the
accounts of trustworthy witnesses, and have found many of their copies
most corrupt, though they are entitled canonical. For how could
they deceive the simple-minded
unless they sweetened their
poisoned cups with a little honey, lest what was meant to be deadly
should be detected by its over-nastiness? Therefore care must be
taken, and the priestly diligence exercised to the uttermost, to
prevent falsified copies that are out of harmony with the pure Truth
being used in reading. And the apocryphal scriptures, which,
under the names of Apostles
163
, form a
nursery-ground for many falsehoods, are not only to be proscribed, but
also taken away altogether and burnt to ashes in the fire. For
although there are certain things in them which seem to have a show of
piety, yet they are never free from poison, and through the allurements
of their stories they have the secret effect of first beguiling men
with miraculous narratives, and then catching them in the noose of some
error. Wherefore if any bishop has either not forbidden the
possession of apocryphal writings in men’s houses, or under the
name of being canonical has suffered those copies to be read in church
which are vitiated with the spurious alterations of Priscillian, let
him know that he is to be accounted heretic, since he who does not
reclaim others from error shows that he himself has gone
astray.
XVII. (16)
About the writings of
Dictinius
164
.
Under the last head a just complaint was made that the
treatises of Dictinius which he wrote in agreement with
Priscillian’s tenets were read by many with veneration: for
if they think any respect is due to Dictinius’ memory, they ought
to admire his restoration rather than his fall. Accordingly it is
not Dictinius but Priscillian that they read: and they approve of
what he wrote in error, not what he preferred after recantation.
But let no one venture to do this with impunity, nor let any one be
reckoned among catholics who makes use of writings that have been
condemned not by the catholic Church alone but by the author himself as
well. Let not those who have gone astray be allowed to make a
fictitious show, and under the veil of the Christian name shirk the
provisions of the imperial decrees. For they attach themselves to
the catholic Church with all this difference of opinion in their heart,
with the object of both making such converts as they can, and escaping
the rigour of the law by passing themselves off as ours. This is
done by Priscillianists and Manichæans alike; for there is such a
close bond of union between the two that they are distinct only in
name, but in their blasphemies are found at one: because although
the Manichæans reject the Old Testament which the others pretend
to accept, yet the purpose of both tends to the same end, seeing that
the one side corrupts while receiving what the other assails and
rejects.
But in their abominable mysteries, which the more
unclean they are, are so much the more carefully concealed, their crime
is but one, their filthy-mindedness one, and their foul conduct
similar. And although we blush to speak so plainly, yet we have
tracked it out with the most painful searches, and exposed it by the
confession of Manichæans who have been arrested, and thus brought
it to the public knowledge: lest by any means it might seem
matter of doubt, although it has been disclosed by the mouth of the men
themselves, who had performed the crime, in our court, which was
attended not only by a large gathering of priests, but also by men of
repute and dignity, and a certain number of the senate and the people,
even as the missive which we have addressed to you, beloved, shows to
have been done. And there has been found out and widely published
about the immoral practices of the Priscillianists just what was also
found out about the foul wickedness of the Manichæans. For
they who are throughout on a level of depravity in their ideas, cannot
be unlike in their religious matters.
So having run through all that the detailed refutation
contains, with which the contents of the memorial of their views does
not disagree, we have, I think, satisfactorily shown what our opinion
on the matters which you, brother, have referred to us, and how
unbearable it is if such blasphemous errors find acceptance in the
hearts even of some priests, or to put it more mildly, are not actively
opposed by them. With what conscience can they maintain the
honourable position which has been given them, who do not labour for
the souls entrusted to them? Beasts rush in, and they do not
close the fold. Robbers lay wait, and they set no watch.
Diseases multiply, and they seek out no remedies. But when in
addition they refuse assent to those who act more warily, and shrink
from anathematizing by their written confession blasphemies which the
whole world has already condemned, what do they wish men to understand
except that they are not of the number of the brethren, but on the
enemy’s side?
XVIII.
The body of Christ really rested in the tomb, and really rose
again.
Furthermore in the matter which you placed last in
your confidential letter, I am surprised that any intelligent Christian
should be in difficulty as to whether when Christ descended to the
realms below, his flesh rested in the tomb: for as it truly died
and was buried, so it was truly raised the third day. For this
the
Lord
Himself also had announced, saying to
the Jews, “destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it
up
165
.” Where the evangelist adds this
comment: “but this He spake of the temple of His
body.” The truth of which the prophet David also had
predicted, speaking in the person of the
Lord
and Saviour, and saying: “Moreover my flesh also shall rest
in hope; because Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, nor give Thy
Holy One to see corruption.
166
” From
these words surely it is clear that the
Lord’s
flesh being buried, both truly rested and did
not undergo corruption: because it was quickly revived by the
return of the soul, and rose again. Not to believe this is
blasphemous enough, and is undoubtedly of a piece with the doctrine of
Manichæus and Priscillian, who with their blasphemous conceptions
pretend to confess Christ, but only in such a way as to destroy the
reality of His incarnation, and death, and resurrection.
Therefore let a council of bishops be held among
you, and let the priests of neighbouring provinces meet at a place
suitable to all: that, on the lines of our reply to your request
for advice, a full inquiry may be made as to whether here are any of
the bishops who are tainted with the contagion of this heresy:
for they must without doubt be cut off from communion, if they refuse
to condemn this most unrighteous sect with all its wrongful
conceptions. For it can nohow be permitted that one who has
undertaken the duty of preaching the Faith should dare to maintain
opinions contrary to Christ’s gospel and the creed of the
universal Church. What kind of disciples will there be in a place
where such masters teach? What will the people’s religion,
or the salvation of the laity be, where against the interests of human
society the holiness of chastity is uprooted, the marriage-bond
overthrown, the propagation of children forbidden, the nature of the
flesh condemned, and, in opposition to the true worship of the true
God
, the Trinity of the Godhead is denied, the
individuality of the persons confounded, man’s soul declared to
be the Divine essence, and enclosed in flesh at the Devil’s will,
the Son of
God
proclaimed only-begotten in
right of being born of a Virgin, not begotten of the Father, and at the
same time maintained to be neither true offspring of
God
, nor true child of the virgin: so that after a
false passion and an unreal death, even the resurrection of the flesh
reassumed out of the tomb should be considered fictitious? But it
is vain for them to adopt the name of catholic, as they do not oppose
these blasphemies: they must believe them, if they can listen so
patiently to such words. And so we have sent a letter to our
brethren and fellow-bishops of the provinces of Tarraco, Carthago,
Lusitania and Gallicia, enjoining a meeting of the general synod.
It will be yours, beloved, to take order that our authoritative
instructions be conveyed to the bishops of the aforesaid
provinces. But should anything, which
God
forbid, hinder the coming together of a general
council of Gallicia
167
, at least let the
priests come together, the assembling of whom our brothers Idacius and
Ceponius shall look to, assisted by your own strenuous efforts to
hasten the applying of remedies to these serious wounds by a provincial
synod also. Dated July 21, in the consulship of the illustrious
Calipius and Ardaburis (447).
137
This Turribius was a
man of learning and zeal, Bishop of Astoria (Astorga) in Spain
(province of Gallicia): canonized by the Roman Church and
commemorated on April 16 (Hurter). The date of the letter is
given as 21 Jul., 447.
138
Hurter
distinguishes these three documents thus: (1)
epistola
,
the private letter of Turribius to Leo; (2)
commonitorium
, the
detailed statement (under 16 heads) of the Priscillianist errors; and
(3)
libellus
, Turribius’ refutation of each head.
This heresy was of Spanish origin, having been broached by Priscillian
about 380. Their views will be seen in the sequel.
139
Priscillianistarum
fœtidissimam apud vos recaluisse sentinam.
140
Multiplicem sibi
fœculentiam miscuerunt
.
141
He alludes to the
invasion of Spain by the German tribes (Perthel, p. 38).
142
See above n. 6.
Quesnel draws attention to the fact that Leo’s refutation of the
Priscillianist heresy, which here follows, was adopted (almost) word
for word by the first council of Bracara (Braga, in Portugal), held in
563, as a sufficient exposition of their own position.
143
S.
John i. 14
.
144
Viz. the
Manichæans.
145
This Pantheistic view
was not, of course, a new one, nor pseudo-Christian in its origin, as
Leo himself shows. Cf. Virg., Georg. IV. 219–227, and
Æn. vi. 724–727.
The
philosophi quidam
to which he
makes reference are the Pythagoreans, and following them with
modifications the Platonists and the Stoics.
146
Ps. cxxxvi. 4
.
147
The reader need
hardly be reminded of the recorded revelation of the great “I
am” (Jehovah) to Moses (
Ex. iii
.).
148
Cf.
Rev. xxi. 5
.
149
i.e., that evil
is not anything positive, but only the negation or absence of good
which
is
positive, just as black is not itself a colour, but
only the absence of colour, whereas white is the presence (in due
proportion) of all the colours of the spectrum.
150
S.
John viii. 24
.
151
Plasmationem
, a
vile hybrid, being the Greek
πλάσμα
, with a Latin ending
(
-atio
); for which apparently the Low Latin of the Vulgate is
responsible. Cf.
Ps.
cxix. 73
, “et
plasmaverunt me” (quoted below, chap. x.).
152
Olim
Perhaps Leo refers to his own action
mentioned in Lett. vii. 1.
153
Ps. cxix. 73
.
154
Jer. i. 5
.
155
In diversæ
qualitatis principes incidisse
, cf.
Rom. viii. 38; Eph. iii. 10; Col. ii.
10
, &c.
156
The Pythagorean
doctrine of
μετεμψύωσις
(transmigration of souls) which was in a modified form accepted by
Plato (
Phædr. et alibi
), would seem to have been the
original source of this view of the soul’s origin. It would
naturally be palatable doctrine to the Gnostics and other
philosophizing sects. In Lett. XXXV., chap. iii., it is
attributed to Origen. For a modem exposition the reader cannot do
better than refer to Wordsworth’s ode on the intimations of
Immortality in childhood.
157
Gal. iii. 27, 28
.
158
Rom. viii. 35–37
.
159
Col. ii. 8–10
.
161
2 Tim. iv. 3, 4
.
160
Ibid. 18,
19
.
162
Leo’s commentary
on this obscure fancy of the Priscillianist is disappointing, as it is
merely a repetition or continuation of his remarks on the 12th
head. They seem to have divided the scriptures in some mystic
fashion into portions corresponding to the
qualitates interiorum
præsulum in patriarcharum nominibus
(
statutæ
) of
chap. xiii., and to have insisted on knowledge of the Scriptures as
necessary to the proper action of those “ruling principles”
on the soul. Cf. S. Aug. Letter CCXXXVII., chap. iii.
(Hurter).
163
Viz., such writings
as the
Actus
of Thomas, Andrew and John, and the
Memoria
apostolorum, qui totam destruit legem veteris Testamenti
, according
to Turribius’s letter to Idacius and Ceponius, chap. v.,
subjoined to this letter in the Leonine series.
164
Dictinius was a bishop
who had turned Priscillianist, and afterwards, at the synod of Toledo
(400), had returned to the fold of the Church (Perthel, p. 41)
165
S.
John ii. 19
.
166
Ps. xvi. 10
.
167
The whole
district over which Turribius was Vicar is here called
Gallicia
,
though, as just above, we find it included the provinces of
Tarraco
,
Carthago
, and
Lusitania,
as well as
Gallicia
.