LETTER ON THE CASE OF BONOSUS. [A.D. 392 or 393.]

THIS letter is certainly not written by S. Ambrose, though included among his letters. The writer of it speaks of 'our brother Ambrose.' Tillemont discusses the authorship in a note, (45.) and makes it probable that it was written by Siricius.

The case of Bonosus had been brought before the Synod of Capua, and they had decided that it should be referred to the Bishops of Macedonia, under the presidency of Amysius Bishop of Thessalonica, as being his nearest neighbours. These Bishops seem to have written a letter to consult Siricius, the Bishop of Rome, and this is believed to be his reply, in which he declines to interfere with their decision, only adding a few remarks upon one point. Bonosus was Bishop of Sardica  06-5  5. b He is sometimes spoken of as Bishop of Nairsus in Dacia Mediterranea (see Note in p. 67.) but Tillemont (note 43 in Life of S. Ambrose) has made it probable that there were two Bishops of the name of Bonosus,one of Nairsus, and the other of Sardica, the latter of whom is the one dealt with by the Synod of Capua. in Illyria, and the founder of an obscure sect. They were accused of Photinianism, and Bonosus is called a fore-runner of Nestorius, but the Helvidian doctrines of which this letter speaks are the most clearly ascertained of their errors. The sect survived at least till the vith Century.

A LETTER CONCERNING THE DECIDING OF THE CASE OF BONOSUS, ACCORDING TO THE DECREE OF THE SYNOD OF CAPUA.

1. You have written to us a Letter concerning Bishop Bonosus in which, either from love of truth or from modesty, you enquire our opinion. But since it has been the judgment of the Council of Capua that those who are neighbours to Bonosus and his accusers should be assigned as his judges, and specially the Macedonian Bishops, who, with the Bishop of Thessalonica, should judge of his acts and writings, we have to remark that the function of judging cannot appertain to ourselves. Otherwise, were the question of the Synod at this day still open, we might well have decided concerning these things which are included in what you have written at length. Having taken upon yourselves this judgment, it is now your part to form your decision on the whole question, to give no power of retreat or escape either to the accusers or the accused; for, being chosen by the Synod to conduct the examination, you have taken upon you its functions.

2. Again, when Bishop Bonosus, after your judgment, sent to our brother Ambrose to enquire his opinion whether he should break into and enter upon the church which was closed to him, he received for reply that he must do nothing rashly, that everything must be carried on modestly, patiently and in order, that nothing contrary to your decision must be attempted, that you, to whom the Synod had committed such authority, would appoint what appeared to you agreeable to justice. The first point therefore is that judgment should be given by those to whom the power of judging has been given; for you, as we have said, judge in place of the entire Synod; as to ourselves it does not befit us to judge as though by the authority of the Synod.

3. Assuredly we cannot deny that he is justly blamed concerning the sons of Mary, and that your Holiness deservedly repudiated the opinion that from the same Virgin womb, of which according to the flesh Christ was born, other offspring was produced. For the Lord Jesus would not have chosen to be born of a Virgin, if He had conceived she would be so wanting in continence as to suffer that birthplace of the Lord's Body, that palace of the eternal King, to be polluted by human intercourse. To propound such an opinion as this, what is it but to fortify the unbelief of the Jews who say that it was impossible He could be born of a Virgin, and who, thus confirmed by the authority of Christian Bishops, will strive with greater earnestness to overthrow the true faith?

4. What else can be the meaning of that text wherein the Lord says to His Mother of John the Evangelist,  Woman, behold thy son, and again to John of Mary,  Behold thy mother? With what purpose was it that while the Lord was hanging upon the cross and atoning for the sins of the world, He declared also the integrity of His Mother? Wherefore was it said but that unbelief might close its lips and be silent, nor dare to offer any insult to the Mother of the Lord? He therefore, in pronouncing upon and asserting His Mother's chastity, likewise bears witness that she was only espoused to her husband Joseph; and that she was ignorant of that carnal commerce which is the accustomed right of the marriage bed; for, had it been that she was to conceive children of Joseph, He would not have chosen to separate her from the company of her husband.

5. But if this is not enough, the Evangelist has added his testimony, saying that the  disciple took her unto his own home. Did he then cause a divorce? Did he carry her off from her husband? How can he who reads this in the Gospel stagger and waver to and fro as one who has been shipwrecked?

6. This then is the testimony of the Son concerning His Mother's chastity, this is the rich heritage of Mary's immaculate Virginity, this is the consummation of the entire work. He spake thus, and  gave up the ghost, crowning the whole mystery with a good end of filial duty.

7. We have also read and perused the whole of the instructions, as well what relates to Senecio being joined with our brother and fellow-bishop Bassus in the government of his Church, as what relates to other matters, and we now look for the direction of your sentence.

EPISTOLA DE CAUSA BONOSI EX CAPUANAE SYNODI DECRETO JUDICANDA.

 Sciscitantibus quid in BONOSI  causa esset statuendum respondet auctor suum jam non esse de illa judicium, sed eorum ipsorum, ut pote quibus illud a Capuano consessu demandatum sit. Addit tamen Bonosum merito reprehensum de Mariae filiis eique unicum fuisse paucis astruit. 

1. «De Bonoso direxistis episcopo, quibus vel  1173A pro veritate, vel pro modestia nostram sententiam sciscitari voluistis. Sed cum hujusmodi fuerit concilii Capuensis judicium, ut finitimi Bonoso atque ejus accusatoribus judices tribuerentur; et praecipue Macedones, qui cum episcopo Thessalonicensi, de ejus factis vel scriptis cognoscerent, advertimus quod nobis judicandi forma competere non posset. Nam si integra esset hodie Synodus, recte de iis, quae comprehendit vestrorum scriptorum series, decerneremus. Vestrum est igitur, qui hoc recepistis judicium, sententiam ferre de omnibus, nec refugiendi vel elabendi, vel accusatoribus, vel accusato copiam dare; vicem enim Synodi recepistis, quos ad examinandum Synodus elegit.

2. «Denique cum Bonosus episcopus post judicium  1173B vestrum misisset ad fratrem nostrum Ambrosium, qui ejus sententiam consuleret, interdictam sibi Ecclesiam irrumpere atque ingredi; responsum est ei, quod nihil temerandum foret, sed omnia modeste, patienter, ordine gerenda, neque contra sententiam vestram tentandum aliquid; ut quod videretur vobis justitiae convenire, statueretis, quibus hanc Synodus dederat auctoritatem. Ideo primum est, ut ii 1009 judicent quibus judicandi facultas est data; vos enim totius, ut scripsimus, Synodi vice decernitis; nos quasi ex Synodi auctoritate judicare non convenit.

3. «Sane non possumus negare de Mariae filiis jure reprehensum, meritoque vestram sanctitatem abhorruisse, quod ex eodem utero virginali, ex quo secundum  1173C carnem Christus natus est, alius partus effusus sit. Neque enim elegisset Dominus Jesus nasci per virginem, si eam judicasset tam incontinentem fore, ut illud genitale Dominici corporis, illam aulam regis aeterni, concubitus humani seminis coinquinaret. Qui enim hoc astruit, nihil aliud nisi perfidiam Judaeorum astruit, qui dicunt eum non potuisse nasci ex Virgine. Jam si hanc accipiant a Sacerdotibus auctoritatem, ut videatur Maria partus fudisse plurimos, majore studio veritatem fidei expugnare contendent.

4. «Et ubi est illud, quod scriptum est, dicente Domino ad matrem de Joanne Evangelista:  Mulier,  1174A  ecce filius tuus; et rursus ad Joannem de  Maria: Ecce mater tua (Joan. XIX, 26, 27)? Quid sibi istud vult, quod cum in cruce Dominus positus peccatum mundi tolleret, pronuntiavit etiam de integritate materna? Aut quid aliud dicitur, nisi ut claudat sua ora perfidia, et obmutescat; ne matrem Domini aliquo audeat temerare convicio? Testis est ergo idem arbiter, idem materni pudoris assertor, quod desponsata fuerit viro tantummodo Joseph; nulla tamen conjugalis coitus consuetudine thori jura cognoverit (Matt. I, 18): neque enim eam suscepturam ex Joseph filios a viri consortio separare voluisset.

5. «Sed si hoc parum est, addidit testimonium Evangelista, dicens quod  suscepit eam Discipulus  in sua (Joan. IX, 27). Numquid ergo divortium fecit?  1174B Numquid a viro abduxit atque abstulit? Ergo qui hoc legit in Evangelio, quomodo quasi naufragus titubat et fluctuat?

6. «Hoc ergo testamentum filii est de matris integritate, haec Mariae locuples integri pudoris haereditas, hic totius finis consummationis. Denique hoc dixit, et  emisit spiritum (Ibid., 30), consummans omne mysterium bono fine pietatis.

7. «Legimus etiam et omnia percurrimus, vel de eo quod fratri nostro et coepiscopo Basso in consortium regendae Ecclesiae datus est Senecio, vel de caeteris, unde vestrae normam exspectamus sententiae.»