a

to be approved by them. Tillemont here observes, that Pacatus was a heathen, and in what he says of Euchrocia, he only has an eye to the exterior profession which the Priscillianists made, of a very austere and retired course of life. Very right. This was their profession. Therefore their master had not taught them obscene doctrines, nor set them an example of extravagant indecency, by frequently praying naked with lewd women.

(4.) After the executions were over, Ithacius was often blamed in conversation; and to excuse himself he would say, that he had acted according to the direction of others: which is not unlikely. And it looks as if Sulpicius could have named some of them; but he judged it more prudent not to do so.

(5.) When Maximus had been put to death in 388, Ithacius and his party lost their principal support; and Ithacius was soon afterwards deposed. Prosper in his Chronicle, at the year next after that in which Maximus lost his life, says, that Ithacius and Ursacius were deprived of the communion of the church, on account of the death of Priscillian, whose accusers they had been.' And Isidore of Seville, as before quoted, says, that Idacius, together with Ursacius, was deprived of the communion of the church, and sent into banishment, where he died. But Sulpicius says, that' Ithacius was the only bishop that was deposed upon this account. He adds, Nardacius, though less guilty, of his own accord resigned his bishopric; which might be said to have been wisely, and modestly done, if he had not endeavoured to recover his lost station.' Who is this Nardacius, and who Ursacius, mentioned by Prosper and Isidore, is not certain. As Ursacius is never mentioned by Sulpicius, nor Nardacius any where else by him, some have thought, that hereby is meant Idacius. On the other hand, as many bishops had some concern in this affair and Idacius has not been mentioned lately by Sulpicius, Nardacius may be reckoned a different person. However that be, I suppose Sulpicius ought to be relied upon, that Ithacius only was now deposed.

(6.) Another thing, as I apprehend, manifesting the different judgments of men concerning this affair, is what Sulpicius says at the conclusion of his narration, of the perpetual feuds and contentions, which there had been among the catholics in Gaul for fifteen years past, from the time of those executions to the time of his finishing his history, in the year of our Lord 400. There were very few Priscillianists in Gaul; the divisions betwixt the bishops and other Christians in that country were owing, therefore, as seems probable, to different sentiments concerning this affair. Some vindicated the proceedings against Priscillian and his followers, others blamed them; and these disputes ran so high, that sometimes they could scarce communicate with one another. Ambrose, in the year 392, said he had been oftentimes hindered from going into Gaul by the frequent divisions of the bishops there.

(7.) There are two councils, whose debates may probably afford some further light in this affair. The first is the council of Saragossa, mentioned by Sulpicius, and supposed to have been held in 380, or 381: in the decrees of this council several things are condemned; as fasting on the Lord's day, and some other days usually reckoned festivals by the catholics; absenting

C'est un Payen qui parle, et qui ne s' arrête qu'à la profession extérieure que faisoient les Priscillianistes d'une vie plus austère, et plus retirée. Les Priscill. Art. x. T. viii.

b Quod initio jure judiciorum et egregio publico defensum, postea Ithacius in jurgiis solitus, ad postremum convictus, in eos retorquebat, quorum id mandato et consiliis effecerat. H. S. 1. ii. c. 51. p. 391.

с

• Maximus Imperator, alias sane bonus, depravatus consiliis sacerdotum, post Priscilliani necem, Ithacium episcopum, Priscilliani accusatorem, cæterosque illius socios, quos nominari non est necesse, vi regiâ tuebatur, ne quis ei crimini daret, operâ illius cujuscumque modi hominem fuisse damnatum, -Congregati apud Treviros episcopi tenebantur, qui quotidie communicantes Ithacio communem sibi caussam fecerant. Dial. 3. cap. xi. in.

Ithacius et Ursacius Episcopi ob necem Priscilliani, cujus accusatores fuerant, Ecclesiæ communione privantur. Prosp. p. 389. Ap. Scalig. Thes. Temp.

e

• See note p. 498.

ad postremum convictus, in eos retorquebat, quorum id mandato et consiliis effecerat. Solus tamen omnium episcopatu detrusus. Nardacius, [f. Nam Idacius, Vorst.']

h

licet minus nocens, sponte se episcopatu abdicaverat. Sapienter id, et verecunde, nisi postea amissum locum repetere tentâsset. H. S. 1. ii. c. 5. p. 392.

propter quorum frequentes dissensiones crebo me excusaveram. De Obitu Valentin. n. 25. T. ii. p. 1181.

" Item Legit: ne quis jejunet Die Dominico.-Item legit: Eucharistiæ gratiam si quis probatur in ecclesiâ non consumsisse, anathema sit in perpetuum.Item legit: Viginti et uno die, quo a 16 Kalendas Januarii usque in diem Ephiphaniæ, quæ est 8. Idus Januarii, continuis diebus, nulli liceat de ecclesia se absentare, nec latere in domibus, nec secedere ad villam, nec montes petere, nec nudis pedibus incedere, sed concurrere ad ecclesiam.-Item lectum est, ut hi per discipli nam, aut sententiam episcopi ab ecclesiâ fuerint separati, ab aliis episcopis non sint recipiendi. Item legit: si quis de clericis propter luxum, vanitatemque præsumtam, de officio sponte discesserit, ac velut observatorem legis monachum voluerit esse magis quam clericum, ita de ecclesiâ repellendum.Item lectum est: Ne quis doctoris sibi nomen imponat, præter has personas, quibus concessum est.Cæsaraugust. Ap. Labb. T. ii. p. 1009, 1010.

Concil.

from church on these days; assembling in private houses and country places; receiving the eucharist, without consuming it [or swallowing it] at church; going barefoot; taking upon them the character of teachers, without authority; referring perhaps to Agape, Elpidius, and Priscillian, who was yet a layman: bishops receiving those who had been excommunicated; clergymen leaving their stations, and betaking themselves to a retired monastic kind of life, because of the luxury, or other faults observable among ecclesiastics. These, and some other such like things are forbidden, which may be reckoned erroneous or irregular. Here are no sentences of condemnation upon those who teach obscene doctrines, and practise gross indecencies; but here are intimations of pretensions to more than ordinary strictness and mortification. And, if I mistake not, the decrees of this council, and their silence about the shameful things imputed to Priscillian at his trial, very much confirm the conjecture formerly proposed to be considered; that no such things had been heard of, till they were invented by Ithacius, and others who, when once they had begun to prosecute Priscillian before the civil magistrate, were too intent upon victory, as Sulpicius observed, and without any regard to truth, forged calumnies, and heaped upon him reproaches of infamous actions, till they gained their end, and had him

executed.

a

C

b

The other council was held at Toledo, in the year 400, or thereabout; of which a sufficient account may be seen in several authors, so far as relates to this affair. Here were reconciled to the church Symphosius and Dictinius, noted Priscillianists, and several others of that sect. It seems, that they two had been with Ambrose at Milan, to entreat his favourable interposition in their behalf: if that is not certain, it is however manifest, that Ambrose became their mediator, and proposed terms upon which they might be received. Ambrose died in 397. Why the affair was deferred is not known: but it appears from the acts of the council, that Simplician had then succeeded him in the see of Milan. Ambrose had proposed, that they should be received to the peace of the church upon retracting their errors, and confessing the faults which they had been guilty of; and they were now received. Symphosius's Priscillianism had many aggravations; he seems to have been a follower of Priscillian from the beginning, and to have declined the judgment of the council of Saragossa in 380. Moreover, the terms proposed by Ambrose were, that for the present all should abide in the stations they were in, without alteration. Nevertheless, in the mean time, before those terms were accepted and executed, Symphosius had ordained Dictinius bishop, who before was only presbyter; which, he said, had been extorted from him by the importunate requests of the people. Symphosius likewise, or he and Dictinius together, had lately ordained in the vacant sees of the province of Galicia several bishops, who were in the Priscillianist scheme. In particular they had ordained Paternus bishop of Braga, the chief city of Galicia: who, however, now renounced Priscillianism before the council, having been convinced of his error, he said, since his ordination, by reading the works of Ambrose bishop of Milan.

Dictinius had been a forward Priscillianist; he had written several books much esteemed by the sect; particularly a book called Libra, the Pound, consisting of twelve parts or arguments, as the Roman pound had twelve ounces. Augustine Augustine speaks of him and his book. I have put

a Baron. Ann. 405. n. xliii.-lix. Pagi Crit. in Baron. Ann. 405. n. xi.-xvii. Tillemont Les Priscillian. art. xiv. -xvii. T. viii. Beausobr. Diss. sur les Adamites. Part. ii. p. 377-379.

Arduum nobis esset audire jam dictos. Literis tamen sanctæ memoriæ Ambrosii, quas post illud concilium ad nos miserat, Ut si condemnâssent quæ perperam egerant, et implêssent conditiones, quas præscriptæ literæ continebant, reverterentur ad pacem, [adde, quæ sanctæ memoriæ Siricius Papa suasisset] magnam nos constat præstitisse patientiam. Conc. Tolet. i. ap. Labbe, T. ii. p. 1230.

C

e Etsi diu deliberantibus verum, post Cæsaraugustanum Concilium, in quo sententia in certos quosque dicta fuerat, solâ tamen unâ die, præsente Symphosio, qui postmodum declinando sententiam præsens audire contemserat. Ibid.

In Synodo Cæsaraugustanâ, anno 381 adversus Priscillianum coactâ; cujus judicium declinâsse dicitur Symphosius in sententiâ Toletana i. Synodo, se subducens. Pagi Aun. 405. n. xiii.

d Cæterum extortum sibi de multitudine plebis, probaret

e

Symphosius, ut ordinaret Dictinium Episcopum, quem sanc tus Ambrosius decrevisset bonæ pacis locum tenere presbyterii, non accipere honoris augmentum. Confitentur etiam illud, quod alios per diversas ecclesias ordinâssent, quibus deerant sacerdotes; habentes hanc fiduciam, quod cum illis propemodum totius Gallicia sentiret plebium multitudo. Ex quibus ordinatus est Paternus Bracarensis ecclesiæ episcopus. In hanc vocem confessionis primus erupit, et sectam Priscilliani se scîsse, sed factum episcopum liberatum se ab eâ lectione librorum S. Ambrosii esse juraret. Conc. Tol. i. ibid.

e et Dictinii Episcopi—famam laudare mordaciter. Est hoc tolerabilius adhuc, quia ille putatur fuisse catholicus, atque ex illo errore correctus-cum deinde Dictinii librum, cujus nomen est Libra, eo quod pertractatis duodecim quæstionibus, velut unciis explicatur, tantis extulerit laudibus, ut talem libram-multis librarum auri millibus pretiosiorem esse testetur. Contr. Mendac. ad Consent. cap. 3. n. 5. T. vi.

Quæ cum ita sint, quoniam nimis longum est omnia pertractare quæ in illâ Librâ Dictinii sunt posita, velut imitanda, exempla mentiendi. Ibid. cap. 17. n. 35. Vid. et cap.21.n.41.

some of his passages, where he speaks of them, in the margin. Pope Leo likewise speaks of Dictinius. He complains of the Priscillianists, that they still read his writings, and followed his errors, though he had renounced them.

b

These two learned Priscillianist bishops, and leading men among them, Symphosius and Dictinius, were received by the catholics in the council of Toledo, upon abjuring their former errors, embraced by them, or advanced and promoted by them in their discourses or writings, Their form of renunciation and confession I have placed below somewhat at large. Now likewise was received Comasius, presbyter under Symphosius; his confession is in the passage just transcribed. Isonius was also now received upon confession, who had lately been baptized, and ordained bishop by Symphosius. In like manner Vegetinus, who had been bishop before the council of Saragossa.

с

d

From the reception of these ecclesiastics by the council, ariseth a strong argument, that the Priscillianists were not guilty of the evil practices laid to the charge of Priscillian, and generally imputed to Gnostics: if they had, they would not have been received upon renouncing their former errors: if that had been the case, I suppose they would have been deposed, and put into a state of penance, and declared incapable of ever holding any office in the church.

с

I would just take notice of one thing more, mentioned in the account of the acts of this council, relating to Herenas bishop of some place in Spain: that all his clergy in general, without being asked, cried out aloud before the council, that Priscillian was a catholic and a holy martyr. Herenas himself likewise said the same, and that Priscillian had suffered persecution from the bishops of his time. Which judgment of his, the bishops of the council said, was a reflection upon many holy men, some deceased, others still living: they therefore declared Herenas, and his clergy, and divers other bishops adhering to him in that sentiment, to be deposed from their offices.

This serves to satisfy us of two things: First, that about thirteen or fourteen years after the event, the Priscillianists (and, it is likely, many others) were of opinion, that Priscillian had been falsely accused, and unjustly put to death. Secondly, it shews, that lewd principles and practices were no part of their religion: but they disapproved them, and reckoned the imputation of them to any man to be reproachful and dishonourable.

(8.) Once more, the testimony of Jerom in favour of Priscillian is not unworthy of our regard: for in his book of Illustrious Men, as cited at the beginning of this chapter, he says, that by means of the faction of Idacius and Ithacius, Priscillian had been put to death at Treves; that 'to that day he was accused by some as having been of the Gnostic heresy; whilst others defended him, saying, that he did not hold the opinions which had been imputed to him.' And in the next chapter he gives an account of Latronian and Tiberian of Bætica, two followers of Priscillian, and particularly commends the former for his learning and poetical writings. It is true, in

• Postremo autem capitulo hoc prodidit justâ querimoniâ, quod Dictinii tractatus, quos secundum Priscilliani dogma conscripsit, a multis cuin veneratione legerentur: cum, si aliquid memoriæ Dictinii tribuendum putant, reparationem ejus magis debeant amare quam lapsum. Non ergo Dictinium, sed Priscillianum legunt; et illud probant quod errans docuit, non quod correctus elegit. Leon. Ep. 15. cap. xvi. al. ep. 93. b Symphosius dixit: Juxta id quod paulo ante lectum est, in membranâ nescio quâ, in quâ dicebatur Filius innascibilis, hanc ego doctrinam, quæ aut duo principia dicit, aut Filium innascibilem, cum ipso auctore damno, qui scripsit.- Item dixit: Omnes libros hæreticos, et maxime Priscilliani doctrinam, juxta quod hodie lectum est, ubi innascibilem Filium scripsisse dicitur, cum ipso auctore damno. Comasius Presbyter dixit: Nemo dubitet, me cum domino meo episcopo sentire, et omnia damnare quæ damnavit, et nihil ejus præferre sapientiae, nisi solum Deum.-Dictinius Episcopus dixit: Sequor sententiam domini mei, et patris mei, et genitoris et doctoris mei Symphosii. Quæcumque locutus est loquor. Et idcirco omnia quæ Priscillianus aut male docuit, aut male scripsit, cum ipso auctore condemno. Ibid. p. 1229.

Post aliquanta.Dictinius episcopus dixit: Audite me, optimi sacerdotes. Corrigite omnia.- -Hoc enim in me reprehendo, quod dixerim unam Dei et hominis esse naturam.

Item dixit: Ego non solum correctionem vestram rogo, sed et omnem præsumtionem meam de scriptis meis arguo atque condemno.- -Item dixit:- -Quæcumque conscripsi, omnia me toto corde respuere. In ead. pag. sub in.

с

Item Isonius nuper baptizatum se a Symphosio, et episcopum factum, hoc se tenere, quod in præsenti concilio Symphosius professus est, respondit. Ibid. p. 1230.

Vegetinus vero, olim ante Cæsaraugustanum concilium Episcopus factus, similiter libros Priscilliani cum auctore damnaverat, ut de cæteris acta testantur. Ibid.

Vegetinum autem, in quem nulla specialiter dicta fuerat ante sententia, datâ professione, quam synodus accepit, statuimus communioui nostræ esse reddendum. Ib. p. 1231. in.

• Herenas clericos suos sequi maluerat, qui sponte, nec interrogati, Priscillianum catholicum, sanctumque Martyrem clâmassent; atque ipse usque ad finem catholicum hunc esse dixisset, persecutionem ab episcopis passum. Quo dicto omnes sanctos, jam plurimos quiescentes, aliquos hac luce durantes, suo judicio deduxerit in reatum. Hunc cum his omnibus, tam suis clericis, quam diversis episcopis, hoc est, Donato, Acurio, Emilio; qui ab eorum professione recedentes maluissent sequi consortium perditorum, decernimus ab sacerdotio submo vendum. Ib. p. 1230, 1231.

a

another work, written about the year 415, he says, that Priscillian had been condemned by the civil magistrate, and by the judgment of all the world: which has led some to say, that Jerom was now better informed concerning the Priscillianists, than when he wrote the former work in 392. But, as Quenell says, Jerom could not be then ignorant of the affairs of the church. That learned man therefore would suppose, that the chapter in the book of Illustrious Men had been interpolated. To which Du Pin well answers, that conjecture, though unsupported by any manuscript, might have been of some moment, if it were not well known, that Jerom has oftentimes spoken very differently of one and the same person. The case, I think, is this: in the book of Illustrious Men he writes with the calmness of an historian; in the other he is out of humour and writes in the heat of controversy. We may then be well assured, that in the year 392, when Jerom wrote his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers, there were different opinions among men concerning Priscillian; and that there were some, who did not allow him to have held the opinions imputed to him, or to have been guilty of the crimes laid to his charge.

We may therefore, I think, after this long discussion of the affair, and after weighing what can be said on both sides, assent to the judgment of that wise and good man, Martin, bishop of Tours, who lived at that time, who was several times at the court of Maximus, before and after the trial of Priscillian, and was well acquainted with the bishops chiefly concerned in that prosecution. He said, 'It was sufficient, and more than sufficient, that being convicted of heresy by the bishops, they should be turned out of the church.' And when that was done, I presume, they ought to have been allowed to live quietly in the world, and to worship God in separate assemblies, in their own way, under the protection of the civil government. Which likewise may be supposed to have been Martin's intention: for, as it seems, neither he, nor his disciple and historian Sulpicius, approved, that magistrates should interpose in things of religion. They therefore did not like, that civil penalties should be inflicted upon erroneous Christians, but only church-censures: and it is likely, that they judged this method to be most conducive to the interests of religious truth. They hoped, that by such censures, men might be awakened to consideration; and that by reasons and arguments, calmly proposed, they who had been seduced, might be convinced of their error, brought back to the catholic church, and to the acknowledgement of the right faith.

VIII. Hitherto we have chiefly considered the origin of this sect, and the history of its author, and his first followers, with their sufferings, as related by Sulpicius, who has given but a very general account of their opinions. And it may be expected, that some farther notice should be taken of these by us.

с

d

1. There is no account of this sect in Epiphanius. Fabricius indeed has referred us for a knowledge of them to Epiphanius and Damascenus; but it is a mistake of that excellent man, through haste. Epiphanius speaks there only of the Montanists, sometimes called Priscillians from Priscilla, one of Montanus's prophetesses; and Damascenus's article in the place referred to is only Epiphanius's summary or recapitulation. Quesnell says, Epiphanius takes no notice of this sect. The reason, he thinks, may be, that he did not distinguish it from the Gnostic or Manichæan, with whom the Priscillianists very much agreed. But I should think that there is another very obvious reason of Epipanius's silence, and more likely to be the true reason: which is, that this sect did not become famous, till after Epiphanius had finished his work. Nor are they expressly mentioned by Philaster; whether he has quite omitted them, will be considered hereafter. However, there are several writers, which may be of use to us, beside Sulpicius Severus, the historian already transcribed: Augustine has a long article concerning them in his book Of Heresies; Orosius, of Spain, sent or delivered to Augustine a Memoir or Commonitorium relating to them. And other writers have mentioned them.

2. Augustine at the beginning of his article concerning them, which I transcribe below, says, • The' Priscillianists, followers of Priscillian of Spain, have a mixture of the doctrines of the • Gnostics and Manichees, together with errors borrowed likewise from other heresies.'

3. Let that suffice for his general character of this people. I shall now add some particulars though not in the order in which they lie in Augustine.

a

4. I therefore in the first place observe their opinion concerning the scriptures. In which respect,' he says, they are more cunning than the Manichees; for they reject not any part of the canonical scriptures, but receive them all, and endeavour to support themselves by their authority. And when any texts are alleged against them, they strive to evade them by allegorical interpretations. They likewise use apocryphal scriptures, and argue from them in favour • of their opinions.'

5. And in divers places, Augustine speaks to the like purpose, saying, that they received all the canonical scriptures entire; using also apocryphal books. And says, whatever is alleged against them from scripture, they evade sometimes by cunning and artful, at other times by ridiculous and stupid interpretations. He also observes, that they had a hymn, said by them to be the hymn which Christ sung at the last supper with the disciples. He moreover says, that hymn was to be found in apocryphal scriptures, not peculiar to the Priscillianists, but used by other heretics likewise. A main part, if not the whole of that hymn, may be seen in Augustine's letter to Ceretius just quoted. What respect they had for that, or other apocryphal scriptures, is not very clear; there does not appear any thing heterodox in that hymn; they owned it was not in the canonical scriptures, and they explained it by them, and agreeably to them.

d

6. Orosius, Augustine's friend, and of Spain, says, that the Priscillianists, differing from the Manichees, endeavour to support their doctrine by the scriptures of the Old, as well as of the New Testament. He also says, they had a book entitled the Memoir, or Memoirs of the Apostles in which, possibly, the above-mentioned hymn was inserted.

7. Priscillian is one of those heretics, who, as Vincent of Lerins says, in almost every page of their works insert quotations of the books of the Old or New Testament.

i

8. Pope Leo, with a partiality well becoming a man that uses authority in things of religion, and loves to make the worst of every thing relating to those called heretics, says, the Priscillianists pretend to receive the books of the Old Testament. However, he cannot deny, but that therein they differ from the Manichees. As for their apocryphal books, he not only prohibits them, but directs also, that they should be sought for, and burnt.

9. Turibius bishop of Astorga in Spain, who is supposed to have flourished about the year 447, speaks of their using apocryphal scriptures, the same with those used by the Manichees;

m

Maxime Gnosticorum et Manichæorum dogmata permixta sectantur. Quamvis et ex aliis hæresibus in eos sordes, tamquam in sentinam quamdam, horribili confusione confluxerint. De Hær. cap. 70. T. viii.

2 Hoc versutiores etiam Manichæis, quod nihil Scripturarum Canonicarum repudiant, simul cum Apocryphis legentes omnia, et in auctoritatem sumentes, sed, in suos sensus allegorizando, vertentes quidquid in sanctis libris est, quod eorum evertat errorem. Ibid.

b Priscillianistæ vero accipiunt omnia et canonica et apocrypha simul. Sed quæcumque, quæ contra eos sunt, in suæ perversitatis sensus aliquando callidâ et astutâ, aliquando ridiculâ et hebeti expositione pervertunt. Ad Ceret. ep. 237. n. 3. T. ii.

с

Et hoc ipsum confirmant ex libro quodam, qui inscribitur Memoria Apostolorum: ubi Salvator interrogari a discipulis videtur secreto, et ostendere, quia de parabolâ Evangelicâ, quæ habet: Exiit seminans seminare semen suum.' [Matt. xiii. 3.] Ibid.

Lege Pauli Samosateni opuscula, Priscilliani, Eunomii, Joviniani, reliquarumque pestium: cernas infinitam exemplorum congeriem, prope nullam omitti paginam, quæ non Novi aut Veteris Testamenti sententiis fucata et colorata sit. Vincent. Comm. p. 356. Paris. 1669.

i —Quia etsi Vetus Testamentum, quod isti se suscipere simulant, Manichæi refutant, ad unum tamen finem utrorumque tendit intentio; cum quod isti abdicando impugnant, isti recipiendo corrumpunt. Ad Turib. ep. 15. cap. 16. p. 230.

k Hymnus sane, quem dicunt esse Domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui maxime permovit venerationem tuam, in scripturis solet apocryphis inveniri. Quæ non proprie Priscillianistarum sunt, sed alii quoque hæretici eis nonnullarum sectarum impietate vanitatis utuntur, inter se quidem diversa sentientes:

sed scripturas istas habent in suâ diversitate communes, easque illi præcipue frequentare assolent, qui Legem veterem et Prophetas non recipiunt. Ibid. n. 2.

d Habes verba eorum in illo codice ita posita: Hymnus Domini, quem dixit secrete sanctis Apostolis discipulis suis, quia scriptum est in Evangelio: Hymno dicto adscendit in montem.'[Matt. xxvi. 30.] Ibid. n 4.

• Deinde, quid caussa est, ut eumdem hymnum isti secundum scripturas canonicas conentur exponere? Ibid. n. 5.

Priscillianus, primum in eo Manichæis miserior, quod ex Veteri quoque Testamento hæresim confirmavit. Oros. Comm. ad Augustin. n. 2. T. viii.

Apocryphæ autem scripturæ, quæ sub nominibus Apostolorum multarum habent seminarium falsitatum, non solum interdicendæ, sed etiam penitus auferendæ sunt, atque ignibus concremandæ. Quamvis enim sint in illis quædam, quæ videantur speciem habere pietatis, numquam tamen vacua sunt venenis, et per fabularum illecebras hoc latenter operantur, ut mirabilium narratione seductos laqueis cujuscumque erroris involvant. Ibid. cap. 15.

Vid. Cav. H. L. T. i. p. 440. et Tillemont. S. Leon, art. xvii.—xix. Tom. xv.

specialiter autem Actus illos, qui vocantur S. Andrea; vel illos, qui appellantur S. Joannis, quos sacrilego Leucius ore conscripsit; vel illos, qui dicuntur S. Thomæ, et his similia; ex quibus Manichæi, et Priscillianista, vel quæcumque illis est secta germana, omnem hæresim suam confirmare nituntur ; et maxime ex blasphemissimo illo libro, qui vocatur Memoria Apostolorum, in quo ad magnam perversi