Saint Bartholomew the Apostle: A Brief Statement

Saint Bartholomew the Apostle

SENTENTIA BREVIS

QUAM SUB NOMINE BARTHOLOMEI APOSTOLI AFFERT S. DIONYSIUS AREOPAGITA. (De mystica theologia. cap. 1, Opp. tom. I, ed. Corderii, Venetiis, 1755, in-folio, pag. 544.)

Thus, then, the divine Bartholomew says: "Both that theology is great and very small, and the Gospel is broad and great, and again, is concise."

CORDERIUS' COMMENTARY

"Thus, then, the divine Bartholomew." Whence it is gathered that Saint Bartholomew also wrote some things on theology, as it is likely the other apostles did, having been questioned by letter on divine matters and problems as occasion arose, having at least replied in writing on the same, and having handed down the most sublime oracles which they had drawn from God Himself—things which for a time, as is the custom of epistles, were preserved and shared with the Catholics, but which were later lost to the ravages of time. He says that theology is "great," that is, diffused, in that part, namely, where we arrive at the knowledge of the Creator and First Cause from creatures as effects, "from what is posterior," as the philosophers say; and this part is that of demonstrative theology, or at any rate that part which is symbolic, which, as Dionysius testifies in the following chapter, is by far the most diffuse. And he says it is "very small," that is, very brief, in that part, naturally, which is mystical, as Dionysius explains in the same place; or, surely, because God is indemonstrable *a priori*, as being lacking in anything. And the Gospel is "broad and great," namely, on account of the breadth and greatness of the things it contains; and again, "concise" or "contracted," that is (as I myself interpret it), small in mass, but greatest in meaning and perfection. Whence the Apostle (Rom. IX, 28) calls it the "abbreviated word," inasmuch as it contains the briefest precept of faith and love, which succeeded to all the intricate ceremonies of the Law. Thus Anselm and OEcumenius. Or because it contains the Word incarnate, who was abbreviated and emptied even to the nature of man, which saved the remnant of Israel.

POPE ANACLETUS

NOTICE.

Anacletus, Greek by birth, from Antioch, his father being Antiochus, sat for nine years, three months [the codex of Lucca says two], and ten days; he served, moreover, in the times of Domitian, from the tenth consulship of Domitian and Sabinus, until the consuls Domitian for the seventeenth time and Clemens. He built and composed the memorial of the blessed Peter, while he had been made presbyter under the blessed Peter, or other places where bishops might be laid for burial; where also he himself was buried in peace, near the body of the blessed Peter, on the third day before the Ides of July. He performed two ordinations, according to Platina, one in the month of December, five presbyters, three deacons, six bishops in various places. And the bishopric ceased for thirteen days.

NOTES.

(1) *Anacletus.* After an interregnum of four months and ten days, in the year of Christ 103 [102], the fourth year of the Emperor Trajan, on the third day of the month of April, Anacletus, having achieved the supreme pontificate of the Christian religion, celebrated for many things done in an excellent manner, is substituted for Clement, who had been taken away by martyrdom. That the *Liber Pontificalis* writes in the *Life of Clement* that the bishopric of the Roman Church ceased for twenty-one days is scarcely credible, since in so short a space of time the martyrdom of Clement, which took place in Chersonesus across the Pontus, could not have been reported to Rome. Baronius, year 102, no. 2, and the following year, no. 2. Whence it happens that Anacletus is placed by Tertullian before Clement, but is omitted entirely by Epiphanius in his (Book of) Heresies, 27, we have already said in the annotations to the *Life of Clement*. Sev. Binius.

(2) *He served, moreover, in the times of Domitian.* The variety and inconsistency of the *Liber Pontificalis* are remarkable: since above it wrote that Clement, the predecessor of Anacletus, was taken from life in the third year of Trajan, Anacletus could not have sat under Domitian, but more truly under Trajan. Idem.

(3) *From the consulship of Domitian X and Sabinus until the consulship of Domitian XVII.* A new error of the author. If Anacletus held the pontificate under the consulships noted, he would have had to precede Clement, or rather, to have sat at the same time as Cletus and Clement. For the tenth consulship of Domitian coincides with the year of Christ 86 [84], the first year of the Emperor Domitian. But the seventeenth of his same consulship coincides with the year of Christ 94 [92], the eleventh year of the Emperor Domitian. Since, therefore, Clement, the predecessor of this Anacletus, died in the third year of the Emperor Trajan, both in life and in his pontificate, as beyond the author of this book, Jerome and Eusebius testify in the places noted above, I do not see in what way it can be said that Anacletus administered the pontifical chair before the reign of Trajan.

(4) *And composed.* By the "memorial of the blessed Peter," understand a certain structure of a building constructed on the Vatican by Anacletus while he was still a presbyter, which antiquity was accustomed to call a church. For St. Augustine also, *De civit. Dei*, book XXII, ch. 10, says: "We do not build to our martyrs temples, as to gods, but memorials, as to dead men, whose spirits live with God." This, the ancient theologian Caius, who flourished in the time of Pope Zephyrinus, according to Eusebius, *History*, book III, c. 24, rightly calls "trophies" (*tropæa*), as they represent the victories of the apostles over the enemies they subdued. His words in Eusebius in the aforementioned place are these: "I can clearly point out the trophies of the apostles; for if you are pleased to go to the Vatican, or to the way which is called the Ostian, you will find the trophies of those who stabilized this Church by their speech and virtue." That this distinguished and illustrious memorial was not cast down by the storm of persecution, but rather increased in glory every single day, surpasses all admiration. Baronius, year 106, n. 2 and 3. Those of Magdeburg, who for this reason criticize Anacletus, are noted for calumny by Bellarmine, *De Romano pontifice*, book IV, ch. 8. Idem.