that it _could be of no Weight unless confirmed by the first See_. Had he been well apprised of this, I cannot think he would have pronounced such a Sentence, as it is very certain he did, without the Authority, the Advice, or even the Knowlege, of the _first See_. [Sidenote: _The Bishop of_ Aquileia _communicates with_ Ruffinus, _though excommunicated by_ Anastasius.] As to _Ruffinus_, _Anastasius_, it is true, separated himself from his Communion; but did not excommunicate him, that is, as the Word is now understood, did not cut him off from the Communion of the Catholic Church, as _Baronius_ insinuates. The Power of excommunicating him in this Sense was by the Canons vested in his own Bishop; and it is manifest from _Jerom_, that _Chromatius_, then Bishop of _Aquileia_, continued to communicate with him after _Anastasius_ had renounced his Communion; nay, after _Chromatius_ himself had condemned _Origen_, and the _Origenists_[1370], that is, those who held the Errors of _Origen_. A plain Proof, that the Bishop of _Aquileia_ did not acquiesce in the Judgment of _Anastasius_ in ranking _Ruffinus_ among them. And truly the only Charge brought against him by _Anastasius_, in his Letter to _John_ of _Jerusalem_, was his having translated _Origen_ into the _Latin_ Tongue, without pointing out his Errors, or offering any Arguments to confute them. Thence he was by _Jerom_ induced to conclude, that _Ruffinus_ held the same Errors. [Sidenote: Ruffinus _unjustly condemned_.] _What could_ Ruffinus _propose_, says he in his Letter, _by translating_ Origen _into the_ Roman _Language? Had he exposed the execrable Errors his Work contains, and raised in his Readers that Indignation which the Author deserves, I should rather have praised than blamed him. But he has in his Mind consented to those Errors, and in translating the Sentiments of_ Origen _expressed his own_[1371]. This _Ruffinus_ denied; declaring, with the Words of _Origen_, in his Preface to the _Periarchon_[1372], that he embraced nothing as Truth, that any-ways differed from the received Doctrines of the Catholic Church: nay, he was so far from defending any of _Origen_’s Errors, which seemed to him repugnant to the Catholic Truths, that in the Apology he composed in Defence of that Writer, as well as in the Preface which he prefixed to his Translation, he undertook to prove, that those Errors were not his, but had been maliciously inserted into his Works, either by his Enemies to eclipse his Reputation, or by Heretics, who had fathered upon him their own Doctrines, with a View of recommending them to the World by the Authority of so great and so venerable a Name[1373]. He followed therein the Example of the most eminent Writers, and the greatest Lights of the Church, namely, of the Martyr _Pamphylus_[1374], of _Athanasius_[1375], _Basil_[1376], his Brother _Gregory_ of _Nyssa_[1377], _Gregory Nazianzen_[1378], and many others, who,