Novatian and Novatianism

Novatian was a schismatic of the third century, and founder of the 
sect of the Novatians; he was a Roman priest, and made himself 
antipope. His name is given as Novatus (Noouatos, Eusebius; 
Nauatos, Socrates) by Greek writers, and also in the verses of 
Damasus and Prudentius, on account of the metre. 

Biography 

We know little of his life. St. Cornelius in his letter to Fabius 
of Antioch relates that Novatian was possessed by Satan for a 
season, apparently while a catechumen; for the exorcists attended 
him, and he fell into a sickness from which instant death was 
expected; he was, therefore, given baptism by affusion as he lay 
on his bed. The rest of the rites were not supplied on his 
recovery, nor was he confirmed by the bishop. "How then can he 
have received the Holy Ghost?" asks Cornelius. Novatian was a man 
of learning and had been trained in literary composition. 
Cornelius speaks of him sarcastically as "that maker of dogmas, 
that champion of ecclesiastical learning". His eloquence is 
mentioned by Cyprian (Ep. lx, 3) and a pope (presumably Fabian) 
promoted him to the priesthood in spite of the protests (according 
to Cornelius) of all the clergy and many of the laity that it was 
uncanonical for one who had received only clinical baptism to be 
admitted among the clergy. The story told by Eulogius of 
Alexandria that Novatian was Archdeacon of Rome, and was made a 
priest by the pope in order to prevent his succeeding to the 
papacy, contradicts the evidence of Cornelius and supposes a later 
state of things when the Roman deacons were statesmen rather than 
ministers. The anonymous work "Ad Novatianum" (xiii) tells us that 
Novatian, "so long as he was in the one house, that is in Christ's 
Church, bewailed the sins of his neighbours as if they were his 
own, bore the burdens of the brethren, as the Apostle exhorts, and 
strengthened with consolation the backsliding in heavenly faith." 

The Church had enjoyed a peace of thirty-eight years when Decius 
issued his edict of persecution early in 250. Pope St. Fabian was 
martyred on 20 January, and it was impossible to elect a 
successor. Cornelius, writing in the following year, says of 
Novatian that, through cowardice and love of his life, he denied 
that he was a priest in the time of persecution; for he was 
exhorted by the deacons to come out of the cell, in which he had 
shut himself up, to assist the brethren as a priest now that they 
were in danger. But he was angry and departed, saying he no longer 
wished to be a priest, for he was in love with another philosophy. 
The meaning of this story is not clear. Did Novitian wish to 
eschew the active work of the priesthood and give himself to an 
ascetic life? 

At all events, during the persecution he certainly wrote letters 
in the name of the Roman clergy, which were sent by them to St. 
Cyprian (Epp. xxx and xxxvi). The letters are concerned with the 
question of the Lapsi (q. v.), and with the exaggerated claim of 
the martyrs at Carthage to restore them all without penance. The 
Roman clergy agree with Cyprian that the matter must be settled 
with moderation by councils to be held when this should be 
possible; the election of a new bishop must be awaited; proper 
severity of discipline must be preserved, such as had always 
distinguished the Roman Church since the days when her faith was 
praised by St. Paul (Rom., i, 8), but cruelty to the repentant 
must be avoided. There is evidently no idea in the minds of the 
Roman priests that restoration of the lapsed to communion is 
impossible or improper; but there are severe expressions in the 
letters. It seems that Novatian got into some trouble during the 
persecution, since Cornelius says that St. Moses, the martyr (d. 
250), seeing the boldness of Novatian, separated him from 
communion, together with the five priests who had been associated 
with him. 

At the beginning of 251 the persecution relaxed, and St. Cornelius 
was elected pope in March, "when the chair of Fabian, that is the 
place of Peter, was vacant", with the consent of nearly all the 
clergy, of the people, and of the bishops present (Cyprian Ep. lv, 
8-9). Some days later Novatian set himself up as a rival pope. 
Cornelius tells us Novatian suffered an extraordinary and sudden 
change; for he had taken a tremendous oath that he would never 
attempt to become bishop. But now he sent two of his party to 
summon three bishops from a distant corner of Italy, telling them 
they must come to Rome in haste, in order that a division might be 
healed by their mediation and that of other bishops. These simple 
men were constrained to confer the episcopal order upon him at the 
tenth hour of the day. One of these returned to the church 
bewailing and confessing his sin, "and we dispatched" says 
Cornelius, "successors of the other two bishops to the places 
whence they came, after ordaining them." To ensure the loyalty of 
his supporters Novatian forced them, when receiving Holy 
Communion, to swear by the Blood and the Body of Christ that they 
would not go over to Cornelius. 

Cornelius and Novatian sent messengers to the different Churches 
to announce their respective claims. From St. Cyprian's 
correspondence we know of the careful investigation made by the 
Council of Carthage, with the result that Cornelius was supported 
by the whole African episcopate. St. Dionysius of Alexandria also 
took his side, and these influential adhesions soon made his 
position secure. But for a time the whole Church was torn by the 
question of the rival popes. We have few details. St. Cyprian 
writes that Novatian "assumed the primacy" (Ep. lxix, 8), and sent 
out his new apostles to many cities to set new foundations for his 
new establishment; and, though there were already in all provinces 
and cities bishops of venerable age, of pure faith, of tried 
virtue, who had been proscribed in the persecution, he dared to 
create other false bishops over their heads (Ep. lv, 24) thus 
claiming the right of substituting bishops by his own authority as 
Cornelius did in the case just mentioned. There could be no more 
startling proof of the importance of the Roman See than this 
sudden revelation of an episode of the third century: the whole 
Church convulsed by the claim of an antipope; the recognized 
impossibility of a bishop being a Catholic and legitimate pastor 
if he is on the side of the wrong pope; the uncontested claim of 
both rivals to consecrate a new bishop in any place (at all 
events, in the West) where the existing bishop resisted their 
authority. Later, in the same way, in a letter to Pope Stephen, 
St. Cyprian urges him to appoint (so he seems to imply) a new 
bishop at Arles, where the bishop had become a Novatianist. St. 
Dionysius of Alexandria wrote to Pope Stephen that all the 
Churches in the East and beyond, which had been split in two, were 
now united, and that all their prelates were now rejoicing 
exceedingly in this unexpected peace -- in Antioch, Caesarea of 
Palestine, Jerusalem, Tyre, Laodicea of Syria, Tarsus and all the 
Churches of Cilicia, Caesarea and all Cappadocia, the Syrias and 
Arabia (which depended for alms on the Roman Church), Mesopotamia, 
Pontus and Bithynia, "and all the Churches everywhere", so far did 
the Roman schism cause its effects to be felt. Meanwhile, before 
the end of 251, Cornelius had assembled a council of sixty bishops 
(probably all from Italy or the neighbouring islands), in which 
Novatian was excommunicated. Other bishops who were not present 
added their signatures, and the entire list was sent to Antioch 
and doubtless to all the other principal Churches. 

It is not surprising that a man of such talents as Novatian should 
have been, conscious of his superiority to Cornelius, or that he 
should have found priests to assist his ambitious views. His 
mainstay was in the confessors yet in prison, Maximus, Urbanus, 
Nicostratus, and others. Dionysius and Cyprian wrote to 
remonstrate with them, and they returned to the Church. A prime 
mover on Novatian's side was the Carthaginian priest Novatus, who 
had favoured laxity at Carthage out of opposition to his bishop. 
In St. Cyprian's earlier letters about Novatian (xliv-xlviii, 1), 
there is not a word about any heresy, the whole question being as 
to the legitimate occupant of the place of Peter. In Ep. li, the 
words "schismatico immo haeretico furore" refer to the wickedness 
of opposing the true bishop. The same is true of " haereticae 
pravitatis nocens factio" with Ep. liii. In Ep. liv, Cyprian found 
it necessary to send his book "De lapsis" to Rome, so that the 
question of the lapsed was already prominent, but Ep. lv is the 
earliest in which the "Novatian heresy" as such is argued against. 
The letters of the Roman confessors (Ep. liii) and Cornelius 
(xlix, 1) to Cyprian do not mention it, though the latter speaks 
in general terms of Novatian as a schismatic or a heretic; nor 
does the pope mention heresy in his abuse of Novatian in the 
letter to Fabius of Antioch (Eusebius, VI, xliii), from which so 
much has been quoted above. It is equally clear that the letters 
sent out by Novatian were not concerned with the lapsi, but were 
"letters full of calumnies and maledictions sent in large numbers, 
which threw nearly all the Churches into disorder"' (Cornelius, 
Ep. xlix). The first of those sent to Carthage consisted 
apparently of "bitter accusations" against Cornelius, and St. 
Cyprian thought it so disgraceful that he did not read it to the 
council (Ep. xlv, 2). The messengers from Rome to the Carthaginian 
Council broke out into similar attacks (Ep. xliv). It is necessary 
to notice this point, because it is so frequently overlooked by 
historians, who represent the sudden but short-lived disturbance 
throughout the Catholic Church caused by Novatian's ordination to 
have been a division between bishops on the subject of his heresy. 
Yet it is obvious enough that the question could not present 
itself: "Which is preferable, the doctrine of Cornelius or that of 
Novatian?" If Novatian were ever so orthodox, the first matter was 
to examine whether his ordination was legitimate or not, and 
whether his accusations against Cornelius were false or true. An 
admirable reply addressed to him by St. Dionysius of Alexandria 
has been preserved (Eusebius, VI, xlv): "Dionysius to his brother 
Novatian, greeting. If it was against your will, as you say, that 
you were led, you will prove it by retiring of your free will. For 
you ought to have suffered anything rather than divide the Church 
of God and to be martyred rather than cause a schism woul have 
been no less glorious than to be martyred rather than commit 
idolatry, nay in my opinion it would have been a yet greater act; 
for in the one case one is a martyr for one's own soul alone, in 
the other for the whole Church". Here again there is no question 
of heresy. 

But yet within a couple of months Novatian was called a heretic, 
not only by Cyprian but throughout the Church, for his severe 
views about the restoration of those who had lapsed in the 
persecution. He held that idolatry was an unpardonable sin, and 
that the Church had no right to restore to communion any who had 
fallen into it. They might repent and be admitted to a lifelong 
penance, but their forgiveness must be left to God; it could not 
be pronounced in this world. Such harsh sentiments were not 
altogether a novelty. Tertullian had resisted the forgiveness of 
adultery by Pope Callistus as an innovation. Hippolytus was 
equally inclined to severity. In various places and at various 
times laws were made which punished certain sins either with the 
deferring of Communion till the hour of death, or even with 
refusal of Communion in the hour of death. Even St. Cyprian 
approved the latter course in the case of those who refused to do 
penance and only repented on their death-bed; but this was because 
such a repentance seemed of doubtful sincerity. But severity in 
itself was but cruelty or injustice; there was no heresy until it 
was denied that the Church has the power to grant absolution in 
certain cases. This was Novatian's heresy; and St. Cyprian says 
the Novatians held no longer the Catholic creed and baptismal 
interrogation, for when they said "Dost thou believe in the 
remission of sins, and everlasting life, through Holy Church?" 
they were liars. 

Writings 

St. Jerome mentions a number of writings of Novatian, only two of 
which have come down to us, the "De Cibis Judaicis" and the "De 
Trinitate". The former is a letter written in retirement during a 
time of persecution, and was preceded by two other letters on 
Circumcision and the Sabbath, which are lost. It interprets the 
unclean animals as signifying different classes of vicious men; 
and explains that the greater liberty allowed to Christians is not 
to be a motive for luxury. The book "De Trinitate" is a fine piece 
of writing. The first eight chapters concern the transcendence and 
greatness of God, who is above all thought and can be described by 
no name. Novatian goes on to prove the Divinity of the Son at 
great length, arguing from both the Old and the New Testaments, 
and adding that it is an insult to the Father to say that a Father 
who is God cannot beget a Son who is God. But Novatian falls into 
the error made by so many early writers of separating the Father 
from the Son, so that he makes the Father address to the Son the 
command to create, and the Son obeys; he identifies the Son with 
the angels who appeared in the Old Testament to Agar, Abraham. 
etc. "It pertains to the person of Christ that he should be God 
because He is the Son of God, and that He should be an Angel 
because He announces the Father's Will" (paternae dispositionis 
annuntiator est). The Son is "the second Person after the Father", 
less than the Father in that He is originated by the Father; He is 
the imitator of all His works, and is always obedient to the 
Father, and is one with Him "by concord, by love, and by 
affection". 

No wonder such a description should seem to opponents to make two 
Gods; and consequently, after a chapter on the Holy Ghost (xxix), 
Novatian returns to the subject in a kind of appendix (xxx-xxxi). 
Two kinds of heretics, he explains, try to guard the unity of God, 
the one kind (Sabellians) by identifying the Father with the Son, 
the other (Ebionites, etc.) by denying that the Son is God; thus 
is Christ again crucified between two thieves, and is reviled by 
both. Novatian declares that there is indeed but one God, 
unbegotten, invisible, immense, immortal; the Word (Sermo), His 
Son, is a substance that proceeds from Him (substantia prolata), 
whose generation no apostle nor angel nor any creature can 
declare. He is not a second God, because He is eternally in the 
Father, else the Father would not be eternally Father. He 
proceeded from the Father, when the Father willed (this 
syncatabasis for the purpose of creation is evidently 
distinguished from the eternal begetting in the Father), and 
remained with the Father. If He were also the unbegotten, 
invisible, incomprehensible, there might indeed be said to be two 
Gods; but in fact He has from the Father whatever He has, and 
there is but one origin (origo, principium), the Father. "One God 
is demonstrated, the true and eternal Father, from whom alone this 
energy of the Godhead is sent forth, being handed on to the Son, 
and again by communion of substance it is returned to the Father." 
In this doctrine there is much that is incorrect, yet much that 
seems meant to express the consubstantiality of the Son, or at 
least His generation out of the substance of the Father. But it is 
a very unsatisfactory unity which is attained, and it seems to be 
suggested that the Son is not immense or invisible, but the image 
of the Father capable of manifesting Him. Hippolytus is in the 
same difficulty, and it appears that Novatian borrowed from him as 
well as from Tertullian and Justin. It would seem that Tertullian 
and Hippolytus understood somewhat better than did Novatian the 
traditional Roman doctrine of the consubstantiality of the Son, 
but that all three were led astray by their acquaintance with the 
Greek theology, which interpreted of the Son as God Scriptural 
expressions (especially those of St. Paul) which properly apply to 
Him as the God-Man. But at least Novatian has the merit of not 
identifying the Word with the Father, nor Sonship with the 
prolation of the Word for the purpose of Creation, for He plainly 
teaches the eternal generation. This is a notable advance on 
Tertullian. 

On the Incarnation Novatian seems to have been orthodox, though he 
is not explicit. He speaks correctly of the one Person having two 
substances, the Godhead and Humanity, in the way that is habitual 
to the most exact Western theologians. But he very often speaks of 
"the man" assumed by the Divine Person, so that he has been 
suspected of Nestorianizing. This is unfair, since he is equally 
liable to the opposite accusation of making "the man" so far from 
being a distinct personality that He is merely flesh assumed 
(caro, or substantia carnis et corporis). But there is no real 
ground for supposing that Novatian meant to deny an intellectual 
soul in Christ; he does not think of the point, and is only 
anxious to assert the reality of our Lord's flesh. The Son of God, 
he says, joins to Himself the Son of Man, and by this connection 
and mingling he makes the Son of Man become Son of God, which He 
was not by nature. This last sentence has been described as 
Adoptionism. But the Spanish Adoptionists taught that the Human 
Nature of Christ as joined to the Godhead is the adopted Son of 
God. Novatian only means that before its assumption it was not by 
nature the Son of God; the form of words is bad, but there is not 
necessarily any heresy in the thought. Newman, though he does not 
make the best of Novatian, says that he "approaches more nearly to 
doctrinal precision than any of the writers of the East and West" 
who preceded him (Tracts theological and ecclesiastical, p. 239). 

The two pseudo-Cyprianic works, both by one author, "De 
Spectaculis" and "De bono pudicitiae", are attributed to Novatian 
by Weyman, followed by Demmler, Bardenhewer, Harnack, and others. 
The pseudo-Cyprianic "De laude martyrii" has been ascribed to 
Novatian by Harnack, but with less probability. The pseudo-
Cyprianic sermon, "Adversus Judaeos", is by a close friend or 
follower of Novatian if not by himself, according to Landgraf, 
followed by Harnack and Jordan. In 1900 Mgr Batiffol with the help 
of Dom A. Wilmart published, under the title of "Tractatus 
Origenis de libris SS. Scripturarum", twenty sermons which he had 
discovered in two MSS. at Orleans and St. Omer. Weyman, 
Haussleiter, and Zahn perceived that these curious homilies on the 
Old Testament were written in Latin and are not translations from 
the Greek. They attributed them to Novatian with so much 
confidence that a disciple of Zahn's, H. Jordan, has written a 
book on the theology of Novatian, grounded principally on these 
sermons. It was, however, pointed out that the theology is of a 
more developed and later character than that of Novatian. Funk 
showed that the mention of competentes (candidates for baptism) 
implies the fourth century. Dom Morin suggested Gregorius 
Baeeticus of Illiberis (Elvira), but withdrew this when it seemed 
clear that the author had used Gaudentius of Brescia and Rufinus' 
translation of Origen on Genesis. But these resemblances must be 
resolved in the sense that the "Tractatus" are the originals, for 
finally Dom Wilgory showed that Gregory of Elvira is their true 
author, by a comparison especially with the five homilies of 
Gregory on the Canticle of Canticles (in Heine's "Bibliotheca 
Anecdotorum" Leipzig, 1848). 

The Novationist Sect 

The followers of Novatian named themselves katharoi, or Puritans, 
and affected to call the Catholic Church Apostaticum, Synedrium, 
or Capitolinum. They were found in every province, and in some 
places were very numerous. Our chief information about them is 
from the "History" of Socrates, who is very favourable to them, 
and tells us much about their bishops, especially those of 
Constantinople. The chief works written against them are those of 
St. Cyprian, the anonymous "Ad Novatianum" (attributed by Harnack 
to Sixtus II, 257-8), writings of St. Pacian of Barcelona and St. 
Ambrose (De paenitentia), "Contra Novatianum", a work of the 
fourth century among the works of St. Augustine, the "Heresies" of 
Epiphanius and Philastrius, and the "Quaestiones" of Ambrosiaster. 
In the East they are mentioned especially by Athanasius, Basil, 
Gregory of Nazianzus, Chrysostom. Eulogius of Alexandria, not long 
before 600, wrote six books against them. Refutations by Reticius 
of Autun and Eusebius of Emesa are lost. 

Novatian had refused absolution to idolaters; his followers 
extended this doctrine to all "mortal sins" (idolatry, murder, and 
adultery, or fornication). Most of them forbade second marriage, 
and they made much use of Tertullian's works; indeed, in Phrygia 
they combined with the Montanists. A few of them did not rebaptize 
converts from other persuasions. Theodoret says that they did not 
use confirmation (which Novatian himself hadnever received). 
Eulogius complained that they would not venerate martyrs, but he 
probably refers to Catholic martyrs. They always had a successor 
of Novatian at Rome, and everywhere they were governed by bishops. 
Their bishops at Constantinople were most estimable persons, 
according to Socrates, who has much to relate about them. The 
conformed to the Church in almost everything, including 
monasticism in the fourth century. Their bishop at Constantinople 
was invited by Constantine to the Council of Nicaea. He approved 
the decrees, though he would not consent to union. On account of 
the homoousion the Novatians were persecuted like the Catholics by 
Constantius. In Paphlagonia the Novatianist peasants attacked and 
slew the soldiers sent by the emperor to enforce conformity to the 
official semi-Arianism. Constantine the Great, who at first 
treated them as schismatics, not heretics, later ordered the 
closing of their churches and cemeteries. After the death of 
Constantius they were protected by Julian, but the Arian Valens 
persecuted them once more. Honorius included them in a law against 
heretics in 412, and St. Innocent I closed some of their churches 
in Rome. St. Celestine expelled them from Rome, as St. Cyril had 
from Alexandria. Earlier St. Chrysostom had shut up their churches 
at Ephesus, but at Constantinople they were tolerated, and their 
bishops there are said by Socrates to have been highly respected. 
The work of Eulogius shows that there were still Novatians in 
Alexandria about 600. In Phrygia (about 374) some of them became 
Quartodecimans, and were called Protopaschitoe; they included some 
converted Jews. Theodosius made a stringent law against this sect, 
which was imported to Constantinople about 391 by a certain 
Sabbatius, whose adherents were called Sabbatiani. 

JOHN CHAPMAN 

Christopher R. Huber