create or innovate, but he gave emphatic expression to an existing church principle in view of the particular circumstances of his episcopate.

The Church is one, then,-this is his positionwith a visible external unity. The essence of that unity lies indeed in a spiritual fact-the life of Christ which is communicated to the Church: but this life is communicated to a visible society, bound together by visible bonds of external association.1 To this visible society he that would be Christ's must belong; 'he cannot have God for his father who has not the Church for his mother.' 2 The sin of schism separates from Christ in such completeness that not even martyrdom can expiate it.3 Of this unity the

Dionysius to Novatian, ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. 43, 45. The Novatianist confessors clearly imply that there was no question of acknowledging both: see their profession ap. Cyprian Ep. xlix. To go back a long way before Cyprian, it is surely of the essence of Ignatius' conception that there should be but 'one bishop' in each community. Of course difficulties may have arisen in particular cases in determining what constituted a community. Ordinarily, no doubt, the civil 'civitas' became the ecclesiastical 'parish'; but there must have been situations hard to deal with under this rule. Thus Lightfoot is very possibly right in regarding Hippolytus as neither strictly bishop of Portus nor bishop of Rome, but an 'assistant bishop' to the see of Rome, an érioкoros évv, dealing with the mixed population of various nationalities at Portus, the port of Rome, and traditionally associated therefore with that place, see S. Clement of Rome vol. ii. pp. 427 ff.; cf. also Dr. Salmon in Dict. Chr. Biog. s.v. HIPPOLYTUS iii. pp. 90, 91. But such a position would have been exceptional.

Harnack appends to his translation of Hatch's work (Die Gesellschaftsverfassung etc. p. 252) a note in disagreement, in the above sense: 'Ich kenne überhaupt keinen Grund, der gegen die Annahme spricht, dass sich die Regel, in jeder Stadt sei stets nur ein katholischer Bischof zu dulden, bereits am Ende des zweiten Jahrhunderts festgestellt hat.' Dr. Hatch in his later work The Growth of Church Institutions (1887, p. 17), quoted in support of his view some words of Epiphanius: οὐ γάρ ποτε ἡ ̓Αλεξάνδρεια δύο ἐπισκόπους ἔσχεν ὡς αἱ ἄλλαι πόλεις (αdν. Haer. Ixviii. 7). But the second bishop here spoken of as existing in other churches of Egypt but not at Alexandria is the schismatic Meletian bishop. The Meletian schism is the subject of the whole section, and the context leaves no doubt as to the meaning. On the subject of this note see Church Quarterly Review, July 1888, 'Ancient and Modern Church Organization' [reprinted in C. H. Turner Studies in Early Church History, 1912, pp. 33-70].

1 Cf. de Unit. Eccles. 5: Ecclesia Domini luce perfusa per orbem totum radios suos porrigit; unum tamen lumen est quod ubique diffunditur, nec unitas corporis separatur: ramos suos in universam terram copia ubertatis extendit, profluentes largiter rivos latius pandit; unum tamen caput est et origo una et una mater fecunditatis successibus copiosa.'

Ep. lxxiv. 7 (quoted above, p. 14 n.', with other passages).

de Unit. Eccles. 14. Great light is thrown on Cyprian's conception of the sin of schism, so far as concerns the relations of different churches, by his subsequent attitude towards Stephen of Rome. He would no doubt have said that the sin

bishop is in each community at once the symbol,1 the guardian,2 and the instrument. He is the instrument of it because the bishops, who succeed to the Apostles by an ordination which makes them their representatives,' are the possessors of that sacerdotal authority and grace with which Christ endowed His Church, and which is necessary for her existence.3 This plenitude of the priesthood is in every bishop, and in every bishop equally, just as every one of the Apostles was 'endowed with an equal fellowship of

of schism in the case of any division lies with the church from which the unjust claim proceeds which causes the division. Stephen made such a claim, i.e. a claim affecting the independence of the churches of Africa in an open question, and endeavoured to enforce it by an excommunication which Cyprian and the Africans ignored. Make no mistake,' wrote St. Firmilian of Caesarea, speaking of Stephen, you have excommunicated yourself' (ap. Cypr. Ep. lxxv. 24). It is to be remarked that St. Augustin makes St. Cyprian in this matter the type of the unschismatical temper, because, while he maintained the independent judgment of the African churches, he did not break off communion with those who differed from them; but, as far as in him lay, remained at unity with them in spite of differences (de Bapt. v. 25 [36]). Augustin is following Jerome in this, who commends Cyprian on the same grounds (adv. Lucifer. 25: 'non cum anathemate eorum qui se sequi noluerant ').

1 Ep. xliii. 5: 'Deus unus est et Christus unus et una ecclesia et cathedra una super Petrum Domini voce fundata. Aliud altare constitui aut sacerdotium novum

fieri praeter unum altare et unum sacerdotium non potest.'

de Unit. Eccles. 5: Quam unitatem tenere firmiter et vindicare debemus, maxime episcopi qui in ecclesia praesidemus, ut episcopatum quoque ipsum unum atque indivisum probemus.'

* Ep. lxvi. 8: 'Unde scire debes episcopum in ecclesia esse et ecclesiam in episcopo et si qui cum episcopo non sit in ecclesia non esse.' ib. 4, 5: '[Christus] dicit ad apostolos ac per hoc ad omnes praepositos qui apostolis vicaria ordinatione succedunt: Qui audit vos, me audit . . . qui reicit vos, me reicit . . . Unde enim schismata et haereses obortae sunt et oriuntur? dum episcopus qui unus est et ecclesiae praeest superba quorundam praesumptione contemnitur et homo dignatione Dei honoratus indignus hominibus iudicatur.' Ep. xxxiii. 1: Dominus noster, cuius praecepta metuere et servare debemus, episcopi honorem et ecclesiae suae rationem disponens in evangelio loquitur et dicit Petro: Ego tibi dico quia tu es Petrus, et super istam petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam, et portae inferorum non vincent eam, et tibi dabo claves regni caelorum, et quae ligaveris etc.... Inde per temporum et successionum vices episcoporum ordinatio et ecclesiae ratio decurrit, ut ecclesia super episcopos constituatur et omnis actus ecclesiae per eosdem praepositos gubernetur. Cum hoc ita divina lege fundatum sit, miror quosdam audaci temeritate sic mihi scribere voluisse ut ecclesiae nomine litteras facerent, quando ecclesia in episcopo et clero et in omnibus stantibus sit constituta.'

As having this plenitude of the priesthood, the word sacerdos is generally used of the bishop; but the presbyter also has sacerdotal powers. Cyprian speaks of our Lord as adorning the body of the presbyterate with glorious priests,' when the presbyter and confessor Numidicus was enrolled among the Carthaginian clergy (Ep. xl.). Cyprian did not draw out the analogy of bishop, priest, and deacon to highpriest, priest, and Levite of the O.T. See Benson's Cyprian (Macmillan, 1897)

PP. 31-41.

honour and power.' But the apostolate, which was finally given to all equally, was given first to St. Peter, that by its being given first to one man, there might be emphasized for ever the unity which Christ willed to exist among the distinct branches or portions of His Church. The episcopate which belongs to each bishop belongs to him as one of a great brotherhood linked by manifold ties into a corporate unity.2

A bishop stands, then, in various relations to the Church. In virtue of his election he represents his flock: he is a part of the church and in a sense responsible to it and stands in a certain constitutional, though not clearly defined, relation to his presbyterate and the clergy generally. They are his recognised council, advisers, co-operators; he does nothing without consulting them.4 But over and above this he represents divine authority. He is divinely appointed; he has not taken his honour upon himself.5 Moreover, in the exercise of his

de Unit. Eccles. 4: Loquitur Dominus ad Petrum: Ego tibi dico, inquit, quia tu es Petrus etc. . . . Super unum aedificat ecclesiam, et quamvis apostolis omnibus post resurrectionem suam parem potestatem tribuat et dicat: Sicut misit me Pater et ego mitto vos: accipite etc. ... tamen ut unitatem manifestaret, unitatis eiusdem originem ab uno incipientem sua auctoritate disposuit. Hoc erant utique et ceteri apostoli quod fuit Petrus, pari consortio praediti et honoris et potestatis, sed exordium ab unitate proficiscitur, ut ecclesia Christi una monstretur. Quam unam ecclesiam etiam in Cantico Canticorum Spiritus sanctus ex persona Domini designat et dicit: Una est columba mea.' ib. 5: Episcopatus unus est, cuius a singulis in solidum pars tenetur,' i.e. in such a way that each has the responsibility of the whole; the whole is in each.

Ep. lv. 24: 'Cum sit a Christo una ecclesia per totum mundum in multa membra divisa, item episcopatus unus episcoporum multorum concordi numerositate

diffusus.'

3 'Ecclesiam in episcopo esse,' Ep. lxvi. 8: cf. Ep. lv. 5, and Dict. Chr. Biog. i. p. 741.

See above p. 89, and also Cyprian's letters to his presbyters, when in retirement, explaining the grounds on which he had ordained to the clergy without consultation; Ep. xxxviii. 1: In ordinationibus clericis, fratres carissimi, solemus vos ante consulere et mores ac merita singulorum communi consilio ponderare.' Ep. xxx. 5 collatione consiliorum cum episcopis, presbyteris, diaconis, confessoribus pariter ac stantibus laicis.' See Epp. xxix.; lxvii. 5.

Ep. lxx. 3: 'Secundum [Domini] dignationem sacerdotium eius in eoclesia administramus.' Ep. lix. 5: Existimat aliquis summa et magna aut non sciente aut non permittente Deo in ecclesia Dei fieri, et sacerdotes, id est dispensatores eius, erunt non de eius sententia ordinati?... Plane episcopi non de voluntate Dei fiunt, sed qui extra ecclesiam fiunt.'

authority, he is responsible to no man outside his church but to God only. Cyprian does not explain, in connexion with this position, the meaning of the provincial council of which he made so much use. Presumably the provincial council has a certain authority over the individual bishop,1 but none the less the independence of each bishop is asserted by Cyprian with unrestricted completeness.

His respect for the see of Rome, as being in a special historical sense-what every episcopate is essentially, as possessing the same authority-the see of Peter, will not go to the length of allowing it any jurisdiction over other churches. It may be in a special way the symbol of unity, as Peter was among the Apostles, but it is nothing more.3

1 When a certain African bishop Therapius received back a lapsed presbyter into communion before the conditions laid down by conciliar authority, 'decreti nostri auctoritate,' had been satisfied, Cyprian and his colleagues in council content themselves with rebuking the bishop, obiurgare,' and directing him to do nothing of the kind in future, but they do not refuse communion to the presbyter thus improperly restored: Ep. lxiv. 1. St. Augustin expresses the gradations in the authority of bishop and of local and plenary' church councils in de Bapt. v. 22 [30].

Ep. lxxii. 3: Qua in re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus aut legem damus, quando habeat in ecclesiae administratione voluntatis suae arbitrium liberum unusquisque praepositus, rationem actus sui Domino redditurus.' Ep. lxxiii. 26: nemini praescribentes aut praeiudicantes, quominus unusquisque episcoporum quod putat faciat, habens arbitrii sui liberam potestatem.'

It is locus Petri,'' Petri cathedra, ecclesia principalis, unde unitas sacerdotalis exorta est' (Epp. lv. 8, lix. 14). By these last words he means probably that the African succession came from Rome (so Puller Primitive Saints and the See of Rome' p. 32). He goes on to assert the independent jurisdiction of each episcopate. Cf. Jerome Ep. cxlvi. ad Evangelum: 'Ubicumque fuerit episcopus sive Romae, sive Eugubii, sive Constantinopoli, sive Rhegii, sive Alexandriae, sive Tanis, eiusdem meriti, eiusdem est et sacerdotii. Potentia divitiarum et paupertatis humilitas vel sublimiorem vel inferiorem episcopum non facit. Ceterum omnes apostolorum successores

sunt.'

It is not the place here to discuss what effect this conception of the see of Peter, as in a special way the symbol and centre of unity, had on the development of Petrine claims. The conception reappears in the later Africans, St. Optatus of Mileum (de Schism. Don. ii. 2, vii. 3-with a more 'papal' tone, but cf. vi. 3) and St. Augustin; see ABCDarium (⇒Psalmus contra partem Donati) 1. 229: ⚫ Numerate sacerdotes vel ab ipsa Petri sede'; c. epistolam Manichaei 4: 'Multa sunt alia quae in [ecclesiae catholicae] gremio me iustissime teneant. . . tenet ab ipsa sede Petri apostoli, cui pascendas oves suas post resurrectionem Dominus commendavit, usque ad praesentem episcopatum successio sacerdotum.' Elsewhere he speaks of all the Apostles as the source of the succession: ecclesia ab ipso Christo` inchoata et per apostolos provecta certa successionum serie usque ad haec tempora, toto terrarum orbe dilatata. . . ecclesia, quae ab ipso per apostolos succedentibus sibimet episcopis usque ad haec tempora propagata dilatatur' (c. Faustum xxviii. 2, 4).

Lucifer,
C. A.D. 360;

Ambrosiaster, Jerome,

This is the theory of the episcopate into which St. Cyprian poured all the force of his great character, all the dignity of his strong holiness, to make it a living reality. He stands out in church history as the typical bishop, and with his weighty sentences he impressed on the episcopal theory an abiding form. Next to Cyprian, it will be well to quote a vivid expression of the principle of the succession from a bishop of Cagliari in Sardinia-that Lucifer who was Athanasius' friend, but whose impatience and violence led him at last into being the founder of a schismatical body. He is addressing Constantius the emperor out of his place of exile in Palestine. and speaking of his nobler friend Athanasius.1

'You persecute the man,' he says, 'whom you ought to listen to. While he is still alive, you send to succeed him that George who is your partner in heresy, when, even if Athanasius had been set free from the body, it was not lawful for you to send any one, but it was and is in God's hand to appoint whom He thought proper as bishop of His people, and that through His servants the catholic bishops. For no man can be filled with the power of the Holy Ghost to govern God's people, save he whom God has chosen, and on whom hands have been laid by the catholic bishops, just as, when Moses was dead, we find his successor Joshua, the son of Nun, filled with the Holy Ghost; because, says Scripture, Moses had laid his hands upon him.'2

Now we approach an interesting class of writings etc., C. A.D. which represent a tendency in the western Church to minimize the position of the episcopate. There are,

370-400.

1 Whether he was himself ever actually separated from the Church is doubtful; see Dict. Chr. Biog. s.v. LUCIFER. His writings date from his exile.

2 de S. Athan. 1. 9: 'Persequeris eum per quem te audire praeceperit Dominus; agente eo in rebus humanis cohaereticum tuum Georgium mittis successorem, cum, tametsi fuisset liberatus iam Athanasius ex corpore, tibi non licuerit mittere, sed fuerit ac sit in Dei manu quem fuisset dignatus populo suo antistitem instituere per servos videlicet suos, hoc est catholicos episcopos. Neque enim posset impleri virtute Spiritus sancti ad Dei gubernandum populum nisi is quem Deus allegisset cuique manus per catholicos episcopos fuisset imposita, sicut defuncto Moyse impletum Spiritu sancto invenimus successorem eius Iesum Naue. Loquitur scriptura sancta dicens: Et Iesus filius Naue impletus est spiritu intellegentiae; imposuerat enim Moyses manum super eum ; et audierunt eum filii Israel et fecerunt secundum quod mandavit Dominus Moysi. Conspicis ordinationi Dei te obviam isse contra Dei faciendo voluntatem, temet mucrone gladii tui iugulatum, siquidem non licuerit ordinari nisi fuisset defunctus Athanasius, et defuncto Athanasio catholicus debuerit per catholicos ordinari episcopos.'