2. Clarke, G. W., The Letters of St. Cyprian of Carthage, vol. 1, Letters 1–27, Ancient Christian Writers 43 (New York: Newman, 1984), 226.Google Scholar

3. Cyprian, Ep. 10.5.2 (Corpus Christianorum, series Latina [hereafter CCL] 3B.55): “Erat ante in operibus fratrum Candida, nunc facta est in martyrum cruore purpurea.” It is here that Cyprian referred to the Church's two blooms: the lily and the rose. Cyprian used purpura to indicate the color of blood, and so Clarke's choice of “crimson” as a translation is more reflective of Cyprian than “purple.”

4. Ibid. “Accipiant coronas uel de opere Candidas uel de passione purpureas. In caelestibus castris et pax et acies habent flores suos auibus miles Christi ob gloriam coronetur.” It is interesting to note, by way of contrast, that Tertullian, de Cor. 1.3 (CCL 2.1040), wrote of those waiting in prison, “ut de martyrii Candida laurea melius coronandus.”

5. See Dunn, Geoffrey D., “Cyprian's Care for the Poor: The Evidence of the de Opere et Eleemosynis,” Studia Patristica, papers presented to the Fourteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies,Oxford2003 (forthcoming).Google Scholar

6. Cyprian, de Oper. 26 (CCL 3A.72): “nusquam Dominus mentis nostris ad praemium deerit, in pace unincentibus coronam candidam pro operibus dabit, in persecutione purpuream pro passione geminabit.”

7. Cyprian, , Ep. 76.1.3 (CCL 3C.607): “diligentiam in administratione.” (Eng. trans. Clarke, G. W., The Letters of St. Cyprian of Carthage, vol. 4, Letters 67–82, Ancient Christian Writers 47 [New York: Newman, 1989]. On the date of the letter, see 277–78.)Google Scholar

8. Ibid., 76.1.4 (CCL 3C.607–8).

9. Arnold Bobertz, Charles, “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron: A Social Historical Study of the Role of Bishop in the Ancient Christian Community of North Africa,” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1988).Google Scholar

10. Brown, Peter, The Making of Late Antiquity (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1978), 79.Google Scholar

11. Bobertz, , “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron,” 65, 70.Google Scholar

12. Ibid., 130–252.

13. See Sailer, Richard, Personal Patronage under the Early Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14. See also Wischmeyer, Wolfgang, “Der Bishof im Prozess. Cyprian als episcopus, patronus, advocatus und martyr vor dem Prokonsul,” in Fructus centesimus. Mélanges offerts à Gerard J. M. Bartelink à l'occasion de son soixante-cinquième anniversaire, ed. Bastiaesen, A. A. R. and others, Instrumenta Patristica 19 (Steenbrugge: Sint-Pietersabdij, and Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1989), 363–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15. On this first Christian biography, including the question of Pontius's authorship of this work, see Sage, Michael M., Cyprian, Patristic Monograph Series 1 (Cambridge, Mass.: Philadelphia Patristic Foundation, 1975), 385–94Google Scholar; Aronen, Jaakko, “Indebtedness to Passio Perpetuae in Pontius' Vita Cypriani,” Vigiliae Christianae 38 (1984): 67–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bobertz, Charles, “An Analysis of Vita Cypriani 3.6–10 and the Attribution of ad Quirinum to Cyprian of Carthage,” Vigiliae Christianae 46 (1992): 112–28Google Scholar; Montgomery, Hugo, “Pontius' Vita S. Cypriani and the Making of a Saint,” Symbolae Osloenses 71 (1996): 195–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16. Pontius, Vita 2 (Corpus Christianorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum [hereafter CSEL] 3.3.xcii): “distractis rebus suis ad indigentium multorum pacem sustinendam tota prope pretia dispensans duo bona simul iunxit, ut et ambitionem saeculi sperneret qua perniciosius nihil est et misericordiam quam Deus etiam sacrificiis suis praetulit.” That Cyprian was a catechumen is stated explicitly at Vita 6 (CSEL 3.3.xcvi). (Eng. trans. Walk's, Ernest from Roberts, A. and Donaldson, J., eds. [rev. A. C. Coxe], The Ante-Nkene Fathers, vol. 5, Fathers of the Third Century: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Caius, Novation, Appendix (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1886).Google Scholar

17. Burns, J. Patout, Cyprian the Bishop, Routledge Early Church Monographs (London: Routledge, 2002), 207, n. 2.Google Scholar

18. Quintilian, Inst. 3.7.4, 10–25.

19. Countryman, L. Wm., The Rich Christian in the Church of the Early Empire: Contradictions and Accommodations, Texts and Studies in Religion 7 (New York: Edwin Mellen, 1980), 185.Google Scholar

20. Ibid., 187.

21. Bobertz, “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron,” 95, n. 44; 127, n. 87.

22. Pontius, Vita 3 (CSEL 3.3.xciv.): “domus eius patuit cuicumque uenienti: nulla uidua reuocata sinu uacuo, nullus indigens lumine non illo comite directus est, nullus debilis gressu non illo baiulo uectus est, nullus nudus auxilio de potentioris manu non illo tutore protectus est. haec debent facere, dicebat, qui Deo placere desiderant. et sic [per] bonorum omnium documenta decurrens, dum meliores semper imitatus, etiam ipse se fecit imitandum.”

23. Bobertz, , “An Analysis of Vita Cypriani 3.6–10,” 116–17Google Scholar, argues that this combination and the omission of Job 29:13a and 14, which is found also in ad Quir. 3.1 (CCL 3.81), is proof that Pontius depended upon ad Quirinum.

24. Bobertz, , “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron,” 119Google Scholar: “Cyprian's generous gift to the Christian community might not have been intended to bring him the bishop's seat in exchange, but it certainly must have established a sense of obligation as well as expectation on the part of the community.”

25. Ibid., 121–23.

26. Ibid., 128–29.

27. At the same time, I have no problem with what I find on page 121: “Taken as a whole, the description of Cyprian's episcopal election in the Vita shows every indication that the selection of Cyprian can be analyzed in terms of a patron-client relationship.” The distinction I am making is between what we today may understand and what Pontius was trying to portray.

28. See Sage, Cyprian, 380. If Bobertz is right, and I think he is, then the date for the baptism is likely to be much closer to Cyprian's election as bishop than to 246.

29. Bobertz examines ad Dona, in his dissertation (80–87), but mainly in terms of what it reveals about Cyprian's social standing at the time of his conversion, not in terms of any conflict between his understanding of Christianity and his experiences of patronclient relationships.

30. Ibid., 95, n. 44.

31. Cyprian, ad Dona. 3 (CCL 3A.4): “Hic stipatus clientium cuneis, frequentiore comitatu officiosi agminis honestatus, poenam putat esse, cum solus est.” Again, the important question is why Cyprian wanted his reader to believe this.

32. Ibid., 10 (CCL 3A.9): “Quis inter haec uero subueniat? Patronus? Sed praeuaricatur et decipit.”

33. Ibid., 11 (CCL 3A.10): “quot tumentium contumeliosa uestigia stipatus in clientium cuneos ante praecessit, ut ipsum etiam salutatum comes postmodum pompa praecederet, obnoxia non homini sed potestati! Neque enim coli moribus meruit Me sed fascibus. Horutn denique uideas exitus turpes. Cum auceps temporum palpator abscessit, cum priuati latus nudum desertor adsecla foedauit: tunc laceratae domus plagae conscientiam feriunt, tune rei familiaris exhaustae damna noscuntur, quibus redemptus fauor uulgi et caducis adque inanibus uotis popularis aura quaesita est.”

34. Ibid., 12 (CCL 3A.10): “et de confinio pauperibus exclusis.”

35. Ibid., 12 (CCL 3A.11): “Nulla in clientes inde largitio est, cum indigentibus nulla partitio est.” The fact that Cyprian even uses the term “clients” while disavowing the patronclient relationship is, I think, an indication of the importance of that relationship to one who was trying to reject it.

36. Ibid., 15 (CCL 3A.12).

37. On some of those influences on Cyprian, see Saxer, Victor, “Reflets de la culture des évêques africains dans l'oeuvre de Saint Cyprien,” Revue Bénédictine 94 (1984): 259–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Countryman, , The Rich Christian, 186Google Scholar, suggests that Cyprian may also have been motivated by philosophical traditions that were not Christian.

38. Cyprian, ad Quir. 3.1 (CCL 3.80–88). If Bobertz, , “An Analysis of Vita Cypriani,” 112–28Google Scholar, is correct and Cyprian did not write ad Quir., then it could well have been the very kind of text that was used for the catechetical instruction of Cyprian himself. The scriptural passages are: Isa. 58:1–9; Job 29:12–13,15–16; Tob. 2:2; 4:5–11; Prov. 19:17; 28:27; 15:27a; 25:21–22; Sir. 3:29; Prov. 3:28; 21:13; 20:7; Sir. 14:11–12; 29:12; Ps. 36(37):25–26; 40(41):2; 111(112):9; Hos. 6:6; Matt. 5:6–7; 6:20–21; 13:45–46; 10:42; 5:42; 19:17–21; 25:31–46; Luke 12:33; 11:40–41; 19:8–9; 2 Cor. 8:14–15; 9:6–7, 9–12; 1 John 3:17; Luke 14:12–14.

39. We find Matt. 5:6 in Ep. 63.8.4 (CCL 3C.399); Matt. 6:20–21 in de laps. 11 (CCL 3.226); de Mort. 26 (CCL 3A.31); de Oper. 7 (CCL 3A.60), 22 (CCL 3A.69); de Orat. 20 (CCL 3A.103); de Habi. 11 (CSEL 3.1.195); de Vnit. 26 (CCL 3.267); Matt. 13:45–46 in de Oper. 7 (CCL 3A.60); Matt. 5:42 in de Bono 16 (CCL 3A.127); Matt. 19:21 in de laps. 21 (CCL 3.226); de Mort. 26 (CCL 3A.31); de Oper. 7 (CCL 3A.59), 22 (CCL 3A.69); de Orat. 20 (CCL 3A.102); de Vnit. 26 (CCL 3.267); de Zelo 16 (CCL 3A.84); Matt. 25:31–46 in de Oper. 16 (CCL 3A.65), 22 (CCL 3A.68), 23 (CCL 3A.69); de Orat. 13 (CCL 3A.97), 33 (CCL 3A.111); de zelo 15 (CCL 3A.84); ad Deme. 24 (CCL 3A.49); Ep. 30.7.2 (CCL 3B.149); Luke 12:33 in de Oper. 7 (CCL 3A.59); Luke 11:40–41 in de Oper. 2 (CCL 3A.56); Luke 19:8–9 in de Oper. 8 (CCL 3A.60); Ep. 63.4.2 (CCL 3C.394); 2 Cor. 9:9–12 in de Oper. 9 (CCL 3A.61); 1 John 3:17 in de Oper. 16 (CCL 3A.65), to mention only the New Testament passages. See Faihey, Michael A., Cyprian and the Bible: A Study in Third-Century Exegesis (Tübingen: Eberhard-Karls-Universität, 1971), passim.Google Scholar

40. Straw, Carole E., “Cyprian and Mt 5:45: The Evolution of Christian Patronage,” in Studia Patristica 18/3, ed. Livingstone, Elizabeth A., papers presented at the 1983 Oxford Patristics Conference (Leuven: Peeters, 1989), 330Google Scholar: “This ideal of munificence is an ideal of reform and so appears on many levels of Cyprian's thought. It expresses God's relation to humanity, and is the image of equity one must imitate to be perfect.”

41. Ibid.

42. Ibid., 332.

43. If anything, perhaps Cyprian might have seen himself as client to God. In return for Cyprian's care of God's poor, he would be rewarded by God with salvation.

44. Cavallotto, Stefano, “II Magistero Episcopale di Cipriano di Cartagine: Aspetti metodologici,” Divus Thomas 91 (1989): 381–93.Google Scholar

45. Montgomery, Hugo, “Saint Cyprian's Secular Heritage,” in Studies in Ancient History and Numismatics Presented to Rudi Thomsen (Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press, 1988), 218–19Google Scholar, while recognizing that secular patronage was influential in Cyprian's actions as bishop, sees something else at work in Cyprian's divestment of property at the time of his conversion (218): “Without doubt Cyprian had been a resourceful person before becoming a Christian. Nevertheless he could gain new prestige in the Church, where other sets of values were valid than in the pagan world.”

46. Monceaux, Paul, Histoire littéraire de l'Afrique chrétienne depuis les origins jusqu' à l'invasion arabe, vol. 2, St. Cyprien et son temps (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1902), 251Google Scholar; Watson, E. W., “The De Habitu Virginum of St. Cyprian,” Journal of Theological Studies 22 (1920–1921): 361–63Google Scholar; Elizabeth Keenan, Angela, Thasci Caecili Cypriani—De Habitu Virginum: A Commentary with an Introduction and Translation, Catholic University of America Patristic Studies 34 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1932), 4Google Scholar; Sage, Cyprian, 381.

47. Dunn, Geoffrey D., “Infected Sheep and Diseased Cattle or the Pure and Holy Flock: Cyprian's Pastoral Care of Virgins,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 11 (2003): 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

48. Cyprian, de Habi. 5 (CSEL 3.1.191).

49. Ibid., 6 (CSEL 3.1.191).

50. Ibid., 7 (CSEL 3.1.192).

51. Ibid., 11 (CSEL 3.1.195): “ut patrimonium suo unusquisque locupletior magis redimere debeat quam augere delicta.” This idea receives only the briefest of mentions in this text.

52. Budde, Gerard J., “Christian Charity: Now and Always,” The Ecclesiastical Review 85 (1931): 571–73.Google Scholar

53. Ibid., 562–64.

54. Cyprian, de Habi. 11 (CSEL 3.1.195): “utere sed ad res salutares et bonas artes: utere ad illa quae Deus praecepit, quae Dominus ostendit. diuitem te sentiant pauperes, locupletem te sentiant indigentes, patrimonio tuo Deum faenera, Christum ciba.”

55. Ibid.: “ut uirginitatis perferre gloriam liceat, ut ad Domini praemia uenire contingat, multorum precibus exora.” On the idea of almsgiving as atonement for sin, and the reference at the end of chapter 6 to virgins glorying in their flesh only when they confess the name under torture, as not indicating a date of composition during the Decian persecution, see Dunn “Infected Sheep and Diseased Cattle,” 5, n. 17. The hundredfold rewards of martyrdom in chapter 21 is again too general a reference to be used for dating purposes. Indeed, the fact that Cyprian spends so much of that chapter concerned about feasts and marriage banquets would suggest that this pastoral letter was not written during a time of persecution.

56. Bobertz, , “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron,” 56–57.Google Scholar

57. Ibid., 57.

58. Tertullian, Apol. 39.5–6 (CCL 1.150–51).

59. Cyprian, de Vnit. 26 (CCL 3.267).

60. Cyprian, de Habi. 8–10, 12–24 (CSEL 3.1.193–95, 195–205).

61. See Clarke, G. W., “Praecedit Dissertatio Biographica/Chronologica de Cypriani Vita ac Scriptis, quam Composuit,” in Sancti Cypriani Episcopi Opera, Pars III, 3, Prolegomena, Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 3D (Turnhout: Brepols, 1999), 691–92.Google Scholar

62. Cyprian, Ep. 2.2.2 (CCL 3B.7).

63. Ibid., 2.2.2; 2.2.3 (CCL 3B.7–8).

64. Ibid., 2.2.3 (CCL 3B.8).

65. Clarke, , “Praecedit Dissertatio,” 692–98.Google Scholar

66. See Clarke, G. W., “Some Observations on the Persecution of Decius,” Antichthon 3 (1969): 63–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sage, Cyprian, 165–265; Maurice, Bévenot, “Cyprian and His Recognition of Cornelius,” journal of Theological Studies, n.s. 28 (1977): 346–59Google Scholar; Fischer, Joseph A., “Die Konzilien zu Karthago und Rom im Jahr 251,” Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum 11 (1979): 263–86Google Scholar; Clarke, Letters, 1:21–39; Grattarola, Pio, “Il Problema dei Lapsi fra Roma e Cartagine,” Rivista di Storia delta Chiesa in Italia 38 (1984): 1–26Google Scholar; Grattarola, , “Gli Scismi di Felicissimo e di Novaziano,” Rivista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia 38 (1984): 367–90Google Scholar; Rives, J. B., “The Decree of Decius and the Religion of Empire,” journal of Roman Studies 89 (1999): 135–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Duval, Yvette, “Le début de la persecution de Dèce à Rome (Cyprien, Ep. 37),” Revue des Études Augustiniennes 46 (2000): 157–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Duval, , “Celerinus et les siens d'après la correspondance de Cyprien (Ep. 21–23, 37, 39),” Revue des Études Augustiniennes 47 (2001): 33–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dunn, Geoffrey D., “The Carthaginian Synod of 251: Cyprian's Model of Pastoral Ministry,” in I concili della cristianità occidentale secoli III–V, Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum 78, xxx Incontro di studiosi dell' antichità cristiania, Roma 3–5 maggio 2001 (Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 2002), 235–57.Google Scholar

67. Brown, Peter, Poverty and Leadership in the Later Roman Empire, Menahem Stern Jerusalem Lectures (Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 2002), 24.Google Scholar

68. Ibid.

69. Weaver, Rebecca H., “Wealth and Poverty in the Early Church,” Interpretation 41 (1987): 372.Google Scholar

70. Clarke, , “Praecedit Dissertatio,” 692.Google Scholar

71. , Ep. 7.2 (CCL 3B.39): “Viduarum et infirmorum et omnium pauperum curam peto diligenter habeatis.”

72. Ibid., 5.1.1 (CCL 3B.27). Bobertz, , “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron,” 132Google Scholar, states that Cyprian wanted the clergy to act as his clients in Carthage. I would argue instead that the clergy were here more agents than clients of Cyprian. Lectors, acolytes, deacons, presbyters, and bishops were all offices in an emerging clerical cursus honorum. At issue is the question of whether one who held a salaried position was the client of the one paying or was in some other relationship.

73. Cyprian, Ep. 5.1.2 (CCL 3B.27). Clarke, Letters, 1:185, n. 8, notes that there have been restrictions placed on the extent of the Church's care for those in need. Now, only the steadfast and meritorious poor were to be helped. One could contrast this with the attitude to be found in Augustine 140 years later that alms were to be given to sinners as well (Augustine, Serm. 164A [see Lambot, C., “Sermon sur l'aumône à restituer à saint Augustin,” Revue Bénédictine 66 (1956): 156–58 = Lambot 28]).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

74. Cyprian, Ep. 13.7 (CCL 3B.78).

75. Ibid., 7.2 (CCL 3B.39).

76. Bobertz, , “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron,” 132–36.Google Scholar

77. Cyprian, Ep. 5.1.2 (CCL 3B.27).

78. Clarke, Letters, 1:186, n. 10.

79. Eiusmodi would refer then not to the Decian persecution itself but to the various emergency situations, like the imprisonment of confessors, that occurred during the persecution.

80. Cyprian, Ep. 14.2.1 (CCL 3B.80).

81. Ibid., 14.2.1–2 (CCL 3B.80–81).

82. Ibid., 13.7 (CCL 3B.78). Duncan-Jones, R. P., “Wealth and Munificence in Roman Africa,” Papers of the British School at Rome 31 (1963): 171CrossRefGoogle Scholar, points out that 200 sesterces would provide a subsistence income for one person for one year

83. [Cyprian], Ep. 31.6.1 (CCL 3B.157).

84. Cyprian, Ep. 13.7 (CCL 3B.78): “Gaudeo autem quando cognosco plurimos fraters nostros pro sua dilectione certatim concurrere et necessitates uestras suis conlationibus adiuuare.”

85. Ibid., 12.1.1 (CCL 3B.67–68).

86. Ibid., 12.2.2 (CCL 3B.70). Brown, , Poverty and Leadership, 119Google Scholar, n. 75, cites this passage on defining who were the eligible poor in the context of his argument about the centralization of wealth for charitable purposes in the hands of the bishop. This is not actually evident in this letter.

87. On the dating of Epp. 10–12, see Clarke, Letters, 1:248.

88. Bobertz, , “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron,” 141–43.Google Scholar

89. Brown, Peter, Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity: Towards a Christian Empire (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1992), 90.Google Scholar

90. Bobertz, , “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron,” 147.Google Scholar

91. Ibid., 162, where Bobertz again identifies all the stantes mentioned in Ep. 12.2.2 with the poor.

92. Wealthy Christians who lapsed were ineligible to contribute to the care for poor Christians. This was accepted by everyone. This is why the laxist argument was so prevalent in Carthage—the church needed the wealthy lapsi to be readmitted to communion quickly so that they could start making financial contributions to the care of the poor again.

93. Cyprian, Ep. 14.1.1 (CCL 3B.79).

94. Ibid., 15.3.2 (CCL 3B.88).

95. Even this is a difficult thing to assert with absolute certainty. In Ep. 55.13.2 (CCL 3B.271), where he made distinctions between those who sacrificed willingly and those who were more reluctant, Cyprian was able to point to those who, while they themselves sacrificed, were able to spare their tenants and farmers and who welcomed into their estates refugees, to whom they provided direct pastoral care themselves, even while cut off from the church. Of course, it is not difficult to imagine Cyprian's concern with this arrangement. These generous lapsi would have had supporters in their claim for easy readmission to the church. The fact, though, that Cyprian wrote favorably about this type of lapsus should indicate that, by the time of the 251 synod, this was less of a problem for him.

96. Cyprian, Ep. 18.1.1 (CCL 3B.100).

97. [Cyprian], Ep. 8.3.1 (CCL 3B.42).

98. [Cyprian], Ep. 50.1.2 (CCL 3B.238–39); Cyprian, Ep. 52.1.2 (CCL 3B.244); 52.2.5 (CCL 3B.247). See Dunn, Geoffrey D., “Widows and Other Women in the Pastoral Ministry of Cyprian of Carthage,” Augustinianum (forthcoming).Google Scholar

99. Cyprian, Ep. 16.2.3 (CCL 3B.92): “precibus et operibus suis satisfacere.”

100. Weaver, , “Wealth and Poverty in the Early Church,” on page 374Google Scholar, states that “Cyprian's teachings on the redemptive value of almsgiving and the hazards inherent in riches clearly had antecedents in Clement [of Alexandria].” The idea in Clement, as she points out on page 371, is that by helping poor Christians the rich would have someone to pray for them in heaven. Such an idea might be found in Cyprian's de Habi., but what we begin to find from Ep. 16 onwards is something different.

101. See Ramsay, Boniface, “Almsgiving in the Latin Church: The Late Fourth and Early Fifth Centuries,” Theological Studies 43 (1982): 241–47.Google Scholar

102. Cyprian, Ep. 19.1.1 (CCL 3B.103).

103. [Cyprian], Ep. 21.2.2 (CCL 3B 112–13). On these two women, see Dunn, Geoffrey D., “Cyprian and Women in a Time of Persecution,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History (forthcoming).Google Scholar

104. Ibid., 21.4.1 (CCL 3B.114).

105. Ibid., 33.2.1 (CCL 3B.165).

106. See Clarke, G. W., The Letters of St. Cyprian of Carthage, vol. 2, Letters 28–54, Ancient Christian Writers 44 (New York: Newman, 1984), 204Google Scholar, n. 4, for whether Felicissimus was a deacon at this point or was only appointed as such by the presbyter Novatus sometime later (Cyprian, Ep. 52.2.3 [CCL 3B.246]). Bobertz, , “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron,” 214–15Google Scholar, accepts that he was already a deacon.

107. See Bobertz, Charles A., “Patronage Networks and the Study of Ancient Christianity,” in Studia Patristica 24, ed. Livingstone, Elizabeth A., papers presented at the Eleventh International Conference on Patristic Studies, Oxford 1991 (Leuven: Peeters, 1993), 20–27.Google Scholar

108. Cyprian, Ep. 41.1.2 (CCL 3B.196–97).

109. Bobertz, , “Cyprian of Carthage as Patron,” 209.Google Scholar

110. Cyprian, Ep. 41.1.2 (CCL 3B.197).

111. Ibid., 41.2.1 (CCL 3B.198).

112. Dunn, , “The Carthaginian Synod of 251,” 243Google Scholar; Sage, Cyprian, 231–32. Clarke, Letters, 2:301–2, considers that, although de Laps, may have been read to the synod, it was not a “programmatic statement for that Council's agenda.”

113. Cyprian, de Laps. 35 (CCL 3.240–41): “iustis operibus incumbere quibus peccata purgantur, elemosynis frequenter insistere quibus a morte animae liberantur. Quod aduersarius auferebat Christus accipiat, nec teneri iam nec amari patrimonium debet quo quis et deceptus et uictus est. Pro hoste uitanda res, pro latrone fugienda, pro gladio metuenda possidentibus et ueneno. Ad hoc tantum profuerit quod remansit ut inde crimen et culpa redimatur; incunctanter et largiter fiat operatio, census omnis in medellam uulneris erogetur: opibus et facultatibus nostris qui de nobis iudicaturus est Dominus faeneretur. Sic sub apostolis fides uiguit, sic primus credentium populus Christi mandata seruauit. Prompti errant, largi errant, distribuendum per apostolos totum dabant, et non talia delicta redimebant.”

114. Ibid., 11 (CCL 3.226).

115. See Monceaux, , Histoire littéraire, 2:298–303Google Scholar; Maurice, Bévenot, St. Cyprian's De Unitate, Chap. 4 in the Light of the Manuscripts, Analecta Gregoriana 11 (Rome: Gregorian University, 1937), 66–77Google Scholar; Bévenot, , “Hi qui sacrificaverunt: A Significant Variant in Saint Cyprian's De Unitate,” Journal of Theological Studies, n.s. 5 (1954): 68–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bévenot, , St. Cyprian: The Lapsed, The Unity of the Catholic Church, Ancient Christian Writers 25 (New York: Paulist, 1956), 5–8Google Scholar; Sage, Cyprian, 241–48; Clarke, Letters, 2:301–2; Bobertz, Charles A., “The Historical Context of Cyprian's De Unitate,” journal of Theological Studies, n.s. 41 (1990): 107–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Burns, , Cyprian the Bishop, 60Google Scholar; Dunn, Geoffrey D., “Heresy and Schism According to Cyprian of Carthage,” journal of Theological Studies, n.s. 55 (2004): 551–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar. I am inclined to the view that Cyprian wrote the treatise with his own situation in mind but sent it to Rome (Ep. 54.4 [CCL 3B.255]) because it was relevant to the crisis that had developed there.

116. Cyprian, de Vnit. 26 (CCL 3.267).

117. See Ramsey, Boniface, “Almsgiving in the Latin Church: The Late Fourth and Early Fifth Centuries,” Theological Studies 43 (1982): 226–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar