Skip to main content

Full text of "History Of The Christian Church Vol II Ante-Nicene Christianity A D 100-325"

See other formats 


*  29  250 


HISTORY 


or  THB 


CHRISTIAN  CHURCH' 


BY 


PHILIP  SCHAFF 


Chrhtianwi  mm:  C/rwfwni  nihil  a  me  tdwum 


VOL,  II. 
ANTK-NIOENE  OIIRISTIANITY. 

A.  1).  100-826. 


NKW  YORK 

CHAKLJCS  SCRIBNKR'S  SOUS 

1922 


Copvnronr,  18R3,  nv 
PHILIP  SrilAI'T 


Coi'YRKiHT,  19  11,  iff 

DAVID  S.  SC 


Printed  in  the  United  State*  of  AmoHet 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SECOND  EDITION. 


THIS  second  volume  contains  the  history  of  Christianity  from  the  end 
of  the  Apostolic  age  to  the  beginning  of  the  Nicene. 

The  first  Edict  of  Toleration,  A.  r>.  811,  made  an  end  of  persecution ; 
the  second  Edict  of  Toleration,  313  (there  is  no  third),  prepared  the  way 
for  legal  recognition  and  protection ;  the  Nicene  Council,  325,  marks  the 
solemn  inauguration  of  the  imperial  state-church.  Constantine,  like 
Eusebius,  the  theologian,  and  Hosius  the  statesman,  of  his  reign,  belongs 
to  both  periods  and  must  be  considered  in  both,  though  more  rally  in  the 
next. 

We  live  in  an  age  of  discovery  and  research,  similar  to  that  which  pre- 
ceded the  Reformation.  The  beginnings  of  history,  the  beginnings  of 
civilization,  the  beginnings  of  Christianity  are  now  absorbing  the  atten- 
tion of  scholars. 

During  the  present  generation  early  church  history  has  been  vastly 
enriched  by  new  sources  of  information,  and  almost  revolutionized  by  in- 
dependent criticism.  Among  the  recent  literary  discoveries  and  pub- 
lications the  following  deserve  special  mention : 

The  SYJRIAO  IGNATIUS  (by  Cureton  1845  and  1849),  which  opened  a 
new  chapter  in  the  Ignatian  controversy  so  closely  connected  with  the  rise 
of  Episcopacy  and  Catholicism ;  the  PHILOSOPHUMENA  of  HIPPOLYTUS 
(by  Miller  1851,  and  by  Duncker  and  Schneidewin,  1859),  which  have  shed 
a  flood  of  light  on  the  ancient  heresies  and  systems  of  thought,  as  well  as 
on  the  doctrinal  and  disciplinary  commotions  in  the  Roman  church  in 
the  early  part  of  the  third  century ;  the  TENTH  BOOK  of  THE  PSEUDO- 
CLEMENTINE  HOMILIES  (by  Dressel,  1853),  which  supplements  our 
knowledge  of  a  curious  type  of  distorted  Christianity  in  the  post-apos- 
tolic age,  and  furnishes,  by  an  undoubted  quotation,  a  valuable  contribu- 
tion to  the  solution  of  the  Johannean  problem ;  the  GREEK  HERMAS 
from  Mt.  Athos  (the  Codex  Lipsiensis,  published  by  Anger  and  Tischen- 
dorf,  1856) ;  a  new  and  complete  Greek  MS.  of  the  FIRST  EPISTLE  oi 
the  ROMAN  CLEMENT  with  several  important  new  chapters  and  the  oldest 

V 


vi  PREFACE. 

written  Christian  prayer  (about  one-tenth  of  the  whole),  found  in  a  Con- 
vent Library  at  Constantinople  (by  Bryennios,  1875) ;  and  in  the  sjime 
codex  the  SECOND  (so  called)  EPISTLE  of  CLEMENT,  or  post-Clcniontine 
HOMILY  rather,  in  its  complete  form  (20  chs.  instead  of  12),  giving  u,s 
the  first  post-apostolic  sermon,  besides  a  new  Greek  text  of  the  Epistle 
of  BARNABAS;  a  SYRIAC  Version  of  CLEMENT  in  the  library  of  Jules 
Mohl,  now  at  Cambridge  (1876) ;  fragments  of  TATIAN'S  DIATESSARON 
with  EPHR^M'S  COMMENTARY  on  it,  in  an  Armenian  version  (Latin  by 
Mosinger  1878) ;  fragments  of  the  apologies  of  MELITO  (1858),  and  Aius- 
TIDES  (1878)  j  the  complete  Greek  text  of  the  ACTS  of  THOMAS  (by  Max 
Bonnet,  1883) ;  and  the  crowning  discovery  of  all,  the  CODEX  SINAITI- 
cus,  the  only  complete  uncial  MS.  of  the  Greek  Testament,  together 
with  the  GREEK  BARNABAS  and  the  GREEK  HERMAS  (by  Tischcndorf, 
1862),  which,  with  the  facsimile  edition  of  the  VATICAN  CODEX  (1SG8- 
1881,  6  vols.),  marks  an  epoch  in  the  science  of  textual  criticism  of  the 
Greek  Testament  and  of  those  two  Apostolic  Fathers,  and  establishes  the 
fact  of  the  ecclesiastical  use  of  all  our  canonical  books  in  tho  age  of 
Eusebius. 

In  view  of  these  discoveries  we  would  not  be  surprised  if  tho  EXPOSI- 
TION of  THE  LORD'S  ORACLES  by  PAPIAS,  which  was  still  in  existence 
at  Nismes  in  1215,  the  MEMORIALS  of  HEGESIPPUS,  and  the  whole 
GREEK  original  of  IRENJBUS,  which  were  recorded  by  a  librarian  us  ex- 
tant in  the  sixteenth  century,  should  turn  up  in  some  old  convent. 

In  connection  with  these  fresh  sources  there  has  been  a  corresponding 
activity  on  the  part  of  scholars.  The  Germans  have  done  and  are  doing 
an  astonishing  amount  of  Quellenforschung&uA  QuellenkriLik  in  numorouB 
monographs  and  periodicals,  and  have  given  us  the  newest  and  best 
critical  editions  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  and  Apologists.  The  JOnglinh 
with  their  strong  common  sense,  judicial  calmness,  and  conservative  tact 
are  fast  wheeling  into  the  line  of  progress,  as  is  evident  from  the  collec- 
tive works  on  Christian  Antiquities,  and  Christian  Biography,  and  from 
Bp.  Lightfoot's  Clementine  Epistles,  which  are  soon  to  be  followed  by  his 
edition  of  the  Ignatian  Epistles.  To  the  brilliant  French  genius  and  learn- 
ing of  Mr.  Renan  we  owe  a  graphic  picture  of  the  secular  surrounding 
of  early  Christianity  down  to  the  time  of  Marcus  Aurelius,  with  sharp 
glances  into  the  literature  and  life  of  the  church.  liiw  Histoire  den 
Origins  du  Christianisme,  now  completed  in  seven  volumes,  after  twenty 
years'  labor,  is"  well  worthy  to  rank  with  Gibbon's  immortal  work.  The 
Rise  and  Triumph  of  Christianity  is  a  grander  theme  than  the  contempo- 
rary Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire,  but  no  historian  can  do 
justice  to  it  without  faith  in  the  divine  character  and  mission  of  that 
peaceful  Conqueror  of  immortal  souls,  whose  kingdom  shall  have  no  end, 


PREFACE.  vii 

The  importance  of  these  literary  discoveries  and  investigations  should 
not  blind  us  to  the  almost  equally  important  monumental  discoveries  and 
researches  of  Cavalier  de  Rossi,  Garrucci,  and  other  Italian  scholars  who 
have  illuminated  the  subterranean  mysteries  of  the  church  of  Rome  and 
of  early  Christian  art.  Neander,  Gieseler,  and  Baur,  the  greatest  church 
historians  of  the  nineteenth  century,  are  as  silent  about  the  catacombs 
as  Mosheim  and  Gibbon  were  in  the  eighteenth.  But  who  could  now  write 
a  history  of  the  first  three  centuries  without  recording  the  lessons  of  those 
rude  yet  expressive  pictures,  sculptures  and  epitaphs  from  the  homes  of 
confessors  and  martyrs  ?  Nor  should  we  overlook  the  gain  which  has 
come  to  us  from  the  study  of  monumental  inscriptions,  as  for  instance 
in  rectifying  the  date  of  Polycarp's  martyrdom  who  is  now  brought  ten 
years  nearer  to  the  age  of  St.  John. 

Before  long  there  will  be  great  need  of  an  historic  architect  who  will 
construct  a  beautiful  and  comfortable  building  out  of  the  vast  material 
thus  brought  to  light.  The  Germans  are  historic  miners,  the  French  and 
English  are  skilled  manufacturers  j  the  former  understand  and  cultivate 
the  science  of  history,  the  latter  excel  in  the  art  of  historiography.  A 
master  of  both  would  be  the  ideal  histprian.  But  God  has  wisely  dis- 
tributed his  gifts,  and  made  individuals  and  nations  depend  upon  and 
supplement  each  other. 

The  present  volume  is  an  entire  reconstruction  of  the  corresponding 
part  of  the  first  edition  (vol.  I.  p.  144^528),  which  appeared  twenty-five 
years  ago.  It  is  more  than  double  in  size.  Some  chapters  (e.  g.  VI.  VII. 
IX.)  and  several  sections  (e.  g.  90-93, 103,  155-157,  168,  171, 184, 189, 
190, 193,  198-204,  etc.)  are  new,  and  the  rest  has  been  improved  and 
enlarged,  especially  the  last  chapter  on  the  literature  of  the  church.  My 
endeavor  has  been  to  bring  the  book  up  to  the  present  advanced  state  oi 
knowledge,  to  record  every  important  work  (German,  French,  English, 
and  American)  which  has  come  under  my  notice,  and  to  make  the  results 
of  the  best  scholarship  of  the  age  available  and  useful  to  the  rising  gene- 
ration. 

In  conclusion,  I  may  be  permitted  to  express  my  thanks  for  the  kind 
reception  which  has  been  accorded  to  this  revised  edition  of  the  work  of 
my  youth.  It  will  stimulate  me  to  now  energy  in  carrying  it  forward  as 
far  as  God  may  give  time  and  strength.  The  third  volume  needs  no  re- 
construction, and  a  new  edition  of  the  same  with  a  few  improvements 
will  be  issued  without  delay. 

PHILIP  SCHAFF* 

UNION  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY, 
October,  1883. 


CONTENTS. 

SECOND  PERIOD: 

ANTE-NIOENE   CHRISTIANITY. 

A,D.  100-311  (325), 

INTEODUOTION. 

j    ?..  General  Literature  on  the  Ante-Nicene  Age ,.  8 

\   2.  General  Character  of  Ante-Nicene  Christianity. 7 

CHAPTER  I. . 
SPREAD  OP  CHBISTLUUTT . 

8,  Literature 13 

4.  Hindrances  and  Helps 14 

j    6.  Causes  of  the  Success  of  Christianity J  16 

C.  Means  of  Propagation 19 

7.  Extent  of  Christianity  in  the  Roman  Empire 22 

8.  Christianity  in  Asia 23 

9.  Christianity  in  Egypt 24 

10.  Christianity  in  North  Africa 26 

11.  Christianity  in  Europe 28 

CHAPTER  IL 
FIESEOTJTION  or  CHRISTIANITY  AND  CHRISTIAN  MARTYRDOM. 

12.  Literature 81 

13.  General  Survey 32 

14.  Jewish  Persecution 36 

15.  Causes  of  Roman  Persecution 40 

16.  Condition  of  the  Church  before  the  Reign  of  Trajan 44 

17.  The  Reign  of  Trajan.    A.  D.  98-117.    Martyrdom  of  Ignatius  .  .  45 

18.  Hadrian,     A.D.  117-137 49 

19.  Antoninus  Pius.    A.D.  137-161.    Martyrdom  of  Polycarp  .   ...  50 

20.  Persecutions  under  Marcus  Aurelius.    A.  D.  161-180 62 

IX 


x  CONTENTS. 

?  21.  From  Septimius  Severus  to  Philip  the  Arabian.    A.D.  193-249    .  57 
2  22.  Persecutions  under  Decius  and  Valerian.    A.  D.  24U-2CO.     Martyr- 

dom of  Cyprian  .    .    .    .  •    .............  '  .   .  GO 

2  23.  Temporary  Repose.     A.  D.  260-303  .........   .   .   .    .   .  03 

$24.  The  Diocletian  Persecution.    A.D.  303-311  .........  04 

1  25.  The  Edicts  of  Toleration.    A.  D.  311-313  ............  71 

2  26.  Christian  Martyrdom  ....................  74 

g  27.  Else  of  the  Worship  of  Martyrs  and  Relics  ...........  82 

CHAPTER  III. 
LITERARY  CONTEST  OF  CHRISTIANITY  WITH  JUDAISM  AND  HEATHENISM. 

§  28.  Literature  ........................  85 

2  29.  Literary  Opposition  to  Christianity  ..............  80 

2  30.  Jewish  Opposition.    Josephus  and  the  Talmud  ........  '.  87 

§  31.  Pagan  Opposition.    Tacitus  and  Pliny  .............  88 

g  32.  Direct  Assaults.    Celsus  .......  •  ............  81) 

2  33.  Lucian    ..........................  WJ 

}  34.  Neo-Platonism  .......................  05 

J  35.  Porphyry  and  Hierocles  .................   *   .  101 

5  36.  Summary  of  the  Objections  to  Christianity  ...........  103 

2  37.  The  Apologetic  Literature  of  Christianity  ...........  104 

§  38.  The  Argument  against  Judaism  ................  107 

2  39.  The  Argument  against  Heathenism  ...........   ...  KM) 

£  40.  The  Positive  Apology  .   .•  ..................  114 

CHAPTER  IV. 

ORGANIZATION  AND  DISCIPLINE  OF  TUB  CHURCH. 

41.  Progress  in  Consolidation  .................  121 


2  42.  Clergy  and  Laity 

2  43.  New  Church  Officers  ...............    *  .....  1,'Jl 

{  44.  Origin  of  the  Episcopate  ...................  J#2 

245.  Development  of  the  Episcopate.    Ignatius   ...........  144 

2  46,  Episcopacy  at  -the  Time  of  Irenseus  and  Tertullian  ........  140 

2  47.  Cypriaiiic  Episcopacy  ....................  ICO 

2  48.  The  Pseudo-Clementine  Episcopacy  ..............  151 

2  49.  Beginnings  of  the  Metropolitan  and  Patriarchal  Systems  .....  152 

250.  Germs  of  the  Papacy   ....................  154 

251.  Chronology  of  the  Popes  ...................  1015 

2  62.  List  of  the  Roman  Bishops  and  Roman  Emperors  during  the  First 

Three  Centuries   ....................  lf,(j 

2  53.  The  Catholic  Unity   .....................  168 

2  54.  Councils     .........................  175 

|  55.  The  Councils  of  Elvira,  Aries,  and  Ancyra  ...........  170 

2  66.  Collections  of  Ecclesiastical  Law.  The  Apostolic  Constitutions  and 

Canons  .......  •  ......   .   ..........  Ifl3 

2  67.  Church  Discipline    ...........   ,  .........  187 

{  68,  Church.  Schisms  ..........  .  ,  .  .........  198 


CONTENTS.  Xl 

CHAPTER  V. 

CHRISTIAN  WORSHIP. 

1  59.  Places  of  Common  Worship 198 

2  60.  The  Lord's  Day     .   .  • 201 

2  61.  The  Christian  Passoyer  (Easter) 206 

2  62.  The  Paschal  Controversies 209 

2  63.  Pentecost 220 

2  64.  Epiphany 221 

2  05.  The  Order  of  Public  Worship 222 

2  06.  Parts  of  Worship,    Reading  of  Scriptures.     Sermons.     Prayers 

Hymns 224 

2  67.  Tho  Division  of  Divino  Porvice.    The  Disciplina  Arcani 231 

2  68.  Tho  Celebration  of  the  Eucharist 235 

2  60.  The  Doctrine  of  the  Eucharist 241 

2  70.  The  Celebration  of  Baptism 247 

\  71.  The  Doctrine  of  ftnpl ism 253 

2  72.  Catechetical  Instruction  and  Confirmation * 255 

2  73.  Infant  Baptism 258 

2  74.  Heretical  Baptism 262 

CHAPTER  VI. 
BEGINNINGS  OF  CHRISTIAN  ABT. 

2  75.  Literature 266 

2  76.  Origin  of  Christian  Art 267 

\  77.  Tho  Cross  and  the  Crucifix 269 

2  78.  Other  Christian  Symbols 273 

g  79.  Historical  and  Allegorical  Pictures .  .  .  .  274 

2  80.  Allegorical  Representations  of  Christ , 276 

2  81.  Pictures  of  the  Virgin  Mary 281 

CHAPTER  VT1. 

THE  CHURCH  IN  THE  CATACOMK. 

?  82.  Literature 286 

2  83.  Origin  and  History  of  the  Catacombs 287 

2  84.  Description  of  the  Catacombs 294 

2  85.  Pictures  and  Sculptures 298 

2  86.  Epitaphs 299 

2  87.  Lessons  of  the  Catacombs 8°6 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
THB  CnmsTiAN  LTB-E  IN  CONTRAST  WITH  PAGAN  COBRTJPTION. 

\  88.  Literature 31* 

2  89.  Moral  Corruption  in  the  Roman  Empire 312 

\  90.  Stoic  Morality 81* 


sii  CONTENTS. 

g    91.  Epictetus    ........................  321 

g    92.  Marcus  Aurelius     .....................  3^6 

g    93.  Plutarch      ........................  330 

g    94.  Christian  Morality     ....................  334 

g    95.  The  Church  and  Public  Amusements      ............  338 

g    96.  Secular  Callings  and  Civil  Duties     ..............  343 

g    97.  The  Church  and  Slavery    ..................  347 

g    98.  The  Heathen  Family      ...................  854 

g    99.  The  Christian  Family  ...................  361 

\  100.  Brotherly  Love  and  Love  for  Enemies    ............  370 

\  101.  Prayer  and  Fasting    ....................  377 

§  102.  Treatment  of  the  Dead  ...................  380 

\  103,  Summary  of  Moral  Reforms  .................  386 


CHAPTER  IX. 

ASCETIC  TENDENCIES. 

g  104.  Ascetic  Virtue  and  Piety  ..................  387 

§  105.  Heretical  and  Catholic  Asceticism   ..............  392 

g  106.  Voluntary  Poverty  .....................  396 

I  107.  Voluntary  Celibacy    ....................  307 

g  108.  Celibacy  of  the  Clergy   ...................  403 

CHAPTER  X. 

MONTANISM. 

g  109.  Literature    ......  '  .................  416 

g  110.  External  History  of  Montanism   ...............  417 

g  111,  Character  and  Tenets  of  Montanism    .............  421 

CHAPTER  XI. 

THE  HEBESIES  OF  TIIE  ANTE-NIOENB  AGB. 

g  112.  Judaism  and  Heathenism  within  the  Church     .........  428 

g  113.  Nazarenes  and  Ebionites.    (Elkesaites,  Mandseans.)    ......  48€ 

g  114.  The  Pseudo-Clementine  Ebionism    ..............  436 

j  115.  Gnosticism.    The  Literature    .............  ...  442 

g  1  16.  Meaning,  Origin  and  Character  of  Gnosticism  ...  ......  444 

g  117.  System  of  Gnosticism.    Its  Theology  .............  449 

g  118.  Ethics  of  Gnosticism  ....................  457 

g  119.  Cultus  and  Organization    ..............  „  .   .  ,  453 

g  120.  Schools  of  Gnosticism    ...................  459 

g  121.  Simon  Magus  and  the  Simonians  ..,.«..,  .......  461 

g  122.  The  Nicolaitans  ......................  464 

g  123.  Cerinthus  ................  ,  .........  406 

g  124.  Basilides  .........................  466 

g  125.  Valentinus  ........................  473 


CONTENTS.  xiii 

2  126.  The  School  of  Valentinus,    fleracleon   .Ptolemy,  Marcos,  Barde- 

san.es,  Harmonius       .  479 

2  127.  Marcion  and  his  School 482 

2  128.  The  Ophites.    The  Sethites  Peratae,  and   lamites 487 

2  129.  Saturninus  (Satormlos^ 491 

2  130.  Carpocrates 492 

2  181.  Tatian  and  the  Encratites      , 493 

2  132,  Justin  the  Gnostic  .   .       ,       .       .          495 

g  133.  Heriuogenes .   .  .    ,  ,  .    .       496 

2'134.  Other  Gnostic  Sects       497 

2  135.  Mani  and  the  Manichaeans    .   .   .  .          498 

2  136.  The  Manichgean  System     .       .   .       .       .       ,  . 503 

CHAPTER  Xli 

THE  DEVELOPMENT  OP  CATHOLU    VHEOLOOY. 

|  187.  Catholic  Orthodoxy 509 

2  138.  The  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  Canon 516 

^  139.  Catholic  Tradition 524 

2  140.  The  Rule  of  Faith  and  the  Apostles' 'Creeo        528 

J  141.  Variations  of  the  Apostles7  Creed     Tables       .       , 634 

2  142.  God  and  the  Creation 538 

2  143.  Man  and  the  Fall    .... 541 

2 144.  Christ  and  the  Incarnation  -       .   .          -,       ........  544 

2  145.  The  Divinity  of  Christ • 648 

2  146.  The  Humanity  of  Chris*1 656 

2  147.  The  Relation  of  the  Di  <ne  and  Human  IT    Jurist 559 

2  148.  The  Holy  Spirit 560 

2  149.  The  Holy  Trinity •  •  -  .  .  564 

2  150.  Antitrinitarians.     .First  Class    JL'he  Alo#,  Iheodotus,  Artemon, 

Paul  of  Samoa  ita       .       ,   .  571 

2  151.  Antitrinitariana. -^  cconlClass    Praxeas  lN-»etus,Ca™»*qs,Beryllus  576 

2  152.  Sabellianism 580 

2  153.  Redemption  . .  583 

2  154.  Other  Doctrines 588 

2  155.  Eachatology.    Immortality  and  Resurrection 589 

2  156.  Between  Death  and  Resurrection    ... ,  .  599 

2  157.  After  Judgment     Future  Punishmenr,      .*,.'. 606 

2  158.  ChiliaBm •     ...  612 

CHAPTER  Xili 

ECCLESIASTICAL  LTTBEATUBE  OF  THE  ANTE-^IOESE  AGE,  AND    IOGEAPHICAL 
(SKETCHES  OF  THE  CHTTROB  H  4THEBS. 

2  159.  Literature .  .  .  .  620 

2  160.  A  General  Estimate  ot  the  Father*      •         625 

1 161.  The  Apostolic  U'atners ...  631 

\  162.  Clement  of  Rome 636 


4v  CONTENTS. 

\  163.  The  Pseudo-Clementine  Writings 648 

2  164.  Ignatius  of  Antioch .  ,  .  661 

2  165.  The  Ignatian  Controversy 660 

2  166.  Polycarp  of  Smyrna 664 

2  167.  Barnabas 671 

I  168.  Hermas 678 

1  169.  Papias 693 

2  170.  The  Epistle  to  Diognetus 608 

1  171.  Sixtus  of  Borne 703 

J  172.  The  Apologists.    Quadratus  and  Aristides 707 

2  173.  Justin  the  Philosopher  and  Martyr 710 

2  174.  The  other  Greek  Apologists.    Tatian 720 

2  175.  Athenagoras  . " 730 

2  176.  Theophilus  of  Antioch 732 

1 177.  Melito  of  Sardis 730 

2  178.  Apolinarius  of  Hierapolis.    Miltiades ,   , 740 

2  179.  Hermias 741 

2  180.  Hegesippus 742 

2  181.  Dionysius  of  Corinth 744 

2  182.  Irenes 740 

2  183.  Hippolytus 757 

2  184.  Caius  of  Kome 775 

g  185   The  Alexandrian  School  of  Theology *  .  777 

2  186.  Clement  of  Alexandria 781 

2  187.  Origen 785 

2  188.  The  Works  of  Origen 703 

2  189.  The  School  of  Origen.    Gregory  Thaumaturgus 700 

2  190.  Dionysius  the  Great 800 

2  191.- Julius  Africanus 803 

2192,  Minor  Divines  of  the  Greek  Church 800 

2  193.  Opponents  of  Origen.    Methodius 800 

2  194.  Lucian  of  Antioch  ..." 812 

2  195.  The  Antiochian  School .  .  815 

2  196.  Tertullian  and' the  African  School 818 

\  197.  The  Writings  of  Tertullian 82g 

{  198.  Minucius  Felix 833 

2  199.  Cyprian 842 

{  200.  Novatian 849 

2  201.  Commodian 863 

§  202.  Arnobius • 850 

{  203.  Victorinus ,  8C1 

I  204.  Eusebius,  Lactantius,  Hosius 864 


Illustrations  from  the  Catacombs ,,,..»  4     867 

Alphabetical  Index *••  t  «•  t   <»,«.*«     W 


SECOND  PERIOD, 


CHRISTIANITY; 

OK, 

THE  AGE  OF  PERSECUTION  AND  MARTYRDOM; 

FEOM   THE 

DEATH  OF  JOHN  THE  APOSTLE  TO  CONSTANTINE  THE  GREAT, 

A.  D.  100-325. 


BLOOD  OF  MARTYRS  IS  THE  SEED  OF  THE  CHURCH," 


SECOND  PERIOD. 


CHRISTIANITY; 

OR, 

THE  AGE  OF  PERSECUTION  AND  MARTYRDOM. 

FROM  THE 
DEATH  OF  JOHN  THE  APOSTLE  TO  CONSTANTINE  THE  GREAT. 


§  1.  Literature  on  the  Ante-Nicene  Age. 

I.  SOURCES. 

<*  .  1.  The  writings  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  the  Apologists,  and  all 
the  ecclesiastical  authors  of  the  2nd  and  3rd,  and  to  some  extent  of 
the  4th  and  5th  centuries  ;  particularly  CLEMENT  OF  EOME,  IGNA- 
TIUS, POLYCARP,  JUSTIN  MARTYR,  IREN-EUS,  HIPPOLYTUS,  TER- 
TULLIAN,  CYPRIAN,  CLEMENT  or  ALEXANDRIA,  ORIGEN,  EUSE- 
BIUS,  JEROME,  EPIPHANIUS,  and  TEEODORET. 

2.  The  writings  of  the  numerous  heretics,  mostly  extant  only  in 
fragments. 

3.  The  works  of  the  pagan  opponents  of  Christianity,  as  CELSUS, 
LUCIAN,  PORPHYRY,  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE. 

4.  The  occasional  notices  of  Christianity,  in  the  contemporary 
classical  authors,  TACITUS,  SUETONIUS,  the  younger  PLINY,  DION 


II.  COLLECTIONS  OF  SOURCES,  (besides  those  included  in  the  com- 

prehensive Patristic  Libraries)  : 
GJBBHARDT,  HARNACK,  and  ZAHN  :  Patrum  Apostolicorum  Opera.    Lips., 

1876  ;  second  ed.  1878  sqq. 
FR.  XAV.  FUNK  (R.  0.):  Opera  Patrum  Apost.    Tubing.,  1878,  1881, 

1887,  2  vols.    The  last  edition  includes  the  Didache. 
L  C.  TH.  OTTO  :   Corpus  Apologetarum  Ckristianontm  soscuU  secundi. 

Jense,  1841  sqq.,  in  9  vols.  ;  2nd  ed.  1847-1861  ;  3rd  ed.  1876  sqq. 


4  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

ROBERT  AND  DONALDSON  :  Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library.    Edinburgh 

(T.&  T.  Clark),  1868-'72,  25  volumes.    American  edition,  chrono- 

logcally  arranged  and  enlarged  by  Bishop  A.  C.  COXB,  D.  D. ,  with 

a  valuable  Bibliographical  Synopsis  by  E.  C.  RICHARDSON.    Now 

York  (Christian  Literature  Company),  1885-87,  9  large  vols. . 

The  fragments  of  the  earliest  Christian  writers,  whose  works  are 
lost,  may  be  found  collected  in  GRABE  :  SpicUegium  Patrum  ut  et 
Haereticorum  Saeculi  I.  II.  et  UL  (Oxon.  1700 ;  new  ed.  Oxf.  1714, 
3  vols.);  in  BOTJTH:  ReliquuR  JSacrce,  swe  auctorum  fere  jam  perdi- 
torum  secundi,  tertiique  saeculi  fragmenta,  quae  supersunt  (Oxon.  1814 
sqq.  4  vols. ;  2nd  ed.  enlarged,  5  vols.  Oxf.  1846-48) ;  and  in  DOM. 
I.  B.  PITRA  (0.  S.  B.3  a  French  Cardinal  since  1863) :  Spidlegium 
Solesmense,  complectens  sanctorum  patrum  scriptorumque  eccles.  anec- 
dota  hactenus  opera)  selecta  e  Graecis,  Orientialibus  et  Latinis  codicibus 
(Paris,  1852-'60,  5  vols.).  Comp.  also  BUNSEN  :  Christianity  and  Man- 
Und,  etc.  Lond.  1854,  vols.  V.,  VI.  and  VII.,  which  contain  the 
Analecta  Ante-Nicaena  (reliquiw  literarics,  canonicos,  liturgies). 

The  h&reseological  writings  of  Epiphanius,  Philastrius,  Pseudo- 
Tertullian,  etc.  are  collected  in  FRANC.  OEHLER  :  Corpus  hcereseolo- 
gicum.  Berol.  1856-61,  3  vols.  They  belong  more  to  the  next  period. 
The  Jewish  and  Heathen  Testimonies  are  collected  by  N.  LARDNER, 
1764,  new  ed.  by  Kippis,  Lond.  1838. 
m.  HISTORIES. 
1.  Ancient  Historians. 

HEGESIPPTJS  (a  Jewish  Christian  of  the  middle  of  the  second  cen- 
tury) :  'TTTo/n^ara  TG>V  £KK%7}fftaffTiKG>v  trpageuv  (quoted  under  the 
title  Tf&re  virofivfaara  and  ^vre  cvyyp&fjLfjLaTa).  These  ecclesiastical 
Memorials  are  only  preserved  in  fragments  (on  the  martyrdom  of 
James  of  Jerusalem,  the  rise  of  heresies,  etc.)  in  Eusebius  H.  Eccl., 
collected  by  Grabe  (Spitileg.  II,  203-214),  Routh  (Reliqu.  Sacra, 
vol.  I.  209-219),  and  Hilgenfeld  ("  Zeitschrift  fur  wissenschaffcliche 
Theol."  1876,  pp.  179  sqq.).  See  art.  of  Weizsacker  in  Herzog,  2nd 
ed.,  V.  695 ;  and  of  Milligan  in  Smith  &  Wace,  II,  875.  The  work 
was  still  extant  in  the  16th  century,  and  may  be  discovered  yet;  see 
Hilgenfeld's  "Zeitschrift"  for  1880,  p.  127.  It  is  strongly  Jewish" 
Christian,  yet  not  Ebionite,  but  Catholic. 

*ETTSEBnrs  (bishop  of  Caesarea  in  Palestine  since  315,  died  340,  "the 
father  of  Church  History,"  "the  Christian  Herodotus,"  confidential 
friend,  adviser,  and  eulogist  of  Constantino  the  Great) :  'E/c^o 'iaaru$ 
laropia,  from  the  incarnation  to  the  defeat  and  death  of  Licinius  324. 
Chief  edd.  by  Stephens,  Paris  1544  (ed.  princeps) ;  Valerius  (with  the 
other  Greek  church  historians),  Par.  1659 ;  Reading,  Cambr.  1720 ; 
Zimmermann,  Francof.  1822;  Burton,  Oxon.  1838  and  1845  (2  vols.); 
Schwegler,  Tub.  1852;  Ldmmer,  Scaphus.  1862  (important  for  the 
text) ;  F.  A.  Heinichen,  Lips.  1827,  second  ed.  improved  1868-70, 
S  vols.  (the  most  complete  and  useml  edition  of  all  the  ficripta  His* 


§  1.  LITERATURE  ON  THE  ANTE-NICENE  AGE.  5 

torica  of  Eus.);  G,  Dindorf,  Lips.,  1871.  Several  versions  (German, 
French,  and  English) ;  one  by  Hanmer  (Cambridge?  1683,  etc.) ; 
another  by  £7.  F.  Crust  (an  Am.  Episo.,  London,  1842,  Phil.,  1860, 
included  in  Bagster's  edition  of  the  Greek  Eccles.  Historians,  London, 
1847,  and  in  Bonn's  Eccles.  Library)]  the  best  with  commentary  by 
A.  G.  McGiffert  (to  be  published  by  "The  Christian  Lit.  Comp.," 
New  York,  1890). 

The  other  historical  writings  of  Eusebius,  including  his  Chronicle, 
his  Life  of,  Constantine,  and  his  Martyrs  of  Palestine,  are  found  in 
Heinichen's  ed.,  and  also  in  the  ed.  of  his  Opera  omnia,  by  MIGNE, 
11  Patrol.  Graeca,"  Par.  1857,  5  vols.  Best  ed.  of  his  Chronicle,  by 
ALFRED  SOHONE,  Berlin,  "866  and  1875,  2  vols. 

Whatever  may  be  said  of  the  defects  of  Eusebius  as  an  historical 
critic  and  writer,  his  learning  and  industry  are  unquestionable,  and 
his  Church  History  and  Chronicle  will  always  remain  an  invaluable 
collection  of  information  not  attainable  in  any  other  ancient  author. 
The  sarcastic  contempt  of  Gibbon  and  charge  of  williul  suppression 
of  truth  are  not  justified,  except  against  his  laudatory  over-estimate 
of  Constantine,  whose  splendid  services  to  the  church  blinded  his 
vision.  For  a  just  estimate  of  Eusebius  see  the  exhaustive  article  of 
Bishop  Lightfoot  in  Smith  &  Wace,  II.  308-348. 
2.  Modern  Historians. 

WILLIAM  CAVE  (died  1713):  Primitive  Christianity.  Lond.  4th  ecL 
1682,  in  3  parts.  The  same :  Lives  of  the  most  eminent  Fathers  of 
"  the  Ghurch  that  flourished  in  the  first  four  centuries,  1677-'83,  2  vols.  ; 
revised  by  ed.  H.  Carey,  Oxford,  1840,  in  3  vols.  Comp.  also  CAVE'S 
Scriptorum  ecclesiasticorum  historia  lit&raria,  a,  Christo  nato  usque 
ad  sosculum  XIV;  best  ed.  Oxford,  1740-'43,  2  vols.  fol. 

*  J.  L.  MOSHEIM  :  Commentarii  de  rebus  Christianis  ante  Constantinum 

M.  Helmst.  1753.  The  same  in  English  by  Vidal,  1813  sqq.,  3  vols., 
and  by  Murdoch,  New  Haven,  1852,  2  vols. 

*  EDWAUD  GIBBON:    The  History  of  the  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman 

Empire.  London,  1776-'88,  6  vols.  j  best  edd.  by  Mifcnan,  with  his 
own,  Guizot's  and  Wenck's  notes,  and  by  William  Smith,  includ- 
ing the  notes  of  Milman,  etc.  Reprinted,  London,  1872, 8  vols.,  !New 
York,  Harpers,  1880,  in  6  vols.  In  Chs.  15  and  16,  and  throughout 
his  great  work,  Gibbon  dwells  on  the  outside,  and  on  the  defects  rather 
than  the  virtues  of  ecclesiastical  Christianity,  without  entering  into 
the  heart  of  spiritual  Christianity  which  continued  beating  through 
all  ages ;  but  fox  fullness  and  general  accuracy  of  information  and 
artistic  representation  his  work  is  still  unsurpassed. 

H.  G.  TZSCHIRNER:  Der  Fall  des  Heidenthums.    Leipz.  1829. 

EDW.  BURTON:  Lectures  upon  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  the  first  three 
Centuries.  Oxf.  1833,  in  3  parts  (in  1  vol.  1845)  He  made  also 
collections  of  the  ante-Nicene  testimonies  to  the  Divinity  of  Christ, 
and  the  Holy  Spirit. 

HENRY  H.  MILMAN  :  The  History  of  Christianity  from  the  Birth  of  Christ 


6  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

to  the  Abolition  of  Paganism  in  the  Eoman  Empire.    Lond.  1840. 

3  vols. ;  2nd  ed.  1866. "  Comp.  also  the  first  book  of  his  History  oj 
Latin  Christianity,  2cl  ed.  London  and  New  York,  1860,  in  8  vols. 

JOHN  EAYE  (Bishop  of  Lincoln,  d.  1853) :  Ecclesiastical  History  of  the 

Second  and  Third  Centuries,  illustrated  from  the  writings  of  Tcrtullian. 

Lond.  1845.     Comp.  also  his  books  on  Justin  Martyr,  Clement  ojf 

Alex.,  and  the  Council  of  Nicosa  (1853). 
F.  D.  MAURICE  :  Lectures  on  the  Eccles.  Hist,  of  the  First  and  Second 

Cent.    Cambr.  1854. 

*  A.  EITSCHL  :  Die  Entstehung  der  alt-katholischen  Kirche.    Bonn,  1850 ; 

2nd  ed.  1857.  The  second  edition  is  partly  reconstructed  and  more 
positive. 

*  E.  BE  PB,ESSENS£  (French  Protestant) :  Histoire  de  trois premiers  siecles 

del'fylisechretienne.  Par.  J858  sqq.  The  same  in  German  trans,  by  E. 
Fabarius,  Leipz.  1862-'63, 4  vols.  English  transl.  by  Annie  Harwood- 
Holmden,  under  the  title:  The  Early  Years  of  Christianity.  A  Com- 
prehensive History  of  the  First  Three  Centuries  of  the  Christian  Church, 

4  vols.    Vol.  I.  The  Apost.  Age ;  vol.  II.  Martyrs  and  Apologists ;  vol. 
III.  Heresy  and  Christian  Doctrine ;  vol.  IV.  Christian  Life  and  Prac- 
tice.   London  (Hodder  &  Stoughton),  1870  sqq.,  cheaper  ed.,  1879. 
Revised  edition  of  the  original,  Paris,  1887  sqq. 

W.  D.  KILLED  (Presbyterian) :  The  Ancient  Church  traced  for  the  first 
three  centuries.  Edinb.  and  New  York,  1859.  New  ed.  N.  Y.,  18K3. 

AMBROSE  MA^AHABT  (R.  Cath.):  Triumph  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  the 
Early  Ages.  New  York,  1859. 

ALVAH  LAMSON  (Unitarian):  The  Church  of  the  First  Three  Centuries, 
with  special  reference  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity;  illustrating  its 
late  origin  and  gradual  formation.  Boston,  1860. 

MILO  MAHAN  (Episcopalian) :  A  Church  History  of  the  First  Three  centurw. 
N.  York,  1860.  Second  ed.,  1878  (enlarged). 

J.  J.  BLUNT  :  History  of  the  Christian  Church  during  the  first  three  cen- 
turies. London,  1861. 

Jos.  SoHWAifE  (R.  C.):  Dogmengeschichte  der  vornicdnischen  Zeit* 
Mtinster,  1862. 

TH.  W.  MOSSMAN:  ffistory  of  the  Cath.  Church  of  J.  Christ  from  the 
death  of&t.  John  to  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  Lond.  1873. 

*EBNEST  RECAST  :  L'  Hi?t,oire  des  origines  du  Christianisme.  Paris,  1863- 
1882,  7  vols.  The  last  two  vols.,  V  fylise  Chrttienne,  1879,  and  Marc 
AurVle,  1882,  belong  to  this  period.  Learned,  critical,  and  brilliant, 
but  thoroughly  secular,  and  skeptical. 

*  GERHABD  UHLHORN:  Der  Kampfdes  Christenthums  mit  dem  Heiden- 

thum.  3d  improved  ed.  Stuttgart,  1879.  English  transl.  by  Profs. 
Egbert  C.  Smyth  and  C.  J.  H.  Ropes:  The  Conflict  of  Christianity,  etc. 
N.  York,  1879.  An  admirable  translation  of  a  graphic  and  inspiring 
account  of  the  heroic  conflict  of  Christianity  with  heathen  Rome, 


i  2.  CHARACTER  OF  ANfE-NlCENE  CHRISTIANITY.         7 

*THEOD.  KEIM,  (d.  1879):  Rom  und  das  Christenthum.    Ed.  from  the 
author's  MSS.  by  If.  Ziegler.    Berlin,  1881.    (667  pages). 

CHK.  WORDSWORTH  (Bishop  of  Lincoln) :  A  Church  History  to  the  Coun- 
cil of  Nicwa,  A.  D.  325.  Lond.  and  N.  York,  1881.    Anglo-Catholic. 

A.  PLUMMER  :    The  Church  of  the  Early  Fath&rs,  London,  1887. 

Of  the  general  works  on  Church  History,  those  of  BARONTUS, 

TlLLEMONT   (R.  C.),  SCHROCKH,  GlESELER,  NEANDER,  and  IUUB 

(the  third  revised  ed.  of  vol.  1st,  Tab.  1853,  pp.  175-527 ;  the  same 
also  transl.  into  English)  should  be  noticed  throughout  on  this 
period ;  but  all  these  books  are  partly  superseded  by  more  recent 
discoveries  and  discussions  of  special  points,  which  will  be  noticed 
in  the  respective  sections. 

§  2.  General  Character  of  Ante-Nic&ne  Christianity. 

We  now  descend  from  the  primitive  apostolic  church  to  the 
Graeco-Roman ;  from  the  scene  of  creation  to  the  work  of 
preservation;  from  the  fountain  of  divine  revelation  to  the 
stream  of  human  development;  from  the  inspirations  of  the 
apostles  and  prophets  to  the  productions  of  enlightened  but 
fallible  teachers.  The  hand  of  God  has  drawn  a  bold  line  of 
demarcation  between  the  century  of  miracles  and  the  succeeding 
ages,  to  show,  by  the  abrupt  transition  and  the  striking  contrast, 
the  difference  between  the  work  of  God  and  the  work  of  man-, 
and  to  impress  us  the  more  deeply  with  the  supernatural  origin 
of  Christianity  and  the  incomparable  value  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. There  is  no  other  transition  in  history  so  radical  and 
sudden,  and  yet  so  silent  and  secret.  The  stream  of  divine  life 
rtin  its  passage  from  the  mountain  of  inspiration  to  the  valley 
of  tradition  is  for  a  short  time  lost  to  our  view,  and  seems  to 
run  under  ground.  Hence  the  close  of  the  first  and  the  begin- 
ning of  the  second  centuries,  or  the  age  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers 
is  often  regarded  as  a  period  for  critical  conjecture  and  doc- 
trinal and  ecclesiastical  controversy  rather  than  for  historical 
narration. 

Still,  notwithstanding  the  striking  difference,  the  church  of 
the  second  and  third  centuries  is  a  legitimate  continuation  of 
that  of  the  primitive  age.  While  far  inferior  in  originality, 
purity,  energy,  and  freshness,  it  is  distinguished  for  conscientious 


8  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

fidelity  in  preserving  and  propagating  the  sacred  writings  and 
traditions  of  the  apostles,  and  for  untiring  zeal  in  imitating 
their  holy  lives  amidst  the  greatest  difficulties  and  dangers,  when 
the  religion  of  Christ  was  prohibited  by  law  and  the  profession 
of  it  punished  as  a  political  crime. 

The  second  period,  from  the  death  of  the  apostle  John  to  the 
end  of  the  persecutions,  or  to  the  accession  of  Constantino,  the 
first  Christian  emperor,  is  the  classic  age  of  the  eedesia  pressa, 
of  heathen  persecution,  and  of  Christian  martyrdom  and 
heroism,  of  cheerful  sacrifice  of  possessions  and  life  itself  for  tho 
inheritance  of  heaven.  It  furnishes  a  continuous  commentary 
on  the  Saviour's  words :  "  Behold,  I  send  you  forth  as  sheep  in 
the  midst  of  wolves ; "  "I  came  not  to  send  peace  on  earth,  but 
a  sword."1  No  merely  human  religion  could  have  stood  such 
an  ordeal  of  fire  for  three  hundred  years.  The  final  victory  of 
Christianity  over  Judaism  and  heathenism,  and  the  mightiest 
empire  of  the  ancient  world,  a  victory  gained  without  physical 
force,  but  by  the  moral  power  of  patience  and  perseverance,  of 
faith  and  love,  is  one  of  the  sublimest  spectacles  in  history,  and 
one  of  the  strongest  evidences  of  the  divinity  and  indestructible 
life  of  our  religion. 

But  equally  sublime  and  significant  are  the  intellectual  and 
spiritual  victories  of  the  church  in  this  period  over  the  science 
and  art  of  heathenism,  and  over  the  assaults  of  Gnostic  and 
Ebionitic  heresy,  with  the  copious  vindication  and  development 
of  the  Christian  truth,  which  the  great  mental  conflict  with 
those  open  and  secret  enemies  called  forth. 

The  church  of  this  period  appears  poor  in  earthly  possessions 
and  honors,  but  rich  in  heavenly  grace,  in  world-conquering 
faith,  love,  and  hope;  unpopular,  even  outlawed,  hated,  and 
persecuted,  yet  far  more  vigorous  and  expansive  than  the 
philosophies  of  Greece  or  the  empire  of  Rome;  composed 
chiefly  of  persons  of  the  lower  social  ranks,  yet  attracting  the 

1  Comp.  Matt.  10 :  17-39 ;  5  :  10,  12;  13  :  21 ;  16 :  24 ;  20  :  22  sq. ;  1  Cor, 
15:  31;  2  Cor.  4:  10;  Bom.  8:  35;  Phil.  3:  10  sq.;  Col.  1 :  24 sq.;  1  Pet 
2;  21. 


§  2.  CHARACTER  OF  ANTE-NICENE  CHRISTIANITY.         9 

,  noblest  and  deepest  minds  of  the  age,  and  bearing  in  her  bosom 
fche  hope  of  the  world;  "as  unknown,  yet  well-known,  as  dying, 
and  behold  it  lives ; "  conquering  by  apparent  defeat,  and  grow- 
ing on  the  blood  of  her  martyrs ;  great  in  deeds,  greater  in 
sufferings,  greatest  in  death  for  the  honor  of  Christ  and  the 
benefit  of  generations  to  come.1 

The  condition  and  manners  of  the  Christians  in  this  age  are 
most  beautifully  described  by  the  unknown  author  of  the  "Epis- 
tola  ad  Diognetum"  in  the  early  part  of  the  second  century.2 
"  The  Christians,"  he  says,  "  are  not  distinguished  from  other 
men  by  country,  by  language,  nor  by  civil  institutions.  For 
they  neither  dwell  in  cities  by  themselves,  nor  use  a  peculiar 
tongue,  nor  lead  a  singular  mode  of  life.  They  dwell  in  the 
Grecian  or  barbarian  cities,  as  the  case  may  be ;  they  follow  the 
usage  of  the  country  in  dress,  food,  and  the  other  affairs  of  life. 
Yet  they  present  a  wonderful  and  confessedly  paradoxical  con- 
duct. They  dwell  in  their  own  native  lands,  but  as  strangers. 
They  take  part  in  all  things,  as  citizens ;  and  they  suffer  all 
things,  as  foreigners.  Every  foreign  country  is  a  fatherland  to 
them,  and  every  native  land  is  a  foreign.  They  marry,  like  all 
others ;  they  have  children ;  but  they  do  not  cast  away  their 
offspring.  They  have  the  table  in  common,  but  not  wives. 
They  are  in  the  flesh,  but  do  not  live  after  the  flesh.  They 

1  Isaac  Taylor,  in  his  Ancient  Christianity,  which  is  expressly  written 
against  a  superstitious  over-valuation  of  the  patristic  age,  nevertheless  admits 
(vol.  i.  p,  37) :  "Our  brethren  of  the  early  church  challenge  our  respect,  as 
well  as  affection ;  for  theirs  was  the  fervor  of  a  steady  faith  in  things  unseen 
and  eternal;  theirs,  often,  a  meek  patience  under  the  most  grievous  wrongs; 
theirs  the  courage  to  maintain  a  good  profession  before  the  frowning  face  of 
philosophy,  of  secular  tyranny,  and  of  splendid  superstition;  theirs  was  ah- 
stractedness  from  the  world  and  a  painful  self-denial ;  theirs  the  most  arduous 
and  costly  labors  of  love ;  theirs  a  munificence  in  charity,  altogether  without 
example ;  theirs  was  a  reverent  and  scrupulous  care  of  the  sacred  writings ; 
and  this  one  merit,  if  they  had  no  other,  is  of  a  superlative  degree,  and  should 
entitle  them  to  the  veneration  and  grateful  regards  of  the  modern  church. 
How  little  do  many  readers  of  the  Bible,  nowadays,  think  of  what  it  cost  the 
Christians  of  the  second  and  third  .centuries,  merely  to  rescue  and  hide  the 
sacred  treasures  from  the  rage  of  the  heathen!" 

8  0.  5  and  6  (p,  69  aq.  ed.  Otto.  Lips.1 1852). 


10  SECOND  PEftlOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

ihre  upon  the  earth,  but  are  citizens  of  heaven.  They  obey  thd 
existing  laws,  and  excel  the  laws  by  their  lives.  They  love  all, 
and  are  persecuted  by  all.  They  are  unknown,  and  yet  they 
are  condemned.  They  are  killed  and  are  made  alive.  They 
are  poor  and  make  many  rich.  They  lack  all  things,  and  in  all 
things  abound.  They  are  reproached,  and  glory  in  their  re- 
proaches. They  are  calumniated,  and  are  justified.  They  are 
cursed,  and  they  bless.  They  receive  scorn,  and  they  give 
honor.  They  do  good,  and  are  punished  as  evil-doers*  When 
punished,  they  rejoice,  as  being  made  alive.  By  the  Jews  they 
are  attacked  as  aliens,  and  by  the  Greeks  persecuted ;  and  the 
cause  of  the  enmity  their  enemies  cannot  tell.  In  short,  what 
the  soul  is  in  the  body,  the  Christians  are  in  the  world.  The 
soul  is  diffiised  through  all  the  members  of  the  body,  and  the 
Christians  are  spread  through  the  cities  of  the  world.  The  soul 
dwells  in  the  body,  but  it  is  not  of  the  body ;  so  the  Christians 
dwell  in  the  world,  but  are  not  of  the  world.  The  soul,  invisi- 
ble, keeps  watch  in  the  visible  body ;  so  also  the  Christians  are 
seen  to  live  in  the  world,  but  their  piety  is  invisible.  The  flesh 
hates  and  wars  against  the  soul,  suffering  no  wrong  from  it,  but 
because  it  resists  fleshly  pleasures;  and  the  world  hates  the 
Christians  with  no  reason,  but  that  they  resist  its  pleasures. 
The  soul  loves  the  flesh  and  members,  by  which  it  is  hated ;  so 
the  Christians  love  their  haters.  The  soul  is  inclosed  in  the 
body,  but  holds  the  body  together;  so  the  Christians  are  de- 
tained in  the  world  as  in  a  prison ;  but  they  contain  the  world. 
Immortal,  the  soul  dwells  in  the  mortal  body ;  so  the  Christians 
dwell  in  the  corruptible,  but  look  for  incorruption  in  heaven. 
The  soul  is  the  better  for  restriction  in  food  and  drink ;  and  the 
Christians  increase,  though  daily  punished.  This  lot  God  has 
assigned  to  the  Christians  in  the  world ;  and  it  cannot  be  taken 
from  them." 

The  community  of  Christians  thus  from  the  fiist  felt  itself, 
in  distinction  from  Judaism  and  from  heathenism,  the  salt  of 
the  earth,  the  light  of  the  world,  the  city  of  God  set  on  a  hill, 
the  immortal  soul  in  a  dying  body ;  and  this  its  impression 


2  2.  CHARACTEK  OF  ANTE-MCENE  CHKISTIANITY.       H 

respecting  itself  was  no  proud  conceit,  but  truth  and, reality, 
acting  in  life  and  in  death,  and  opening  the  way  through  hatred 
and  persecution  even  to  an  outward  victory  over  the  world. 

The  ante-Nicene  age  has  been  ever  since  the  Reformation  a 
battle-field  between  Catholic  and  Evangelical  historians  and 
polemics,  and  is  claimed  by  both  for  their  respective  creeds. 
But  it  is  a  sectarian  abuse  of  history  to  identify  the  Chris- 
tianity of  this  martyr  period  either  with  Catholicism,  or  with 
Protestantism.  It  is  rather  the  common  root  out  of  which 
both  have  sprung,  Catholicism  (Greek  and  Eoman)  first,  and 
Protestantism  afterwards.  It  is  the  natural  transition  from 
the  apostolic  age  to  the  Nicene  age,  yet  leaving  behind  many 
important  truths  of  the  former  (especially  the  Pauline  doctrines) 
which  were  to  be  derived  and  explored  in  future  ages.  We 
can  trace  in  it  the  elementary  forms  of  the  Catholic  creed, 
organization  and  worship,  and  also  the  germs  of  nearly  all  the 
corruptions  of  Greek  and  Roman  Christianity. 

In  its  relation  to  the  secular  power,  the  ante-Nicene  church 
is  simply  the  continuation  of  the  apostolic  period,  and  has 
nothing  in  common  either  with  the  hierarchical,  or  with  the 
Erastian  systems.  It  was  not  opposed  to  the  secular  govern- 
ment in  its  proper  sphere,  but  the  secular  heathenism  of  the 
government  was  opposed  to  Christianity.  The  church  was  alto- 
gether based  upon  the  voluntary  principle,  as  a  self-supporting 
and  self-governing  body.  In  this  respect  it  may  be  compared 
to  the  church  in  the  United  States,  but  with  this  essential 
difference  that  in  America  the  secular  government,  instead  of 
persecuting  Christianity,  recognizes  and  protects  it  by  law,  and 
secures  to  it  full  freedom  of  public  worship  and  in  all  its 
activities  at  home  and  abroad. 

The  theology  of  the  second  and  third  centuries  was  mainly 
apologetic  against  the  paganism  of  Greece  and  Rome,  and 
polemic  against  the  various  forms  of  the  Gnostic  heresy.  In 
this  conflict  it  brings  out,  with  great  force  and  freshness,  the 
principal  arguments .  for  the  divine  origin  and  character  of  the 
Christian  religion  and  the  outlines  of  the  true  doctrine  of  Christ 


12  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

and  the  holy  trinity,  as  afterwards  more  fully  developed  in  the 
Nicene  and  post-Nicene  ages. 

The  organization  of  this  period  may  be  termed  primitive 
episcopacy,  as  distinct  from  the  apostolic  order  which  preceded, 
and  the  metropolitan  and  patriarchal  hierarchy  which  succeeded 
it.  In  worship  it  forms  likewise  the  transition  from  apostolic 
simplicity  to  the  Ifturgical  and  ceremonial  splendor  of  full-grown 
Catholicism. 

The  first  half  of  the  second  century  is  comparatively  veiled 
in  obscurity,  although  considerable  light  has  been  shed  over  it 
by  recent  discoveries  and  investigations.  After  the  death  of 
John  only  a  few  witnesses  remain  to  testify  of  the  wonders  of 
the  apostolic  days,  and  their  writings  are  few  in  number,  short 
in  compass  and  partly  of  doubtful  origin :  a  volume  of  letters  and 
historical  fragments,  accounts  of  martyrdom,  the  pleadings  of 
two  or  three  apologists;  to  which  must  be  added  the  rude 
epitaphs,  faded  pictures,  and  broken  sculptures  of  the  subter- 
ranean church  in  the  catacombs.  The  men  of  Ubat  generation 
were  more  skilled  in  acting  out  Christianity  in  life  and  death, 
than  in  its  literary  defence.  After  the  intense  commotion  of 
the  apostolic  age  there  was  a  breathing  spell,  a  season  of  unpre- 
tending but  fruitful  preparation  for  a  new  productive  epoch. 
But  the  soil  of  heathenism  had  been  broken  up,  and  the  new 
seed  planted  by  the  hands  of  the  apostles  gradually  took  root. 

Then  came  the  great  literary  conflict  of  the  apologists  and 
doctrinal  polemics  in  the  second  half  of  the  same  century;  and 
towards  the  middle  of  the  third  the  theological  schools  of 
Alexandria,  and  northern  Africa,  laying  the  foundation  the  one 
for  the  theology  of  the  Greek,  the  other  for  that  of  the  Latin 
church.  At  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century  the  church 
east  and  west  was  already  so  well  consolidated  in  doctrine  and 
discipline  that  it  easily  survived  the  shock  of  the  last  and  most 
terrible  persecution,  and  could  enter  upon  the  fruits  of  its  long- 
continued  sufferings  and  take  the  reins  of  government  in  the  old 
Konm  empire. 


CHAPTER  I. 

SPREAD  OF  CHRISTIANITY, 

§  3.  Literature. 

I.  SOURCES. 

No  statistics  or  accurate  statements,  but  only  scattered  hints  in 

FLINT  (107) :  Ep.  x.  96  sq.  (the  letter  to  Trajan).  IGNATIUS  (about  110) : 
Ad  Magnes.  c.  10.  Ep.  ad  Dwgn.  (about  120)  c.  6. 

JUSTIN  MARTTR  (about  140) :  Dial.  117 ;  Apol  I  53. 

IEENAEUS  (about  170) :  Adv.  Haer.  L  10 ;  HI.  3,  4  ;  v.  20,  eta 

TERTTJLUAN  (about  200):  Apol.  I  21,  37,  41*  42;  Ad  Nat.  I  7;  Ad 
Scap.  c.  2,  5 ;  Adv.  Jud.  7,  12,  13. 

ORIGEN  (d.  254):  Contr.  Cds.  I.  7,  27;  II.  13,  46;  TTT  10,  30;  De 
Princ.  L  IV.  o,  1,  8  2 ;  Com.  in  Matth.  p.  857,  ed.  Delarue. 

EUSEBIUS  (d.  340) :  Hist.  Eccl  EL  1 ;  v;  1 ;  vii,  1 ;  viii.  1,  also  books  k. 
and  x.  RUFINUS  :  Hist.  Eodes.  ix.  6. 

AUGUSTIN  (d.  430) :  De  Oivitate  Dei.  Eng.  translation  by  M*  Dads,  Edin- 
burgh, 1871 ;  new  ed.  (in  Schaff  's 1 1  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Library ' '), 
N.  York,  1887. 

II.  WORKS. 

MICH.  LE  QUIEN  (a  learned  Dominican,  d.  1733) :  Oriens  Christianus. 

Par.  1740.    3  yols.  fol.    A  complete  ecclesiastical  geography  of  the 

East,  divided  into  the  four  patriarchates  of  Constantinople,  Alexan- 
dria, Antioch,  and  Jerusalem. 

MOSHEIM:  Historical  Commentaries,  etc.  (ed.  Murdock)  I.  25&-290. 
GIBBON  :  Tfic  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire.    Chap.  xv. 
A.  BEUGKOT  :  JUstoire  de  la  destruction  du  paganisme  en  Occident.    Paris 

1835,  2  vols.    Crowned  by  the  Academic  des  inscriptions  ei  beHes* 

letters. 

CHASTEL:   Hlstoire  de  la  destruction  du  paganisme  dans  T 

empire  d'  Orient.    Paris  1850.    Prize  essay  of  the  Academie. 

History  of  the  Christian  Relig.  and  Church  (trans,  of  Torrey), 

L  68-79. 
WlLTSCH:  Handbuch  der  Idrchl.  Geographic  u.  Statistik.    Berlin  1846. 

I.  p.  32  sqq. 
CHS.  MERIYALE  :  Conversion  of  the  Roman  Empire  (Boyle  Lectures  for 

1864),  republ.  N.  York  1865.    Comp.  also  his  History  of  the  Romans 

under  the  l&mpire,  which  goes  from  Julius  Csesar  to  Marcus  Aurelius, 

Lond.  &  N.  York,  7  vols. 
EDWARD  A.  FREEMAN:  The  Historical  Geography  of  Europe,    Lond.  & 

K  York  1881,    2  vols.  (vol.  L  chs.  II.  &  III.  pp.  18-71.) 
Comp.  FRIEDLINDER,  Sittengesch.  Roms.  III.  517  sqq.;  and  ItarAN! 

Marc-Aurtte.    Paris  1882,  ch.  xxv.  pp.  447-464  (Statistigue  ei  ea> 

tension  geographique  du  Christianisme). 
V.   SCHULTZE :  Geschwhte  des  Untergangs  des  griech^bmiscTwn,.    Heiden- 

thums.    Jena,  1887. 

13 


14  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.D.  100-31L 

§  4.  Hindrances  and  Helps. 

For  the  first  three  centuries  Christianity  was  placed  in  the 
most  unfavorable  circumstances,  that  it  might  display  its  moral 
power,  and  gain  its  victory  over  the  world  by  spiritual  weapons 
alone.  Until  the  reign  of  Constantine  it  had  not  even  a  legal 
existence  in  the  Roman  empire,  but  was  first  ignored  as  a 
Jewish  sect,  then  slandered,  proscribed,  and  persecuted,  as  a 
treasonable  innovation,  and  the  adoption  of  it  made  punishable 
with  confiscation  and  death.  Besides,  it  offered  not  the  slightest 
favor,  as  Mohammedanism  afterwards  did,  to  the  corrupt  in- 
clinations of  the  heart,  but  against  the  current  ideas  of  Jews 
and  heathen  it  so  presented  its  inexorable  demand  of  repent- 
ance and  conversion,  renunciation  of  self  and  the  world,  that 
more,  according  to  Tertullian,  were  kept  out  of  the  new  sect  by 
love  of  pleasure  than  by  love  of  life.  The  Jewish  origin  of 
Christianity  also,  and  the  poverty  and  obscurity  of  a  majority 
of  its  professors  particularly  offended  the  pride  of  the  Greeks 
and  Romans.  Celsus,  exaggerating  this  fact,  and  ignoring  the 
many  exceptions,  scoffingly  remarked,  that  "  weavers,  cobblers, 
and  fullers,  the  most  illiterate  persons"  preached  the  "irrational 
feith,"  and  knew  how  to  commend  it  especially  "to  women  and 
children," 

But  in  spite  of  these  extraordinary  difficulties  Christianity 
made  a  progress  which  furnished  striking  evidence  of  its  divine 
origin  and  adaptation  to  the  deeper  wants  of  man,  and  was 
employed  as  such  by  Irenseus,  Justin,  Tertullian,  and  other 
fathers  of  that  day.  Nay,  the  very  hindrances  became,  in  the 
hands  of  Providence,  means  of  promotion.  Persecution  led  to 
martyrdom,  and  martyrdom  had  not  terrors  alone,  but  also  attrac- 
tions, and  stimulated  the  noblest  and  most  unselfish  form  of  am- 
bition. Every  genuine  martyr  was  a  living  proof  of  the  truth 
and  holiness  of  the  Christian  religion.  Tertullian  could  exclaim 
to  the  heathen :  "  All  your  ingenious  cruelties  can  accomplish 
nothing;  they  are  only  a  lure  to  this  sect.  Our  number  in- 


\  4.  HINDKANCES  AND  HELPS.  15 

creases  the  more  you  destroy  us.  The  blood  of  the  Christians 
is  their  seed,"  The  moral  earnestness  of  the  Christians  con- 
trasted powerfully  with  the  prevailing  corruption  of  the  age, 
and  while  it  repelled  the  frivolous  and  voluptuous,  it  could  not 
fail  to  impress  most  strongly  the  deepest  and  noblest  minds. 
The  predilection  of  the  poor  and  oppressed  for  the  gospel 
attested  its  comforting  and  redeeming  power.  But  others  also, 
though  not  many,  from  the  higher  and  educated  classes,  were 
from  the  first  attracted  to  the  new  religion;  such  men  as 
Nicodemus,  Joseph  of  Arimathsea,  the  apostle  Paul,  the  pro- 
consul Sergius  Paulus,  Dionysius  of  Athens,  Erastus  of  Corinth, 
and  some  members  of  the  imperial  household.  Among  the 
sufferers  in  Domitian's  persecution  were  his  own  near  kins- 
woman Flavia  Domitilla  and  her  husband  Flavius  Clemens. 
In  the  oldest  part  of  the  Catacomb  of  Callistus,  which  is  named 
after  St.  Lucina,  members  of  the  illustrious  gens  Pomponia,  and 
perhaps  also  of  the  Flavian  house,  are  interred.  The  se- 
natorial and  equestrian  orders  furnished  several  converts  open 
or  concealed.  Pliny  laments,  that  in  Asia  Minor  men  of  every 
rank  (omnis  ordinis)  go  over  to  the  Christians.  Tertullian 
asserts  that  the  tenth  part  of  Carthage,  and  among  them 
senators  and  ladies  of  the  noblest  descent  and  the  nearest 
relatives  of  the  proconsul  of  Africa  professed  Christianity. 
The  numerous  church  fathers  from  the  middle  of  the  second 
century,  a  Justin  Martyr,  Irenseus,  Hippolytus,  Clement, 
Origen,  Tertullian,  Cyprian,  excelled,  or  at  least  equalled  in 
talent  and  culture,  their  most  eminent  heathen  contemporaries. 

Nor  was  this  progress  confined  to  any  particular  localities. 
It  extended  alike  over  all  parts  of  the  empire.  "We  are  a 
people  of  yesterday,"  says  Tertullian  in  his  Apology,  "  and  yet 
we  have  filled  every  place  belonging  to  you — cities,  islands, 
castles,  towns,  assemblies,  your  very  camp,  your  tribes,  com- 
panies, palace,  senate,  forum!  We  leave  you  your  temples 
only.  We  can  count  your  armies;  our  numbers  in  a  single 
province  will  be  greater."  All  these  facts  expose  the  injustice 
of  the  odious  charge  of  Celsus,  repeated  by  a  modern  sceptic, 


16  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

that  the  new  sect  was  almost  entirely  composed  of  the  dregs  of 
the  populace — of  peasants  and  mechanics,  of  boys  and  women, 
of  beggars  and  slaves. 

§  5.-  Causes  of  the  Success  of  Christianity. 

The  chief  positive  cause  of  the  rapid  spread  and  ultimate 
triumph  of  Christianity  is  to  be  found  in  its  own  absolute 
intrinsic  worth,  as  the  universal  religion  of  salvation,  and  in 
the  perfect  teaching  and  example  of  its  divine-human  Founder, 
who  proves  himself  to  every  believing  heart  a  Saviour  from 
sin  and  a  giver  of  eternal  life,  y  Christianity  is  adapted  to  all 
classes,  conditions,  and  relations  among  men,  to  all  nationalities 
and  races,  to  all  grades  of  culture,  to  every  soul  that  longs  for 
redemption  from  sin,  and  for  holiness  of  life.  |  Its  value  could  be 
seen  in  the  tru^h  and  self-evidencing  power  of  its  doctrines ;  in. 
the  purity  and  sublimity  of  its  precepts;  in  its  -  regenerating 
and  sanctifying  effects  on  heart  and  life;  in  the  elevation  of 
woman  and  of  home  life  over  which  she  presides ;  in  the 
amelioration  of  the  condition  of  the  poor  and  suffering ;  in  the 
faith,  the  brotherly  love,  the  beneficence,  and  the  triumphant 
death  of  its  confessors. 

To  this  internal  moral  and  spiritual  testimony  were  added 
the  powerful  outward  proof  of  its  divine  origin  in  the  prophe- 
cies and  types  of  the  Old  Testament,  so  strikingly  fulfilled  in 
the  New;  and  finally,  the  testimony  of  the  'miracles,  which, 
according  to  the  express  statements  of  Quadratus,  Justin 
Martyr,  Irenseus,  Tertullian,  Origen,  and  others,  continued  in 
this  period  to  accompany  the  preaching  of  missionaries  from 
time  to  time,  for  the  conversion  of  the  heathen. 

Particularly  favorable  outward  circumstances  were  the  ex- 
tent, order,  and  unity  of  the  Roman  empire,  and  the  prevalence 
of  the  Greek  language  and  culture. 

In  addition  to  these  positive  causes,  Christianity  had  a 
powerful  negative  advantage  in  the  hopeless  condition  of  the 
Jewish  and  heathen  world.  Since  the  fearful  judgment  of  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  Judaism  wandered  restless  and 


?  5.  CAUSES  OF  THE  SUCCESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.          17 

accursed,  without  national  existence.  Heathenism  outwardly- 
held  sway,  but  was  inwardly  rotten  and  in  process  of  inevitable 
decay.  The  popular  religion  and  public  morality  were  under- 
mined by  a  sceptical  and  materialistic  philosophy;  Grecian 
science  and  art  had  lost  their  creative  energy;  the  Eoman 
empire  rested  only  on  the  power  of  the  sword  and  of  temporal 
interests ;  the  moral  bonds  of  society  were  sundered ;  unbounded 
avarice  and  vice  of  every  kind,  even  by  the  confession  of  a 
Seneca  and  a  Tacitus,  reigned  in  Eome  and  in  the  provinces, 
from  the  throne  to  the  hovel.  Virtuous  emperors,  like 
Antoninus  Pius  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  were  the  exception,  not 
tho  rule,  and  could  not  prevent  the  progress  of  moral  decay. 
Nothing,  that  classic  antiquity  in  its  fairest  days  had  produced, 
could  heal  the  fatal  wounds  of  the  age,  or  even  give  transient 
relief.  '  The  only  star  of  hope  in  the  gathering  night  was  the 
young,  the  fresh,  the  dauntless  religion  of  Jesus,  fearless  of 
death,  strong  in  faith,  glowing  with  love,  and  destined  to  com- 
mend itself  more  and  more  to  all  reflecting  minds  as  the  only 
living  religion  of  the  present  and  the  future. »  While  the  world 
was  continually  agitated  by  wars,  and  revolutions,  and  public 
calamities,  while  systems  of  philosophy,  and  dynasties  were 
rising  and  passing  away,  the  new  religion,  in  spite  of  fearful 
opposition  from  without  and  danger  from  within,  was  silently 
and  steadily  progressing  with  the  irresistible  force  of  truth,  and 
worked  itself  gradually  into  the  very  bone  and  blood  of  the 

race. 

"  Christ  appeared,"  says  the  great  Augustin,  "to  the  men  of 
the  decrepit,  decaying  world,  that  while  all  around  them  was 
withering  away,  they  might  through  Him  receive  new,  youthful 
life." 

NOTES. 

GIBBON  in  his  famous  fifteenth  chapter,  traces  the  rapid  progress  of 
Christianity  in  the  Eoman  empire  to  five  causes:  the  zeal  of  the  early 
Christians,  the  belief  in  future  rewards  and  punishment,  the  power  of 
miracles,  the  austere  (pure)  morals -of  the  Christian,  and  the  compact 
church  organization.  Bat  these  causes  are  themselves  the  effects  of  a 
Vol.  II.  2. 


1$  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

cause  which  Gibbon  ignores,  namely,  the  divine  truth  of  Christianity 
the  perfection  of  Christ's  teaching  and  Christ's  example.  See  the 
strictures  of  Dr.  John  Henry  Newman,  Grammar  of  Assent,  445  sq.,  and 
Dr.  George  P.  Fisher,  The  Beginnings  of  Christianity,  p.  543  sqq.  "  The 
zeal"  [of  the  early  Christians],  says  Fisher,  "was  zeal  for  a  person,  and 
for  a  cause  identified  with  Him ;  the  belief  in  the  future  life  sprang  out 
of  faith  in  Him  who  had  died  and  risen  again,  and  ascended  to  Heaven; 
the  miraculous  powers  of  the  early  disciples  were  consciously  connected 
with  the  same  source ;  the  purification  of  morals,  and  the  fraternal  unity, 
which  lay  at  the  basis  of  ecclesiastical  association  among  the  early 
Christians,  were  likewise  the  fruit  of  their  relation  to  Christ,  and  their 
common  love  to  Him.  The  victory  of  Christianity  in  the  Eoman  world 
was  the  victory  of  Christ,  who  was  lifted  up  that  He  might  draw  all  men 
unto  Him.'1 

LECKY  (Hist  ofEurop.  Morals,  I.  412)  goes  deeper  than  Gibbon,  and 
accounts  for  the  success  of  early  Christianity  by  its  intrinsic  excellency 
and  remarkable  adaptation  to  the  wants  of  the  times  in  the  old  Roman 
empire.  "In  the  midst  of  this  movement,"  he  says,  "Christianity 
gained  its  ascendancy,  and  we  can  be  at  no  loss  to  discover  the  cause 
of  its  triumph.  No  other  religion,  under  such  circumstances,  had  ever 
combined  so  many  distinct  elements  of  power  and  attraction.  Unlike 
the  Jewish  religion,  it  was  bound  by  no  local  ties,  and  was  equally 
adapted  for  every  nation  and  for  every  class.  Unlike  Stoicism,  it 
appealed  in  the  strongest  manner  to  the  affections,  and  offered  all  the 
charm  of  a  sympathetic  worship.  Unlike  the  Egyptian  religion,  it 
united  with  its  distinctive  teaching  a  pure  and  noble  system  of  ethics, 
and  proved  itself  capable  of  realizing  it  in  action.  It  proclaimed,  amid 
a  vast  movement  of  social  and  national  amalgamation,  the  universal 
brotherhood  of  mankind.  Amid  the  softening  influence  of  philosophy 
and  civilization,  it  taught  the  supreme  sanctity  of  love.  To  the  slave, 
who  had  never  before  exercised  so  large  an  influence  over  Roman 
religious  life,  it  was  the  religion  of  the  suffering  and  the  oppressed.  To 
the  philosopher  it  was  at  once  the  echo  of  the  highest  ethics  of  the  later 
Stoics,  and  the  expansion  of  the  best  teaching  of  the  school  of  Plato. 
To  a  world  thirsting  for  prodigy,  it  offered  a  history  replete  with  wonders 
more  strange  than  those  of  Apollonius ;  while  the  Jew  and  the  Chaldean 
could  scarcely  rival  its  exorcists,  and  the  legends  of  continual  miracles 
circulated  among  its  followers.  To  a  world  deeply  conscious  of  political 
dissolution,  and  prying  eagerly  and  anxiously  into  the  future,  it  pro- 
claimed with  a  thrilling  power  the  immediate  destruction  of  the  globe— 
the  glory  of  all  its  friends,  and  the  damnation  of  all  its  foes.  To  a  world 
that  had  grown  very  weary  gazing  on  the  cold  passionless  grandeur 
which  Cato  realized,  and  which  Lucan  sung,  it  presented  an  ideal  of 
compassion  and  of  love— an  ideal  destined  for  centuries  to  draw  around 
it  all  that  was  greatest,  as  well  aS  all  that  was  noblest  upon  earth— a 
Teacher  who  could  weep  by  the  sepulchre  of  His  friend,  who  was 


I  6.  MEANS  OF  PROPAGATION.  19 

touched  with  the  feeling  of  our  infirmities.  To  a  world,  in  fine,  dis- 
tracted by  hostile  creeds  and  colliding  philosophies,  it  taught  its 
doctrines,  not  as  a  human  speculation,  but  as  a  Divine  revelation, 
authenticated  much  less  by  reason  than  by  faith.  f  With  the  heart  man 
believeth  unto  righteousness;'  'He  that  doeth  the  will  of  my  Father 
will  know  the  doctrine,  whether  it  be  of  God ; '  '  Unless  you  believe  you 
cannot  understand;'  '  A  heart  naturally  Christian;'  'The  heart  makes 
the  theologian,'  are  the  phrases  which  best  express  the  first  action  of 
Christianity  upon  the  world.  Like  all  great  religions,  it  was  more  con- 
cerned with  modes  of  feeling  than  with  modes  of  thought.  The  chief 
cause  of  its  success  was  the  congruity  of  its  teaching  with  the  spiritual 
nature  of  mankind.  It  was  because  it  was  true  of  the  moral  sentiments 
of  the  age,  because  it  represented  faithfully  the  supreme  type  of  excel- 
lence to  which  men  were  then  tending,  because  it  corresponded  with 
their  religious  wants,  aims,  and  emotions,  because  the  whole  spiritual 
being  could  then  expand  and  expatiate  under  its  influence,  that  it 
planted  its  roots  so  deeply  in  the  hearts  of  men." 

MERIVALE  (Convers.  of  the  Rom.  Emp.,  Preface)  traces  the  conversion 
of  the  Roman  empire  chiefly  to  four  causes :  1)  the  external  evidence  of 
the  apparent  fulfilment  of  recorded  prophecy  and  miracles  to  the  truth 
of  Christianity ;  2)  the  internal  evidence  of  satisfying  the  acknowledged 
need  of  a  redeemer  and  sanctifier;  3)  the  goodness  and  holiness  mani- 
fested in  the  lives  and  deaths  of  the  primitive  believers ;  4)  the  temporal 
success  of  Christianity  under  Constantine,  which  "  turned  the  mass  of 
mankind,  as  with  a  sweeping  revolution,  to  the  rising  sun  of  revealed 
truth  in  Christ  Jesus." 

RENAN  discusses  the  reasons  for  the  victory  of  Christianity  in  the  31st 
chapter  of  his  Marc-Aurlle  (Paris  1882),  pp.  561-588.  He  attributes  it 
chiefly  "to  the  new  discipline  of  life/'  and  "the  moral  reform,"  which 
the  world  required,  which  neither  philosophy  nor  any  of  the  established 
religions  could  give.  The  Jews  indeed  rose  high  above  the  corruptions 
of  the  times.  "  Gloire  eternelle  et  unique,  qui  doitfaire  oublier  Hen  des 
folios  et  des  violences  !  Les  Juifs  sont  les  r&wlutionnaires  du  \er  et  du  2e 
siecle  de  noire  'ere.'9  They  gave  to  the  world  Christianity.  "Les popula- 
tions se  pr&cipitbrent,  par  une  sorte  du  mouvement  instinctif,  dans  une  secte 
qui  satis/await  leur  aspirations  les  plus  intimes  et  ouvrait  des  esperances 
infinies."  Renan  makes  much  account  of  the  belief  in  immortality 
and  the  offer  of  complete  pardon  to  every  sinner,  as  allurements  to 
Christianity ;  and,  like  Gibbon,  he  ignores  its  real  power  as  a  religion  of 
salvation.  This  accounts  for  its  success  not  only  in  the  old  Roman 
empire,  but  in  every  country  and  nation  where  it  has  found  a  home. 

§  6.  Means  of  Propagation. 

It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  after  the  days  of  the  Apostles  no 
names  of  great  missionaries  are  mentioned  till  the  opening  of 


20  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  middle  ages,  when  the  conversion  of  nations  was  effected  or 
introduced  by  a  few  individuals  as  St.  Patrick  in  Ireland,  St 
Columba  in  Scotland,  St  Augustine  in  England,  St.  Boniface  in 
Germany,  St.  Ansgar  in  Scandinavia,  St.  Cyril  and  Methodiui 
among  the  Slavonic  races.  There  were  no  missionary  societies 
no  missionary  institutions,  no  organized  efforts  in  the  ante 
Nicene  age ;  and  yet  in  less  than  300  years  from  the  death  ol 
St.  John  the  whole  population  of  the  Roman  empire  which  thej 
represented  the  civilized  world  was  nominally  christianized. 

To  understand  this  astonishing  fact,  we  must  remember  that 
the  foundation  was  laid  strong  and  deep  by  the  apostles  them- 
selves. The  seed  scattered  by  them  from  Jerusalem  to  Rome, 
and  fertilized  by  their  blood,  sprung  up  as  a  bountiful  harvest. 
The  word  of  our  Lord  was  again  fulfilled  on  a  larger  scale : 
"One  soweth,  and  another  reapeth.  I  sent  you  to  reap  that 
whereon  ye  have  not  labored :  otht  rs  have  labored,  and  ye  are 
entered  into  their  labor"  (John  4  :  38). 

Christianity  once  established  was  its  own  best  missionary.  It 
grew  naturally  from  within.  It  attracted  people  by  its  very 
presence.  It  was  a  light  shining  in  darkness  and  illuminating 
the  darkness.  And  while  there  were  no  professional  mission- 
aries devoting  their  whole  life  to  this  specific  work,  every 
congregation  was  a  missionary  society,  and  every  Christian 
believer  a  missionary,  inflamed  by  the  love  of  Christ  to  convert 
his  fellow-men.  The  example  had  been  set  by  Jerusalem  and 
Antioch,  and  by  those  brethren  who,  after  the  martyrdom  of 
Stephen,  "  were  scattered  abroad  and  went  about  preaching  the 
Word."1  Justin  Martyr  was  converted  by  a  venerable  old  man 
whom  he  met  walking  on  the  shore  of  the  sea.  "  Every  Chris- 
tian laborer,"  says  Tertullian,  "both  finds  out  God  and 
manifests  him,  though  Plato  affirms  that  it  is  not  easy  to  dis- 
cover the  Creator,  and  difficult  when  He  is  found  to  make  him 
known  to  all"  Celsus  scoffingly  remarks  that  fullers  and 
workers  in  wool  and  leather,  rustic  and  ignorant  persons,  were 

:  4;  11:  19. 


\  6.   MEANS  OF  PROPAGATION.  21 

the  most  zealous  propagators  of  Christianity,  and  brought  it 
first  to  women  and  children.  Women  and  slaves  introduced  it 
into  the  home-circle.  It  is  the  glory  of  the  gospel  that  it  is 
preached  to  the  poor  and  by  the  poor  to  make  them  rich. 
Origen  informs  us  that  the  city  churches  sent  their  missionaries 
to  the  villages.  The  seed  grew  up  while  men  slept,  and 
brought  forth  fruit,  first  the  bla&e,  then  the  ear,  after  that  the 
full  corn  in  the  ear.  Every  Christian  told  his  neighbor,  the 
laborer  to  his  fellow-laborer,  the  slave  to  his  fellow-slave,  the 
servant  to  his  master  and  mistress,  the  story  of  his  conversion, 
as  a  mariner  tells  the  story  of  the  rescue  from  shipwreck. 

The  gospel  was  propagated  chiefly  by  living  preaching  and 
by  personal  intercourse ;  to  a  considerable  extent  also  through 
the  sacred  Scriptures,  which  were  early  propagated  and  trans- 
lated into  various  tongues,  the  Latin  (North  African  and  Italian), 
the  Syriac  (the  Curetonian  and  the  Pesbito),  and  the  Egyptian  (in 
three  dialects,  the  Memphitic,  the  Thebaic,  and  the  Bashmuric). 
Communication  among  the  different  parts  of  the  Roman  empire 
from  Damascus  to  Britain  was  comparatively  easy  and  safe. 
The  highways  built  for  commerce  and  for  the  Roman  legions, 
served  also  the  messengers  of  peace  and  the  silent  conquests  of 
the  cross.  Commerce  itself  at  that  time,  as  well  as  now,  was  a 
powerful  agency  in  carrying  the  gospel  and  the  seeds  of  Chris- 
tian civilization  to  the  remotest  parts  of  the  Roman  empire. 

The  particular  mode,  as  well  as  the  precise  time,  of  the  intro- 
duction of  Christianity  into  the  several  countries  during  this 
period  is  for  the  most  part  uncertain,  and  we  know  not  much 
more  than  the  fact  itself*  No  doubt  much  more  was  done  by 
the  apostles  and  their  immediate  disciples,  than  the  New  Testa- 
ment informs  us  of.  But  on  the  other  hand  the  mediaeval 
tradition  assigns  an  apostolic  origin  to  many  national  and  local 
churches,  which  cannot  have  arisen  before  the  second  or  third 
century.  Even  Joseph  of  Arimathsea,  Nicodemus,  Dionysius 
the  Areopagite,  Laza-rus,  Martha  and  Mary  were  turned  by  the 
legend  into  missionaries  to  foreign  lands. 


£2  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

§  7.  Extent  of  Christianity  in  the  Roman  Empire. 

Justin  Martyr  says,  about  the  middle  of  the  second  century : 
lt  There  is  no  people,  Greek  or  barbarian,  or  of  any  other  race, 
by  whatsoever  appellation  or  manners  they  may  be  distinguished, 
however  ignorant  of  arts  or  agriculture,  whether  they  dwell  in 
tents  or  wander  about  in  covered  wigons  —  among  whom 
prayers  and  thanksgivings  are  not  offered  in  the  name  of  the 
crucified  Jesus  to  the  Father  and  Creator  of  all  things."  Half 
a  century  later,  Tertullian  addresses  the  heathen  defiantly: 
"  "We  are  but  of  yesterday,  and  yet  we  already  fill  your  cities, 
islands,  camps,  your  palace,  senate  and  forum ;  we  have  left  to 
you  only  your  temples."1  These,  and  similar  passages  of 
Irenseus  and  Arnobius,  are  evidently  rhetorical  exaggerations. 
Origen  is  more  cautious  and  moderate  in  his  statements.  But 
it  may  be  fairly  asserted,  that  about  the  end  of  the  third  century 
the  name  of  Christ  was  known,  revered,  and  persecuted  in 
every  province  and  every  city  of  the  empire.  Maximian,  in 
one  of  his  edicts,  says  that  "almost  all"  had  abandoned  the 
worship  of  their  ancestors  for  the  new  s$ct. 

In  the  absence  of  statistics,  the  number  of  the  Christians 
must  be  purely  a  matter  of  conjecture.  In  all  probability  it 
amounted  at  the  close  of  the  third  and  the  beginning  of  the 
fourth  century  to  nearly  one-tenth  or  one-twelfth  of  the  subjects 
of  Eome,  that  is  to  about  ten  millions  of  souls. 

But  the  fact,  that  the  Christians  were  a  closely  united  body, 
fresh,  vigorous,  hopeful,  and  daily  increasing,  while  the  heathen 
were  for  the  most  part  a  loose  aggregation,  daily  diminishing, 
made  the  true  prospective  strength  of  the  church  much  greater. 

The  propagation  of  Christianity  among  the  barbarians  in  the 
provinces  of  Asia  and  the  north-west  of  Europe  beyond  the 

lt'Sola  vdbis  rdinquimus  templa"  Apol  c.  37.  Long  before  Tertullian 
the  heathen  Pliny,  in  his  famous  letter  to  Trajan  (Epp.  x.  97)  had  spoken  of 
**  desokta  templet"  and  "  sacra  sokmtnaa  diu  int&rmissa"  in  consequence  of  the 
spread  of  the  Christian  superstition  throughout  the  cities  and  villages  of  ASIA 
Minor. 


\  8.  CHRISTIANITY  EST  ASIA.  23 

Roman  empire,  was  at  first,  of  course,  too  remote  from  the  cur- 
1  rent  of  history  to  be  of  any  great  immediate  importance.    But 
it  prepared  the  way  for  the  civilization  of  those  regions,  and 
their  subsequent  position  in  the  world. 

NOTES. 

Gibbon  and  Friedlander  (III.  531)  estimate  the  number  of  Christians 
at  the  accession  of  Constantine  (306)  probably  too  low  at  one-twentieth  ; 
Matter  and  Robertson  too  high  at  one-fifth  of  his  subjects.  Some  older 
writers,  misled  by  the  hyperbolical  statements  of  the  early  Apologists, 
even  represent  the  Christians  as  having  at  least  equalled  if  not  exceeded 
the  number  of  the  heathen  worshippers  in  the  empire.  In  this  case 
common  prudence  would  have  dictated  a  policy  of  toleration  long  be- 
fore Constantine.  Mosheim,  in  his  Hist.  Commentaries,  etc.  (Murdock's 
translation  I.  p.  274  sqq.)  discusses  at  length  the  number  of  Christians  in 
the  second  century  without  arriving  at  definite  conclusions.  Chastel 
estimates  the  number  at  the  time  of  Constantine  at  -^  in  the  West,  -^  in 
the  East,  ^  on  an  average  (Hist,  de  la  destruct.  du  paganism^  p.  36). 
According  to  Chrysostom,  the  Christian  population  of  Antipch  in  his  day 
(380)  was  about  100,000,  or  one-half  of  the  whole. 

§  8.  Christianity  in  Asia. 

Asia  was  the  cradle  of  Christianity,  as  it  was  of  humanity 
and  civilization.  The  apostles  themselves  had  spread  the  new 
religion  over  Palestine,  Syria,  and  Asia  Minor.  According  to 
the  younger  Pliny,  under  Trajan,  the  temples  of  the  gods  in 
Asia  Minor  were  almost  forsaken,  and  animals  of  sacrifice  found 
hardly  any  purchasers.  In  the  second  century  Christianity 
penetrated  to  Edessa  in  Mesopotamia,  and  some  distance  into 
Persia,  Media,  Bactria,  and  Parthia;  and  in  the  third,  into 
Armenia  and  Arabia.  Paul  himself  had,  indeed,  spent  three 
years  in  Arabiaa  but  probably  in  contemplative  retirement,  pre- 
paring for  his  apostolic  ministry.  There  is  a  legend,  that  the 
apostles  Thomas  and  Bartholomew  carried  the  gospel  to  India. 
But  a  more  credible  statement  is,  that  the  Christian  teacher 
Pantsenus  of  Alexandria  journeyed  to  that  country  about  190, 
and  that  in  the  fourth  century  churches  were  found  there. 

The  transfer  of  the  seat  of  power  from  Rome  to  Con- 
stantinople, and  the  founding  of  the  East  Roman  empire  under 
Constantine  I.  gave  to  Asia  Minor,  and  especially  to  Constan' 


24  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

tinople,  a  commanding  importance  in  the  history  of  the  Church 
for  several  centuries.  The  seven  (Ecumenical  Councils  from 
325  to  787  were  all  held  in  that  city  or  its  neighborhood,  and 
the  doctrinal  controversies  on  the  Trinity  and  the  person  of 
Christ  were  carried  on  chiefly  in  Asia  Minor,  Syria,  and  -Egypt 
In  the  mysterious  providence  of  God  those  lands  of  the  Bible 
and  the  early  church  have  been  conquered  by  the  prophet  of 
Mecca,  the  Bible  replaced  by  the  Koran,  and  the  Greek  church 
reduced  to  a  condition  of  bondage  and  stagnation;  but  tho 
time  is  not  far  distant  when  the  East  will  be  regenerated  by 
the  undying  spirit  of  Christianity.  A  peaceful  crusade  of 
devoted  missionaries  preaching  the  pure  gospel  and  leading 
holy  lives  will  reconquer  the  holy  land  and  settle  the  Eastern 

question. 

§  9.  Christianity  in  Egypt. 

In  Africa  Christianity  gained  firm  foothold  first  in  Egypt, 
and  there  probably  as  early  as  the  apostolic  age.  The  land  of 
the  Pharaohs,  of  the  pyramids  and  sphinxes,  of  temples  and 
tombs,  of  fderoglyphics  and  mummies,  of  sacred  bulls  and 
crocodiles,  of  despotism  and  slavery,  is  closely  interwoven  with 
sacred  history  from  the  patriarchal  times,  and  even  imbedded  in 
the  Decalogue  as  "  the  house  of  bondage."  It  was  the  home 
of  Joseph  and  his  brethren,  and  the  cradle  of  Israel.  In 
Egypt  the  Jewish  Scriptures  were  translated  more  than  two 
hundred  years  before  our  era,  and  this  Greek  version  used  even 
by  Christ  and  the  apostles,  spread  Hebrew  ideas  throughout  the 
Roman  world,  and  is  the  mother  of  the  peculiar  idiom  of  the 
New  Testament.  Alexandria  was  full  of  Jews,  the  literary  as 
well  as  commercial  centre  of  the  East,  and  the  connecting  link 
between  the  East  and  the  West.  There  the  largest  libraries 
were  collected ;  there  the  Jewish  mind  came  into  close  contact 
with  the  Greek,  and  the  religion  of  Moses  with  the  philosophy 
of  Plato  and  Aristotle.  There  Philo  wrote,  while  Christ  taught 
in  Jerusalem  and  Galilee,  and  his  works  were  destined  to  exert 
a  great  influence  on  Christian  exegesis  through  the  Alexandrian 
fathers. 


I  9.  CHKISTIAOTTY  IN  EGYPT.  25 

Mark,  the  evangelist,  according  to  ancient  tradition,  laid  the 

flndation  of  the  church  of  Alexandria.  The  Copts  in  old 
-Cairo,  the  Babylon  of  Egypt,  claim  this  to  be  the  place  from 
which  Peter  wrote  his  first  epistle  (5 :  13) ;  but  he  must  mean 
either  the  Babylon  on  the  Euphrates,  or  the  mystic  Babylon  of 
Rome.  Eusebius  names,  as  the  first  bishops  of  Alexandria, 
Annianos  (A.  D.  62-85),  Abilios  (to  98),  and  Kerdon  (to  110). 
This  see  naturally  grew  up  to  metropolitan  and  patriarchal  im- 
portance and  dignity.  As  early  as  the  second  century  a  theologi- 
cal school  flourished  in  Alexandria,  in  which  Clement  and 
Origen  taught  as  pioneers  in  biblical  learning  and  Christian 
philosophy.  From  Lower  Egypt  the  gospel  spread  to  Middle 
and  Upper  Egypt  and  the  adjacent  provinces,  perhaps  (in  the 
fourth  century)  as  far  as  Nubia,  Ethiopia,  and  Abyssinia.  At 
a  council  of  Alexandria  in  the  year  235,  twenty  bishops  were 
present  from  the  different  parts  of  the  land  of  the  Nile. 

During  the  fourth  century  Egypt  gave  to  the  church  the 
Arian  heresy,  the  Athauasian  orthodoxy,  and  the  monastic 
piety  of  St.  Antony  and  St.  Pachomius,  which  spread  with 
irresistible  force  over  Christendom. 

The  theological  literature  of  Egypt  was  chiefly  Greek.  Most 
of  the  early  manuscripts  of  the  Greek  Scriptures — including 
probably  the  invaluable  Sinaitic  and  Vatican  MSS. — were  writ- 
ten in  Alexandria.  But  already  in  the  second  century  the 
Scriptures  were  translated  into  the  vernacular  language,  in 
three  different  dialects.  What  remains  of  these  versions  is  of 
considerable  weight  in  ascertaining  the  earliest  text  of  the  Greek 
Testament. 

The  Christian  Egyptians  are  the  descendants  of  the 
Pharaonic  Egyptians,  but  largely  mixed  with  negro  and  Arab 
blood,  Christianity  never  fully  penetrated  the  nation,  and  was 
almost  swept  away  by  the  Mohammedan  conquest  under  the 
Caliph  Omar  (640),  who  burned  the  magnificent  libraries  of 
Alexandria  under  the  plea  that  if  the  books  agreed  with  the 
Koran,  they  were  useless,  if  not,  they  were  pernicious  and  fit 
for  destruction.  Since  that  time  Egypt  almost  disappears  from 


26  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311 

church  history,  arid  is  still  groaning,  a  house  of  bondage  undei 
new  masters.  The  great  mass  of  the  people  are  Moslems,  but 
the  Copts — about  half  a  million  of  five  and  a  half  millions — 
perpetuate  the  nominal  Christianity  of  their  ancestors,  and  form 
a  mission  field  for  the  more  active  churches  of  the  West. 

§  10.  Christianity  in  North  Africa. 

B6TTIGER :  Gesehichte  der  Carthager.     Berlin,  1827. 

MOVEES  :  Die  Phomzier.    1840-56,  4  vols.    (A  standard  work.) 

TH.  MOMMSEN:  Row.  Gesehichte,  1. 489  sqq.  (Book  III.  chs.  1-7, 5th  ed.) 

N.  DAVIS  :  Carthage  and  her  Remains.    London  &  K  York,  1861. 

R.  BOSWORTH  SMITH  ;  Carthage  and  the  Carthaginians.    Lond.  2nd  ed. 

1879.    By  the  same :  Rome  and  Carthage.    N.  York,  1880. 
OTTO  MELTZER  :  Gesehichte  der  Karthager.     Berlin,  vol.  1. 1879. 

These  books  treat  of  the  secular  history  of  the  ancient  Cartha- 

g'nians,  but  help  to  understand  the   situation   and  antecedents. 
JULIUS  LLOYD;  The  North  African  Church.     London,  1880,     Comes 

down  to  the  Moslem  Conquest. 

The  inhabitants  of  the  provinces  of  Northern  Africa  were  of 
Semitic  origin,  with  a  language  similar  to  the  Hebrew,  but 
became  Latinized  in  customs,  laws,  and  language  under  the 
Roman  rule.  The  church  in  that  region  therefore  belongs  to 
Latin  Christianity,  and  plays  a  leading  part  in  its  early  history. 

The  Phoenicians,  a  remnant  of  the  Canaanitcs,  were  the 
English  of  ancient  history.  They  carried  on  the  commerce  of 
the  world ;  while  the  Israelites  prepared  the  religion,  and  the 
Greeks  the  civilization  of  the  world.  Three  small  nations,  in 
small  countries,  accomplished  a  more  important  work  than  the 
colossal  empires  of  Assyria,  Babylon,  and  Persia,  or  even  Rome. 
Occupying  a  narrow  strip  of  territory  on  the  Syrian  coaflt, 
between  Mount  Lebanon  and  the  sea,  the  Phoenicians  sent  their 
merchant  vessels  from  Tyre  and  Sidon  to  all  parts  of  the  old 
world  from  India  to  the  Baltic,  rounded  the  Cape  of  Good 
Hope  two  thousand  years  before  Yasco  de  Gama,  and  brought 
back  sandal  wood  from  Malabar,  apices  from  Arabia,  ostrich 
plumes  from  Nubia,  silver  from  Spain,  gold  from  the  Niger, 
iron  from  Elba,  tin  from  England,  and  amber  from  the  Baltic* 


2  10.  CHBISTIANITY  IN  NORTH  AFEICA.  27 

Tlhey  furnished  Solomon  with  cedars  from  Lebanon,  and  helped 
hwtt  to  build  his  palace  and  the  temple.  They  founded  on  the 
northernmost  coast  of  Africa,  more  than  eight  hundred  years 
before  Christ,  the  colony  of  Carthage.1  From  that  favorable 
position  they  acquired  the  control  over  the  northern  coast  of 
Africa  from  the  pillars  of  Hercules  to  the  Great  Syrtes,  over 
Southern  Spain,  the  islands  of  Sardinia  and  Sicily,  and  the 
whole  Mediterranean  sea.  Hence  the  inevitable  rivalry  between 
Borne'  and  Carthage,  divided  only  by  three  days'  sail ;  hence 
the  three  Punic  wars  which,  in  spite  of  the  brilliant  military 
genius  of  Hannibal,  ended  in  the  utter  destruction  of  the  capital 
of  North  Africa  (B.  c.  146).2  "  Delenda  est  C^thago,"  was 
the  narrow  and  cruel  policy  of  the  elder  Cato.  But  under 
Augustus,  who  carried  out  the  wiser  plan  of  Julius  Csesar,  there 
arose  a  new  Carthage  on  the  ruins  of  the  old,  and  became  a 
rich  and  prosperous  city,  first  heathen,  then  Christian,  until  it 
was  captured  by  the  barbarous  Vandals  (A.  D.  439),  ?nd  finally 
destroyed  by  a  race  cognate  to  its  original  founders,  the  Mo- 
hammedan Arabs  (647).  Since  that  time  "a  mournful  and 
solitary  silence  "  once  more  brooded  over  its  ruins.8 

Christianity  reached  proconsular  Africa  in  the  second,  per- 
haps already  at  the  close  of  the  first  century,  we  do  not  know 
when  and  how.  There  was  constant  intercourse  with  Italy.  It 
spread  very  rapidly  over  the  fertile  fields  and  burning  sands  of 
Mauritania  and  Numidia.  Cyprian  could  assemble  in  258  a 


1  The  Phoenician  or  Punic  name  is  Karthada,  the  QneekEarchedon  (Kapxqd&>\ 
the  Latin  Carthago.    It  means  New  City  (Neapolis).    The  word  Kereth  or 
Cfarth  enters  also  into  the  names  of  other  cities  of  Phoenician  origin,  as  Oirta 
m  I'lanwdia. 

2  S-23  the  masterly  comparison  of  Kome  and  Carthage  by  Mommsen,  Book 
III.  ch.  1.  (vol.  I.  506),  of  the  destruction  of  Carthage  in  Book  IV.  ch.  1.  (vol. 
II.  22  sqq.) 

8  On  the  ruins  of  Carthage  see  the  descriptions  of  ET.  Davis  and  B.  Smith  ( Eor/ie 
and  Carthage,  ch.  xx.  263-291).  The  recent  conquest  of  Tunis  by  France 
(1881)  gives  new  interest  to  the  past  of  that  country,  and  opens  a  new  chapter 
for  its  future.  Smith  describes  Tunis  as  the  most  Oriental  of  Oriental  towns, 
with  a  gorgeous  mixture  of  races— Arabs,  Turks,  Moors,  and  Negroes— held 
together  by  the  religion  of  Islam. 


28  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

synod  of  eighty-seven  bishops,  and  in  308   the 

Donatists  held  a  council  of  two  hundred  and  seventy  bishops'  at 

Carthage.    The  dioceses,  of  course,  were  small  in  those  days. 

The  oldest  Latin  translation  of  the  Bible,  miscalled  "  Itala" 
(the  basis  of  Jerome's  "Vulgata"),  was  made  probably  in 
Africa  and  for  Africa,  not  in  Rome  and  for  Rome,  where  at 
that  time  the  Greek  language  prevailed  among  Christians, 
Latin  theology,  too,  was  not  born  in  Rome,  but  in  Carthage. 
Tertullian  is  its  father.  Minutius  Felix,  Arnobius,  and  Cyprian 
bear  witness  to  the  activity  and  prosperity  of  African  Chris- 
tianity and  theology  in  the  third  century.  It  reached  its  high- 
est perfection  during  the  first  quarter  of  the  fifth  century  in  the 
sublime  intellect  and  burning  heart  of  St.  Augustin,  the  greatest 
among  the  fathers,  but  soon  after  his  death  (430)  it  was  buried 
first  beneath  the  Yandal  barbarism,  and  in  the  seventh  century 
by  the  Mohammedan  conquest.  Yet  his  writings  led  Christian 
thought  in  the  Latin  church  throughout  the  dark  ages,  stimu- 
lated the  Reformers,  and  are  a  vital  force  to  this  day. 

§  11.  Christianity  in  Europe. 
"  Westward  the  course  of  Empire  takes  its  way." 

This  law  of  history  is  also  the  law  of  Christianity.  From 
Jerusalem  to  Rome  was  the  march  of  the  apostolic  church. 
Further  and  further  West  has  been  the  progress  of  missions 
ever  since. 

The  church  of  ROME  was  by  far  the  most  important  one  for 
all  the  West.  According  to  Eusebius,  it  had  in  the  middle  of 
the  third  century  one  bishop,  forty-six  presbyters,  seven  deacons 
with  as  many  sub-deacons,  forty-two  acolyths,  fifty  readers, 
exorcists,  and  door-keepers,  and  fifteen  hundred  widows  and 
poor  persons  under  its  care.  From  this  we  might  estimate  the 
number  of  members  at  some  fifty  or  sixty  thousand,  i.  e.  about 
one-twentieth  of  the  population  of  the  city,  which  cannot  be 
accurately  determined  indeed,  but  must  have  exceeded  one  mil- 
lion during  the  reign  of  the  Antonines.1  The  strength  of  Chris- 

1  Gibbon,  in  his  thirty-first  chapter,  and  Milman  estimate  the  population  of 


2  11,  CHRISTIANITY  IN  EUROPE.  29 

tianity  in  Rome  is  also  confirmed  by  the  enormous  extent  of  the 
catacombs  where  the  Christians  were  buried. 

From  Rome  the  church  spread  to  all  the  cities  of  ITALY.  The 
first  Roman  provincial  synod,  of  which  we  have  information, 
numbered  twelve  bishops  under  the  presidency  of  Telesphorus 
(142-154).  In  the  middle  of  the  third  century  (255)  Cornelius 
of  Rome  held  a  council  of  sixty  bishops. 

The  persecution  of  the  year  177  shows  the  church  already- 
planted  in  the  south  of  GAUL  in  the  second  century.  Christianity 
came  hither  probably  from  the  East ;  for  the  churches  of  Lyons 
and  Vienne  were  intimately  connected  with  those  of  Asia  Minor, 
to  which  they  sent  a  report  of  the  persecution,  and  Irenseus, 
bishop  of  Lyons,  was  a  disciple  of  Polycarp  of  Smyrna.  Gre- 
gory of  Tours  states,  that  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century 
seven  missionaries  were  sent  from  Rome  to  Gaul.  One  of  these, 
Dionysius,  founded  the  first  church  of  Paris,  died  a  martyr  at 
Montmartre,  and  became  the  patron  saint  of  France.  Popular 
superstition  afterwards  confounded  him  with  Dionysius  the 
Areopagite,  who  was  converted  by  Paul  at  Athens. 

SPAIN  probably  became  acquainted  with  Christianity  likewise 
in  the  second  century,  though  no  clear  traces  of  churches  and 
bishops  there  meet  us  till  the  middle  of  the  third.  The  council 
of  Elvira  in  306  numbered  nineteen  bishops.  The  apostle 
1  Paul  once  formed  the  plan  of  a  missionary  journey  to  Spain, 
and  according  to  Clement  of  Rome  he  preached  there,  if  we 
understand  that  country  to  be  meant  by  "  the  limit  of  the  West," 
to  which  he  says  that  Paul  carried  the  gospel.1  But  there  is  no 
trace  of  his  labors  in  Spain  on  record.  The  legend,  in  defiance 
of  all  chronology,  derives  Christianity-  in  that  country  from  James 

Kome  at  1,200,000 ;  Hoeck  (on  the  basis  of  the  Monumentum  Ancyranum), 
Zumpt  and  Howson  at  two  millions;  Bunsen  somewhat  lower;  while  Bureau 
de  la  Malle  tries  to  reduce  it  to  half  a  million,  c  n  the  ground  that  the  walls  of 
Servius  Tullius  occupied  an  area  only  one-fifth  of  that  of  Paris.  But  these 
walls  no  longer  marked  the  limits  of  the  city  since  its  reconstruction  after  the 
conflagration  under  Nero,  and  the  suburbs  stretched  to  an  unlimited  extent 
into  the  country.  Comp.  vol.  I.  p.  359. 

- 15 :  24;  Clem.  B.  Ad  Cor.  c.  5  (TO 


30  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  Elder,  who  was  executed  in  Jerusalem  in  44,  and  is  said  to 
he  buried  at  Campostella,  the  famous  place  of  pilgrimage, 
where  his  bones  were  first  discovered  under  Alphonso  II.,  to- 
wards the  close  of  the  eighth  century. 1 

"When  Irenseus  speaks  of  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  among 
the  GERMANS  and  other  barbarians,  who,  "  without  paper  and 
ink,  have  salvation  written  in  their  hearts  by  the  Holy  Spirit," 
he  can  refer  only  to  the  parts  of  Germany  belonging  to  the 
Roman  empire  (Germania  tisrhenana). 

According  to  Tertullian  BRITAIN  also  was  brought  under  the 
power  of  the  cross  towards  the  end  of  the  second  century.  The 
Celtic  church  existed  in  England,  Ireland,  and  Scotland,  inde- 
pendently of  Rome,  long  before  the  conversion  of  the  Anglo- 
saxons  by  the  Roman  mission  of  Augustine;  it  continued  for 
some  time  after  that  event  and  sent  offshoots  to  Germany, 
France,  and  the  Low  Countries,  but  was  ultimately  at  different 
dates  incorporated  with  the  Roman  church.  It  took  its  origin 
probably  from  Gaul,  and  afterwards  from  Italy  also.  The 
legend  traces  it  to  St.  Paul  and  other  apostolic  founders.  The 
venerable  Bede  (fT35)  says,  that  the  British  king  Lucius  (about 
167)  applied  to  the  Roman  bishop  Eleutherus  for  missionaries. 
At  the  council  of  Aries,  in  Gaul  (Arelate),  in  314,  three  British 
bishops,  of  Eboracum  (York),  Londinum  (London),  and  Colonia 
Londinensium  (i.  e.  either  Lincoln  or  more  probably  Colchester), 
were  present. 

The  conversion  of  the  barbarians  of  Northern  and  Western 
Europe  did  not  begin  in  earnest  before  the  fifth  and  sixth  cen- 
turies, and  will  claim  our  attention  in  the  history  of  the  Middle 


J".  B,  Gams  (E.  C.):  Die  Kirchengeschishte  wn  Spanien,  Kegonslwrg, 
1862-1879,  5  vols.  The  first  vol.  (422  pages)  is  taken  up  with,  the  legendary 
history  of  the  first  three  centuries.  75  pages  are  ^iven  to  the  disunion  of 
Paul's  journey  to  Spain.  Gams  traces  Christianity  in  that  country  to  Paul  and 
to  seven  disciples  of  the  Apostles  sent  to  Borne,  namely,  Torquatus,  Ctesiphon, 
Secundus,  Indaletius,  Cacilius,  Hesvchius,  and  Euphrasius  (according  to  the 
Roman  Martyrologium,  edited  by  Baronius,  1586). 


II. 

PERSECUTION"  OF  CHRISTIANITY  AND  CHRISTIAN  >tARTYRDOMc 
"Semen  est  sanguis  Christianorum" — Tertullian. 

§  12.  Literature. 

I.  SOTTBCES: 

EUSEBITTS  :  JET.  E.y  particularly  Lib.  viii.  and  ix. 

LACTANTIUS:  De  Mbrtibus  persecutorum. 

The  Apologies  of  JUSTIN  MARTYR,  MINUCIUS  FELIX,  TEKTTTLLIAITJ 

and  ORIGEN,  and  the  Epistles  of  CYPRIAN. 
THEOD.  RUIN ART:   Acta  primorum  martyrum  sincera  et  seleota.    Par. 

1689 ;  2nd  ed.    Amstel.  1713  (covering  the  first  four  cent.). 
Several  biographies  in  the  Acta  Sanctorum.    Antw.  1643  sqq. 
Les  Acts  des  martyrs  depuis  Forigine  de  Veglise  Chretienne  jusqtfa  nos 

t&mps.     Traduits  et  publics  par  Zes  R.R.  P.P.  benedictins  de  la  congreg. 

de  France.    Par.  1857  sqq. 
The  Martijrol.  Hieronymianum  (ed.  Florentini,  Luc.  1668,  and  in  Migne's 

PatroL  Lot.  Opp.  Hieron.  xi,  434  sqq.) ;  the  Martijrol  Romanum  (ed. 

Baron.  1586),  the  Menolog.  Grcec.  (ed.  Urbini,  1727) ;  DE  Eossi, 

EOLLEE,  and  other  works  on  the  Roman  Catacombs. 

II.  WORKS. 

JOHN  FOXE  (or  Fox,  d.  1587) :  Acts  and  Monuments  of  the  Church  (com- 
monly called  Book  of  Martyrs),  first  pub.  at  Strasburg  1554,  and 
Basle  1559 ;  first  complete  ed.  fol.  London  1563 ;  9th  ed.  fol.  1684, 
3  vols.  fol. ;  best  ed.  by  G.  Townsend,  Lond.  1843,  8  vols.  80. ;  also 
many  abridged  editions.  Foxe  exhibits  the  entire  history  of  Chris- 
tian martyrdom,  including  the  Protestant  martyrs  of  the  middle  age 
and  the  sixteenth  century,  with  polemical  reference  to  the  church 
of  Rome  as  the  successor  of  heathen  Rome  in  the  work  of  bloody 
persecution.  "The  Ten  Roman  persecutions"  are  related  in  the 
first  volume. 

KORTHOLDT:  De  perseoutionibus  eccL  primcevce.    Kiel,  1629. 

GIBBON:  chap.  xvi. 

MUNTER:  Die  Christen  im  heidnischen  H<m$e  vor  Consfantin  Copenh, 
1828. 

VON  MANSEGG  (R.  C.) :  Die  Verfolgungen  dor  ersten 
lichen  Kirche.    Vienna,  1821. 

31 


32  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

W.  AD.  SCHMIDT  :  Geschichte  der  Denk  u.  Glaubensfreiheit  im  ersfm 
Jahrhund&rt  der  Kaiserherrschaft  und  des  Christenthums.  Bcrl.  1847. 

KHITZLEK:  Die  Heldenzeiten  des  Christenthums.  Vol.  i.  Der  KarnvJ 
mit  dem  Heidenthum.  Leipz.  1856. 

FE.  W.  GASS  :  Das  christl  Mdrtyrert/mm  in  den  ersten  JahrJimdcrtcn. 
1859-60  (in  Niedner's  "  Zeitsckrift  fur  hist.  Thcol."  for  185<),  pp. 
323-392,  and  1860,  pp.  315-381). 

F.  OVERBECK  :  Gesetze  der  rb'm.  Kaiser  gegen  die  Christen,  is  his  Studies 
zur  Gesch.  der  alien  Kirche,  I.  Chemn.  1875. 

B.  AUBE:  Histoire  des  persecutions  de  I'fylisejusqu9  a  la  fin  des  Antonins. 
2nd  ed.  Paris  1875  (Crowned  by  the  Acud6mie  frai^aiso).  By  the 
same:  Histoire  des  persecutions  de  I'&glise,  La polemique pcvycnnv  a  la 
fin  du  II.  s&cZe,  1878.  Les  Chrtstiens  dans  7  empire  remain,  <l<>,  la,  fin 
des  Antonins  au  milieu  du  III6  siede  (180-%lfi\  1881.  Eegl'ise  et 
Tltdt  dam  la  seconds  moitU  du  III6  siecle,  1886. 

K,  WIESELER  :  Die  Christenverfolgungen  der  Gdsaren,  Imt.  und  chronol, 
untersucht.  Giitersloh,  1878. 

GEEH.  UHLHOEN  :  Der  Kampf  des  Christenthums  mit  dcm  IIcMknthum. 
3d  ed.  Stuttgart,  1879.  EngL  transl.  by  Smyth  &  Ropes,  1870. 

THEOD.  KEIM:  Rom  und  das  CJmstenthum.    Berlin,  1881. 

E.  KENAN  :  Marc-Aurtle.    Paris,  1882,  pp.  53-69. 

§  13.  General  Survey. 

The  persecutions  of  Christianity  during  the  first  three  cen- 
turies appear  like  a  long  tragedy  :  first,  foreboding  signs;  then 
a  succession  of  bloody  assaults  of  heathenism  upon  the  religion 
of  the  cross ;  amidst  the  dark  scenes  of  fiendish  hatred  and 
cruelty  the  bright  exhibitions  of  suffering  virtue;  now  and 
then  a  short  pause;  at  last  a  fearful  and  desperate  struggle  of 
the  old  pagan  empire  for  life  and  death,  ending  in  the  abiding 
victory  of  the  Christian  religion.  Thus  this  bloody  baptism 
of  the  church  resulted  in  the  birth  of  a  Christian  world.  It 
was  a  repetition  and  prolongation  of  the  crucifixion,  but  fol- 
lowed by  a  resurrection. 

Our  Lord  had  predicted  this  conflict,  and  prepared  His  dis- 
ciples for  it  "  Behold,  I  send  you  forth  as  sheep  in  the  midst 
of  wolves.  They  will  deliver  you  up  to  councils,  and  in  their 
synagogues  they  will  scourge  you;  yea  and  before  governors 
and  kings  shall  ye  be  brought  for  My  sake,  for  a  testimony  to 
them  aud  to  the  Gentiles.  And  brother  shall  deliver  up 


2  13.  QENEEAL  SURVEY.  33 

orother  to  death,  and  the  father  his  child :  and  children  shall 
rise  up  against  parents,  and  cause  them  to  be  put  to  death. 
And  ye  shall  be  hated  of  all  men  for  My  name's  sake :  but  he 
that  endureth  to  the  end,  the  same  shall  be  saved."  These,  and 
similar  words,  as  well  as  the  recollection  of  the  crucifixion  and 
resurrection,  fortified  and  cheered  many  a  confessor  and  martyr 
in  the  dungeon  and  at  the  stake. 

The  persecutions  proceeded  first  from  the  Jews,  afterwards 
from  the  Gentiles,  and  continued,  with  interruptions,  for  nearly 
three  hundred  years.  History  reports  no  mightier,  longer  and 
deadlier  conflict  than  this  war  of  extermination  waged  by 
heathen  Rome  against  defenseless  Christianity.  It  was  a  most 
unequal  struggle,  a  struggle  of  the  sword  and  of  the  cross; 
carnal  power  all  on  one  side,  moral  power  all  on  the  other.  It 
was  a  struggle  for  life  and  death.  One  or  the  t  other  of  the 
combatants  must  succumb.  A  compromise  was  impossible. 
The  future  of  the  world's  history  depended  on  the  downfall 
of  heathenism  and  the  triumph  of  Christianity.  Behind  the 
scene  were  the  powers  of  the  invisible  world,  God  and  the 
prince  of  darkness,  Justin,  Tertullian,  and  other  confessors 
traced  the  persecutions  to  Satan  and  the  demons,  though  they 
did  not  ignore  the  human  and  moral  aspects ;  they  viewed  them 
also  as  a  punishment  for  past  sins,  and  a  school  of  Christian 
virtue.  Some  denied  that  martyrdom  was  an  evil,  since  it 
only  brought  Christians  the  sooner  to  God  and  the  glory  of 
heaven.  As  war  brings  out  the  heroic  qualities  of  men,  so  did 
the  persecutions  develop  the  patience,  the  gentleness,  the  en- 
durance of  the  Christians,  and  prove  the  world-conquering 

power  of  faith. 

Number  of  Persecutions. 

From  the  fifth  century  it  has  been  customary  to  reckon  ten 
great  persecutions :  u&der  Nero,  Domitian,  Trajan,  Marcus 
Aurelius,  Septimius  Severus,  Maximinus,  Decius,  Valerian, 
Aurelian,  and  Diocletian.1  This  number  was  suggested  by  the 

x  So"Augustin,  DC  Qivit.  Dei,  xviii.  52,  but  he  mentions  Antoninus  for  Marcus 
Aurelius.    Lactantius  counts  six,  Sulpitius  Severus  nine  persecutions. 
Vol.  II.     3. 


34  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

ten  plagues  of  Egypt  taken  as  types  (which,  however,  befell 
the  enemies  of  Israel,  and  present  a  contrast  rather  than  a 
parallel),  and  by  the  ten  horns  of  the  Roman  beast  making  war 
with  the  Lamb,  taken  for  so  many  emperors.1  But  the  number 
is  too  great  for  the  general  persecutions,  and  too  small  for  the 
provincial  and  local.  Only  two  imperial  persecutions — those 
of  Decius  and  Diocletian  — extended  over  the  empire;  but 
Christianity  was  always  an  illegal  religion  from  Trajan  to  Con- 
stantine,  and  subject  to  annoyance  and  violence  everywhere.2 
Some  persecuting  emperors — Nero,  Domitian,  Galerius,  were 
monstrous  tyrants,  but  others — Trajan,  Marcus  Aurelius, 
Decius,  Diocletian — were  among  the  best  and  most  energetic, 
emperors,  and  were  prompted  not  so  much  by  hatred  of  Chris- 
tianity as  by  zeal  for  the  maintenance  of  the  laws  and  the 
power  of  the  government.  On  the  other  hand,  some  of  the 
most  worthless  emperors — Commodus,  Caracalla,  and  Helio- 
gabahis — were  rather  favorable  to  the  Christians  from  sheer 
caprice.  All  were  equally  ignorant  of  the  true  character  of 
the  new  religion. 

The  Result. 

The  long  and  bloody  war  of  heathen  Rome  against  the 
church,  which  is  built  upon  a  rock,  utterly  failed.  It  began  in 
Rome  under  Nero,  it  ended  near  Rome  at  the  Milvian  bridge, 
under  Constantine.  Aiming  to  exterminate,  it  purified.  It 
called  forth  the  virtues  of  Christian  heroism,  and  resulted  in 
the  consolidation  and  triumph  of  the  new  religion.  The 

1Ex.  chs.  5-10;  Rev.  17:  12sqq.  Augustin  felt  the  impropriety  of  refer- 
ring to  the  Egyptian  plagues,  and  calls  this  a  mete  conjecture  of  the  human 
mind  which  "sometimes  hits  the  truth  and  sometimes  is  deceived,"  He  also 
rectifies  the  number  hy  referring  to  the  persecutions  before  Nero,  mentioned  in 
the  N.  T.,  and  to  the  persecutions  after  Diocletian,  as  that  of  Julian,  and  the 
Arian  emperors.  "  When  I  think  of  these  and  the  like  things,"  he  says,  "it 
does  not  seem  to  me  that  the  number  of  persecutions  with  which  the  church  is 
to  be  tried  can  be  definitely  stated." 

2  On  the  relation  of  Christianity  to  the  laws  of  the  Roman  empire,  flee 
Aube*,  Le  la  kgalitt  du  Ckistmime  dans  f  empire  Bmain  au  lar  v&clt.  Paris 
1866. 


213-  GENERAL  SURVEY.  3g 

philosophy  of  persecution  is  best  expressed  by  the  terse  word 
of  Tertullian,  who  lived  in  the  midst  of  them,  but  did  not  see 
the  end:  "The  blood  of  the  Christians  is  the  seed  of  the 
Church.  V 

Rdigious  Freedom. 

The  blood  of  persecution  is  also  the  seed  of  civil  and  religious 
liberty.  All  sects,  schools,  and  parties,  whether  religious  or 
political,  when  persecuted,  complain  of  injustice  and  plead  for 
toleration ;  but  few  practise  it  when  in  power.  The  reason  of 
this  inconsistency  lies  in  the  selfishness  of  human  nature,  and  in 
mistaken  zeal  for  what  it  believes  to  be  true  and  right.  Liberty 
is  of  very  slow,  but  sure  growth. 

The  ancient  world  of  Greece  and  Rome  generally  was  based 
upon  the  absolutism  of  the  state,  which  mercilessly  trampled 
under  foot  the  individual  rights  of  men.  It  is  Christianity 
which  taught  and  acknowledged  them. 

The  Christian  apologists  first  proclaimed,  however  imper- 
fectly, the  principle  of  freedom  of  religion,  and  the  sacred  rights 
of  conscience.  Tertullian,  in  prophetic  anticipation  as  it  were 
of  the  modern  Protestant  theory,  boldly  tells  the  heathen  that 
everybody  has  a  natural  and  inalienable  right  to  worship  God 
according  to  his  conviction,  that  all  compulsion  in  matters  of 
conscience  is  contrary  to  the  very  nature  of  religion,  and  that 
no  form  of  worship  has  any  value  whatever  except  as  far  as  it 
is  a  free  voluntary  homage  of  the  heart.1 

Similar  views  in  favor  of  religious  liberty  were  expressed  by 

1  See  the  remarkable  passage  Ad  Scapulam,  c.  2:  "  Tamen  humani  juris  et 
naturdis  potestaMs  est  unwwique  quod  putavertt  colere,  nee  alii  obest,  out  prodest 
alt&rius  religio.  Sed  nee  religionis  est  cog&re  religionem,  quo3  sponte  tmripi  debeat 
non  vi,  cum  et  hostiae  ab  animo  Wb&nti  expostulentur.  Ita  etsi  no$  compuleritis  ad 
sacrificandum,  nihtt  prcestobitis  diis  vestris.  Ab  invitis  enim  sacrificia  non  dewcfer- 
ab'unt,  nisi  si  contentiosi  sunt;  contentiosus  autem  deus  non  est"  Comp.  the  similar 
passage  in  Tertullian,  Apolog.  c.  24,  where  after  enumerating  the  various  forms 
of  idolatry  which  enjoyed  free  toleration  in  the  empire  he  continues :  "Videte 
enim  neethoc  ad  irreligiositatis  elogium  concurrat,  adimere  libertatem  religionis  et 


quern  nolim.    Nemo  86  ab  invito  coli  voletj  ne  homo  quidem" 


36  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.I).  100-311. 

Justin  Martyr/  and  at  the  close  of  our  period  l>y  Lactantius, 
who  says :  "  Religion  cannot  be  imposed  by  force ;  the  matter 
must  be  carried  on  by  words  rather  than  by  blows,  that  the 
will  may  be  affected.  Torture  and  piety  are  widely  different ; 
nor  is  it  possible  for  truth  to  be  united  with  violence,  or  justice 
with  cruelty.  Nothing  is  so  much  a  matter  of  free  will  as 
religion."  2 

The  Church,  after  its  triumph  over  paganism,  forgot  this 
lesson,  and  for  many  centuries  treated  all  Christian  heretics,  as 
well  as  Jews  and  Gentiles,  just  as  the  old  Romans  had  treated 
the  Christians,  without  distinction  of  creed  or  sect.  Every 
state-church  from  the  times  of  the  Christian  emperors  of  Con- 
stantinople to  the  times  of  the  Russian  Czars  and  the  South 
American  Republics,  has  more  or  less  persecuted  the  dissenters, 
in  direct  violation  of  the  principles  and  practice  of  Christ  and 
the  apostles,  and  in  carnal  misunderstanding  of  the  spiritual 
nature  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

§  14,  Jewish  Persecution. 
SOURCES. 

I.  Dio  CASSIUS:  ffist.  Rom.  LXYIII.  32;  LXIX.  12-14;  JTTSTTN  M.: 
ApoL  I.  31,  47;  EUSEBIUS  :  K  EccL  IV.  2.  and  6.  Rabbinical  tra- 
ditions in  Derenbourg :  Histoire  de  la  Palestine  depuis  Qyrus  juxqu' 
a  Adrien  (Paris  1867),  pp.  402-438. 

n.  FB.  MtoTER:  Der  Mdiscke  Krieg  unter  Frajan  u.  Hadrian.  Altona 
and  Leipz.  1821. 

DEYLINQ-:  Aeliae  Capitol  origines  et  Mstorice.    Lips.  1743. 

EWALD:  Gesch.  des  Volkes  Israel,  VEL  373-432. 

MILMAK:  History  of  the  Jews,  Books  18  and  20. 

GElTZ:  Gesch.  der  Juden.    Yol.  IY.  (Leipz.  1866). 

SCH-&EEB:  Neutestam.  Zeitgeschichte  (1874),  pp.  350-367. 

The  Jews  had  displayed  their  obstinate  unbelief  and  bitter 
hatred  of  the  gospel  in  the  crucifixion  of  Christ,  the  stoning  of 
Stephen,  the  execution  of  James  the  Elder,  the  repeated  incar- 
cerations of  Peter  and  John,  tibe  wild  rage  against  Paul,  and  the 

1  Apol  I.  c.  %  4, 12.  8  Irutiit.  dm.  V.  20. 


2  14.  JEWISH  PERSECUTION.  37 

murder  of  James  the  Just.  No  wonder  that  the  fearful  judg- 
ment of  God  at  last  visited  this  ingratitude  upon  them  in  the 
destruction  of  the  holy  city  and  the  temple,  from  which  the 
Christians  found  refuge  in  Pella. 

But  this  tragical  fate  could  break  only  the  national  power  of 
i)he  Jews,  not  their  hatred  of  Christianity.  They  caused  the 
death  of  Symeon,  bishop  of  Jerusalem  (107) ;  they  were  par- 
ticularly active  in  the  burning  of  Poly  carp  of  Smyrna;  and 
they  inflamed  the  violence  of  the  Gentiles  by  c^umniating  the 
>ect  of  the  Nazarenes. 

The  Rebellion  under  Bar-Cochba.    Jerusalem  again  Destroyed. 

By  severe  oppression  under  Trajan  and  Hadrian,  the  prohibi- 
tion of  circumcision,  and  the  desecration  of  Jerusalem  by  the 
idolatry  of  the  pagans,  the  Jews  were  provoked  to  a  new  and 
powerful  insurrection  (A.  r>.  132-135).  A  pseudo-Messiah, 
Bar-Cochba  (son  of  the  stars,  Num.  24 :  17),  afterwards  called 
Bar-Cosiba  (son  of  falsehood),  put  himself  at  the  head  of  the 
rebels,  and  caused  all  the  Christians  who  would  not  join  him  to 
be  most  cruelly  murdered.  But  the  false  prophet  was  defeated 
by  Hadrian's  general  in  135,  more  than  half  a  million  of  Jews 
were  slaughtered  after  a  desperate  resistance,  immense  numbers 
sold  into  slavery,  985  villages  and  50  fortresses  levelled  to  the 
ground,  nearly  all  Palestine  laid  waste,  Jerusalem  again  de- 
stroyed, and  a  Roman  colony,  Aelia  Capitolina,  erected  on  its 
ruins,  with  an  image  of  Jupiter  and  a  temple  of  Venus.  The 
coins  of  Aelia  Capitolina  bear  the  images  of  Jupiter  Capitolinus, 
Bacchus,  Serapis,  Astarte. 

Thus  the  native  soil  of  the  venerable  religion  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament was  ploughed  up,  and  idolatry  planted  on  it.  The  Jews 
were  forbidden  to  visit  the  holy  spot  of  their  former  metropolis 
upon  pain  of  death.1  Only  on  the  anniversary  of  the  destruo 

1  As  reported  by  Justin  M.,  a  native  of  Palestine  and  a  cotemporary  of  this 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.  ApoL  I.  c.  47.  Tertullian  also  says  (Adv.  Jiid.  c. 
13),  that  "an  interdict  was  issued  forbidding  any  one  of  the  Jews  to  linger  in 
the  confines  of  the  district." 


38  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

tion  were  they  allowed  to  behold  and  bewail  it  from  a  distance. 
The  prohibition  was  continued  under  Christian  emperors  to  their 
disgrace.  Julian  the  Apostate,  from  hatred  of  the  Christians, 
allowed  and  encouraged  them  to  rebuild  the  temple,  but  in  vain. 
Jerome,  who  spent  the  rest  of  his  life  in  monastic  retirement  at 
Bethlehem  (d.  419),  informs  us  in  pathetic  words  that  in  his  day 
old  Jewish  men  and  women,  "in  oorporibus  et  in  habitu  BUG 
iram  Domini  demonstrates"  had  to  buy  from  the  Eoman  watch 
the  privilege  of  weeping  and  lamenting  over  the  ruins  from 
mount  Olivet  in  sight  of  the  cross,  "ut  qui  quondam  cmerant 
sangruinem  Qhristi,  emant  lacrymas  suas,  et  ne  fletus  quidem  eis 
gratuities  sit.3'1  The  same  sad  privilege  the  Jews  now  enjoy 
under  Turkish  rule,  not  only  once  a  year,  but  every  Friday 
beneath  the  very  walls  of  the  Temple,  now  replaced  by  the 
Mosque  of  Omar.2 

The  Talmud. 

After  this  the  Jews  had  no  opportunity  for  any  further  inde- 
pendent persecution  of  the  Christians.  Yet  they  continued  to 
circulate  horrible  calumnies  on  Jesus  and  his  followers.  Their 
learned  schools  at  Tiberias  and  Babylon  nourished  this  bitter 
hostility.  The  Talmud,  i.  e.  Doctrine,  of  which  the  first  part 
(the  Mishna,  i.  e.  Kepetition)  was  composed  towards  the  cud 
of  the  second  century,  and  the  second  part  (the  Gemara,  i.  e. 
Completion)  in  the  fourth  century,  well  represents  the  Judaism 
of  its  day,  stiff,  traditional,  stagnant,  and  anti-Christian.  Sub- 
sequently the  Jerusalem  Talmud  was  eclipsed  by  the  Babylonian 
(430-521),  which  is  four  times  larger,  and  a  still  more  distinct 
expression  of  Eabbinism.  The  terrible  imprecation  on  apostates 

1  Ad  Zephan.  1 :  15  sqq.    Schiirer  quotes  the  passage,  p.  363. 

1  "The  Wailing  Place  of  the  Jews"  at  the  cyclopean  foundation  wall  is  just 
outside  of  the  Mosque  El  Aska,  and  near  "  Kobinson's  Arch."  There  I  saw 
on  Good  Friday,  1877,  a  large  number  of  Jews,  old  and  young,  men  and 
women,  venerable  rabbis  with  patriarchal  beards,  others  dirty  and  repulsive, 
kissing  the  stone  wall  and  watering  it  with  their  tears,  while  repeating  from 
Hebrew  Bibles  and  prayer-books  the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah,  Psalms  76th 
and  79th,  and  various  litanies.  Comp.  Tobler,  Topographic  von  Jerusalem, 
I.  629. 


2  14.  JEWISH  PERSECUTION.  39 

(precatio  hceretieorum),  designed  to  deter  Jews  from  going  over 
to  the  Christian  faith,  conies  from  the  second  century,  and  is 
stated  by  the  Talmud  to  have  been  composed  at  Jafna,  where 
the  Sanhedrin  at  that  time  had  its  seat,  by  the  younger  Rabbi 
Gamaliel. 

The  Talmud  is  the  slow  growth  of  several  centuries.  It  is  a 
chaos  of  Jewish  learning,  wisdom,  and  folly,  a  continent  of  rub- 
bish, with  hidden  pearls  of  true  maxims  and  poetic  para- 
bles. Delitzsch  calls  it  "  a  vast  debating  club,  in  which  there 
hum  confusedly  the  myriad  voices  of  at  least  five  centuries,  a 
unique  code  of  laws,  in  comparison  -with  which  the  law-books  of 
all  other  nations  are  but  lilliputian."  It  is  the  Old  Testament 
misinterpreted  and  turned  against  the  New,  hi  fact,  though  not 
in  form.  It  is  a  rabbinical  Bible  without  inspiration,  without 
the  Messiah,  without  hope.  It  shares  the  tenacity  of  the  Jewish 
race,  and,  like  it,  continues  involuntarily  to  bear  testimony  to 
the  truth  of  Christianity.  A  distinguished  historian,  on  being 
asked  what  is  the  best  argument  for  Christianity,  promptly  re- 
plied :  the  Jews.1 

Unfortunately  this  people,  still  remarkable  even  in  its  tragical 
end,  was  in  many  ways  cruelly  oppressed  and  persecuted  by  the 
Christians  after  Constantine,  and  thereby  only  confirmed  in  its 
fanatical  hatred  of  them.  The  hostile  legislation  began  with 
the  prohibition  of  the  circumcision  of  Christian  slaves,  and  the 
intermarriage  between  Jews  and  Christians,  and  proceeded 
already  in  the  fifth  century  to  the  exclusion  of  the  Jews  from 
all  civil  and  political  rights  in  Christian  states.  Even  our  en- 
lightened age  has  witnessed  the  humiliating  spectacle  of  a  cruel 
Judenhetze  in  Germany  and  still  more  in  Russia  (1881).  But 
through  all  changes  of  fortune  God  has  preserved  this  ancient 

1  On  the  literature  of  the  Talmud  see  the  articles  in  Herzog,  and  in  McClin- 
tock  &  Strong,  and  especially  Schurer,  Neutesfamentl.  Zeitgeschichte  (Leipz. 
1874),  pp.  45-49,  to  which  I  add  Schurer's  essay:  Die  Predigt  Jesu  Christi  in 
ihrem,  Verhaltnias  mm  AU&n,  Testament  wnd  aum  Judenthwm,  Darmstadt,  1882. 
The  relation  of  the  Talmud  to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  the  few  resem- 
blances is  discussed  by  Pick  in  McClintock  &  Strong,  vol.  ix.  571. 


40  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

race  as  a  living  monument  of  his  justice  and  his  mercy  ;  and 
he  will  undoubtedly  assign  it  an  important  part  in  the  consum- 
mation of  his  kingdom  at  the  second  coming  of  Christ. 

§  15.  Causes  of  Roman  Persecution. 

The  policy  of  the  Roman  government,  the  fanaticism  of  the 
superstitious  people,  and  the  self-interest  of  the  pagan  priests 
conspired  for  the  persecution  of  a  religion  which  threatened  to 
demolish  the  tottering  fabric  of  idolatry  ;  and  they  left  no  ex- 
pedients of  legislation,  of  violence,  of  craft,  and  of  wickedness 
untried,  to  blot  it  from  the  earth.  ^ 

To  glance  first  at  the  relation  of  the  Roman  state  to  the  Chris- 

tian religion. 

Roman  Toleration. 

The  policy  of  imperial  Rome  Was  in  a  measure  tolerant.     It 


was  repressive,  but  not  preventive.  Freedom  of  thought 
not  checked  by  a  censorship,  education  was  left  untrammelled  to 
be  arranged  between  the  teacher  and  the  learner.  The  armies 
were  quartered  on  the  frontiers  as  a  protection  of  the  empire, 
not  employed  at  home  as  instruments  of  oppression,  and  fcho 
people  were  diverted  from  public  affairs  and  political  discontent 
by  public  amusements.  The  ancient  religions  of  the  conquered 
races  were  tolerated  as  far  as  they  did  not  interfere  with  the 
interests  of  the  state.  The  Jews  enjoyed  special  protection  since 
the  time  of  Julius  Csesar. 

Now  so  long  as  Christianity  was  regarded  by  the  Romans  as 
a  mere  sect  of  Judaism,  it  shared  the  hatred  and  contempt,  in- 
deed, but  also  the  legal  protection  bestowed  on  that  ancient 
national  religion.  Providence  had  so  ordered  it  that  Christianity 
had  already  taken  root  in  the  leading  cities  of  the  empire  before 
its  true  character  was  understood.  Paul  had  carried  it,  under 
the  protection  of  his  Roman  citizenship,  to  the  ends  of  the  em- 
pire, and  the  Roman  proconsul  at  Corinth  refused  to  interfere 
with  his  activity  on  the  ground  that  it  was  an  internal  question 
of  the  Jews,  which  did  not  belong  to  his  tribunal.  The  heathen 


J15.   CAUSLS  OF  ROMAN  PERSECUTION.  41 

statesmen  and  authors,  even  down  to  the  age  of  Trajan,  includ- 
ing the  historian  Tacitus  and  the  younger  Pliny,  considered  the 
Christian  religion  as  a  vulgar  superstition,  hardly  worthy  of 
their  notice. 

But  it  was  far  too  important  a  phenomenon,  and  made  far  too 
rapid  progress  to  be  long  thus  ignored  or  despised.  So  soon  as 
it  was  understood  as  a  new  religion,  and  as,  in  fa  t,  claiming  uni- 
versal validity  and  acceptance,  it  was  set  down  as  unlawful  and 
treasonable,  a  religio  illicitaj  and  it  was  the  constant  reproach 
of  the  Christians :  "  You  have  no  right  to  exist."  * 

Roman  Intolerance. 

We  need  not  be  surprised  at  this  position.  For  with  all  its 
professed  and  actual  tolerance  the  Roman  state  was  thoroughly 
interwoven  with  heathen  idolatry,  and  made  religion  a  tool  of 
its  policy.  Ancient  history  furnishes  no  example  of  a  state 
without  some  religion  and  form  of  worship.  Rome  makes  no 
exception  to  the  general  rule.  "The  Romano-Hellenic  state- 
religion"  (says  Mommsen),  "and  the  Stoic  state-philosophy 
inseparably  combined  with  it  were  not  merely  a  convenient 
instrument  for  every  government-oligarchy,  democracy,  or 
monarchy — but  altogether  indispensable,  because  it  was  just  as 
impossible  to  construct  the  state  wholly  without  religious  eler 
ments  as  to  discover  any  new  state  religion  adapted  to  form  a 
substitute  for  the  old." 2 

The  piety  of  Romulus  and  Numa  was  believed  to  have  laid 
the  foundation  of  the  power  of  Rome.  To  the  favor  of  the 
deities  of  the  republic,  the  brilliant  success  of  the  Roman  arms  was 
attributed.  The  priests  and  Vestal  virgins  were  supported  out 
of  the  public  treasury.  The  emperor  was  ex-officio  the  pontifex 
ma&imus,  and  even  an  object  of  divine  worship.  The  gods 
were  national ;  and  the  eagle  of  Jupiter  Capitolinus  moved  as 
a  good  genius  before  the  world-conquering  legions.  Cicero  lays 
down  as  a  principle  of  legislation,  that  no  one  should  be  allowed 

1  "Non  licet  ease  vos."    Tertullian,  Apol  4. 

a  The  History  of  Rome,  translated  by  Dickson,  vol.  IV.  P.  II.  p.  559. 


42  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

to  worship  foreign  gods,  unless  they  were  recognized  by  public 
statute.1  Maecenas  counselled  Augustus:  "Honor  the  gods 
according  to  the  custom  of  our  ancestors,  and  compel 2  others  to 
worship  them.  Hate  and  punish  those  who  bring  in  strange 
gods." 

It  is  true,  indeed,  that  individuals  in  Greece  and  Kome  en- 
joyed an  almost  unlimited  liberty  for  expressing  sceptical  and 
even  impious  sentiments  in  conversation,  in  books  and  on  the 
stage.  We  need  only  refer  to  the  works  of  Aristophanes, 
Lucian,  Lucretius,  Plautus,  Terence.  But  a  sharp  distinction 
was  made  then,  as  often  since  by  Christian  governments,  be- 
tween liberty  of  private  thought  and  conscience,  which  is 
inalienable  and  beyond  the  reach  of  legislation,  and  between  the 
liberty  of  public  worship,  although  the  latter  is  only  the  legiti- 
mate consequence  of  the  former.  Besides,  wherever  religion  is 
a  matter  of  state-legislation  and  compulsion,  there  is  almost 
invariably  a  great  deal  of  hypocrisy  and  infidelity  among  the 
educated  classes,  however  often  it  may  conform  outwardly,  from 
policy,  interest  or  habit,  to  the  forms  and  legal  acquirements  of 
the  established  creed. 

The  senate  and  emperor,  by  special  edicts,  usually  allowed 
conquered  nations  the  free  practice  of  their  worship  even  in 
Borne ;  not,  however,  from  regard  for  the  sacred  rights  of  con- 
science, but  merely  from  policy,  and  with  the  express  prohibition 
of  making  proselytes  from  the  state  religion ;  hence  severe  laws 
were  published  from  time  to  time  against  transition  to  Judaism, 

Obstacles  to  the  Toleration  of  Christianity. 

To  Christianity,  appearing  not  as  a  national  religion,  but 
claiming  to  be  the  only  true  universal  one,  making  its  converts 
among  every  people  and  every  sect,  attracting  Greeks  and 
.Romang  in  much  larger  numbers  than  Jews,  refusing  to  com- 
promise with  any  form  of  idolatry,  and /threatening  in  fact  the 
very  existence  of  the  Eoman  state  religion',*!  even  this  limited 

1  "Nisi  publice  adscitos."  2  av<fy/ca£e,  according  to  Dion 


§15.  CAUSES  OF  BOMAN  PERSECUTION.       43 

toleration  could  not  be  granted.  The  same  all-absorbing  politi- 
cal interest  of  Rome  dictated  here  the  opposite  course,  and 
Tertullian  is  hardly  just  in  charging  the  Eomans  with  inconsist- 
ency for  tolerating  the  worship  of  all  false  gods,  from  whom 
they  had  nothing  to  fear,  and  yet  prohibiting  the  worship  of  the 
only  true  God  who  is  Lord  over  all.1  Born  under  Augustus. 
and  crucified  under  Tiberius  at  the  sentence  of  the  Roman 
magistrate,  Christ  stood  as  the  founder  of  a  spiritual  universal 
empire  at  the  head  of  the  most  important  epoch  of  the  Roman 
power,  a  rival  not  to  be  endured.  The  reign  of  Constantine 
subsequently  showed  that  the  free  toleration  of  Christianity  was 
the  death-blow  to  the  Roman  state  religion. 

Then,  too,  the  conscientious  refusal  of  the  Christians  to  pay 
divine  honors  to  the  emperor  and  his  statue,  and  to  take  part  in 
any  idolatrous  ceremonies  at  public  festivities,  their  aversion  to 
the  imperial  military  service,  their  disregard  for  politics  and 
depreciation  of  all  civil  and  temporal  affairs  as  compared  with 
the  spiritual  and  eternal  interests  of  man,  their  close  brotherly 
union  and  frequent  meetings,  drew  upon  them  the  suspicion  of 
hostility  to  the  Caesars  and  the  Roman  people,  and  the  unpardon- 
able crime  of  conspiracy  against  the  state.2 

The  common  people  also,  with  their  polytheistic  ideas,  ab- 
horred the  believers  in  the  one  God  as  atheists  and  enemies  of 
the  gods.  They  readily  gave  credit  to  the  slanderous  rumors  of 
all  sorts  of  abominations,  even  incest  and  cannibalism,  practised 
by  the  Christians  at  their  religious  assemblies  and  love-feasts, 
and  regarded  the  frequent  public  calamities  of  that  age  as  pun- 
ishments justly  inflicted  by  the  angry  gods  for  the  disregard  of 
their  worship.  In  North  Africa  arose  the  proverb  f  "  If  God 
does  not  send  rain,  lay  it  to  the  Christians."  At  every  inunda- 
tion, or  drought,  or  famine,  or  pestilence,  the  fanatical  populace 
cried :  "  Away  with  the  atheists'!  To  the  lions  with  the  Chris- 
tians ! ;* 

1  Apolog.  c.  24  at  the  close :  "Apud  vo&  yuodvis  cohere  jits  e&t  proeter  Deuw  -uertwn, 
fuasi  non  hie  magis  omnium  sit  Dews,  cuius  omnes  swnus" 

2  Hence  the  reproacliful  designation,  "  Hostes  C&sarum  etpopuli  Romani" 


44  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

Finally,  persecutions  were  sometimes  started  by  priests,  jug- 
glers,  artificers,  merchants,  and  others,  who  derived  their  support 
from  the  idolatrous  worship.  These,  like  Demetrius  at  Ephesus, 
and  the  masters  of  the  sorceress  at  Philippi,  kindled  the  fanati- 
cism and  indignation  of  the  mob  against  the  new  religion  for  its 
interference  with  their  gains.1 

§  16.  Condition  of  the  Church  before  the  Reign  of  Trajan. 

The  imperial  persecutions  before  Trajan  belong  to  die 
Apostolic  age,  and  have  been  already  described  in  the  first 
volume.  We  allude  to  them  here  only  for  the  sake  of  the  con- 
nection. Christ  was  born  under  the  first,  and  crucified  under 
the  second  Boman  emperor.  Tiberius  (A.  D.  14-37)  is  reported 
to  have  been  frightened  by  Pilate's  account  of  the  crucifixion 
and  resurrection,  and  to  have  proposed  to  the  senate,  without 
success,  the  enrolment  of  Christ  among  the  Roman  deities ;  but 
this  rests  only  on  the  questionable  authority  of  Tcrtullian.  The 
edict  of  Claudius  (42-54)  in  the  year  53,  which  banished  the 
Jews  from  Rome,  fell  also  upon  the  Christians,  but  as  Jews  witli 
whom  they  were  confounded.  The  fiendish  persecution  of  Nero 
(54-68)  was  intended  as  a  punishment,  not  for  Christianity,  but 
for  alleged  incendiarism  (64).  It  showed,  however,  the  popular 
temper,  and  was  a  declaration  of  war  against  the  new  religion. 
It  became  a  common  saying  among  Christians  that  Nero  would 
reappear  as  Antichrist. 

During  the  rapidly  succeeding  reigns  of  Galba,  Otho,  Vitcllius, 
Vespasian,  and  Titus,  the  church,  so  far  as  we  know,  suffered 
no  very  serious  persecution. 

But  Domitian  (81-96),  a  suspicious  and  blasphemous  tyrant, 
accustomed  to  call  himself  and  to  be  called  "  Lord  and  God," 
treated  the  embracing  of  Christianity  as  a  crime  against  the  state, 
and  condemned  to  death  many  Christians,  even  his  own  cousin, 
the  consul  Flavius  Clemens,  on  the  charge  of  atheism ;  or  con- 
fiscated their  property,  and  sent  them,  as  in  the  case  of 

'    *  Comp.  Arts.  19:  24;  16:  16. 


\  17.  TEAJAN,  A.D.  98-117.  45 

Domitilla,  the  wife  of  the  Clemens  just  mentioned,  into  exile. 
His  jealousy  also  led  him  to  destroy  the  surviving  descendants 
of  David ;  and  he  brought  from  Palestine  to  Rome  two  kinsmen 
of  Jesus,  grandsons  of  Judas,  the  "  brother  of  the  Lord,"  but 
seeing  their  poverty  and  rustic  simplicity,  and  hearing  their  ex- 
planation of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  as  not  earthly,  but  heavenly, 
to  be  established  by  the  Lord  at  the  end  of  the  world,  when  He 
should  come  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,  he  let  them  go. 
Tradition  (in  Irenseus,  Eusebius,  Jerome)  assigns  to  the  reign  of 
Domitian  the  banishment  of  John  to  Patmos  (which,  however, 
must  be  assigned  to  the  reign  of  Nero),  together  with  his  miracu- 
lous preservation  from  death  in  Rome  (attested  by  Tertullian), 
and  the  martyrdom  of  Andrew,  Mark,  Onesimus,  and  Dionysius 
the  Areopagite.  The  Martyrium  of  Ignatius  speaks  of  "  many 
persecutions  under  Domitian." 

His  humane  and  justice-loving  successor,  Nerva  (96-98),  re- 
called the  banished,  and  refused  to  treat  the  confession  of  Chris- 
tianity as  a  political  crime,  though  he  did  not  recognise  the  new 
religion  as  a  religio  lieita. 

§  17.  Trajan.  A.  D.  98-117—  Christianity  Forbidden,— Martyr- 
dom  of  Symeon  of  Jerusalem,  and  Ignatius  of  Antioch. 

I.  SOURCES. 

PUNICS,  jun. :  Epist.  x.  96  and  97  (al.  97  sq.).    TEBTULLTATT  :  Apol  c.  2 ; 
EUSEBIUS  :  H.  E.  III.  11, 32, 33, 36.    Chron.  pasch.  p.  470  (ed.  Bonn.). 

Acta  Martyrii  Ignatii,  in  KTOTART,  p.  8  sqq. ;  recent  edd.  by  THEOD.  - 
ZAHN,  in  Patrum  Apost.  Opera  (Lips.  1876),  vol.  II.  pp.  301  sqq. ; 
FUNK,  Opera  Pair.  Apost.,  vol.  I.  254-265 ;  II.  218-275 ;  and  LIGHT- 
FOOT  :  S.  Ignatius  and  S.  Polye.,  II.  1,  473-570. 

II.  WORKS. 

On  Trajan's  reign  in  general  see  TILLEMONT,  Histoire  des  Empereurs; 

MERIVALE,  History  of  the  Romans  under  the  Empire. 
On  Ignatius :  THEOD*.  ZAHN:  Ignatius  von  Antioehien.    Gotha  1873  (631 
pages).    LIGHTFOOT  :  8.  Ignatius  and  S.  Pofyc.,  London  1885, 2  vols. 
On  the  chronology :  ADOLPH  HARNACK  :  Die  Zeit  des  Ignatius.    Leipzig, 
1878  (90  pages);  comp.  EJEIM,  /.  a  510-562;  but  especially  LIGHT- 
FOOT,  I.  c.  II.  1,  390  sqq. 

The  Epistles  of  Ignatius  will  be  discussed  in  chapter  XTTL  on  ecclesi- 
astical literature,  2  164  and  165. 


46  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Trajan,  one  of  the  best  and  most  praiseworthy  emperors, 
honored  as  the  "  father  of  his  country,"  but,  like  his  friends, 
Tacitus  and  Pliny,  wholly  ignorant  of  the  nature  of  Christianity, 
was  the  first  to  pronounce  it  in  form  a  proscribed  religion,  as  it 
had  been  all  along  in  fact.  He  revived  the  rigid  laws  against 
all  secret  societies,1  and  the  provincial  officers  applied  them  to 
the  Christians,  on  account  of  their  frequent  meetings  for  worship. 
His  decision  regulated  the  governmental  treatment  of  the  Chris- 
tians for  more  than  a  century.  It  is  embodied  in  his  correspond- 
ence with  the  younger  Pliny,  who  was  governor  of  Bithynia  in 
Asia  Minor  from  109  to  111. 

Pliny  came  in  official  contact  with  the  Christians.  He  him- 
self saw  in  that  religion  only  a  "depraved  and  immoderate 
superstition,"  and  could  hardly  account  for  its  popularity.  He 
reported  to  the  emperor  that  this  superstition  was  constantly 
spreading,  not  only  in  the  cities,  but  also  in  the  villages  of  Asia 
Minor,  and  captivated  people  of  every  age,  rank,  and  sex,  so 
that  the  temples  were  almost  forsaken,  and  the  sacrificial  victims 
found  no  sale.  To  stop  this  progress,  he  condemned  many  Chris- 
tians to  death,  and  sent  others,  who  were  Roman  citizens,  to  the 
imperial  tribunal.  But  he  requested  of  the  emperor  further 
instructions,  whether,  in  these  efforts,  he  should  have  respect  to 
age ;  whether  he  should  treat  the  mere  bearing  of  the  Christian 
name  as  a  crime,  if  there  were  no  other  offence. 

To  these  inquiries  Trajan  replied:  "You  have  adopted  the 
right  course,  my  friend,  with  regard  to  the  Christians ;  for  no 
universal  rule,  to  be  applied  to  all  cases,  can  be  laid  down  in 
this  matter.  They  should  not  be  searched  for ;  but  when  accused 
and  convicted,  they  should  be  punished;' yet  if  any  one  denies 
that  he  has  been  a  Christian,  and  proves  it  by  action,  namely, 

1  Or  prohibited  clubs.  This  is  the  meaning  of  hetosria  (£rafpe«i  or  Iraipta), 
collegium,  sodalitas,  sodcditium,  company,  brotherhood,  especially  a  private 
political  club  or  union  for  party  purposes.  The  Roman  sodalities  were  festive 
clubs  or  lodges,  and  easily  available  for  political  and  revolutionary  ends. 
Trajan  refused  to  sanction  a  company  of  firemen  in  Nicomedia  (Pliny,  Ep>  X. 
34,  al.  43).  Comp.  Biittner,  Geschichte  d&r  polttischen,  Hetdrien  in  Athen  (1840X 
and  Mommsen,  De  collegiis  et  soddieiis  Eomanorum  (Kiel,  1843). 


t  17.  TRAJAN,  A.D.  98-117.  47 

by  worshipping  our  gods,  he  is  to  be  pardoned  upon  his  repent- 
ance, even  though  suspicion  may  still  cleave  to  him  from  his 
antecedents.  But  anonymous  accusations  must  not  be  admitted 
in  any  criminal  process ;  it  sets  a  bad  example,  and  is  contrary 
to  our  age"  (i.  e.  to  the  spirit  of  Trajan's  government). 

This  decision  was  much  milder  than  might  have  been  expected 
from  a  heathen  emperor  of  the  old  Roman  stamp.  TertuUiaai 
charges  it  with  self-contradiction,  as  both  cruel  and  lenient,  for- 
bidding the  search  for  Christians  and  yet  commanding  their 
punishment,  thus  declaring  them  innocent  and  guilty  at  the  same 
time.  But  the  emperor  evidently  proceeded  on  political  princi- 
ples, and  thought  that  a  transient  and  contagious  enthusiasm, 
as  Christianity  in  his  judgment  was,  could  be  suppressed  sooner 
by  leaving  it  unnoticed,  than  by  openly  assailing  it.  He  wished 
to  ignore  it  as  much  as  possible.  But  every  day  it  forced  itself 
more  and  more  upon  public  attention,  as  it  spread  with  the 
irresistible  power  of  truth. 

This  rescript  might  give  occasion,  according  to  the  sentiment 
of  governors,  for  extreme  severity  towards  Christianity  as  a 
secret  union  and  a  religio  illicita.  Even  the  humane  Pliny  tells 
us  that  he  applied  the  rack  to  tender  women.  /Syria  and  Pales- 
tine suffered  heavy  persecutions  in  this  reign. 

Symeon,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  and,  like  his  predecessor  James, 
a  kinsman  of  Jesus,  was  accused  by  fanatical  Jews,  and  cruci- 
fied A.  D.  107,  at  the  age  of  a  hundred  and  twenty  years. 

In  the  same  year  (or  probably  between  110  and  116)  the  distin- 
guished bishop  Ignatius  of  Antioch  was  condemned  to  death, 
transported  to  Eome,  and  thrown  before  wild  beasts  in  the 
Colosseum.  The  story  of  his  martyrdom  has  no  doubt  been 
much  embellished,  but  it  must  have  some  foundation  in  fact, 
and  is  characteristic  of  the  legendary  martyrology  of  the  ancient 
church. 

Our  knowledge  of  Ignatius  is  derived  from  his  disputed 
epistles,1  and  a  few  short  notices  by  Irenseus  and  Origen.  While 

*In  three  recensions,  two  in  Greek,  and  one  in  Syriac.  The  seven  shorten 
Greek  Ep.  are  genuine.  See  below  ?  165. 


48  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

his  existence,  his  position  in  the  early  Church,  and  his  martyr* 
dom  are  admitted,  everything  else  about  him  is  called  in  ques- 
tion.   How  many  epistles  he  wrote,  and  when  he  wrote  them,  how 
much  truth  there  is  in  the  account  of  his  martyrdom,  and  when 
it  took  place,  when  it  was  written  up,  and  by  whom — all  are 
undecided,  and  the  subject  of  protracted  controversy.     He  was, 
according  to  tradition,  a  pupil  of  the  Apostle  John,  and  by  hia 
piety  so  commended  himself  to  the  Christians  in  Antioch  that 
he  was  chosen  bishop,  the  second  after  Peter,  Euodius  being  the 
first.     But  although  he  was  a  man  of  apostolic  character,  and 
governed  the  church  with  great  care,  he  was  personally  not 
satisfied,  until   he  should  be  counted   worthy  of  sealing  his 
testimony  with  his  blood,  and  thereby  attaining  to  the  highon* 
seat  of  honor.     The  coveted  crown  came  to  him  at  last,  and  hirf 
eager  and  morbid  desire  for  martyrdom  was  gratified.     The  em- 
peror Trajan,  in  107,  came  to  Antioch,  and  there  threatened 
with  persecution  all  who  refused  to  sacrifice  to  the  gods.     Igna- 
tius was  tried  for  this  offence,  and  proudly  confessed  himself  a 
"Theophorus"  ("bearer  of  God")  because,  as  he  said,  he  had 
Christ  within  his  breast.     Trajan  condemned  him  to  be  thrown 
to  the  lions  at  Rome.    The  sentence  was  executed  with  all  haste. 
Ignatius  was  'immediately  bound  in  chains,  and  taken  over  land 
and  sea,  accompanied  by  ten  soldiers,  whom  he  denominated  his 
"  leopards,"  from  Antioch  to  Seleucia,  to  Smyrna,  where  he 
met  Polycarp,  and  whence  he  wrote  to  the  churches,  particu- 
larly to  that  in  Rome ;  to  Troas,  to  Neapolis,  through  Macedonia 
to  Epirus,  and  so  over  the  Adriatic  to  Rome. .  He  was  received 
by  the  Christians  there  with  every  manifestation  of  respect,  but 
would  not  allow  them  to  avert  or  even  to  delay  his  martyrdom. 
It  was  on  the  20th  day  of  December,  107,  that  he  was  thrown 
into  the  amphitheater:  immediately  the  wild  beasts  fell  upon 
him,  and  soon  naught  remained  of  his  body  but  a  few  bones, 
which  were  carefully  conveyed  to  Antioch  as  an  inestimable 
treasure.    The  faithful  friends  who  had  accompanied  him  from 
home  dreamed  that  night  that  they  saw  him ;  some  that  he  was 
standing  by  Christ,  dropping  with  sweat  as  if  he  had  just  come 


3  18.  HADRIAN,  A.  D.  117-138.  49 

from  his  great  labor.     Comforted  by  these  dreams  they  returned 
with  the  relics  to  Antioch. 

Note  on  the  Date  of  the  Martyrdom  of  Ignatius, 

The  date  A.  D.  107  has  in  its  favor  the  common  reading  of  the  best  of 
the  martyrologies  of  Ignatius  (Colbertinum)  hvar^  erer,  in  the  ninth  year,  i.  e. 
from  Trajan's  accession,  A.  r>.  98.  From  this  there  is  no  good  reason  to  de- 
part in  favor  of  another  reading  rsraprov  erof,  the  nineteenth  year,  i.  e.  A.  D. 
116.  Jerome  makes  the  date  A.  D.  109.  The  fact  that  the  names  of  the 
Roman  consuls  are  correctly  given  in  the  Martyrium  Colbertinum,  is  proof  of 
ihe  correctness  of  the  date,  which  is  accepted  by  such  critics  as  Ussher,  Tille- 
mont,  Mohler,  Hefele,  and  Wieseler.  The  latter,  in  his  work  Die  'Christenver- 
folgungen  der  Casaren,  1878,  pp.  125  sqq.,  finds  confirmation  of  this  date  in 
Eusebius's  statement  that  the  martyrdom  took  place  before  Trajan  came  to 
Antioch,  which  was  in  his  10th  year  •_  in  the  short  interval  between  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  Ignatius  and  Symeon,  son  of  Klopas  (Hist.  Ecc.  III.  32);  and 
finally,  in  the  letter  of  Tiberian  to  Trajan,  relating  how  many  pressed  forward 
to  martyrdom — an  effect,  as  Wieseler  thinks,  of  the  example  "of  Ignatius.  If 
107  be  accepted,  then  another  supposition  of  Wieseler  is  probable.  It  is  well 
known  that  in  that  year  Trajan  held  an  extraordinary  triumph  on  account  of 
his  Pacian  victories :  may  it  not  have  been  that  the  blood  of  Ignatius  reddened 
the  sand  of  the  amphitheatre  at  that  time  ? 

But  107  A.  D.  is  by  no  means  universally  accepted.  Keim  (Rom  und  das 
Christenthum,  p.  540)  finds  the  Martyrium  Colbertinum  wrong  in  stating  that  the 
death  took  place  under  the  first  consulate  of  Sura  and  the  second  of  Senecu 
because  in  107  Sura  was  consul  for  the  third  and  Senecio  for  the  fourth  time. 
He  also  objects  that  Trajan  was  not  in  Antioch  in  107,  but  in  115,  on  his  way 
to  attack  the  Armenians  and  Parthians.  But  this  latter  objection  falls  to  the 
ground  if  Ignatius  was  not  tried  by  Trajan  personally  in  Antioch.  Harnack 
concludes  that  it  is  only  barely  possible  that  Ignatius  was  martyred  under 
Trajan.  Lightfoot  assigns  the  martyrdom  to  between  110  and  118. 

§  18.  Hadrian.    A.  D.  117-138. 

See  GEBGOBOVIUS  :  Gexch.  Hadrians  und  seiner  Zeit  (1851);  EENAN:  L'flglise 
chr&ienne  (1879),  1-44,  and  WAGBNMANN  in  Herzog,  vol.  v.  501-506. 

Hadrian,  of  Spanish  descent,  a  relative  of  Trajaa,  and 
adopted  by  him  on  his  death-bed,  was  a  man  of  brilliant  talents 
and  careful  education,  a  scholar,  an  artist,  a  legislator  and 
administrator,  and  altogether  one  of  the  ablest  among  the 
Roman  emperors,  but  of  very  doubtful  morality,  governed  by 
changing  moods,  attracted  in  opposite  directions,  ancf  at  last  lost 
in  self-contradictions  and  utter  disgust  of  life.  His  mausoleum 
(Moles  Hadriani)  still  adorns,  as  the  castle  of  Santf  Angelo,  die 
bridge  of  the  Tiber  in  Rome.  :He  is  represented  both  as  a 
friend  and  foe  of  the  church.  He  -was  devoted  to  the  religion 
Vol.  II.  4 


50  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

of  the  state,  bitterly  opposed  to  Judaism,  indifferent  to  Chris* 
tianity  from  ignorance  of  it  He  insulted  the  Jews  and  the 
Christians  alike  by  erecting  temples  of  Jupiter  and  Venus  over 
the  site  of  the  temple  and  the  supposed  spot  of  the  crucifixion. 
He  is  said  to  have  directed  the  Asiatic  proconsul  to  check  the 
popular  fury  against  the  Christians,  and  to  punish  only  those 
who  should  be;  by  an  orderly  judicial  process,  convicted  of  trans- 
gression of  the  laws.1  But  no  doubt  he  regarded,  like  Trajan, 
the  mere  profession  of  Christianity  as  itself  such  a  transgression. 

,,The  Christian  apologies,  which  took  their  rise  under  this 
emperor,  indicate  a  very  bitter  public  sentiment  against  the 
Christians,  and  a  critical  condition  of  the  church.  The  least 
encouragement  from  Hadrian  would  have  brought  on  a  bloody 
persecution.  Quadratus  and  Aristides  addressed  their  pleas  for 
their  fellow-Christians  to  him,  we  do  not  know  with  what  effect. 

Later  tradition  assigns  to  his  reign  the  martyrdom  of  St, 
Eustachius,  St.  Symphorosa  and  her  seven  sons,  of  the  Roman 
bishops  Alexander  and  Telesphorus,  and  others  whose  names  are 
scarcely  known,  and  whose  chronology  is  more  than  doubtful. 

§  19.  Antoninus  Pius.    A.  D.  137-161.     The  Martyrdom  of 

Polycarp* 

COMTE  DE  CHAMPAGNT  (E.  C.) :  Les  Antonins.  (A.  D.  6JM.80),  Parist 
1863 ;  3d  ed.  1874.  8  vols.,  8vo.  MERIVALE'S  History. 
MARTYBIUM  POLYCARPI  (the  oldest,  simplest,  and  least  objection- 
able of  the  martyr-acts),  in  a  letter  of  the  church  of  Smyrna  to  the 
Christians  in  Pontus  or  Phrygia,  preserved  by  EUSEBITJS,  H.  Eccl. 
IV.  15,  and  separately  edited  from  various  MSS.  by  Ussher  (1647) 
and  in  nearly  all  the  editions  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  especially 
by  0.  T.  Gebhardt,  Harnack,  and  Zahn,  II.  132-168,  and  Prolog. 
L-LVI.  The  recension  of  the  text  is  by  Zahn,  and  departs  from 
the  text  of  the  Bollandists  in  98  places.  Best  edition  by  LIGHT- 

1  The  rescript  of  Hadrian  to  Minucius  Fundamis  (124  or  128),  preserved  by 
Eusebius  in  a  Greek  translation,  (H.  J£,  IV.  8,  9),  is  almost  an  edict  of  tolera- 
tion, and  hence  doubted  by  Baur,  Keim,  Aube*,  but  defended  as  genuine  by 
Neander  (1. 101,  Engl.  ed.),  Wieseler,  Funk,  Kenan  (/.  c.  p.  32  sqq  ).  Benan 
represents  Hadrian  as  a  rieur  spirituel,  im  Zman  couronn$  prenant  le  mondt 
eonme  urijwfriwle  (p.  6),  and  therefore  more  favorable  to  religious  liberty  than 
the  serious  Trojan  and  the  pious  Antoninus  and  Marcus  Aurelius.  But  Fried* 
lander  (HI.  492)  accepts  the  report  of  Pausanias  that  Hadrian  was  zealously 
devoted  to  the  worship  of  the  gods.  Keim  regards  him  as  a  visionary  anil 
hostile  to  Christianity  is  well  as  to  Judaism. 


<  19.  ANTONINUS  PIUS,  A.  D.  138-161.  §1 

FOOT,  8.  Ign.  and  S.  Polycarp,  I.  417  sqq.,  and  II.  1005-1047.  Comp, 

the  Greek  Vita  Polycarpi,  in  Funk,  II.  315  sqq. 
{GNATIUS  :  Ad.  Potycarpum.    Best  ed.,  by  Lightfoot,  I  c. 
ZEENAEUS:  Adv.  Haer.  III.  3.  4.    His  letter  to  Florinus  in  EUSEB.  v.  20. 
POLYOBATES  of  Ephesus  (c.  190),  in  EUSEB.  v.  24. 

On  the  date  of  Polycarp's  death : 
WADDINGTON:  Memoire  sur  la  chronologie  de  la  vie  du  rhdteur  Aeliu* 

Aristide  (in  "Mem.  de  P  Acad.  des  inscript.  et  belles  letters,"  Tom. 

XXVI.  Part  II.    1867,  pp.  232  sqq.),  and  in  Fastes  des  provinces 

Asiatiques,  1872,  219  sqq. 
WIESELEB:  Das  Marty  Hum  Polykarp's  und  dessen  Chronologie^  in  his 

•    Christenverfolgungen,  etc.  (1878),  34-87. 
KEIM  :  Die  Zwolf  Martyrer  von  Smyrna  und  der  Tod  des  JSisTiops  Poly- 

karp,  in  his  Aus  dem  Urchristenthum  (1878),  92-133. 
E.  EGLI:   Das  Mariyrium  des  Polyk.>  in  Hilgenfeld's  "  Zeitschrift  fur 

wissensch.  Theol."  for  1882,  pp.  227  sqq. 

Antoninus  Pius  protected  the  Christians  from  the  tumultuous 
violence  which  broke  out  against  them  on  account  of  the  frequent 
public  calamities.  "But  the  edict  ascribed  to  him,  addressei  to  the 
deputies  of  the  Asiatic  cities,  testifying  to  the  innocence  of  the 
Christians,  and  holding  them  up  to  the  heathen  as  models  of 
fidelity  and  zeal  in  the  worship  of  God,  could  hardly  have  come 
from  an  emperor,  who  bore  the  honorable  title  of  Pius  for  his 
conscientious  adherence  to  the  religion  of  his  fathers;1  and  in  any 
case  he  could  not  have  controlled  the  conduct  of  the  provincial 
governors  and  the  fury  of  the  people  against  an  illegal  religion. 

The  persecution  of  the  church  at  Smyrna  and  the  martyrdom 
of  its  venerable  bishop,  which  was  formerly  assigned  to  the  year 
167,  under  the  reign  of  Marcus  Aurelius,  took  place,  according 
to  more  recent  research,  under  Antoninus  in  155,  when  Statius 
Quadratus  was  proconsul  in  Asia  Minor.2  Polycarp  was  a  per- 

1  He  always  offered  sacrifice  himself  as  high-priest.    Friedlander  IH.  492. 

*  So  Waddingfon,  who  has  made  it  almost  certain  that  Quadratus  was  Roman 
consul  A.  D.  142,  and  proconsul  in  Asia  from  154  to  155,  and  that  Polycarp 
died  Feb.  23,  155.  He  is  followed  by  Kenan  (1873),  Ewajd  (1873),  Aub£ 
(1875),  Hilgenfeld  (1874),  Lightfoot  (1875),  Lipsius  (1874),  0.  v.  Gebhardt 
(1875),  Zahn,  Harnack  (1876),  Egli  (1882),  and  again  by  Lightfoot  (1885,  L  c, 
I.  647  sqq).  Wieseler  and  Keim  learnedly  defend  the  old  date  (166-167), 
which  rests  on  the  authority  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  and  was  held  by 
Masson  and  Clinton.  But  Lightfoot  refutes  their  objections  (I.  647,  sqq.),  and 
sustains  Waddington. 


52  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

sonal  friend  and  pupil  of  the  Apostle  John,  and  chief  pres- 
byter of  the  church  at  Smyrna,  where  a  plain  stone  monument 
still  marks  his  grave.  He  was  the  teacher  of  Irenseus  of  Lyons, 
and  thus  the  connecting  link  between  the  apostolic  and  post- 
apostolic  ages.  As  he  died  155  at  an  age  of  eighty-six  years  or 
more,  he  must  have  been  born  A.  D.  69,  a  year  before  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  and  may  have  enjoyed  the  friendship  of 
St.  John  for  twenty  years  or  more.  This  gives  additional  weight 
to  his  testimony  concerning  apostolic  traditions  and  writings, 
We  have  from  him  a  beautiful  epistle  which  echoes  the  apostolic 
teaching,  and  will  be  noticed  in  another  chapter. 

Polycarp  steadfastly  refused  before  the  proconsul  to  deny  his 
King  and  Saviour,  whom  he  had  served  six  and  eighty  years, 
and  from  whom  he  had  experienced  nothing  but  love  and 
mercy.  He  joyfully  went  up  to  the  stake,  and  amidst  the 
flames  Braised  God  for  having  deemed  him  worthy  "  to  be  num- 
bered among  his  martyrs,  to  drink  the  cup  of  Christ's  sufferings, 
unto  the  eternal  resurrection  of  the  soul  and  the  body  in  the 
incorruption  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  The  slightly  legendary  ac- 
count in  the  letter  of  the  church  of  Smyrna  states,  that  the 
flames  avoided  the  body  of  the  saint,  leaving  it  unharmed,  like 
gold  tried  in  the  fire  ;  also  the  Christian  bystanders  insisted,  that 
they  perceived  a  sweet  odor,  as  of  incense.  Then  the  execu- 
tioner thrust  his  sword  into  the  body,  and  the  stream  of  blood 
at  once  extinguished  the  flame.  The  corpse  was  burned  after 
the  Roman  custom,  but  the  bones  were  preserved  by  the  church, 
and  held  more  precious  than  gold  and  diamonds.  The  death  of 
this  last  witness  of  the  apostolic  age  checked  the  fury  of  the 
populace,  and  the  proconsul  suspended  the  persecution. 

§  20.  Persecutions  under  Marcus  Awrelius.    A.  D.  1^1-180, 


HARCTJS  ATTRELIUS  ANTONINUS  :  (b.  121,  d.  180)  :  T# 

ifi,  or  Meditations.  It  is  a  sort  of  diary  or  common  place  book,  in 
which  the  emperor  wrote  down,  towards  the  close  of  his  life,  partly 
amid  the  turmoil  of  war  "  in  the  land  of  the  Quadi  "  (on  the 
Danube  in  Hungary),  for  his  self-improvement,  his  own  moral  reflec- 
tions) together  with  striking  maxims  of  wise  and  virtuous 


g  20.  MAECUS  AUBELXUS,  A.  D.  161-180.  53 

Ed.  princeps  by  Xylander  Zurich  1558,  and  Basle  1568;  bested 
with  a  new  Latin  trans,  and  very  full  notes  by  Gataker,  Lond.  1643, 
Cambr.  1652,  and  with  additional  notes  from  the  French  by  Dacier, 
Lond.  1697  and  1704.  New  ed.  of  the  Greek  text  by  J.  J7.  tic/tufts, 
1802  (and  1821 ) ;  another  by  Adamantius  Corais,  Par.  1816.  English 
translation  by  George  Long,  Lond.  1863,  republ.  Boston,  revised  edi- 
tion, London,  1880.  There  are  translations  into  most  European 
languages,  one  in  Italian  by  the  Cardinal  Francis  Barberini  (nephew 
of  Pope  Urban  VIII),  who  dedicated  his  translation  to  his  own  soul, 
"to  make  it  redder  than  his  purple  at  the  sight  of  the  virtues  of  this 
Gentile."  Comp.  also  the  letters  of  the  famous  rhetorician  M.  Com. 
Fronto,  the  teacher  of  M.  Aurelius,  discovered  and  published  by 
Angelo  Mai,  Milan  1815  and  Borne  1823  (Epistolarum  ad  Mar  cum 
Ccesarem  Lib.  V.,  etc.)  They  are,  however,  very  unimportant,  ex- 
cept so  far  as  they  show  the  life-long  congenial  friendship  between 
the  amiable  teacher  and  his  imperial  pupil. 

A-BETOLD  BODEK:  Marcus  Aurelius  Antoninus  als  Freund  und  Zeitgeno&se 
les  Rabbi  JeTiuda  ha-Nasi.  Leipz.  1868.  (Traces  the  connection 
of  this  emperor  with  the  Jewish  monotheism  and  ethics.) 

B.  BENAN  :  Marc-Aurlle  et  la  fin  du  monde  antique.  Paris  1882.  This 
is  the  seventh  and  the  last  vol.  of  his  work  of  twenty  years'  labor 
on  the  "Histoire  des  Origines  du  Christianisme.*'  It  is  as  full  of 
genius,  learning  and  eloquence,  and  as  empty  of  positive  faith  as 
the  former  volumes.  He  closes  the  period  of  the  definite  formation 
of  Christianity  in  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  but  proposes  in 
a  future  work  to  trace  it  back  to  Isaiah  (or  the  "Great  Unknown") 
as  its  proper  founder. 

EUSEBIUS  :  H.  E.  V.  1-3.  The  Letter  of  the  Churches  of  Lyons  and 
Vienne  to  the  Christians  of  Asia  Minor.  Die  Akten  des  Karpus,  des 
Papylus  und  der  Agathonike,  untersucht  von  AD.  HABNACK.  Leipz. , 
1888. 

On  the  legend  of  the  Legio  fulminatrix  see  TEETULUAM' :  ApoL 
5 ;  ETJSEB.  :  H.  E.  V.  5. ;  and  DIGIT  CASS.  :  Hist.  LXXL  8,  9. 

Marcus  Aurelius,  the  philosopher  on  the  throne,  was  a 
well-educated,  just,  kind,  and  amiable  emperor,  and  readied 
the  old  Roman  ideal  of  self-reliant  Stoic  virtue,  but  for 
this  very  reason  he  had  no  sympathy  with  Christianity,  and 
probably  regarded  it  as  an  absurd  and  fanatical  superstition. 
He  had  no  room  in  his  cosmopolitan  philanthropy  for  the  purest 
and  most  innocent  of  his  subjects,  many  of  whom  served  in  his 
own  army.  He  was  flooded  with  apologies  of  Melito,  Miltiades, 
Atheuagoras  in  behalf  of  the  persecuted  Christians,  but  turned 
a  deaf  ear  to  them.  Only  once,  in  his  Meditations,  does  be 


54  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

allude  to  them,  and  then  with  scorn,  tracing  their  noble  en^ 
thusiasm  for  martyrdom  to  "sheer  obstinacy"  and  love  for 
theatrical  display.1  His  excuse  is  ignorance.  He  probably 
never  read  a  line  of  the  New  Testament,  nor  of  the  apologies 
addressed  to  him.2 

Belonging  to  the  later  Stoical  school,  which  believed  in  an 
immediate  absorption  after  death  into  the  Divine  essence,  he 
considered  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul, 
with  its  moral  consequences,  as  vicious  and  dangerous  to  the 
welfare  of  the  state.  .  A  law  was  passed  under  his  reign,  punish- 
ing every  one  with  exile  who  should  endeavor  to  influence 
people's  mind  by  fear  of  the  Divinity,  and  this  law  was,  no 
doubt,  aimed  at  the  Christians.3  At  all  events  his  reign  was  a 
stormy  time  for  the  church,  although  the  persecutions  cannot  be 
directly  traced  to  him.  The  law  of  Trajan  was  sufficient  to 
justify  the  severest  measures  against  the  followers  of  the  "  for- 
bidden" religion. 

About  the  year  170  the  apologist  Melito  wrote  :    "  The  race 


1  Med.  xi.  3  :  M$  KCLT(L  tyikriv  irapdragw,  &$  ol  "KpiaTiavoi,  a/Ua 
ffepv&c  'Kal,  &OTE  KCU  aMov  rreiffai  ,  arpay^^. 

2  Bodek  (Z.  c.  p.  82  sqq.)  maintains,  contrary  to  the  common  view,  that  Marcus- 
Aurelius  was  personally  indifferent  to  heathenism  and  Christianity,  that  his  acts 
of  respect  for  the  worship  of  the  gods,  related  by  Capitolinus  and  others,  were- 
simply  official  tributes,  and  that  the  persecutions  of  the  Christians  did  probably 
not  originate  with  him.    "  Er  war  eben  so  wenig  ein  Fewd  des  Chwtenthimsf 
als  er  ein  Feind  des  Heidenthums  war:  was  wie  religioser  Fanatismus  aussahr 
war  in  Wahrheit  nur  politiscker  Conservatimus"  (p.  87).    On  the  other  hand,. 
Bodek  claims  for  him  a  friendly  sympathy  with  Judaism  in  its  monotheistic 
and  ethical  features,  and  assumes  that  he  had  intimate  relations  with  * 
Jewish  rabbi.     But  there  is  nothing  in  his  twelve  books  "De  seipso  el 
ad  seipsum"  which  is  inconsistent  with  an  enlightened  heathen  piety  under  the 
unconscious  influence  of  Christianity,  yet  hostile  to  it  partly  from  ignorance 
of  its  true  nature,  partly  from  a  conscientious  regard  to  his  duty  as  the  pontifex 
maaJmus  of  the  state  religion.   The  same  was  the  case  with  Trajan  and  Decius. 
Eenan  (p.  262  sqq.)  calls  the  Meditations  of  Marcus  Aurelius  "  k  livre  le  plus 
purement  hurnain  quttty  ait.  II  ne  tranche  aucune  Question  contrwwse'e.    En 
thfologie,  Mare  Aurtik  flotte  entire  le  d&ime  pur,  le  polyth&sme  enterpr&e'  dam 
un  sens  physique,  a  la  f  won  des  stoiciens,  et  une  sorte  de  panthewne  cosmique." 

*  "Si  quis  aliguid  faerit,  quo  leves  hominum  animi  superstitione  numinis 
terrerentur,  Dims  Marcus  hujumodi  homines  in  insulam  relegari  rescripsit" 
Dig.  XLVIIL  tit.  19.  1.  13,  quoted  by  Lecky  in  Hist.  ofEurop.  Morals,  I.  441- 


?20.  MAKCUS  AURELIUS,  A.D.  361-180.  55 

of  the  worshippers  of  God  in  Asia  is  now  persecuted  by  new 
edicts  as  it  never  has  been  heretofore;  shameless,  greedy 
sycophants,  finding  occasion  in  the  edicts,  now  plunder  the  in- 
nocent day  and  night."  The  empire  was  visited  at  that  time 
by  a  number  of  conflagrations,  a  destructive  flood  of  the  Tiber, 
an  earthquake,  insurrections,  and  particularly  a  pestilence,  which 
spread  from  Ethiopia  to  Gaul.  'This  gave  rise  to  bloody  perse- 
cutions, in  which  government  and  people  united  against  the  ene- 
mies of  the  gods  and  the  supposed  authors  of  these  misfortunes. 
Celsus  expressed  his  joy  that  "the  demon"  [of  the  Christians] 
was  "  not  only  reviled,  but  banished  from  every  land  and  sea," 
and  saw  in  this  judgment  the  fulfilment  of  the  oracle:  "the 
mills  of  the  gods  grind  late."  But  at  the  same  time  these  per- 
secutions, and  the  simultaneous  literary  assaults  on  Christianity 
by  Celsus  and  Lucian,  show  that  the  new  religion  was  con- 
stantly gaining  importance  in  the  empire. 

In  177,  the  churches  of  Lyons  and  Vienne,  in  the  South  of 
France,  underwent  a  severe  trial.  Heathen  slaves  were  forced 
by  the  rack  to  declare,  that  their  Christian  masters  practised  all 
the  unnatural  vices  which  rumor  charged  them  with ;  and  this 
was  made  to  justify  the  exquisite  tortures  to  which  the  Christians 
were  subjected.  But  the  sufferers,  "  strengthened  by  the  foun- 
tain of  living  water  from  the  heart  of  Christ,"  displayed  extra- 
ordinary faith  and  steadfastness,  and  felt,  that  "  nothing  can  be 
fearful,  where  the  love  of  the  Father  is,  nothing  painful,  where 
shines  the  glory  of  Christ." 

The  most  distinguished  victims  of  this  Gallic  persecution  were 
the  bishop  Pothinus,  who,  at  the  age  of  ninety  years,  and  just 
recovered  from  a  sickness,  was  subjected  to  all  sorts  of  abuse, 
and  then  thrown  into  a  dismal  dungeon,  where  he  died  in  two 
days ;  the  virgin  Blandina,  a  slave,  who  showed  almost  super- 
human strength  and  constancy  under  -  the  most  cruel  tortures, 
and  was  at  last  thrown  to  a  wild  beast  in  a  net;  Ponticus,  a  boy 
of  fifteen  years,  who  could  be  deterred  by  no  sort  of  cruelty 
from  confessing  his  Saviour.  The  corpses  of  the  martyrs,  which 
covered  the  streets,  were  shamefully  mutilated,  then  burned,  and 


56  SECOND  PEBIOD.     A.  D.  100-311. 

the  ashes  cast  into  the  Rhone,  lest  any  remnants  of  the  enemies 
of  the  gods  might  desecrate  the  soil.  At  last  the  people  grew 
weary  of  slaughter,  and  a  considerable  number  of  Christians 
survived.  The  martyrs  of  Lyons  distinguished  themselves  by 
true  humility,  disclaiming  in  their  prison  that  title  of  honor,  as 
due  only,  they  said,  to  the  faithful  and  true  witness,  the  First- 
born from  the  dead,  the  Prince  of  life  (Rev.l :  5),  and  to  those  of 
his  followers  who  had  already  sealed  their  fidelity  to  Christ  with 
their  blood. 

About  the  same  time  a  persecution  of  less  extent  appears  to 
have  visited  Autun  (Augustodunum)  near  Lyons.  Symphorimis, 
a  young  man  of  good  family,  having  refused  to  fall  down  before 
the  image  of  Cybele,  was  condemned  to  be  beheaded.  On 
his -way  to  the  place  of  execution  his  own  mother  called  to  him : 
"  My  son,  be  firm  and  fear  not  that  death,  which  so  surely  loads 
to  life.  Look  to  Him  who  reigns  in  heaven.  To-day  is  thy 
earthly  life  not  taken  from  thee,  but  transferred  by  a  blessed 
exchange  into  the  life  of  heaven." 

The  story  of  the  "thundering  legion"1  rests  on  the  fact  of  a 
remarkable  deliverance  of  the  Roman  army  in  Hungary  by  a 
sudden  shower,  which  quenched  their  burning  thirst  and  fright- 
ened their  barbarian  enemies,  A.  D.  174.  The  heathens,  how- 
ever, attributed  this  not  to  the  prayers  of  the  Christian  soldiers, 
but  to  their  own  gods.  The  emperor  himself  prayed  to  Jupiter: 
"  This  hand,  which  has  never  yet  shed  human  blood,  I  raise  to 
thee."  That  this  event  did  not  alter  his  views  respecting  the 
Christians,  is  proved  by  the  persecution  in  South  Gaul,  which 
broke  out  three  years  later. 

Of  isolated  cases  of  martyrdom  in  this  reign,  we  notice  that 
of  Justin  Martyr,  at  Rome,  in  the  year  166.  His  death  is 
traced  to  the  machinations  of  Crescens,  a  Cynic  philosopher. 

Marcus  Aurelius  was  succeeded  by  his  cruel  and  contemptible 
eon,  Commodus  (180-192),  who  wallowed  in  the  mire  of  every 

1  Legiofdminatrix,  icepawo<j>6poc.  The  twelfth  legion  bore  the  name  Fulminata 
as  fer  back  as  the  time  of  Trajan ;  and  hence  it  cannot  be  derived  from  this 
event. 


821.  A.D.  193-249.  f>7 

sensual  debauchery,  and  displayed  at  the  same  time  like  Nero 
the  most  ridiculous  vanity  as  dancer  and  singer,  and  in  the 
character  of  buffoon ;  but  he  was  accidentally  made  to  favor 
the  Christians  by  the  influence  of  a  concubine/  Marcia,  and 
accordingly  did  not  disturb  them.  Yet  under  his  reign  a  Roman 
senator,  Apollonius,  was  put  to  death  for  his  faith. 

§  21.  Condition  of  the  Church  from  Septimius  Severus  to  Philip 
the  Arabian.    A.  D.  193-249. 

CLEMENS  ALEX.  :  Strom.  II.  414.    TERTULL.  :  Ad  Scapulam,  c.  4,  5 ; 
ApoL  (A.  D.  198),  c.  7,  12,  30,  37,  49. 

Eespecting  the  Alexandrian  martyrs  comp.  EUSEB.:  VI.  1  and  5. 
The  Acts  of  the  Carthaginian  martyrs,  which  contain  their  ipsis- 
sima  verba  from  their  diaries  in  the  prisons,  but  bear  a  somewhat 
Montanistic  stamp,  see  in  BUIITABT,  p.  90  sqq. 
LAMPRIDIUS  :  Vita  Alex.  Severi,  c.  22,  29,  49. 

On  Philip  the  Arabian  see  ETJSEB.  :  VI.  34, 36.    HIERON.  :  Chron. 
•  ad  ann.  246. 

J.  J.  MULLER  :  Staat  und  Kirche  unter  Alex.  Severus.    Zurich  1874. 
F.  GORRES:  Kaiser  Alex.  Severus  und  das  Christenthum.    Leipz.,  1877. 
JEAN  REVILLE  :  La  religion  d  Rome  sous  Its  Severes.    Paris,  1886  (vii 
and  302  pp)  ;  Germ,  trans!  by  Kruger,  1888. 

With  Segtimius  Severus  (193-211),  who  was  of  Punic  descent 
and  had  a  Syrian  wif§,  a  line  of  emperors  (Caracalla,  Heliogaba- 
lus,  Alexander  Severus)  came  to  the  throne,  who  were  rather 
Oriental  than  Roman  in  their  spirit,  and  were  therefore  far  less 
concerned  than  the  Antonines  to  maintain  the  old  state  religion. 
Yet  towards  the  close  of  the  second  century  there  was  no  lack  of 
local  persecutions ;  and  Clement  of  Alexandria  wrote  of  those 
times :  "  Many  martyrs  are  daily  burned,  confined,  or  beheaded, 
before  our  eyes." 

In  the  beginning  of  the  third  century  (202)  Septimius  Severus, 
turned  perhaps  by  Montanistic  excesses,  enacted  a  rigid  law 
against  the  further  spread  both  of  Christianity  and  of  Judaism. 
This  occasioned  violent  persecutions  in  Egypt  and  in  North 
Africa,  and  produced  some  of  the  fairest  flowers  of  martyrdom. 

In  Alexandria,  in  consequence  of  this  law,  Leonides,  father 


58  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100^311. 

of  the  renowned  Origen,  was  beheaded.  Potamiaena,  a  virgin 
of  rare  beauty  of  body  and  spirit,  was  threatened  by  beastly 
passion  with  treatment  worse  than  death,  and,  after  cruel  tor- 
tures, slowly  burned  with  her  mother  in  boiling  pitch.  One  of 
the  executioners,  Basilides,  smitten  with  sympathy,  shielded 
them  somewhat  from  abuse,  and  soon  after  their  death  embraced 
Christianity,  and  was  beheaded.  He  declared  that  Potamisena 
had  appeared  to  him  in  the  night,  interceded  with  Christ  for 
him,  and  set  upon  his  head  the  martyr's  crown. 

In  Carthage  some  catechumens,  three  young  men  and  two 
young  women,  probably  of  the  sect  of  the  Montanists,  showed 
remarkable  steadfastness  and  fidelity  in  the  dungeon  and  at  the 
place  of  execution.  Perpetua,  a  young  woman  of  noble  birth, 
resisting,  not  without  a  violent  struggle,  both  the  entreaties  of 
her  aged  heathen  father  and  the  appeal  of  her  helpless  babe  upon 
her  breast,  sacrificed  the  deep  and  tender  feelings  of  a  daughter 
and  a  mother  to  the  Lord  who  died  for  her.  Felicitas,  a  slave, 
when  delivered  of  a  child  in  the  same  dungeon,  answered  the 
jailor,  who  reminded  her  of  the  still  keener  pains  of  martyrdom: 
"  Now  I  suffer,  what  I  suffer ;  but  then  another  will  suffer  for 
me,  because  I  shall  suffer  for  him."  All  remaining  firm,  they 
were  cast  to  wild  beasts  at  the' next  public  festival,  having  first 
interchanged  the  parting  kiss  in  hope  of  a  speedy  reunion  in 
heaven. 

*  The  same  state  of  things  continued  through  the  first  years  of 
Caracalla  (211-217),  though  this  gloomy  misanthrope  passed  no 
laws  against  the  Christians. 

The  abandoned  youth,  El-Gabal,  or  Heliogabalus  (218-222), 
who  polluted  the  throne  by  the  blackest  vices  and  follies, 
tolerated  all  the  religions  in  the  hope  of  at  last  merging  them  in 
his  favorite  Syrian  worship  of  the  sun  with  its  abominable 
excesses.  He  himself  was  a  priest  of  the  god  of  the  sun,  and 
thence  took  his  name.1 
His  far  more  worthy  cousin  and  successor,  Alexander  Severus 

1  Unless  we  should  prefer  to  derive  it  from  Sj*  and  ^^  "mountain of  God." 


821.  A.D.  193-249.  59 

(222-235),  was  addicted  to  a  higher  kind  of  religious  eclecticism 
and  syncretism,  a  pantheistic  hero-worship.  He  placed  the  busts 
of  Abraham  and  Christ  in  his  domestic  chapel  with  those  of 
Orpheus,  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  and  the  better  Roman  emperors, 
and  had  the  gospel  rule,  "As  ye  would  that  men  should  do  to 
you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them,"  engraven  on  the  walls  of  his  palace 
and  on  public  monuments.1  His  mother,  Julia  Mammaea,  was  a> 
patroness  of  Origen. 

His  assassin,  Maximinus  the  Thracian  (235-238),  first  a 
herdsman,  afterwards  a  soldier,  resorted  again  to  persecution  out 
of  mere  opposition  to  his  predecessor,  and  gave  free  course  to 
the  popular  fury  against  the  enemies  of  the  gods,  which  was  at 
that  time  excited  anew  by  an  earthquake.  It  is  uncertain 
-whether  he  ordered  the  entire  clergy  or  only  the  bishops  to  be 
killed.  He  was  a  rude  barbarian  who  plundered  also  heathen 
temples. 

The  legendary  poesy  of  the  tenth  century  assigns  to  his  reign 
the  fabulous  martyrdom  of  St.  Ursula,  a  British  princess,  and  her 
company  of  eleven  thousand  (according  to  others,  ten  thousand) 
virgins,  who,"  on  their  return  from  a  pilgrimage  to  Borne,  were 
murdered  by  heathens  in  the  neighborhood  of  Cologne.  This 
incredible  number  has  probably  arisen  from  the  misinterpretation 
of  an  inscription,  like  "  Ursula  et  Undecimilla "  (which  occurs 
in  an  old  missal  of  the  Sorbonne),  or  "  Ursula  et  XI  M.  V.," 
i.  e.  Martyres  Virgines,  which,  by  substituting  milia  for  mar- 
tyres,  was  increased  from  eleven  martyrs  to  eleven  thousand 
virgins.  Some  historians  place  the  fact,  which  seems  to  form 
the  basis  of  this  legend,  in  connexion  with  the  retreat  of  the 
Huns  after  the  battle  of  Chalons,  451.  The  abridgment  of 
Mil.)  which  may  mean  soldiers  (milites)  as  well  as  thousands 
(milia),  was  another  fruitful  source  of  mistakes  in  a  credulous 
and  superstition's  age.  ^  ,  . 

'jG-ordianus  (238-244)  left  the  church  undisturbed/  ^Philip  the 
Arabian  (244-249)  was  even  supposed  by  some  to  be  a  Chris- 
1  Yet  he  meant  no  more  than  toleration,  as  Lampridius  says,-  22  (21) :  Judab 


60  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  IX  100-311. 

tian,  and  was  termed  by  Jerome  "  primus  omnium  ex  xtomaim 
imperatoribus  Christianus."  IL  is  certain  thai  Origan  wrote 
letters  to  him  and  to  his  wife,  Severa. 

This  season  of  repose,  however,  cooled  the  moral  zeal  and 
brotherly  love  of  the  Christians  ;  and  the  mighty  storm  under 
the  following  reign  served  well  to  restore  the  purity  of  the 
church. 

§  22.  Persecutions  under  Deeius,  and  Valerian,    A.  D.  249-2(50, 
Martyrdom  of  Cyprian. 

DIOSTYSIUS  ALEX.,  in  Euseb.  VI.  40-42;  VII.  10,  11. 

CYPRIAJ*  :  De  Lapsis,  and  particularly  his  Epistles  of  this  period.  On 
Cyprian's  martyrdom  see  the  Proconsular  Acts,  and  PONTIUS  :  Vita 
CyprianL 

FRANZ  G-ORRES  :  Die  Toleranzedicte  des  Kaisers  Gallienus,  in  the  "  Jahr- 
bucher  fur  protest.  TheoL,"  1877,  pp.  606-630.  By  the  same  :  Die 
angebliche  Christenverfolgung  zur  Zeit  der  Kaiser  Numerianus  md 
Carinusjin  Hilgenfeld's  "Zeitschrift  fur  wissensckaftl.  Thcologic." 
1880  pp.  31-64. 

Decius  Trajan  (249-251),  an  earnest  and  energetic  emperor,  in 
whom  the  old  Roman  spirit  once  more  awoke,  resolved  to  root 
out  the  church  as  an  atheistic"  and  seditious  sect,  and  in  the  year 
250  published  an  edict  to  all  the  governors  of  the  provinces, 
enjoining  return  to  the  pagan  state  religion  under  the  heaviest 
penalties.  This  was  the  signal  for  a  persecution  vi  which,  in 
extent,  consistency,  and  cruelty,  exceeded  all  before  it.  In  truth 
it  was  properly  the  first  which  covered  the  whole  empire,  and 
accordingly  produced  a  far  greater  number  of  martyrs  than  any 
former  persecution.  In  the  execution  of  the  imperial  decree 
confiscation,  exile,  torture,  promises  and  threats  of  all  kinds, 
were  employed  to  move  the  Christians  to  apostasy.  Multitudes 
of  nominal  Christians,1  especially  at  the  beginning,  sacrificed  to 
the  gods  (sacrificati,  thwrificdti),  or  procured  from  the  magistrate 
a  false  certificate  that  they  had  done  so  (libdlatid},  and  were 
then  excommunicated  as  apostates  (lapti)',  while  hundreds 


u  Mtmmus  fratrum  numerus"  says  Cyprian. 


2  22.  DECIUS,  A.  D.  249r260  61 

rushed  with  impetuous  zeal  to  the  prisons  and  the  tribunals,  to 
obtain  the  confessor's  or  martyr's  crown.  The  confessors  of 
Rome  wrote  from  prison  to  their  brethren  of  Africa :  "  What 
more  glorious  and  blessed  lot  can  fall  to  man  by  the  grace  of 
God,  than  to  confess  God  the  Lord  amidst  tortures  and  in  the 
face  of  death  itself;  to  confess  Christ  the  Son  of  God  with 
lacerated  body  and  with  a  spirit  departing,  yet  free;  and  to 
become  fellow-sufferers  with  Christ  in  the  name  of  Christ? 
Though  we  have  not  yet  shed  our  blood,  we  are  ready  to  do  so. 
Pray  for  us,  then,  dear  Cyprian,  that  the  Lord,  the  best  captain, 
would  daily  strengthen  each  one  of  us  more  and  more,  and  at 
last  lead  us  to  the  field  as  faithful  soldiers,  armed  with  those 
divine  weapons  (Eph.  6 :  2)  which  can  never  be  conquered." 

The  authorities  were  specially  severe  with  the  bishops  and 
officers  of  the  churches.  Fabianus  of  Rome,  Babylas  of  An- 
tioch,  and  Alexander  of  Jerusalem,  perished  in  this  persecution. 
Others  withdrew  to  places  of  concealment ;  some  from  cowardice : 
some  from  Christian  prudence,  in  hope  of  allaying  by  their 
absence  the  fury  of  the  pagans  against  their  flocks,  and  of 
saving  their  own  lives  for  the  good  of  the  church  in  better 
times. 

Among  the  latter  was  Cyprian,  bishop  of  Carthage,  who  incur- 
red much  censure  by  his  course,  but  fully  vindicated  himself  by 
his  pastoral  industry  during  his  absence,  and  by  his  subsequent 
martyrdom.  He  says  concerning  the  matter :  "  Our  Lord  com- 
manded us  in  times  of  persecution  to  yield  and  to  fly.  He 
taught  this,  and  he  practised  it  himself.  For  since  the  martyr's 
crown  comes  by  the  grace  of  God,  and  cannot  be  gained  before 
the  appointed  hour,  he  who  retires  for  a  time,  and  remains  true 
to  Christ,  does  not  deny  his  faith,  buir  only  abides  his  time." 

The  poetical  legend  of  the  seven  brothers  at  Ephesus,  who 
fell  asleep  in  a  cave,  whither  they  had  fled,  and  awoke  two  hun- 
dred years  afterwards,  under  Theodosius  II.  (447),  astonished 
to  see  the  once  despised  and  hated  cross  now  ruling  over  city  and 
country,  dates  itself  internally  from  the  time  of  Decius,  but  ia 
not  mentioned  before  Gregory  of  Tours  in  the  sixth  century. 


62  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Under  Gallus  (251-253)  the  persecution  received  a  fresh  im 
pulse  through  the  incursions  of  the  Goths,  and  the  prevalence  of 
a  pestilence,  drought,  and  famine.    Under  this  reign  the  Roman 
bishops  Cornelius  and  Lucius  were  banished,  and  then  con- 
demned to  death. 

Valerian  (253-260)  was  at  first  mild  towards  the  Christians ; 
but  in  257  he  changed  his  course,  and  made  an  effort  to  check 
fche  progress  of  their  religion  without  bloodshed,  by  the  banish- 
ment of  ministers  and  prominent  laymen,  the  confiscation  of 
their  property,  and  the  prohibition  of  religious  assemblies. 
These  measures,  however,  proving  fruitless,  he  brought  the  death 
penalty  again  into  play. 

The  most  distinguished  martyrs  of  this  persecution  under 
Valerian  are  the  bishops  Sixtus  II.  of  Rome,  and  Cyprian  of 
Carthage. 

When  Cyprian  received  his  sentence  of  death,  representing 
him  as  an  enemy  of  the  Roman  gods  and  laws,  he  calmly  an- 
swered :  u  Deo  gratias  I "  Then,  attended  by  a  vast  multitude 
to  the  scaffold,  he  prayed  once  more,  undressed  himself,  covered 
his  eyes,  requested  a  presbyter  to  bind  his  hands,  and  to  pay  the 
executioner,  who  tremblingly  drew  the  sword,  twenty-five  pieces 
of  gold,  and  won  the  incorruptible  crown  (Sept.  14,  258).  His 
faithful  friends  caught  the  blood  in  handkerchiefs,  and  buried 
the  body  of  their  sainted  pastor  with  great  solemnity. 

Gibbon  describes  the  martyrdom  of  Cyprian  with  circum- 
stantial minuteness,  and  dwells  with  evident  satisfaction  on  the 
small  decorum  which  attended  his  execution.  But  this  is  no 
fair  average  specimen  of  the  style  in  which  Christians  were  exe- 
cuted throughout  the  empire.  For  Cyprian  was  a  man  of  the 
highest  social  standing  and  connection  from  his  former  eminence 
as  a  rhetorician  and  statesman.  His  deacon,  Pontius,  relates 
that  "  numbers  of  eminent  and  illustrious  persons,  men  of  mark 
and  family  and  secular  distinction,  often  urged  him,  for  the  sake 
of  their  old  friendship  with  him,  to  retire."  We  shall  return 
to  Cyprian  again  in  the  history  of  church  government,  where 
he  figures  as  a  typical,  ante-Nicene  high-churchman,  advocating 


g  23.  TEMPOKAKY  EEPOSE.  63 

both  the  visible  unity  of  the  church  and  episcopal  independence 
of  Eome. 

The  much  lauded  martyrdom  of  the  deacon  St.  Laurentius 
of  Eome,  who  pointed  the  avaricious  magistrates  to  the  poor 
and  sick  of  the  congregation  as  the  richest  treasure  of  the 
church,  and  is  said  to  have  been  slowly  roasted  to  death  (Aug. 
10,  258),  is  scarcely  reliable  in  its  details,  being  first  mentioned 
by  Ambrose  a  century  later,  and  then  glorified  by  the  poet 
Prudentius.  A  Basilica  on  the  Via  Tiburtina  celebrates  the 
memory  of  this  saint,  who  occupies  the  same  position  among 
the  martyrs  of  the  church  of  Eome  as  Stephen  among  those  of 
Jerusalem. 

§  23.  Temporary  Repose.    A.  D.  260-303. 

s 

Gallienus  (260-268)  gave  peace  to  the  church  once  more,  and 
even  acknowledged  Christianity  as  a  religio  licita.  ,And  this 
calm  continued  forty  years ;  for  the  edict  of  persecution,  issued 
by  the  energetic  and  warlike  Aurelian  (270-275),  was  rendered 
void  by  his  assassination ;  and  the  six  emperors  who  rapidly  fol- 
lowed, from  275  to  284,  let  the  Christians  alone. 

The  persecutions  under  Carus,  Numerianus  and  Carinus  from 
284  to  285  are  not  historical,  but  legendary.1 

During  this  long  season  of  peace  the  church  rose  rapidly  in 
numbers  and  outward  prosperity.  Large  and  even  splendid 
houses  of  worship  were  erected  in  the  chief  cities,  and  provided 
with  collections  of  sacred  books  and  vessels  of  gold  and  silver 
for  the  administration  of  the  sacraments.  But  in  the  same  pro- 
portion discipline  relaxed,  quarrels,  intrigues,  and  factions  in- 
creased, and  worldliness  poured  in  like  a  flood. 

Hence  a  new  trial  was  a  necessary  and  wholesome  process  of 
purification.2 

1  See  Fraaz  GorraB,  I  *  f  Eusebius,  R.  &  YIH.  1. 


64  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D,  100-311. 

§  24.  The  Diocletian  Persecution*   A.  D.  303-311. 

I.  SOURCES. 

EUSEBITTS:  H.  E.  Lib.  VIII. -X;  De  Martyr.  Palcest.  (ed,  Cureton,  Loud, 

1861) ;  Vita  Const,  (ed.  Heinichen,  Lips.  1870). 
LAOTANTIUS  :  De  Mortibus  Persec.  c.  7  sqq.    Of  uncertain  authorship. 
BASILIUS  M. :  Oratio  in  Gordium  mart. ;  Oratio  in  Barlaham  mart. 

II.  WORKS. 

BARONITTS  :  Annal.  ad  ann.  302-305. 
GIBBON:  Chrs.  XIII.,  XIV.  and  XVI. 

JAK.  BITRCKHARDT  :  Die  Zeit  Constantins  des  GT.    Basel,  1853,  p.  325. 
TH.  KEIM:  Der  Uebertritt  Constantins  des  Gr.  zum  Christenthum.  Zurich 

1852.    The  same :  Die  romischen  Toleranzedicte  fur  das  Chnstenthum 

(311-313),  in  the  "  Tub.  Theol.  Jahrb."    1852.    (His.  Rom  und  da* 

Christenthum  only  comes  down  to  A,  D.  192.) 
ALB.  VOG-EL  :  Der  Kaiser  Diocletian.    Gotha  1857. 
BERETHARDT:  Diokletian  in  8.  Verhaltnisse  zu  den  Christen.  Bonn,  1862. 
HOTZIKER:  Regierung  und  Christenverfolgung  des  Kaisers  Diocletianus 

und  seiner  Nachfolger.    Leipz.  1868. 

THEOD.  PREUSS  :  Kaiser  Diocletian  und  seine  Zeit.    Leipz,  1869. 
A.  J.  MASON:  The  Persecution  of  Diocletian.    Cambridge,  1876.    Pages 

370.    (Oomp.  a  review  by  Ad.  Harnack  in  the  "  Theol.  Literaturzei- 

tung"  for  1877.    No.  7.  f.  169.) 

THEOD.  ZAHN  :  Constantin  der  Grosse  und  die  Kirche.    Hannover,  1876. 
BREEGER  :  Constantin  der  Gr.  als  ReligiompolitiJcer.   Gotha,  1880.    Comp. 

the  Lit.  on  Constantine,  in  vol.  III.,  10, 11. 

The  forty  years'  repose  was  followed  by  the  last  and  most 
violent  persecution,  a  struggle  for  life  and  death.  S ' 

"The  accession  of  the  Emperor  Diocletian  is  the  era  from 
which  the  Coptic  Churches  of  Egypt  and  Abyssinia  still  date, 
under  the  name  of  the  '  Era  of  Martyrs/  All  former  persecu- 
tions of  the  faith  were  forgotten  in  the  horror  with  which  men 
looked  back  upon  the  last  and  greatest :  the  tenth  wave  (as  men 
delighted  to  count  it)  of  that  great  storm  obliterated  all  the  traces 
that  had  been  left  by  others.  The  fiendish  cruelty  of  JSfero,  the 
-jealous  fears  of  Domitian,  the  nnimpassioned  dislike  of  Marcus, 
the  sweeping  purpose  of  Decius,  the  clever  devices  of  Valerian, 


?  24.  THE  DIOCLETIAN  PEESECUTION.  65 

fell  into  obscurity  when  compared  with  the  concentrated  terrors 
of  that  final  grapple,  which' resulted  in  the  destruction  of  the 
old  Koman  Empire  and  the  establishment  of  the  Cross  as  the 
symbol  of  the  world's  hope."1 

Diocletian  (284-305)  was  one  of  the  most  judicious  and  able 
emperors  who,  in  a  trying  period,  preserved  the  sinking  state 
from  dissolution.  He  was  the  son  of  a  slave  or  of  obscure 
parentage,  and  worked  himself  up  to  supreme  power.  He 
converted  the  Roman  republican  empire  into  an  Oriental 
despotism,  and  prepared  the  way  for  Constantine  and  Con- 
stantinople. He  associated  with  himself  three  subordinate 
co-regents,  Maximian  (who  committed  suicide,  310),  Galerius 
(<L  311),  and  Constantius  Chlorus  (d.  306,  the  father  of  Con- 
stantine the  Great),  and  divided  with  them  the  government 
of  the  immense  empire ;  thereby  quadrupling  the  personality  of 
the  sovereign,  and  imparting  vigor  to  provincial  administration, 
but  also  sowing  the  seed  of  discord  and  civil  wax.2  Gibbon 
calls  him  a  second  Augustus,  the  founder  of  a  new  empire,  rather 
than  the  restorer  of  the  old.  He  also  compares  him  to  Charles 
V.,  whom  he  somewhat  resembled  in  his  talents,  temporary  suc- 
cess and  ultimate  failure,  and  voluntary  retirement  from  the 
cares  of  government. 

In  the  first  twenty  years  of  his  reign  Diocletian  respected 
the  toleration  edict  of  Gallienus.  His  own  wife  Prisca,  his 
daughter  Valeria,  and  most  of  his  eunuchs  and  court  officers, 
besides  many  of  the  most  prominent  public  functionaries,  were 
Christians,  or  at  least  favorable  to  the  Christian  religion.  He 

1  So  Arthur  James  Mapon  begins  his  book  on  the  Persecution  ofDwdetian. 

2  Mazimian   (surnamed  Herculius)    ruled  in  Italy  and  Africa,  Galerius 
'Armentarius)  on  the  banks  of  the  Danube,  and  afterwards  in  the  East,  Con- 
stantius (Chlorus)  in  Gaul,  Spain,  and  Britain ;  while  Diocletian  reserved  to 
himself  Asia,  Egypt,  and  Thrace,  and  resided  in  Nicomedia.   Galerius  married 
a  daughter  of  Diocletian  (the  unfortunate  Valeria),  Constantius  a  (nominal) 
daughter  of  Maximian  (Theodora),  after  repudiating  their  former  wives. 
Constantine,  the  son  of  the  divorced  Helena,  married  Fausta,  the  daughter  of 
Maximian  as  his  second  wife  (father  and  son' being  married  to  two  sisters). 
He  was  raised  to  the  dignity  of  Csesar,  July  25,  306.    Sec  Gibbon,  chs.  XHI 
wadXTV. 

VOL  IL— 5 


66  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311.' 

himself  was  a  superstitious  heathen  and  an  oriental  despot. 
Like  Aurelian  and  Domitian  before  him,  he  claimed  divine 
honors,  as  the  vicar  of  Jupiter  Capitolinus.  He  was  called,  as 
the  Lord  and  Master  of  the  world,  Soeratissimitt  Dominux 
Noster;  he  guarded  his  Sacred  Majesty  with  many  circles  of 
soldiers  and  eunuchs,  and  allowed  no  one  to  approach  him  ex- 
cept on  bended  knees,  and  with  the  forehead  touching  the  ground, 
while  he  was  seated  on  the  throne  in  rich  vestments  from  the  far 
East,  " Ostentation,"  says  Gibbon,  "was  the  first  principle  of 
the  new  system  instituted  by  Diocletian."  As  a  practical  states- 
man, he  must  have  seen  that  his  work  of  the  political  restor- 
ation and  consolidation  of  the  empire  would  lack  a  firm  and 
permanent  basis  without  the  restoration  of  the  old  religion  of 
the  state.  Although  he  long  postponed  the  religious  question, 
he  had  to  meet  it  at  last.  It  could  not  be  expected,  in  the 
nature  of  the  case,  that  paganism  should  surrender  to  its  dang- 
erous rival  without  a  last  desperate  effort  to  save  itself. 

But  the  chief  instigator  of  the  renewal  of  hostility,  according 
to  the  account  of  Lactantius,  was  Diocletian's  co-regent  and 
son-in-law,  Galerius,  a  cruel  and  fanatical  heathen.1  He  pre- 
vailed at  last  on  Diocletian  in  his  old  age  to  authorize  the  per- 
secution which  gave  to  his  glorious  reign  a  disgraceful  end. 

In  303  Diocletian  issued  in  rapid  succession  three  edicts, 
each  more  severe  than  its  predecessor.  Maximian  issued  the 
fourth,  the  worst  of  all,  April  30,  304.  Christian  dhurches 
were  to  be  destroyed ;  all  copies  of  the  Bible  were  to  be  burned  ; 
all  Christians  were  to  be  deprived  of  public  office  and  civil  rights ; 
and  at  last  all,  without  exception,  were  to  sacrifice  to  the  gods 
upon  pain  of  death.  Pretext  for  this  severity  was  afforded  by 
the  occurrence  of  fire  twice  in  the  palace  of  Nicomedia  in 
Bithynia,  where  Diocletian  resided.2  It  was  strengthened  by 

*  Lactantius  (De  Mart.  P&rsec.  c.  9),  calls  him  "a  wild  beast,"  in  whom 
dwelt  "a  native  barbarity  and  a  savageness  foreign  to  Boman  blood."  H« 
4ied  at  last  of  a  terrible  disease,  of  which  Lactantius  gives  a  minute  account 
<ch?  33). 

1  Lactantius  charges!  the  incendiarism  qn  Galerius  who,  as  a  second  Nero, 


§  24.  THE  DIOCLETIAN  PEKSECUTION.  fi7 

the  tearing  down  of  the  first  edict  by  an  imprudent  Christian 
(celebrated  in  the  Greek  church  under  the  name  of  John),  who 
vented  in  that  way  his  abhorrence  of  such  "godless  and  tyran- 
nical rulers,"  and  was  gradually  roasted  to  death  with  every 
species  of  cruelty.  But  the  conjecture  that  the  edicts  were 
occasioned  by  a  conspiracy  of  the  Christians  who,  feeling  their 
rising  power,  were  for  putting  the  government  at  once  into 
Christian  hands,  by  a  stroke  of  state,  is  without  any  foundation 
in  history.  It  is  inconsistent  with  the  political  passivity  of  the 
church  during  the  firsb  three  centuries,  which  furnish  no  ex- 
ample of  rebellion  and  revolution.  At  best  such  a  conspiracy 
could  only  have  been  the  work  of  a  few  fanatics;  and  they,  like 
the  one  who  tore  down  the  first  edict,  would  have  gloried  in  the 
deed  and  sought  the  crown  of  martyrdom.1 

The  persecution  began  on  the  twenty-third  day  of  February, 
303,  the  feast  of  the  T&rminalia  (as  if  to  make  an  end  of  the 
Christian  sect),  with  the  destruction  of  the  magnificent  church 
in  Nicomedia,  and  soon  spread  over  the  whole  Roman  empire, 
except  Gaul,  Britain,  and  Spain,  where  the  co-regent  Constan-  • 
tius  Chlorus,  and  especially  his  son,  Constantine  the  Great  (from 
306),  were  disposed,  as  far  as  possible,  to  spare  the  Christians. 
But  even  here  the  churches  were  destroyed,  and  many  martyrs 
of  Spain  (St.  Yincentius,  Eulalia,  and  others  celebrated  by 
Prudentius),  and  of  Britain  (St.  Alban)  are  assigned  by  later 
tradition  to  this  age. 

endangered  the  residence  for  the  purpose  of  punishing  the  innocent  Christians. 
Constantine,  who  then  resided  at  the  Court,  on  a  solemn  occasion  at  a  later 
period,  attributes  the  fire  to  lightning  ( Orat.  ad  Sanct.  c.  25),  but  the  repetition 
of  the  occurrence  strengthens  the  suspicion  of  Lactantiua. 

1  Gibbon,  ch.  XVI.,  intimates  the  probability  of  a  political  plot.  In  speak- 
ing of  the  fire  in  the  imperial  palace  of  Nicomedia,  he  says:  "The  sus- 
picion naturally  fell  on  the  Christians ;  and  it  was  suggested,  with  some  degree 
of  probability,  that  those  desperate  fanatics,  provoked  by  their  present  suffer- 
ings, and  apprehensive  of  impending  calamities,  had  entered  into  a  conspiracy 
with  their  faithful  brethren,  the  eunuchs  of  the  palace,  against  the  lives  of  two 
emperors,  whom  they  detested  as  the  irreconcilable  enemies  of  the  church  of 
God."  The  conjecture  of  Gibbon  was  renewed  by  Burkhardt  in  his  work  on 
Constantine,  pp.  332  ff.,  but  without  any  evidence.  Baur  rejects  it  as  artificial 
and  very  improbable.  (Kirch&ngeseh.  1. 452,  note).  Mason  (p.  97  sq.)  refutes  it 


68  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

The  persecution  raged  longest  and  most  fiercely  in  the  East 
under  the  rule  of  Galerius  and  his  barbarous  nephew  Maximin 
Daza,  who  was  intrusted  by  Diocletian  before  his  retirement 
with  the  dignity  of  Caesar  and  the  extreme  command  of  Egypt 
and  Syria.1  He  issued  in  autumn,  308,  a  fifth  edict  of  persecu- 
tion, which  commanded  that  all  males  with  their  wives  and 
servants,  and  even  their  children,  should  sacrifice  and  actually 
taste  the  accursed  offerings,  and  that  all  provisions  in  the 
.  markets  should  be  sprinkled  with  sacrificial  wine.  This  monr- 
strous  law  introduced  a  reign  of  terror  for  two  years,  and  left 
the  Christians  no  alternative  but  apostasy  or  starvation.2  All 
the  pains,  which  iron  and  steel,  fire  and  sword,  rack  and  cross, 
wild  beasts  and  beastly  men  could  inflict,  were  employed  to 
gain  the  useless  end. 

Eusebius  was  a  witness  of  this  persecution  in  C&sarea,  Tyre, 
and  Egypt,  and  saw,  with  his  own  eyes,  as  he  tells  us,  the 
houses  of  prayer  razed  to  the  ground,  the  Holy  Scriptures  com- 
mitted to  the  flames  on  the  market  places,  the  pastors  hunted, 
tortured,  and  torn  to  pieces  in  the  amphitheatre.  Even  the 
wild  beasts,  he  says,  not  without  rhetorical  exaggeration,  at 
last  refused  to  attack  the  Christians,  as  if  they  had  assumed 
the  part  of  men  in  place  of  the  heathen  Eomans ;  the  bloody 
swords  became  dull  and  shattered;  the  executioners  grew  weary, 
and  had  to  relieve  each  other ;  but  the  Christians  sang  hymns 
of  praise  and  thanksgiving;  in  honor  of  Almighty  God,  even  to 
their  latest  breath.  He  describes  the  heroic  sufferings  and 
death  of  several  martyrs,  including  his  friend,  te  the  holy  and 
blessed  Pamphilus,"  who  after  two  years  of  imprisonment  won 

<•  l  See  Lactant.,  De  Morte  Perm.  ch.  18  and  19,  32,  and  Gibbon,  ch.  XIV. 
(vol.  II.  16  in  Smith's  edition).  The  original  name  of  Maximin  was  Daza. 
He  must  not  be  confounded  with  Maximian  (who  was  older  and  died  three 
years  before  Mm).  He  was  a  rude,  ignorant  and  superstitions  tyrant,  equal 
to  Galerius  in  cruelty,  and  surpassing  him  in  incredible  debauchery  (See 
Lact.  I  c.  ch.  37  sqq.).  He  died  of  poison  after  being  defeated  by  Licinius, 
in  313. 

3  See  on  this  edict  of  Maximin,  Euseb.  Mart.  Pal  IX.  2 ;  the  Acts  of  Martyrs 
in  Boll.,  May  8,  p.  291,  and  Oct.  19,  p.  428  j  Mason,  I  c.  284  sqq. 


?  24.  THE  DIOCLETIAN  PEESECUTIOK  69 

the  civ  wn  of  life  (309),  with  eleven  others — a  typical  company 
that  teemed  to  him  to  be  "a  perfect  representation  of  the 
church/* 

Eusebiiis  himself  was  imprisoned,  but  released.  The  charge 
of  having  escaped  martyrdom  by  offering  sacrifice  is  without 
foundation.1 

In  this,  as  in  former  persecutions,  the  number  of  apostates 
who  preferred  the  earthly  life  to  the  heavenly,  was  very  great. 
To  these  was  now  added  also  the  new  class  of  the  traditores, 
who  delivered  the  holy  Scriptures  to  the  heathen  authorities,  to 
be  burned.  But  as  the  persecution  raged,  the  zeal  and  fidelity 
of  the  Christians  increased,  and  martyrdom  spread  as  by  con- 
tagion. Even  boys  and  girls  showed  amazing  firmness.  In 
many  the  heroism  of  faith  degenerated  to  a  fanatical  courting 
of  death ;  confessors  were  almost  worshipped,  while  yet  alive ; 
and  the  hatred  towards  apostates  distracted  many  congregations, 
and  produced  the  Meletian  and  Donatist  schisms- 

The  number  of  martyrs  cannot  be  estimated  with  any  degree 
of  certainty.  The  seven  episcopal  and  the  ninety-two  Pales- 
tinian martyrs  of  Eusebius  are  only  a  select  list  bearing  a  simi- 
lar relation  to  the  whole  number  of  victims  as  the  military 
lists  of  distinguished  fallen  officers  to  the  large  mass  of  common 
soldiers,  and  form  therefore  no  fair  basis  for  the  calculation  of 
Gibbon,  who  would  reduce  the  whole  number  to  less  than  two 
thousand.  During  the  eight  years2  of  this  persecution  the  num- 
ber of  victims,  without  including  the  many  confessors  who  were 
barbarously  mutilated  and  condemned  to  a  lingering  death  in 
the  prisons  and  mines,  must  have  been  much  larger.  But  there  is 
no  truth  in  the  tradition  (which  figures  in  older  church  histories) 
that  the  tyrants  erected  trophies  in  Spain  and  elsewhere  with  such 
inscriptions  as  announce  the  suppression  of  the  Christian  sect.3 

1  Lightfoot  vindicates  him  in  his  learned  art.  Eusd.  in  Smith  and  Wace, 
Diet,  of  Christ.  Biogr.  II.  811. 

2  Or  ten  years,  if  we  include  the  local  persecutions  of  Maximin  and  Licinius 
after  the  first  edict  of  toleration  (311-313). 

a  As  "Nowi'ne  Chritfianorum  deleto;  superstitions  Christiana  ubique  delete,  ei 
etdtu  Deorum  propagate."  See  the  inscriptions  in  full  in  Baronius  ad  ann.  304> 


70  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D,  100-311. 

The  martyrologies  date  from  this  period  several  legends,  the 
germs  of  which,  however,  cannot  now  be  clearly  sifted  from  the 
additions  of  later  poesy.  The  story  of  the  destruction  of  the 
legio  Thebaica  is  probably  an  exaggeration  of  the  martyrdom 
of  St.  Mauritius,  who  was  executed  in  Syria,  as  tribunus  militum, 
with  seventy  soldiers,  at  the  order  of  Maximin.  The  mar- 
tyrdom of  Barlaam,  a  plain,  rustic  Christian  of  remarkable 
constancy,  and  of  Gordius,  a  centurion  (who,  however,  was  tor- 
tured and  executed  a  few  years  later  under  Licinius,  314)  haa 
been  eulogized  by  St.  Basil*  A  maiden  of  thirteen  years,  St. 
Agnes,  whose  memory  the  Latin  church  has  celebrated  ever 
since  the  fourth  century,  was,  according  to  tradition,  brought  in 
chains  before  the  judgment-seat  in  Home;  was  publicly  ex- 
posed, and  upon  her  steadfast  confession  put  to  the  sword ;  but 
afterwards  appeared  to  her  grieving  parents  at  her  grave  with 
a  white  lamb  and  a  host  of  shining  virgins  from  heaven,  and 
said :  <f  Mourn  me  no  longer  as  dead,  for  ye  see  that  I  live. 
Eejoice  with  me,  that  I  am  forever  united  in  heaven  with  the 
Saviour,  whom  on  earth  I  loved  with  all  'my  heart."  Hence 
the  lamb  in  the  paintings  of  this  saint;  and  hence  the  conse- 
cration of  lambs  in  her  church  at  Rome  at  her  festival  (Jan. 
21),  from  whose  wool  the  pallium  of  the  archbishop  is  made. 
Agricola  and  Vitalis  at  Bologna,  Gervasius  and  Protasius  at 
Milan,  whose  bones  were  discovered  in  the  time  of  Ambrose 
Janurius,  bishop  of  Benevent,  who  became  the  patron  saint  of 
Naples,  and  astonishes  the  faithful  by  the  annual  miracle  of  the 
liquefaction  of  his  blood,  and  the  British  St.  Alban,  who 
delivered  himself  to  the  authorities  in  the  place  of  the  priest 
he  had  concealed  in  his  house,  and  converted  his  executioner, 
are  said  to  have  attained  martyrdom  under  Diocletian.1 

no.  8,  9 ;  but  they  are  inconsistent  with  the  confession  of  the  failure  in  the 
edict  of  toleration,  and  acknowledged  to  be  worthless  even  by  Gams  (K.  Gesh. 
v.  Spani&n,  I.  387). 

1  For  details  see  the  Martyrologies,"  the  "  Lives  of  Saints,"  also  Baronius 
Annal.  This  historian  is  so  fully  convinced  of  the  "wsigne  et  perpetuum 
miracidum  sanguinis  S.  Januarii,"  that  he  thinks  it  unnecessary  to  produce  any 
'v'tnes-*,  since  "tola  Italia,  et  totus  Christian™  orbis  testis  est  locupletissimusV 
Ad  ann.  305  no.  6, 


3  25.  THE  EDICTS  OF  TOLEBATlOtt.  7] 

§  25.  The  Edicts  of  Toleration.    A.  D.  311-313. 

See  Lit.  in  \  24,  especially  EJEIM,  and  MASON  (Persecution  of  JHodeiian, 
pp.  299  and  326  sqq.) 

This  persecution  was  the  last  desperate  struggle  of  Roman 
heathenism  for  its  life.  It  was  the  crisis  of  utter  extinction  or 
absolute  supremacy  for  each  of  the  two  religions.  At  the  close 
of  the  contest  the  old  Roman  state  religion  was  exhausted. 
Diocletian  retired  into  private  life  in  305,  under  the  curse  of 
the  Christians ;  he  found  greater  pleasure  in  planting  cabbages 
at  Salona  in  his  native  Dalmatia,  than  in  governing  a  vast  em- 
pire, but  his  peace  was  disturbed  by  the  tragical  misfortunes  of 
his  wife  and  daughter,  and  in  313,  when  all  the  achievements 
of  his  reign  were  destroyed,  he  destroyed  himself. 

Galerius,  the  real  author  of  the  persecution,  brought  to  reflec- 
tion by  a  terrible  disease,  put  an  end  to  the  slaughter  shortly 
before  his  death,  by  a  remarkable  edict  of  toleration,  which  he 
issued  from  Nicomedia  in  311,  in  connexion  with  Constantine 
and  Licinius.  In  that  document  he  declared,  that  the  purpose 
of  reclaiming  the  Christians  from  their  wilful  innovation  and 
the  multitude  of  their  sects  to  the  laws  and  discipline  of  the 
Roman  state,  was  not  accomplished ;  and  that  he  would  now 
grant  them  permission  to  hold  their  religious  assemblies,  pro- 
vided they  disturbed  not  the  order  of  the  state..  To  this  he 
added  in  conclusion  the  significant  iostruction  that  the  Chris- 
tians, "  after  this  manifestation  of  grace,  should  pray  to  their 
God  for  the  welfare  of  the  emperors,  of  the  state,  and  of  them- 
selves, that  the  state  might  prosper  in  every  respect,  and  that 
they  might  live  quietly  in  their  homes." l 

1  M.  de  Broglie  (L'figlise  et  V Empire,  1. 182)  well  characterizes  this  mani- 
festo :  "  Singulier  document,  moitie  insolent,  mottfe  suppliant,  qui  commence  par  in- 
wtter  les  chrttiens  etfinit  par  leur  demander  de  prier  leur  mattre  pour  faL"  Mason 
(I  c.  p.  299) :  '*  The  dying  emperor  shows  no  penitence,  makes  no  confession, 
except  his  impotence.  He  wishes  to  dupe  and  outwit  the  angry  Christ,  by 
pretending  to  be  not  a  persecutor  but  a  reformer.  With  a  curse,  he  dashes 
his  edict  of  toleration  in  the  church's  face,  and  hopes  superstitiously  that  it 
will  win  him  indemnity." 


72  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.B.  100-311. 

This  edict  virtually  closes  the  period  of  persecution  in  th« 
Roman  empire. 

For  a  short  time  Maximin,  whom  Eusebius  calls  "the  chief 
of  tyrants,"  continued  in  every  way  to  oppress  and  vex  the 
church  in  the  East,  and  the  cruel  pagan  Maxentius  (a  son  of 
Maximian  and  son-in-law  of  Galerius)  did  the  same  in  Italy. 

But  the  young  Constautine,  who  hailed  from  the  far  West,  had 
already,  in  306,  become  emperor  of  Gaul,  Spain,  and  Britain. 
He  had  been  brought  up  at  the  court  of  Diocletian  at  Nicomedia 
(like  Moses  at  the  court  of  Pharaoh)  and  destined  for  his  suc- 
cessor, but  fled  from  the  intrigues  of  Galerius  to  Britain,  and 
was  appointed  by  his  father  and  proclaimed  by  the  army  as  his 
successor.  He  crossed  the  Alps,  and  under  the  banner  of  the 
cross,  he  conquered  Maxentius  at  the  Milvian  bridge  near  Rome, 
and  the  heathen  tyrant  perished  with  his  army  of  veterans  in  the 
waters  of  the  Tiber,  Oct.  27,  312.  A  few  months  afterwards 
Constantine  met  at  Milan  with  his  co-regent  and  brother-in-law, 
Licinius,  and  issued  a  new  edict  of  toleration  (313),  to  which 
Maximin  also,  shortly  before  his  suicide  (313),  was  compelled  to 
give  his  consent  at  Nicomedia.1  The  second  edict  went  beyond  the 
first  of  311 ;  it  was  a  decisive  step  from  hostile  neutrality  to 
friendly  neutrality  and  protection,  and  prepared  the  way  for  the 
legal  recognition  of  Christianity;  as  the  religion  of  the  empire.  It 
ordered  the  full  restoration  of  all  confiscated  church  property 
to  the  Corpus  Christianorum,  at  the  expense  of  the  imperial 
treasury,  and  directed  the  provincial  magistrates  to  execute  this 
order  at  once  with  all  energy,  so  that  peace  may  be  fully  es- 
tablished and  the  continuance  of  the  Divine  favor  secured  to 
the  emperors  and  their  subjects. 

This  was  the  first  proclamation  of  the  great  principle  that 

1  It  is  usually  stated  (also  by  Keim,  I  c.,  Gieseler,  Baur,  vol.  I  454  sqq.), 
that  Constantine  and  Licinius  issued  two  edicts  of  toleration,  one  in  the  year 
31%  and  one  from  Milan 'in  313,  since  the  last  refers  to  a  previous  edict; 
but  the  reference  seems  to  be  to  directions  now  lost  for  officials  which  accom- 
panied the  edict  of  Galerius  (311),  of  which  Constatine  was  a  oo-signatory, 
There  is  no  edict  of  312.  See  Zahn  and  especiallv  Mason  (p.  S28  sq.),  alec 
Uhlhorn  (Conflict,  etc.,  p.  497,  Engl.  translation). 


J  25.  THE  EDICTS  OF  TOLERATION.  73 

every  man  had  a  right  to  choose  his  religion  according  to  the 
dictates  of  his  own  conscience  and  honest  conviction,  without 
compulsion  and  interference  from  the  government.1  Religion  is 
worth  nothing  except  as  an  act  of  freedom.  A  forced  religion 
is  no  religion  at  all.  Unfortunately,  the  successors  of  Constan- 
tine  from  the  time  of  Theodosius  the  Great  (383-395)  enforced 
the  Christian  religion  to  the  exclusion  of  every  other;  and  not 
only  so,  but  they  enforced  orthodoxy  to  the  exclusion  of  every 
form  of  dissent,  which  was  punished  as  a  crime  against  the  state. 

Paganism  made  another  spasmodic  effort.  Licinius  fell  out 
with  Constantine  and  renewed  the  persecution  for  a  short  time 
in  the  East,  but  he  was  defeated  in  323,  and  Constantine  became 
sole  ruler  of  the  empire.  He  openly  protected  and  favored  the 
church,  without  forbidding  idolatry,  and  upon  the  whole  re- 
mained true  to  his  policy  of  protective  toleration  till  his  death 
(337).  This  was  enough  for  the  success  of  the  church,  which 
had  all  the  vitality  and  energy  of  a  victorious  power ;  tfhile 
heathenism  was  fast  decaying  at  its  root. 

With  Constantine,  therefore,  the  last  of  the  heathen,  the  first 
of  the  Christian,  emperors,  a  new  period  begins.  The  church 
ascends  the  throne  of  the  Caesars  under  the  banner  of  the  once 
despised,  now  honored  and  triumphant  cross,  and  gives  new 
vigor  and  lustre  to  the  hoary  empire  of  Home.  This  sudden 
political  and  social  revolution  seems  marvellous ;  and  yet  it  was 
only  the  legitimate  result  of  the  intellectual  and  moral  revolu- 
tion which  Christianity,  since  the  second  century,  had  silently 
and  imperceptibly  wrought  in  public  opinion.  The  very  vio- 
lence of  the  Diocletian  persecution  betrayed  the  inner  weakness 
of  heathenism.  The  Christian  minority  with  its  ideas  already 
controlled  the  deeper  current  of  history.  Constantine,  as  a 

i  "Ut  dar&mm  et  Christianis  et  omnibu*  liberam  potestatem  sequ&ndi  retigionGm, 
quam  quiswnque  wlumet."  See  Euseb.  H.  E.X.5;  Lactant.  De  Mori.  Pers. 
c.  48.  Mason  (p.  327)  says  of  flie  Edict  of  Milan :  "  It  is  the  very  first  an- 
nouncement of  that  doctrine  which  is  now  regarded  as  the  mark  and  principle 
of  civilization,  the  foundation  of  solid  liberty,  the  characteristic  of  modern 
politics.  In  vigorous  and  trenchant  sentences  it  sets  forth  perfect  freedom  of 
conscience,  the  unfettered  choice  of  religion." 


74  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

sagacious  statesman,  saw  the  signs  of  the  times  and  followed 
them.  The  motto  of  his  policy  is  well  symbolized  in  his  mili- 
tary standard  with  the  inscription :  "  HOG  signo  vinces"1 

What  a  contrast  between  Nero,  the  first  imperial  persecutor, 
riding  in  a  chariot  among  Christian  martyrs  as  burning  torches 
in  his  gardens,  and  Constantine,  seated  in  the  Council  of  Nicsea 
among  three  hundred  and  eighteen  bishops  (some  of  whom — as 
the  blinded  Confessor  Paphnutius,  Paul  of  Neocsesarea,  and  the 
ascetics  from  Upper  Egypt  clothed  in  wild  raiment — wore  the 
insignia  of  torture  on  their  maimed  and  crippled  bodies),  and 
giving  the  highest  sanction  of  civil  authority  to  the  decree  of 
the  eternal  deity  of  the'  once  crucified  Jesus  of  Nazareth ! 
Such  a  revolution  the  world  has  never  seen  before  or  since,  ex- 
cept the  silent,  spiritual,  and  moral  reformation  wrought  by 
Christianity  itself  at  its  introduction  in  the  first,  and  at  its 
revival  in  the  sixteenth  century. 

§  26.  Christian  Martyrdom. 

I.  SOURCES. 

IGNATIUS:  Eplstolcz.  Martyrium  Poly  carpi.  TEBTULLIAIT  :  Ad  Mar- 
tyres.  ORIGENES :  Exliortatio  ad  martyrium  (KpoTpeKTiK.b$  Tidyoc  els 
papTvptov.)  CYPBIAK:  Ep.  11  ad  mart.  PHTOENTIUS  :  Uepi  crty&vuv 
hymni  XTV.  Comp.  Lit.  J  12. 

II.  WORKS. 
SAGITTARIUS :  De  mart,  vnidatibus,  1696. 

H,  DODWELL:  De  paudtate  martyrum,  in  his  Dmertationes  Cyprianica. 

Lend.  1684. 

RUINAB/T  (E.  C.) :  Prafatio  generalis  in  Ada  Martyrum. 
F.  W.  GASS  :  Das  christl.  Martyr&rihum  in  den  ersten  Jahrhunderten,  in 

Niedner's  "Zeitschrifb  f.  Mst.  Theol."  1859  and  '60. 
E.  DE  PBESSENSE:   The  Martyrs  and  Apologists.    Translated  from  the 

French.    London  and  N.  Y.  1871.    (Oh.  II.  p.  67  sqq.). 
CHATEATTBBIAKD  :  Les  martyrs  ou  le  triomphe  de  la  reL  chrfa.  2  vols. 

Paris  1809  and  often  (best  Engl.  trsl.  by  0.  IF.  Wight,  N.  York, 

1859.)    Has  no  critical  or  historical  value,  but  merely  poetical. 
Comp.  in  part  Mrs.  JAMESON:  Sacred  and  Legendary  Art.    Lond.  1848. 
»2  vols. 

1  For  a  fuller  account  of  Constantine  and  his  relation  to  the  Chnrch.  see  the 
next  volume. 


2  26.  CHEISTIAN  MABTYEDOM.  75 

To  these  protracted  and  cruel  persecutions  the  church  opposed 
no  revolutionary  violence,  no  carnal  resistance,  but  the  moral 
heroism  of  suffering  and  dying  for  the  truth.  But  this  very 
heroism  was  her  fairest  ornament  and  stanchest  weapon.  In 
this  very  heroism  she  proved  herself  worthy  of  her  divine 
founder,  who  submitted  to  the  death  of  the  cross  for  the  salva- 
tion of  the  world,  and  even  prayed  that  his  murderers  might 
be  forgiven.  The  patriotic  virtues  of  Greek  and  Roman  an- 
tiquity reproduced  themselves  here  in  exalted  form,-  in  self- 
denial  for  the  sate  of  a  heavenly  country,  and  for  a  crown  that 
fadeth  not  away.  Even  boys  and  girls  became  heroes,  and 
rushed  with  a  holy  enthusiasm  to  death.  In  those  hard  times 
men  had  to  make  earnest  of  the  words  of  the  Lord :  "  -Whoso- 
ever doth  not  bear  his  cross  and  come  after  me,  cannot  be  my 
disciple."  "  He,  that  loveth  father  and  mother  more  than  me, 
is  not  worthy  of  me."  But  then  also  the  promise  daily  proved 
itself  true:  "Blessed  arei  they,  who  are  persecuted  for  right- 
eousness' sake ;  for  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  "  He, 
that  loseth  his  life  for  my  sake,  shall  find  it."  And  it  ap- 
plied not  only  to  the  martyrs  themselves,  who  exchanged  the 
troubled  life  of  earth  for  the  blessedness  of  heaven,  but  also 
to  the  church  as  a  whole,  which  came  forth  purer  and  stronger 
from  every  persecution,  and  thus  attested  her  indestructible 
vitality. 

These  suffering  virtues  are  among  the  sweetest  and  noblest 
fruits  of  the  Christian  religion.  It  is  not  so  much  the  amount 
of  suffering  which  challenges  our  admiration,  although  it  was 
terrible  enough,  as  the  spirit  with  which  the  early  Christians 
bore  it.  Men  and  women  of  all  classes,  noble  senators  and 
learned  bishops,  illiterate  artisans  and  poor  slaves,  loving 
mothers  and  delicate  virgins,  hoary-headed  pastors  and  innocent 
children  approached  their  tortures  in  no  temper  of  unfeeling 
indifference  and  obstinate  defiance,  but,  like  their  divine  Master, 
with  calm  self-possession,  humble  resignation,  gentle  meekness, 
cheerful  faith,  triumphant  hope,  and  forgiving  charity.  Such 
spectacles  must  have  often  overcome  even  the  inhuman  mur- 


76  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

derer.  "Go  on,"  says  Tertullian  tauntingly  to  the  heathen 
governors,  "rack,  torture,  grind  us  to  powder:  our  numbers 
increase  in  proportion  as  ye  mow  us  down.  The  blood  of 
Christians  is  their  harvest  seed.  Your  very  obstinacy  is  a 
teacher.  For  who  is  not  incited  by  the  contemplation  of  it  to 
inquire  what  there  is  in  the  core  of  the  matter  ?  And  who, 
after  having  joined  us,  does  not  long  to  suffer  ?"* 

Unquestionably  there  were  also  during  this  period,  especially 
after  considerable  seasons  of  quiet,  many  superficial  or  hypo- 
critical Christians,  who,  the  moment  the  storm  of  persecution 
broke  forth,  flew  like  chaff  from  the  wheat,  and  either  offered 
incense  to  the  gods  (thurificati,  sacrifeati),  or  procured  false 
witness  of  their  return  to  paganism  (libeUatici,  from  libellum),  or 
gave  up  the  sacred  books  (traditores).  Tertullian  relates  with 
righteous  indignation  that  whole  congregations,  with  the  clergy 
at  the  head,  would  at  times  resort  to  dishonorable  bribes  in 
order  to  avert  the  persecution  of  heathen  magistrates.2  But 
these  were  certainly  cases  of  rare  exception.  Generally  speak- 
ing the  three  sorts  of  apostates  (lapsi)  were  at  once  excommu- 
nicated, and  in  many  churches,  through  excessive  rigor,  were 
even  refused  restoration. 

Those  who  cheerfully  confessed  Christ J  before  the  heathen 
magistrate  at  the  peril  of  life,  but  were  not  executed,  were 
honored  as  confessors*  Those  who  suffered  abuse  of  all  kind 
and  death  itself,  for  their  faith,  were  called  martyrs  or  bloodr 
witnesses* 

Among  these  confessors  and  martyrs  were  not  wanting  those 
in  whom  the  pure,  quiet  flame  of  enthusiasm-  rose  into  the  wild 
fire  of  fanaticism,  and  whose  zeal  was  corrupted  with  impatient 
haste,  heaven-tempting  presumption,  and  pious  ambition;  to 
whom  that  word  could  be  applied :  "  Though  I  give  my  body 

1  Comp.  a  similar  passage  in  the  anonymous  Ep.  ad  Diognetum,  c.  6  and  7  a( 
the  close,  and  in  Justin  M.,  Did.  c.  Tryph.  Jud.  c.  110. 

*Defuga  in  persee.  c.  13:   "Massaliter  tote  ecd&tiae  trttutum  sibi  irrogt 
wrunt." 

/,  confessores,  Matt.  10 :  32;  1  Tim.  6  :  12. 
t  Acts  22:  20;  Heb.  12:  1;  1  Pet  5:  1;  Rev.  17:  6. 


?  26.  CHRISTIAN  MABTYEDOM.  77 

to  be  burned,  and  have  not  love,  it  profiteth  me  nothing." 
They  delivered  themselves  up  to  the  heathen  officers,  and  in 
every  way  sought  the  martyr's  crown,  that  they  might  merit 
heaven  and  be  venerated  on  earth  as  saints.  Thus  Tertullian 
tells  of  a  company  of  Christians  in  Ephesus,  who  begged  mar- 
tyrdom from  the  heathen  governor,  but  after  a  few  had  been 
executed,  the  rest  were  sent  away  by  him  with  the  words : 
"  Miserable  creatures,  if  you  really  wish  to  die,  you  have  pre- 
cipices and  halters  enough."  Though  this  error  was  far  less 
discreditable  than  the  opposite  extreme  of  the  cowardly  fear  of 
man,  yet  it  was  contrary  to  the  instruction  and  the  Cample  of 
Christ  and  the  apostles,1  and  to  the  spirit  of  true  martyrdom, 
which  consists  in  the  union  of  sincere  humility  and  power,  and 
•possesses  divine  strength  in  the  very  consciousness  of  human 
weakness.  'And  accordingly  intelligent  church  teaqhers  cen- 
sured this  stormy,  morbid  zeal.  The  church  of  Smyrna  speaks 
thus :  "  We  do  not  commend  those  who  expose  themselves ;  for 
the  gospel  teaches  not  so."  Clement  of  Alexandria  says: 
"The  Lord  himself  has  commanded  us  to  flee  to  another 
city  when  we  are  persecuted ;  not  as  if  the  persecution  were  an 
evil  i  not  as  if  we  feared  death ;  but  that  we  may  not  lead  or 
help  any  to  evil  doing."  In  Tertullian's  view  martyrdom  per- 
fects itself  in  divine  patience ;  and  with  Cyprian  it  is  a  gift  of 
divine  grace,  which  one  cannot  hastily  grasp,  but  must  patiently 
wait  for. 

But  after  all  due  allowance  for  such  adulteration  and  de- 
generacy, the  martyrdom  of  the  first  three  centuries  still 
remains  one  of  the  grandest  phenomena  of  history,  and  an 
evidence  of  the  indestructible,  divine  nature  of  Christianity. 

No  other  religion  could  have  stood  for  so  long  a  period  the 
combined  opposition  of  Jewish  bigotry,  Greek  philosophy,  and 
Roman  policy  and  power ;  no  other  could  have  triumphed  at 
last  over  so  many  foes  by  purely  moral  and  spiritual  force, 
without  calling  any  carnal  weapons  to  its  aid.  This  compre- 

i  Comp.  Matt.  10 :  23 ;  24 :  15-20 ;  Phil.  1 :  20-25 ;  2  Tim.  4 :  6-8. 


78  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

hensrv-e  and  long-continued  martyrdom  is  the  peculiar  crown 
and  glory  of  the  early  church ;  it  pervaded  its  entire  literature 
and  gave  it  a  predominantly  apologetic  character;  it  entered 
deeply  into  its  organization  and  discipline  and  the  development 
of  Christian  doctrine;  it  affected  the* public  worship  and  private 
devotions;  it  produced  a  legendary  poetry;  but  it  gave  rise  also, 
innocently,  to  a  great  deal  of  superstition,  and  undue  exaltation 
of  human  merit;  and  it  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  Catholic 
worship  of  saints  and  relics. 

Sceptical  writers  have  endeavored  to  diminish  its  moral  effect 
by  pointing  to  the  fiendish  and  hellish  scenes  of  the  papal 
crusades  against  the  Albigenses  and  Waldenses,  the  Parisian 
massacre  of  the  Huguenots,  the  Spanish  Inquisition,  and  other 
persecutions  of  more  recent  date.  Dodwell  expressed  the  opi- 
nion, which  has  been  recently  confirmed  by  the  high  authority 
of  the  learned  and  impartial  Niebuhr,  that  the  Diocletian  per- 
secution was  a  mere  shadow  as  compared  with  the  persecution 
of  the  Protestants  in  the  Netherlands  by  the  Duke  of  Alva  in 
the  service  of  Spanish  bigotry  and  despotism.  Gibbon  goes 
even  further,  and  boldly  asserts  that  "the  number  of  Pro- 
testants who  were  executed  by  the  Spaniards  in  a  single  pro- 
vince and  a  single  reign,  far  exceeded  that  of  the  primitive 
martyrs  in  the  space  of  three  centuries  and  of  the  Eoman  em- 
pire." The  victims  of  the  Spanish  Inquisition  also  arte  said 
to  outnumber  those  of  the  Roman  emperors.1 

1  The  number  of  Dutch  martyrs  under  the  Duke  of  Alva  amounted,  accord- 
ing to  Grotius,  to  over  100,000;  according  to  P.  Sarpi,  the  B.  Cath.  historian, 
to  50,000.  Motley,  in  his  History  of  the  Rise  of  the  Dutch  Republic,  vol.  H. 
504,  says  of  the  terrible  reign  of  Alva :  "  The  barbarities  committed  amid  the 
sack  and  ruin  of  those  blazing  and  starving  cities  are  almost  beyond  belief; 
unborn  infants  were  torn  from  the  living  bodies  of  their  mothers;  women  and 
children  were  violated  by  the  thousands ;  and  whole  populations  burned  and 
hacked  to  pieces  by  soldiers  in  every  mode  which  cruelty,  in  its  wanton  in- 
genuity, could  devise."  Buckle  and  Friedlander  (III.  586)  assert  that  during 
the  eighteen  years  of  office  of  Torquemada,  the  Spanish  Inquisition  punished, 
according  to  the  lowest  estimate,  105,000  persons,  among  whom  8,800  were 
burnt.  In  Andalusia  2000  Jews  were  executed,  and  17,000  punished  in  a  single 
year. 


i  25.  CHRISTIAN  MAKTYBDOM.  79 

Admitting  these  sad  facts,  they  do  not  justify  any  sceptical 
conclusion.  For  Christianity  is  no  more  responsible  for  the 
crimes  and  cruelties  perpetrated  in  its  name  by  unworthy  pro- 
fessors and  under  the  sanction  of  an  unholy  alliance  of  politics 
and  religion,  than  the  Bible  for  all  the  nonsense  men  have  put 
into  it,  or  God  for  the  abuse  daily  and  hourly  practised  with 
his  best  gifts.  But  the  number  of  martyrs  must  be  judged  by 
the  total  number  of  Christians  who  were  a  minority  of  the 
population.  The  want  of  particular  statements  by  contemporary 
writers  leaves  it  impossible  to  ascertain,  even  approximately, 
the  number  of  martyrs.  Dodwell  and  Gibbon  have  certainly 
underrated  it,  as  far  as  Eusebius,  the  popular  tradition  since 
Constantino,  and  the  legendary  poesy  of  the  middle  age,  have 
erred  the  other  way.  This  is  the  result  of  recent  discovery  and 
investigation,  and  fully  admitted  by  such  writers  as  Eenan. 
Origen,  it  is  true,  wrote  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century, 
that  the  number  of  Christian  martyrs  was  small  and  easy  to 
be  counted  ;  God  not  permitting  that  all  this  class  of  men  should 
be  exterminated.1  But  this  language  must  be  understood  as 
referring  chiefly  to  the  reigns  of  Caracalla,  Heliogabalus,  Alex- 
ander Severus  and  Philippus  Arabs,  who  did  not  persecute 
the  Christians.  Soon  afterwards  the  fearful  persecution  of 
Decius  broke  out,  in  which  Origen  himself  was  thrown  into 
prison  and  cruelly  treated.  Concerning  the  preceding  ages,  his 
statement  must  be  qualified  by  the  equally  valid  testimonies  of 
Turtullian,  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Origen's  teacher),  and  the 
still  older  Irenseus,  who  says  expressly,  that  the  church,  for 
her  love  to  God,  "  sends  in  all  places  and  at  all  times  a  multi- 
tude of  martyrs  to  the  Father."  2  Even  the  heathen  Tacitus 
speaks  of  an  "  immense  multitude"  (ingens  muttitudd)  of  Chris- 
tians, who  were  murdered  in  the  city  of  Eome  alone  during  the 


Kara  Kaipovg  not  G$6dpa  evapidfiTjroL  rsOvfaaffi.    Adv.  Cels.  III.  & 
The  older  testimony  of  Melito  of  Sardis,  in  the  well-known  fragment  from 
his  Apology,  preserved  by  Eusebius  IV.  26,  refers  merely  to  the  small  number 
of  imperial  persecutors  before  Marcus  Aurelius. 
2  Adv.  Haer.  IV.  c.  33,  ?  9  :  Ecdesia  omni  in  loco  ob  earn,  quam  habet  ergo,  Dwm 


80  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Neronian  persecution  in  64.  To  this  must  be  added  the  silent, 
yet  most  eloquent  testimony  of  the  Koman  catacombs,  which, 
according  to  the  calculation  of  Marchi  and  North  cote,  extended 
over  nine  hundred  English  miles,  and  are  said  to  contain  nearly 
seven  millions  of  graves,  a  large  proportion  of  these  including 
the  relics  of  martyrs,  as  the  innumerable  inscriptions  and  in- 
struments of  death  testify.  '  The  sufferings,  moreover,  of  the 
church  during  this  period  are  of  course  not  to  be  measured 
merely  by  the  number  of  actual  executions,  but  by  the  far  more 
numerous  insults,  slanders,  vexations,  and  tortures,  which  the 
cruelty  of  heartless  heathens  and  barbarians  could  devise,  or 
any  sort  of  instrument  could 'inflict  on  the  human  body,  and 
which  were  in  a  thousand  cases  worse  than  death. 

Finally,  while  the  Christian  religion  has  at  all  times  suffered 
more  or  less  persecution,  bloody  or  unbloody,  from  the  ungodly 
world,  and  always  had  its  witnesses  ready  for  any  sacrifice ;  yet 
at  no  period  since  the  first  three  centuries  was  the  whole  church 
denied  the  right  of  a  peaceful  legal  existence,  and  the  profession 
of  Christianity  itself  universally  declared  and  punished  as  a 
political  crime.  Before  Constantine  the  Christians  were  a  help- 
less and  proscribed  minority  in  an  essentially  heathen  world, 
and  under  a  heathen  government.  Then  they  died  not  simply 
for  particular  doctrines,  but  for  the  facts  of  Christianity.  Then 
it  was  a  conflict,  not  for  a  denomination  or  sect,  but  for  Chris- 
tianity itself.  The  importance  of  ancient  martyrdom  does  not 
rest  so  much  on  the  number  of  victims  and  the  cruelty  of  their 
sufferings  as  on  the  great  antithesis  and  the  ultimate  result  in 
saving  the  Christian  religion  for  all  time  to  come.  Hence  the 
first  three  centuries  are  the  classical  period  of  heathen  persecu- 
tion and  of  Christian  martyrdom.  The  martyrs  and  confessors 
of  the  ante-lSTicene  age  suffered  for  the  common  cause  of  all 
Christian  denominations  and  sects,  and  hence  are  justly  held  in 
reverence  and  gratitude  by  all. 


i  26.  CHRISTIAN  MARTYRDOM.  83 


NOTES. 

Dr.  Thomas  Arnold,  who  had  no  leaning  to  superstitious  and  idolatrous 
saint-worship,  in  speaking  of  a  visit  to  the  church  of  San  Stefano  at  Rome, 
remarks :  *'  No  doubt  many  of  the  particular  stories  thus  painted  will  bear  no 
critical  examination ;  it  is  likely  enough,  too,  that  Gibbon  has  truly  accused 
the  general  statements  of  exaggeration.  But  this  is  a  thankless  labor.  Divide 
the  sum  total  of  the  reported  martyrs  by  twenty— by  fifty,  if  you  will ;  after 
all  you  have  a  number  of  persons  of  all  ages  and  seres  suffering  cruel  torment? 
and  death  for  conscience'  sake,  and  for  Christ's ;  and  by  their  sufferings  mani- 
festly with  God's  blessing  ensuring  the  triumph  of  Christ's  gospel.  Neither 
do  I  think  that  we  consider  the  excellence  of  this  martyr  spirit  half  enough. 
I  do  not  think  that  pleasure  is  a  sin ;  but  though  pleasure  is  not  a  sin,  yet 
surely  the  contemplation  of  suffering  for  Christ's  sake  is  a  thing  most  needful 
for  us  in  our  days,  from  whom  in  our  daily  life  suffering  seems  so  far  removed. 
And  as  God's  grace  enabled  rich  and  delicate  persons,  women  and  even 
children,  to  endure  all  extremities  of  pain  and  reproach,  in  times  past;  so 
there  is  the  same  grace  no  less  mighty  now ;  and  if  we  do  not  close  ourselves 
against  it,  it  might  be  in  us  no  less  glorious  in  a  time  of  trial." 

Lecky,  a  very  able  and  impartial  historian,  justly  censures  the  unfeeling 
chapter  of  Gibbon  on  persecution.  "  The  complete  absence,"  he  says  (History 
of  HJuropean  Morals,  I.  494  sqq.),  "  of  all  sympathy  with  the  heroic  courage 
manifested  by  the  martyrs,  and  the  frigid,  and  in  truth  most  unphilosophical 
severity  with  which  the  historian  Las  weighed  the  words  and  actions  of  men 
engaged  in  the  agonies  of  a  deadly  struggle,  must  repel  every  generous  nature, 
while  the  persistence  with  which  he  estimates  persecutions  by  the  number  of 
deaths  rather  than  the  amount  of  suffering,  diverts  the  mind  from  the  really  dis- 
tinctive atrocities  of  the  Pagan  persecutions It  is  true  that  in  one 

Catholic  country  they  introduced  the  atrocious  custom  of  making  the  spectacle 
of  men  burnt  alive  for  their  religious  opinions  an  element  in  the  public  fes- 
tivities. It  is  true,  too,  that  the  immense  majority  of  the  acts  of  the  martyrs 
are  the  transparent  forgeries  of  lying  monks ;  but  it  is  also  true  that  among 
the  authentic  records  of  Pagan  persecutions  there  are  histories  which  display, 
perhaps  more  vividly  than  any  other,  both  the  depth  of  cruelty  to  which 
human  nature  may  sink,  and  the  heroism  of  resistance  it  may  attain.  There 
was  a  time  when  it  was  the  just  boast  of  the  Romans,  that  no  refinement  of 
cruelty,  no  prolongations  of  torture,  were  admitted  in  their  stern  but  simple 
penal  code.  But  all  this  was  changed.  Those  hateful  games,  which  made  the 
spectacle  of  human  suffering  and  death  the  delight  of  all  classes,  had  spread 
their  brutalising  influence  wherever  the  Roman  name  was  known,  had  rendered 
millions  absolutely  indifferent  to  the  sight  of  human  suffering,  had  produced 
in  many,  in  the  very  centre  of  an  advanced  civilisation,  a  relish  and  a  passion 
for  torture,  a  rapture  and  an  exultation  in  watching  the  spasms  of  extreme 
agony,  such  as  an  African  or  an  American  savage  alone  can  equal.  The  most 
horrible  recorded  instances  of  torture  were  usually  inflicted,  either  by  the 
populace,  or  in  their  presence,  in  the  arena.  "We  read  of  Christians  bound  in 
chains  of  red-hot  iron,  while  the  stench  of  their  half-consumed  flesh  rose  in  a 
Vol.  II.  6. 


82  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

suffocating  cloud  to  heaven ;  of  others  who  were  torn  to  the  very  bone  by  shells, 
or  hocks  of  iron ;  of  holy  virgins  given  over  to  the  lust  of  the  gladiator  or  to 
the  mercies  of  the  pander ;  of  two  hundred  and  twenty-seven  converts  sent  on 
one  occasion  to  the  minea,  each  with  the  sinews  of  one  leg  severed  by  a  red-hot 
iron,  and  with  an  eye  scooped  from  its  socket;  of  fires  so  slow  that  the  victims 
writhed  for  hours  in  their  agonies ;  of  bodies  torn  limb  from  limb,  or  sprink- 
led with  burning  lead ;  of  mingled  salt  and  vinegar  poured  over  the  flesh  that 
was  bleeding  from  the  rack ;  of  tortures  prolonged  and  varied  through  entire 
days.  For  the  love  of  their  Divine  Master,  for  the  cause  they  believed  to  be 
•true,  men,  and  even  weak  girls,  endured  these  things  without  flinching,  when 
one  word  would  have  freed  them  from  their  sufferings.  No  opinwn  we  may 
farm  of  the  proceedings  of  priests  in  a  later  age  should  impair  the  reverence  with 
which  we  bend  before  the  martyrs  tomb. 

§  27.  Rise  of  the  Worship  of  Martyrs  and  Relics. 

I.  SOURCES. 

In  addition  to  the  works  quoted  in  JJ  12  and  26,  comp.  EUSEB.  H.  E.  IV. 
15;  De  Mart.  Palaest.  c.  7.  CLEM.  ALEX.:  Strom.  IV.  p.  596. 
ORIG.  :  Exhort,  ad  mart.  c.  30  and  50.  In  Num.  Kom.  X.  2.  TEH- 
TTJLL.  :  De  cor.  mil.  c.  3 ;  De  Eesurr.  earn,  c-  43.  CYPR.  :  De  lapsis, 
c.  17 ;  Epist.  34  and  57.  CONST.  APOST.  :  1.  8. 

II.  WORKS. 

0.  SAGITTARIUS:  De  natalitiis  mart.    Jen.  1696. 

SCHWABE  :  De  insigni  veneratione,  guae  obtinuit  erga  marlyres  in  primit. 
ecd.  Altd.1748. 

In  thankful  remembrance  of  the  fidelity  of  this  "  noble  army 
of  martyrs,"  in  recognition  of  Hie  unbroken  communion  of 
saints,  and  in  prospect  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  the 
church  paid  to  the  martyrs,  and  even  to  their  mortal  remains,  a 
veneration,  which  was  in  itself  well-deserved  and  altogether 
natural,  but  which  early  exceeded  the  scriptural  limit,  and 
afterwards  degenerated  into  the  worship  of  saints  and  relics. 
The  heathen  hero-worship  silently  continued  in  the  church  and 
was  baptized  with  Christian  names. 

In  the  church  of  Smyrna,  according  to  its  letter  of  the  year 
155,  we  find  this  veneration  still  in  its  innocent,  childlike  form: 
"  They  [the  Jews]  know  not,  that  we  can  neither  ever  forsake 
Christ,  who  has  suffered  for  the  salvation  of  the  whole  world 
of  iihe  redeemed,  nor  worship  another.  Him  indeed  ^e  adore 
as  the  Son  of  God;  but  the  martyrs  we  love  a* 


?  27.  WORSHIP  OF  MAETYBS  AND  RELICS.  83 


they  deserve  (dfanto/jtev  dcr^c),  for  their  surpassing  love  to 
their  King  and  Master,  as  we  wish  also  to  be  their  companions 
and  fellow-disciples."  l  The  day  of  the  death  of  a  martyr  was 
called  his  heavenly  birth-day,2  and  was  celebrated  annually  at 
his  grave  (mostly  in  a  cave  or  catacomb),  by  prayer,  reading 
of  a  history  of  his  suffering  and  victory,  oblations,  and  cele- 
bration of  the  holy  supper. 

But  the  early  church  did  not  stop  with  this.  Martyrdom 
was  taken,  after  the  end  of  the  second  century,  not  only  as  a 
higher  grade  of  Christian  virtue,  but  at  the  same  time  as  a 
baptism  of  fire  and  blood,3  an  ample  substitution  for  the 
baptism  of  water,  as  purifying  from  sin,  and  as  securing  an 
entrance  into  heaven.  Origen  even  went  so  far  as  to  ascribe  to 
the  sufferings  of  the  martyrs  an  atoning  virjnie  for  others,  an 
efficacy  like  that  of  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  on  the  authority 
of  such  passages  as  2  Cor.  12:  15;  Col.  1  :  24;  2  Tim.  4:  6. 
According  to  Tertullian,  the  martyrs  entered  immediately  into 
the  blessedness  of  heaven,  and  were  not  required,  like  ordinary 
Christians,  to  pass  through  the  intermediate  state.  Thus  was 
applied  the  benediction  on  those  who  are  persecuted  for  right- 
eousness' sake,  Matfr.  5:  10-12.  Hence,  according  to  Origen 
and  Cyprian,  their  prayers  before  the  throne  of  God  caine  to  be 
thought  peculiarly  efficacious  for  the  church  militant  on  earth, 
and,  according  to  an  example  related  by  Eusebius,  their  future 
intercessions  were  bespoken  shortly  before  their  death. 

In  the  Roman  Catacombs  we  find  inscriptions  where  the  de- 
parted are  requested  to  pray  for  their  living  relatives  and  friends. 

The  veneration  thus  shown  for  the  persons  of  the  martyrs 
was  transferred  in  smaller  measure  to  their  remains.  The 
church  of  Smyrna  counted  the  bones  of  Polycarp  more  precious 
than  gold  or  diamonds.4  The  remains  of  Ignatius  were  held  in 

1  Martyrium  Polycarpi,  cap.  17  ;  comp.  Ensebius,  H.  K  IV.  15. 

2  'Hfiepa  yerfflhtoe,  yeviQfaa,  natcdes,  natalitia  martyrum. 

3  Lavacrum  samguinis,  p&irTiapa  6ia  rcvp6gt  comp.  Matt.  20:  22;  Luke  12  :  50; 
Mark  10  :  39. 

*  It  is  worthy  of  note,  however,  that  some  of  the  startling  phenomena  related 
in  the  Martyrium  Polycarpi  by  the  congregation  of  Smyrna  are  omitted  in  th« 
narrative  of  Eusebius  CIV.  1$).  and  may  be  a  later  interpolation, 


84  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311, 

equal  veneration  by  the  Christians  at  Antioch.  The  friend*,  of 
Cyprian  gathered  his  blood  in  handkerchiefs,  and  built  a  chapel 
over  his  tomb. 

A  veneration  frequently  excessive  was  paid,  not  only  to  the 
deceased  martyrs,  but  also  the  surviving  confessors.     It  was 
made  the  special  duty  of  the  deacons  to  visit  and  minister  tc 
them  in  prison.     The  heathen  Lucian  in  his  satire,  "  De  morte 
Peregrmi,"  describes  the  unwearied  care  of  the  Christians  foi 
their  imprisoned  brethren;   the  heaps  of  presents  brought  to 
them;  and  the  testimonies  of  sympathy  even  by  messengers 
from  great  distances;  but ' all,  of  course,  in  Lucian's  view,  out 
of  mere  good-natured  enthusiasm.     Tertullian  the  Montanist 
censures  the  excessive  attention  of  the  Catholics  to  their  con- 
fessors.    The  libelli  paeis,  as  they  were  called — intercessions  of 
the  confessors  for  the  fallen — commonly  procured  restoration  to 
the  fellowship  of  the  church.     Their  voice  had  peculiar  weight 
in  the  choice  of  bishops,  and  their  sanction  not  rarely  over- 
balanced the  authority  of  the  clergy,     Cyprian  is  nowhere  more 
eloquent  than  in  the  praise  of  their  heroism.     His  letters  to  the 
imprisoned  confessors  in  Carthage  are  full  of  glorification,  in  a 
style  somewhat  offensive  to  our  evangelical  ideas.     Yet  after 
all,  he  pr9tests  against  the  abuse  of  their  privileges,  from  which 
he  had  himself  to  suffer,  and  earnestly  exhorts  them  to  a  holy 
walk ;  that  the  honor  they  have  gained  may  not  prove  a  snare 
to  them,   and  through   pride  and   carelessness   be   lost.     He 
always  represents  the  crown  of  the  confessor  and  the  martyr  as 
a  free  giffc  of  the  grace  of  God,  and  sees  the  real  essence  of  it 
rather  in  the   inward  disposition   than   in   the   outward   act* 
Commodian  conceived  the  whole  idea  of  martyrdom  in  its  true 
breadth,  when  he  extended  it  to  all  those  who,  without  shedding 
their  blood,  endured  to  the  end  in  love,  humility,  and  patience, 
and  in  all  Chri#*»V« 


CHAPTER  III. 

IJTEKAKY   CONTEST    OF   CHKISTIANTTY    WITH    JUDAISM    AND 
HEATHEJSTSM. 


§28.  Literature. 

I.  SOURCES. 

TACITUS  (Consul  97,  d.  about  117) :  Annal.  xv.  4L  Comp.  Ms  picture 
of  the  Jews,  Histv.  1-5. 

TLIKCUS  (d.  about  114) :  Ep.  x.  96,  97. 

CELSUS  (flourished  about  150) :  'AA;?%  ;Uyof.  Preserved  in  fragments  in 
Origen's  Refutation  (8  books  Ka-&  KfA^ov);  reconstructed,  trans- 
lated and  explained  by  THEODOE  KEIH:  Celsus*  Wahres  Wort, 
Aelteste  wissenschaftliche  Sfreitschrift  mdik&r  Weltanschauung  gegen 
das  Cliristenthum,  Zurich  1873  (293  pages). 

LUCIAN  (d.  about  180):  ne/jt  rfc  TlEpsypivov  refavrft,  c.  11-16;  and 
'AJl9%  b7opta,  I.  22,  30 ;  II.  4,  11. 

POEPHYBITJS  (about  300) :  Kara  XpLcriavav  Myoi.  Only  fragments 
preserved,  and  collected  by  HOLSTER,  Eom.  1630.  His  most  im- 
portant works  are  lost.  Those  that  remain  are  ed.  by  A.  NAUCK, 
I860: 

II.  WOEKS. 

NATH.  LAEDNER:  Collection  of  Ancient  Jewish  and  Heathen  Testimonies 

to  the  Truth  ofm  the  Christian  Religion  (Lond.  1727-'57)  in  the  VI. 

and  VII.  vols.  of  his  Works,  ed.  by  Kippis,  London,  1838.    Very 

valuable. 
MOSHEIM:   Introduction  to  his  Germ,  translation   of  Qngen  against 

Celsiis.    Hamb.  1745. 
BnroEMAisrN :  Celsus  und  seine  Schriften  gegen  die  Christen,  in  Illgen's 

"  Zeitschr.  fur  hist.  Theol."    Leipz.  1842.  N.  2,  p.  58-146. 
AD.  PLANCK  :  LuUan  u.  das  Christenthum,  in  the  "  Studien  u.  Kritiken,' 

1851.  N.  4 ;  translated  in  the  "  Bibliotheca  Sacra,"  Andover,  1852. 
F.  CHE.  BATTE  :  Das  Christenthum  der  3  ersten  Jdhrli.  Tub.  seed.  ed.  1860 

(and  1863)  pp.  370-430. 
NEANDEE:  General  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church;  EngL 

trans,  by  Torrey,  vol.  L,  157-178     (12'h  Boston  ed.) 

85 


86  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

BlCHARB  VON  DER  ALM:  Die  Urtheile  heidnischer  und  judischcr 
Schriftsteller  der  vier  ersten  Jahrh.  uber  Jesus  und  die  ersten  Christen. 
Leipz.  1865.  (An  infidel  book.) 

JEL  KELLNEE  (E.  C.) :  Hellenismus  und  Christenthum  oder  die  geistige 
Reaction  des  antiken  Heidenthums  gegen  das  Christenthum.  Koln 
1866  (454  pp.) 

B.  AUBE:  De  PApologetique  chretienne  au  II6  siecle.  St.  Justin,  philo- 
sophe  et  martyr,  2nd  ed.  Paris  1875.  By  the  same :  Histoire  des  Per- 
secutions de  Peglise.  The  second  part,  also  under  the  title  La 
polemique  paienne  &  la  fin  du  II«  sibcle.  Paris  1878. 

E.  REBTAN:  Marc-Aurlle  (Paris  1882),  pp.  345  (Celse  et  Luden),  379  sqq 
(NouveZles  apologies). 

J.  W.  FAEEAR:  Seekers  after  God.  London,  1869,  -new  ed.  1877.  (Es- 
says on  Seneca,  Epictetus,  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  compared  with 
Christianity.) 

Comp.  the  Lit.  quoted  in  \  12,  especially  UHLHORIT  and  KEIM  (1881), 
and  the  monographs  on  Justin  M.,  Tertullian,  Origen,  and  other 
Apologists,  which  are  noticed  in  sections  treating  of  these  writers. 

§  29.  Literary  Opposition  to  Christianity. 

Besides  the  external  conflict,  which  we  have  considered  in  the 
second  chapter,  Christianity  was  called  to  pass  through  an 
equally  important  intellectual  and  literary  struggle  with  the 
ancient  world ;  and  from  this  also  it  came  forth  victorious, 
and  conscious  of  being  the  perfect  religion  for  man.  We 
shall  see  in  this  chapter,  that  most  of  the  objection^  of  modern 
infidelity  against  Christianity  were  anticipated  by  its  earliest 
literary  opponents,  and  ably  and  successfully  refuted  by  the 
ancient  apologists  for  the  wants  -of  the  church  in  that  age. 
Both  unbelief  and  faith,  like  human  nature  and  divine  grace, 
are  essentially  the  same  in  all  ages  and  among  all  nations,  but 
vary  in  form,  and  hence  every  age,  as  it  produces  its  own 
phase  of  opposition,  must  frame  its  own  mode  of  defense. 

The  Christian  religion  found  at  first  as  little  favor  with  the 
representatives  of  literature  and  art  as  with  princes  and 
statesmen.  In  the  secular  literature  of  the  latter  part  of  the 
first  century  and  the  beginning  of  the  second,  we  find  little 
more  than  ignorant,  careless  and  hostile  allusions  to  Christianity 
as  a  new  form  of  superstition  which  then  began  to  attract  the 
attention  of  the  Eoman  government.  In  this  point  of  view 


?  30.  JEWISH  OPPOSITION.  87 

also  Christ's  kingdom  was  not  of  the  world,  and  was  compelled 
to  force  its  way  through  the  greatest  difficulties ;  yet  it  proved 
at  last  the  mother  of  an  intellectual  and  moral  culture  far  in 
advance  of  the  Graeco-Koman,  capable  of  endless  progress,  and 
full  of  the  vigor  of  perpetual  youth* 

The  pious  barbarism  of  the  Byzantine  emperors  Theodosius 
II.  and  Valentinian  III.  ordered  the  destruction  of  the  works 
of  Porphyrius  and  all  other  opponents  of  Christianity,  to  avert 
the  wrath  of  God,  but  considerable  fragments  have  been  pre- 
served in  the  refutations  of  the  Christian  Fathers,  especially 
Origen,  Eusebius,  Cyril  of  Alexandria  (against  Julian),  and 
scattered  notices  of  Jerome  and  Augustin. 

§  30.  Jewish  Opposition.     Josephus  and  the  Talmud. 

• 

The  hostility  of  the  Jewish  Scribes  and  Pharisees  to  the 
gospel  is  familiar  from  the  New  Testament.  Josephus  men- 
tions Jesus  once  in  his  Archaeology,  but  in  terms  so  favorable 
as  to  agree  ill  with  his  Jewish  position,  and  to  subject  the 
passage  to  the  suspicion  of  interpolation  or  corruption.1  His 
writings,  however,  contain  much  valuable  testimony  to  the  truth 
of  the  gospel  history.  His  "Archaeology  "throughout  is  a  sort 
of  fifth  Gospel  in  illustration  of  the  social  and  political  environ- 
ments of  the  life  of  Christ.2  His  "History  of  the  Jewish 
War,"  in  particular,  is  undesignedly  a  striking  commentary 
on  the  Saviour's  predictions  concerning  the  destruction  of  the 
city  and  temple  of  Jerusalem,  the  great  distress  and  affliction 
of  the  Jewish  people  at  that  time,  the  famine,  pestilence,  and 
earthquake,  the  rise  of  false  prophets  and  impostors,  and  the 
flight  of  his  disciples  at  the  approach  of  these  calamities.8 

The  attacks  of  the  later  Jews  upon  Christianity  are  essen- 
tially mere  repetitions  of  those  recorded  in  the  Gospels — denial 

1  Joseph.  Antiqu.  1.  XVTIL  c.  3,  sect.  3.    Comp.  on  this  much  disputed  pas- 
sage, vol.  I.,  p.  92. 

2  It  is  the  special  merit  of  Keim  to  have  thoroughly  utilized  Josephus  foi 
the  biography  of  Jesus. 

8  These  coincidences  have  been  traced  out  in  full  by  Lardner,  Works,  ed 
Kippis,  vol.  VI.  p.  406  ff. 


86  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

* 

RICHARD  VON  DEB,  ALM:  Die  Urtheile  heidnischer  und  judischcr 
Schriftsteller  der  vier  ersten  Jahrh.  uber  Jesus  und  die  ersten  Christen. 
Leipz.  1865.  (An  infidel  book.) 

H.  KELLNER  (R.  C.) :  Hdlenismus  und  Christenthum  oder  die  geistige 
Reaction  des  antiken  Heidenthums  gegen  das  Christenthum.  Koln 
1866  (454 pp.) 

B.  AUB&  :  De  P  Apologetique  chrUienne  au  II*  siecle.  St.  Justin,  philo- 
sophe  et  martyr,  2nd  ed.  Paris  1875.  By  the  same :  SRstoire  des  Per- 
secutions de  PegHse.  The  second  part,  also  under  the  title  La 
poUmique  pa'ienne  &  la  fin  du  II«  siecle.  Paris  1878. 

E.  KEN-AN:  Marc-AurUe  (Paris  1882),  pp.  345  (Celse  et  Laden),  379  sqq 
(Nouvelles  apologies}. 

J.  W.  FAEEAB:  Seekers  after  God.  London,  1869,  new  ed.  1877.  (Es- 
says on  Seneca,  Epictetus,  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  compared  with 
Christianity.) 

Comp.  the  Lit.  quoted  in  \  12,  especially  UHLHOBI*-  and  KEIM  (1881), 
and  the  monographs  on  Justin  M.,  Tertullian,  Origen,  and  other 
Apologists,  which  are  noticed  in  sections  treating  of  these  writers. 

§  29.  Literary  Opposition  to  Christianity. 

Besides  the  external  conflict,  which  we  have  considered  in  the 
second  chapter,  Christianity  was  called  to  pass  through  an 
equally  important  intellectual  and  literary  struggle  with  the 
ancient  world;  and  from  this  also  it  came  forth  victorious, 
and  conscious  of  being  the  perfect  religion  for  man.  We 
shall  see  in  this  chapter,  that  most  of  the  objections,  of  modern 
infidelity  against  Christianity  were  anticipated  by  its  earliest 
literary  opponents,  and  ably  and  successfully  refuted  by  the 
ancient  apologists  for  the  wants  -of  the  church  in  that  age. 
Both  unbelief  and  faith,  like  human  nature  and  divine  grace, 
are  essentially  the  same  in  all  ages  and  among  all  nations,  but 
vary  in  form,  and  hence  every  age,  as  it  produces  its  own 
phase  of  opposition,  must  frame  its  own  mode  of  defense. 

The  Christian  religion  found  at  first  as  little  favor  with  the 
representatives  of  literature  and  art  as  with  princes  and 
statesmen.  In  the  secular  literature  of  the  latter  part  of  the 
first  century  and  the  beginning  of  the  second,  we  find  little 
more  than  ignorant,  careless  and  hostile  allusions  to  Christianity 
as  a  new  form  of  superstition  which  then  began  to  attract  the 
attention  of  the  Eoman  government.  In  this  point  of  view 


\  30.  JEWISH  OPPOSITION.  87 

also  Christ's  kingdom  was  not  of  the  world,  and  was  compelled 
to  force  its  way  through  the  greatest  difficulties ;  jet  it  proved 
at  last  the  mother  of  an  intellectual  and  moral  culture  far  in 
advance  of  the  Grseco-Roman,  capable  of  endless  progress,  and 
full  of  the  vigor  of  perpetual  youth. 

The  pious  barbarism  of  the  Byzantine  emperors  Theodosius 
II.  and  Valentinian  III.  ordered  the  destruction  of  the  works 
of  Porphyrius  and  all  other  opponents  of  Christianity,  to  avert 
the  wrath  of  God,  but  considerable  fragments  have  been  pre- 
served in  the  refutations  of  the  Christian  Fathers,  especially 
Origen,  Eussbius,  Cyril  of  Alexandria  (against  Julian),  and 
scattered  notices  of  Jerome  and  Augustin. 

§  30.  Jewish  Opposition.    Josephus  and  the  Talmud. 

• 

The  hostility  of  the  Jewish  Scribes  and  Pharisees  to  the 
gospel  is  familiar  from  the  New  Testament.  Josephus  men- 
tions Jesus  once  in  tis  Archaeology,  but  in  terms  so  favorable 
as  to  agree  ill  with  his  Jewish  position,  and  to  subject  the 
passage  to  the  suspicion  of  interpolation  or  corruption.1  His 
writings,  however,  contain  much  valuable  testimony  to  the  truth 
of  the  gospel  history.  His  "  Archaeology"  throughout  is  a  sort 
of  fifth  Gospel  in  illustration  of  the  social  and  political  environ- 
ments of  the  life  of  Christ.2  His  "History  of  the  Jewish 
War,"  in  particular,  is  undesignedly  a  striking  commentary 
on  the  Saviour's  predictions  concerning  the  destruction  of  the 
city  and  temple  of  Jerusalem,  the  great  distress  and  affliction 
of  the  Jewish  people  at  that  time,  the  famine,  pestilence,  and 
earthquake,  the  rise  of  false  prophets  and  impostors,  and  the 
flight  of  his  disciples  at  the  approach  of  these  calamities.8 

The  attacks  of  the  later  Jsws  upon  Christianity  are  essen- 
tially mere  repetitions  of  those  recorded  in  the  Gospels— denial 

1  Joseph.  Antiqu,.  1.  XVIII.  c.  3,  sect  3.    Comp.  on  this  much  disputed  pas- 
sage,  vol.  I.,  p.  92. 

2  It  is  the  special  merit  of  Keirn  to  have  thoroughly  utilized  Josephus  foi 
"the  biography  of  Jesus. 

8  These  coincidences  have  been  traced  out  in  full  by  Lardner,  Works,  ed 
Kippia,  vol.  VI.  p.  406  ff. 


88  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

of  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus,  and  horrible  vituperation  of  his 
confessors.  We  learn  their  character  best  from  the  dialogue 
of  Justin  with  the  Jew  Trypho.  The  fictitious  disputation  on 
Christ  by  Jason  and  Papiscus,  first  mentioned  by  Celsus,  was 
lost  since  the  seventh  century.1  It  seems  to  have  been  a  rather 
poor  apology  of  Christianity  against  Jewish  objections  by  a 
Jewish  Christian,  perhaps  by  Aristo  of  Pella. 

The  Talmud  is  the  Bible  of  Judaism  separated  from,  and 
hostile  to,  Christianity,  but  it  barely  notices  it  except  indirectly. 
It  completed  the  isolation  of  the  Jews  from  all  other  people. 

§  81.  Pagan  Opposition.     Tacitus  and  Pliny. 

The  Greek  and  Eoman  writers  of  the  first  century,  and  some 
of  the  second,  as  Seneca,  the  elder  Pliny,  and  even  the  mild 
and  noble  Plutarch,  either  from  ignorance  or  contempt,  never 
allude  to  Christianity  at  all. 

Tacitus  and  the  younger  Pliny,  contemporaries  and  friends 
of  the  emperor  Trajan,  are  the  first  to  notice  it;  and  they 
speak  of  it  only  incidentally  and  with  stoical  disdain  and 
antipathy,  as  an  "  exitiabilis  superstitio"  "prava  et  immodica 
.superstitio"  "  infleoribilis  obstinatio"  These  celebrated  and  in 
their  way  altogether  estimable  Komaii  authors  thus,  from  mani- 
fest ignorance,  saw  in  the  Christians  nothing  but  superstitious 
fanatics,  and  put  them  on  a  level  with  the  hated  Jews;  Tacitus, 
in  fact,  reproaching  iihem  also  with  the  "odium  generis 
humani"  This  will  afford  some  idea  of  the  immense  obstacles 
which  the  new  religion  encountered  in  public  opinion,  especially 
in  the  cultivated  circles  of  the  Eoman  empire.  The  Christian 
apologies  of  the  second  century  also  show,  that  the  most  mali- 
cious and  gratuitous  slanders  against  the  Christians  were  circu- 
lated among  the  common  people,  even  charges  of  incest  and 
cannibalism,3  which  may  have  arisen  in  part  from  a  misappre- 

l'Idffovoc  Koi  ILcnriffKov  avrdoyia  irepl  Xptarov.  Origenes  Contra  Cels.  IV» 
51.  Celsus  says,  that  he  read  the  book  which  defends  the  allegorical  interpre- 
tation, with  pity  and  hatred.  Comp.  Harnack,  AUchrisil.  Lit&rafar,  vol.  I 
(1882),  p.  115  sqq. 

*  Qi6iir66eioi  pii-eif,  incesti  conoubitus;  and  ftveareia  deitrva,  Thyestece  epulce. 


2  32.  DIRECT  ASSAULTS.  89 

hension  of  the  intimate  brotherly  love  of  the  Christians,  and 
their  nightly  celebration  of  the  holy  supper  and  love-feasts. 

Their  indirect  Testimony  to  Christianity. 

On  the  other  hand,  however,  the  scanty  and  contemptuous 
allusions  of  Tacitus  and  Pliny  to  Christianity  bear  testimony  to 
a  number  of  facts  in  the  Gospel  History.  Tacitus,  in  giving 
an  account  of  the  Neronian  persecution,  incidentally  attests, 
that  Christ  was  put  to  death  as  a  malefactor  by  Pontius  Pilate 
in  the  reign  of  Tiberius;  that  he  was  the  founder  of  the  Chris- 
tian sect,  that  the  latter  took  its  rise  in  Judaea  and  spread  in 
spite  of  the  ignominious  death  of  Christ  and  the  hatred  and 
contempt  it  encountered  throughout  the  empire,  so  that  a  "  vast 
multitude"  (multitudo  ingens)  of  them  were  most  cruelly  put  to 
death  in  the  ciiy  of  Eome  alone  as  early  as  the  year  64.  He 
also  bears  valuable  testimony,  in  the  fifth  book  of  his  History, 
together  with  Joseph  us,  from  whom  he  mainly,  though  not 
exclusively  takes  his  account,  to  the  fulfilment  of  Christ's 
prophecy  concerning  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the 
overthrow  of  the  Jewish  theocracy. 

As  to  Pliny's  famous  letter  to  Trajan,  written  about  107,  it 
proves  the  rapid  spread  of  Christianity  in  Asia  Minor  -at  that 
time  among  all  ranks  of  society,  the  general  moral  purity  and 
steadfastness  of  its  professors  amid  cruel  persecution,  their  mode 
and  time  of  worship,  their  adoration  of  Christ  as  God,  their 
observance  of  a  "  stated  day,"  which  is  undoubtedly  Sunday, 
and  other  facts  of  importance  in  the  early  history  of  the  Church. 
Trajan's  rescript  in  reply  to  Pliny's  inquiry,  furnishes  evidence 
of  the  innocence  of  the  Christians ;  he  notices  no  charge  against 
them  except  their  disregard  of  the  worship  of  the  gods,  and 
forbids  them  to  be  sought  for.  Marcus  Aurelius  testifies,  in 
one  brief  and  unfriendly  allusion,  to  their  eagerness  for  the 
crown  of  martyrdom. 

§  32*  Direct  Assaults.     CeUus. 

The  direct  assault  upon  Christianity,  by  works  devoted  to  the 
purpose,  began  about  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  and  was 


90  SECOND  PERIOD,    A.  D.  100-311. 

very  ably  conducted  by  a  Grecian  philosopher,  Celsus,  other* 
wise  unknown ;  according  to  Origen,  an  Epicurean  with  m&ny 
Platonic  ideas,  and  a  friend  of  Lucian.  He  wrote  during  the 
persecuting  reign  of  Marcus  Aurelius.1 

Celsus,  with  all  his  affected  or  real  contempt  for  the  new 
religion,  considered  it  important  enough  to  be  opposed  by  an 
extended  work  entitled  "  A  True  Discourse,"  of  which  Origen 
in  his  Refutation,  has  faithfully  preserved  considerable  frag- 
ments.2 These  represent  their  author  as  an  eclectic  philosopher 
of  varied  culture,  skilled  in  dialectics,  and  familiar  with  the 
Gospels,  Epistles,  and  even  the  writings  of  the  Old  Testament. 
He  speaks  now  in  the  frivolous  style  of  an  Epicurean,  now  in 
the  earnest  and  dignified  tone  of  a  Platonist.  At  one  time  he 
advocates  the  popular  heathen  religion,  as,  for  instance,  its  doc- 
trine of  demons ;  at  another  time  he  rises  above  the  polytheistic 
notions  to  a  pantheistic  or  sceptical  view.  He  employs  all  the 
aids  which  the  culture  of  his  age  afforded,  all  the  weapons  of 
learning,  common  sense,  wit,  sarcasm,  and  dramatic  animation 
of  style,  to  disprove  Christianity ;  and  he  anticipates  most  of 
the  arguments  and  sophisms  of  the  deists  and  infidels  of  later 
times.  Still  his  book  is,  on  the  whole,  a  very  superficial,  loose, 
and  light-minded  work,  and  gives  striking  proof  of  the  ina- 
bility of  the  natural  reason  to  understand  the  Christian  truth, 
It  has  no  savor  of  humility,  no  sense  of  the  oorruption  of  hu- 
man nature,  and  man's  need  of  redemption ;  it  is  full  of  heathen 
passion  and  prejudice,  utterly  blind  to  any  spiritual  realities, 
and  could  therefore  not  in  the  slightest  degree  appreciate  the 
glory  of  the  Redeemer  and  of  his  work.  It  needs  no  refuta- 
tion, it  refutes  itself. 

1  Oiigan  (I.  8)  indefinitely  assigns  him  to  the  reign  of  Hadrian  and  the 
Antonines;  most  historians  (Mosheim,  Gieseler,  Baur,  Friedlander)  to  A.  D. 
150  or  later;  others  (Tillemont,  Neander,  Zeller)  to  about  160  or  170;  Keirn 
(I  c.  p.  267)  to  A.  D.  178.  As  the  place  of  composition  Keim  (p.  274)  sug- 
gests Rome,  others  Alexandria.  He  ably  defends  his  identity  with  the  friend 
of  Lucian  (p.  291),  hut  makes  him  out  a  Platonist  rather  than  an  Epicurean 
(p.203sqq.). 

*  See  the  restoration  of  Celsus  from  these  fragments  by  Dr.*Keun,  quoted  above* 


8  32.  DIBECT  ASSAULTS.  91 

Celsus  first  introduces  a  Jew,  who  accuses  the  mother  of 
Jesus  of  adultery  with  a  soldier  named  Panthera ; l  adduces  the 
denial  of  Peter,  the  treachery  of  Judas,  and  the  death  of  Jesus 
as  contradictions  of  his  pretended  divinity;  and  makes  the 
resurrection  an  imposture.  Then  Celsus  himself  begins  the 
attack^  and  begins  it  by  combating  the  whole  idea  of  the  super- 
natural, which  forms  the 'common  foundation  of  Judaism  and 
Christianity.  The  controversy  between  Jews  and  Christiana 
appears  to  him  as  foolish  as  the  strife  about  the  shadow  of 
an  ass.  The  Jews  believed,  as  well  as  the  Christians,  in  the 
prophecies  of  a  Eedeemer  of  the  world,  and  thus  differed  from 
them  only  in  that  they  still  expected  the  Messiah's  coming. 
But  then,  to  what  purpose  should  God  come  down  to  earth  at 
all,  or  send  another  down?  He  knows  beforehand  what  is 
going  on  among  men.  And  such  a  descent  involves  a  change, 
a  transition  from  the  good  to  the  evil,  from  the  lovely  to  the 
hateful,  from  the  happy  to  the  miserable ;  which  is  undesirable, 
and  indeed  impossible,  for  the  divine  nature.  In  another  place 

he  says,  God  troubles  himself  no  more  about  men  than  about 
«  *  K 

monkeys  and  flies.  Celsus  thus  denies  the  whole  idea  of  reve- 
lation, now  in  pantheistic  style,  now  in  the  levity  of  Epicurean 
deism ;  and  thereby  at  the  same  time  abandons  the  ground  of 
the  popular  heathen  religion.  In  his  view  Christianity  has  no 
rational  foundation  at  all,  but  is  supported  by  the  imaginary 
terrors  of  future  punishment.  Particularly  offensive  to  him 
are  the  promises  of  the  gospel  to  the  poor  and  miserable,  and 
the  doctrines  of  forgiveness  of  sins  and  regeneration,  and  of 
the  resurrection  of  the  body.  This  last  he  scoffingly  calls  a 
hope  of  worms,  but  not  of  rational  souls.  The  appeal  to  the 
omnipotence  of  God,  he  thinks,  does  not  help  the  matter,  be- 

i  ttdv&Jip,  panthera,  here,  and  in  the  Talmud,  where  Jesus  is  likewise  called 
fcOHJ?  J5  *BT  is  used,  like  the  Latin  lupa,  as  a  type  of  ravenous  lost  hence 
as  a  symbolical  name  for  /w^p.  So  Nitzsch  and  Baur,  But  Keim  (p,  12) 
takes  it  as  a  designation  of  the  wild  rapacious  (KO.V  dqp&v)  Roman  soldier. 
The  mother  of  Jesus  was,  according  to  the  Jewish  informant  of  Celsus,  a 
poor  seamstress,  and  engaged  to  a  rtarpenter,  who  plunged  her  into  disgrac* 
and  misery  when  he  found  out  her  infidelity. 


92  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

cause  God  can  do  nothing  improper  and  unnatural.  He  re* 
preaches  the  Christians  with  •  ignorance,  credulity,  obstinacy, 
innovation,  division,  and  sectarianism,  which  they  inherited 
mostly  from  their  fathers,  the  Jews,  They  are  all  uncultivated, 
mean,  superstitious  people,  mechanics,  slaves,  women,  and  chil- 
dren. The  great  mass  of  them  he  regarded  as  unquestionably 
deceived.  But  where  there  are  deceived,  there  must  be  also 
deceivers ;  and  this  leads  us  to  the  last  result  of  this  polemical 
sophistry.  Celsus  declared  the  first  disciples  of  Jesus  to  be 
deceivers  of  the  worst  kind;  a  band  of  sorcerers,  who  fabri- 
cated and  circulated  the  miraculous  stories  of  the  Gospels, 
particularly  that  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus;  but  betrayed 
themselves  by  contradictions.  The  originator  of  the  imposture, 
however,  is  Jesus  himself,  who  learned  that  magical  art  in 
Egypt,  and  afterwards  made  a  great  noise  with  it  in  his  native 
country. 

But  here,  this  philosophical  and  critical  sophistry  virtually 
acknowledges  its  bankruptcy.  The  hypothesis  of  deception  is 
the  very  last  one  to  offer  in  explanation  of  a  phenomenon  so 
important  as  Christianity  was  even  in  that  day.  The  greater 
and  more  permanent  the  deception,  the  more  mysterious  and 
unaccountable  it  must  appear  to  reason. 

Chrysostom  made  the  truthful  remark,  that  Celsus  bears  wit- 
ness to  the  antiquity  of  the  apostolic  writings.  This  heathen 
assailant,  who  lived  almost  within  hailing  distance  of  St.  John, 
incidentally  gives  us  an  abridgement  of  the  history  of  Christ  as 
related  by  the  Gospels,  and  this  furnishes  strong  weagons  against 
modern  infidels,  who  would  represent  this  history  as  a  later  in- 
vention. "  I  know  everything,"  he  says ;  "  we  have  had  it  all 
from  your  own  books,  and  need  no  other  testimony ;  ye  slay 
yourselves  with  your  own  sword."  He  refers  to  the  Gospels  of 
Matthew,  Luke,  and  John,  and  makes  upon  the  whole  about 
eighty  allusions  to,  or  quotations  from,  the  New  Testament.  He 
takes  notice  of  Christ's  birth  from  a  virgin  in  a  small  village 
of  Judaea,  the  adoration  of  the  wise  men  from  the  East,  the 


8  33.  LUCIAN.  93 

slaughter  of  the  infants  by  order  of  Herod,  the  flight  to  Egypt, 
where  he  supposed  Christ  learned  the  charms  of  magicians,  his 
residence  in  Nazareth,  his  baptism  and  the  descent  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  the  shape  of  a  dove  and  the  voice  from  heaven,  the 
election  of  disciples,  his  friendship  with  publicans  and  other  low 
people,  his  supposed  cures  of  the  lame  and  the  blind,  and  raising 
of  the  dead,  the  betrayal  of  Judas,  the  denial  of  Peter,  the 
principal  circumstances  in  the  history  of  the  passion  and  cruci- 
fixion, also  the  resurrection  of  Christ.1 

It  is  true  he  perverts  or  abuses  most  of  these  facts;  but  ac- 
cording to  his  own  showing  they  were  then  generally  and  had 
always  been  believed  by  the  Christians.  He  alludes  to  some  of 
the  principal  doctrines  of  the  Christians,  to  their  private  assem- 
blies for  worship,  to  the  office  of  presbyters.  He  omits  the 
grosser  charges  of  immorality,  which  he  probably  disowned  as 
absurd  and  incredible. 

In  view  of  all  these  admissions  we  may  here,  with  Lardner, 
apply  Samson's  riddle :  "  Out  of  the  eater  came  forth  meat,  and 
out  of  the  strong  came  forth  sweetness."  2 

§  33.  LuGian. 

Edd.  of  Lucian's  works  by  Eemsterhuis  and  Eeiz  (1743  sqq.),  Jacolitz 
(1836-39),  Dindorf(184Q  and  1858),  Be&Jcer  (1853),  Franc.  Fritzsche 
(1860-'69).  The  pseudo-Lucianic  dialogue  -PhUopatris  (^Uirarp^ 
loving  one's  country,  patriot)  in  which  the  Christians  are  ridiculed 
and  condemned  as  enemies  of  the  Roman  empire,  is  of  a  much  later 
date,  probably  from  the  reign  of  Julian  the  Apostate  (363).  See 
Gesner :  De  cetate  et  auctore  Philopatridis,  Jen.  1714 

1  Keim  (Geschickte  Jesu  von  Nazara,  I.  22)  says  of  Celsus:  "  Von  der  Jung- 
fraugeburt  bis  sum  Jammer  des  Todes  bei  JEssig  und  Galk,  bis  zu  den  Wundern 
des  Todes  und  der  Auferstehung  hat  er  uns&re  JSvangelien  verfolgt,  und  anderen 
Qudlen,  wdche  mm  Theft  heute  noch  fliessen,  hat  er  den  Glauben  an  die  Hats- 
liMeit  Jem  und  an  die  Sundhaftigkeit  seiner  Junger  abgewonnen."  Comp.  Kevm?* 
monograph  on  Cfefews,  pp.  219-231.  On  the  bearing  of  his  testimony  on  the 
genuineness  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  see  vol.  I.  p.  708. 

3  Judges  xiv.  14.  Comp.  Lardner*s  Works,  vol.  VII.  pp.  210-270.  Dr. 
Doddridge  and  Dr.  Leland  made  good  use  of  Celsus  against  the  Deists  of  the 
last  century.  He  may  with  still  greater  effect  be  turned  against  the  more 
radical  theories  of  Strauss  and  Eenan.  For  Keim's  estimate,  see  his 


94  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

JACOB  :  CharakteristiJc  Lucians.    Hamburg  1822. 

G.  BERNAYS  :  Lucian  und  die  Oyniker.    Berlin,  1879. 

Comp.  KEIM  :  Cekus,  143-151 ;  ED.  ZELLEB  :  Alexander  und  Peregrinus^ 
in  the  "  Deutsche  Kundschau,"  for  Jan.  1877 ;  HENBY  COTTEBILL  : 
Peregrinus  Proteus  (Edinb.  1879);  AD.  HABNACK  in  Herzog  (ed, 
TL),  VIII.  772-779;  and  the  Lit.  quoted  in  \  28.. 

In  the  same  period  the  rhetorician  Lucian  (born  at  Samosata 
in  Syria  about  120,  died  in  Egypt  or  Greece  before  200). 
the  Voltaire  of  Grecian  literature,  attacked  the  Christian  re- 
ligion with  the  same  light  weapons  of  wit  and  ridicule,  with 
which,  in  his  numerous  elegantly  written  works,  he  assailed  the 
old  popular  faith  and  worship,  the  mystic  fanaticism  imported 
from  the  East,  the  vulgar  life  of  the  Stoics  and  Cynics  of  that 
day,  and  most  of  the  existing  manners  and  customs  of  the  dis- 
tracted period  of  the  empire.  An  Epicurean,  worldling,  and 
infidel,  as  he  was,  could  see  in  Christianity  only  one  of  the  many 
vagaries  and  follies  of  mankind;  in  the  miracles,  only  jugglery; 
in  the  belief  of  immortality,  an  empty  dream ;  and  in  the  con- 
tempt of  death  and  the  brotherly  love  of  the  Christians,  to 
which  he  was  constrained  to  testify,  a  silly  enthusiasm. 

Thus  he  represents  the  matter  in  an  historical  romance  on  the 
life  and  death  of  Peregrinus  Proteus,  a  contemporary  Cynic 
philosopher,  whom  he  makes  the  basis  of  a  satire  upon  Chris- 
tianity, and  especially  upon  Cynicism.  Peregrinus  is  here  pre- 
sented as  a  perfectly  contemptible  man,  who,  after  the  meanest 
and  grossest  crimes,  adultery,  sodomy,  and  parricide,  joins  the 
credulous  Christians  in  Palestine,  cunningly  imposes  on  them, 
soon  rises  to  the  highest  repute  among  them,  and,  becoming  one 
of  the  confessors  in  prison,  is  loaded  with  presents  by  them,  in 
fact  almost  worshipped  as  a  god,  but  is  afterwards  excommuni- 
cated for  eating  some  forbidden  food  (probably  meat  of  the 
idolatrous  sacrifices) ;  then  casts  himself  into  the  arms  of  the 
Cynics,  travels  about  everywhere,  in  the  filthiest  style  of  that 
sect;  and  at  last  about  the  year  165,  in  frantic  thirst  for  fame, 
plunges  into  the  flames  of  a  funeral  pile  before  the  assembled 
populace  of  the  town  of  Olympia,  for  the  triumph  of  philosophy 


?  34.  NEOPLATOA.oitf.  95 

This  fiction  of  the  self-burning  was  no  doubt  meant  for  a  parody 
on  the  Christian  martyrdom,  perhaps  with  special  reference  to 
Polycarp,  who  a  few  years  before  had  suffered  death  by  fire  at 
Smyrna  (155).1 

Lucian  treated  the  Christians  rather  with  a  compassionate 
smile,  than  with  hatred.  He  nowhere  urges  persecution.  He 
never  calls  Christ  an  impostor,  as  Celsus  does,  but  a  "  crucified 
sophist/3  a  term  which  he  uses  as  often  in  a  good  sense  as  in  the 
bad.  But  then,  in  the  end,  both  the  Christian  and  the  heathen 
religions  amount,  in  his  view,  to  imposture ;  only,  in  his  Epicu- 
rean indifferentism,  he  considers  it  not  worth  the  trouble  to  trace 
such  phenomena  to  their  ultimate  ground,  and  attempt  a  philoso- 
phical explanation.2 

The  merely  negative  position  of  this  clever  mocker  of  all 
religions  injured  heathenism  more  than  Christianity,  but  could 
not  be  long  maintained  against  either ;  the  religious  element  is 
far  too  deeply  seated  in  the  essence  of  human  nature.  Epicure- 
anism and  scepticism  made  way,  in  their  turns,  for  Platonism, 
and  for  faith  or  superstition.  Heathenism  made  a  vigorous 
effort  to  regenerate  itself,  in  order  to  hold  its  ground  against  the 
steady  advance  of  Christianity.  But  the  old  religion  itself  could 
not  help  feeling  more  and  more  the  silent  influence  of  the  new. 

§  34.  Neo-Platonim. 
I.  SOURCES. 

PLOTINTJS  :  Opera  Omnia,  ed.  Oxf.  1835,  3  vols. ;  ed.  KirchhoiF,  Lips. 
1856  j  ed.  Didot,  Par.  1856 ;  H.  F.  Muller,  Berlin  1878-80. 

PORPHYBIUS:  Kara  Xpiariavuv  Uyoi  (fragments  collected  in  Holstein: 
Dissert,  de  vita  et  scriptis  Porphyr.  Rom.  1630).  His  biographies  of 
Pythagoras,  Plotinus,  and  other  works  were  ed.  by  A.  Nauck,  1860. 

1  Harnack,  Z.  c.  denies  a  reference  to  Polycarp. 

2  Berneys  (I  c.  p.  43)    characterizes   Lucian    very   unfavorably:    "em 
anscheinend  nieht  sehr  gluddisher  Adwcat,  ist  er  ohne  ernste  Studien  ins  Literaten- 
tJvrni  ubergegangen;  unwissend  und  kichtfertig  tragt  er  kdigiich  eine  niMistische 
Oede  in  Besmg  auf  atte  rdigiosen  und  metaphysiscJien  Fragen  zur  Scliau  und  reisst 
alles  db  wrkehrt  und  lacherlisJi  herunter.'1    Barneys  thinks  that  •  the  Peregrinus 
Proteus  is  not  directed  against  the  Christians,  but  against  the  Cynic  philoso- 
phers, and  more  particularly  against  the  then  still  living  Theagenes. 


96  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 


HlEEOCLES:    Adyoi  QdaMj&ete  irpbf  Xptariavoijc  (fragments    in   Euseb.; 

Contra   Hieroct.    lib.,   and   probably  also   in   Macarius   Magnes: 

"A7roKp<n/cof  #  Moyoyev/A,  Par.  1876). 
PHILOSTEATUS  :    De,  Vita  Apollo  till  Tyanensis  libri  octo  (Greek   and 

Latin),  Venet,  1501  ;  ed.  Waterman,  Par.  1840  ;  cd.  Kayscr,  Zurich, 

1853,  1870.    Also  in  German,  French  and  English  transitions 

II.  WOEKS. 

VOGT  :  Neuplatotmmm  u.  Christemhum.    Berl.  1836. 

BITTEE  :  Gesv/L  der  Philos:  vol  4th,  1834  (in  English  by  Morrison,  Oo~. 

1838). 
NEANDEE  :  Ueber  das  neunte  Buch  w  der  zweiten  Enneade  des  Plotinus. 

1843.  (vid.  Neander's  Wissenschaftl.    Abhandlungen,  published  by 

Jacobi,  Berl.  1851,  p.  22  sqq.) 
ULLMANN:  Einflus  des  Chmtent.iums  auf  Porphyrius,  in  "Stud.  u.Krit." 

1832. 

KIECHITEII:  Die  Philosophic  des  Plotin.    Halle,  1854. 
F.  CHE.  BAUE  :   Apollonius  von  Tyana  u.  C/ir-istiw.    Tiib.  1832,  republ. 

by  Ed.  Zeller,  iu  Drd  Abhandhuigen  zur  Gesch.  der  altm  Philosophic 

u.  ihres  Vcrh.  mm  Ohristenthum.    Leipzig,  1876,  pp.  1-227. 
JOHN  1L.  NEWMAN  :  Apollonius  Tyanceus.  Loud.  1849  (Encycl.  Metropol. 
"     Vol.  X.,  pp.  619-644). 
A.  CHASSAI?G  :  Ap.  de  T.,  sa  vie,  ses  voyages,  sesprodigcs,  etc.    Paris,  1802, 

Translation  from  the  Greek,  with  explanatory  notes. 
H.  KELLNEE  :  Porphyrius  und  scin  Verhaltniss  zum  Chri&tenthum,  in  the 

Tubingen  "Theol.  Quartalschrift,"  1865.    No.  I. 
ALBEET  EEVILLE  :  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  the  Pagan  Christ  of  the  third 

century,  translated  from  the  French.    Lond.  1866. 
K.  MONKEBEEG:  Apollonius  v.  Tyana.    Hamb.  1877. 
FE.  UEBEEWEG:   History  of  Philosophy  (Eng.  transl.  N.  York,  1871), 

vol.  I.  232-259. 
ED.  ZELLEE  :  Philosophic  der  Griechen,  III.  419  sqq. 

More  earnest  and  dignified,  but  for  this  very  reason  more 
lasting  and  dangerous,  was  the  opposition  which  proceeded 
directly  and  indirectly  from  Neo-Platonism.  This  system  pre- 
sents the  last  phase,  the  evening  red,  so  to  speak,  of  the  Grecian 
philosophy;  a  fruitless  effort  of  dying  heathenism  to  revive 
itself  against  the  irresistible  progress  of  Christianity  in  its 
freshness  and  vigor.  It  was  a  pantheistic  eclecticism  and  a 
philosophico-religious  syncretism,  which  sought  to  reconcile 
Platonic  anS  Aristotelian  philosophy  with  Oriental  religion  and 
iheosophy,  polytheism  with  monotheism,  superstition  with  cul- 


2  34.  NEOPLATONISM.  97 

fcure,  and  to  hold,  as  with  convulsive  grasp,  the  old  popular 
religion  in  a  refined  and  idealized  form.  Some  scattered  Chris- 
tian idaas  also  were  unconsciously  let  in;  Christianity  already 
nlled  the  atmosphere  of  the  age  too  much,  to  be  wholly  shut 
out.  As  might  be  expected,  this  compound  of  philosophy  and 
religion  was  an  extravagant,  fantastic,  heterogeneous  affair,  like 
its  contemporary,  Gnosticism,  which  differed  from  it  by  formally 
recognising  Christianity  in  its  syncretism.  Most  of  the  Neo- 
Platonists,  Jamblichus  in  particular,  were  as  much  hierophants 
and  theurgists  as  philosophers,  devoted  themselves  to  divination 
and  magic,  and  boasted  of  divine  inspirations  and  visions. 
Their  literature  is  not  an  original,  healthy  natural  product,  but 
an  abnormal  after-growth. 

In  a  time  of  inward  distraction  and  dissolution  the  human 
mind  hunts  up  old  and  obsolete  systems  and  notions,  or  resorts 
to  magical  and  theurgic  arts.  Superstition  follows  on  the  heels 
of  unbelief,  and  atheism  often  stands  closely  connected  with  the 
fear  of  ghosts  and  the  worship  of  demons.  The  enlightened 
emperor  Augustus  was  troubled,  if  he  put  on  his  left  shoe  first 
in  the  morning,  instead  of  the  right;  and  the  accomplished 
elder  Pliny  wore  amulets  as  protection  from  thunder  and 
lightning.  In  their  day  the  long-forgotten  Pythagoreanism 
was  conjured  from  the  grave  and  idealized.  Sorcerers  like 
Simon  Magus,  Elymas,  Alexander  of  Abonoteichos,  and  Apol- 
lonius  of  Tyana  (d.  A.  D.  96),  found  great  favor  even  with  the 
higher  classes,  who  laughed  at  the  fables  of  the  gods.  Men 
turned  wishfully  to  the  past,  epecially  to  the  mysterious  East, 
the  land  of  primitive  wisdom  and  religion.  The  Syrian  eultua 
was  sought  out ;  and  all  sorts  of  religions,  all  the  sense  and  all 
the  nonsense  of  antiquity  found  a  rendezvous  in  Home.  Even 
a  succession  of  Roman  emperors,  from  Septimius  Severus,  at 
the  close  of  the  second  century,  to  Alexander  Severus,  embraced 
this  religious  syncretism,  which,  instead  of  supporting  the  old 
Roman  state  religion,  helped  to  undermine  it.1 

1  The  oldeM  apostle  of  this  storage  medley  of  Hellenic,  Persian,  Chaldean, 
Vol.  II,     *. 


98  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-811. 

After  the  beginning  of  the  third  century  this  tendency  found 
philosophical  expression  and  took  a  reformatory  turn  in  Neo- 
Platonism.  The  magic  power,  which  was  thought  able  to 
reanimate  all  these  various  elements  and  reduce  them  to  har- 
mony, and  to  put  deep  meaning  into  the  old  mythology,  was  the 
philosophy  of  the  divine  Plato;  which  in  truth  possessed 
essentially  a  mystical  character,  and  was  used  also  by  learned 
Jews,  like  Philo,  and  by  Christians,  like  Origen,  in  their 
idealizing  efforts  and  their  arbitrary  allegorical  expositions  of 
offensive  passages  of  the  Bible.  In  this  view  we  may  find 
among  heathen  writers  a  sort  of  forerunner  of  the  Neo- 
Platonists  in  the  pious  and  noble-minded  Platonist,  Plutarch 
of  Bceotia  (d.  120),  who  likewise  saw  a  deeper  sense  in  the 
myths  of  the  popular  polytheistic  faith,  and  in  general,  in  his 
comparative  biographies  and  his  admirable  moral  treatises,  looks 
at  the  fairest  and  noblest  side  of  the  Grseco-Boman  antiquity, 
but  often  wanders  off  into  the  trackless  regions  of  fancy. 

The  proper  founder  of  Neo-Platonism  was  Ammonius  Sa<jcas, 
"  of  Alexandria,  who  was  born  of  Christian  parents,  but  aposta- 
tized, and  died  in  the  year  243.  His  more  distinguished  pupil, 
Plotinus,  also  an  Egyptian  (204r-269),  developed  the  Neo- 
Platonic  ideas  in  systematic  form,  and  gave  them  firm  foothold 
and  wide  currency,  particularly  in  Rome,  where  he  taught 
philosophy.  The  system  was  propagated  by  his  pupil  Porphyry 
of  Tyre  (d.  304),  who  likewise  taught  in  Rome,  by  Jamblichus 

and  Egyptian  mysteries  in  Borne  was  Nigidius  Figulus,  who  belonged  to  the 
strictest  section  of  the  aristocracy,  and  filled  the  praetorship  in  696  A-  U. 
(58  B.  c.)  He  foretold  the  father  of  the  subsequent  emperor  Augustus  on  the 
very  day  of  his  birth  his  future  greatness.  The  system  was  consecrated  by 
the  name  of  Pythagoras,  the  primeval  sage  of  Italian  birth,  the  miracle- 
worker  and  necromancer.  The  new  and  old  wisdom  made  a  profound  im- 
pression on  men  of  the  highest  rank  and  greatest  learning,  who  took  part  in 
the  citation  of  spirits,  as  in  the  nineteenth  century  spirit-rapping  and  table- 
moving  exercised  for  a  while  a  similar  charm.  "These  last  attempts  to  save 
the  Roman  theology,  like  the  similar  efforts  of  Cato  in  the  field  of  politics, 
produce  at  once  a  comical  and  a  melancholy  impression.  We  may  smile  at 
the  creed  and  its  propagators,  but  still  it  is  a  grave  matter  when  all  men  begin 
to  addict  themselves  to  absurdity."  Th.  Mommsen,  History  of  Rome,  vol.  IV 
p*  563  (Dickson's  translation,  Ix)n<J.  1867,1 


g  34.  NEO-PLATONISM.  99 

of  Chalcis  in  Coelo-Syria  (d.  333),  and  by  Proclus  of  Con- 
stantinople (d.  485).  It  supplanted  the  popular  religion  among 
the  educated  classes  of  later  heathendom,  and  held  its  ground 
until  the  end  of  the  fifth  century,  when  it  perished  of  its  own 
internal  falsehood  and  contradictions. 

Prom  its  love  for  the  ideal,  the  supernatural,  and  the  mys- 
tical, this  system,  like  the  original  Platonism,  might  become  for 
many  philosophical  minds  a  bridge  to  faith;  and  so  it  was  even  to 
St.  Augustin,  whom  it  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  scepticism, 
and  filled  with  a  burning  thirst  for  truth  and  wisdom.  But  it 
could  also  work  against  Christianity.  Neo-Platonism  was,  in 
fact,  a  direct  attempt  of  the  more  intelligent  and  earnest 
heathenism  to  rally  all  its  nobler  energies,  especially  the  forces 
of  Hellenic  philosophy  and  Oriental  mysticism,  and  to  found  a 
universal  religion,  a  pagan  counterpart  to  the  Christian.  Plo- 
tinus,  in  his  opposition  to  Gnosticism,  assailed  also,  though  not 
expressly,  the  Christian  element  it  contained.  On  their  syn 
cretistic  principles  the  Neo-Platonists  could  indeed  reverence 
Christ  as  a  great  sage  and  a  hero  of  virtue,  but  not  as  the  Son 
of  God.  They  ranked  the  wise  men  of  heathendom  with  him. 
The  emperor  Alexander  Severus  (d.  235)  gave  Orpheus  and 
Apollonius  of  Tyana  a  place  in  his  lararium  by  the  side  of  the 
bust  of  Jesus, 

The  rhetorician  Pliilostratus,  the  elder,  about  the  year 
220,  at  the  request  of  Julia  Domna,  the  wife  of  Septimius 
Severus,  and  a  zealous  patron  of  the  reform  of  paganism, 
idealized  the  life  of  the  pagan  magician  and  soothsayer  Apol- 
lonius, of  the  Pythagorean  school,  and  made  him  out  an  ascetic 
saint,  a  divinely  inspired  philosopher,  a  religious  reformer  and 
worker  of  miracles,  with  the  purpose,  as  is  generally  assumed, 
though  without  direct  evidence,  of  holding  him  up  as  a  rival  of 
Christ  with  equal  claims  to  the  worship  of  men.1 

1  PMlostratus  himself  gives  no  intimation  of  such  design  on  his  part,  and 
simply  states  that  he  was  requested  by  the  empress  Julia  Domna  (A.D.  217),  to 
draw  up  a  biography  of  Apollonius  from  certain  memoranda  of  Damis,  one  of 
his  Mends  and  followers.  The  name  of  Christ  is  never  mentioned  by  him; 


100  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

The  points  of  resemblance  are  chiefly  these :  Jesus  was  the 
Son  of  God,  Apollonius  the  son  of  Jupiter ;  the  birth  of  Christ 
was  celebrated  by  the  appearance  of  angels,  that  of  Apollonius 
by  a  flash  of  lightning;  Christ  raised  the  daughter  of  Jairus, 
Apollonius  a  young  Eoman  maiden,  from  the  dead ;  Christ  cast 
out  demons,  Apollonius  did  the  same ;  Christ  rose  from  the 
dead,  Apollonius  appeared  after  his  death.  Apollonius  is  made 
to  combine  also  several  characteristics  of  the  apostles,  as  the 
miraculous  gift  of  tongues,  for  he  understood  all  the  languages 
of  the  world.  Like  St.  Paul,  he  received  his  earlier  education  at 
Tarsus,  labored  at  Antioch,  Ephesus,  and  other  cities,  and  was  per- 
secuted by  Nero.  Like  the  early  Christians,  he  was  falsely  ac- 
cused of  sacrificing  children  with  certain  mysterioas  ceremonies.1 

With  the  same  secret  polemical  aim  Porphyry  and  Jamblichus 
embellished  the  life  of  Pythagoras,  and  set  him  forth  as  the 
highest  model  of  wisdom,  even  a  divine  being  incarnate,  a 
Christ  of  heathenism. 

These  various  attempts  to  Christianize  paganism  were  of 
course  as  abortive  as  so  many  attempts  to  galvanize  a  corpse. 
They  made  no  impression  upon  their  age,  much  less  upon  ages 
following.  They  were  indirect  arguments  in  favor  of  Chris- 
tianity: they  proved  the  internal  decay  of  the  false,  and  the 
irresistible  progress  of  the  true  religion,  which  began  to  mould 
the  spirit  of  the  age  and  to  affect  public  opinion  outside  of  the 
church.  By  inventing  false  characters  in  imitation  of  Christ 

nor  does  he  allude  to  the  Gospels,  except  in  one  instance,  where  he  uses  the 
same  phrase  as  the  daemon  in  St.  Luke  (viii.  28) :  «'  I  beseech  thee,  torment 
me  not  (tf  pe  paaavlcw.).  Vita  Apott.  IV.  25.  Bishop  Samuel  Parker,  in  * 
work  on  the  Divine  Authority  of  the  Christian  Religion  (1681),  Lardner, 
Neander  (K  G.  I.  298),  and  J.  S.  Watson  (in  a  review  of  Re*ville's  Apoll  of 
T.,  in  the  "Contemporary  Review"  for  1867,  p.  199  ff.),  deny  the  commonly 
received  opinion,  first  maintained  by  Bishop  Daniel  Hust,  and  defended  by 
Baur,  Newman,  and  Re*ville,  that  Philostratus  intended  to  draw  a  parallel 
between  his  hero  and  Christ.  The  resemblance  is  studied  and  fictitious,  and 
rt  is  certain  that  at  a  later  date  Hierocles  vainly  endeavored  to  lower  the 
dignity  of  Christ  by  raising  this  Pythagorean  adventurer  as  portrayed  by 
Philostratus,  to  a  level  with  the  eternal  Son  of  God. 

1  Comp.  the  account  of  the  resemblance  by  Baur,  /.  c.  pp.  138  sqq. 


i  3d.  PORPHYRY  AND  QIEROCLES.  101 

they  indirectly  conceded  to  the  historical  Christ  his  claim  to  the 
admiration  and  praise  of  mankind. 

§  35.  Porphyry  and  Hierodes. 
See  the  Lit.  in  {  34. 

One  of  the  leading  Neo-Platonists  made  a  direct  attack  upon 
Christianity,  and  was,  in  the  eyes  of  the  church  fathers,  its 
bitterest  and  most  dangerous  enemy.  Towards  the  end  of  the 
third  century  Porphyry  wrote  an  extended  work  against  the 
Christians,  in  fifteen  books,  which  called  forth  numerous 
refutations  from  the  most  eminent  church  teachers  of  the  time, 
particularly  from  Methodius  of  Tyre,  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  and 
Apollinaris  of  Laodicea.  In  448  all  the  copies  were  burned  by 
order  of  the  emperors  Theodosius  II.  and  Valentinian  IIL,  and 
we  know  the  work  now  only  from  fragments  in  the  fathers. 

Porphyry  attacked  especially  the  sacred  books  of  the  Chris- 
tians, with  more  knowledge  than  Celsus.  He  endeavored,  with 
keen  criticism,  to  point  out  the  contradictions  between  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  New,  and  among  the  apostles  themselves  ; 
and  thus  to  refute  the  divinity  of  their  writings.  He 
represented  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  as  vatidnia  post  euentoi, 
and  censured  the  allegorical  interpretation  of  Origen,  by  which 
transcendental  mysteries  were  foisted  into  the  writings  of 
Moses,  contrary  to  their  clear  sense.  He  took  advantage,  above 
all,  of  the  collision  between  Paul  and  Peter  at  Antioch  (Gal. 
2:  11),  to  reproach  the  former  with  a  contentious  spirit,  the 
latter  with  error,  and  to  infer  from  the  whole,  that  the  doctrine 
of  such  apostles  must  rest  on  lies  and  frauds.  Even  Jesus 
himself  he  charged  with  equivocation  and  inconsistency,  on 
account  of  his  conduct  in  John  7  :  8  compared  with  verse  14. 

Still  Porphyry  would  not  wholly  reject  Christianity.  Like 
many  rationalists  of  more  recent  times,  he  distinguished  the 
original  pure  doctrine  of  Jesus  from  the  second-handed, 
adulterated  doctrine  of  the  apostles.  In  another  work1  on  the 


1  ILepl  rsfr  £K  fayiw  ftfovoftac.    Fabricius,  Mosheim,  Neander,  and  othen^ 
freat  the  work  as  genuine,  but  Lardner  denies  it  to  Porphyry. 


102  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A,  D.  100-311. 

"  Philosophy  of  Oracles,"  often  quoted  by  Eusebius,  and  also 
by  Augustin,1  he  says,  we  must  not  calumniate  Christ,  who  was 
most  eminent  for  piety,  but  only  pity  those  who  worship  him 
as  God.  •"  That  pious  soul,  exalted  to  heaven,  is  become,  by  a 
sort  of  fate,  an  occasion  of  delusion  to  those  souls  from  whom 
fortune  withholds  the  gifts  of  the  gods  and  the  knowledge  of 
the  immortal  Zeus."  Still  more  remarkable  in  this  view  is  a 
letter  to  his  wife  Maxcella,  which  A.  Mai  published  at  Milan  in 
1816,  in  the  unfounded  opinion  that  Marcella  was  a  Christian. 
In  the  course  of  this  letter  Porphyry  remarks,  that  what  is 
born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh;  that  by  faith,  love,  and  hope  we 
raise  ourselves  to  the  Deity;  that  evil  is  the  fault  of  man ;  that 
God  is  holy ;  that  the  most  acceptable  sacrifice  to  him  is  a  pure 
heart;  that  the  wise  man  is  at  once  a  temple  of  God  and  a 
priest  in  that  temple.  For  these  and  other  such  evidently 
Christian. ideas  and  phrases  he  no  doubt  had  a  sense  of  his  own, 
which  materially  differed  from  their  proper  scriptural  meaning. 
But  such  things  show  how  Christianity  in  that  day  exerted, 
even  upon  its  opponents,  a  power,  to  which  heathenism  was 
forced  to  yield  an  unwilling  assent. 

The  last  literary  antagonist  of  Christianity  in  our  period  is 
Hierocles,  who,  while  governor  of  Bythynia,  and  afterwards  of 
Alexandria  under  Diocletian,  persecuted  that  religion  also  with 
the  sword,  and  exposed  Christian  maidens  to  a  worse  fate  than 
death.  His  "Truth-loving  Words  to  the  Christians"  has  been 
destroyed,  like  Porphyry's  work,  by  the  mistaken  zeal  of  Chris- 
tian emperors,  and  is  known  to  us  only  through  the  answer  of 
Eusebius  of  Csesarea.2  He  appears  to  have  merely  repeated  the 
objections  of  Celsus  and  Porphyry,  and  to  have  drawn  a 

*  De  (Mt.  Dei,  I.  XIX.  c.  22,  23;  comp.  also  Eusebius,  Dmonstr.  Evmg. 

m.  6. 

2  To  this  may  be  added  the  extracts  from  an  unnamed  heathen  philosopher 
(probably  Hierocles  or  Porphyrius)  in  the  apologetic  work  of  Macarius  Magnes 
(about  400),  which  was  discovered  at  Athens  in  1867,  and  published  by  Blon- 
del,  Paris  1876.  See  L.  Duchesne,  De  Marcario  Magneto  et  smptis  efus,  Pan 
1877,  and  Zockler  in  Herzog,  ed.  II.  vol.  IX.  160. 


\  36.  OBJECTIONS  TO  CHRISTIANITY.  103 

comparison  between  Christ  and  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  which 
resulted  in  favor  of  the  latter.  The  Christians,  says  he,  con- 
sider Jesus  a  God,  on  account  of  some  insignificant  miracles 
falsely  colored  up  by  his  apostles;  but  the  heathens  far  more 
justly  declare  the  greater  wonder-worker  Apollonius,  as  well  as 
an  Aristeas  and  a  Pythagoras,  simply  a  favorite  of  the  gods  and 
a  benefactor  of  men. 

§  36.  Summary  of  the  Objections  to  Christianity. 

In  general  the  leading  arguments  of  the  Judaism  and 
heathenism  of  this  period  against  the  new  religion  are  the 
following : 

1.  Against  Christ:   his  illegitimate  birth;  his  association 
with  poor,  unlettered  fishermen,  and  rude  publicans :  his  fora* 
of  a-  servant,  and  his  ignominious  death.    But  the  opposition 
to  him  gradually  ceased.    While  Celsus  called  him  a  downright 
impostor,  the  Syncretists  and  Neo-Platonists  were  disposed  to 
regard  him  as  at  least  a  distinguished  sage. 

2.  Against  Christianity:  its  novelty;  its  barbarian  origin; 
its  want  of  a  national  basis;  the  alleged  absurdity  of  some 
of  its  facts  and  doctrines,  particularly  of  regeneration  and  the 
resurrection;  contradictions  between  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments, among  the  Gospels,  and  between  Paul  and  Peter;  the 
demand  for  a  blind,  irrational  faith. 

3.  Against  the  Christians:  atheism,  or  hatred  of  the  gods; 
the  worship  of  a  crucified  malefactor;  poverty,  and  want  of 
culture  and  standing;  desire  of  innovation;  division  and  sec- 
tarianism; want  of  patriotism;  gloomy  seriousness ;  credulity; 
superstition,  and  fanaticism.     Sometimes  they  were  charged 
even  with  unnatural  crimes,  like  those  related  in  the  pagan 
mythology  of  Oedipus^  and  his   mother  Jocaste  (concubitus 
Oedipodei],  and   of  Thyestes  ,and  Atreus  (epulce  Thyestece). 
Perhaps    some  Gnostic  'sects    ran    into  scandalous  excesses; 
but  as  against  the  Christians  in  general  this  charge  was  so 
clearly  unfounded,  that  it  is  not  noticed  even  by  Celsus  and 


104  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Lucian.  The  senseless  accusation,  that  they  worshipped  an 
ass's  head,  may  have  arisen,  as  Tertullian  already  intimates,1 
from  a  story  of  Tacitus,  respecting  some  Jews,  who  were  once 
directed  by  a  wild  ass  to  fresh  water,  and  thus  relieved  from 
the  torture  of  thirst;  and  it  is  worth  mentioning,  only  to  show 
how  passionate  and  blind  was  the  opposition  with  which  Chris- 
tianity in  this  period  of  persecution  had  to  contend. 

§  37.  The  Apologetic  Literature  of  Christianity. 
Comp.  Lit.  in  ?  1  and  12. 

L  The  sources  are  all  the  writings  of  the  Apologists  of  the  second  and 
third  centuries ;  particularly  JUSTIN  M. :  Apologia  I.  and  //.  / 
TERTTTLL.:  Apologetics;  MINUCITJS  FELIX:  Octavius;  ORIGEN: 
Contra  Celsum  («ard  K&aou)  libr.  VIII.  ARISTIDIS,  Philosophi 
Atheniensis,  Sermones  duo,  Venetiis  1878.  (From  an  Armenian 
translation).  Complete  editions  of  the  Apologists :  Apologg.  Christ. 
Opp.  ed.  Prud.  Maranus,  Par.  1742;  Corpus  Apologetarum  Chris- 
tianorum  sosculi  secundi,  ed.  Th.  Otto,  Jenae,  1847  sqq.  ed.  III. 
1876  sqq.  A  new  ed.  by  0.  v.  Q-ebhardt  and  E.  Schwartz,  begun  1888. 

II.  FABRICIUS:  Delectus  argumentorum  et  Syllabus  scriptorum,  qui  verita- 
tem  reL  Christ,  asseruerunt.  Hamb.  1725. 

TZSCHTRITER:   Geschichte  d&r  Apologetik.    Lpz.  1805  (unfinished). 

G.  H.  VAST  SANDEN  :  Qesch.  der  ApoL  translated  from  Dutch  into  German 
by  Quack  and  Binder.  Stuttg.  1846.  2  vols. 

SEMISCH:  Justin  der  Mart.    Bresl.  1840.    II.  56-225. 

W.  B.  COLTON:  The  Evidences  of  Christianity  as  exhibited  in  the  writings 
of  its  Apologists  down  to  Augustine  (Hulsean  Prize  Essay,  1852), 
republ.  in  Boston,  1854. 

KAEL  WERNER  (E.  C.) :  Geschichte  der  apologetischen  und  polemischen 
Literatur  der  christl.  Theologie.  Schaffhausen,  1861-'65.  5  vols. 
(vol.  I.  belongs  here). 

JAMES  DONALDSON:  A  Critical  History  of  Christian  Literature  and 
Doctrine  from  the  Death  of  the  Apostles  to  the  Mcene  Council.  Lon- 
don, 1864-66.  3  vols. 

ADOLF  HARNACK:  Die  Ueberlieferung  der  Oriechischen  Apologeten  des 
ssweiten  Jahrhunderts  in  der  alten  J&rche  und  im  Mittelalter.  Band  I. 
Heft  1  and  2.  Leipz.  1882. 

These  assaults  of  argument  and  calumny  called  forth  in  the 
second  century  the  Christian  apologetic  literature,  the  vindica- 

1  ApoL  c.  16 :  "Somnwstis  caput  axininum  esse  deam  nostnm.    Ham  CorndiM* 

'etc. 


?37.  THE  APOLOGETIC  L1TEJJATUKE.  1UD 

tion  of  Christianity  by  the  pen,  against  the  Jewish  zealot,  the 
Grecian  philosopher,  and  the  Roman  statesman.  The  Christians 
were  indeed  from  the  first  "  ready  always  to  give  an  answer  to 
every  man  that  asked  them  a  reason  of  the  hope  that  was  in 
them."  But  when  heathenism  took  the  field  against  them  not 
only  with  fire  and  sword,  but  with  argument  and  slander 
besides,  they  had  to  add  to  their  simple  practical  testimony  a 
theoretical  self-defence..  The  Christian  apology  against  non- 
Christian  opponents,  and  the  controversial  efforts  against 
Christian  errorists,  are  the  two  oldest  branches  of  theological 
science. 

The  apologetic  literature  began  to  appear  under  the  reign 
of  Hadrian,  and  continued  to  grow  till  the  end  of  our  period. 
Most  of  the  church  teachers  took  part  in  this  labor  of  their  day. 
The  first  apologies,  by  Quadratus,  bishop  of  Athens,  Aristides, 
philosopher  of  Athens,  and  Aristo  of  Pell  a,  which  were  ad- 
dressed to  the  emperor  Hadriau,  and  the  later  works  of  Melito 
of  Sardis,  Claudius  Apollinaris  of  Hierapolis,  and  Miltiades,  who 
lived  under  Marcus  Aurelius,  were  either  entirely  lost,  or  pre- 
served only  in  scattered  notices  of  Eusebius.  But  some  in- 
teresting fragments  of  Melito  and  Aristides  have  been  recently 
discovered.1  More  valuable  are  the  apologetical  works  of  the 
Greek  philosopher  and  martyr,  Justin  (d.  166),  which  we  pos- 
sess in  full.  After  him  come,  in  the  Greek  church,  Tatian, 
Athenagoras,  Theophilus  of  Antioch,  and  Hermias  in  the  last 
half  of  the  second  century,  and  Origen,  the  ablest  of  all,  in  the 
first  half  of  the  third. 

The  most  important  Latin  apologists  are  Tertullian  (d.  about 
220),  Minucius  Felix  (d.  between  220  and  230 ;  according  to 
some,  between  161  and  200),  the  later  Arnobius  and  Lactantius, 
all  of  North  Africa. 

Here  at  once  appears  the  characteristic  difference  between  the 


*  See  on  the  works  of  these  Apologists,  lost  and  partly  recovered,  Harnack, 
1.  c.  pp.  100  sqq. ;  240  sqq. ;  and  Kenan,  L'egl  chret.  p.  40  sqq.  We  shall  refei 
to  them  in  the  chapter  on  Christian  literature. 


106  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Greek  and  the  Latin  minds.  The  Greek  apologies  are  more 
learned  and  philosophical,  the  Latin  more  practical  and  juridical 
in  their  matter  and  style.  The  former  labor  to  prove  the  truth 
of  Christianity  and  its  adaptedness  to  the  intellectual  wants  of 
man ;  the  latter  plead  for  its  legal  right  to  exist,  and  exhibit 
mainly  its  moral  excellency  and  salutary  effect  upon  society. 
The  Latin  also  are  in  general  more  rigidly  opposed  to  heathen- 
ism, while  the  Greek  recognke  in  the  Grecian  philosophy  a 
certain  affinity  to  the  Christian  religion. 

The  apologies  were  addressed  in  some  cases  to  the  emperors 
(Hadrian,  Antoninus  Pius,  Marcus  Aurelius)  or  the  provincial 
governors;  in  others,  to  the  intelligent  public.  Their  first 
object  was  to  soften  the  temper  of  the  authorities  and  people 
towards  Christianity  and  its  professors  by  refuting  the  false 
charges  against  them.  It  may  be  doubtful  whether  they  ever 
reached  the  hands  of  the  emperors;  at  all  events  the  persecu- 
tion continued.1  Conversion  commonly  proceeds  from  the  heart 
and  will,  not  from  the  understanding  and  from  knowledge, 
Xo  doubt,  however,  these  writings  contributed  to  dissipate 
prejudice  among  honest  and  susceptible  heathens,  to  spread 
more  favorable  views  of  the  new  religion,  and  to  infuse  a  spirit 
of  humanity  into  the  spirit  of  the  age,  the  systems  of  moral 
philosophy  and  the  legislation  of  the  Antonines. 

Yet  the  chief  service  of  this  literature  was  to  strengthen 
believers  and  to  advance  theological  knowledge.  It  brought  the 
church  to  a  deeper  and  clearer  sense  of  the  peculiar  nature  of 
the  Christian  religion,  and  prepared  her  thenceforth  to  vindicate 
it  before  the  tribunal  of  reason  and  philosophy;  whilst  Judaism 
and  heathenism  proved  themselves  powerless  in  the  combat, 
and  were  driven  to  the  weapons  of  falsehood  and  vituperation. 
.The  sophisms  and  mockeries  of  a  Celsus  and  a  Lucian  have 
none  but  a  historical  interest;  the  Apologies  of  Justin  and  the 
Apologeticus  of  Tertullian,  rich  with  indestructible  truth  and 

^rosins,  however, 'relates  in  his  Hist.  vii.  14,  that  Justin  M.,  ty  his 
Apology,  maile  the  eoiperor  Antoninus  Pius  "  b&nignum  erga  Christiana*" 


2  38.  AEGUMENT  AGAINST  JUDAISM.  107 

glowing  piety,  are  read  with  pleasure  and  edification  to  this 
day. 

The  apologists  do  not  confine  themselves  to  the  defensive, 
but  carry  the  war  aggressively  into  the  territory  of  Judaism 
and  heathenism.  They  complete  their  work  by  positively  de- 
monstrating that  Christianity  is  the  divine  religion,  and  the  only 
true  religion  for  all  mankind. 

§  38,  The  Argument  against  Judaism. 

In  regard  to  the  controversy  with  Judaism,  we  have  two 
principal  sources  :  the  Dialogue  of  Justin  Martyr  with  the  Jew 
Trypho,1  based,  it  appears,  on  real  interviews  of  Justin  with 
Trypho;  and  Tertullian's  work  against  the  Jews.2  Another 
work  from  the  first  half  of  the  second  century  by  Aristo  of 
Pella,  entitled  "A  Disputation  of  Jason  and  Papiscus  con- 
cerning Christ,"  is  lost. 3  It  was  known  to  Celsus  who  speaks 
contemptuously  of  it  on  account  of  its  allegorical  interpretation. 
Origen  deems  it  useful  for  ordinary  readers,  though  not  calcu- 
lated to  make  much  impression  on  scholars.  It  was  intended 
to  show  the  fulfillment  of  the  old  prophecies  in  Christ,  and  ends 
with  the  conviction  of  the  Jew  Papiscus  aud  his  baptism  by 
Jason.  The  author  was  a  Jewish  Christian  of  Pella,  the  city 
of  refuge  for  the  Christians  of  Jerusalem  before  the  desti  tiction. 

I.  The  DEFENSIVE  apology  answered  the  Jewish  objections 
thus : 

(1)  Against  the  charge,  that  Christianity  is  an  apostasy  from 
the  Jewish  religion,  it  was  held,  that  the  Mosaic  law,  as  far  as 
it  relates  to  outward  rites  and  ceremonies  was  only  a  temporary 
institution  for  the  Jewish  natiou  foreshadowing  the  substance 
of  Christianity,  while  its  moral  precepts  as  contained  in  the 
Decalogue  were  kept  in  their  deepest  spiritual  sense  only  by 

1  AfAhopoc  Trpbc  Tpftywvo  'lovdalov. 

J  Adv&rsus  Judceoft.    Also  Cyprian's  Testimonia  adv.  Judaos. 

s  'Idawvof  KCU  UaTTiaKM  avrdoy'ta  irepi  Xptarov.  Comp,  the  discussion  of  Har- 
nack,  I  c.  pp.  115-130.  He  assigns  the  book  to  A.  D.  135  or  soon  after.  It 
disappeared  in  the  seventh  century. 


108  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Christians ;  that  the  Old  Testament  itself  points  to  its  own 
dissolution  and  the  establislinient  of  a  new  covenant;1  that 
Abraham  was  justified  before  he  was  circumcised,  and  women, 
who  could  not  be  circumcised,  were  yet  saved. 

(2)  Against  the  asertion,  that  the  servant-form  of  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  and  his  death  by  the  cross,  contradicted  the  Old 
Testament  idea  of  the  Messiah,  it  was  urged,  that  the  appear- 
ance of  the  Messiah  is  to  be  regarded  as  twofold,  first,  in  the 
form  of  a  servant,  afterwards  in  glory;  and  that  the  brazen 
serpent  in  the  wilderness,  and  the  prophecies  of  David  in 
Psalm  22,  of  Isaiah  in  ch.  53,  and  Zech.  13,  themselves  point 
to  the  sufferings  of  Christ  as  his  way  to  glory. 

(3)  To  the  objection,  that  the  divinity  of  Jesus  contradicts 
the  unify  of  God  and  is  blasphemy,  it  was  replied,  that  the 
Christians  believe  likewise  in  only  one  God;   that  the  Old 
Testament  itself  makes  a  distinction  in  the  divine  nature ;  that 
the  plural  expression:  "Let  us  make  man/'2  the  appearance 
of  the  three  men  at  Mamre,3  of  whom  one  was  confessedly 
God/  yet  distinct  from  the  Creator,5  indicate  this ;  and  that  all 
theophanies  (which  in  Justin's  view  are  as  many  cliristophanies), 
and  the  Messianic  Psalms,6  which  ascribe  divine  dignity  to  the 
Messiah,  show  the  same. 

II.  The  AGGRESSIVE  apology  or  polemic  theology  urges  as 
evidence  against  Judaism : 

(1)  First  and  mainly  that  the  prophecies  and  types  of  the  Old 
Testament  are  fulfilled  in  Jesus  Christ  and  his  church.  Justin 
finds  all  the  outlines  of  the  gospel  history  predicted  in  the  Old 
Testament :  the  Davidic  descent  of  Jesus,  for  example,  in  Isa. 
11:  1;  the  birth  from  a  virgin  in  7:  14;  the  birth  at 
Bethlehem  in  Micah  5 :  1 ;  the  flight  into  Egypt  in  Hosea 
11 :  1  (rather  than  Ps.  22 :  10  ?) ;  the  appearance  of  the  Baptist 

lla.  51:  4  sqq.;  55:  3  sqq.;  Jer.  31:  31  sqq. 
'Gen.  1:  26;  comp.  3:  22.  "          s  Gen.  18:  1  sqq. 

*  21 :  12.  s  19 .  24. 

8  Ps.  110:  1  sqq.;  45:  7  sqq.;  72:  2-19,  and  others. 


\  39.  DEFENSE  AGAINST  HEATHENISM,  109 

in  Is.  40 :  1-17 ;  Mai.  4 :  5 ;  the  heavenly  voice  at  the  baptism 
of  Jesus  in  Ps.  2 :  7 ;  the  temptation  in  the  wilderness  under 
the  type  of  Jacob's  wrestling  in  Gen.  32 :  24  sqq; ;  the  miracles 
of  our  Lord  in  Is.  35:5;  his  sufferings  and  the  several  cir- 
cumstances of  his  crucifixion  in  Is.  53  and  Ps.  22.  In  this 
effort,  however,  Justin  wanders  also,  according  to  the  taste  of 
his  uncritical  age,  into  arbitrary  fancies  and  allegorical  conceits ; 
as  when  he  makes  the  two  goats,  of  which  one  carried  away  the 
sins  into  the  wilderness,  and  the  other  was  sacrificed,  typos  of 
the  first  and  second  advents  of  Christ ;  and  sees  in  the  twelve 
bells  on  the  robe  of  the  high  priest  a  type  of  the  twelve 
apostles,  whose  sound  goes  forth  into  all  the  world.1 

(2)  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  in  which  Judaism,  accord- 
ing to  the  express  prediction  of  Jesus,  was  condemned  by  God 
himself,  and  Christianity  was  gloriously  vindicated.  Here  the 
Jewish  priest  and  historian  Josephus,  who  wrote  from  personal 
observation  a  graphic  description  of  this  tragedy,  had  to  furnish 
a  powerful  historical  argument  against  his  own  religion  and  for 
the  truth  of  Christianity.  Tertullian  sums  up  the  prophetic 
predictions  of  the  calamities  which  have  befallen  the  Jews  for 
rejecting  Christ,  "  the  sense  of  the  Scriptures  harmonizing  with 
the  events." 2 

§  39.  The  Defense  against  Heathenism. 

I.  The  various  OBJECTIONS  and  ACCUSATIONS  of  the  heathens, 
which  we  have  collected  in  §  36,  were  founded  for  the  most 
part  on  ignorance  or  hatred,  and  in  many  cases  contradicted 
themselves. 

(1)  The  attack  upon  the  miraculous  in  the  evangelical  history 
the  apologists  could  meet  by  pointing  to  Hie  similar  element  in 
the  heathen  mythology;  of  course  proposing  this  merely  in  the 
way  of  argumentum  ad  hominem,  to  deprive  the  opposition  of 
the,  right  to  object.  For  the  credibility  of  the  miraculous 
accounts  in  the  Gospels,  particularly  that  of  the  resurrection  of 

-  Ps.  19 :  4 ;  comp-  Bom.  10 :  18.  2  Adv.  Jud.  c.  13. 


HO  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

Jesus,  Origen  appealed  to  the  integrity  and  piety  of  the  nar- 
rators, to  the  publicity  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  and  to  the  effects 
of  that  event. 

(2)  The  novelty  and  late  appearance  of  Christianity  were 
justified  by  the  need  of  historical  preparation  in  which  the 
human  race  should  be  divinely  trained  for  Christ;  but  more 
frequently  it  was  urged  also,  that  Christianity  existed  in  the 
counsel  of  God  from  eternity,  and  had  its  unconscious  votaries, 
especially  among  the  pious  Jews,  long  before  the  advent  of 
Christ.  By  claiming  the  Mosaic  records,  the  apologists  had 
greatly  the  advantage  as  regards  antiquity  over  any  form  of 
paganism,  and  could  carry  their  religion,  in  its  preparatory  state, 
even  beyond  the  flood  and  up  to  the  very  gates  of  paradise. 
Justin  and  Tatian  make  great  account  of  the  fact  that  Moses  is 
much  older  than  the  Greek  philosophers,  poets,  and  legislators. 
Athenagoras  turns  the  tables,  and  shows  that  the  very  names 
of  the  heathen  gods  are  modern,  and  their  statues  creations  of 
yesterday.  Clement  of  Alexandria  calls  the  Greek  philosophers 
thieves  and  robbers,  because  they  stole  certain  portions  of  truth 
from  the  Hebrew  prophets  and  adulterated  them.  Tcrtul- 
lian,  Minucius  Felix  and  others  raise  the  same  charge  of  pla- 


(3)  The  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  so  peculiarly 
offensive  to  the  heathen  and  Gnostic  understanding,  was  sup- 
ported, as  to  its  possibility,  by  reference  to  the  omnipotence  of 
God,  and  to  the  creation  of  the  world  and  of  man  ;  and  its 
propriety  and  reasonableness  were  argued  from  the  divine 
image  in  man,  from  the  high  destiny  of  the  body  to  be  the 
temple  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  from  its  intimate  connection 
with  the  soul,  as  well  as  from  the  righteousness  and  goodness 
of  God.  The  argument  fropi  analogy  was  also  very  generally 
used,  but  often  without  proper  discrimination.  Thus,  Theophilus 
alludes  to  the  decline  and  return  of  the  seasons,  the  alternation? 
of  day  and  night,  the  renewal  of  the  waning  and  waxing  moon, 
the  growth  of  seeds  and  fruits.  Tertullian  expresses  his  sur- 
that  anybody  should  deny  the  possibility  and  probability 


239.   DEFENSE  AGAINST  HEATHENISM.  Ill 

of  the  resurrection  in  view  of  the  mystery  of  our  birth  and  the 
daily  occurrences  of  surrounding  nature.  "All  things/7  he 
says,  "  are  preserved  by  dissolution,  renewed  by  perishing ;  and 

shall  man the  lord  of  all  this  universe  of  creatures, 

which  die  and  rise  again,  himself  die  only  to  perish  for- 
ever?"1 

(4)  The  charge  of  immoral  conduct  and  secret  vice  the  apolo- 
gists might  repel  with  just  indignation,  since  the  New  Testament 
contains  the  purest  and  noblest  morality,  and  the  general  con- 
duct of  the  Christians  compared  most  favorably  with  that  of 
the  heathens.  "Shame!  shame!"  they  justly  cried;  "to  roll 
upon  the  innocent  what  you  are  openly  guilty  of,  and  what 
belongs  to  you  and  your  gods  I"  Origen  says  in  the  preface  to 
the  first  book  against  Celsus :  "  When  false  witness  was  brought 
against  our  blessed  Saviour,  the  spotless  Jesus,  he  held  his 
peace,  and  when  he  was  accused,  returned  no  answer,  being 
fully  persuaded  that  the  tenor  of  his  life  and  conduct 
among  the  Jews  was  the  best  apology  that  could  possibly  be 

made  in  his  behalf. And  even  now  he  preserves  the 

same  silence,  and  makes  no  other  answer  than  the  unblemished 
lives  of  his  sincere  followers ;  they  are  his  most  cheerful  and  , 
successful  advocates,  and  have  so  loud  a  voice  that  they  drown/ 
the  clamors  of  the  most  zealous  and  bigoted  adversaries." 

II.  To  their  defence  the  Christians,  with  the  rising  conscious- 
ness of  victory,  added  direct  ARGUMENTS  AGAINST  HEATHEN- 
ISM, which  were  practically  sustained  by  its  dissolution  in  the 
following  period. 

(1)  The  popular  religion  of  the  heathens,  particularly  the 
doctrine  of  the  gods,  is  unworthy,  contradictory,  absurd,  im- 
moral, and  pernicious.  The  apologists  and  most  of  the  early 
church  teachers  looked  upon  the  heathen  gods  not  as  mere 
imaginations  or  personified  powers  of  nature  or  deifications  of 

i  Apohg.  c.  43.  Comp.  his  special  tract  De  Resurrections  Carnis,  c.  12,  where 
he  defends  the  doctrine  more  fully  against  the  Gnostics  and  their  radical  mis- 
conception of  the  nature  and  import  of  the  body. 


112  SECONfi  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

distinguished  men,  but  as  demons  or  fallen  angels.  They  took 
this  view  from  the  Septuagint  version  of  Ps.  96  :  5,1  and  from 
the  immorality  of  those  deities,  which  was  charged  to  demons 
(even  sexual  intercourse  with  fair  daughters  of  men,  according 
to  Gen.  6  :  2). 

"  What  sad  fates,"  says  Minucius  Felix,  "what  lies,  ridiculous 
things,  and  weaknesses  we  read  of  the  pretended  gods !  Even 
their  form,  how  pitiable  it  is !  Vulcan  limps ;  Mercury  has 
wings  to  his  feet ;  Pan  is  hoofed ;  Saturn  in  fetters ;  and  Janus 
has  two  faces,  as  if  he  walked  backwards Some- 
times Hercules  is  a  hostler,  Apollo  a  coyr-herd,  and  Neptune, 
Laomedon's  mason,  cheated  of  his  wages.  There  we  have  the 
thunder  of  Jove  and  the  arms  of  Aeneas  forged  on  the  same 
anvil  (as  if  the  heavens  and  the  thunder  and  lightning  did  not 
exist  before  Jove  was  born  in  Crete) ;  the  adultery  of  Mars  and 
Venus ;  the  lewdness  of  Jupiter  with  Ganymede,  all  of  which 
were  invented  for  the  gods  to  authorize  men  in  their  wicked- 
ness." "Which  of  the  poets,"  asks  Tertullian,  "does  not 
calumniate  your  gods  ?  One  sets  Apollo  to  keep  sheep ;  another 
hires  out  Neptune  to  build  a  wall ;  Pindar  declares  JEsculapius 
was  deservedly  scathed  for  his  avarice  in  exercising  the  art  of 
medicine  to  a  bad  purpose ;  whilst  the  writers  of  tragedy  and 
comedy  alike,  take  for  their  subjects  the  crimes  or  the  miseries 
of  the  deities.  Nor  are  the  philosophers  behindhand  in  this 
respect.  Out  of  pure  contempt,  they  would  swear  by  an  oak,  a 
goat,  a  dog.  Diogenes  turned  Hercules  into  ridicule ;  and  the 
Roman  Cynic  Varro  introduces  three  hundred  Joves  without 
heads."  From  the  stage  abuser  the  sarcastic  African  father 
selects,  partly  from  his  own  former  observation,  those  of  Diana 
being  flogged,  the  reading  of  Jupiter's  will  after  his  decease, 
and  the  three  half-starved  Herculesses !  Justin  brings  up  the 
infanticide  of  Saturn,  the  parricide,  the  anger,  and  the  adultery 
of  Jupiter,  the  drunkenness  of  Bacchus,  the  voluptuousness  of 
Venus,  and  he  appeals  to  the  judgment  of  the  better  heathen^ 

3  HdvTtf  ol  $sol  TOV  s&v&v  6aip6vta.    Comp.  1  Cor.  10 :  20. 


g39.  DEFENSE  AGAINST  HEATHENISM.  113 

who  were  ashamed  of  these  scandalous  histories  of  the  gods;  to 
Plato,  for  example,  who  for  this  reason  banishes  Homer  from 
his  ideal  State.  Those  myths,  which ,  had  some  resemblance  to 
the  Old  Testament  prophecies  or  the  gospel  history,  Justin,  re- 
gards as  caricatures  of  the  truth,  framed  by  demons  by  abuse 
of  Scripture.  The  story  of  Bacchus,  for  instance,  rests  in  his 
fanciful  view,  on  Gen.  49 :  11  sq. ;  the  myth  of  the  birth  of 
Perseus  from  a  virgin,  on  Is.  7:14;  that  of  the  wandering  of 
Hercules,  on  Ps.  19 :  6;  the  fiction  of  the  miracles  of  Esculapius 
on  Is.  35 :  1  sqq. 

Origen  asks  Celsus,  why  it  is  that  he  can  discover  profound 
mysteries  in  those  strange  and  senseless  accidents,  which  have 
befallen  his  gods  and  goddesses,  showing  them  to  be  polluted 
with  crimes  and  doing  many  shameful  things;  whilst  Moses, 
who  says  nothing  derogatory  to  the  character  of  God,  angel,  or 
man,  is  treated  as  an  impostor.  He  challenges  any  one  to  com- 
pare Moses  and  his  laws  with  the  best  Greek  writers;  and  yet 
Moses  was  as  far  inferior  to  Christ,  as  he  was  superior  to  the 
greatest  of  heathen  sages  and  legislators. 

(2)  The  Greek  philosophy,  which  rises  above  the  popular 
belief,  is  not  suited  to  the  masses,  cannot  meet  $ie  religious 
wants,  and    confutes    itself   by   its    manifold    contradictions. 
Socrates,    the    wisest    of  all    the    philosophers,    himself  ac- 
knowledged that  he  knew  nothing.     On  divine  and  human 
things  Justin  finds  the  philosophers  at  variance  among  them- 
selves }  with  Thales  water  is  the  ultimate  principle  of  all  things ; 
with  Anaximander,  air ;  with  Heraclitus,  fire ;  with  Pythagoras, 
number.     Even  Plato  not  seldom  contradicts  himself;   now 
supposing  three  fundamental  causes  (God,  matter,  and*  ideas), 
now  four  (adding  the  world-soul) ;  now  he  considers  matter  as 
unbegotten,  now  as  begotten ;  at  one  time  he  ascribes  substan- 
tiality to  ideas,  atf  another  makes  thefn  mere  forms  of  thought, 
etc.    Who,  then,  he  concludes,  would  intrust  to  the  philosophers 
the  salvation  of  his  soul  ? 

(3)  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Greek  apologists  recognized 
also  elements  of  truth  in  the  Hellenic  literature,  especially  in 

Vol.  II.    8 


114  SECOND  PERIOD.    A?D.  100-311. 

the  Platonic  and  Stoic  philosophy,  and  saw  in  them,  as  in  th« 
law  and  the  prophecies  of  Judaism,  a  preparation  of  the  way 
for  Christianity.  Justin. attributes  all  the  good  in  heathenism 
to  the  divine  Logos,  who,  even  before  his  incarnation,  scattered 
the  seeds  of-  truth  (hence  the  name  "  Logos  spermaticos"),  and 
incited  susceptible  spirits  to  a  holy  walk.  Thus  there  were 
Christians  before  Christianity;  and  among  these  he  expressly 
reckons  Socrates  and  Heraclitus.1  Besides,  he  supposed  that 
Pythagoras,  Hato,  and  other  educated  Greeks,  in  their  journeys 
to  the  East,  became  acquainted  with  the  Old  Testament  writ- 
ings, and  drew  from  them  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  God, 
and  other  like  truths,  though  they  in  various  ways  misunder- 
stood them,  and  adulterated  them  with  pagan  errors.  This 
view  of  a  certain  affinity  between  the  Grecian  philosophy  and 
Christianity,  as  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  new  religion, 
was  afterwards  further  developed  by  the  Alexandrian  fathers, 
Clement  and  Origen.2 

The  Latin  fathers  speak  less  favorably  of  the  Greek  philo- 
sophy; yet  even  Augustin  acknowledges  that  the  Platonists 
approach  so  nearly  to  Christian  truth  that  with  a  change  of 
some  expressions  and  sentences  they  would  be  true  Christians 
(in  theory).3 

§  40.  The  Positive  Apology. 

The  Christian  apology  completed  itself  in  the  positive  de- 
monstration of  the  divinity  of  the  new  religion ;  which  was  'at 

the  same  time  the  best  refutation  of  both  the  old  ones.    As 

* 

1  Also  the  Stoics  and  some  of  the  poets  as  far  as  their  moral  teaching  went, 
comp.  Just.  Apol.  II.  c.  8,  and  13. 

*  See  the  introduction  of  E.  Spiess  to  his  Logos  spermatikos,  Leipz.  1871. 

*De  Vera  Religwne  IV.  7:  "Proxime  Pfatonici  a  writate  Christiana  absmt 
vd  veri  Christiani  sunt  panels  mutatis  verbis  atque  sententifa"  Retract.  I.  13 : 
"Res  ipsa  quae  nunc  rdigio  Christiana  nuncupaturj  erat  apud  antiquoe,  net  defuti 
ab  initio  generis  humani,  quousque  Christus  veniret  in  carnem,  unde  vera  rdigio, 
qua&jam  erat,  coepit  appellari  Christiana.''  Comp,  Lactantius,  De  Faha  Edigime, 
I.  5 ;  De  Vita  Beata,  VII.  7 ;  Minucius  Fel.,  Oetav.  20. 


§40.  THE  POSITIVE  APOLOGY.  115 

early  as  this  period  the  strongest  historical  and  philosophical 
arguments  for  Christianity  were  brought  forward,  or  at  least 
indicated,  though  in  connection1  with  many  untenable  adjuncts. 

1.  The  great  argument,  not  only  with  Jews,  but  with 
heathens  also,  was  the  PEOPHECIES  ;  since  the  knowledge  of 
future  events  can  come  only  from  God.  The  first  appeal  of 
the  apologists  was,  of  course,  to  the  prophetic  writings  of  the 
Old  Testament,  in  which  they  found,  by  a  very  liberal  interpre- 
tation, every  event  of  the  gospel  history  and  every  lineament  of 
our  Saviour's  character  and  work.  In  addition  to  the  Scriptures, 
even  such  fathers  as  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and,  with  more 
caution,  Origen,  Eusebius,  St.  Jerome,  and  St.  Augustin,  em- 
ployed also,  without  hesitation,  apocryphal  prophecies,  especially 
the  Sibylline  oracles,  a  medley  of  ancient  heathen,  Jewish,  and 
in  part  Christian  fictions,  about  a  golden  age,  the  coming  of 
Christ,  the  fortunes  of  Home,  and  the  end  of  the  world.1  And 
indeed,  this  was  not  all  error  and  pious  fraud.  Through  all 
heathenism  there  runs,  in  truth,  a  dim,  unconscious  presenti- 
ment and  longing  hope  of  Christianity.  Think  of  the  fourth 
Eclogue  of  Virgil,  with  its  predictions  of  the  "  virgo "  and 
"nova  progenies"  from  heaven,  and  the  "putr"  with  whom, 
after  the  blotting  out  of  sin  and  the  killing  of  the  serpent,  a 
golden  age  of  peace  was  to  begin.  For  this  reason  Virgil  was 
the  favorite  poet  of  the  Latin  church  during  the  middle  ages, 
and  figures  prominently  in  Dante's  Divina  Comedia  as  his  guide 
through  the  dreary  regions  of  the  Inferno  and  Purgatorio  to  the 
very  gates  of  Paradise.  Another  pseudo-prophetic  book  used 


1  Comp.  DB.  FRIEDUEB  :  Die  SibyUinischen  Weissagungen  wllsttimdig  gesam- 
mdt>  mit  kriti&chem,  Commentare  und  metrischer  Ueb&rseteung.  Leipz.  1852. 
Another  edition  with  a  Latin  version  by  C.  AIEXANDRE,  Paris  1841,  second 
ed.  1869,  2  torn.  We  have  at  present  twelve  books  of  XMW°i  cfivMtaKoi  in 
Greek  hexameters,  and  w>me  fragments.  They  have  been  critically  discussed 
by  Blondel  (1649),  .Bleek  (1819),  Volkmann  (1853),  Ewald  (1858),  Liiben 
U875),  Renss,  and  Schurer  (see  lit.  in  his  N.  T.  Ztitgesch.  p.  513).  The  Sibyl 
figures  in  the  Dies  Irae  alongside  with  King  David  (teste  David  cum  Sibylla),  as 
prophesying  the  day  of  judgment. 


116  SECOND  PEB10D.    A.D.  100-311. 

by  the  fathers  (Tertulliao,  Origen,.  and  apparently  Jerome)  is 
"The  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,"  written  by  a 
Jewish  Christian  between  A.  D.  ItX)  and  120.  It  puts  into  the 
mouth  of  the  twelve  sons  of  Jacob  farewell  addresses  and  pre- 
dictions of  the  coming  of  Christ,  his  death  and  resurrection, 
of  baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  the  rejection  of  the  gospel 
by  the  Jews,  and  the  preaching  of  Paul,  the  great  apostle  of  the 
Gentiles,  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  end  of  the 
world.1 

2.  The  TYPES.    These,  too,  were  found  not  only  in  the  Old 
Testament,  but  in  the  whole  range  of  nature.     Justin  saw 
everywhere,  in  the  tree  of  life  in  Eden,  in  Jacob's  ladder,  in 
the  rods  of  Moses  and  Aaron,  nay,  in  every  sailing  ship,  in  the 
wave-cutting  oar,  in  the  plough,  in  the  human  countenance, 
in  the  human  form  with  outstretched  arms,  in  banners  and 
trophies — the  sacred  form  of  the  cross,  and  thus  a  prefiguration 
of  the  mystery  of  redemption  through  the  crucifixion  of  the 
Lord.2 

3.  The  MIRACLES  of  Jesus  and  the  apostles,  with  those  which 
continued  to  be  wronght  in  the*name  of  Jesus,  according  to  the 
express  testimony  of  the  fathers,  by  their  contemporaries.    But 
as  the  heathens  also  appealed  to  miraculous  deeds  and  appear- 
ances in  favor  of  their  religion,  Justin,  Arnobius,  and  par- 
ticularly Origen,  fixed  certain  criteria,  such  as  the  moral  purity 
of  the  worker,  and  his  intention  to  glorify  God  and  benefit 
man,  for  distinguishing  the  true  miracles  from  Satanic  juggleries. 
"  There  might  have  been  some  ground,"  says  Origen,  "  for  the 
comparison  which  Celsus  makes  between  Jesus  and  certain 

1  Best  edition  by  ROBERT  SINKER  from  the  Cambridge  MS.,  Cambridge, 
1869,  and  an  Appendix,  1879 ;  an  English  translation  by  Sinker,  in  the  "Ante- 
Kicene  Library,"  vol.  XXII.  (Edinb.  1871).  Discussions  by  Nitzsch  (1810), 
Ritschl  (1850  and  1857),  Vorstmann  (1857),  Kayser  (1851),  Liicke  (1852), 
Dillmann  (in  Herzog,  first  ed.  XII.  315),  Lightfoot  (1875),  and  Warfield  (in 
"Presbyt.  Beview,"  1ST.  York,  January,  1880,  on  the  apologetical  value  of  the 
work  for  its  allusions  to  various  books  of  the  N.  T.). 

3  Apol  I.  c.  55;  Did.  c.  Tryph.  c.  91. 


§  40.  THE  POSITIVE  APOLOGY.  11? 

wandering  magicians,  if  there  had  appeared  in  the  latter  the 
slightest  tendency  to  beget  in  persons  a  true  fear  of  God,  and  so 
to  regulate  their  actions  in  prospect  of  the  day  of  judgment. 
But  they  attempt  nothing  of  the  sort.  Yea,  they  themselves 
are  guilty  of  the  most  grievous  crimes;  whereas  the  Saviour 
would  have  his  hearers  to  be  convinced  by  the  native  beauty 
of  religion  and  the  holy  lives  of  its  teachers,  rather  than  by 
even  the  miracles  they  wrought." 

The  subject  of  j>o^-apostolic  miracles  is  surrounded  by  much 
greater  difficulties  in  the  absence  of  inspired  testimony,  and  in 
most  cases  even  of  ordinary  immediate  witnesses.  There  is  an 
antecedent  probability  that  the  power  of  working  miracles  was 
not  suddenly  and  abruptly,  but  gradually  withdrawn,  as  the 
necessity  of  such  outward  and  extraordinary  attestation  of  the 
divine  origin  of  Christianity  diminished  and  gave  way  to  the 
natural  operation  of  truth  and  moral  suasion.  Hence  St. 
Augustin,  in  the  fourth  century,  says :  "  Since  the  establishment 
of  the  church  God  does  not  wish  to  perpetuate  miracles  even  to 
our  day,  lest  the  mind  should  put  its  trust  in  visible  signs,  or 
grow  cold  at  the  sight  of  common  marvels."  *  But  it  is  im- 
possible to  fix  the  precise  termination,  either  at  the  death  of  the 
apostles,  or  their  immediate  disciples,  or  the  conversion  of  the 
Koman  empire,  or  the  extinction  of  the  Arian  heresy,  or  any 
subsequent  era,  and  to  sift  carefully  in  each  particular  case  the 
truth  from  legendary  fiction. 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  genuine  writings  of  the  ante- 
Nicene  church  are  more  free  from  miraculous  and  superstitious 
elements  than  the  aima.!**  of  the  Nicene  age  and  the  middle 


*  On  the  other  hand,  however,  St.  Augustin  lent  the  authority  of  his  name 
to  some  of  the  most  incredible  miracles  of  his  age,  wrought  hy  the  bones  of 
St.  Stephen,  and  even  of  Gervasius  and  Protasius.  Comp.  the  treatise  of  Fr- 
Nitzsch  (jun.)  on  Augustin's  Doctrine  of  Miracles,  Berlin  1865 ;  and  on  the 
general  subject  J.  H.  Newman's  Two  Essays  on  Biblical  and  Ecdesiastical 
Miracles,  third  ed.  London  1873 ;  and  J.  B.  Mozley's  Bampton  Lectures  On 
Miracles.  Oxford  and  Lond.  (1865  J,  fifth  ed.  1880,  Lect.  VIIL  which  treats 
of  false  miracles. 


118  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311, 

ages.  The  history  of  monasticism  teems  with  miracles  even 
greater  than  those  of  the  New  Testament.  Most  of  the  state- 
ments of  the  apologists  are  couched  in  general  terms,  and  refei 
to  extraordinary  cures  from  demoniacal  possession  (which  pro- 
bably includes,  in  the  language  of  that  age,  cases  of  madness, 
deep  melancholy,  and  epilepsy)  and  other  diseases,  by  the  in- 
vocation of  the  name  of  Jesus.1  Justin  Martyr  speaks  of  such 
cures  as  a  frequent  occurrence  in  Eome  and  all  over  the  world, 
and  Origen  appeals  to  his  own  personal  observation,  but  speaks 
in  another  place  of  the  growing  scarcity  of  miracles,  so  as  to 
suggest  the  gradual  cessation  theory  as  held  by  Dr.  Neander, 
Bishop  Kaye,  and  others.  Tertullian  attributes  many  if  not 
most  of  the  conversions  of  his  day  to  supernatural  dreams  and 
visions,  as  does  also  Origen,  although  with  more  caution.  But 
in  such  psychological  phenomena  it  is  exceedingly  difficult  to 
draw  the  line  of  demarcation  between  natural  and  supernatural 
causes,  and  between  providential  interpositions  and  miracles 
proper.  The  strongest  passage  on  this  subject  is  found  in 
Irenaeus,  who,  in  contending  against  the  heretics,  mentions, 
besides  prophecies  and  miraculous  cures  of  demoniacs,  even  the 
raising  of  the  dead  among  contemporary  events  taking  place  in 
the  Catholic  church;2  but  he  specifies  no  particular  case  or 
name;  and  it  should  be  remembered  also,  that  his  youth  still 
bordered  almost  on  the  Johannean  age. 

4.  The  MORAL  effect  of  Christianity  upon  the  heart  and  life 
of  its  professors.  The  Christian  religion  has  not  only  taught 
the  purest  and  sublimest  code  of  morals  ever  known  among 
men,  but  actually  exhibited  it  in  the  life,  sufferings,  and*  death 
of  its  founder  and  true  followers.  All  the  apologists,  from  the 
author  of  the  Epistle  to  Diognetus  down  to  Origen,  Cyprian, 
and  Augustin,  bring  out  in  strong  colors  the  infinite  superiority 

-tfceyare  analogous  to  the  "  faith-cures,"  real  or  pretended,  of  our  own  age. . 
*  Adv.  Haer.  II.  31,  g  2,  and  II.  32,  §  4:   TE<ty  ft  Kal  veicpol  wtpfyffav  /col 
iraptftetvov  otv  faiv  Imvois  heat.    These  two  passages  can  hardly  be  explained, 
with  Henmann  and  Meander,  as  referring  merely  to  cases  of  apparent  death. 


2  40.  THE  POSITIVE  APOLOGY.  119 

of  Christian  ethics  over  the  heathen,  and  their  testimony  is  fully 
corroborated  by  the  practical  fruits  of  the  church,  as  \ve  shall 
have  -occasion  more  fully  to  show  in  another  chapter.  "  They 
think  us  senseless,"  says  Justin,  "because  we  worship  this 
Christ,  who  was  crucified  under  Pontius  Pilate,  as  God  next  to 
the  Father.  But  they  would  not  say  so,  if  thfey  knew  the  mys- 
tery of  the  cross.  By  its  fruits  they  may  know  it.  We,  who 
once  lived  in  debauchery,  now  study  chastity ;  we,  who  dealt  in 
sorceries,  have  consecrated  ourselves  to  the  good,  the  increate 
God ;  we,  who  loved  money  and  possessions  above  all  things 
else,  now  devote  our  property  freely  to  the  general  good,  and 
give  to  every  needy  one ;  we,  who  fought  and  killed  each  other, 
now  pray  for  our  enemies ;  those  who  persecute  us  in  hatred, 
we  kindly  try  to  appease,  in  the  hope  that  they  may  share  the 
same  blessings  which  we  enjoy." l 

5.  The  rapid  SPBEAD  of  Christianity  by  purely  moral  means, 
and  in  spite  of  the  greatest  external  obstacles,  yea,  the  bitter 
persecution  of  Jews  and  Gentiles.  The  anonymous  apologetic 
Epistle  to  Diognetus  which  belongs  to  the  literature  of  the 
Apostolic  Fathers,  alreadythus  urges  this  point :  "  Do  you  not 
see  the  Christians  exposed  to  wild  beasts,  that  they  may  be  per- 
suaded to  deny  the  Lord,  and  yet  not  overcome  ?  Do  you  not 
see  that  the  more  of  them  are  punished,  the  greater  becomes  the 
number  of  the  rest  ?  This  does  not  seem  to  be  the  work  of 
man :  this  is  the  power  of  God ;  these  are  the  evidences  of  his 
manifestation."2  Justin  Martyr  and  Tertullian  frequently  go 
on  in  a  similar  strain.  Origen  makes  good  use  of  this  argu- 
ment against  Celsus,  and  thinks  that  so  great  a  success  as 
Christianity  met  among  Greeks  and  barbarians,  learned  and 
unlearned  persons  in  so  short  a  time,  without  any  force  or 
other  worldly  means,  and  in  view  of  the  united  opposition  of 
emperors,  senate,  governors,  generals,  priests,  and  people,  can 
only  be  rationally  accounted  for  on  the  ground  of  an  ex- 

i  Apol  I.  c.  13  and  14.  *  Ad  Dfogn.  c.  7. 


120  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.B.  100-311. 

traordinary  providence  'of   God    arid    the    divine  nature  of 
Christ. 

6.  The  REASONABLENESS  of  Christianity,  and  its  agreement 
with  all  the  true  and  the  beautiful  in  the  Greek  philosophy  and 
poesy.    All  who  had  lived  rationally  before  Christ  were  really, 
though  unconsciously,  already  Christians.     Thus  all   that  is 
Christian  is  rational,  and  all  that  is  truly  rational  is  Christian. 
Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  of  course,  Christianity  is  supra-rational 
(not  irrational). 

7.  The  ADAPTATION  of  Christianity  to  the  deepest  needs  of 
human    nature,  which    it    alone    can    meet.      Here    belongs 
Tertullian's    appeal    to    the    "testimonia    animae    naturalit&r 
Christianae;"  his  profound  thought,  that  the  human  soul  is, 
in  its  inmost  essence  and  instinct,  predestined  for  Christianity, 
and  can  find  rest  and  peace  in  that  alone.     "The  soul,"  says  he, 
"  though  confined  in  the  prison  of  the  body,  though  perverted 
by  bad  training,  .though  weakened  by  lusts  and  passions,  though 
given  to  the  service  of  false  gods,  still  no  sooner  awakes  from 
its  intoxication  and  its  dreams,  and  recovers  its  health,  than  it 
calls  upon  God  by  the  one  name  due  to  him:     f Great  God! 
good  God!' — and   then   looks,  not  to    the    capitol,   but    to 
heaven ;  for  it  knows  the  abode  of  the  living  God,  from  whom 
it  proceeds."1 

This  deep  longing  of  the  human  soul  for  the  living  God  in 
Christ,  Augustin,  in  whom  Tertullian's  spirit  returned  purified 
and  enriched,  afterwards  expressed  in  the  grand  sentence: 
"Thou,  O  God,  hast  made  us  for  thee,  and  our  heart  is  restless, 
till  it  rests  in  thee." 2 

1  Tert>Apolog.  c.  17.  Comp.  the  beautiful  passage  in  De  Testim  Animce,  c.  2: 
"Si  enim  anima,  aut  divina  aut  a  Deo  data  est,  sine  drubio  dator&m  &ium  novit,  et  si 
wwit,  utique  et  timet  .  .  .  .  0  testimonium  v&ritatis,  qua  apud  ipsa  dcwnonia  testem 


J  Aug.  Confess.  I.  1 :  «  Fecisti  nos  ad  Tet  et  inguietum  est  cor  nostrum,  donee  re 


CHAPTER  IV. 

ORGANIZATION  AND  DISCIPLINE  OP  THE  CHUEOH. 

L  The  chief  sources  for  this  chapter  are  the  Epistles  of  IGNATIUS,  the 
works  of  IEENJEUS,  TERTULLIAN,  and  especially  CYPEIA^,  and  the 
so-called  CONSTITUTIONES  APOSTOLIC^, 

II.  See  the  Literature  in  vol.  L  ?  58  (p.  481  sqq.),  particularly  the  works 

Of  BOTHE,  BlTSCHL,  LlGHTFOOT,  and  HATCH. 

§  41.  Progress  in  Consolidation. 

IN  the  external  organization  of  the  church,  several  important 
changes  appear  in  the  period  before  us.  The  distinction  of 
clergy  and  laity,  and  the  sacerdotal  view  of  the  ministry  be- 
comes prominent  and  fixed;  subordinate  church  offices  are 
multiplied ;  the  episcopate  arises ;  the  beginnings  of  the  Eoman 
primacy  appear ;  and  the  exclusive  unity  of  the  Catholic  church 
develops  itself  in  opposition  to  heretics  and  schismatics.  The 
apostolical  organization  of  the  first  century  now  gives  place  to 
the  old  Catholic  episcopal  system ;  and  this,  in  its  turn,  passes 
into  the  metropolitan,  and  after  the  fourth  century  into  the 
patriarchal.  Here  the  Greek  church  stopped,  and  is  governed 
to  this  day  by  a  hierarchical  oligarchy  of  patriarchs  equal  in 
rank  and  jurisdiction;  while  the  Latin  church  went  a  step 
further,  and  produced  in  the  middle  ages  the  papal  monarchy. 
The  germs  of  this  papacy  likewise  betray  themselves  even  in 
our  present  period,  particularly  in  Cyprian,  together  with  a 
protest  against  it.  Cyprian  himself  is  as  much  a  witness  for 
consolidated  primacy,  as  for  independent  episcopacy,  and  hence 
often  used  and  abused  alike  by  Romanists  and  Anglicans  for 
sectarian  purposes. 

The  characteristics,  however,  of  the  pre-Constantinian  hier- 


122  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

archy,  in  distinction  from  the  post-Constantinian,  both  Greel 
and  Roman,  are,  first,  its  grand  simplicity,  and  secondly,  it 
spirituality,  or  freedom  from  all  connection  with  political  powei 
and  worldly  splendor.  Whatever  influence  the  church  acquired 
and  exercised,  she  owed  nothing  to  the  secular  government, 
which  continued  indifferent  or  positively  hostile  till  the  protec- 
tive toleration  edict  of  Constantine  (313).  Tertullian  thought 
it  impossible  for  an  emperor  to  be  a  Christian,  or  a  Christian  to 
be  an  emperor ;  and  even  after  Constantine,  the  Donatists  per- 
sisted in  this  view,  and  cast  up  to  the  Catholics  the  memory  of 
the  former  age :  "  What  have  Christians  to  do  with  kings  ?  or 
what  have  bishops  to  do  in  the  palace?"1  The  ante-Nicene 
fathers  expected  the  ultimate  triumph  of  Christianity  over  the 
world  from  a  supernatural  interposition  at  the  second  Advent 
Origen  seems  to  have  been  the  only  one  in  that  age  of  violent 
persecution  who  expected  that  Christianity,  by  continual  growth, 
would  gain  the  dominion  over  the  world.2 

The  consolidation  of  the  church  and  its  compact  organization 
implied  a  restriction  of  individual  liberty,  in  the  interest  of 
order,  and  a  temptation  to  the  abuse  of  authority.  But  it  was 
demanded  by  the  diminution  of  spiritual  gifts,  which  were 
poured  out  in  such  extraordinary  abundance  in  the  apostolic 
age.  It  made  the  church  a  powerful  republic  within  the 
Roman  empire,  and  contributed  much  to  its  ultimate  success. 
"  In  union  is  strength,"  especially  in  times  of  danger  and  per- 
secution such  as  the  church  had  to  pass  through  in  the  ante- 
Nicene  age.  While  we  must  deny  a  divine  right  and  perpetual 
obligation  to  any  peculiar  form  of  government  as  far  as  it 
departs  from  the  simple  principles  of  the  New  Testament,  we 
may  concede  a  historical  necessity  and  great  relative  importance 
to  the  ante-Nicene  and  subsequent  organizations  of  the  church. 
Even  the  papacy  was  by  no  means  an  unmixed  evil,  but  a 
training  school  for  the  barbarian  nations  during  the  middle  ages. 

1 "  Quid  Christianis  cum  regibus  f  aut  quid  episcopis  cum  palcdio  f  " 

1  Oonfra  Cds.  VIII.  68.    Comp.  the  remarks  of  Neander,  I.  129  (Boston  ed.) 


\  42.  CLEEGY  AND  LAITY.  123 

Those  who  condemn,  in  principle,  all  hierarchy,  sacerdotalism, 
and  ceremonialism,  should  remember  that  God  himself  appointed 
the  priesthood  and  ceremonies  in  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  and 
that  Christ  submitted  to  the  requirements  of  the  law  in  the  days 
of  his  humiliation. 

§  42.  Clergy  and  Laity. 

The  idea  and  institution  of  a  special  priesthood,  distinct  from 
the  body  of  the  people,  with  the  accompanying  notion  of  sacri- 
fice and  altar,  passed  imperceptibly  from  Jewish  and  heathen 
reminiscences  and  analogies  into  the  Christian  church.  The 
majority  of  Jewish  converts  adhered  tenaciously  to  the  Mosaic 
institutions  and  rites,  and  a  considerable  part  never  fully 
attained  to  the  height  of  spiritual  freedom  proclaimed  by  Paul, 
or  soon  fell  away  from  it.  He  opposed  legalistic  and  cere- 
monial tendencies  in  Galatia  and  Corinth ;  and  although  sacer- 
dotalism does  not  appear  among  the  errors  of  his  Judaieing 
opponents,  the  Levitical  priesthood,  with  its  three  ranks  of 
high-priest,  priest,  and  Levite,  naturally  furnished  an  analogy 
for  the  threefold  ministry  of  bishop,  priest,  and  deacon,  and 
came  to  be  regarded  as  typical  of  it.  Still  less  could  the 
Gentile  Christians,  as  a  body,  at  once  emancipate  themselves 
from  their  traditional  notions  of  priesthood,  altar,  and  sacrifice, 
on  which  their  former  religion  was  based.  Whether  we  regard 
the  change  as  an  apostasy  from  a  higher  position  attained,  or  as 
a  reaction  of  old  ideas  never  fully  abandoned,  the  change  is 
undeniable,  and  can  be  traced  to  the  second  century.  The 
church  could  not  long  occupy  the  ideal  height  of  the  apostolic 
age,  and  as  the  pentecostal  illumination  passed  away  with  the 
death  of  the  apostles,  the  old  reminiscences  began  to  reassert 
themselves.1 

i  Kenan,  looking  at  the  gradual  development  of"  the  hierarchy  out  of  the 
primitive  democracy,  from  his  secular  point  of  view,  calls  it  "the  most  pro- 
found transformation  "  in  history,  and  a  triple  abdication :  first  the  dub'  (the 
congregation)  committing  its  power  to  the  bureau  or  the  committee  (the  college 
of  presbyters),  then  the  bureau  to  its  president  (the  bishop)  who  could  say: 


124  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

In  the  apostolic  church  preaching  and  teaching  were  not  con- 
fined to  a  particular  class,  but  every  convert  could  proclaim  the 
gospel  to  unbelievers,  and  every  Christian  who  had  the  gift 
could  pray  and  teach  and  exhort  in  the  congregation.1  The 
New  Testament  knows  no  spiritual  aristocracy  or  nobility,  but 
calls  all  believers  "saints,"  though  many  fell  far  short  of  their 
vocation.  Nor  does  it  recognize  a  special  priesthood  in  distinc- 
tion from  the  people,  as  mediating  between  God  and  the  laity. 
It  knows  only  one  high-priest,  Jesus  Christ,  and  clearly  teaches 
the  universal  priesthood,  as  well  as  universal  kingship,  of  be- 
lievers.2 It  does  this  in  a  far  deeper  and  larger  sense  than  the 
Old;3  in  a  sense,  too,  which  even  to  this  day  is  not  yet  fully 
realized.  The  entire  body  of  Christians  are  called  "  clergy " 
(x)ypot),  a  peculiar  people,  the  heritage  of  God.4 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  equally  clear  that  there  was  in  the 
apostolic  church  a  ministerial  office,  instituted  by  Christ,  for  the 
very  purpose  of  raising  the  mass  of  believers  from  infancy  and 
pupilage  to  independent  and  immediate  intercourse  with  God, 

"Jesuiskdiib"  and  finally  the  presidents  to  the  pope  as  the  universal  and 
infallible  biahop ;  the  last  process  being  completed  in  the  Vatican  Council  ot 
1870.  See  his  L'figlise  chretienne,  p.  88,  and  his  English  Conferences  (Hibbcrt 
Lectures,  1880),  p.  90. 

iComp.  Acts  8:  4;  9:  27;  13:  15;  18:  26,  28;  Eom.  12:  6;  1  Cor.  12: 
10,  28;  14:  1-6,  31.  Even  in  the  Jewish  Synagogue  the  liberty  of  teaching 
was  enjoyed,  and  the  elder  could  ask  any  member  of  repute,  even  a  stranger, 
to  deliver  a  discourse  on  the  Scripture  lesson  (Luke  4 :  17 ;  Acts  17 :  2). 

2 1  Pet.  2:  5,  9;  5:  3;  Eev.  1:  6;  5:  10;  20:  6.  See  Neander,  Lightfoot, 
Stanley,  etc.,  and  vol.  L  486  sqq.  I  add  a  passage  from  Hatch's  Barnpton 
Lectures  on  The  Organmtim  of  the  Early  Christian  Churches  (1881),  p.  139  : 
"In  earlier  times  there  was  a  grander  faith.  For  the  kingdom  of  God  was  a 
kingdom  of  priests.  Not  only  the  'four  and  twenty  elders'  before  the  throne, 
but  the  innumerable  souls  of  the  sanctified  upon  whom  '  the  second  death  had 
no  power/  were  '  kings  and  priests  unto  God.'  Only  in  that  high  sense  wa* 
priesthood  predicable  of  Christian  men.  For  the  shadow  had  passed :  the 
reality  had  come :  the  one  High  Priest  of  Christianity  was  Christ." 

»Exod.l9:6. 

4 1  Pet.  5 :  3.  Here  Peter  warns  his  fellow-presbyters  not  to  lord  it 
(Kuptdetv)  over  the  d.ypOL  or  the  K^povo^  i.  e.,  the  lot  or  inheritance  of  the 
Lord,  the  chaige  allotted  to  them.  Comp.  Deut.  4:  20;  9:  29  (LXX). 


§  42.  CLEEGY  AND  LAITY.  125 

to  that  prophetic,  priestly,  and  kingly  position,  which  in  prin- 
ciple and  destination  belongs  to  them  all.1  This  work  is  the 
gradual  process  of  church  history  itself,  and  will  not  be  fully 
accomplished  till  the  kingdom  of  glory  shall  come.  But  these 
ministers  are  nowhere  represented  as  priests  in  any  other  sense 
than  Christians  generally  are  priests  with  the  privilege  of  a 
direct  access  to  the  throne  of  grace  in  the  name  of  their  one 
and  eternal  high-priest  in  heaven.  Even  in  the  Pastoral  Epis- 
tles which  present  the  most  advanced  stage  of  ecclesiastical  or- 
ganization in  the  apostolic  period,  while  the  teaching,  ruling,  and 
pastoral  functions  of  the  presbyter-bishops  are  fully  discussed, 
nothing  is  said  about  a  sacerdotal  function.  The  Apocalypse, 
which  was  written  still  later,  emphatically  teaches  the  universal 
priesthood  and  kingship  of  believers.  The  apostles  themselves 
never  claim  or  exercise  a  special  priesthood.  The  sacrifice 
which  all  Christians  are  exhorted  to  offer  is  the  sacrifice  of 
their  person  and  property  to  the  Lord,  and  the  spiritual  sac- 
rifice of  thanksgiving  and  praise.2  In  one  passage  a  Christian 
"  altar  "  is  spoken  of,  in  distinction  from  the  Jewish  altar^  of 
literal  and  daily  sacrifices,  but  this  altar  is  the  cross  on  which 
Christ  offered  himself  once  and  forever  for  the  sins  of  the 
world.3 

After  the  gradual  abatement  of  the  extraordinary  spiritual 
elevation  of  the  apostolic  age,  which  anticipated  in  its  way  the 
ideal  condition  of  the  church,  the  distinction  of  a  regular  class 
of  teachers  from  the  laity  became  more  fixed  and  prominent. 
This  appears  first  in  Ignatius,  who,  in  his  high  episcopalian 
spirit,  considers  the  clergy  the  necessary  medium  of  access  for 
the  people  to  God.  "Whoever  is  within  the  sanctuary  (or  altar)^ 
is  pure ;  but  he  who  is  outside  of  the  sanctuary  is  not  pure ;  that 


iComp.  Eph.4:  11-13. 

2Kom.  12:  1;  Phil.  2:  17;  lPet.2:  5^  Heb.  13:  16. 

3  Heb.  13 :  10.  So  dvaiaffrfoiov  is  understood  by  Thomas  Aquinas,  Bengel, 
Bleek,  Liinemann,  Biehm,  etc.  Others  explain  it  of  the  Lord's  table,  Light- 
foot  (p.  263)  of  the  congregation  assembled  for  common  worship. 


126  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

is,  he  who  does  anything  without  bishop  and  presbytery  and 
deacon,  is  not  pure  in  conscience." *  Yet  he  nowhere  represents 
the  ministry  as  a  sacerdotal  office.  The  Didache  calls  "  the 
prophets"  high-priests,  but  probably  in  a  spiritual  sense.2 
Clement  of  Rome,  in  writing  to  the  congregation  at  Corinth, 
draws  a  significant  and  fruitful  parallel  between  the  Christian 
presiding  office  and  the  Levitical  priesthood,  and  uses  the  ex- 
pression "layman"  (tooc  fc&pa>itoc)  as  antithetic  to  high- 
priest,  priests,  and  Levites.3  This  parallel  contains  the  germ 
of  the  whole  system  of  sacerdotalism.  But  it  is  at  best  only 
an  argument  by  analogy.  Tertullian  was  the  first  who  expressly 
and  directly  asserts  sacerdotal  claims  on  behalf  of  the  Christian 
ministry,  and  calls  it  "  sacerdotium"  although  he  also  strongly 
affirms  the  universal  priesthood  of  all  believers.  Cyprian  (d. 
258)  goes  still  further,  and  applies  all  the  privileges,  duties,  and 
responsibilities  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  to  the  officers  of  the 
Christian  church,  and  constantly  calls  them  sacerdotes  and  sacer- 
dotium. He  may  therefore  be  called  the  proper  father  of  the 
sacerdotal  conception  of  the  Christian  ministry  as  a  mediating 
agency  between  God  and  the  people.  During  the  third  century 
it  became  customary  to  apply  the  term  "priest"  directly  and 


1  Ad  Tratl.  c.  7 :    6  EVT&C  &vffiacm?ptov  &v  Katiaptf  kanv  6  6£  e/crdf  •ftvaiaarq- 
oiov  &v  ov  Ka&apo£  kanv  rovrecmVj  &  #wp2f  &iruTK6irav  Kal  irpeapvTepiov  teal  dtatcdvov 
irpaaeuv  TI,  ovrog  ov  Kafiapd?  eariv  Ty  GweL6rjcei.     Funk's  ed.     I.     208.     Some 
MSS.  omit  the  second  clause,  perhaps  from  homo3oteleuton.    Von  Gebhardt 
and  Harnack  also  omit  it  in  the  Greek  text,  but  retain  it  in  the  Latin  (qui 
extra  altare  est,  non  mundus  est).    The  rovrttrriv  evidently  requires  the  clause. 

2  Cf.  ch.  13*    See  note  in  SchaiPs  edition,  p.  206. 

8  Ad  Cor.  40 :  •'  Unto  the  high-priest  his  proper  services  have  been  in- 
trusted, and  to  the  priests  their  proper  office  is  appointed,  and  upon  the  levites 
their  proper  ministratioa1?  are  laid.  The  layman  is  bound  by  the  layman's 
Drdinances  (o  /lakof  ai>#p<J7rof  rdiq  ^akoZf  irpoGT&yfjLaGiv  Mderai)"  The  passage 
occurs  in  the  text  of  Bryennios  as- well  as  in  the  older  editions,  and  there  is 
no  good  reason  to  suspect  it  of  being  an  interpolation  in  the  hierarchical  in- 
terest, as  Neander  and  MiJman  kave  done.  Bishop  Lightfoot,  in  his  /Sfc. 
Clement  of  Rome,  p.  128  sq.,  puts  a  mild  construction  upon  it,  and  says  that 
the  analogy  does  not  extend  to  the  three  orders,  because  Clement  only  knows 
two  (bishops  and  deacons^  and  that  the  high  priesthood  of  Christ  is  wholly 
different  in  kind  from  the  Mosaic  high  priesthood,  and  exempt  from  those  very 
limitations  on  which  Clement  dwells  in  that  chapter, 


§42.  CHEBGY  AND  LAITY-  127 

exclusively  to  the  Christian  ministers,  especially  the  bishops.1 
In  the  same  manner  the  whole  ministry,  and  it  alone,  was  called 
"  clergy/'  with  a  double  reference  to  its  presidency  and  its  pe- 
culiar relation  to  God.2  It  was  distinguished  by  this  name  from 
the  Christian  people  or  "laiiy."3  Thus  the  term  "clergy," 
which  first  signified  the  lot  by  which  office  was  assigned  (Acts 
1 :  17,  25),  then  the  office  itself,  then  the  persons  holding  that 
office,  was  transferred  from  the  Christians  generally  to  the  minis- 
ters exclusively. 

Solemn  "  ordination "  or  consecration  by  the  laying  on  of 
hands  was  the  form  of  admission  into  the  "  ordo  eeclesiasticus  " 
or  "  sacerdotalis."  In  this  order  itself  there  were  again  three 
degrees,  "  ordines  majores/'  as  they  were  called :  the  diaconate, 
the  presbyterate,  and  the  episcopate-^-held  to  be  of  divine  insti- 
tution. Under  these  were  the  "  ordines  rninores,"  of  later  date, 
from  sub-deacon  to  ostiary,  which  formed  the  stepping-stone 
between  the  clergy  proper  and  the  people.4 


surrvmus  sacerdos  (Tertullian,  De  Ba.pt.  7),  and  once  ponlifex ' 
mas-imus  (De  Pudic.  1,  with  ironical  reference,  it  seems,  to  the  Roman  "bishop) ; 
ordo  sacerdotalis  (De  Exhort.  Cast.  7) ;  itpsv^  and  sometimes  Ap^tepevg-  (Apost. 
Const.  II.  34,  35,  36,  57;  III.  9;  vi.  15, 18,  etc.).  Hippolytus  calls  his  office 
•an  apxtepareia  and  (hdaaicaMa  (Ref.  Hder-  I.  prooem.).  Cyprian  generally  ap- 
plies the  term  sacerdos  to  the  bishop,  and  calls  his  colleagues  eonsacerdotdes 

2  K7^pof,  clerus,  raf/f,  ordo,  ordo  sacerdotcdis  (Tertull.,  De  Exhort.  Cast.  7), 
ordo  ecdesiastmis  or  ecdesiae  (De  Monog.  11 ;  De  Idolol.  7) ;  KtyptKoi,  derid. 
The  first  instance  perhaps  of  the  use  of  derus  in  the  sense  of  clergy  is  in  Ter- 
tullian, De  Monog.  c.  12:    "  Undeenim  episcopi  et  derus f"  and:  " Extollimur 
et  inflamur  adversus  derum "    Jerome  (Ad  Nepotian.)  explains  this  exclusive 
application  of  derus  to  ministers,  "  vel  quia  de  sorte  Bunt  Domini,  vd  quia  ipse 
Dominus  sors,  id  est,  pars  dericorwn  est"    The  distinction  between  the  regular 
clergy,  who  were  also  monks,  and  the  secular  clergy  or  parish  priests,  is  of 
much  later  date  (seventh  or  eighth  century). 

3  Aa<fc,  falKol,  plebs.    In  Tertullian,  Cyprian,  and  in  the  Apostolic  Constitu- 
tions the  terra  "layman"  occurs  very  often.    Cyprian  speaks  (250)  of  a  "con- 
ference held  with  bishop?,  presbyters,  deacons,  confessors,  and  also  with  laymen 
who  stood  firm"  (in  persecution),  Ep.  30,  ad  Bom. 

*  Occasionally,  however,  we  find  a  somewhat  wider  terminology.  Tertullian 
mentions,  De  Monog.  c.  12,  the  ordo  whwarum  among  the  ordines  ecdesiastici, 
and  even  the  rauch  later  Jerome  (see  In  Jcsaiam,  1.  v.  c.  19, 18),  enumerates 
yuinque  ecdesiae  ordines,  epmopos,  presbyfcrns,  diaconos,  fdd™,  ratechumenos. 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A/D.  100-311. 

Thus  we  find,  so  early  as  the  third  century,  the  foundations 
of  a  complete  hierarchy;  though  a  hierarchy  of  only  moral 
power,  and  holding  no  sort  of  outward  control  over  the  con- 
science. The  body  of  the  laity  consisted  of  two  classes  :  the 
faithful,  or  the  baptized  and  communicating  members,  and  the 
catechumens,  who  were  preparing  for  baptism.  Those  church 
members  who  lived  together  in  one  place,1  formed  a  church 
in  the  narrower  senge.2 

"With  the  exaltation  of  the  clergy  appeared  the  tendency  to 
separate  them  from  secular  business,  and  even  from  social  rela- 
tions —  from  marriage,  'for  example  —  and  to  represent  them,  even 
outwardly,  as  a  caste  independent  of  the  people,  and  devoted 
exclusively  to  the  service  of  the  sanctuary.  They  drew  their 
support  from  the  church  treasury,  which  was  supplied  by  volun- 
tary contributions  and  weekly  collections  on  the  Lord's  Day. 
After  the  third  century  they  were  forbidden  to  engage  in  any 
secular  business,  or  even  to  accept  any  trusteeship.  Celibacy  was 
not  yet  in  this  period  enforced,  but  left  optional.  Tertullian, 
•  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  and  other  distinguished  church  teachers,  lived 
in  wedlock,  though  theoretically  preferring  the  unmarried  state. 
Of  an  official  clerical  costume  no  certain  trace  appears  before 
the  fourth  century  ;  and  if  it  came  earlier  into  use,  as  may  have 
been  the  case,  after  the  example  of  the  Jewish  church,  it  must 
have  been  confined,  during  the  times  of  persecution,  to  the  actual 
exercises  of  worship. 

"With  the  growth  of  this  distinction  of  clergy  and  laity,  how- 
ever, the  idea  of  the  universal  priesthood  continued  from  time 
to  time  to  assert  itself:  in  Irenseus,3  for  example,  and  in  an 
eccentric  form  in  the  Montanists,  who  even  allowed  women  to 
teach  publicly  in  the  church.  So  Tertullian,  with  whom  derus 
and  laid  were  at  one  time  familiar  expressions,  inquires,  as  the 
champion  of  the  Montanistic  reaction  against  the  Catholic 
hierarchy  :  "  Are  not  we  laymen  priests  also  ?  "  4  It  is  written, 


i  H  dpoiKoi,  TapmtoifiQt,  Eph.  2  :  19  ;  1  Pet.  2:11.        »  or  parish,  vapouda. 
'  Adv.  Hatr.  iv.  8,  \  3.  *  Nome  et  laid  sacerdotes  wmus  9 


i  42.  CLERGY  AND  LAITY.  129 

he  continues :  "  He  hath  made  us  kings  and  priests  (Eev.  1 :  6). 
It  is  the  authority  of  the  church  alone  which  has  made  a  dis- 
tinction between  clergy  and  laity.  "Where  there  is  no  college  of 
ministers,  you  administer  the  sacrament,  you  baptize,  you  are  a 
priest  for  yourself  alone.  And  where  there  are  three  of  you, 
there  is  a  church,  though  you  be  only  laymen.  For  each  one 
lives  by  his  own  faith,  and  there  is  no  respect  of  persons  with 
God." l  All,  therefore,  which  the  clergy  considered  peculiar  to 
them,  he  claimed  for  the  laity  as  the  common  sacerdotal  privilege 
of  all  Christians. 

Even  in  the  Catholic  church  an  acknowledgment  of  the 
general  priesthood  showed  itself  in  the  custom  of  requiring  the 
baptized  to  say  the  Lord's  Prayer  before  the  assembled  congre- 
gation. With  reference  to  this,  Jerome  says:  "Sacerdotium 
laid,  id  est}  baptisma"  The  congregation  also,  at  least  in  the 
West,  retained  for  a  long  time  the  right  of  approval  and  rejec- 
tion in  the  choice  of  its  ministers,  even  of  the  bishop.  Clement 
of  Rome  expressly  requires  the  assent  of  the  whole  congregation 
for  a  valid  election ; 2  and  Cyprian  terms  this  an  apostolic  and 
almost  universal  regulation.3  According  to  his  testimony  it  ob- 
tained also  in  Eome,  and  was  observed  in  the  case  of  his  con- 
temporary, Cornelius.4  Sometimes  in  the  filling  of  a  vacant 
bishopric  the  "suffragium"  of  the  people  preceded  the  "judi- 
cium "  of  the  clergy  of  .the  diocese.  Cyprian,  and  afterwards 
Athanasius,  Ambrose,  Augustin,  and  other  eminent  prelates, 
were  in  a  manner  pressed  into  the  bishopric  in  this  democratic 
way.  Cyprian,  with  all  his  high-church  proclivities,  declares  it 
his  principle  to  do  nothing  as  bishop  without  the  advice  of  the 
presbyters  and  deacons,  and  the  consent  of  the  people.5  A  pe- 

1  De  Exhort.  Cast,  c;  7.    Comp.  also  De  Monog.  7,  12;  De  Bapt.  17;  D* 

Orat.  18. 

2  Ad  Cor.  44 :  ^wsvfioK&oqe  rfc  sKKhjfflas  naaiis,  consentiente  umversa  ecdewL 

8  Up.  Ix.  3-4  (ed.  Goldhorn). 

*  Ep.  Iv.  7 :  "  Fadus  est  Cornelius  episcopus  de  Dei  et  Christi  ejv&  judicio,  d* 
dericorum  pome  omnium  testimonio,  de  plebis  qua  turn  adfuti  suffrage,  et  de  wcer 


Vol.  IL    9. 


130  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

culiar  influence,  which  even  the  clergy  could  not  withstand, 
attached  to  the  "confessors,"  and  it  was  sometimes  abused  by 
them,  as  in  their  advocacy  of  the  lapsed,  who  denied  Christ  in 
the  Decian  persecution. 

Finally,  we  notice  cases  where  the  function  of  teaching  was 
actually  exercised  by  laymen.  The  bishops  of  Jerusalem  and 
Csesarea  allowed  the  learned  Origen  to  expound  the  Bible  to 
their  congregations  before  his  ordination,  and  appealed  to  the 
example  of  several  bishops  in  the  East.1  Even  in  the  Apos- 
tolical Constitutions  there  occurs,  under  the  name  of  the  Apostle 
Paul,  the  direction :  "  Though  a  man  be  a  layman,'rf  experienced 
in  the  delivery  of  instruction,  and  reverent  in  habit,  he  may 
teach;  for  the  Scripture  says;  'They  shall  be  all  taught  of 
God/"2  The  fourth  general  council  at  Carthage  (398)  pro- 
hibited laymen  from  teaching  in  the  presence  of  clergymen  and 
without  their  consent;  implying  at  the  same  time,  that  with  such 
permission  the  thing  might  be  done.3 

It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  a  number  of  the  most  eminent 
church  teachers  of  this  period,  Hermas,  Justin  Martyr,  Athena- 
goras,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen,  Tertullian,  Arnobius, 


1  Euseb.,  H.R  VI.  19:  "There  [in  Oesarea]  he  [Origen]  was  also  requested 
by  the  bishops  to  expound  the  sacred  Scriptures  publicly  in  the  church,  al- 
though he  had  not  yet  obtained  the  priesthood  by  the  imposition  of  hands." 
It  is  true  this  was  made  the  ground  of  a  charge  against  him  by  Demetrius, 
bishop  of  Alexandria;  but  the  charge  was  that  Origen  had  preached  "in  the 
presence  of  bishops,"  not  that  he  had  preached  as  a  layman.  And  the  bishops 
of  Jerusalem  and  Csesarea  adduced  several  examples  of  holy  bishops  inviting 
capable  laymen  to  preach  to  the  people.  Prudentius  and  Aedesius,  while  lay- 
men, founded  the  church  in  Abyssinia,  Socrates,  Hist.  Ecd.  1. 19. 

1  Const.  Apost.  VIII.  31.  Ambrosiaster,  or  Hilary  the  Deacon,  in  his  Com. 
Ad  Eph.  4 :  11,  12,  says  that  in  early  times  "omnes  docebant  et  wines  bcup- 
tizabant.'' 

'  Can.  98 :  "  Laicus  prossentibus  dericis,  nisi  ipsis  jubentibus,  docere  <nm  audeat." 
The  99th  canon  forbids  women,  no  matter  how  "learned  or  holy,"  to  "presume 
to  teach  men  in  a  meeting."  Pope  Leo  I.  (Ep.  92  and  93)  forbids  lay  preach- 
ing in  the  interest  of  ecclesiastical  order.  Charlemagne  enacted  a  law  that 
"a  layman  ought  not  to  recite  a  lesson  in  church,  nor  to  say  the  Hallelujah, 
tort  only  the  Psalm  or  responses  without  the  Hallelujah." 


2  43.  NEW  CHUECH  OFFICERS.  131 

and  Lactantius,  were  either  laymen,  or  at  roost  only  presbyters. 
Hermas,  who  wrote  one  of  the  most  popular  and  authoritative 
books  in  the  early  church,  was  probably  a  layman;  perhaps 
also  the  author  of  the  homily  which  goes  under  the  name  of  the 
Second  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Borne,  and  has  recently  been 
discovered  in  full  both  in  the  original  Greek  and  in  a  Syriac 
translation ;  for  he  seems  to  distinguish  himself  and  his  hearers 
from  the  presbyters.1 

§  43.  New  Church  Officers. 

The  expansion  of  the  church,  the  development  of  her  cultus, 
and  the  tendency  towards  hierarchical  pomp,  led  to  the  multi- 
plication of  offices  below  the  diaconate,  which  formed  the 
ordines  mmores.  About  the  middle  of  the  third  century  the 
following  new  officers  are  mentioned : 

1.  SUB-DEACONS,  or  under-helpers;2  assistants  and  deputies 
of  the  deacons;  the  only  one  of  these  subordinate  offices  for 
which  a  formal  ordination  was  required.    Opinions  differ  as  to 
its  value. 

2.  KEADEKS,3  who  read  the  Scriptures  in  the  assembly  and 
had  charge  of  the  church  books. 

3.  ACOLYTHS/  attendants  of  the  bishops  in  their  official 
duties  and  processions. 

VSxoKCiSTS,5  who,  by  prayer  and  the  laying  on  of  hands, 
cast  oulrffl^dyl  spirit  from  the  possessed,6  and  from  catechumens, 


1  The  Greek  text  (of  which  only  a  fragment  was  known  before)  was  found 
and  published  by  Bryennios,  1875,  the  Syriac  version  by  Bensley,  1876.  See 
Harnack's  ed.  in  the  Patres  Apost.  vol.  I.,  and  Lightfoot,  8-  Clement  of  Rome, 
Appendix  (1877).  Harnack,  Hilgenfeld,  and  Hatch  (L  c.  114 ;  note)  suppose 
that  the  homily  was  delivered  by  a  layman,  but  Lightfoot  (p.  304)  explains 
the  language  above  alluded  to  as  a  common  rhetorical  figure  by  which  the 
speaker  places  himself  on  a  level  with  his  audience. 

>  TTroSi&Kovoi,  subdiaconi,  perhaps  the  same  as  the  iiinipfrai  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament and  the  earlier  fathers. 

* 'Avayvuffrai,  l-ectores,  mentioned  by'Tertullian. 
,  acolythi.     5  'EtjopKurrai,  exorcistoe. 


132  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

and  frequently  assisted  in  baptism.    This  power  had  been  for- 
merly considered  a  free  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit 

5.  PBECENTOKS,1  for  the  musical  parts  of  the  liturgy,  psalms, 
benedictions,  responses,  etc. 

6.  JANITOBS  or  sextons,2  who  took  care  of  the  religious  meet- 
ing-rooms, and  at  a  later  period  also  of  the  church-yards. 

7.  Besides  these  there  were  in  the  larger  churches  CATE- 
CHISTS,  and,  where  the  church  language  in  the  worship  was  not 
understood,  INTEEPEETEES  ;  but  the  interpreting  was  commonly 
done  by  presbyters,  deacons,  or  readers. 

The  bishop  Cornelius  of  Rome  (d.  252),  in  a  letter  on  the 
Novation  schism,3  gives  the  number  of  officers  in  his  church  as 
follows:  Forty-six  presbyters,  probably  corresponding  to  the 
number  of  the  meeting-houses  of  the  Christians  in  the  city; 
seven  deacons,  after  the  model  of  the  church  at  Jerusalem  (Acts 
vi) ;  seven  sub-deacons ;  forty-two  acolyths,  and  fifty-two  exor- 
cists, readers,  and  janitors. 

As  to  the  ordiTies  majores,  the  deacons  during  this  period  rose 
in  importance.  In  addition  to  their  original  duties  of  caring 
for  the  poor  and  sick,  they  baptized,  distributed  the  sacramental 
cup,  said  the  church  prayers,  not  seldom  preached,  and  were 
confidential  advisers,  sometimes  even  delegates  and  vicars  of  the 
bishops.  This  last  is  true  especially  of  the  "archdeacon,"  who 
does  not  appear,  however,  till  the  fourth  century.  The  presby- 
ters, on  the  contrary,  though  above  the  deacons,  were  now  over- 
topped by  the  new  office  of  bishop,  in  which  the  entire  govern- 
ment of  the  church  became  centred. 

§  44,  Origwi  of  the  Episcopate. 

Besides  the  works  already  cited,  compare  the  special  works  and  essays 
on  the  Ignatian  controversy,  published  since  1837,  by  EOTHE  (close 
of  his  Anfdnge,  etc.),  HEFELE  (R.  0.),  BATTR,  EILGENFELD, 
BUNSEN,  PETERMANN,  CDBETON,  LIPSIUS,  UHLHORN,  ZAUN, 
LIGHTFOOT  (L-  376  sqq).  Also  R.  D.  HITCHCOCK  on  the  Origin 

i  Wkrai,  psalmistae  cantores.  *  Qvpopoij  nvtopoi,  ostiarii  janitores. 

'InEuseb.  vi.  43. 


§  44.  OEIGIN  OF  THE  EPISCOPATE.  133 

of  Episcopacy,  N.  Y.  1867  (in  the  "Am.  Presbyt.  &TheoL  Keview" 

for  Jan.  1867,  pp.  133-169J ;  LIGHTFOOT  on  the  Christian  Ministry 

(1873) ;  HATCH  on  the  Organization  of  the  Early  Christian  Church 

(1881) ;  EENAN,    UEglise  chretietim  (1879),   oh.    VI.   Progres   de 

V&piscopat;  and  GrORE,  The  Ministry  of  the  Church  (1889). 

The  most  important  and  also  the  most  difficult  phenomenon 
of  our  period  in  the  department  of  church  -organization  is  the 
rise  and  development  of  the  episcopate  as  distinct  from  the 
presbyterate.  This  institution  comes  to  view  in  the  second 
century  as  the  supreme  spiritual  office,  and  is  retained  to  this 
day  by  all  Roman  and  Greek  Christendom,  and  by  a  large  part 
of  the  Evangelical  church,  especially  the  Anglican  communion. 
A  form  of  government  so  ancient  and  so  widely  adopted,  can 
be  satisfactorily  accounted  for  only  on  the  supposition  of  a 
religious  need,  namely,  the  need  of  a  tangible  outward  repre- 
sentation and  centralization,  to  illustrate  and  embody  to  the 
people  their  relation  to  Christ  and  to  God,  and  the  visible  unity 
of  the  church.  It  is  therefore  inseparable  from  the  catholic 
principle  of  authority  and  mediation;  while  the  protestant 
principle  of  freedom  and  direct  intercourse  of  the  believer  with 
Christ,  consistently  carried  out,  infringes  the  strict  episcopal 
constitution,  and  tends  to  ministerial  equality.  Episcopacy  in 
the  full  sense  of  the  term  requires  for  its  base  the  idea  of  a  real 
priesthood  and  real  sacrifice,  and  an  essential  distinction  between 
clergy  and  laity.  Divested  of  these  associations,  it  resolves 
itself  into  a  mere  superintendency.1 

During  the  lifetime  of  the  apostles,  those  eye-  and  ear-wit- 
nesses of  the  divine-human  life  of  Jesus,  and  the  inspired 
organs  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  there  was  no  room  for  proper 
bishops ;  and  those  who  were  so  called,  must  have  held  only  a 

1  Such  is  the  Swedish  and  Danish  Lutheran,  the  American  Methodist,  and 
the  Moravian  episcopate,  which  recognizes  the  validity  of  non-episcopal 
orders.  The  Anglican  church  harhors  a  high-church  and  a  low-church  theory 
of  episcopacy,  the  one  derived  from  the  medieval  hierarchy,  the  other  from 
the  Beformation,  but  repudiates  the  primacy  as  an  antichristian  usurpation, 
although  it  must  be  confessed  to  be  almost  as  old  as  episcopacy,  its  roots  going 
back  to  Clement  of  Borne,  or  at  all  event"  to  the  age  of  Irenaus. 


134  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-511. 

subordinate  place.  The  church,  too,  in  the  first  century  was  as 
yet  a  strictly  supernatural  organization,  a  stranger  in  this  world, 
standing  with  one  foot  in  eternity,  and  longing  for  the  second 
coming  of  her  heavenly  bridegroom.  But  in  the  episcopal 
constitution  the  church  provided  an  extremely  simple  but  com- 
pact and  freely  expansible  organization,  planted  foot  firmly 
upon  earth,  became  an  institution  for  the  education  of  her  in- 
fant people,  and,  as  chiliastic  hopes  receded,  fell  into  the  path 
of  quiet  historical  development;  yet  unquestionably  she  thus 
incurred  also  the  danger  of  a  secularization  which  reached  its 
height  just  when  the  hierarchy  became  complete  in  the  Roman 
church,  and  which  finally  necessitated  a  reformation  on  the 
basis  of  apostolical  Christianity.  That  this  secularization  began 
with  the  growing  power  of  the  bishops  even  before  Constantine 
and  the  Byzantine  court  orthodoxy,  we  perceive,  for  instance,  in 
the  lax  penitential  .discipline,  the  avarice,  and  the  corruption 
with  which  Hippolytus,  in  the  ninth  book  of  his  Philosophu- 
mena,  reproaches  Zephyrinus  and  Callistus,  the  Roman  bishops 
of  his  time  (202-223) ;  also  in  the  example  of  the  bishop  Paul 
of  Samosata,  who  was  deposed  in  269  on  almost  incredible 
charges,  not  only  against  his  doctrine,  but  still  more  against  hLs 
moral  character.1  Origen  complains  that  there  are,  especially 
in  the  larger  cities,  overseers  of  the  people  of  God,  who  seek  to 
outdo  the  pomp  of  heathen  potentates,  would  surround  them- 
selves, like  the  emperors,  with  a  body-guard,  and  make  them- 
selves terrible  and  inaccessible  to  the  poor.2 

"We  consider,  first,  the  ORIGIN  of  the  episcopate.  The  un- 
reliable character  of  our  documents  and  traditions  from  the 
transition  period  between  the  close  of  the  apostolic  church  and 
the  beginning  of  the  post-apostolic,  leaves  large  room  here  for 
critical  research  and  combination.  First  of  all  comes  the  ques- 
tion: Was  the  episcopate  directly  or  indirectly  of  apostolic 

1  Comp.  Euseb.  vii.  27-30. 

1  See  the  passages  quoted  by  Gieseler,  vol.  I.  282  sq,  (Harpers'  'ed.  of  New 
York.) 


\  44.  OBIGIN  OF  THE  EPISCOPATE.  135 

(Johannean)  origin?1  Or  did  it  arise  after  the  death  of  the 
apostles,  and.develope  itself  from  the  presidency  of  the  congre- 
gational presbytery?2  In  other  words,  was  the  episcopate  a 
continuation  and  contraction  of,  and  substitute  for,  the  apos- 
tolate,  or  was  it  an  expansion  and  elevation  of  the  presbyterate?3 
The  later  view  is  more  natural  and  better  sustained  by  facts* 
Most  of  its  advocates  date  the  change  from  the  time  of  Ignatius 
in  the  first  quarter  of  the  second  century,  while  a  few  carry  it 
further  back  to  the  close  of  the  first,  when  St.  John  still  lived 
in  Ephesus. 

I.  For  the  APOSTOLIC  origin  of  episcopacy  the  following 
points  may  be  made : 

(1)  The  position  of  James,  who  evidently  stood  at  the  head 
of  the  church  at  Jerusalem/  and  is  called  bishop,  at  least  in  the 
pseudo-Clementine  literature,  and  in  fact  supreme  bishop  of  the 
whole  church.5    This  instance,  however,  stands  quite  alone,  and 
does  not  warrant  an  inference  in  regard  to  the  entire  church. 

(2)  The  office  of  the  assistants  and  delegates  of  the  apostles, 
like  Timothy,  Titus,  Silas,  Epaphroditus,  Luke,  Mark,  who 
had  a  sort  of  supervision  of  several  churches  and  congregational 
officers,  and  in  a  measure  represented  the  apostles  in  special 
missions.     But,  in  any  case,  these  were   not  limited,  at  least 
during  the  life  of  the  apostles,  each  to  a  particular  diocese; 
they  were  itinerant  evangelists  and  legates  of  the  apostles;  only 

1  Tills  is  the  Greek,  the  Eoman  Catholic,  and  the  high  Anglican  theory. 
It  is  advocated  by  a  very  few  Continental  Protestants  as  Chevalier  Bunsen, 
Rothe   and    Thiersch    (an   Irvingite),   who    trace   episcopacy  to  John  in 
Ephesus. 

2  So  the  Lutheran,  Presbyterian,  and  some  eminent  Episcopal  writers.    We 
mention  Mosheim,  Neander,  Lightfoot,  Stanley,    Hatch.    Also  Baur  and 
Renan,  who  judge  as  mere  critics. 

8  Bishop  Lightfoot  (1.  c.  p.  194)  thus  states  the  question  with  his  own  an- 
swer:  "The  episcopate  was  formed,  not  out  of  the  apostolic  order  by  localiza- 
tion, but  out  of  the  presbyterial  by  elevation;  and  the  title,  which  originally 
was  common  to  all,  came  at  length  to  be  appropriated  to  the  chief  among 
them." 

*  Acts  15 :  13 ;  21 :  18.    Comp.  vol.  T.  264  sqq. 


136  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-811. 

the  doubtful  tradition  of  a  later  day  assigns  them  distinct 
bishoprics.    If  bishops  at  all,  they  were  missionary  bishops. 

(8)  The  angels  of  the  seven  churches  of  Asia/  who,  if  re- 
garded as  individuals,  look  very  like  the  later  bishops,  and  indi- 
cate a  monarchical  shaping  of  the  church  government  in  the 
days  of  John.  But,  apart  from  the  various  interpretations  of 
the  Apocalyptic  &ff&ot9  that  office  appears  not  co-ordinate  with 
the  apostolate  of  John,  but  subordinate  to  it,  and  was  no  more 
than  a  congregational  superintendency. 

(4)  The  testimony  of  Ignatius  of  Antioch,  a  disciple  of  John, 
in  his  seven  (or  three)  epistles  from  the  beginning  of  the  second 
century  (even  according  to  the  shorter  Syriac  version),  presup- 
poses the  episcopate,  in  distinction  from  the  presbyterate,  as 
already  existing,  though  as  a  new  institution,  yet  in  its  growth. 

(5)  The  statement  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,2  that  John  in- 
stituted bishops  after  his  return  from  Patmos ;  and  the  accounts 
of  Irenseus,8  Tertullian/  Eusebius,6  and  Jerome,6  that  the  same 
apostle  nominated  and  ordained  Polycarp  (with  whom  Ireuseus 
was  personally  acquainted)  bishop  of  Smyrna. 

(6)  The  uncertain  tradition  in  Eusebius,  who  derived  it  prob- 
ably from  Hegesippus,  that  the  surviving  apostles  and  disciples 
of  the  apostles,  soon  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  elected 
Symeon,  the  son  of  Klopas  and  a  cousin  of  Jcsas,  bishop  of 
that  city  and  successor  of  James.    But  this  arrangement  at  bc&t 
was  merely  local,  and  not  general.7 

(7)  The  tradition  of  the  churches  of  Antioch  and  Koine, 


1  Eev.  1 :  20.    For  the  different  views  Bee  vol.  I.  497. 

*  Quw  dives  sdws,  c.  42.  *  Adv.  JEToer.  III.  8. 

*  De  Praeser.  Haer.  c.  32.  8  H.  E.  III.  36. 
6  Catd.  sub  Polyc. 

»  H.  K  III.  11.  Comp.  the  fragment  of  Hegesippus,  in  IV.  22.  Lightfoot 
(PhttippiaffiSj  p.  202)  remarks  against  Bothe's  inference :  "The  account  of 
Hegeaippns  confines  the  object  of  this  gathering  to  the  appointment  of  a  suc- 
cessor of  8k  James.  If  its  deliberations  had  exerted  that  vast  and  permanent 
influence  on  the  future  of  the  church  which  Rothe's  theory  suppose,  it  i& 
scarcely  possible  that  this  early  historian  should  have  been  ignorant  of  tin 
feet,  or  knowing  it  should  have  passed  it  over  in  silence.'' 


§44.  ORIGIN  OF  THE  EPISCOPATE.  137 

which  trace  their  line  of  bishops  back  to  apostolic  institution, 
and  kept  the  record  of  an  unbroken  succession. 

(8)  A  passage  in  the  second  of  the  Pfaff  Fragments  of 
IrenaeuSj  which  speaks  of  "  second  ordinances  of  the  apostles  " 
(deurepat   T&V  dnoffTofav  deardzetc).     Rothe  understands   by 
these  the  institution  of  the  episcopate.     But  aside  from  the 
doubtful  genuineness  of  the  Fragments,  these  words  are  at  all 
events  of  unsettled  interpretation,  and,  according  to  the  con- 
nection, relate  not  to  the  government  of  the  church  at  all,  but 
to  the  celebration  of  the  eucharist. 

(9)  Equally  uncertain   is   the   conclusion   drawn   from   an 
obscure  passage  in  the  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Rome  to  the 
Corinthians,  which  admits  of  different  interpretations.1    The 
apostles,  it  is  said,  foreseeing  the  future  controversy  about  the 
name  of  the  episcopal  office,  appointed  bishops  and  deacons, 
and  afterwards  made  the  disposition,2  that  when  they  should 


1  Ad  Corinth,  c.  44:    01  &x6<rToXot  yfjLQv  eyvaxrav  £:<!  Toy  xupiov 

JipiffTOo  on  £pt$  effrat  ixi  roD  3v6fj.a70$  TJJC  intffxoxrjS.  Aid. 
ofiv  ri}V  alriav  irpdyycofftv  e&^<Jre£  rehiav  y.a^iarr^a.v  robs 
x;  xa\  fteragb  ImvofL^v  [or  to/toiojv]  l&uxav,  &ra>?,  lav 
WffW,  dtad££(i>vTat  Srepot  dedoxtpaa  pivot  ay$pe$  -cry  AeiToopfiav 
avraiv.  "  Our  apostles  knew  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  that  there  would 
be  strife  over  the  name  of  the  bishop's  office  [i.  e.f  the  office  of  the  ministry 
in  general  ;  com  p.  Acts  1  :  20  ;  Sept.  Num.  4  :  16  ;  Bs.  109  :  8  ;  2  Chr.  23  :  18]. 
For  this  cause,  therefore,  having  complete  foreknowledge,  they  appointed  the 
aforesaid  persons  [i  e.,  presbyter-bishops  and  deacons;  comp.  c.  42  and  57], 
and  afterwards  they  made  the  disposition  [or  provided  a  continuance,  if  we 
read  with  Lightfoot  iirtfumfv],  that  if  these  should  fall  asleep,  other  approved 
men  should  succeed  to  their  ministration." 

2  The  reading  is  obscure  and  disputed.     The  Alexandrian  MS.  reads: 
frcivofjLijv,  the  Constantinopolitan  :  entdofnjv  (both  have  EUI-OMEN}.    The 
former  word  is  rare  (from  v£fuot  or  from  vd/io?),  the  latter  is  not  found  in  the 
dictionaries  ;  and  hence  various  emendations  have  been  proposed,  as  &^ovofjL7J\> 
(Juniua),    littdoxyv  (Bryennios),    fatpobjv    (von  Gebhardt  and  Harnack), 
txtliovTJv  (Bunsen,  Lightfoot),  fatrptnnjv  (Hilgenfeld),  ^dopjV,  l.Kivop.iayy 
tntffTohjv,  iKiTayyv,  en  vdfiov.     Rothe  (Anfange,  p.  374)  ingeniously  trans* 
lates     kmvofjLTiv   "  testamentary   disposition  "    (testamenfariscJie   Verfugung  = 
^Trcvo/jtcV,  an  after-enactment,  a  codicil),  and  identifies  it  with  the  dsurspau 
dtard$et$  of  the  fragment  of  Irenseus.     But  this  is  rejected  by  the  latest 
editors  as  untenable.    Lightfoot  (with  Bunsen)  reads  iietfjLowjv>  permanence 
(not  "life-tenure,"  as  Bunsen  rendered  it).    The  drift  of  the  .-passage,  how 


138  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

fall  asleep,  other  approved  men  should  follow  them  in  office. 
Rothe  refers  "they"  and  "them"  to  the  apostles  as  the  main 
subject.  But  these  words  naturally  refer  to  the  congregational 
officers  just  before  mentioned,  and  in  this  case  the  f(  other  ap- 
proved men  "  are  not  successors  of  the  apostles,  but  of  the  pres- 
byter-bishops and  deacons.1  This  view  is  sustained  by  the  con- 
nection. The  difficulty  in  the  Corinthian  congregation  was  a 
rebellion,  not  against  a  single  bishop,  but  against  a  number  of 
presbyter-bishops,  and  Clement  reminds  them  that  the  apostles 
instituted  this  office  not  only  for  the  first  generation,  but  provided 
for  a  permanent  succession,  and  that  the  officers  were  appointed 
for  life,  and  could  therefore  not  be  deposed  so  long  as  they  dis- 
charged their  duties.  Hence  he  goes  on  to  say,  immediately 
after  the  disputed  passage  in  chapter  44 :  "  Wherefore  we  think 
that  those  cannot  justly  be  thrown  out  of  their  ministry  who 
were  appointed  either  by  them  (the  apostles),  or  afterwards  by 
other  eminent  men,  with  the  consent  of  the  whole  congregation; 
and  who  have  with  all  lowliness  and  innocency  ministered  to 
the  flock  of  Christ,  in  peace,  and  without  self-interest,  and  were 
for  a  long  time  commended  by  all." 

(10)  Finally,  the  philosophical  consideration,  that  the  uni- 
versal and  uncontested  spread  of  the  episcopate  in  the  second 
century  cannot  be  satisfactorily  explained  without  the  presump- 
tion of  at  least  the  indirect  sanction  of  the  apostles.  By  the 
same  argument  the  observance  of  Sunday  and  infant  baptism 
are  usually  traced  to  apostolic  origin.  But  it  is  not  quite  con- 
ever,  does  not  so  much  depend  upon  the  meaning  of  this  word  as  upon  the 
question  whether  the  apostles,  or  the  congregational  officers  are  the  grammati- 
cal subjects  of  the  following  verb,  xotjjy&ajfftv. 

1  See  also  Gebhardt  and  Harnack  (prestyteri  et  diawni  Mi,  gnos  a/postoU  ipsi 
wnstituemnt),  the  Roman  Catholic  editor  Funk  ("  KOitaflltotv,  ac.  epwcopt  et 
diaconi  de  quorum  successzone  Ctemens  agit"),  and  Bishop  Lightfoot  ("the  first 
generation  of  presbyters  appointed  by  the  apostles  themselves").  Comp.  also 
on  this  whole  passage  Lightfoot,  Phttippicm,  p.  203,  where  he  refutes  Rothe'a 
interpretation;  Baur  Ursprung  des  Episcopate,  p.  53;  Ewald,  Oesch.  des  Volkei 
Tsrad,  VIL  300 ;  Hitachi,  Alikath.  K.  358  and  413,  and  Hilgenfeld,  Apo& 
Voter,  70. 


2  44.  ORIGIN  OP  THE  EPISCOPATE.  139 

elusive,  since  most  of  the  apostles  died  before  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem.  It  could  only  apply  to  John,  who  was  the  living 
centre  of  the  church  in  Asia  Minor  to  the  close  of  the  first 
century.1 

II.  The  theory  of  the  POST-APOSTOUC  origin  of  the  episcopate 
as  a  separate  office  or  order,  and  its  rise  out  of  the  presidency 
of  the  original  congregational  presbyterate,  by  way  of  human, 
though  natural  and  necessary,  development,  is  supported  by  the 
following  facts : 

(1)  The  undeniable  identity  of  presbyters  and  bishops  in  the 
New  Testament,2  conceded  even  by  the  best  interpreters  among 
the  church  fathers,  by  Jerome,  Chrysostom,  and  Theodoret,  and 
by  the  best  scholars  of  recent  times. 

(2)  Later,  at  the  close  of  the  first  and  even  in  the  second 
century,  the  two  terms  are  still  used  in  like  manner  for  the  same 
office.    The  Eoman  bishop  Clement,  in  his  First  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians  says,  that  the  apostles,  in  the  newly-founded  churches, 
appointed  the  first  fruits  of  the  faitb,  i.  e.}  the  first  converts, 
"bishops  and  deacons."3    He  here  omits  the  7rpeerj9ure/w,  as 
Pauhdoes  in  Phil.  1 :  1,  for  the  simple  reason  that  they  are  in 
his  view  identical  with  ixlffxonoe  •  while  conversely,  in  c.  57,  he 
enjoins  subjection  to  presbyters,  without  mentioning  bishops.4 

1  Hence  Rothe  traces  the  institution  to  John.  And  Bishop  Lightfoot 
(Philippians,  p.  204)  is  inclined  to  this  view :  *'  Asia  Minor  was  the  nurse,  if 
not  the  mother  of  episcopacy  in  the  Gentile  churches.  So  important  an  insti- 
tution, developed  in  a  Christian  community  of  which  St.  John  was  the  living 
centre  and  guide,  could  hardly  have  grown  up  without  his  sanction:  and  early 
tradition  very  distinctly  connects  his  name  "with  the  appointment  of  bishops 
in  these  parts."  He  repeats  the  same  view  more  confidently  in  his  Igwxt,. 
and  Potyc. ,  I.  377. 

•Acts  20:  17,  28;  Phil.l:  1;  Tit.  1:  5;  1  Tim.  3:  1-7,  8-13;  1  Pet.  5: 
1,  2.  Comp.  the  author's  Hist,  of  the  Apost.  Oh.  \\  132,  133,  pp.  522-531  (N. 
York  ed.) ;  and  vol.  I.  p.  492  sqq. 

8  C.  42.  Comp.  the  Commentary  of  Lightfoot  "It  is  impossible  that  he 
should  have  omitted  the  presbyters,  more  especially  as  his  one  object  is  to 
defend  their  authority,  which  had  been  assailed.  The  words  tnicROKos  and 
irpttftbrspos  therefore  are  synonymes  in  Clement,  as  they  are  in  the  apostolic 
irriters.  In  Ignatius  and  Polycarp  they  first  appear  as  distinct  titles." 

4  The  fyovvevoi,  c.  1,  also,  and  the  npoTjyabfiEvoi,  c.  21,  are  not  bishops,  but 
congregational  officers  collectively,  as  in  Heb.  13 :  7,  17,  24. 


140  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

The  Didaehe  mentions  bishops  and  deacons,  but  no  presbyter^1 
Clement  of  Alexandria  distinguishes,  it  is  true,  the  doiinmntc, 
the  presbyterate,  and  the  episcopate;  but  he  supposes  only  a 
two-fold  official  character,  that  of  presbyters,  and  that  of 
deacons  —  a  view  which  found  advocates  so  late  as  the  middle 
ages,  even  in  pope  Urban  II.,  A.  D.  1091.  L-wtly,  Ircnajna, 
towards  the  close  of  the  second  century,  though  himself  a 
bishop,  makes  only  a  relative  difference  between  episcopi  and 
presbyteri  ;  speaks  of  successions  of  the  one  in  the  same  sense 
as  of  the  other;  terms  the  office  of  the  latter  episcopates;  and 
calls  the  bishops  of  Eome  "  presbyters."  2  Sometimes,  it  is 
true,  he  appears  to  use  the  term  "  presbyters  "  in  a  more  general 
sense,  for  the  old  men,  the  fathers.3  But  in  any  case  his 
language  shows  that  the  distinction  between  the  two  offices  was 
at  that  time  still  relative  and  indefinite. 

(3)  The  express  testimony  of  the  learned  Jerome,  that  the 
churches  originally,  before  divisions  arose  through  the  instiga- 
tion of  Satan,  were  governed  by  the  common  council  of  the 
presbyters,  and  not  till  a  later  period  was  one  of  the  presbyters 
placed  at  the  head,  to  watch  over  the  church  and  suppress 
schisms.4    He  traces  the  difference  of   the  office  simply  to 
"ecclesiastical  "  custom  as  distinct  from  divine  institution.5 

(4)  The  custom  of  the  church  of  Alexandria,  where,  from 
the  evangelist  Mark  down  to  the  middle  of  the  third  century, 
the  twelve  presbyters  elected  one  of  their  number  president, 
and  called  him  bishop.    This  fact  rests  on  the  authority  of  Je- 


1  Ch.  15  :  Xeiporwfaare  kawolg  kmotinovs  KOI  dutK&ixnif.    Sec  SchjiiTs  mono- 
graph on  the  Didache,  p.  211  sq. 

2  Ado.  Haer.  iii.  2  ,  |  2  ;  3,  {  2  ;  iv.  26,  \  2,  {4  and  \  5.    Conip.  also  the  let- 
ter of  Ireuseus  to  the  Boman  bishop  Victor  m  Euscb.,  v.  24. 

3  Comp.  2  Jno.  1.  and  3  Jno.  1. 

*  Ad  Titum  i.  7.    Comp.  Epist.  83  and  85. 

8  Ad  Tit.  i.  7  :  "  Sicut  ergo  presbyt&ri  sdunt,  see  ex  ecdesice  consueittdine  ci,  qui  mln 
prcepositvs  fuerit,  esse  subjectos,  ita,  episcopi  nwerint,  $e  mwjk  cowmtudwc, 
di&positwnis  Dominica  veritcde  presbyteris  esse  rnajores  et  in  commune  dcbara 
siam  regere."    The  Boman  deacon  Hilary  (Ambrosiaster)  says,  ad  1  Tim. 
10:    "I27c  enim  episcopus  est,  qui  inter  presbyteros  primus  eat."    Comp.  al 
Clirysostom  Horn,  xi,  in  Epist,  1  ad  Tim.  3  :  8. 


2  44.  ORIGIN  OF  THE  EPISCOPATE.  143 

rome,1  and  is  confirmed  independently  by  the  Annals  of  the  Alex- 
andrian patriarch,  Eutychius,  of  the  tenth  century.2  The  latter 
states  that  Mark  instituted  in  that  city  a  patriarch  (this  is  an 
anachronism)  and  twelve  presbyters,  who  should  fill  the  vacant 
patriarchate  by  electing  and  ordaining  to  that  office  one  of  their 
number  and  then  electing  a  new  presbyter,  so  as  always  to 
retain  the  number  twelve.  He  relates,  moreover,  that  down  to 
the  time  of  Demetrius,  at  the  end  of  the  second  century,  there 
was  no  bishop  in  Egypt  besides  the  one  at  Alexandria;  conse- 
quently there  could  have  been  no  episcopal  ordination  except  by 
going  out  of  the  province. 

III.  CONCLUSION.  The  only  satisfactory*  conclusion  from 
these  various  facts  and  traditions  seems  to  be,  that  the  episco- 
pate proceeded,  both  in  the  descending  and  ascending  scale, 
from  the  apostolate  and  the  original  presbyterate  conjointly,  as 
a  contraction  of  the  former  and  an  expansion  of  the  latter, 
without  either  express  concert  or  general  regulation  of  the 
apostles,  neither  of  which,  at  least,  can  be  historically  proved. 
It  arose,  instinctively,  as  it  were,  in  that  obscure  and  critical 
transition  period  between  the  end  of  the  first  and  the  middle 
of  the  second  century.  It  was  not  a  sudden  creation,  much  less 
the  invention  of  a  single  mind.  It  grew,  in  part,  out  of  the 
general  demand  for  a  continuation  of,  or  substitute  for,  the 

1  Epist.  ad  Evangdum  ( Opp.  iv.  p.  802,  ed.  Martinay) :  Alexandria  a  Mam 
ewmgdista  usque  ad  Heradam  et  Dionysium  episcopos  presbyteri  semper  uwm  ex 
se  electum  in  excdsiori  gradu  cottocatunj  episcopum  nominabaTti,  gwmodo  si  exertifou 
imperatorem  facial,  aut  diaconi  elegant  de  se,  quern  industrium  aoverint  et  archi- 
diaconum  vacant. 

8  Ed.  Oxon.  1658,  p.  331 :  "  Constituit  evangdista  Marcus  wia  cum  Bakcaiia 
patriarcha  duodecim  presbyteros,  qui  nempe  cum  patriarchs  manerent,  adeo  trf  euw 
vacaret  patriachatuSj  unum  e  duodecim  presbyteris  different,  cnius  capiti  rdiqwi 
^ndecim  mantis  imponentes  ipsi  lenedicerent  et  pafrwrcham  crearentj  deinde  wnm 
aliquem  vtisign&m,  digerent,  quern  secwai  presbyterum  constituerent,  loco  ejv^  gui 
foetus  est  patriarchaj  ut  ica  semper  exstarent  duodecim.  Neque  desiti  Alewndriae 
institutum  hoc  de  presbyteris,  tit  scUcet  -patriarehas  crearent  ex  presbyteris  dwdecim, 
usque  ad  tempora  Alexandri  patriarchs  AtexaTidriae.  Is  autem  vetuit,  ne  deincep* 
pairiarcham  presbyteri  crearent.  Et  decrervit,  ut  waortuo  patriarch* 
tpiscopi,  qi^jpatriarcham  ordinarent." 


142  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

apostolic  church  government,  and  this,  so  far  as  it  was 
missible  at  all,  very  naturally  passed  first  to  the  most  eminent 
disciples  and  fellow-laborers  of  the  apostles,  to  Mark,  Luke, 
Timothy,  Clement,  Ignatius,  Polycarp,  Papias,  which  accounts 
for  the  fact  that  tradition  makes  them  all  bishops  in  the  promi- 
nent sense  of  the  term.    It  was  further  occasioned  by  the  need 
of  a  unity  in  the  presbyterial  government  of  congregations, 
which,  in  the  nature  of  the  case  and  according  to  the  analogy 
of  the  Jewish  dp^effu^d^^o^1  required  a  head  or  president. 
This  president  was  called  bishop,  at  first  only  by  eminence,  as 
primus  inter  pares;  afterwards  in  the  exclusive  sense.    In  the 
smaller  churches  there  was,  perhaps,  from  the  beginning,  only 
one  presbyter,  who  of  himself  formed  this  centre,  like  the 
chorepisoopi  or  country-bishops  in  the  fourth  century.     The 
dioceses  of  the  bishops  in  Asia  Minor  and  North  Africa,  owing 
to  their  large  number,  in  the  second  and  third  centuries,  can 
hardly  have  exceeded  the  extent  of  respectable  pastoral  charges. 
James  of  Jerusalem,  on  the  other  hand,  and  his  immediate 
successors,  whose  positions  in  many  respects  were  altogether 
peculiar,  seem  to  have  been  the  only  bishops  in  Palestine. 
Somewhat  similar  was  the  state  of  things  in  Egypt,  where, 
down  to  Demetrius  (A.D.  190-232),  we  find  only  the  one  bishop 
of  Alexandria. 

"We  cannot  therefore  assume  any  strict  uniformity.  But  the 
whole  church  spirit  of  the  age  tended  towards  centralization; 
it  everywhere  felt  a  demand  for  compact,  solid  unity ;  and  this 
inward  bent,  amidst  the  surrounding  dangers  of  persecution  and 
heresy,  carried  the  church  irresistibly  towards  the  episcopate. 
In  so  critical  and  stormy  a  time,  the  principle,  union  is  strength, 
division  is  weakness,  prevailed  over  all.  In  fact,  the  existence 
of  the  church  at  that  period  may  be  said  to  have  depended  in  a 
great  measure  on  the  preservation  and  promotion  of  unity,  and 
that  in  an  outward,  tangible  form,  suited  to  the  existing  grade 
of  culture.  Such  a  unity  was  offered  in  the  bishop,  who  held  a 

1  Mark  5 :  35,  36,  38 ;  Luke  8 :  41-49 ;  Acts  18 :  8-i/. 


J44.  OEIGIN  OP  THE  EPISCOPATE.  143 

monarchical,  or  more  properly  a  patriarchal  relation  to  the  con- 
gregation. In  the  bishop  was  found  the  visible  representative 
of  Christ,  the  great  Head  of  the  whole  church.  In  the  bishop, 
therefore,  all  sentiments  of  piety  found  a  centre.  In  the 
bishop  the  whole  religious  posture  of  the  people  towards  God 
and  towards  Christ  had  its  outward  support  and  guide.  And 
iu  proportion  as  every  church  pressed  towards  a  single  centre, 
this  central  personage  must  acquire  a  peculiar  importance  and 
subordinate  the  other  presbyters  to  itself;  though,  at  the  same 
time,  as  the  language  of  Clement  and  Irenaeus,  the  state  of 
things  in  Egypt,  and  even  in  North  Africa,  and  the  testimony 
of  Jerome  and  other  fathers,  clearly  prove,  the  remembrance  of 
the  original  equality  could  not  be  entirely  blotted  out>  but  con- 
tinued to  show  itself  in  various  ways. 

Besides  this  there  was  also  a  powerful  practical  reason  for 
elevating  the  powers  of  the  bishop.  Every  Christian  congre- 
gation was  a  charitable  society,  regarding  the  care  of  the  widow 
and  orphan,  the  poor  and  the  stranger  as  a  sacred  trust ;  and 
hence  the  great  importance  of  the  bishop  as  the  administrative 
officer  by  whom  the  charitable  funds  were  received  and  the  alms 
disbursed.  In  Greek  communities  the  title  bishop  (ixfoxozoc, 
iTO/je^r^'c)  was  in  wide  use  for  financial  officers.  Their  ad- 
tninistrative  functions  brought  them  in  close  relation  to  the 
deacons,  as  their  executive  aids  in  the  care  of  the  poor  and  sick. 
The  archdeacon  became  the  right  arm,  the  aeye"  and  "heart" 
of  the  bishop.  In  primitive  times  every  case  of  poverty  or 
suffering  was  separately  brought  to  the  notice  of  the  bishop  and 
personally  relieved  by  a  deacon.  Afterwards  institutions  were 
founded  for  widows  and  orphans,  poor  and  infirm,  and  generally 
placed  under  the  superintendence  of  the  bishop;  but  personal 
responsibility  was  diminished  by  this  organized  charity,  and  the 
deacons  lost  their  original  significance  and  became  subordinate 
officers  of  public  worship.1 

1  The  philanthropic  and  financial  aspect  of  episcopacy  has  been  brought  out 
very  folly  by  Hatch,  in  his  Bampton  Lectures  on  Tb&  Organisation  of  the  Earlj 
Churches,  Lect.  IL 


144  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Whatever  may  be  thought,  therefore,  of  the  origin  and  the 
divine  right  of  the  episcopate,  no  impartial  historian  can  deny 
its  adaptation  to  the  wants  of  the  church  at  the  time,  and  its 
historical  necessity. 

But,  then,  this  primitive  catholic  episcopal  system  must  by  no 
means  be  confounded  with  the  later  hierarchy.  The  dioceses, 
excepting  those  of  Jerusalem,  "Ephesus,  Alexandria,  Antioch, 
and  Rome,  must  have  long  remained  very  small,  if  we  look  at 
fche  number  of  professing  Christians.  In  the  Apocalypse  seven 
such  centres  of  unity  are  mentioned  within  a  comparatively 
small  compass  in  Asia  Minor,  and  at  a  time  when  the  number  of 
Christians  was  insignificant.  In  the  year  258,  Cyprian  assem- 
bled a  council  of  eighty-seven  bishops  of  North  Africa.  The 
functions  of  the  bishops  were  not  yet  strictly  separated  from 
those  of  the  presbyters,  and  it  was-  only  by  degrees  that  ordina- 
tion, and,  in  the  Western  church,  confirmation  also,  came  to  be 
intrusted  exclusively  to  the  bishops. 

§  45.  Development  of  the  Episcopate.    Ignatius. 

It  is  matter  of  fact  that  the  episcopal  form  of  government  was 
universally  established  in  the  Eastern  and  Western  church  as 
early  as  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  Even  the  heretical 
sects,  at  least  the  Ebionites,  as  we  must  infer  from  the  commen- 
dation of  the  episcopacy  in  the  pseudo-Clementine  literature, 
were  organized  on  this  plan,  as  well  as  the  later  schismatic  par- 
ties of  Novatians,  Donatists,  etc.  But  it  is  equally  undeniable, 
that  the  episcopate  reached  its  complete  form  only  step  by  step. 
In  the  period  before  us  we  must  note  three  stages  in  this 
development  connected  with  the  name  of  Ignatius  in  Syria 
(d.  107  or  115),  Irenaeus  in  Gaul  (d.  202),  and  Cyprian  in  North 
Africa  (d.  258). 

The  episcopate  first  appears,  as  distinct  from  the  presbyterate, 
but  as  a  congregational  office  only  (in  distinction  from  the 
diocesan  idea),  and  as  yet  a  young  institution,  greatly  needing 
commendation,  in  the  famous  seven  (or  three)  Epistles  of  Igna< 


$45.  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  EPISCOPATE.    IGNATIUS.  145 

tins  of  Antioch,  a  disciple  of  the  apostles,  and  the  second  bishop 
of  that  see  (Evodius  being  the  first,  and  Hero  the  third).  He  is 
also  the  first  who  uses  the  term  "  catholic  church/3  as  if  episco- 
pacy and  catholicity  sprung  up  simultaneously.  The  whole 
story  of  Ignatius  is  more  legendary  than  real,  and  his  writings 
are  subject  to  grave  suspicion  of  fraudulent  interpolation.  We 
have  three  different  versions  of  the  Ignatian  Epistles,  but  only 
one  of  them  can  be  genuine ;  either  the  smaller  Greet  version, 
or  the  lately  discovered  Syriac.1  In  the  latter,  which  contains 
only  three  epistles,  most  of  the  passages  on  the  episcopate  are 
wanting,  indeed;  yet  the  leading  features  of  the  institution 
appear  even  here,  and  we  can  recognise  e&  ungue  konem.2  In 
any  case  they  reflect  the  public  sentiment  before  the  middle  of 
the  second  centnry. 

The  substance  of  these  epistles  (with  the  exception  of  that  to 
the  Romans,  in  which,  singularly  enough,  not  a  word  is  said 
about  bishops3),  consists  of  earnest  exhortations  to  obey  the 

1  The  question  of  the  genuineness  will  be  discussed  in  ?  165  (p.  660). 
Cureton  (1845)  Bunsen,  Lipsius,  and  others  accept  the  Syriac  version  as 
the  original  form  of  the  Ignatian  epistles,  and  regard  even  the  short  Greek 
text  as  corrupt,  but  yet  as  dating  from  the  middle  of  the  second  century. 
Rothe,  Hefele,  Schaff  (first  ed.),  Diisterdieck,  Uhlhorn,  Zahn,  Harnack,  defend 
the  genuineness  of  the  shorter  Greek  recension.    The  larger  Greek  recension 
is  universally  given  up  as  spurious.    The  origin  of  the  hierarchical  system  ia 
obscured  by  pious  frauds.    See  below,  J  164  and  165. 

2  In  the  Syriac  Ep.  to  Polycarp,  the  word  bishop  occurs  four  times ;  in  the 
Syriac  Ep.  to  the  Ephesians,  God  is  blessed  for  having  given  them  such  a  bishop 
as  Onesimus.    In  the  shorter  Greek  Ep.  to  Polycarp  episcopacy  is  mentioned 
in  the  salutation,  and  in  three  of  the  eight  chapters  (ch.  5  twice,  ch.  6  twice, 
ch.  8  once).    In  the  21  chapters  of  the  Greek  Ep.  to  the  Uph-esians,  the  woid 
bishop  occurs  thirteen  times,  presbyter  three  times,  and  deacon  once  (in  the  first 
six  chapters,  and  ch.  21).    In  the  Greek  TraUians,  the  bishop  appears  nine 
times ;  in  the  Magnesians,  eleven  times ;  in  the  Phttaddphians,  eight  times ;  in 
the  Smyrrweans,  nine  times.    Thus  in  the  three  Syriac  Epistles  the  bishop  is 
mentioned  hut  six  times ;  in  the  seven  shorter  Greek  Epistles  about  fifty  times; 
but  one  of  the  strongest  passages  is  found  in  the  Syriac  Epistle  to  Polycarp 
(ch.  5.  and  6.). 

«  Except  that  Ignatius  speaks  of  himself  as  *  the  bishop  of  Syria,"  who 
"has  found  favor  with  God,  being  sent  from  the  East  to  the  West"  (ch.  2V 
The  verb  eiriffKOTrfo  is  also  used,  but  of  Christ  (ch.  9). 
Vol.  TT.     10 


146  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

bishop  and  maintain  the  unity  of  the  church  against  the  Juda« 
istic  and  docetic  heresies.  With  the  near  prospect  and  the  most 
ardent  desire  for  martyrdom,  the  author  has  no  more  fervent 
wish  than  the  perfect  inward  'and  outward  unity  of  the  faith- 
ful; and  to  this  the  episcopate  seems  to  him  indispensable.  In 
his  view  Christ  is  the  invisible  supreme  head,  the  one  great 
universal  bishop  of  all  the  churches  scattered  over  the  earth. 
The  human  bishop  is  the  centre  of  unity  for  the  single  congre- 
gation, and  stands  in  it  as  the  vicar  of  Christ  and  even  of  God.1 
The  people,  therefore,  should  unconditionally  obey  him,  and  do 
nothing  without  his  will.  Blessed  are  they  who  are  one  with 
the  bishop,  as  the  church  is  with  Christ,  and  Christ  with  the 
Father,  so  that  all  harmonizes  in  unity.  Apostasy  from  the 
bishop  is  apostasy  from  Christ,  who  acts  in  and  through  the 
bishops  as  his  organs. 

We  shall  give  passages  from  the  shorter  Greek  text  (as  edited 
by  Zahn)  : 

"  If  any  one  is  able  to  continue  in  purity  (Iv  &rvst<]L,i.  e.,  in  the 
state  of  celibacy),  to  the  honor  of  the  flesh  of  our  Lord,  let  him 
continue  so  without  boasting  ;  if  he  boasts,  he  is  lost  (dbr^ero)  ; 
if  he  become  known  more  than  the  bishop,2  he  is  corrupt 
(ef&aptae).  It  is  becoming,  therefore,  to  men  and  women  who 
marry,  that  they  marry  by  the  counsel  of  the  bishop,  that  the 
marriage  may  be  in  the  Lord,  and  not  in  -lust.  Let  every  thing 
be  done  for  the  honor  of  God.  Look  to  the  bishop,  that  God 
also  [may  look]  upon  you.  I  will  be  in  harmony  with  those 
who  are  subject  to  the  bishop,  and  the  presbyters,  and  the 
deacons;  with  them  may  I  have  a  portion  near  God!"  This 
passage  is  one  of  the  strongest,  and  occurs  in  the  Syriac  Epistle 
to  Polycarp  as  well  as  in  the  shorter  Greek  recension.5  It 
characteristically  connects  episcopacy  with  celibacy:  the  as- 


efc  r6nov  $ew  TrpoKa&faEvoe,  each  bishop  being  thus  a  sort  of  pope. 

8  Zahn  reads,  Ad  Polyc.  cap.  5  :  kav  yvoGftq  irteov  TOV  kma^iroVj  i.  e.  if  he  be 
better  known  or  more  esteemed  than  the  bishop.  The  other  reading  is,  TT^V, 
beyond,  or  apart  from. 

1  Ad  Polyc.  cap.  5  and  6     The  Greek  text  yaries  but  little  from  the  Syriac. 


§45.  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  EPISCOPATE.   IGNATIUS.  147 

cetic  system  of  Catholicism  starts  in  celibacy,.  as  the  hierarchical 
organization  of  Catholicism  takes  its  rise  in  episcopacy.  "It 
becomes  you  to  be  in  harmony  with  the  mind  (or  sentence, 
P^ffl?)  °f  ^e  bishop,  as  also  ye  do.  For  your  most  estimable 
presbytery,  worthy  of  God,  is  fitted  to  the  bishop  as  the  strings 
are  to  the  harp."  l  "  It  is  evident  that  we  should  look  upon  the 
bishop  as  we  do  upon  the  Lord  himself."  2  "I  exhort  you  that 
ye  study  to  do  all  things  with  a  divine  concord:  the  bishop  pre- 
siding in  the  place  of  God  (e*V  r6xov  #eoD),  and  presbyters  in 
the  place  of  the  college  of  the  apostles,  (e«c  rdxov  auvedplou  r<#> 
d.noar6hov),  and  the  deacons,  most  dea»  to  me,  being  intrusted 
with  the  ministry  (dfoxoviav)  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  was  with  the 
Father  before  all  ages,  and  in  the  end  appeared  to  us."  3  "  Be 
subject  to  the  bishop,  and  to  one  another,  as  Christ  [was  subject] 
to  the  Father  according  to  the  flesh,  and  the  apostles  to  Christ 
and  to  the  Father  and  to  the  Spirit,  in  order  that  the  union  be 
carnal  (aapxtxq),  as  well  as  spiritual."  4  "  It  is  necessary,  as  is 
your  habit,  to  do  nothing  without  the  bishop,  and  that  ye  should 
be  subject  also  to  the  presbytery  (rep  xpeffpureplw),  as  to  the  apos- 
tles of  Jesus  Christ."5  "  As  many  as  are  of  God  and  of  Jesus 
Christ,  are  also  with  their  bishop."  6  "  Let  all  of  you  follow 
the  bishop,  as  Jesus  Christ  [follows]  the  Father;  and  the  pres- 
bytery as  ye  would  the  apostlas  ;  and  reverence  the  deacons  as 
the  ordinance  of  God.  Without  the  bishop  let  no  one  do  any- 
thing connected  with  the  church.  Let  that  eucharist  be  ao- 
counted  valid  which  is  [offered]  under  the  bishop  or  by  one  he 
has  appointed.  Wherever  the  bishop  is  found,  there  let  the 
people  be;  as  wherever  Christ  is,  there  is  the  catholic  church. 

1  Ad  Ephes.  c.  4:     Oora>q  ffvvijpfjLOffrai  rw  en  tffxdna),  &<;  %opdal  xt&dpa. 

2  Ad  Ephes.  c.  6:     Tdv  olv  snfoxoxov  d^Xov  ott  a>q  aMv  rdv  xbptov  £el 


3  Ad  Magnes.  c-  6. 

*  Ibid.  c.  13.    The  desire  for  *'  carnal"  unity  is  significant. 

5  Ad  TraUian.  c.  2:    yAva^xatov  sffrtv,  cbffxep  jroeetTe,  avsu  TOO 

TTpdffffeiv  ofj.5.*;,  x.  r.  L 
Ad  PMlad.  ^  3. 


148  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Without  the  bishop  it  is  not  lawful  either  to  baptize  or  to  cele- 
brate a  love-feast." l 

This  is  the  first  time  that  the  term  "catholic"  is  applied 
to  the  church,  and  that  episcopacy  is  made  a  condition  of 
catholicity. 

"He  that  honors  the  bishop,  shall  be  honored  by  God;  he 
that  does  anything  without  the  knowledge  of  the  bishop  serves 
the  devil."2 

This  is  making  salvation  pretty  much  depend  upon  obe- 
dience to  the  bishop ;  just  as  Leo  L,  three  centuries  later,  in  the 
controversy  with  Hilary  of  Aries,  made  salvation  depend  upon 
obedience  to  the  pope  by  declaring  every  rebel  against  the  pope 
to  be  a  servant  of  the  devil !  Such  daring  superabundance 
of  episcopalianism  clearly  betrays  some  special  design  and  raises 
the  suspicion  of  forgery  or  large  interpolations. .  But  it  may 
also  be  explained  as  a  special  pleading  for  a  novelty  which  to 
the  mind  of  the  writer  was  essential  to  the  very  existence  of 
the  church. 

The  peculiarity  in  this  Ignatian  view  is  that  the  bishop 
appears  in  it  as  the  head  and  centre  of  a  single  congregation, 
and  not  as  equally  the  representative  of  the  whole  church;  also, 
that  (as  in  the  pseudo-Clementine  Homilies)  he  is  the  vicar  of 
Christ^  and  not,  as  in  the  later  view,  merely  the  successor  of  the 
apostles, — the  presbyters  and  deacons  around  him  being  repre- 
sented as  those  successors ;  and  finally,  that  there  are  no  distinc- 
tions of  order  among  the  bishops,  no  trace  of  a  primacy;  all 
are  fully  coordinate  vicars  of  Christ,  who  provides  for  him- 
self in  them,  as  it  were,  a  sensible,  perceptible  omnipresence 
in  the  church.  The  Ignatian  episcopacy,  in  short,  is  congrega- 
tional, not  diocesan ;  a  new  and  growing  institution,  not  a  settled 
policy  of  apostolic  origin. 

1  Ad.  Smyrn.  c.  8 :    "Oxou  av  <pavrj  6  Infaxonos,  hsl  TO  nJLfj&o 
&ffittp  $nou  &v  TJ  XpiffTbt;  7^tfoDc,  &el  9  xaftohxy  £xxJLyffta. 
a  Ad  8myrn.  c.  9 :    *0    Tt^aiv    ^iffxoTcov    find    fteou    Tertfajrat'  6 


246.  EPISCOPACY  OP  IREN^EUS  AND  TERTULLIA3.    149 

§  46.  Episcopacy  at  the  time  of  Irenceus  and  Tertidlian. 

In  all  these  points  the  id&a  of  the  episcopate  in  Irenseus,  the 
great  opponent  of  Gnosticism  (about  180),  is  either  lower  or 
higher.  This  father  represents  the  institution  as  a  diocesan 
office,  and  as  the  continuation  of  the  apostolate,  as  the  vehicle  of 
the  catholic  tradition,  and  the  support  of  doctrinal  unity  in  oppo- 
sition to  heretical  vagaries.  He  exalts  the  bishops  of  the  original 
apostolic  churches,  above  all  the  church  of  Rome,  and  speaks 
with  great  emphasis  of  an  unbroken  episcopal  succession  as  a 
test  of  apostolic  teaching  and  a  bulwark  against  heresy.1 

At  the  same  time  the  wavering  terminology  of  Irenseus  in  the 
interchangeable  use  of  the  words  "bishop"  and  "presbyter55 
reminds  us  of  Clement  of  Rome,  and  shows  that  the  distinction 
of  the  two  orders  was  not  yet  fully  fixed.2 

i  Comp.  Adv.  Har.  in.  3,  ?  1,  2 ;  4, 1 ;  IV.  33,  §  8.  I  remember  what  great 
stress  the  late  Dr.  Pusey,  when  I  saw  him  at  Oxford  in  1S44,  laid  on  the  testi- 
mony of  Ireneeus  for  the  doctrine  of  an  unbroken  episcopal  succession,  as  the 
indispensable  mark  of  a  genuine  Catholic  church ;  while  he  ignored  the  simul- 
taneous growth  of  the  primacy,  which  a  year  afterwards  carried  his  friend,  J. 
H.  Newman,  over  to  the  church  of  Borne.  The  New  Testament  is  the  only 
safe  guide  and  ultimate  standard  in  all  matters  of  faith  and  discipline.  The 
teaching  of  Irenseus  on  episcopacy  is  well  set  forth  by  Lightfoot  (I.  c.  p.  237) : 
"Irenseus  followed  Ignatius  after  an  interval  of  about  two  generations.  With 
the  altered  circumstances  of  the  Church,  the  aspect  of  the  episcopal  office  has 
also  undergone  a  change.  The  religious  atmosphere  is  now  charged  with 
heretical  speculations  of  all  kinds.  Amidst  the  competition  of  rival  teachers, 
all  eagerly  bidding  for  support,  the  perplexed  believer  asks  for  some  decisive 
test  by  which  he  may  try  the  claims  of  disputants.  To  this  question  Irenaaus 
supplies  an  answer.  '  If  you  wish/  he  argues, f  to  ascertain  the  doctrine  of  the 
Apostles,  apply  to  the  Church  of  the  Apostles.'  In  the  succession  of  bishops 
tracing  their  descent  from  the  primitive  age  and  appointed  by  the  Apostles 
themselves,  you  have  a  guarantee  for  the  transmission  of  the  pure  faith,  which 
no  isolated,  upstart,  self-constituted  teacher  can  furnish.  There  is  the  Church 
of  Eome  for  instance,  whose  episcopal  pedigree  is  perfect  in  all  its  links,  and 
whose  earliest  bishops,  Linus  and  Clement,  associated  with  the  Apostles  them- 
selves :  there  is  the  Church  of  Smyrna  again,  whose  bishop  Polycarp,  the  dis- 
ciple of  St.  John,  died  only  the  other  day. "  Thus  the  episcopate  is  regarded 
now  not  so  much  as  the  centre  of  ecclesiastical  unity,  but  rather  as  the  depositary 
of  apostolic  tradition" 

><  Comp.  Adv.  Haer.  III.  2,  \  2;  IV.  20;  V.  20;  and  his  letter  to  Victor  of 
Rome  in  Eusebius,  H.  E.  V.  24. 


150  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

The  same  view  of  the  episcopal  succession  as  the  preserver  of 
apostolic  tradition  and  guardian  of  orthodox  doctrine,  we  find 
also,  though  less  frequently,  in  the  earlier  writings  of  Tertullian, 
with  this  difference  that  he  uniformly  and  clearly  distinguishes 
bishops  and  presbyters,  and  thus  proves  a  more  advanced  state 
of  the  episcopal  polity  at  his  time  (about  200).1  But  afterwards, 
in  the  chiliastic  and  democratic  cause  of  Montanism,  he  broke 
with  the  episcopal  hierarchy,  and  presented  against  it  the  anti- 
thesis that  the  church  does  not  consist  of  bishops,  and  that  the 
laity  are  also  priests.2 

§  47.  Oyprianie  Episcopacy. 

The  old  catholic  episcopalianism  reached  its  maturity  in  the 
middle  of  the  third  century  in  the  teaching  and  example  gf 
Cyprian,  bishop  and  martyr  of  the  church  in  North  Africa.  He 
represents  the  claims  of  episcopacy  in  close  connection  with  the 
idea  of  a  special  priesthood  and  sacrifice.3  He  is  the  typical 
high-churchman  of  the  ante-Nicene  age.  He  vigorously  put 
into  practice  what  he  honestly  believed.  He  had  a  good  oppor- 
tunity to  assert  his  authority  in  the  controversy  about  the  lapsed 
during  the  Decian  persecution,  in  the  schism  of  Felicissimus, 
and  in  the  controversy  on  heretical  baptism. 

Cyprian  considers  the  bishops  as  the  bearers  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  who  passed  from  Christ  to  the  apostles,  from  them  by 
ordination  to  the  bishops,  propagates  himself  in  an  unbroken 
line  of  succession,  and  gives  efficacy  to  all  religious  exercises. 
Hence  they  are  also  the  pillars  of  the  unity  of  the  church ;  nay, 
in  a  certain  sense  they  are  the  church  itself.  "  The  bishop," 

1  De  Praesor.  Hoer.  c.  32,  36. 

2  Non  ecdesia  numerus  episcoporum.    De  Pudic.  c.  21.    Comp.  \  42,  p.  128. 

8  ''As  Cyprian  crowned  the  edifice  of  episcopal  power,  so  also  was  he  the  first 
to  put  forward  without  relief  or  disguise  the  sacerdotal  assumptions :  and  so 
uncompromising  was  the  tone  in  which  he  asserted  them,  that  nothing  was  left 
to  his  successors  but  to  enforce  his  principles  and  reiterate  his  language." 
Lightfoot  I  c.  p.  257.  "If  with  Ignatius  the  bishop  is  the  centre  of  Christian 
unity,  if  with  Irenasus  he  is  the  depository  of  apostolic  tradition,  with  Cypriai 
he  is  the  absolute  vicegerent  of  Christ  in  things  spiritual.1'  Ibid.  p.  238. 


248.  THE  PSEUDO-CLEMENTINE  EPISCOPACY.        151 

says  he,  "  is  in  the  church,  and  the  church  in  the  bishop,  and  if 
any  one  is  not  with  the  bishop  he  is  not  in  the  church."1 
And  this  is  the  same  with  him  as  to  say,  he  is  no  Christian. 
Cyprian  is  thoroughly  imbued  with  the  idea  of  the  solidary 
unity  of  the  episcopate, — the  many  bishops  exercising  only  one 
office  in  solidum,  each  within  his  diocese,  and  each  at  the  same 
time  representing  in  himself  the  whole  office.3 

But  with  all  this,  the  bishop  still  appears  in  Cyprian  in  the 
closest  connexion  with  the  presbyters.  He  undertook  no  impor- 
tant matter  without  their  advice.  The  fourth  general  council, 
at  Carthage,  A.D.  398,  even  declared  the  sentence  of  a  bishop, 
without  the  concurrence  of  the  lower  clergy,  void,  and  decreed 
that  in  the  ordination  of  a  presbyter,  all  the  presbyters,  with  the 
bishop,  should  lay  their  hands  on  the  candidate.3 

The  ordination  of  a  bishop  was  performed  by  the  neighboring 
bishops,  requiring  at  least  three  in  number.  In  Egypt,  however, 
so  long  as  there  was  but  one  bishop  there,  presbyters  must  have 
performed  the  consecration,  which  Eutychius 4  and  Hilary  the 
Deacon5  expressly  assert  was  the  case. 

§48.  The  Pseudo-Clementine  Episcopacy. 

Besides  this  orthodox  or  catholic  formation  of  the  episcopate, 
the  kindred  monarchical  hierarchy  of  the  Ebionitic  sect  de- 
serves attention,  as  it  meets  us  in  the  pseudo-Clementine 
Homilies.  Chronologically  this  falls  in  the  middle  of  the 
second  century,  between  Ignatius  and  Irenseus,  and  forms  a  sort 

1  Epfet.  Ixvi.  3.   Comp.  Ep.  lv.  20 :   Christianus  non  est}  qwi  in  Ghristi  ecclesia 
non  est. 

2  De  Unit.  Ecd.  c.  5 :  Hfyiscopatus  unus  est,  cujus  a  singulis  in  solidwn  pars 
tenetur.    'Comp.  Ep.  lv.  20 :    Qmm  sit  a  Christo  una  ecclesia  per  totum  mundum 
in  multa  membra  divisa,  item  episcopates  unus  episcoporum  multorvm  concordi 


8  Can.  3 :  Presbyter  quum  ordinatur,  episcopo  eum  benedicente  et  manum  super 
caput  ejus  tenentet  etiam  omnes  presbyteri,  qui  praesentes  sunt,  manus  suas  juxfa 


manum  episcopi  super  capui  unus  wnewu. 

4  JSutyehii  Patriarchce  Alexandr.  Annal.  interpr.  Pocockio  (Oxon.  1658, 1.  p^ 
331).    See  the  passage  quoted,  p.  141. 

*  Or  Ambrosiaster,  Ad  Eph.  iv.  11. 


152  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

of  transition  from  the  former  to  the  latter ;  though  it  cannot 
exactly  be  said  to  have  influenced  the  Catholic  chorch.  It  is 
rather  a  heretical  counterpart  of  the  orthodox  episcopate.  The 
organization  which  consolidated  the  Catholic  church  answered 
the  same  purpose  for  a  sect.  The  author  of  the  pseudo- 
Clementina,  like  Ignatius,  represents  the  bishop  as  the  vicar  of 
Christ,1  and  at  the  same  time,  according  to  the  view  of  Irenseus, 
as  the  vicar  and  successor  of  the  apostles ; 2  but  outstrips  both 
in  his  high  hierarchical  expressions,  such  as  xd&ed/ja  $p6vo$ 
roD  Intffxonou,  and  in  his  idea  of  the  primacy,  or  of  a  universal 
church  monarchy,  which  he  finds,  however,  not  as  Irenaeus 
suggests  and  Cyprian  more  distinctly  states,  in  Peter  and  the 
Roman  see,  but,  agreeably  to  his  Judaistic  turn,  in  James  of 
Jerusalem,  the  "  bishop  of  bishops." 3 

The  Maniohseans  had  likewise  a  hierarchical  organization  (as 
the  Mormons  in  modern  times). 

Montanism,  on  the  other  hand,  was  a  democratic  reaction 
against  the  episcopal  hierarchy  in  favor  of  the  general  priest- 
hood, and  the  liberty  of  teaching  and  prophesying,  but  it  was 
excommunicated  and  died  out,  till  it  reappeared  under  a  dif- 
ferent form  in  Quakerism. 

§  49.  Beginnings  of  the  Metropolitan  and  Patriarchal  Systems. 

Though  the  bishops  were  equal  in  their  dignity  and  powers  as 
successors  of  the  apostles,  they  gradually  fell  into  different  ranks, 
according  to  the  ecclesiastical  and  political  importance  of  their 
several  districts. 

1.  On  the  lowest  level  stood  the  bishops  of  the  country 
churches,  the  chorepisGopi  who,  though  not  mentioned  before 
the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century,  probably  originated  at  an 
'earlier  period.4  They  stood  between  the  presbyters  and  the  city 

i  Horn.  iii.  60,  62,  66,  70.    Ep.  Clem,,  ad  Jac.  17.    Comp.  Beeogn.  iii.  06. 
*  H<m.  xi.  36 ;  Recogn.  iii.  66 ;  vi.  15. 
« 'E7r/ff/a>7ro£  kKLGriiruv,  ffom.  xi.  35 ;  Eecogn.  iv.  35. 

4  The  country  bishops  (xopeirtffKQKoi)  appear  first  in  the  councils  of  Ancyra 
•ad  Neo-Csesarea,  314,  and  again  in  the  Council  of  Nicaea.    They  continued  to 


?.  49.  METROPOLITAN  AND  PATKIABCHAL  SYSTEMS,    153 

bishops,  and  met  the  wants  of  episcopal  supervision  in  the 
villages  of  large  dioceses  in  Asia  Minor  and  Syria,  also  in 
Gaul. 

2.  Among  the  city  bishops  the  metropolitans  rose  above  the  rest, 
that  is,  the  bishops  of  the  capital  cities  of  the  provinces.1    They 
presided  in  the  provincial  synods,  and,  as  primi  inter  pares, 
ordained  the  bishops  of  the  province.     The  metropolitan  system 
appears,  from  the  Council  of  Nicsea  in  325,  to  have  been  already 
in  operation  at  the  time  of  Constantine  and  Eusebius,  and  was 
afterwards  more  fully  carried  out  in  the  East.    In  JSTorth  Africa 
the  oldest  bishop,  hence  called  senex,  stood  as  primas,  at  the  head 
of  his  province;  but  the  bishop  of  Carthage  enjoyed  the  highest 
consideration,  and  could  summon  general  councils. 

3.  Still  older  and  more  important  is  the  distinction  of  apostohc 
mother-churches,2  such  as  those  at  Jerusalem,  Antioch,  Alexan- 
dria, Ephesus,  Corinth,  and  Borne.    In  the  time  of  Irenaeus 
and  Tertullian  they  were  held  in  the  highest  regard,  as  the  chief 
bearers  of  the  pure  church  tradition.    Among  these  Antioch, 
Alexandria,  and  Eome  were  most  prominent,  because  they  were 
the  capitals  respectively  of  the  three  divisions  (eparchice)  of  the 
Roman  empire,  and  centres  of  trade  and  intercourse,  combining 
with  their  apostolic  origin  the  greatest  political  weight    To  the 
bishop  of  Antioch  fell  all  Syria  as  his  metropolitan  district  ;  to 
the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  all  Egypt  ;  to  the  bishop  of  Borne, 
central  and  lower  Italy,  without  definite  boundaries. 

4.  Here  we  have  the  germs  of  the  eparchal  or  patriarchal  sys- 
tem, to  wfeich  the  Greek  church  to  this  day  adheres.    The  name 
patriarch  was  at  first,  particularly  in  the  East,  an  honorary  title 
for  all  bishops,  and  was  not  till  the  fourth  century  exclusively 

exist  in  the  East  till  the  9th  century,  when  they  were  superseded  by  the  exarchs 
(&apxpi)i  In  the  West,  the  chorepiscopi  performed  regular  episcopal  functions, 
without  proper  subordination  to  the  diocesans,  and  hence  excited  jealousy  and 
hostility  till  tne  office  was  abolished  under  Charlemagne,  and  continued  only 
as  a  title  ot  various  cathedral  dignitaries.  See  Haddan  in  Smith  &  Cheetham, 
Diet.  Chr.  Ant.  L  354>  *&&  &&  authorities  quoted  there* 


Sedes  avostolica,  matrices  ecetexfa* 


154  -  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

appropriated  to  the  bishops  of  the  three  ecclesiastical  and  poli- 
tical capitals  of  the  Roman  empire,  Antioch,  Alexandria  and 
Rome,  and  also  to  the  bishop  of  Jerusalem  honoris  causa,  and 
the  bishop  of  Constantinople  or  New  Rome.  So  in  the  West 
the  term  papa  afterwards  appropriated  by  the  Roman  bishop, 
as  summus  pontifex,  vioarius  Christi,  was  current  for  a  long  time 
in  a  more  general  application. 

§  50.  Germ  of  the  Papacy. 
Oomp.  the  Lit.  in  vol.  I.  ?  25  (p.  245). 

BLONDEL:   Fraite  historique  de  laprimauti  en  Ffylise.    Geneve,  1641. 

SALMASITTS:  De  Primaiu  Papce.    Lugd.  Bat.  1645. 

Is.  BABBOW:  The  Pope's  Supremacy.  Lond,  1680  (new  ed.  Oxf.  1836. 
K  York,  1845). 

EOTEENSEE  (E.  C.):  Der  Primat  Des  Papstes  in  alien  christlichen 
Jahrhunderten,  3  vols.  Mainz,  1836-38  (1. 1-98). 

KEXRICE:  (E.  C.,  archbishop  of  Baltimore,  d.  1853) :  The  Primacy  of  the 
Apostolic  See  vindicated.  N.  York,  4th  ed.  1855. 

E.  I.  WILBERFOBCE  (formerly  archdeacon  in  the  Anglican  church ;  died 
in  the  Eoman  church,  1857) :  An  Inquiry  into  the  Principles  of  Church 
Authority;  or  Reasons  for  Recalling  my  subscriptions  to  the  Royal 
Supremacy.  Lond.  1854  (ch.  vi.-x.). 

J.  E.  EIDDLE  :  The  History  of  the  Papacy  to  the  Period  of  the  Reforma- 
tion.  Lond.  1856.  2  vols.  (Chapter  1,  p.  2-113 ;  chiefly  taken  from 
Schrockh  and  Planck). 

THOMAS  GREEJSTWOOD:  Cathedra  Petri.  'A  Political  History  of  the  great 
Latin  Patriarchate.  Lond.  1856-1872.  6  vols.  Yol.  L  ch.  I.-VI. 
(A  work  of  independent  and  reliable  learning.) 

JOH.  FBIEDBICH  (Old  Oath.) :  Zur  altesten  Geschichte  des  Primates  in  der 
Kirche.  Bonn,  1879. 

E.  EENAN:  Conferences  d'Angleterre.  Rome  et  le  christianisme.  Paris 
1880.  The  Hibbert  Lectures  delivered  in  Lond.  1880.  English 
translation  by  Charles  Beard,  London  (Williams  &  Norgate)  1880, 
another  by  Erskine  Clement  (Boston,  1880).  Consists  mostly  of  ex- 
tracts from  his  books  on  the  Origin  of  Christianity,  skillfully  put 
together. 

E.  FOEMBT  (E.  C.) :   Ancient  Rome  and  its  connection  wth  the  Christian 

Religion.  London  1880. 
Jos.  LANGEN  (Old  Oath.) :  Geschichte  der  romiscnen  Kirche  bis  zum  Pontifi* 

cote  Leo's  L  Bonn,  1881. 
jft.  F.  LHTLEDALE  (Anglo-Oath.):  The  Petrine  Claims.  A  Oritical 

Inguii'y.    London  1889.    Controversial. 


g  50.  GERMS  OF  THE  PAPACY.  155 

Among  the  great  bishops  of  Antioch,  Alexandria,  and  Borne, 
the  Roman  bishop  combined  all  the  conditions  for  a  primacy, 
which,  from  a  purely  honorary  distinction,  gradually  became  the 
basis  of  a  supremacy  of  jurisdiction.  The  same  propension  to 
monarchical  unity,  which  created  out  of  the  episcopate  a  centre, 
first  for  each  congregation,  then  for  each  diocese,  pressed  on 
towards  a  visible  centre  for  the  whole  church.  Primacy  and 
episcopacy  grew  together.  In  the  present  period  we  already 
find  the  faint  beginnings  of  the  papacy,  in  both  its  good  and  its 
evil  features ;  and  with  them,  too,  the  first  examples  of  earnest 
protest  against  the  abuse  of  its  power.  In  the  Nicene  age  ihe 
bishop  of  Jerusalem  was  made  an  honorary  patriarch  in  view  of 
the  antiquity  of  that  church,  though  his  diocese  was  limited ;  and 
from  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  the  new  patriarch  of 
Constantinople  or  New  Rome,  arose  to  the  primacy  among  thfe 
eastern  patriarchs,  and  became  a  formidable  rival  of  the  bishop 
of  old  Rome. 

The  Roman  church  claims  not  only  human  but  divine  right 
for  the  papacy,  and  traces  its  institution  directly  to  Christ,  when 
he  assigned  to  Peter  an  eminent  position  in  the  work  of  found- 
ing his  church,  against  which  even  the  gates  of  hades  shall 
never  prevail.  This  claim  implies  several  assumptions,  viz.  (1) 
that  Peter  by  our  Lord's  appointment  had  not  simply  a  primacy 
of  personal  excellency,  or  of  honor  and  dignity  (which  must  be 
conceded  to  him),  but  also  a  supremacy  of  jurisdiction  over  the 
other  apostles  (which  is  contradicted  by  the  fact  that  Peter  him- 
self never  claimed  it,  and  that  Paul  maintained  a  position  of 
perfect  independence,  and  even  openly  rebuked  him  at  An- 
tioch,  Gal.  2 :  11);  (2)  that  the  privileges  of  this  primacy  and 
supremacy  are  not  personal  only  (as  the  peculiar  gifts  of  Paul 
or  John  undoubtedly  were),  but  official,  hereditary  and  trans- 
ferable ;  (3)  that  they  were  actually  transferred  by  Peter,  not  upon 
the  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  or  Antioch  (where  Peter  certainly  was), 
but  upon  the  bishop  of  Rome ;  (4)  that  Peter  was  not  only  at 
Rome  (which  is  very  probable  after  63,  though  not  as  certain 
as  Paul's  presence  and  martyrdom  in  Rome),  but  acted  there 


156  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

as  bishop  till  his  martyrdom,  and  appointed  a  successor  (of 
which  there  is  not  the  slightest  historical  evidence);  and  (5)  that 
the  bishops  of  Rome,  as  successors  of  Peter,  have  always  en- 
joyed and  exercised  an  universal  jurisdiction  over  the  Christian 
church  (which  is  not  the  case  as  a  matter  of  fact,  and  still  less 
as  a  matter  of  conceded  right). 

Leaving  a  full  discussion  of  most  of  these  points  to  polemical 
theology,  we  are  here  concerned  with  the  papacy  as  a  growth  of 
history,  and  have  to  examine  the  causes  which  have  gradually 
raised  it  to  its  towering  eminence  among  the  governing  institu- 
tions of  the  world. 

The  historical  influences  which  favored  the  ascendency  of  the 
Roman  see  were : 

(1)  The  high  antiquity  of  the  Roman  church,  which  had 
been  honored  even  by  Paul  with  the  most  important  doctrinal 
epistle  of  the  New  Testament.    It  was  properly  the  only  apos- 
tolic mother-church  in  the  West,  and  was  thus  looked  upon 
from  the  first  by  the  churches  of  Italy,  Gaul,  and  Spain,  with 
peculiar  reverence. 

(2)  The  labors,  martyrdom,  and  burial  at  Rome  of  Peter  and 
Paul,  the  two  leading  apostles.    The  whole  Roman  congrega- 
tion passed  through  the  fearful  ordeal  of  martyrdom  during 
the  Neronian  persecution,  but  must  soon  afterwards  have  been 
reorganized,  with  a  halo  of  glory  arising  from  the  graves  of  the 
victims. 

(3)  The  political  pre-eminence  of  that  metropolis  of  the  world, 
which  was  destined  to  rule  the  European  races  with  the  sceptre 
of  the  cross,  as  she  had  formerly  ruled  them  with  the  sword. 

(4)  The  executive  wisdom  and  the  catholic  orthodox  instinct 
of  the  Roman  church,  which  made  themselves  felt  in  this 
period  in  the  three  controversies  on  the  time  of  Easter,  the 
penitential  discipline,  and  the  validity  of  heretical  baptism. 

To  these  may  be  added,  as  secondary  causes,  her  firmness 
under  persecutions,  and  her  benevolent  care  for  suffering 
brethren,  even  in  distant  places,  as  celebrated  by  Dionysius  of 
Corinth  (180),  and  by  Eusebius. 


2  50.  GERMS  OF  THE  PAPACY.  1§7 

From  the  time  of  St.  Paul's  Epistle  (58),  when  he  bestowed 
high  praise  on  the  earlier  Eoman  converts,  to  the  episcopate 
of  Victor  at  the  close  of  the  second  centurj;  and  the  unfavora- 
ble account  by  Hippolytus  of  Pope  Zephyrinus  and  Pope  Cal- 
listus,  we  have  no  express  and  direct  information  about  the 
internal  state  of  the  Roman  church.  But  incidentally  it  is 
more  frequently  mentioned  than  any  other.  Owing  to  its 
metropolitan  position,  it.  naturally  grew  in  importance  and 
influence  with  the  spread  of  the  Christian  religion  in  the  em- 
pire. Rome  was  the  battle-field  of  orthodoxy  and  heresy,  and 
a  resort  of  all  sects  and  parties.  It  attracted  from  every 
direction  what  was  true  and  false  in  philosophy  and  religion. 
Ignatius  rejoiced  in  the  prospect  of  suffering  for  Christ  in  the 
centre  of  the  world;  Polycarp  repaired  hither  to  settle  with 
Anicetus  the  paschal  controversy;  Justin  Martyr  presented  there 
his  defense  of  Christianity  to  the  emperors,  and  kid  down  for 
it  his  life  ;  Irenseus,  Tertullian,  and  Cyprian  conceded  to  that 
church  a  position  of  singular  pre-eminence.  Eome  was  equally 
sought  as  a  commanding  position  by  heretics  and  theosophic 
jugglers,  as  Simon  Magus,  Valentine,  Marcion,  Cerdo,  and  a 
host  of  others.  No  wonder,  then,  that  the  bishops  of  Rome 
at  an  early  date  were  looked  upon  as  metropolitan  pastors,  and 
spoke  and  acted  accordingly  with  an  air  of  authority  which 
reached  far  beyond  their  immediate  diocese. 

Clement  of  Rome. 

The  first  example  of  the  exercise  of  a  sort  of  papal  authority 
is  found  towards  the  close  of  the  first  century  in  the  letter  of 
the  Eoman  bishop  Clement  (d.  102)  to  the  bereaved  and  dis- 
tracted church  of  Corinth.  This  epistle,  full  of  beautiful  ex- 
hortations to  harmony,  love,  and  humility,  was  sent,  as  the  very 
address  shows,1  not  in  the  bishop's  own  name,  which  is  not 


1  'H  SKKtycia  TOV  &eov,  %  irapoiKOwa  'Pety^  rf  eia&ijafy  rcm  foou,  rf 
K6pw&ov.  "  The  church  of  God  which  sojourns  at  Rome  to  the  church  of  God 
which  sojourns  at  Corinth."  TLdpoiKo?  is  a  temporary,  K&TOLKOC  a  permanent, 
resident  The  Christians  appear  here  as  strangers  and  pilgrims  in  this  world, 
*Jio  have  their  home  in  heaven  ;  comp.  1  Pet.  1  :  17  ;  2  :  11  ;  Eeb.  11  :  IS 


158  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

mentioned  at  all,  but  in  that  of  the  Eoman  congregation, 
which  speaks  always  in  the  first  person  plural.  It  was  a 
service  of  love,  proffered  by  one  church  to  another  in  time  of 
need.  Similar  letters  of  instruction,  warning  and  comfort  were 
written  to  other  congregations  by  Ignatius,  Poly  carp,  Dionysius 
of  Corinth,  Irenseus.  Nevertheless  it  can  hardly  be  denied  that 
the  document  reveals  the  sense  of  a  certain  superiority  over  al] 
ordinary  congregations.  The  Roman  church  here,  without  being 
asked  (as  far  as  appears),  gives  advice,  with  superior  administra- 
tive wisdom,  to  an  important  church  in  the  East,  dispatches 
messengers  to  her,  and  exhorts  her  to  order  and  unity  in  a  tone 
of  calm  dignity  and  authority,  as  the  organ  of  God  and  the  Holy 
Spirit.1  This  is  all  the  more  surprising  if  St.  John,  as  is 
probable,  was  then  still  living  in  Ephesus,  which  was  nearer  to 
Corinth  than  Rome.  The  hierarchical  spirit  arose  from  the 
domineering  spirit  of  the  Roman  church,  rather  than  the 
Roman  bishop  or  the  presbyters  who  were  simply  the  organs 
of  the  people.2  But  a  century  later  the  bishop  of  Rome  was 
substituted  for  the  church  of  Rome,  when  Victor  in  his  own 
name  excommunicated  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor  for  a  trifling 
difference  of  ritual.  From  this  hierarchical  assumption  there 
was  only  one  step  towards  the  papal  absolutism  of  a  Leo  and 
Hildebrand,  and  this  found  its  ultimate  doctrinal  climax  in  the 
Vatican  dogma  of  papal  infallibility. 


Ignatius',  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans  (even  in  the  Syriac 
recension),  applies  to  that  congregation  a  number  of  high-sound- 
ing titles,  and  describes  her  as  "  presiding  in  the  place  of  the 

1  This  is  very  evidant  towards  the  close  from  the  newly  discovered  portions, 
chs.  59,  62  and  63  (edition  of  Bryennios,  Const.  1875).*  These  chapters  shed 
new  light  on  the  origin  of  the  papal  domination.  Comp.  the  judicious  remarks 
of  Lightfoot  in  his  Appendix  to  £  Clement  of  Rome  (Lond.  1877),  p.  252  sqq. 

y  It  is  quite  evident  from  the  Epistle  itself  that  at  that  time  the  Roman  con- 
gregation was  still  governed  by  a  college  of  presbyters  (collegiatisch,  nickt 
monarchisch,  as  Langen,  L  c.  p.  81,  expresses  it), 


I  50  GERMS  OF  THE  PAPACY.          159 

region  of  the  Bomans,"  and  as  "  taking  the  lead  in  charity."  J  This 
is  meant  as  a  commendation  of  her  practical  benevolence  for  which 
she  was  famous.  Dionysius  of  Corinth  in  his  letter  to  Soter  of 
Rome,  testifies  to  it  as  saying  ;  "  This  practice  has  prevailed  with 
you  from  the  very  beginning,  to  do  good  to  all  the  brethren  in 
every  way,  and  to  send  contributions  to  many  churches  in  every 
city."2  The  Eoman  church  was  no  doubt  more  wealthy  than 
any  other,  and  the  liberal  use  of  her  means  must  have  greatly 
increased  her  influence.  Beyond  this,  Ignatius  cannot  be  quoted 
as  a  witness  for  papal  claims.  He  says  not  a  word  of  the 
primary,  nor  does  he  even  mention  Clement  or  any  other 
bishop  of  Kome.  The  church  alone  is  addressed  throughout. 
He  still  had  a  lively  sense  of  the  difference  between  a  bishop 
and  an  apostle.  "  I  do  not  command  you,"  he  writes  to  the  * 
Romans,  "as  if  I  were  Peter  or  Paul;  they  were  apostles." 

Irenceus. 

Irenseus  calls  Rome  the  greatest,  the  oldest  (?)  church,  acknow- 
ledged by  all,  founded  by  the  two  most  illustrious  apostles,  Peter 
and  Paul,  the  church,  with  which,  on  account  of  her  more  im- 
portant precedence,  all  Christendom  must  agree,  or  (according  to 
another  interpretation)  to  which  (as  the  metropolis  of  the  world) 
all  other  churches  must  resort.3  The  "more  important  pre- 


f  aydini?,  prcesid&ns  in  caritate.  Inscription.  Zahn  in  his 
ed.,  p.  75,  says  :  "  In  caritatis  operibus  semper  primum  locum  sibi  vindicavit  ecclesia 
Ewwna?  Some  Roman  Catholic  writers  (as  Mohler,  Patrol  L  144)  explain 
the  phrase  very  artificially  and  hierarchically  :  "  head  of  the  love-union  of 
Christendom  (  Vorsteherin  des  Liebesbundes)"  Agape  never  means  church,  but 
either  love,  or  love-feast.  See  Langen,  1.  c.  p.  94. 

.     «  Euseb.,  Hist.  EccL  IV.  23,  10:    %  apxw  vfuv  £&os  tori  TOVTO,  irdvra?  ptv 
EiiepyereZv,  eKKhqniaiG  re  iroWuug  raZf  pard.  icaoav  irdfav  e<j>66ta 


3  The  famous  passage,  Adv.  Hacr.  iii.  \  2,  is  only  extant  in  Latin,  and  of 
disputed  interpretation  :  "Ad  hane  emm  eedesiam  propter  potentiorem  (according 
to  Massuet's  conjecture:  potiorem)  principalitatem  necesse  est  omnem.  convenire 
gccZesiam,  hoc  est,  eos  qui  sunt  undiqwe  fideles,  in  qua  semper  ab  k  is,  qui  sunt 
undique,  conservafa  est  ab  apostolis  traditio."  In  the  original  Greek  it  probably 
read  :  TLp6c  TaLrrjv  yao  rty>  SKK^ffiav  6ia  T%V  iKavuriflav  xpurelav  ovuftaivew  (or. 
in  the  local  sense,  avvtyxeoBat)  del  (according  to  others:  niwy/cy,  natural  necea- 
aity}  naffav  TT)V  kKjOtfjalav,  etc.  The  stress  lies  on  princiyalitas,  which  stand? 


160  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

cedence"  places  her  above  the  other  apostolic  churches,  to 
which  likewise  a  precedence  is  allowed. 

This  is  surely  to  be  understood,  however,  as  a  precedence  only 
of  honor,  not  of  jurisdiction.  Eor  when  Pope  Victor,  about  the 
year  190,  in  hierarchical  arrogance  and  intolerance,  broke  fellow- 
ship with  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor,  for  no  other  reason  but 
because  they  adhered  to  their  tradition  concerning  the  celebration 
of  Easter,  the  same  Irenseus,  though  agreeing  with  him  on  the 
disputed  point  itself,  rebuked  him  very  emphatically  as  a  trou- 
bier  of  the  peace  of  the  church,  and  declared  himself  against  & 
forced  uniformity  in  such  unessential  matters.  Nor  did  the 
Asiatic  churches  allow  themselves  to  be  intimidated  by  the  dicta- 
tion of  Victor,  They  answered  the  Roman  tradition  with  that 
of  their  own  sedes  apostolieae.  The  difference  continued  until  the 
council  at  Nicsea  at  last  settled  the  controversy  in  favor  of  Ihe 
Roman  practice,  but  even  long  afterwards  the  old  Brithli 
churches  differed  from  the  Roman  practice  in  the  Easter 
observance  to  the  time  of  Gregory  I. 

Hippolytus. 

The  celebrated  Hippolytus,  in  the  beginning  of  the  third 
century,  was  a  decided  antagonist  of  the  Roman  bishops,  Zephy- 
rinus  and  Callistus,  both  for  doctrinal  and  disciplinary  reasons. 
Nevertheless  we  learn  'from  his  work  called  Philosophumena, 
that  at  that  time  the  Roman  bishop  already  claimed  an  absolute 

probably  for  Kpursia  (so  Thierscb  and  Gieseler).  Comp.  Iren.  IV.  38,  3,  where 
irpuTsbsi  is  rendered  prindpalitatem  habet.  Stieren  and  Ziegler  ( Irenceus,  1871,  p. 
152),  however,  translate  propter  potentiorem  prindpalitatem :  ct&  rfiv  Imvuripav 
apxaidTTjTa,  "on  account  of  the  higher  antiquity?'  Comp.  on  the  whole  passage 
an  essay  by  Thiersch  in  the  "Studien  und  Kritiken"  1842,  512  pqq.;  Gieseler 
1. 1.  p  214  (\  51) ;  Schneemann :  Sancti  Irenosi  de  ecclesice  Romance  principal 
testimonium  commentatum  et  defen&um,  Freiburg  i.  B.  1870,  and  Langen,  I  c.  p. 
170  sqq  Langen  (who  is  an  Old  Catholic  of  the  Dollinger  school)  explains : 
"Die  potior  principalitas  bezeichnet  den  Voirang,  welchen  ctieKirche  der  Hauptstad! 
als  solche  vor  alien  ubrigen  Kirchen  besass  ....  die  Haupstadt  war  das  Centrum 
des  dam&ligen  Weltverkehrs,  wid  in  Folge  dessen  der  Sammelplatz  von  Christen 
viler  Art"  He  defends  the  local  sense  of  convenire  by  parallel  passages  from 
Herveus  of  Bordeaux  and  Hugo  Eterianus  (p.  172  sq.).  But  the  moral  sense 
(fp  agree)  seems  more  natujpal. 


g  50.  GERMS  OF  THE  PAPACY.  161 

power  within  his  own  jurisdiction ;  and  that  Callistus,  to  the 
great  grief  of  part  of  the  presbytery,  laid  down  the  principle, 
that  a  bishop  can  never  be  deposed  or  compelled  to  resign  by  the 
presbytery,  even  thongh  he  have  committed  a  mortal  sin. 

Tertuttian. 

Tertullian  points  the  heretics  to  the  apostolic  mother  churches, 
as  the  chief  repositories  of  pure  doctrine;  and  among  these  gives 
especial  prominence  to  that  of  Rome,  where  Peter  was  crucified, 
Paul  beheaded,  and  John  immersed  unhurt  in  boiling  oil  (?)  and 
then  banished  to  the  island.  Yet  the  same  father  became  after- 
wards an  opponent  of  Rome.  He  attacked  its  loose  penitential 
discipline,  and  called  the  Roman  bishop  (probably  Zephyrinus), 
in  irony  and  mockery,  "pontifeos  maximum"  and  st episcopm 
episeoporum" 

Cyprian. 

Cyprian  is  clearest,  both  in  his  advocacy  of  the  fundamental 
idea  of  the  papacy,  and  in  his  protest  against  the  mode  of  its 
application  in  a  given  case.  Starting  from  the  superiority  of 
Peter,  upon  whom  the  Lord  built  his  church,  and  to  whom  he 
intrusted  the  feeding  of  his  sheep,  in  order  to"  represent  thereby 
the  unity  in  the  college  of  the  apostles,  Cyprian  transferred 
the  same  superiority  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  as  the  successor  of 
Peter,  and  accordingly  called  the  Roman  church  the  chair  of 
Peter,  and  the  fountain  of  priestly  unity,1  the  root,  also,  and 
mother  of  the  catholic  church.2  But  on  the  other  side,  he  asserts 
with  equal  energy  the  equality  and  relative  independence  of 
the  bishops,  as  successors  of  the  apostles,  who  had  all  an  equally 
direct  appointment  from  Christ.  In  his  correspondence  he  uni- 
formly addresses  the  Roman  bishop  as  " brother"  and  "col* 
league,"  conscious  of  his  own  equal  dignity  and  authority.  And 

1  Pefri  cathedra,™  atque  eedesiam  principalem,  wide  unites  sacerdotalis  exorta  est. 
Epkt.  lv.  c.  19  (ed.  Bal.)  Ad  Carndium  epixs.  Rom.  In  Goldhorn's  ed.,  Ep.  lix. 
19. 

1  Ecdesiae  cathoKcae  radieem,  et  merfrwem.     Ep.  ±1.  2  ed.  Bal.  (xlyiii.  ed. 
Goldh.).    Other  passages  in  Cyrian  favorable  to  the  Eoman  see  are  either  in- 
terpolations or  corruptions  in  the  interest  of  the  papacy. 
Vol.  II.    1J- 


162  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

in  the  controversy  about  heretical  baptism,  he  opposes  Pope  Ste- 
phen with  almost  Protestant  independence,  accusing  him  of  erroi 
and  abuse  of  his  power,  and  calling  a  tradition  without  truth  an 
old  error.  Of  this  protest  he  never  retracted  a  word. 

Firmilian. 

Still  more  sharp  and  unsparing  was  the  Cappadocian  bishop, 
Firmilian,  a  disciple  of  Origen,  on  the  bishop  of  Rome,  while 
likewise  implying  a  certain  acknowledgment  of  his  primacy. 
Firmilian  charges  him  with  folly,  and  with  acting  unworthily  of 
his  position ;  because,  as  the  successor  of  Peter,  he  ought  rather 
to  further  the  unity  of  the  church  than  to  destroy  it,  and  ought 
to  abide  on  the  rock  foundation  instead  of  laying  a  new  one  by 
recognising  heretical  baptism.  Perhaps  the  bitterness  of  Firmi- 
lian was  due  partly  to  his  friendship  and  veneration  for  Origen, 
who  had  been  condemned  by  a  council  at  Rome. 

Nevertheless,  on  this  question  of  baptism,  also,  as  on  those  of 
Easteiy-and^of,  penance,  the  Roman  church  came  out  victorious 
in  the  end. 

Comparative  Insignificance  of  the  first  Popes. 

From  these  testimonies  it  is  clear,  that  the  growing  influence  of 
the  Roman  see  was  rooted  in  public  opinion  and  in.  the  need  of 
unity  in  the  ancient  church.  It  is  not  to  be  explained  at  all  by 
the  talents  and  the  ambition  of  the  incumbents.  On  the  contrary, 
the  personality  of  the  thirty  popes  of  the  first  three  centuries  falls 
quite  remarkably  into  the  background;  though  they  are  all 
canonized  saints,  and,  according  to  a  later  but  extremely  doubtful 
tradition,  were  also,  with  two  exceptions,  martyrs.1  Among  them, 
and  it  maj  be  said  down  to  Leo  the  Great,  about  the  middle  of 
the  fifth  century,  there  was  hardly  one,  perhaps  Clement,  who 

1  Irenaeus  recognizes  among  the  Boman  bishops  from  Clement  to  Eleuthems 
(177),  all  of  whom  he  mentions  by  name,  only  <me  martyr,  to  wit,  Telesphorus, 
of  whom  he  says:  "Of  KCU  tvMgw  tyaprbpyae,  Adv.  Ha&r.  III.,  c.  3,  §  3.  So 
Euaebius,  H.  E.  V.  6.  From  this  we  may  judge  of  the  value  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  tradition  on  this  point.  R  is  so  remote  from  the  time  in  question  a& 
to  be  utterly  unworthy  of  credit 


J51.  CHBONOLOGY  OF  THE  POPEa  163 

could  compare,  as  a  church  leader,  with  an  Ignatius,  a  Cyprian, 
and  an  Ambrose;  or,  as  a  theologian,  with  an  Irenseus,  a  Ter- 
tullian,  an  Athanasius,  and  an  Augustin.-  Jerome,  among 
his  hundred  and  thirty-six  church  celebrities,  of  the  first  four 
centuries,  brings  in  only  four  Roman  bishops,  Clement,  Victor, 
Cornelius,  and  Damasus,  and  even  these  wrote  only  a  few  epis- 
tles. Hippolytus,  in  his  Philosophumena,  written  about  225, 
even  presents  two  contemporaneous  popes,  St.  Zephyrinus 
(202-218)  and  Callistus  (St.  Calixtus  L,  218-223),  from  his  own 
observation,  though  not  without  partisan  feeling,  in  a  most  un- 
favorable light ;  charging  the  first  with  ignorance  and  avarice,2 
the  second  with  scandalous  conduct  (he  is  said  to  have  been 
once  a  swindler  and  a  fugitive  slave  rescued  from  suicide),  and 
both  of  them  with  the  Patripassian  heresy.  Such  charges  could 
not  have  been  mere  fabrications  with  so  honorable  an  author  as 
Hippolytus,  even  though  he  was  a  schismatic  rival  bishop  to 
Callistus ;  they  must  have  had  at  least  some  basis  of  feet 

§  51.  Chronology  of  the  Popes. 
I.  SOURCES. 

The  principal  sources  for  the  obscure  chronology  of  the  early  hishops 
of  Eome  are  the  catalogues  of  popes.  These  are  divided  into 
two  classes,  the  oriental  or  Greek,  and  the  occidental  or  Latin. 
To  the  first  belong  the  lists  of  Hegesippus  and  Irenseus,  from  the 
second  century,  that  of  Eusebius  (in  his  Chronide,  and  his  Church 
History),  and  his  successors  from  the  fourth  century  and  later.  This 
class  is  followed  by  Lipsius  and  HarnacL  The  second  class  em* 
braces  the  catalogues  of  Augustin  (Ep.  55,  al.  165),  Optatns  of  Mileve 
(De  schism.  Donat.  II.  3),  the  "Catalogus  Liberianus"  (coming 
down  to  Liberius,  354),  the  "Catalogus  Felicianus"  (to  530),  the 

1  Cardinal  Newman  says  (Apologia,  p.  407; :  "  The  see  of  Eome  possessed  no 
great  mind  in  the  whole  period  of  persecution.  Afterwards  for  a  long  time  it 
had  not  a  single  doctor  to  show.  The  great  luminary  of  the  western  world  is 
St.  Augustin ;  he,  no  infallible  teacher,  has  formed  the  intellect  of  Europe." 
Dean  Stanley  remarks  (Christian  Institutions,  p.  241) :  "  There  have  been  occu- 
pants of  the  sees  of  Constantinople,  Alexandria,  and  Canterbury,  who  have 
produced  more  effect  on  the  mind  of  Christendom  by  their  utterances  than 
any  of  the  popes.'' 

*  He  calls  him  in  the  ninth  book  of  the  Philosophumena  an  farfp  MI&TIK  JOB 


164  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

"Catalogus  Cononianus,"  based  perhaps  on  the  "Catalogus  Leoninus  * 
(to  440),  the  "Liber  Pontificalia"  (formerly  supposed  to  be  based 
on  the  preceding  catalogues,  but  according  to  the  Abbe  Duchesne 
and  Waitz,  older  than  the  "Liber  Felicianus").  The  "Liber 
Pontif "  itself  exists  in  different  MSS.,  and  has  undergone  many 
changes.  It  is  variously  dated  from  the  fifth  or  seventh  century. 

To  these  may  be  added  the  "  Martyrologia  "  and  "  Calendaria  "  of 
the  Boman  Church,  especially  the  "Martyrologium  Hieronymia- 
nnm,"  and  the  "  Martyrologium  Eomanum.  parvum"  (both  of  the 
seventh  or  eighth  century). 

The  inscriptions  on  the  papal  tombs  discovered  in  Rome  since 
I860,  contain  names  and  titles,  but  no  dates. 

On  the  "  Catalogus  Liberianus/7  see  especially  the  critical  essay  of 
Mommsen  "  Ueber  den  Chronographen  des  Jahres  354,"  in  the 
"Transactions  of  the  Royal  Saxon  Society  of  Sciences/'  Philos. 
histor.  Section,  vol.  L  (1850),  p.  631  sqq.  The  text  of  the  Catalogue 
is  given,  p.  634r-'37,  and  by  Lipsius,  Chronologie  der  ram.  Bischofe, 
Append,  p.  265-268.  The  oldest  MSS.  of  the  "Liber  Pontificalia" 
date  from  the  seventh  and  eighth  centuries,  and  present  a  text  of 
A.  D.  641,  but  with  many  variations.  "  Hit  wahrer  Sicherheit,1'  says 
Waitz,  u  gelangen  wir  in  der  Geschichte  des  Papsthums  nicht  uber 
das  lie  Jahrhundert  hinauf" 

II.  WORKS. 

PHIL.  JAFFE:  Eegesta  Pontificwm,  Romanorum  db  condita  eccksia  ad  ann. 
1198.  Berolini  1851,  ed.  secunda  correcta  et  aucta  auspiciis  GTJL. 
WATTENBACH.  Lips.  1881  sqq.  Continued  by  POTTHAST  from 
1198-1304,  and  supplemented  by  HARTTUNG  (BcLI.  A.  P.  748-1198, 
Gotha  1880). 

R.  A.  LlPsms :  ChronoZogie  der  rom.  Bischofe  lis  zur  Mtte  des  4t&n  Jahrh. 
Kiel,  1869.  Comp.  HOET'S  review  of  this  book  in  the  "  Academy" 
for  Sept.  15,  1871.  LIPSIUS  :  Neue  Studien  zur  Papstchronologie, 
in  the  "  Jahrbucher  for  Protest.  Theol."  Leipz.  1880  (pp.  78-126 
and  233-307).  Lipsius  denies  that  Peter  ever  was  at  Rome. 

ABBE  L.  DUCHESNE  :  Etude  mr  le  Liber  Pontificalis.  Paris,  1887.  La 
date  et  les  recensions  du  Liber  Pontifiealis.  1879.  Le  Liber  Pontifi- 
calis. Texte,  introduction  et  commentaire.  Paris,  1884  and  1889,  2 
vok  4°  (with  fac  similes). 

ADOLF  HARNACK  :  Die  Zdt  des  Ignatius  und  die  Chronologie  der  antioch- 
enischen  Bischofe  bis  Fyrannus.  Leipz.  1878  (p.  73). 

G-.  WAITZ  :  Ueber  die  verschiedenen  Texte  des  Liber  PontiftcaliSj  in  the 
"  Archiv  der  Gesellschaft  fur  altere  deutsche  Geschichtskunde,"  IV; 
and  his  review  of  Duchesne,  and  Lipsius,  in  H.  v.  Sybel's  "Histor. 
Zeitschrift"  for  1880,  p.  135  sqq. 

The  oldest  links  in  the  chain  of  Roman  bishops  are  veiled  in 


351.  CHBOtfOLOQY  OF  THE  POPES.  165 

impenetrable  darkness.    Tertullian  and  most  of  the  Latins  (and 
the  pseudo-Clementina),  make  Clement  (Phil.  4 :  3),    the  first 
successor  of  Peter;1  but  Irenaeus,  Eusebius,  and  other  Greeks, 
also   Jerome  and  the  Roman  Catalogue,    give  him  the  third 
place,  and  put  Linus  (2  Tim.  4 :  21),  and  Anacletus  (or  Anin- 
cletus),  between  him  and  Peter.2    In  some  lists  Cletus  is  substi- 
tuted for  Anacletus,  in  others  the  two  are  distinguished.    Per- 
haps Linus  and  Anacletus  acted  during  the  life  time  of  Paul  and 
Peter  as   assistants,  or  presided   only  over   one  part  of  the 
church,  while  Clement  may  have  had  charge  of  another  branch; 
for  at  that  early  day,  the  government  of  the  congregation  com- 
posed of  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christian  elements  was  not  so  cen- 
tralized as  it   afterwards  became.    Furthermore,  the  earliest 
fathers,  with  a  true  sense  of  the  distinction  between  the  apostolic 
and  episcopal  offices,  do  not  reckon  Peter  among  the  bishops  of 
Borne  at  all ;  and  the  Roman  Catalogue  in  placing  Peter  in  the 
line  of  bishops,  is  strangely  regardless  of  Paul,  whose  indepen- 
dent labors  in 'Borne  are  attested  not  only  by  tradition,  but  by 
the  clear  witness  of  his  own  epistles  and  the  book  of  Acts. 

Lipsius,  after  a  laborious  critical  comparison  of  the  different 
catalogues  of  popes,  arrives  at  the  conclusion  that  Linus,  Ana- 
cletus, and  Clement  were  Boman  presbyters  (or  presbyter-bishops 
in  the  N.  T.  sense  of  the  term),  at  the  close  of  the  first  century, 
Evaristus  and  Alexander  presbyters  at  the  beginning  of  the 
second,  Xystus  I.  (Latinized:  Sixtus),  presbyter  for  ten  years 

1  Or  at  least  the  first  appointed  by  Peter.  Tertullian  De  Praescr.  Hcer.  c.  32 
*{  Romanorum  dementem  a  Petro  ordinafoim''  TheApost.  OonsL  VH.  6  make 
Linus  (comp.  2  Tim.  4 :  21)  the  first  bishop,  appointed  by  Paul,  Clement  the 
next,  appointed  by  Peter.  According  to  Epiphanius  (J2cer.  XXVII.  6)  Clement 
was  ordained  by  Peter,  but  did  not  enter  upon  his  ofiice  till  after  the  death  of 
Linus  and  Anacletus. 

*  The  catalogue  of  Irenseus  (Adv.  Hoer.  HL  3, 3)  down  to  his  own  time  (A.  D. 
177)  is  this :  The  apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  Linos,  Anadetos,  Clement,  Evaristus, 
Alexander,  Xystos,  Telesphoros,  who  died  gloriously  as  a  martyr,  Hyginos, 
Kos,  Aniketos,  Soter,  Eleutheros,  who  then  held  "the  inheritance  of  the  epis- 
copate in  the  twelfth  place  from  the  apostles/7  Irenaeus  adds :  "In  this  order, 
and  by  this  succession,  the  ecclesiastical  tradition  from  the  apostles  and  th* 
preaching  of  the  truth  have  come  down  to  us." 


166 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 


till  about  128,  Telesphorus  for  eleven  years,  till  about  139,  and 
his  next  successors  diocesan  bishops.1 

It  must  in  justice  be  admitted,  however,  that  the  list  of 
Roman  bishops  has  by  far  the  preeminence  in  age,  completeness, 
integrity  of  succession,  consistency  of  doctrine  and  policy,  above 
every  similar  catalogue,  not  excepting  those  of  Jerusalem,  An- 
fcioch,  Alexandria,  and  Constantinople;  and  this  must  carry  great 
weight  with  those  who  ground  their  views  chiefly  on  external 
testimonies,  without  being  able  to  rise  to  the  free  Protestant  con- 
ception of  Christianiiy  and  its  history  of  development  on  earth. 

§  51.  List  of  the  Roman  Bishops  and  Roman  JEmperors  during 
the  First  Three  Centuries. 

From  the  lists  of  Eusebius  (till  Silvester),  Jafifc  (Regesta\ 
Potthast  (Bibliotheca  Hist.  Medii  Aewi)9  Lipsius  and  others 
compared.  See  a  continuation  of  the  list  in  my  History  of 
Mediceval  Christianity,  p.  205 


POPES, 


?  42-  67  Petrus-Apostolus.8 

(63-64) 
?  67-  79  Linus-Presbyter. 


?  79-  91  Cletus  or  Anacletus. 
?  91-100  Clemens  I. 

?  100-109  Evaristus. 

?  109-119  Alexander! 

?  113-128  Xystus  or  Sixtus  I 

?  128-139  Telesphorus  (Martyr). 


EMPEROBS. 

Augustus, 

Tiberius, 

Caligula, 

Claudius. 

Nero, 

Galba, 

Otho, 

Vitellius,  , 

Vespasian, 

Titus, 

Domitian, 

Nerva, 

Trajan, 

Hadrian, 
Antoninus  Pius, 


ba,  ) 
o,  \ 
illius,  ) 


B.  C. 

27 

AJX 14-37 
37-41 

41-54 
54-68 

68 
68-69 

70-79 
79-81 
81-96 
96-98 
9&-117 

117-138 
188-161 


1  Langen  (I  c.  p.  100  sqq.)  carries  the  line  of  Boman  presbyter-bishops  down 
to  Alexander,  and  dates  the  monarchical  constitution  of  the  Roman  church 
(»".  e.  the  diocesan  episcopacy)  from  the  age  of  Trajan  or  Hadrian.  Irenams 
(in  Euseb.  V-27)  calls  the  Roman  bishops  down  to  Anicetus  (354)  Trpea/Sircpou 

*  The  best  historians  agree  that  Peter  cannot  have  been  in  Borne  before  A.  B 
63,  and  that  the  Roman  tradition  of  a  twenty-five  years'  episcopate  is  a  'iable. 


1 52- LIST  OF  ROMAN  BISHOPS  AJSJD  EMPEKOB&        167 


A.  P. 


POPES. 


?  139-142  Hyginus. 
?  142-154  Pius  I. 
?  154-168  Anicetus. 
?  168-176  Soter. 
? 177-190  Eleutherus. 
?  190-202  Victor  L 


202-218  Zephyrmus. 


218-223  Callistus,  or  Calixtus  I. 

(Hippoly  tus,  Antipope). 
7223-230  Urbanusl. 
?  230-235  Pontianus    (resigned    in 

exile). 

235-236  Anterus. 
236-250  Fabianus,  Martyr. 


250-251  The  See  vacant  till  March 

251. 

? 251-252  Cornelius  (in  exile). 
}  251  (Novatianus,  Antipope). 

252-253  Lucius  L 
?  253-257  StephanusL 


?  257-258  Xystus  (Sixtus)  IL 
^llS  }  The  See  vacant 

259-269  Dionysius. 

269-274  Felix  I. 

275-283  Eutychianus. 

283-296  Gajus  (Cains). 


296-304  Marcellinus. 
304-307  The  See  vacant. 


308-309  Marcellus, 
?309-310  Eusebius,  d.  Sept  26  (?) 
309. 

309-310  The  See  vacant. 
311-314  Miltiades  (Melchiades) 
314r-335  Silvester  I. 


EMPERORS*  6*  0. 


Marcus  Aurehus,  161-180 

Commodus,  180-190 

Pertinax,  190-191 

Didius  Julianus,  191-192 

Niger,  192-193 

Septimius  Severus,  193-211 

Caracalla,          \  on  917 

Geta(d.212),    j  211-217 

M.  Opilius  Macrinus,  217-218 

Heliogabalus,  21&-222 

AJexander'Severus,  222-235 


MaximinL  (theThracian), 
The  two  Gordians,     1 
Maximus  Pupienus,   y 
Balbinus,  ) 

Gordian  the  Younger, 
Philip, 
Decius, 

Gallus. 
Volusian, 


Valerian, 
Gallienus. 


Claudius  IL 

Aurelian, 

Tacitus, . 

Probus, 

Carus, 

Carinus,         } 

Numerian,     ) 

Diocletian  (d.  313), 

Maximian,  joint  Emp.  ) 

with  Diocletian,         j 
Constantius  (d.  306),") 
Galerius  (d.  Sll),        V 
Licinius  (d.  328),  -      j 
Maximin  II.  (Daza), 
Constantine  the  Great, 
Galerius  (d.  311), 
Licinius  (d.  323), 
Maximin  (d.  313), 
Maxentius  (d.  312), 

reigning  jointly. 


Constantine  the  Great, 
<*ole  ruler. 


235-287 
237-238 

238-244 
244-249 
249-251 

251-252 

252-253 
253-268 
256-259 
259-268 


268-270 
270-275 
275-276 
276-282 
282-284 

28^-286 
284^305 
286-305 

304or307 
S08-309 

809-S23 


323-337 


168  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

The  whole  number  of  popes,  from  the  Apostle  Peter  to  Leo 
XIII.  (1878)  is  two  hundred  and  sixty-three.  This  would 
allow  about  seven  years  on  an  average  to  each  papal  reign.  The 
traditional  twenty-five  years  of  Peter  were  considered  the  maxi- 
mum which  none  of  his  successors  was  permitted  to  reach,  except 
Pius  IX.,  the  first  infallible  pope/ who  reigned  twenty-seven 
years  (1846-1878).  The  average  term  of  office  of  the  arch- 
bishops of  Canterbury  is  fourteen  years. 

§53.  The  Catholic  Unity. 

J.  A.  M5HLEE  (R.  0.):    Die  Einheit  der  Kirche  oder  das  Prineip  de* 

Katholictemua.    Tubingen  1825.    Full  of  Catholic  enthusiasm  for 

the  unity  of  the  church. 
B.  EOTHE:    Die  Anfange  der  christl.  Kirche.    Wittenb.1837  (pp.  553- 

711),    A  Protestant  counterpart  of  Mohler's  book. 
HTJTHEB:  Cyprian's  Lehre  von  der  Mnheit  der  Kirche.    Hamb.  1839. 
J.  W.  NEYIN:    Cyprian;  four  articles  in  the  "Mercershurg  Review," 

1852.    Comp.  VABIEN'S  strictures  on  these  articles  in  the  same 

"Beview"  for  1853,  p.  555  sqq. 
JOH.  *PETEES  (Ultramontane) :   Die  Lehre  des  heil.  Cyprian  von  der 

Eiriheit  der  Kirche  gegenuber  den  beiden  Schismen  in  Carthago  und 

Rom.  Luxemh.  1870. 
Jos.  H.  BEINKESTS  (Old  Oath.  Bishop) :  Die  Lehre  des  heil.  Cyprian  von 

der  Einhett  der  Kirche.    Wurzburg,  1873. 
Comp.  also  HABTEi/sed.  of  Cyprian's  Opera  (3  Parts,  Vienna,  1868-71), 

and  the  monographs  on  Cyprian  by  BETTBEEG  (1831),  PETERS 

(1877),  FECHTRUP  (1878),  and  0.  KETSCHL  (1883). 

On  the  basis  of  Paul's  idea  of  the  unity,  holiness,  and  univer- 
sality of  the  church,  as  the  mystical  body  of  Christ ;  hand  in 
hand  with  the  episcopal  system  of  government;  in  the  form 
of  fad;  rather  than  of  dogma;  and  in  perpetual  conflict  with 
heathen  persecution  from  without,  and  heretical  and  schismatic 
tendencies  within — arose  the  idea  and  the  institution  of  "  the 
Holy  Gatholie  Ghwnh?  as  the  Apostles'  Creed  has  it;1  or,  in 

1  The  Church  of  England  retained  the  term  "catholic"  in  the  Creed,  and 
the  ante-papal  and  anti-papal  use  of  this  term  (=  general,  universal)  j  while 
Luther  in  his  Catechism,  and  the  Moravian  church  (in  her  liturgy)  substituted 
the  word  "Christian,''  and  surrendered  the  use  of  "catholic"  to  the  Roman 
Catholics.  "Roman"  is  a  sectarian  term  (in  opposition  to  Greek  Catholic 
and  Evangelical  Catholic). 


2  53.  THE  CATHOLIC  UNITY.  169 

the  fuller  language  of  the  Mcene-Constantinopolitan,  "  the  On* 
Holy  Catholic  Apostolic  Church"  In  both  the  oecumenical  sym- 
bols, as  even  in  the  more  indefinite  creeds  of  the  second  and 
third  centuries,  on  which  those  symbols  are  based,  the  church 
appears  as  an  article  of  faith,1  presupposing  and  necessarily 
following  faith  in  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit; 
and  as  a  holy  fellowship,2  within  which  the  various  benefits  of 
grace,  from  the  forgiveness  of  sins  to  the  life  everlasting,  are 
enjoyed. 

Nor  is  any  distinction  made  here  between  a  visible  and  an 
invisible  church.  All  catholic  antiquity  thought  of  none  but 
the  actual,  historical  church,  and  without  hesitation  applied  to 
this,  while  yet  in  the  eyes  of  the  world  a  small,  persecuted  sect, 
those  four  predicates  of  unity,  holiness,  universality,  and  apos- 
tolicity,  to  which  were  afterwards  added  exclusiveness,  infalli- 
bility and  indestructibility.  There  sometimes  occur,  indeed, 
particularly  in  the  Novatian  schism,  hints  of  the  incongruity 
between  the  empirical  reality  and  the  ideal  conception  of  the 
church;  and  this  incongruity  became  still  more  palpable,  in 
regard  to  the  predicate  of  holiness,  after  the  abatement  of  the 
spiritual  elevation  of  the  apostolic  age,  the  cessation  of  persecu- 
tion, and  the  decay  of  discipline.  But  the  unworthiness  of 
individual  members  and  the  external  servant-form  of  the  church 
were  not  allowed  to  mislead  as  to  the  general  objective  charac- 
ter, which  belonged  to  her  in  virtue  of  her  union  with  her 
glorious  heavenly  Head. 

The  fathers  of  our  period  all  saw  in  the  church,  though  with 
different  degrees  of  clearness,  a  divine,  supernatural  order  of 
things,  in  a  certain  sense  the  continuation  of  the  life  of  Christ 
on  earth,  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  sole  repository  of 
the  powers  of  divine  life,  the  possessor  and  interpreter  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  the  mother  of  all  the  faithful.  She  is  holy 

1  Oredo  ecd&iam;  yet  not  in  (elf)  ecdesfam,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Divine 
persons. 

*  Ommunio  sanctorum.  This  clause,  however,  is  not  found  in  the  original 
Creed  of  the  Roman  church  before  the  fifth  century. 


170  SECOND  PEJEUOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

because  she  is  separated  from  the  service  of  the  profane  world, 
is  animated  by  the  Holy  Spirit;  forms  her  members  to  holiness, 
and  exercises  strict  discipline.  She  is  catholic,  that  is  (according 
to  the  precise  sense  of  fl/uc,  which  denotes  not  so  much  numerical 
totality  as  wholeness),  complete,  and  alone  true,  in  distinction 
fronj  all  parties  and  sects.  Catholicity,  strictly  taken,  includes 
the  three  marks  of  universality,  unity,  and  exclusiveness,  and 
is  an  essential  property  of  the  church  as  the  body  and  organ  of 
Christ,  who  is,  in  fact,  the  only  Redeemer  for  all  men.  Equally 
inseparable  from  her  is  the  predicate  of  apostolicity,  that  is,  the 
historical  continuity  or  unbroken  succession,  which  reaches  back 
through  the  bishops  to  the  apostles,  from  the  apostles  to  Christ, 
and  from  Christ  to  God.  In  the  view  of  the  fathers,  every 
theoretical  departure  from  this  empirical,  tangible,  catholic 
church  is  heresy,  that  is,  arbitrary,  subjective,  ever  changing 
human  opinion;  every  practical  departure,  all  disobedience  to 
her  rulers  is  schism,  or  dismemberment  of  the  body  of  Christ; 
either  is  rebellion  against  divine  authority,  and  a  heinous,  if 
not  the  most  heinous,  sin.  No  heresy  can  reach  the  conception 
of  the  church,  or  rightly  claim  any  one  of  her  predicates;  it 
forms  at  best  a  sect  or  party,  and  consequently  falls  within  the 
province  aud  the  fate  of  human  and  perishing  things,  while  the 
church  is  divine  and  indestructible. 

This  is  without  doubt  the  view  of  the  ante-Nicene  fathers, 
even  of  the  speculative  and  spiritualistic  Alexandrians.  The 
most  important  personages  in  the  development  of  the  doctrine 
concerning  the  church  are,  again,  Ignatius,  Irenseus,  and  Cyp- 
rian. Their  whole  doctrine  of  the  episcopate  is  intimately 
connected  with  their  doctrine  of  the  catholic  uniiy,  and  deter- 
mined by  it.  For  the  episcopate  is  of  value  in  their  eyes  only 
as  the  indispensable  means  of  maintaining  and  promoting  this 
unity :  while  they  are  compelled  to  regard  the  bishops  of  heretics 
and  schismatics  as  rebels  and  antichrists. 

1.  In  the  Epistles  of  IGNATIUS  the  unity  of  the  church,  in 
the  form  and  through  the  medium  of  the  episcopate,  is  the 
fundamental  thought  and  the  leading  topic  of  exhortation.  The 


?  53.  THE  CATHOLIC  UNITY.  171 

author  calls  himself  a  man  prepared  for  union.1  He  also  is  the 
first  to  use  the  term  "  catholic  "  in  the  ecclesiastical  sense,  when 
he  says  :2  "  Where  Christ  Jesus  is,  there  is  the  catholic  church;" 
that  is,  the  closely  united  and  full  totality  of  his  people.  Only 
in  her,  according  to  his  view,  can  we  eat  the  bread  of  God  ;  he, 
who  follows  a  schismatic,  inherits  not  the  kingdom  of  God.3 

We  meet  similar  views,  although  not  so  clearly  and  strongly 
stated,  in  the  Roman  Clement's  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
in  the  letter  of  the  church  of  Smyrna  on  the  martyrdom  of 
Polycarp,  and  in  the  Shepherd  of  Hernias. 

2  iREN-aaus  speaks  much  more  at  large  respecting  the 
church.  He  calls  her  the  haven  of  rescue,  the  way  of  salvation, 
the  entrance  to  life,  the  paradise  in  this  world,  of  whose  trees, 
to  wit,  the  holy  Scriptures,  we  may  eat,  excepting  the  tree  of 
knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  which  he  takes  as  a  type  of  heresy. 
The  church  is  inseparable  from  the  Holy  Spirit  ;  it  is  his  home, 
and  indeed  his  only  dwelling-place  on  earth.  "  WTiere  the 
church  is,"  says  he,  putting  the  church  first,  in  the  genuine 
catholic  spirit,  "  there  is  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  where  the  Spirit 
of  God  is  there  is  all  grace."4  Only  on  the  bosom  of  the 
church,  continues  he,  can  we  be  nursed  to  life.  To  her  must  we 
flee,  to  be  made  partakers  of  the  Holy  Spirit  ;  separation  from 
her  is  separation  from  the  fellowship  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Here- 
tics, in  his  view,  are  enemies  of  the  truth  and  sons  of  Satan,  and 
will  be  swallowed  up  by  hell,  like  the  company  of  Koran, 
Dathan,  and  Abirarn.  Characteristic  in  this  respect  is  the  well- 
known  legend,  which  he  relates,  about  the  meeting  of  the  apostk 
John  with  the  Gnostic  Cerinthus,  and  of  Polycarp  with  Marcion, 
the  "  first-born  of  Satan." 

3.  TERTULLIAN  is  the  first  to  make  that  comparison  of  the 
church  with  Noah's  ark,  which  has  since  become  classical  in 


elg  bwatv  KarypTLafiivov*  *  Ad  Smyrn.  c.  8. 

*  Ad  Ephes.  c.  5.    Ad  'Troll,  c.  7.    Ad  Philad.  c  3,  etc. 

4  Adv.  Hcer.  iii.  24.  "Ubi  ecdesia  ibi  et  Spiritus  Dei,  et  vbi  Spiritus  Dei,  itf* 
ecd&da  et  omnis  gratia"  Protestantism  would  say,  conversely,  putting  th« 
Spirit  first  :  "  Ubi  Spiritus  Dei,  ibi  ecdesia  et  minis  gratia." 


172  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Roman  catholic  theology;  and  he  likewise  attributes  heresies  to 
the  devil,  without  any  qualification.  But  as  to  schism,  he  was 
himself  guilty  of  it  since  he  joined  the  Montanists  and  bitterly 
opposed  the  Catholics  in  questions  of  discipline.  He  has  there- 
fore no  place  in  the  Roman  Catholic  list  of  the  patres,  but 
simply  of  the  scriptores  ecclesice. 

4.  Even  CLEMENT  of  Alexandria,  and  ORIGEN,  with  all 
their  spiritualistic  and  idealizing  turn  of  mind,  are  no  exception 
here.  The  latter,  in  the  words:  "Out  of  the  church  no  man 
can  be  saved/'1  brings  out  the  principle  of  the  catholic  exclu- 
siveness  as  unequivocally  as  Cyprian.  Yet  we  find  in  him, 
together  with  very  severe  judgments  of  heretics,  mild  and  tolerant 
expressions  also;  and  he  even  supposes,  on  the  ground  of  Rom0 
2 :  6  sqq.,  that  in  the  future  life  honest  Jews  and  heathens  will 
attain  a  suitable  reward,  a  low  grade  of  blessedness,  though  ^iot 
the  "life  everlasting"  in  the  proper  sense.  In  a  later  age  he 
was  himself  condemned  as  a  heretic. 

Of  other  Greek  divines  of  the  third  century,  Methodius  in 
particular,  an  opponent  of  Origen,  takes  high  views  of  the 
church,  and  in  his  Symposion  poetically  describes  it  as  "the 
garden  of  God  in  the  beauty  of  eternal  spring,  shining  in  the 
richest  splendor  of  immortalizing  fruits  and  flowers;"  as  the 
virginal,  unspotted,  ever  young  and  beautiful  royal  bride  of  the 
divine  Logos. 

5.  Finally,  CYPBIA^,  in  his  Epistles,  and  most  of  all  in  his 
classical  tract :  De  Unitate  Ecdesue,  written  in  the  year  251, 
amidst  the  distractions  of  the  N ovatian  schism,  and  not  without 
an  intermixture  of  hierarchical  pride  and  party  spirit,  has  most 
distinctly  and  most  forcibly  developed  the  old  catholic  doctrine 
of  the  church,  her  unity,  universality,  and  exclusiveness.  He 
is  the  typical  champion  of  visible,  tangible  church  unity,  and 
would  have  made  a  better  pope  than  any  pope  before  Leo  I. ; 
yet  after  all  he  was  anti-papal  and  anti-Boman  when  he  differed 
from  the  pope.  Augustin  felt  this  inconsistency,  and  thought 

1  Horn.  3  in  Josuam,  c.  5.    "  Extra  hanc  domum,  id  est  extra  ecdemm>  new 
wfoerfur." 


J53.  THE  CATHOLIC  UNITY.  173 

that  he  had  wiped  it  out  by  the  blood  of  his  martyrdom.  But 
he  never  gave  any  sign  of  repentance.  His  views  are  briefly  as 
follows : 

The  Catholic  church  was  founded  from  the  first  by  Christ 
on  St.  Peter  alone,  that,  with  all  the  equality  of  power  among 
the  apostles,  unity  might  still  be  kept  prominent  as  essential  to 
her  being.  She  has  ever  since  remained  one,  in  unbroken  epis- 
copal succession ;  as  there  is  only  one  sun,  though  his  rays  are 
everywhere  diffused.  Try  once  to  separate  the  ray  from  the 
sun ;  the  unity  of  the  light  allows  no  division.  Break  the  branch 
from  the  tree ;  it  can  produce  no  fruit.  Cut  off  the  brook  from 
the  fountain;  it  dries  up.  Out  of  this  empirical  orthodox 
church,  episcopally  organized  and  centralized  in  Rome,  Cyprian 
can  imagine  no  Christianity  at  all ; l  not  only  among  the  Gnostics 
and  other  radical  heretics,  but  even  among  the  Novations,  who 
varied  from  the  Catholics  in  no  essential  point  of  doctrine,  and 
only  elected  an  opposition  bishop  in  the  interest  of  their  rigorous 
penitential  discipline.  Whoever  separates  himself  from  the 
catholic  church  is  a  foreigner,  a  profane  person,  an  enemy,  con- 
demns himself,  and  must  be  shunned.  No  one  can  have  God  for 
his  father,  who  has  not  the  church  for  his  mother.2  As  well 
might  one  out  of  the  ark  of  Noah  have  escaped  the  flood,  as 
one  out  of  the  church  be  saved;3  because  she  alone  is  tha 
bearer  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  of  all  grace. 

In  the  controversy  on  heretical  baptism,  Cyprian  carried  out 
the  principle  of  exclusiveness  even  more  consistently  than  the 
Roman  church.  For  he  entirely  rejected  such  baptism,  while 
Stephen  held  it  valid,  and  thus  had  to  concede,  in  strict  consis- 
tency, the  possibility  of  regeneration,  and  hence  of  salvation, 
outside  the  Catholic  church.  Here  is  a  point  where  even 
the  Roman  system,  generally  so  consistent,  has  a  loophole  of 
liberality,  and  practically  gives  up  her  theoretical  principle  of 

1  "  Christianus  non  est,  qui  in  Christi  e&desia  non  est." 

2  (t  Habere  non  potest  Deum  pcrfrem,  qm  ecdesiam  non  habet  matron." 

8  " Extra  eccksiam  nuUa  solus.''  Yet  lie  nowhere  says  "extra  ecd&iam  Jffr 
manam  nutta  solus." 


174  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

exclusiveness.  But  in  carrying  out  this  principle,  even  in 
persistent  opposition  to  the  pope,  in  whom  lie  saw  the  successor 
of  Peter  and  the  visible  centre  of  unity,  Cyprian  plainly  denied 
the  supremacy  of  Roman  jurisdiction  and  the  existence  of  an 
infallible  tribunal  for  the  settlement  of  doctrinal  controversies, 
and  protested  against  identifying  the  church  in  general  with  the 
church  of  Rome.  And  if  he  had  the  right  of  such  protest  in 
favor  of  strict  exclusiveness,  should  not  the  Greek  church,  and 
above  all  the  Evangelical,  much  rather  have  the  right  of  protest 
against  the  Roman  exelusiveness,  and  in  favor  of  a  more  free 
and  comprehensive  conception  of  the  church  ? 

We  may  freely  acknowledge  the  profound  and  beautiful  truth 
at  the  bottom, of  this  old  catholic  doctrine  of  the  church,  and  the 
historical  importance  of  it  for  that  period  of  persecution,  as  well 
as  for  the  great  missionary  work  among  the  barbarians  of  the 
middle  ages ;  but  we  cannot  ignore  the  fact  that  the  doctrine 
rested  in  part  on  a  fallacy,  which,  in  course  of  time,  after  the 
union  of  the  church  with  the  state,  or,  in  other  words,  with  the 
world,  became  more  and  more  glaring,  and  provoked  an  internal 
protest  of  ever-growing  force.  It  blindly  identified  the  spiritual 
unity  of  the  church  with  unity  of  organization,  insisted  on 
outward  uniformity  at  the  expense  of  free  development,  and 
confounded  the  faulty  empirical  church,  or  a  temporary  phase 
of  the  development  of  Christianity,  with  the  ideal  and  eternal 
kingdom  of  Christ,  which  will  not  be  perfect  in  its  manifestation 
until  the  glorious  second  coming  of  its  Head.  The  Scriptural 
principle:  "Out  of  Christ  there  is  no  salvation,"  was  con- 
tracted and  restricted  to  the  Cyprianic  principle :  "  Out  of  the 
(visible)  churoh  there  is  no  salvation  f  and  from  this  there  was 
only  one  step  to  the  fundamental  error  of  Romanism :  "  Out 
of  the  Roman  Church  there  is  no  salvation." 

]STo  effort  after  outward  unity  could  prevent  the  distinction 
of  an  Oriental  and  Occidental  church  from  showing  itself  at  this 
early  period,  in  language,  customs,  and  theology; — a  distinc- 
tion which  afterwards  led  to  a  schism  to  this  day  unhealed. 

It  may  well  be  questioned  whether  our  Lord  intended  an 


2  54.  COUNCILS.  175 

outward  visible  unity  of  the  church  in  the  present  order  of 
things.  He  promised  that  there  should  be  "one  flock,  one 
shepherd/'  but  not  "  one  fold."1  There  may  be  one  flock,  and 
yet  many  folds  or  church  organizations.  In  the  sacerdotal 
prayer,  our  Lord  says  not  one  word  about  church,  bishops  or 
popes,  but  dwells  upon  that  spiritual  unity  which  reflects  the 
harmony  between  the  eternal  Father  and  the  eternal  Son.  "The 
true  communion  of  Christian  men — ( the  communion  of  saints * 
upon  which  all  churches  are  built — is  not  the  common  per- 
formance of  external  acts,  but  a  communion  of  soul  with  sool 
and  of  the  soul  with  Christ.  It  is  a  consequence  of  the  nature 
which  God  has  given  us  that  an  external  organization  should 
help  our  communion  with  one  another :  it  is  a  consequence  both 
of  our  twofold  nature,  and  of  Christ's  appointment  that  external 
acts  should  help  our  communion  with  Him.  But  subtler, 
deeper,  diviner  than  anything  of  which  external  things  can  be 
either  the  symbol  or  the  bond  is  that  inner  reality  and  essence 
of  union — that  interpenetrating  community  of  thought  and 
character — which  St.  Paul  speaks  of  as  the  ( unity  of  the  Spirit/ 
and  which  in  the  sublimest  of  sublime  books,  in  the  most  sacred 
words,  is  likened  to  the  oneness  of  the  Son  with  the  Father  and 
of  the  Father  with  the  Son/'2 

§  54.  Councils. 

Best  Collections  of  Acts  of  Councils  by  HABDUDT  (1715, 12  yols.),  and 

MASTSI  (1759,  31  vols.). 
C.  J.  HEFELE  (E.  C.  Bishop  of  Bottenburg,  and  member  of  the  Vatican 

Council  of  1870):    Conciliengeschichte,  Freiburg  1855;  second  ed. 

1873  sqq.,  7  vols.  down  to  the  Council  of  Florence,  A.  D.  1447  (See  vol. 

L,  pp.  83-242).     English  translation  by  W.  E.  Claris  and  H.  R. 

Oxenham  (Edinb.  1871,  2d  vol.  1876,  3d  vol.  1883). 
E.  B.  PttSEY  (d.  1882) :  The  Councils  of  the  Church,  from  the  Council  of 

Jerusalem,  A.  D.  51,  to  the  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  381; 

1  John  10:  16.  It  was  a  characteristic,  we  may  say,  an  ominous  mistake  of 
the  Latin  Vulgate  to  render  mipw  by  wile  (confounding  it  with  attj ).  The 
Authorized  Version  has  copied  the  mischievous  blunder  ("one  fold"),  but  the 
Revision  of  1881  has  corrected  it. 

2  Hatch,  L  c.  p.  187  sq. 


176  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

chiefly  as  to  their  constitution,  but  also  as  to  their  object  and  history. 

Loud.  1857. 
A.  W.  DALE:  The  Synod  of  Elvira,  [A.  ]>.  306]  and  Christian  Life  in  the 

Fourth  Century.    Lond.  1882. 
Comp.  the  article  Council  in  SMITH  and  CHEETHAM  and  Lect.  VII.  in 

HATCH,  Bampton  Lect.  on  the  Organization  of  the  Early  Christian 

Church.    Lond.  1881,  pp.  165  sqq. 

Councils  or  Synods  were  an  important  means  of  maintaining 
and  promoting  ecclesiastical  unity,  and  deciding  questions  of 
faith  and  discipline.1  They  had  a  precedent  and  sanction  in 
the  apostolic  Conference  of  Jerusalem  for  the  settlement  of  the 
circumcision  controversy.3  They  were  suggested  moreover  by  the 
deliberative  political  assemblies  of  the  provinces  of  the  Eoman 
empire,  which  met  every  year  in  the  chief  towns.3  But  we  have 
no  distinct  trace  of  Councils  before  the  middle  of  the  second 
century  (between  50  and  170),  when  they  first  appear,  in  the 
disputes  concerning  Montanism  and  Easter. 

There  are  several  kinds  of  Synods  according  to  their  size, 

DIOCESAN,  PEOV1NCIAL  (or  METROPOLITAN),  NATIONAL,  PATKI- 

ARCHAL,  and  oEcmiENTCAi,  (or  UNIVERSAL).4     Our  period 
knows  only  the  first  three.    Diocesan  synods  consist  of  the 


1  Cbnci7?ttm,  first  used  in  the  ecclesiastical  sense  by  Tertullian,  De  fejun.  c.  13, 
De  Pudic.  c.  10;  cirvofas,  assembly,  meeting  for  deliberation  (Herodotus, 
Thucydides,  Plato,  Demosthenes,  etc.),  first  used  of  Christian  assemblies  in  the 
pseudo-Apostolical  Gonstit.  V.  20,  and  the  Canons,  c.  36  or  38.  It  may  desig- 
nate a  diocesan,  or  provincial,  or  general  Christian  convention  for  either  elec- 
tive, or  judicial,  or  legislative,  or  doctrinal  purposes. 

1  A.  D.  50.  Acts  15  and  G-al.  2.  Comp.  also  the  Lord's  promise  to  be  pre- 
sent where  even  the  smallest  number  are  assembled  in  his  name,  Matt  18:  19> 
20.  See  vol.  I.  §  64,  p.  503  sqq. 

*  On  the  provincial  councils  of  the  Roman  empire  see  Marquardt,  Romische 
Starisverwdfang,  I.  365-377,  and  Hatch,  I  c.  p.  164  sqq.  The  deliberation* 
were  preceded  by  a  sacrifice,  and  the  president  was  called  highpriest. 

4  That  is,  within  the  limits  of  the  old  Roman  empire,  as  the  orbis  terrarum. 
There  never  was  an  absolutely  universal  council.  Even  the  seven  (Ecumenical 
Councils  from  325  to  787  were  confined  to  the  empire,  and  poorly  attended  by 
Western  bishops.  The  Roman  Councils  held  after  that  time  (down  to  the 
Vatican  Council  in  1870)  daim  to  be  oecumenical,  but  exclude  the  Greek  and 
all  evangelical  churches. 


J  54.  COUNCILS.  177 

bishop  and  his  presbyters  and  deacons  with  the  people  assisting, 
and  were  probably  held  from  the  beginning,  but  are  not  men- 
tioned before  the  third  century.  Provincial  synods  appear  first 
in  Greece,  where  the  spirit  of  association  had  continued  strong 
since  the  days  of  the  Achaean 'league,  and  then  in  Asia  Minor, 
North  Africa,  Gaul,  and  Spain.  They  were  held,  so  far  as  the 
stormy  times  of  persecution  allowed,  once  or  twice  a  year,  in  the 
metropolis,  under  the  presidency  of  the  metropolitan,  who  thus 
gradually  acquired  a  supervision  over  the  other  bishops  of  the 
province.  Special  emergencies  called  out  extraordinary  sessions, 
and  they,  it  seems,  preceded  the  regular  meetings.  They  were 
found  to  be  useful,  and  hence  became  institutions. 

The  synodical  meetings  were  public,  and  the  people  of  the 
community  around  sometimes  made  their  influence  felt.  In  the 
time  of  Cyprian,  presbyters,  confessors,  and  laymen  took  an 
active  part,  a  custom  which  seems  to  have  the  sanction  of  apos- 
tolic practice.1  At  the  Synod  which  met  about  256,  in  the 
controversy  on  heretical  baptism,  there  were  present  eighty- 
seven  bishops,  very  many  priests  and  deacons,  and  "  maxima  pars 
plebisj"2  and  in  the  synods  concerning  the  restoration  of  the 
Lapsi,  Cyprian  convened  besides  the  bishops,  his  clergy,  the 
"  confessores"  and  "  laicos  stantes  "  (i.  e.  in  good  standing).3  ]$Tor 
was  this  practice  confined  to  North  Africa.  We  meet  it  in 
Syria,  at  the  synods  convened  on  account  of  Paul  of  Samosata 
(264-269),  and  in  Spain  at  the  council  of  Elvira.  Origen,  who 
was  merely  a  presbyter,  was  the  leading  spirit  of  two  Arabian 
synods,  and  convinced  their  bishop  Beryllus  of  his  Christological 


1  Comp.  Acts  15:  6,  7, 12, 13,  23,  where  the  "  brethren"  are  mentioned  ex- 
pressly, besides  the  apostles  and  elders,  as  members  of  the  council,  even  at  the 
final  decision  and  in  the  pastoral  letter.  On  the  difference  of  reading,  see  vol. 
I.  505. 

3  Cyprian,  Opera,  p.  329,  ed.  Baluz.  In  the  acts  of  this  council,  however 
(pp.  330-338),  only  the  bishops  appear  as  voters,  from  which  some  writers 
infer  that  the  laity,  and  eve&  the  presbyters,  had  no  votum  decisivum.  But  in 
several  old  councils  the  presbyters  and  deacons  subscribed  their  names  after 
those  of  the  bishops;  see  Harduin,  (M.  Ocmc.  I.  250  and  266;  Hefele  L  19. 

*  jEJjp.  ad.,  xiii.,  Ixvi.,  Ixad. 
Vol.  II.    12. 


|78  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

error.  Even  the  Koman  clergy,  in  their  letter  to  Cyprian,i 
speak  of  a  common  synodical  consultation  of  the  bishops  with  the 
priests,  deacons,  confessors,  arid  laymen  in  good  standing. 

But  with  the  advance  of  the  hierarchical  spirit,  this  republican 
feature  gradually  vanished.  After  the  council  of  Nicaea  (325) 
bishops  alone  had  seat  and  voice,  and  the  priests  appear  here- 
after merely  as  secretaries,  or  advisers,  or  representatives  of  their 
bishops.  The  bishops,  moreover,  did  not  act  as  representatives 
of  their  churches,  nor  in  the  name  of  the  body  of  the  believers, 
as  formerly,  but  in  their  own  right  as  successors  of  the  apostles. 
They  did  not  as  yet,  however,  in  this  period,  claim  infallibility 
for  their  decisions,  unless  we  choose  to  find  a  slight  approach  to 
such  a  claim  in  the  formula  :  "  Placuit  nobis,  Sancto  Spiritu 
suggerente"  as  used,  for  example,  by  the  council  of  Carthage,  in 
252.2  At  all  events,  their  decrees  at  that  time  had  only  moral 
power,  and  could  lay  no  claim  to  universal  validity.  Even 
-Cyprian  emphatically  asserts  absolute  independence  for  each 
bishop  in  his  own  diocese.  "  To  each  shepherd,"  he  says,  "  a 
portion  of  the  Lord's  flock  has  been  assigned,  and  his  account 
must  be  rendered  to  his  Master." 

The  more  important  acts,  such  as  electing  bishops,  excommu- 
nication, decision  of  controversies,  were  communicated  to  other 
provinces  by  epistolce  synodioce.  In  the  intercourse  and  the 
translation  of  individual  members  of  churehes,  letters  of  recom- 
mendation3 from  the  bishop  were  commonly  employed  or 
required  as  terms  of  admission.  Expulsion  from  one  church 
was  virtually  an  expulsion  from  all  associated  churches. 

The  effect  of  the  synodical  system  tended  to  consolidation. 
The  Christian  churches  from  independent  communities  held 
together  by  a  spiritual  fellowship  of  faith,  became  a  powerful 


1  Cyprian,  Ep.  liy.,  on  the  ground  of  the  Mo£e  r$  fyfy  irvebpaTi  xat  fyTv, 
erf  Spirititi  Sancto  et  nobis,  Acts  15:  28.  So  also,  the  council  of  Aries,  A.  i>. 
314:  JRfocttfc  ergo,  presents  Spirit*.  Sancto  et  angdis  eftw  (Harduin,  OoU.  OrncA 
I.  262). 

*  Ifoittolae  formafae,  ypdft.ua.ra 


§  55.  COUNCILS  OF  ELVIEA,  AELES,  AND  ANCYRA. '  179 

confederation,   a    compact    moral    commonwealth    within  the 
political  organization  of  the  Roman  empire. 

As  the  episcopate  culminated  in  the  primacy,  so  the  synodical 
system  rose  into  the  oecumenical  councils,  which  represented  the 
whole  church  of  the  Roman  empire.  But  these  could  not  be 
held  till  persecution  ceased,  and  the  emperor  became  the  patron 
of  Christianity.  The  first  was  the  celebrated  council  of  Xicsea, 
in  the  year  325.  The  state  gave  legal  validity  to  the  decrees 
of  councils,  and  enforced  them  if  necessary  by  all  its  means  of 
coercion.  But  the  Roman  government  protected  only  the 
Catholic  or  orthodox  church,  except  during  the  progress  of 
the  Arian  and  other-  controversies,  before  the  final  result  was 
reached  by  the  decision  of  an  oecumenical  Synod  convened  by 
the  emperor,  * 

§  55.    The  Councils  of  Elvira,  Arks,  and  Aneyra. 

Among  the  ante-KTicene  Synods  some  were  occasioned  by  the 
Montanist  controversy  in  Asia  Minor,  some  by  the  Paschal 
controversies,  some  by  the  affairs  of  Origen,  some  by  the  Nova- 
tion schism  and  the  treatment  of  the  Lapsi  in  Carthage  and 
Rome,  some  by  the  controversies  on  heretical  baptism  (255,  256), 
three  were  held  against  Paul  of  Samosata  in  Antioch  (264-269). 

In  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century  three  Synods,  held 
at  Elvira,  Aries,  and  Ancyra,  deserve  special  mention,  as  they 
approach  the  character  of  general  councils  and  prepared  the 
way  for  the  first  oecumenical  council.  They  decided  no  doctrinal 
question,  but  passed  important  canons  on  church  polity  and 

1  This  policy  was  inaugurated  by  Constantino  I.  A.  B.  326  (Cod.  TkewL  16, 
5.  1).  He  confined  the  privileges  and  immunities  which,  in  313,  he  had 
granted  to  Christiana  in  his  later  enactments  to  u  QatholiccB  legis  obserratoribusJ" 
He  ratified  the  Nicene  creed  and  exiled  Arius  (325),  although  he  afterwards 
wavered  and  was  baptized  by  a  semi-Arian  bishop  (337).  His  immediate 
successors  wavered  likewise.  But  as  a  rule  the  Byzantine  emperors  recognized 
the  decisions  of  councils  in  dogma  and  discipline,  and  discouraged  and  ulti- 
mately prohibited  the  formation  of  dissenting  sects.  The  state  can,  of  course, 
not  prevent  dissent  as  an  individual  opinion  j  it  can  only  prohibit  and  punish 
the  oper  profession.  Full  religious  liberty  requires  separation  of  church  and 
state, 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

Christian  morals.  They  were  convened  for  the  purpo&e  of 
restoring  order  and  discipline  after  the  ravages  of  the  Diocletian 
persecution.  They  deal  chiefly  with  the  large  class  of  the 
Lapsed,  and  reflect  the  transition  state  from  the  ante-Nicene 
to  the  iSTieene  age.  They  are  alike  pervaded  by  the  spirit  of 
clericalism  and  a  moderate  asceticism. 

1.  The  Synod  of  ELVIRA  (Illiberis,  or  Eliberis,  probably  on 
the  site  of  the  modern  Granada)  was  held  in  306/  and  attended 
by  nineteen  bishops,  and  twenty-six  presbyters,  mostly  from  the 
Southern  districts  of  Spain.  Deacons  and  laymen  were  also 
present.  The  Diocletian  persecution  ceased  in  Spain  after  the 
abdication  of  Biocletian  and  Maximian  Herculeus  in  305;  while 
it  continued  to  rage  for  several  years  longer  in  the  East  under 
Galerius  and  Maximin.  The  Synod  passed  eighty-one  Latin 
canons  against  various  forms  of  heathen  immorality  then  still 
abounding,  and  in  favor  of  church  discipline  and  austere  morals. 
The  Lapsed  were  forbidden  the  holy  communion  even  in  articulo 
mortis  (can.  1).  This  is  more  severe  than  the  action  of  the 
K"icene  Synod.  The  thirty-sixth  canon  prohibits  the  admission 
of  sacred  pictures  on  the  walls  of  the  church  buildings,2  and  has 
often  been  quoted  by  Protestants  as  an  argument  against  image 
worship  as  idolatrous;  while  Roman  Catholic  writers  explain  it 
either  as  a  prohibition  of  representations  of  the  deity  only,  or  aa 
a  prudential  measure  against  heathen  desecration  of  holy  things.3 
Otherwise  the  Synod  is  thoroughly  catholic  in  spirit  and  tone. 
Another  characteristic  feature  is  the  severity  against  the  Jews 

1  Hefele,  Gams,  and  Bale  decide  in  favor  of  this  date  against  the  superscrip- 
tion which  puts  it  down  to  the  period  of  the  Council  of  Nicsea  (324).  The 
chief  reason  is  that  Hosins,  bishop  of  Cordova,  could  not  be  present  in  324 
when  he  was  in  the  Orient,  nor  at  any  time  after  307,  when  he  joined  the 
company  of  Constantine  as  one  of  his  private  councillors. 

»  "  Placuti  picture®  in  ecdesia  esse  non  debere,  ne  quod  colitur  et  adoratur  in 
pariettbus  depingatur."  "There  shall  be  no  pictures  in  the  church,  lest  what 
is  worshipped  [saints]  and  adored  [God  and  Christ]  should  be  depicted  on 
the  walls." 

*  The  last  is  the  interpretation  of  the  canon  by  De  Rossi,  in  Roma  sotteranea, 
Tom.  I,  p,  97,  and  Hefele,  1. 170.  But  Dale  (p.  292  sqq.)  thinks  that  it  wai 
timed  against  the  idolatry  of  Christian?. 


{  55.  COUNCILS  OF  ELVIRA,  ABLES,  AJSD  AXCYBA.    181 

who  were  numerous  in  Spain.    Christians  are  forbidden  to 
marry  Jews.1 

The  leading  genius  of  the  Elvira  Synod  and  the  second  in  the 
list  was  Hosius,  bishop  of  Corduba  (Cordova),  who  also  attended 
the  Council  of  Nicsea  as  the  chief  representative  of  the  TTest. 
He  was  a  native  of  Cordova,  the  birth-place  of  Lucan  and  Seneca, 
and  more  than  sixty  years  in  the  episcopate.  Athanasius  calls 
him  a  man  holy  in  fact  as  well  as  in  name,  and  speaks  of  his 
wisdom  in  guiding  synods.  As  a  far-seeing  statesman,  he  seems 
to  have  conceived  the  idea  of  reconciling  the  empire  with  the 
church  and  influenced  the  mind  of  Constantine  in  that  direction. 
He  is  one  of  the  most  prominent  links  between  the  age  of  perse- 
cution and  the  age  of  imperial  Christianity.  He  was  a  strong 
defender  of  the  JSTicene  faith,  but  in  his  extreme  old  age  he 
wavered  and  signed  an  Arian  formula.  Soon  afterwards  he 
died,  a  hundred  years  old  (358). 

2.  The  first  Council  of  ARLES  in  the  South  of  France3  was 
held  A.  D.  314,  in  consequence  of  an  appeal  of  the  Donatists  to 
Constantine  the  Great,  against  the  decision  of  a  Eoman  Council 
of  313,  consisting  of  three  Galilean  and  fifteen  Italian  bishops 
under  the  lead  of  Pope  Melchiades.  This  is  the  first  instance 
of  an  appeal  of  a  Christian  party  to  the  secular  power,  and  it 
turned  out  unfavorably  to  the  Donatists  who  afterwards  became 
enemies  of  the  government.  The  Council  of  Aries  was  the  first 
called  by  Constantine  and  the  forerunner  of  the  Council  of 

1  The  best  accounts  of  the  Synod  of  Elvira  are  given  by  Ferdinand  de  Men- 
doza,  De  <mfinwndo  Concilia  Illiberitano  ad  Qlementem  VIIL,  1593  (reprinted, 
in  Mansi  II.  57-397) ;  Fr.  Ant.  Gonzalez,  Collect.  Can.  JScclesuB  Hispanfa,  Ma- 
drid, 1808,  new  ed.  with  Spanish  version,  1849  (reprinted  in  Bruns,  Bibl.  Ecd. 
Tom.  I.  Pars  II.  1  sqq.);  Hefele,  Concttiengesch.  1. 148-192  (second  ed.,  1873; 
or  122  sqq.,  first  ed.);  Gams,  Kirchengesch.  von  Spanien  (1864\  vol.  II.  1-136; 
and  Dale  in  his  monograph  on  the  Synod  of  Elvira,  London,  188*2- 

2  Cbncttium  Ardatense,  from  Arelate  or  Ardatum  Sacfanorum,  one  of  the  chief 
Eoman  cities  in  South-Eastern  Gaul,  where  Constantine  fct  one  time  resided, 
and  afterwards  the  West  Gothic  King  Enrich.    It  was  perhaps  the  seat  of  the 
first  bishopric  of  Gaul,  or  second  only  to  that  of  Lyons  and  Vienne.    Several 
councils  were  held  in  that  city,  the  second  in  353  during  the  Arian  contra 
Tergy. 


182  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Nicsea.  Augiistm  calls  it  even  universal,  but  It  was  only  Wes- 
tern at  best.  It  consisted  of  thirty-three  bishops1  from  Gaul, 
Sicily,  Italy  (exclusive  of  the  Pope  Sylvester,  who, 'however, 
was  represented  by  two  presbyters  and  .two  deacons),  North 
Africa,  and  Britain  (three,  from  York,  London,  and  probably 
from  Cserleon  on  Usk),  besides  thirteen  presbyters  and  twenty- 
three  deacons.  It  excommunicated  Donatus  and  passed  twenty- 
two  canons  concerning  Easter  (which  should  be  held  on  one  and 
the  same  day),  against  the  non-residence  of  clergy,  against 
participation  in  races  and  gladiatorial  fights  (to  be  punished  by 
excommunication),  against  the  rebaptism  of  heretics,  and  on  other 
matters  of  discipline.  Clergymen  who  could  be  proven  to  have 
delivered  sacred  books  or  utensils  in  persecution  (the  traditores) 
should  be  deposed,  but  their  official  acts  were  to  be  held 
valid.  The  assistance  of  at  least  three  bishops  was  required  at 
ordination.2 

3.  The  Council  of  ANCYRA,  the  capital  of  Galatia  in  Asia 
Minor,  was  held  soon  after  the  death  of  the  persecutor  Maximin 
(313),  probably  in  the  year  314,  and  represented  Asia  Minor 
and  Syria.  It  numbered  from  twelve  to  eighteen  bishops  (the 
lists  vary),  several  of  whom  eleven  years  afterwards  attended 
the  Council  of  Nicsea.  Marcellus  of  Ancyra  who  acquired 
celebrity  in  the  Arian  controversies,  presided,  according  to 
others  Vitalis  of  Antioch.  Its  object  was  to  heal  the  wounds 
of  the  Diocletian  persecution,  and  it  passed  twenty-five  canons 
relating  chiefly  to  the  treatment  of  those  who  had  betrayed  their 
faith  or  delivered  the  sacred  books  in  those  years  of  terror. 
Priests  who  had  offered  sacrifice  to  the  gods,  but  afterwards 
repented,  were  prohibited  from  preaching  and  all  sacerdotal 
functions,  but  allowed  to  retain  their  clerical  dignity.  Those 
who  had  sacrificed  before  baptism  may  be  admitted  to  ordera 

1  Not  633,  as  Mddintock  &  Strong's  "Cyclop."  has  it  sub  Axles. 

2  See  Ens.  H.  E.  z.  5;  Mansi,  II.  463-468;  Munchen,  J>as  erste  Gonctt  wi 
Arks  (in  the  "Bonner  Zeifechrift  fur  Philos.  und  kath.  TheoL,"  No.  9,^6, 27), 
and  Hefele  L  201-219  (2nd  ed.). 


{  56.  COLLECTIONS  OF  ECCLESIASTICAL  LAW.        183 

Adultery  is  to  be  punished  by  seven  years*  penance,  murder 
by  life-long  penance.1 

A  similar  Council  was  held  soon  afterwards  at  Neo-Csesarea 
in  Cappadocia  (between  314-325),  mostly  by  the  same  bishops 
<vho  attended  that  of  Ancyra,  and  passed  fifteen  disciplinar^canous-*  • 

§  56.  Collections  of  Ecclesiastical  Law.     The  Apostolical  Con- 

stitutiom  and  Canons. 

SOURCES. 

L  dtaTayoti  TWV  dytwv  'Axoff-dAwv  did  K)jQfuevrQ$9  etc.,  C/O3EST.LTIJTlOyE8 
APOSTOLIOE,  first  edited  by  Fr.  Tiirrianus,  Yen.  1563,  then  in 
Cotelier's  ed.  of  the  Patres  Apostolici  (1. 199  sqq.),  in  Mansi  (Collect. 
Condi.  L),  and  Earduin  (Coll  Cone.  L);  newly  edited  by  Ueltzen, 
Eost.  1853,  and  P.  A.  de  Lagarde,  Lips,  and  Lond.  1854  and  1862. 
Ueltzen  gives  the  textus  receptus  improved.  Lagarde  aims  at  the 
oldest  text,  which  he  edited  in  Syriac  (Didascalia  Apostolorum 
Syriace,  1854),  and  in  Greek  (Consttt.  Apostolorum  Greece,  1862). 
Hilgenfeld:  Nov.  Test,  extra  Canonem  rec.,  Lips.  (1866),  ed.  II.  (1884), 
Fasc.  IV.  110-121.  He  gives  the  Ap.  Church  Order  under  the  title 
Duce  Vice  vcl  Judicium  Petri. 

THOS.  PELL  PLATT  :  The  JEthiopic  I>idasealia;  or  the  JEthiopic  Version  of  the 
Apostolical  Constitutions,  received  in  the  Church  of  Abyssihia3  with  an  Engl 
Transl.,  Lond.  1834. 

HENRY  TATTAM:  The  Apt&tolieal  Constitutions,  or  Canons  of  the  Apostles  in 
Coptic.  With  an  Encjl.  translation.  Lond.  1848  (214  pages). 

EL  Kav6v$$  ixxtyfftaffrixo}  T&V  &f.  9AKo<rc6la>v,  CiJ^ONES,  qui  dicuntut 
Apostolorum,  in  most  collections  of  church  law,  and  in  Cofet.  (I.  437 
sqq.)j  Man&i,  and  Harduin  (torn.  L),  and  in  the  editions  of  the  Ap. 
Constitutions  at  the  close.  Separate  edd.  by  PATTL  DE  LAGARDE  in 
Greek  and  Syriac :  Reliquice  juris  ecde&iastici  antiguissimcs  Syriace. 
Lips.  1856 ;  and  Reliquiae  juris  ecdesiastici  Greece,  1856  (both  to  he 
had  at  Trubner's,  Strassburg).  An  Ethiopic  translation  of  the 
Canons,  ed.  by  WINAND  FELL,  Leipz.  1871. 

W.  G-.  BEVERIDGE  (Bishop  of  St.  Asaph,  d.  1708) :  2w<5&«w,  5.  Pandtcto 
Canonum  8.  G.  Apostolorum  ei  Condliorum,  ab  Ecclesia  Grr.  recept 
Oxon.  1672-82,  2  vols.  fol. 

JOHN  FULTON:  Index  Canonum.  In  Greek  and  English.  With  a  Com- 
plete Digest  of  the  entire  code  of  canon  law  in  the  undivided  Primitive 
Church.  N.  York  1872 ;  revised  ed.  with  Preface  by  P.  Schaff,  1883. 

i  Hefele,  vol.  I.  222  sqq.,  gives  the  canons  in  Greek  and  German  with  ex- 
planation.  He  calls  it  a  Synodus  plenaria,  i.  e.,  a  general  council  for  the 
churches  of  Asia  Minor  and  Syria.  See  also  Mansi  II,  514  sqq.  Two  Arian 
Synods  were  held  at  Ancyra  in  358  and  375.  *  See  Hefele  I.  242-25J . 


SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

CRITICAL  DISCUSSIONS. 
KBABBE:  Ueber  den   Ursprung  u.  den  InhaU  der   apost.    Oonstitutionen   da 

Clemens  Bamanus.  Hamb.  1829. 
S.  v.  DEEY  (R  C.) :  JVeue  Untersuchungen  uber  die  Constitut.  u.  Kanones  der  Ap. 

Tiib.  1832. 
J.  W.  BiCKELL  (d.  1848) :  Gesch.  des  Kirchenrechts.    Giess.  1843  (1. 1,  pp.  52- 

255).    The  second  part  appeared,  Frankf.,  1849. 
CHASE:  Constitutions  of  the  Holy  Apostles,  including  the  Canons;  WJiiston's 

version  revised  from  the  Greek;  with  a  prize  essay  (of  Krabbe)  upon  t/ieir 

origin  and  contents.    Kew  York,  1848. 
BUXSEN  :  Hippolytus  u.  seine  Zeit,  Leipz.  1852  (I.  pp.  418-525,  and  II.  pp.  1- 

126) ;  and  in  the  2d  Engl.  ed.  Hippolytus  and  his  Age,  or  Christianity  and 

Mankind,  Lond.  1854  (vols.  V-Vn). 
fTTMreT.-R  (B.  C.) :  GoncUiengeschichte  I.  p.  792  sqq.  (second  ed.  1873). 

THE  DIDACHE  LITERATURE  (folly  noticed  in  Schaff's  monograph). 
PEQLOTH.  BEYENNIOS :  AJ&OT  rwv  6&6eKa  airoar6?iuv.    Constantinople,  1833. 
AD.  HARNACK  :  DieLehreder  Zicb'lf  Apostel.    Leipz.,  1884.    Die  Aposteikhre 

unddiejudisch&iltiden  Wege,  1886. 
PH.  SCHAFF:   The  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,   or  the  Oldest  Church 

Manual.    N.  York,  1885.    3d  ed.  revised  and  enlarged,  1889. 

Several  church  manuals  or  directories  of  public  worship,  and 
discipline  have  come  down  to  us  from  the  first  centuries  in  differ- 
ent languages.  They  claim  directly  or  indirectly  apostolic 
origin  and  authority,  but  are  post-apostolic  and  justly  excluded 
from  the  canon.  They  give  us  important  information  on  the 
ecclesiastical  laws,  morals,  and  customs  of  the  ante-Nicene  age. 

1.  THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE  APOSTLES  is  the  oldest 
and  simplest  church  manual,  of  Jewish  Christian  (Palestinian  or 
Syrian)  origin,  from  the  end  of  the  first -century,  known  to  the 
Greek  fathers,  but  only  recently  discovered  and  published  by 
Biyennios  (1883).  It  contains  in  16  chapters  (1)  a  summary  of 
moral  instruction  based  on  the  Decalogue  and  the  royal  com- 
mandment of  love  to  God  and  man,  in  the  parabolic  form  of  two 
ways,  the  way  of  life  and  the  way  of  death ;  (2)  directions  on 
the  celebration  of  baptism  and  the  eucharist  with  the  agape ;  (3) 
directions  on  discipline  and  the  oflices  of  apostles  (£  e.  travelling 
evangelists),  prophets,  teachers,  bishops  (L  e.  presbysters),  and 
deacons;  (4)  an  exhortation  to  watchfulness  in  view  of  the 
coming  of  the  Lord  and  the  resurrection  of  the  saints.  A  very 


3  56.  COLLECTIONS  OF  ECCLESIASTICAL  LAW.        185 

remarkable  book.     Its  substance  survived  in  the  seventh  book 
of  the  Apostolical  Cofastitutions. 

2.  THE  ECCLESIASTICAL  CANONS  OF  THE  HOLY  APOSTLES 
or  APOSTOLICAL  CHURCH  ORDER,  of  Egyptian  origin,  probably 
of  the  third  century.    An  expansion  of  the  former  in  the  shape 
of  a  fictitious  dialogue  of  the  apostles,  first  published  in  Greek 
by  Bickell  (1843),  and  then  also  in  Coptic  and  Syriac.    It  con- 
tains ordinances  of  the  apostles  on  morals,  worship,  and  discipline. 

3.  THE  APOSTOLICAL  CONSTITUTIONS,  the  most  complete  and 
important  Church  Manual.     It  is,  in  form,  a  literary  fiction, 
professing  to  be  a  bequest  of  all  the  apostles,  handed  down 
through  the  Roman  bishop  Clement,  or  dictated  to  him.     It 
begins  with  the  words :  "  The  apostles  and  elders,  to  all  who 
among  the  nations  have  believed  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
Grace  be  with  you,  and  peace."    It  contains,  in  eight  books,  a 
collection  of  moral  exhortations,  church  laws  and  usages,  and 
liturgical  formularies,  which  had  gradually  arisen  in  the  various 
churches  from  the  close  of  the  first  century,  the  time  of  the 
Roman  Clement,  downward,  particularly  in  Jerusalenij  Antioch, 
Alexandria,  and  Rome,  partly  on  the  authority  of  apostolic 
practice.    These  were  at  first  orally  transmitted  ;  then  committed 
to  writing  in  different  versions,  like  the  creeds;   and  finally 
brought,  by  some  unknown  hand,  into  their  present  form.    The 
first  six  books,  which  have  a  strongly  Jewish-Christian  tone,  were 
composed,  with  the  exception  of  some  later  interpolations,  at  the 
end  of  the  third  century,  in  Syria.    The  seventh  book  is  an  ex- 
pansion of  the  Didaehe  of  the  Twelve  Apostles.    The  eighth 
book  contains  a  liturgy,  and,  in  an  appendix,  the  apostolical 
canons.      The  collection  of  the  three  parts  into  one  whole 
may  be  the  work  of  the  compiler  of  the  eighth  book.    It 
is  no  doubt  of  Eastern  authorship,  for  the  church  of  Rome 
nowhere  occupies  a  position  of  .priority  or  supremacy.1    The 

1Harnack  (I  c.  266-268)  identifies  Pseudo-Clement  with  Pseudo-Ignatius, 
and  assigns  him  to  the  middle  of  the  fourth  centuiy. 


SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

design  TOS,  to  set  forth  the  ecclesiastical  life  for  laity  and  clergy, 
and  to  establish  the  episcopal  theocracy.  These  constitutions 
were  more  used  and  consulted  in  the  East  than  any  work  of  the 
fathers,  and  were  taken  as  the  rule  in  matters  of  discipline,  like 
the  Holy  Scriptures  in  matters  of  doctrine.  Still  the  collection, 
as  such,  did  not  rise  to  formal  legal  authority,  and  the  second 
Trullan  council  of  692  (known  as  quinisextum),  rejected  it  for 
its  heretical  interpolations,  while  the  same  council  acknowledged 
the  Apostolical  Canons.1 

The  "  APOSTOLICAL  CANONS"  consist  of  brief  church  rules  or 
prescriptions,  in  some  copies  eighty-five  in  number,  in  others 
fifty,  and  pretend  to  be  of  apostolic  origin,  b6ing  drawn  up  by 
Clement  of  Rome  from  the  directions  of  the  apostles,  who  in 
several  places  speak  in  the  first  person.  They  are  incorporated 
in  the  "Constitutions"  as  an  appendix  to  the  eighth  book, 
but  are  found  also  by  themselves,  in  Greek,  Syriac,  jEthiopic, 
and  Arabic  manuscripts.  Their  contents  are  borrowed  partly 
from  the  Scriptures,  especially  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  partly  from 
tradition,  and  partly  from  the  decrees  of  early  councils  at  An- 
tioch,  Neo-Cresarea,  jSicsea,  Laodicea,  &c.  (but  probably  not 
Chalcedon,  451),  They  are,  therefore,  evidently  of  gradual 
growth,  and  were  collected  either  after  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century/  or  not  till  the  latter  part  of  the  fifth/  by  some 

1  Turrianiis,  Bovius,  and  the  eccentric  Whiston  regarded  these  pseudo- 
apostolic  Constitutions  as  a  'genuine  work  of  the  apostles,  containing  Christ's 
teaching  during  the  forty  days  between  the  Eesurrection  and  Ascension,  But 
Baronius,  Bellarmin,  and  Petavius  attached  little  weight  to  them,  and  the 
Protestant  scholars,  Daillg  and  Blondel,  attacked  and  overthrew  their  genuine- 
ness and  authority.  The  work  is  a  gradual  growth,  with  many  repetitions, 
interpolations,  and  contradictions,  and  anachronisms.  James,  who  was  be- 
headed (A.  D.  44),  is  made  to  sit  in  council  with  Paul  (VI.  14),  but  elsewhere 
is  represented  as  dead  (V.  7).  The  apostles  condemn  post-apostolic  heresies 
and  heretics  (VI.  8),  and  appoint  days  of  commemoration  of  their  death 
(VIII-  33).  Episcopacy  is  extravagantly  extolled.  P.  de  Lagarde  says: 
(Ed  juris  eccfes.  ant.,  Preface,  p.  IV.)  :  «  Communi*  mwrum  doctorum  fere  om- 
niwn  nunc  inmhtit  optnio  eas  [constitution®]  sascuk  tertio  clam  sucerevisse  eL  qwm 

x  aligiKindo  libris  absolute  fuissent*  septimo  et  octavo  auctas  esse  posted." 

a  As  Bickell  supposes.    Beveridge  put  the  collection  in  the  third  century. 

*  According  to  Daille,  Dr.  von  Drey,  and  Mejer. 


tex 


?  57.  CHURCH  DISCIPLINE.  187 

unknown  hand,  probably  also  in  Syria.  They  are  designed  to 
furnish  a*  complete  system  of  discipline  for  the  clergy.  Of  the 
laity  they  say  scarcely  a  word.  The  eighty-fifth  and  last  canon 
settles  the  canon  of  the  Scripture,  but  reckons  among  the  Xew 
Testament  books  two  epistles  of  Clement  and  the  genuine  books 
of  the  pseudo-Apostolic  Constitutions. 

The  Greek  church,  at  the  Trullan  council  of  692,  adopted 
the  whole  collection  of  eighty-five  canons  as  authentic  and  bind- 
ing, and  John  of  Damascus  placed  it  even  on  a  parallel  with 
the  epistles  of  the  apostle  Paul,  thus  showing  that  he  had  no 
sense  of  the  infinite  superiority  of  the  inspired  writings.  The 
Latin  church  rejected  it*  at  first,  but  subsequently  decided  for 
the  smaller  collection  of  fifty  canons,  which  Dionysus  Exiguus 
about  the  year  500  translated  from  a  Greek  manuscript. 

§  57.  Church  Discipline. 

L  Several  Tracts  of  TERTTTLLIAJS-  (especially  De  Pcenitentia).  The 
PMZosophumena  of  HIPPOLYTUS  (L  IX.).  The  Epistles  of  CYPBIA^", 
and  his  work  De  Lap&is.  The  Epistola  Canonicce  of  DIONYSIUS  of 
Alex.,  GREGORY  THAUMATURGUS  (about  260),  and  PETER  of  Alex. 
(about  306),  collected  in  EOUTH'S  Reliquiae  Sacrce,  torn.  HL,  2nd 
ed.  The  CONSTIT.  APOST.  II.  16,  21-24.  The  CAXOXS  of  the  coun- 
cils of  Elvira,  Arelate,  Ancyra,  Neo-Ccesareay  and  Niccea,  between 
306  and  325  (in  the  Collections  of  Councils,  and  in  Bourn's  Ediq. 
8aer.  torn.  IV.). 

II.  MORINUS  :  De  Disdplina  in  administrations  sacram  paenitentiae,  Par. 
1651  (Venet.  1702). 

MARSHALL  :  Penitential  Discipline  of  the  Primitive  Church.  Lond.  1714 
(new  ed.  1844). 

FR.  FRANK  :    Die  Bussdisciplin  der  Kirche  bis  zum  7  Jahrh.    Mainz. 


On  the  di£'-lpline  of  the  Montanists,  see  BONWETSCH:  Die  GescTiichte  de$ 
Montanismus  (1881),  pp.  108-118. 

The  ancient  church  was  distinguished  for  strict  discipline. 
Previous  to  Constantine  the  Great,  this  discipline  rested  on 
purely  moral  sanctions,  and  had  nothing  to  do  with  civil  con- 
straints and  punishments.  A  person  might  be  expelled  from  one 
congregation  without  the  least  social  injury.  But  the  more  pow- 
erful the  church  became,  the  more  serious  were  the  consequences 


188  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-811. 

of  her  censures,  and  when  she  was  united  with  the  state,  eccle- 
siastical offenses  were  punished  as  offenses  against  the  state,  in 
extreme  cases  even  with  death.  The  church  always  abhorred 
blood  ("ecclesia  non  sitit  sanguinem"),  but  she  handed  the  offen- 
der over  to  the  civil  government  to  be  dealt  with  according 
to  law.  The  worst  offenders  for  many  centuries  were  heretics  or 
teachers  of  false  doctrine. 

The  object  of  discipline  was,  on  the  one  hand,  the  dignity  and 
purity  of  the  church,  on  the  other,  the  spiritual  welfare  of  the 
offender ;  punishment  being  designed  to  be  also  correction.  The 
extreme  penalty  was  excommunication,  or  exclusion  from  all  the 
rights  and  privileges  of  the  faithful.  This  was  inflicted  for  heresy 
and  schism,  and  all  gross  crimes,  such  as  theft,  murder,  adultery, 
blasphemy,  and  the  denial  of  Christ  in  persecution.  After  Ter- 
tullian,  these  and  like  offences,  incompatible  with  the  regenerate 
&tate,  were  classed  as  mortal  sins,1  in  distinction  from  venial 
sins  or  sins  of  weakness.2 

Persons  thus  excluded  passed  into  the  class  of  penitents,3  and 
could  attend  only  the  catechumen  worship.  Before  they  could 
be  re-admitted  to  the  fellowship  of  the  church,  they  were 
required  to  pass  through  a  process  like  that  of  the  catechumens^ 
only  still  more  severe,  and  to  prove  the  sincerity  of  their  peni- 
tence by  the  absence  from  all  pleasures,  from  ornament  in  dress, 
and  from  nuptial  intercourse,  by  confession,  frequent  prayer, 
fasting,  almsgiving,  and  other  good  works.  Under  pain  of  a 
troubled  conscience  and  of  separation  from  the  only  saving 
church,  'they  readily  submitted  to  the  severest  penances.  The 
church  teachers  did  not  neglect,  indeed,  to  inculcate  the  penitent 
spirit  and  the  contrition  of  the  heart  as  the  main  thing.  Yet 
many  of  them  laid  too  great  stress  on  certain  outward  exercises. 

1  Peccata  mortalia,  or,  ad  mortem;  after  a  rather  arbitrary  interpretation  of 
1  John  5 : 16.  Tertullian  gives  seven  mortal  sins :  Homieidium,  idololatria,fraus, 
negatw,  blasphemia,  utique  et  moeckia  etfomicatio  etsiqua,  alia  molatio  templi  Dei. 
Depudic.  Q.  19,  These  he  declares  irremissibilia,  horum  ultra  exorator  non  wit 
Christy*;  that  is,  if  they  be  committed  after  baptism ;  for  baptism  washes  away 
all  former  guilt.  Hence  he  counselled  delay  of  baptism. 

1  Peccoto  venialia. 


I  57.  CHUECH  DISCIPLINE.  189 

Tertulliau  conceived  the  entire  church  penance  as  a  "satisfac- 
tion "  paid  to  God.  This  view  could  easily  obscure  to  a  danger- 
ous degree  the  all-sufficient  merit  of  Christ,  and  lead  to  that  self- 
righteousness  against  which  the  Reformation  raised  so  loud  a  voice. 
The  time  and  the  particular  form  of  the  penances,  in  the 
second  century,  was  left  as  yet  to  the  discretion  of  the  several 
ministers  and  churches.  Not  till  the  end  of  the  third  century 
was  a  rigorous  and  fixed  system  of  penitential  discipline  esta- 
blished, and  then  this  could  hardly  maintain  itself  a  eenturv. 
Though  originating  in  deep  moral  earnestness,  and  designed  only 
for  good,  it  was  not  fitted  to  promote  the  genuine  spirit  of  re- 
pentance. Too  much  formality  and  legal  constraint  always 
deadens  the  spirit,  instead  of  supporting  and  regulating  it. 
This  disciplinary  formalism  first  appears,  as 'already  familiar, 
in  the  council  of  Ancyra,  about  the  year  314.  * 

Classes  of  Penitents. 

The  penitents  were  distributed  into  four  classes: — 

(1)  The  WEEPERS,2  who  prostrated  themselves  at  the  church 
doors  in  mourning  garments  and  implored  restoration  from  the 
clergy  and  the  people. 

(2)  The  HEARERS,3  who,  like  the  catechumens  called  by  the 
same  name,  were  allowed  to  hear  the  Scripture  lessons  and 
the  sermon. 

(3)  The  KNEELBRS,4  who  attended  the  public  prayers,  but 
only  in  the  kneeling  posture. 

(4)  The  STANDEES,5  who  could  take  part  in  the  whole  wor- 
ship standing,  but  were  still  excluded  from  the  communion. 

1  Can.  4  sqq.    See  Hefele,  Conciliengesch  (second  ed.)  L  225  sqq.    Comp. 
also  the  fifth  canon  of  Neocsesarea,  and  Hefele,  p.  246. 

2  lipoaKTiaiovre^  flentes  ;  also  called  ^eifid^ovre^  hi&nantes. 

9  ' A.Kpo6/LisvoL,  audientes,  or  auditores.  The  fourteenth  canon  of  Nicaea  (Hefele 
L  418)  directs  that  "Catechumens  who  had  fallen,  should  for  three  years  be 
only  hearers,  but  afterwards  pray  with  the  Catechumens." 

*  TowicMvovTSG,  genuflectentes  -'  also  finwrfrrrovrfif ,  substrati.  The  term  y6vv 
t&ivuv  as  designating  a  class  of  penitents  occurs  only  in  the  5th  canon  of  the 
Council  of  Neocaesarea,  held  after  314  and  before  325- 

8  SwLGrdfjLevot.,  consistences. 


190  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311, 

Those  classes  answer  to  the  four  stages  of  penance.1  The 
course  of  penance  was  usually  three  or  four  years  long,  but, 
like  the  catechetical  preparation,  could  be  shortened  accord- 
incr  to  circumstances,  or  extended  to  the  day  of  death.  In 
the  East  there  were  special  penitential  presbyters,2  intrusted 
with  the  oversight  of  the  penitential  discipline. 

Restoration. 

After  the  fulfilment  of  this  probation  came  the  act  of  recon- 
ciliation.3 The  penitent  made  a  public  confession  of  sin,  re- 
ceived absolution  by  the  laying  on  of  hands  of  the  minister, 
and  precatory  or  optative  benediction,4  was  again  greeted  by  the 
congregation  with  the  brotherly  kiss,  and  admitted  to  the  cele- 
bration of  the  communion.  For  the  ministry  alone  was  he  for 
ever  disqualified.  Cyprian  and  Firmilian,  however,  guard 
against  the  view,  that  the  priestly  absolution  of  hypocritical 
penitents  is  unconditional  and  infallible,  and  can  forestall  the 
judgment  of  God.5 

Two  Parties. 

In  reference  to  the  propriety  of  any  restoration  in  certain  cases* 
there  was  an  important  difference  of  sentiment,  which  gave  rise 
to  several  schisms.  All  agreed  that  the  church  punishment 


fle/us;    aKp6am$y  auditus;  MTTUOI?,  prostratio,   humiliatio  ; 
$,  consistentia.    The  last  three  classes  are  supposed  to  correspond  to 
three  classes  of  catechumens,  hut  without  good  reason.    There  was  only  one 
class  of  catechumens,  or  at  most  two  classes.    See  below,  ?  72. 
*  TLpsvpvTEpot,  1-i  rfc  nsravoias,  presbyteri  poenitentiani 
8  Reconciliatio. 

4  The  declarative;  and  especially  the  direct  indicative  or  judicial  form  of 
titeolution  seems  to  be  of  later  origin. 

5  Cypr.  Epist.  LV.,  c.  15:    "  Neque  &nim  prejitdicamus  Domino  judicaturo, 
quominus  si  pwaitentiam  plenam  et  justam  peccatoris  invenerit  tune  raium  fcuyiatj 
quod  a  nobis  fuerit  hie  statutum.    Si  vero  nos  oliquis  pcenitentice  simulatioTie  de- 
luserit,  Deusy  cui  non  derideturj  et  qni  cor  hominis  intueturt  de  hiSj  qwx  nos  minus 
perspeximus,  judket  et  serwrum  suorum  sententiam  Dominus  emendet"     Comp. 
the  similar  passages  in  Epist.  LXXV.  4,  and  De  Lapsis,  c.  17.    But  if  the 
church  can  err  in  imparting  absolution  to  the  unworthy,  as  Cyprian  concedes, 
she  can  err  also  in  withholding  absolution  and  in  passing  sentence  of  excom- 
munication. 


?  57.  CHURCH  DISCIPLINE.  191 

could  not  forestall  the  judgment  of  God  at  the  last  day,  but  was 
merely  temporal,  and  looked  to  the  repentance  and  conversion 
of  the  subject.  But  it  was  a  question  whether  the  church 
should  restore  even  the  grossest  offender  on  his  confession  of 
sorrow,  or  should,  under  certain  circumstances,  leave  him  to  the 
judgment  of  God.  The  strict,  puritanic  party,  to  which  the 
Montanists,  the  Novatians,  and  the  Donatists  belonged,  and,  for 
a  time,  the  whole  African  and  Spanish  Church,  took  ground 
against  the  restoration  of  those  who  had  forfeited  the  grace  of 
baptism  by  a  mortal  sin,  especially  by  denial  of  Christ ;  since, 
otherwise,  the  church  would  lose  her  characteristic  holiness,  and 
encourage  loose  morality.  The  moderate  party,  which  prevailed 
in  the  East,  in  Egypt,  and  especially  in  Borne,  and  was  so  far 
the  catholic  party,  held  the  principle  that  the  church  should 
refuse  absolution  and  communion,  at  least  on  the  death-bed, 
to  no  penitent  sinner.  Paul  himself  restored  the  Corinthian 
offender.1 

The  point  here  in  question  was  of  great  practical  moment  in 
the  times  of  persecution,  when  hundreds  and  thousands  re- 
nounced their  faith  through  weakness,  but  as  soon  as  the  danger 
was  passed,  pleaded  for  readmission  into  the  church,  and  were 
very  often  supported  in  their  plea  by  the  potent  intercessions 
of  the  martyrs  and  confessors,  and  their  libelli  pads.  The 
principle  was:  necessity  knows  no  law.  A  mitigation  of  the 
penitential  discipline  seemed  in  such  cases  justified  by  every 
consideration  of  charity  and  policy.  So  great  was  the  number 
of  the  lapsed  in  the  Decian  persecution,  that  even  Cyprian 
found  himself  compelled  to  relinquish  his  former  rigoristk' 
views,  all  the  more  because  he  held  that  out  of  the  visible 
church  there  was  no  salvation. 

The  strict  party  were  zealous  for  the  holiness  of  God ;  the 
moderate,  for  his  grace.  The  former  would  not  go  beyond  the 
revealed  forgiveness  of  sins  by  baptism,  and  were  content  with 
urging  the  lapsed  to  repentance,  without  offering  them  hope  of 

1 1  Cor.  5 :  1  sqq.    Comp.  2  Cor.  2 :  5  sqq. 


192  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

absolution  in  this  life.  The  latter  refused  to  limit  the  mercy 
of  God  and  expose  the  sinner  to  despair.  The  former  were 
carried  away  with  an  ideal  of  the  church  which  cannot  be 
realized  till  the  second  coining  of  Christ;  and  while  impelled  to 
,  a  fanatical  separatism,  they  proved,  in  their  own  sects,  the  im- 
possibiiy  of  an  absolutely  pure  communion  on  earth.  The 
others  not  rarely  ran  to  the  opposite  extreme  of  a  dangerous 
looseness,  were  quite  too  lenient,  even  towards  mortal  sins, 
and  sapped  the  earnestness  of  the  Christian  morality. 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  lax  penitential  discipline  had  its 
chief  support  from  the  end  of  the  second  century,  in  the  Roman 
church.  Tertullian  assails  that  church  for  this  with  bitter  mock- 
ery. Hippolytus,  soon  after  him,  does  the  same;  for,  though 
uo  Montanist,  he  was  zealous  for  strict  discipline.  According  to 
his  statement  (in  the  ninth  book  of  his  Philosophumena),  evi- 
dently made  from  fact,  the  pope  Callistus,  whom  a  later  age 
stamped  a  saint  because  it  knew  little  of  him,  admitted  bigami 
and  trlgami  to  ordination,  maintained  that  a  bishop  could  not 
be  deposed,  even  though  he  had  committed  a  mortal  sin,  and 
appealed  for  his  view  to  Rom.  14 :  4,  to  the  parable  of  the  tares 
and  the  wheat,  Matt.  13 :  30,  and,  above  all,  to  the  ark  of  Noah, 
which  was  a  symbol  of  the  church,  and  which  contained  both 
clean  and  unclean  animals,  even  dogs  and  wolves.  In  short,  he 
considered  no  sin  too  great  to  be  loosed  by  the  power  of  the 
keys  in  the  church.  And  this  continued  to  be  the  view  of  his 
successors. 

But  here  we  perceive,  also,  how  the  looser  practice  in  regard 
to  penance  was  connected  with  the  interest  of  the  hierarchy.  It 
favored  the  power  of  the  priesthood,  which  claimed  for  itself 
the  right  of  absolution  ;  it  was  at  the  same  time  matter  of  worldly 
policy ;  it  promoted  the  external  spread  of  the  church,  though 
at  the  expense  of  the  moral  integrity  of  her  membership,  and 
facilitated  both  her  subsequent  union  with  the  state  and  her 
hopeless  confusion  with  the  world.  No  wonder  the  church  of 
Rome,  in  this  point,  as  in  others,  triumphed  at  last  over  all 
opposition 


J  58.   CHURCH  SCHISMS.  193 

§  58.  Church  Schisms. 

L  On  the  Schism  of  HIPPOLYTTJS-.  The  Pkilosophumena  of  HIPPOL. 
lib.  IX.  (ed.  Aliller,  Oxf,  1851,  better  by  Duncker  and  Schneidewin, 
Gott.  1859),  and  the  monographs  on  Hippolytus,  by  Bunsen3  D61- 
linger,  Wordsworth,  Jacobi,  and  others  (which  will"  be  noticeJ  i  * 
chapter-XIII.  J  183). 

II.  On  the  Schism  of  Felicissimus :  CYPRIAN:  Epist.  38-40,  42,  55. 

III.  On  the  Novatian  Schism:   HIPPOL.:   Philosoph.  1.  IX.  CYPE.: 
JEpist.  41-52 ;  and  the  Epistles  of  CORNELIUS  of  Rome,  and  Dio^rrs. 
of  Alex.,  in  Euseb."#.  E.,  VI.  43-45 ;  VIL  8.    Comp.  Lit.  in  1200. 

IV.  On  the  Meletian  Schism :  Documents  in  Latin  translation  in  MAFFEI: 
Osservationi   Letterarie,  Verona,  1738,  torn.  III.  p.  11  sqq.,  and  the 
Greek  fragments  from  the  Liber  de  pcenitentia  of  Peter  of  Alexandria 
in  ROUTH  :  Reliquice  Sacr.  vol.  II.  pp.  21-51.     EPIPHAST.  :  Soer.  68 
(favorable  to  Meletius) ;  ATHANAS.  :  ApoL  contra  Arianos,  |  59 ;  and 
after    him,    SOCE.,   SOZOM.,   and   THEOD.    (very   nnfavorable  to 
Meletius). 

Out  of  this  controversy  on  the  restoration  of  the  lapsed,  pro- 
ceeded four  schisms  during  the  third  century ;  two  in  Rome,  one 
in  North  Africa,  and  one  in  Egypt.  Montanism,  too,  was  in 
a  measure  connected  with,  the  question  of  penitential  discipline, 
but  extended  also  to  several  other  points  of  Christian  life,  and 
will  be  discussed  in  a  separate  chapter. 

I.  The  Roman  schism  of  HIPPOLYTUS.    This  has  recently 
been  brought  to  the  light  by  the  discovery  of  his  Phttosophu- 
mena  (1851).     Hippolytus  was  a  worthy  disciple  of  Irenseus, 
arid  the  most  learned  and  zealous  divine  in  Rome,  during  the 
pontificates  of  Zephyrinus  (202-217),  and  Callistus  (217-222). 
He  died  a  martyr  in  235  or  236.     He  was  an  advocate  of  strict 
views  on  discipline  in  opposition  to   the   latitudinarian  prac- 
tice which  we   have   described   in  the   previous  section.     He 
gives  a  most  unfavorable  account  of  the  antecedents  of  Callistus, 
and  charges  him  and  his  predecessor  with  the  patripassian  heresv 
The  difference,  therefore,  was  doctrinal  as  well  as  disciplinarian. 
It  seems  to  have  led  to  mutual  excommunication  and  a  tem- 
porary schism,  which  lasted  till  A.  D.  235.     Hippolytus  ranks 
himself  with  the  successors  of  the  apostles,  and  seems  to  have 
been  bishop  of  Portus.  the  port  of  Rome  (according  to  later 
Vol.11.    13. 


J94  SECOND  PERIOD.     A.  D.  100-311. 

Latin  tradition),  or  bishop  of  Rome  (according  to  Greek  writers). 
If  bishop  of  Rome,  lie  was  the  first  schismatic  pope,  and  fore- 
runner  of  Novatianus,  who  was  ordained  anti  pope  in  251. 1 
But  the  Roman  Church  must  have  forgotten  or  forgiven  his 
schism,  for  she  numbers  him  among  her  saints  and  martyrs,  and 
celebrates  his  memory  on  the  twenty-second  -of  August.  Pru- 
dentius,  the  Spanish  poet,  represents  him  as  a  Roman  presbyter, 
who  first  took  part  in  the  Novatian  schism,  then  returned  to  the 
Catholic  church,  and  was  torn  to  pieces  by  wild  horses  at  Ostia 
on  account  of  his  faith.  The  remembrance  of  the  schism  was 
lost  in  the  glory  of  his  supposed  or  real  martyrdom.  According 
to  the  chronological  catalogue  of  Popes  from  A.D.  354,  a 
"  presbyter33  Hippolytus,  together  with  the  Roman  bishop  Pon- 
tianus,  the  successor  of  Callistus,  was-  banished  from  Rome  in 
the  reign  of  Alexander  Severus  (235),  to  the  mines  of  Sardinia.3 
II.  The  schism  of  FELICISSIMTJS,  at  Carthage,  about  the  year 
250,  originated  in  the  personal  dissatisfaction  of  five  presbyters 
with  the  hasty  and  irregular  election  of  Cyprian  to  the  bishopric, 
by  the  voice  of  the  congregation,  very  soon  after  his  baptism, 
A.D.  248.  At  the  head  of  this  opposition  party  stood  the  pres- 
byter Novatus,  an  unprincipled  ecclesiastical  demagogue,  of 
restless,  insubordinate  spirit  and  notorious  character,3  and  th$- 
deacon  Felicissimus,  whom  Novatus  ordained,  without  the  per- 
mission or  knowledge  of  Cyprian,  therefore  illegally,  whether 
with  his  own  hands  or  through  those  of  foreign  bishops.  The 
controversy  cannot,  however,  from  this  circumstance,  be  con- 
strued, as  it  is  by  Neander  and  others,  into  a  presbyterial 
reaction  against  episcopal  autocracy.  For  the  opponent  them- 
selves afterwards  chose  a  bishop  in  the  person  of  F^rtunatus. 

* 

1  See  the  particulars  in  ?  183,  and  in  DoDinge'r's  ByppoL'tsotfy.  Gall,  Engl, 
transl.  by  A.  Plummer  (1876),  p.  92  sqq.  '  / 

4  See  Mommsen,  Ueber  den.  Chronographen  mm  Jabr  354  (1^50),  JLipsiiw, 
Ghronologie  der  rom.  Bisehdfa  p.  40  sqq. ;  Dollinger,  I  c.  p.  332  sqjq. ;  Jacobi  in 
aerzog*VL  142  sqq. 

1  Cyprian  charge?  him  with  terrible  cruelties,  such  as  robbing  widows  and 
orphans,  gross  abuse  of  his  father,  and  of  his  wife  even  during  her  pregnancy; 
and  says,  that  he  was  about  to  be  arraigned  for  this  and  similar  misconduct 
Then  the  Decian  persecution  broke  out  Eo.  49. 


?  58.  CHURCH  SCHISMS.  195 

The  Novatians  and  the  Meletians  likewise  had  the  episcopal 
form  of  organization,  though  doubtless  with  many  irregularities 
in  the  ordination. 

After  the  outbreak  of  the  Decian  persecution  this  personal 
rivalry  received  fresh  nourishment  and  new  importance  from 
the  question  of  discipline.  Cyprian  originally  held  Tertullian's 
principles,  and  utterly  opposed  the  restoration  of  the  lapsed, 
till  further  examination  changed  his  views.  Yet,  so  great  was 
the  multitude  of  the  fallen,  that  he  allowed  an  exception  in 
periculo  mortis.  His  opponents  still  saw  even  in  this  position 
an  unchristian  severity,  least  of  all  becoming  him,  who,  as  they 
misrepresented  him,  fled  from  his  post  for  fear  of  death.  They 
gained  the  powerful  voice  of  the  confessors,  who  in  the  face 
of  their  own  martyrdom  freely  gave  their  peace-bills  to  the 
lapsed.  A  regular  trade  was  carried  on  in  these  indulgences. 
An  arrogant  confessor,  Lucian,  wrote  to  Cyprian  in  the  name  of 
the  rest,  that  he  granted  restoration  to  all  apostates,  and  begged 
him  to  make  this  known  to  the  other  bishops.  We  can  easily 
understand  how  this  lenity  from  those  who  stood  in  the  fire, 
might  take  more  with  the  people  than  the  strictness  of  the 
bishop,  who  had  secured  himself.  The  church  of  Xovatus 
and  Felicissimus  was  a  resort  of  all  the  careless  lapsi.  Fe- 
licissimus  set  himself  also  against  a  visitation  of  churches 
and  a  collection  for  the  poor,  which  Cyprian  ordered  during 
his  exile. 

"When  the  bishop  returned,  after  Easter,  251,  he  held  a 
council  at  Carthage,  which,  though  it  condemned  the  party  of 
Felicissimus,  took  a  middle  course  on  the  point  in  dispute.  It 
sought  to  preserve  the  integrity  of  discipline,  yet  at  the  same 
time  to  secure  the  fallen  against  despair.  It  therefore  decided 
for  the  restoration  of  those  who  proved  themselves  truly  peni- 
tent, but  against  restoring  the  careless,  who  asked  the  commu- 
nion merely  from  fear  of  death.  Cyprian  afterwards,  when  the 
persecution  was  renewed,  under  Gall  us,  abolished  even  this  limi- 
tation. He  was  thus,  of  course,  not  entirely  consistent,  but 
gradually  accommodated  his  principles  to  circumstances  and  to 


196  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  practice  of  the  Roman  church.1  His  antagonists  elected 
their  bishop,  indeed,  but  were  shortly  compelled  to  yield  to  the 
united  force  of  the  African  and  Eoman  churches,  especially  as 
they  had  no  moral  earnestness  $t  the  bottom  of  their  cause. 

His  conflict  with  this  schismatical  movement  strengthened  Cy- 
prian's 'episcopal  authority,  and  led  him  in  his  doctrine  of  the 
unity  of  the  church  to  the  principle  of  absolute  exclusiveness. 

III.  The  XOVATIAST  schism  in  Borne  was  prepared  by  the 
controversy  already  alluded  to  between  Hippolytus  and  Callistus. 
It  broke  out  soon  after  the  African  schism,  and,  like  it,  in  con- 
sequence of  an  election  of  bishop.  But  in  this  case  the  opposi- 
tion advocated  the  strict  discipline  against  the 'lenient  practice 
of  the  dominant  church.  The  Novatianists2  considered  them- 
selves the  only  pure  communion/  and  unchurched  all  churches 
which  defiled  themselves  by  re-admitting  the  lapsed,  or  any  other 
gross  offenders.  They  went  much  farther  than  Cyprian,  even 
as  far  as  the  later  Donatists.  They  admitted  the  possibility  of 
mercy  for  a  mortal  sinner,  but  denied  the  power  and  the  right 
of  the  church  to  decide  upon  it,  'and  to  prevent,  by  absolution, 
the  judgment  of  God  upon  such  offenders.  They  also,  like  Cy- 
prian, rejected  heretical  baptism,  and  baptized  all  who  came  over 
to  them  from  other  communions  not  just  so  rigid  as  themselves. 

At  the  head  of  this  party  stood  the  Eoman  presbyter  Nova- 
tian,4  an  earnest,  learned,  but  gloomy  man,  who  had  come  to 
faith  through  severe  demoniacal  disease  and  inward  struggles. 
He  fell  out  with  Cornelius,  who,  after  the  Decian  persecution  in 
251,  was  nominated  bishop  of  Rome,  and  at  once,  to  the  grief 
of  many,  showed  great  indulgence  towards  the  lapsed.  Among 
his  adherents  the  above-named  Novatus  of  Carthage  was  par- 
ticularly busy,  either  from  a  mere  spirit  of  opposition  to  exist- 
ing authority,  or  from  having  changed  his  former  lax  principles 
on  his  removal  to  Eome.  Nbvatian,  against  his  will,  was  chosen 

1  In  Ufa.  52,  Ad  Antonianvm,  he  tried  to  justify  himself  in  regard  to  this 
change  in  his  views.  8  Nbvatiani,  Novatianeiises.  8  Ka&apot. 

*  Eosebins  and  the  Greeks  call  him  "Soov&rof,  and  confound  him  with  Novalus 
of  Carthage.  Dionysius  of  Alex.,  however,  calls  him 


?58.  CHURCH  SCHISMS.  197 

bishop  by  the  opposition.  Cornelius  excommunicated  him. 
Both  parties  courted  the  recognition  of  the  churches  abroad, 
Fabian,  bishop  of  Antioch,  sympathized  with  the  rigorists. 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  on  the  contrary,  accused  them  of 
blaspheming  the  most  gracious  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  calling 
him  unmerciful.  And  especially  Cyprian,  from  his  seal  for 
ecclesiastical  unity  and  his  aversion  to  Novatus,  took  sides  with 
Cornelius,  whom  he  regarded  the  legitimate  bishop  of  Rome. 

In  spite  of  this  strong  opposition  the  Xovatian  sect,  by  virtue 
of  its  moral  earnestness,  propagated  itself  in  various  provinces 
of  the  West  and  the  East  down  to  the  sixth  century.  In 
Phrygia  it  combined  with  the  remnants  of  the  ilontanists. 
The  council  of  Nicsea  recognized  its  ordination,  and  endeavored, 
without  success,  to  reconcile  it  with  the  Catholic  church.  Con- 
stantine,  at  first  dealt  mildly  with  the  Novations,  but  afterwards 
prohibited  them  to  worship  in  public  and  ordered  their  books 
to  be  burnt. 

IV.  The  MELETIAN  schism  in  Egypt  arose  in  the  Diocletian 
persecution,  about  305,  and  lasted  more  than  a  century,  but, 
owing  to  the  contradictory  character  of  our  accounts,  it  is  not  so 
well  understood.  It  was  occasioned  by  Meletius,  bishop  of 
Lycopolis  in  Thebais,  who,  according  to  one  statement^  from 
zeal  for  strict  discipline,  according  to  another,  from  sheer  arro- 
gance, rebelled  against  his  metropolitan,  Peter  of  Alexandria 
(martyred  in  311),  and  during  his  absence  encroached  upon  his 
diocese  with  ordinations,  excommunications,  and  the  like.  Peter 
warned  his  people  against  him,  and,  on  returning  from  his 
flight,  deposed  him  as  a  disturber  of  the  peace  of  the  churchc 
But  the  controversy  continued,  and  spread  over  all  Egypt.  The 
council  of  Mcaea  endeavored,  by  recognizing  the  ordination  of 
the  twenty-nine  Meletian  bishops,  and  by  other  compromise 
measures,  to  heal  the  division ;  but  to  no  purpose.  The  Mele- 
tfans  afterwards  made  common  cause  with  the  Arians. 

The  DONATIST  schism,  which  was  more  formidable  than  any 
of  those  mentioned,  likewise  grew  out  of  the  Diocletian  perse- 
cution, but  belongs  more  to  the  next  period. 


CHAPTER  V. 

CHRISTIAN    WORSHIP. 

L  The  richest  sources  here  are  the  works  of  JUSTE*  M.,  TEBTTTLLULW, 
CYPBIAST,  EUSEBIUS,  and  the  so-called  CONSTITUTIONS  APOS- 
TOLICJE;  also  CLEMENT  OF  EOME  (Ad  Cor.  59-61),  and  the  Homily 
falsely  ascribed  to  him  (fully  publ.  1875). 

II.  See  the  books  quoted  in  vol.  L  455,  and  the  relevant  sections  in  the 
archaeological  works  of  BDTGHAM  (Antiquities  of  the  Christian 
Church,  Lond.  1708-22.  10  vols. ;  new  ed.  Lond.  1852,  in  2  vols.), 
AUGITSTI  (whose  larger  work  fills  12  vols.,  Leipz.  1817-31,  and  his 
Handbuch  der  Christl.  Arch&oL  3  vols.  Leipz.  1836),  BlNTEBIM 
(R  C.),  SIEGEL,  SMITH  &  CHEETHAM  (Diet,  of  Chr.  Ant.,  Lond. 
1875,  2  vols.),  and  GABBUCCI  (Storia  della  artecrist.,  1872-80, 6  vols.) 

§  59.  Places  of  Common  Worship. 

B.  EosprsiAOTS:  De  Templis,  etc.  Tig.  1603.  And  in  his  Opera, 
Genev.  1681. 

FABRICIUS  :  De  Templis  vett.  Christ    Helmst.  1704. 

MUBATOBI  (E.  C.) :  Deprimis  Christianorum  Ecclesiis.    Arezzo,  1770. 

HUBSCH:  Altchristliche  Eirchen.    Karlsruh,  1860. 

Jos.  MULLOOLT:  St.  Clement  and  his  Basilica  in  Borne.  Eome,  2^  ed. 
1S73. 

DE  VOGUE  :  Architecture  civile  et  relig.  du  1«  au  VTIe  sifole.  Paris, 
1877,  2  vols. 

The  numerous  works  on  church  architecture  (by  Fergusson,  Brown, 
Bunsen,  Kugler,  Kinkel,  Kreuser,  Schnaase,  Lubke,  Voillet-le-Duc, 
De  Vogiie,  etc.)  usually  begin  with  the  basilicas  of  the  Constan- 
tinian  age,  which  are  described  in  vol.  III.  541  sqq. 

THE  Christian  worship,  as  might  be  expected  from  the 
humble  condition  of  the  -church  in  this  period  of  persecution, 
was  very  simple,  strongly  contrasting  with  the  pomp  of  the 
Greek  and  Roman  communion ;  yet  by  no  means  puritanic. 
We  perceive  here,  as  well  as  in  organization  and  doctrine,  the 
gradual  and  sure  approach  of  the  Nicene  age,  especially  in  the 
ritualistic  solemnity  of  the  baptismal  service,  and  the  mystical 
character  of  the  eucharistic  sacrifice. 


§59.  PLACES  OF  COMMON  WOESHIP.  199 

Let  us  glance  first  at  the  places  of  public  worship.  Until 
about  the  close  of  the  second  century  the  Christians  held  their 
worship  mostly  in  private  houses,  or  in  desert  places,  at  the 
graves  of  martyrs,  and  in  the  crypts  of  the  catacombs.  This 
arose  from  their  poverty,  their  oppressed  and"  outlawed  con- 
dition, their  love  of  silence  and  solitude,  and  their  aversion  to  all 
heathen  art.  The  apologists  frequently  assert,  that  their  brethren 
had  neither  temples  nor  altars  (in  the  pagan  sense  of  these 
words),  and  that  their  worship  was  spiritual  and  independent 
of  place  and  ritual.  Heathens,  like  Celsus,  cast  this  up  to  them 
as  a  reproach  ;  but  Origen  admirably  replied  :  The  humanity 
of  Christ  is  the  highest  temple  and  the  most  beautiful  image  of 
God,  and  true  Christians  are  living  statues  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
with  which  no  Jupiter  of  Phidias  can  compare.  Justin  Martyr 
said  to  the  Eoman  prefect:  The  Christians  assemble  wherever 
it  is  convenient,  because  their  God  is  not,  like  the  gods  of  the 
heathen,  inclosed  in  space,  but  is  invisibly  present  everywhere. 
Clement  of  Alexandria  refhtes  the  superstition,  that  religion  is 
bound  to  any  building. 

In  private  houses  the  room  best  suited  for  worship  and  for 
the  love-feast  was  the  oblong  dining-hall,  the  triclinium,  which 
was  never  wanting  in  a  convenient  Greek  or  Roman  dwelling, 
*and  which  often  had  a  semicircular  niche,  like  the  choir1  in  the 
later  churches.  An  elevated  seat2  was  used  for  reading  the 
Scriptures  and  preaching,  and  a  simple  table3  for  the  holy  com- 
munion. Similar  arrangements  were  made  also  in  the  cata- 
combs, which  sometimes  have  the  form  of  a  subterranean 
church. 

The  first  traces  of  special  houses  of  worship4  occur  in  Tertul- 


1  Chorus,  Pfaa.  The  two  are  sometimes  identified,  sometimes  distinguished, 
ihe  bema  being  the  sanctuary  proper  for  the  celebration  of  the  holy  mysteries, 
the  choir  the  remaining  part  of  the  chancel  for  the  clergy  ;  while  the  nave  was 
for  the  laity. 

*  'A/^/foj',  suggestus,  pulpitum. 

d  Tpdirefy,  mensa  sacra;  also  ara,  altare. 

*  'Ewe^fffo,  kKK^ataar^ptov,  Kupuucd,  ol/cof  #£ou,  ecdesia,  dominica,  domus  Do, 
templum.    The  names  for  a  church  building  in  the  Teutonic  and  Slavonic  Ian- 


200  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

lian,  who  speaks  of  going  to  church/  and  in  his  'contemporary 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  mentions  the  double  meaning  of 
the  word  ixxtyffia.2  About  the  year  230,  Alexander  Severus 
granted  the  Christians  the  right  to  a  place  in  Rome  against  ttoe 
protest  of  the  tavern-keepers,  because  the  worship  of  God  in  any 
form  was  better  than  tavern-keeping.  After  the  middle  of  the 
third  century  the  building  of  churches  began  in  great  earnest, 
as  the  Christians  enjoyed  over  forty  years  of  repose  (260-303), 
and  multiplied  so  fast  that,  according  to  Eusebius,  more  spa- 
cious places  of  devotion  became  everywhere  necessary.  The 
Diocletian  persecution  began  (in  303,)  with  the  destruction  of  the 
magnificent  church  at  Nicomedia,  which,  according  to  Lactan- 
tius,  even  towered  above  the  neighboring  imperial  palace.3 
Rome  is  supposed  to  have  had,  as  early  as  the  beginning  of  the 
fourth  century,  more  than  forty  churches.  But  of  the  form 
and  arrangement  of  them  we  have  no  account.  With  Constan- 
tine  the  Great  begins  the  era  of  church  architecture,  and  its  first 
style  is  the  Basilica.  The  emperor  himself  set  the  example, 
and  built  magnificent  churches  in  Jerusalem,  Bethlehem, 
and  Constantinople,  which,  however,  have  undergone  many 
changes.  His  contemporary,  the  historian  Eusebius,  gives  us 
the  first  account  of  a  church  edifice  which  Paulinus  built  in 
Tyre  between  A.D.  313  and  322.*  It  included  a  large  portico 
)  ;  a  quadrangular  atrium  (al'&pcov),  surrounded  by 


guages  (l&rche,  Church,  JTerfc,  J&pfa*  2fcer&>/,  etc.)  are  derived  from  the  Greek 
Kopuucfi,  KvptaK6v  (belonging  to  the  Lord,  the  Lord's  house),  through  the  medium 
of  the  Gothic;  the  names  in  the  Romanic  languages  (Chi&a,  Igrqa,  figlise,  etc.) 
from  the  Latin  ecdesiay  although  this  is  also  from  the  Greek,  and  means  origi- 
nally assembly  (either  a  local  congregation,  or  the  whole  body  of  Christians).. 
Churches  erected  specially  in  honor  of  martyrs  were  called  martyria,  mcmoriost 
j  tiiulL 


9  De  Mori.  Persec.  c.  12.  The  Chronicle  of  Edessa  (in  Assem.  BibL  Orient, 
XL  397)  mentions  the  destruction  of  Christian  temples  A.  D.  292. 

4  IZtrf.  Ecd.  X.  4.  Eusebius  also  describes,  in  rhetorical  exaggeration  and 
looseness,  the  churches  built  by  Constantine  in  Jerusalem,  Antioch,  and  Con- 
stantinople (Vila  Const.  1.  III.  50;  IV.  58,  59).  See  De  Vogue*,  fyfaes  de  la 
ferre-aamfe,  Hiibsch,  I  c.,  and  Smith  &  Cheetham,  I.  368  WQ. 


g  60.  THE  LOKD'S  DAY.  201 

ranges  of  columns;'  a  fountain  in  the  centre  of  the  atrium  for 
the  customary  washing  of  hands  and  feet  before  entering  the 
church ;  interior  porticoes ;  the  nave  or  central  space  (paffitetot 
o&oc)  with  galleries  above  the  aisles,  and  covered  by  a  roof 
of  cedar  of  Lebanon ;  and  the  most  holy  altar  (Itycov  dj-fwu 
ti-uataaryptov).  Eusebius  mentions  also  the  thrones  (dpovot)  for 
the  bishops  and  presbyters,  and  benches  or  seats.  The  church 
was  surrounded  by  halls  and  inclosed  by  a  wall,  which  can  still 
be  traced.  Fragments  of  five  granite  columns  of  this  building 
ore  among  the  ruins  of  Tyre. 

The  description  of  a  church  in  the  Apostolic  Constitutions,1 
implies  that  the  clergy  occupy  the  space  at  the  east  end  of  the 
church  (in  the  choir),  and  the  people  the  nave,  but  mentions  no 
barrier  between  them.  Such  a  barrier,  however,  existed  as  earlv 

*  '  If 

as  the  fourth  century,  when  the  laity  were  forbidden  to  enter  the 
enclosure  of  the  altar. 

§  60.  The  Lortfs  Day. 
See  Lit.  in  vol.  L  476. 

The  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Day  in  memory  of  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ  dates  undoubtedly  from  the  apostolic  age.2 
Nothing  short  of  apostolic  precedent  can  account  for  the  univer- 
sal religious  observance  in  the  churches  of  the  second  century. 
There  is  no  dissenting  voice.  This  custom  is  confirmed  by  the 

1 II.  57,  ed.  Ueltzen,  p.  66  sqq. 

2  The  original  designations  of  the  Christian  Sabbath  or  "weekly  rest-day  are : 
'(l  fila  or  jtia  aafifidruv,  the  first  day  of  the  week  (Matt.  28 :  1 ;  Mark  16 :  2 ; 
Luke  24:  1;  John  21:  1;  Acts  20:  7;  1  Cor.  16:  2),  and  tf  yutpa  KvpmKf,, 
the  Lord's  Day,  which  first  occurs  in  Eev.  1 :  10,  then  in  Ignatius  and  the 
fathers.  The  Latins  render  it  Dominicus  or  Dominica  dies.  Barnabas  calls  it 
the  eighth  day,  in  contrast  to  the  Jewish  sabbath.  After  Constantine  the  Jew- 
ish term  Sabbath  and  the  heathen  term  Sunday  ($tutpa  rov  f/Mov,  dies  Softs) 
were  used  also.  In  the  edict  of  Gratian,  A.  D.  386,  two  are  combined :  "  Sotis 
die,  quern  Dominicum  rite  dixere  majores"  On  the  Continent  of  Europe  Sunday 
has  ruled  out  Sabbath  completely ;  while  in  England,  Scotland,  and  the  United 
States  Sabbath  is  used  as  often  as  the  other  or  oftener  in  religious  literature. 
The  difference  is  characteristic  of  the  difference  in  the  Continental  and  the 
Anglo-American  observance  of  the  Lord's  Day. 


202  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311, 

testimonies  of  the  earliest  post-apostolic  writers,  as  Barnabas,1 
Ignatius,2  and  Justin  Martyr.3  It  is  also  confirmed  by  the 
younger  Pliny.4  The  Didache  calls  the  first  day  "the  Lord's 
Day  of  the  Lord."5 

Considering  that  the  church  was  struggling  into  existence, 
and  that  a  large  number  of  Christians  were  slaves  of  heathen 
masters,  we  cannot  expect  an  unbroken  regularity  of  worship 
and  a  universal  cessation  of  labor  on  Sunday  until  the  civil 
government  in  the  time  of  Constantine  came  to  the  help  of  the 
church  and  legalized  (and  in  part  even  enforced)  the  observance 
of  the  Lord's  Day.    This  may  be  the  reason  why  the  religious 
observance  of  it  was  not  expressly  enjoined  by  Christ  and  the 
apostles;   as  for  similar  reasons  there  is  no  prohibition  of 
polygamy  and  slavery  by  the  letter  of  the  New  Testament, 
although  its  spirit  condemns  these  abuses,  and  led  to  their  abo- 
lition.   "VFe  may  go  further  and  say  that  coercive  Sunday  laws 
are  against  the  genius  and  spirit  of  the  Christian  religion  which 
appeals  to  the  free  will  of  man,  and  uses  only  moral  means  for 
its  ends.    A  Christian  government  may  and  ought  to  protect  the 
Christian  Sabbath  against    open  desecration,  but  its  positive 
observance  by  attending  public  worship,  must  be  left  to  the 
conscientious  conviction  of  individuals.     Eeligion  cannot  be 
forced  by  law.     It  looses  its  value  when  it  ceases  to  be  voluntary. 
The  fathers  did  not  regard  the  Christian  Sunday  as  a  continu- 
ation of,  but  as  a  substitute  for,  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  and  based 
it  not  so  much  on  the  fourth  commandment,  and  the  primitive 
rest  of  God  in  creation,  to  which  the  commandment  expressly 
refers,  as  upon  the  resurrection  of  Christ  and  the  apostolic  tra- 
dition.   There  was  a  disposition  to  disparage  the  Jewish  law  in 

1  Ep^  c.  15:  "We  celebrate  the  eighth  day  with  joy,  on  which  Jesus  rose 
from  the  dead,  and,  after  having  appeared  [to  his  disciples],  ascended  to 
heaven/'  It  does  not  follow  from  this  that  Barnabas  put  the  ascension  of 
Christ  likewise  on  a  Sunday. 

*  Ep.  ad  Magnes.  c.  8,  9.  *  Apol.  I.  67. 

*  "Statodie,"  in  his  letter  to  Trajan,  Ep.  X.  97.   This  "stated  day,"  on  which 
the  Christians  in  Bithynia  assembled  before  day-light  to  sing  hymns  to  Christ 
as  a  God,  and  to  bind  themselves  by  a  scteramentum,  must  be  the  Lord's  Day. 

6  Ch.  14:  Kvptaur/  wpiov,  pleonastic.    The  adjective  in  Eev.  1 :  10. 


?  60,  THE  LORD'S  DAY.  203 

the  zeal  to  prove  the  independent  originality  of  Christian  insti- 
tutions. The  same  polemic  interest  against  Judaism  ruled  in 
the  paschal  controversies,  and  made  Christian  Easter  a  move- 
able  feast.  Nevertheless,  Sunday  was  always  regarded  in  the 
ancient  church  as  a  divine  institution,  at  least  .in  the  secondary 
sense,  as  distinct  from  divine  ordinances  in  the  prirnaiy  sense, 
which  were  directly  and  positively  commanded  by  Christ,  as 
baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper.  Regular  public  worship  abso- 
lutely requires  a  stated  day  of  worship. 

Ignatius  was  the  first  who  contrasted  Sunday  with  the  Jewish 
Sabbath  as  something  done  away  with.1  So  did  the  author  of 
the  so-called  Epistle  of  Barnabas.2  Justin  Martyr,  in  contro- 
versy with  a  Jew,  says  that  the  pious  before  Moses  pleased  God 
without  circumcision  and  the  Sabbath,3  and  that  Christianity 
requires  not  one  particular  Sabbath,  but  a  perpetual  Sabbath.4 
He  assigns  as  a  reason  for  the  selection  of  the  first  day  for  the 
purposes  of  Christian  worship,  because  on  that  day  God  dis- 
pelled the  darkness  and  the  chaos,  and  because  Jesus  rose  from 
the  dead  and  appeared  to  his  assembled  disciples,  but  makes  no 
allusion  to  the  fourth  commandment.5  He  uses  the  term  "  to 
sabbathize  "  (^ajS/forif  e*v),  only  of  the  Jews,  except  in  the  pas- 
sage just  quoted,  where  he  spiritualizes  the  Jewish  law.  Dio- 
nysius  of  Corinth  mentions  Sunday  incidentally  in  a  letter  to 
the  church  of  Some,* A. D.,  170:  "To-day  we  kept  the  Lord's 

1  Ep,  ad  Magnes.  c.  8,  9  in  the  shorter  Greek  recension  (wanting  in  the  Syriac 
edition). 

2  Cap.  15.    This  Epistle  is  altogether  too  fierce  in  its  polemics  against  Ju- 
daism to  be  the  production  of  the  apostolic  Barnabas. 

1  Dial  o  Tryph.  Jud.  19,  27  (Tom.  I.  P.  n.  p.  68,  90,  in  the  third  ed.  of 
Otto). 

4  Dial.  12  (II.  p.  46) :   aa/Sparifriv  ipag  (so  Otto  reads,  but  fyae  would  be 
better)  6  icaivbe  vdpnc  6ta  iravrog  (belongs  to  aapparlfriv)  ktietei.     Comp.  Ter- 
tullian,  Contra  Jud.  c.  4 :   "  Untie  nos  inteUigimis  magiSj  sabbatizare  nos  ab  omni 
opere  servili  semper  debere,  et  non  tantum  septimo  guogue  die,  sed  per  omne 
tempus" 

5  ApoL  L  67  (I-  p.  161) :  T#v  fe  rov  fpdov  fipipav  Koivq  ^dvrec  r%v  ow&svciv 
troiobfjie&a,  iireify  Ttpbrrj  karlv  fyepa,  sv  y  6  &ebg  rb  ff/cdrof  KOI  T%V  vfo?v  rpr^of , 
tc<5o//ov  e^o^jycre,  ical  'I^trouf  'Kpiarbe  6  ^repoq  <rwr#p  rrj  avry  fni&pq.  ex  veicp&v  avttmi 
K.r.  A. 


204  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Day  holy,  in  which  we  read  your  letter."1  Melito  of  Sardis 
wrote  a  treatise  on  the  Lord's  Day,  which  is  lost.2  Irenseus  of 
Lyons,  about  170,  bears  testimony  to  the  celebration  of  the 
Lord's  Day,3  but  likewise  regards  the  Jewish  Sabbath  merely  as 
a  symbolical  and  typical  ordinance,  and  says  that  "Abraham 
without  circumcision  and  without  observance  of  Sabbaths  be- 
lieved in  God,"  which  proves  "the  symbolical  and  temporary 
character  of  those  ordinances,  and  their  inability  to  make  per- 
fect,"4 Tertullian,  at  the  close  of  the  second  and  beginning 
of  the  third  century,  views  the  Lord's  Day  as  figurative  of  rest 
from  sin  and  typical  of  man's  final  rest,  and  says:  "We  have 
nothing  to  do  with  Sabbaths,  new  moons  or  the  Jewish  festivals, 
much  less  with  those  of  the  heathen.  We  have  our  own  solem- 
nities, the  Lord's  Day,  for  instance,  and  Pentecost.  As  the 
heathen  confine  themselves  to  their  festivals  and  do  not  observe 
ours,  let  us  confine  ourselves  to  ours,  and  not  meddle  with  those 
belonging  to  them."  He  thought  it  wrong  to  fast  on  the 
Lord's  Day,  or  to  pray  kneeling  during  its  continuance.  "  Sun- 
day we  give  to  joy."  But  he  also  considered  it  Christian  duty 
to  abstain  from  secular  care  and  labor,  lest  we  give  place  to  the 
devil.5  This  is  the  first  express  evidence  of  cessation  from  labor 
an  Sunday  among  Christians.  The  habit  of  standing  in  prayer 
on  Sunday,  which  Tertullian  regarded  as  essential  to  the  festive 
character  of  the  day,  and  which  was  sanctioned  by  an  oecumenical 
council,  was  afterwards  abandoned  by  the  western  church. 

1  Eusebius,  K  E.  IV.  23. 

1  Espl  Kvpuudjc  Ad>of.    Euseb.  IV.  26. 

3  Li  one  of  his  fragments  mpt  TOU  ird<?xa,  and  by  his  part  in  the  Quartadeci- 
manian  controversy,  which  turned  on  the  yearly  celebration  of  the  Christian 
Passover,  but  implied  universal  agreement  as  to  the  weekly  celebration  of  the 
Resurrection.  Comp.  Hessey,  Bampton  Lectures  on  Sunday.  London,  186Q 
p.  373. 

*Adv.  HOST.  IV.  16. 

5  De  Oral.  c.  23 :  "Nbs  vero  sieut  accepimtts,  solo  die  Dominicae  Rewrrectionis  non 
ab  isto  tantum  [the  bowing  of  the  knee],  sed  omni  anzietatis  Mbitu  et  cfficio  cavere 
debtmusy  difftrentes  etiam  negotia^  ne  quern  diabolo  locum  demus."  Other  pass- 
ages of  Tertullian,  Cyprian,  Clement  of  Alex.,  and  Origen  see  in  Hessey  I  <ju 
pp.375ff.  '^ 


§60.  THE  LOKD'S  DAY.  205 

The  Alexandrian  fathers  have  essentially  the  same  view,  with 
some  fancies  of  their  own  concerning  the  allegorical  meaning 
of  the  Jewish  Sabbath. 

We  see  then  that  the  ante-N icene  church  clearly  distinguished 
the  Christian  Sunday  from  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  and  put  it  OB 
independent  Christian  ground.  She  did  not  fully  appreciate 
the  perpetual  obligation  of  the  fourth  commandment  in  its 
substance  as  a  weekly  clay  of  rest,  rooted  in  the  physical  and 
moral  necessities  of  man.  This  is  independent  of  those  cere- 
monial enactments  which  were  intended  only  for  the  Jews  and 
abolished  by  the  gospel.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  church 
took  no  secular  liberties  with  the  day.  On  the  question  of  the- 
atrical and  other  amusements  she  was  decidedly  puritanic  and 
ascetic,  and  denounced  them  as  being  inconsistent  on  any  day 
with  the  profession  of  a  soldier  of  the  cross.  She  regarded 
Sunday  as  a  sacred  day,  as  the  Day  of  the  Lord,  as  the  weekly 
commemoration  of  his  resurrection  and  the  pentecostal  effiision 
of  the  Spirit,  and  therefore  as  a  day  of  holy  joy  and  thanksgiv- 
ing to  be  celebrated  even  before  the  rising  sun  by  prayer,  praise, 
and  communion  with  the  risen  Lord  and  Saviour. 

Sunday  legislation  began  with  Constantine,  and  belongs  to 
the  next  period. 

The  observance  of  the  Sabbath  among  the  Jewish  Christians 
gradually  ceased.  Yet  the  Eastern  church  to  this  day  marks 
the  seventh  day  of  the  week  (excepting  only  the  Easter  Sab- 
bath) by  omitting  fasting,  and  by  standing  in  prayer ;  while  the 
Latin  church,  in  direct  opposition  to  Judaism,  made  Saturday  a 
fast  day.  The  Controversy  on  this  point  began  as  early  as  the 
end  of  the  second  century. 

WEDNESDAY/  and  especially  FRIDAY/  were  devoted  to  the 
weekly  commemoration  of  the  sufferings  and  death  of  the  Lord, 
and  observed  as  days  of  penance,  or  watch-days,3  and  half-fast- 
ing (which  lasted  till  three  o'clock  in  the  afternoon).4 

1  Feria  quarta.  *  Feria  sexta,  $ 

»  Dies  stationum  nf  the  milites  Christ^  4  Semijyurda* 


^08  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

§  61.  The  Christian  Passover.    (Easter). 

H.  HOSPIXIA^US  :  Festa  Christ.,  h.  e.  de  origins,  progressu,  ceremoniis  et 

ritibusfestorum  dierum  Christ.    Tig.  1593,  and  often. 
A.  G.  PILLWITZ:    Gesch.  der  hdl.  Zeiten  in  der  abendland.  Kirche, 

Dresden,  1842. 
M.  A.  XICKEL  (E.  C.)  :  Die  heil.  Zdten  u.  Feste  nach  ihrrer  Gesch.  u. 

Feier  in  der  kath.  Kirche.    Mainz,  1825-1838.    6  Tola. 
F.  PIPER  :  Gesch.  des  Osterfestes.    Berl.  1845. 
Lisco  :  Das  christl.  Kirchenjahr.    Berlin,  1840,  4th  ed.  1850. 
STEAUSS  (court-chaplain  of  the  King  of  Prussia,  d.  1863)  :  Das  evangel 

Kirchenjahr.    Berlin,  1850. 

BOBERTAG:  Das  evangel.  Kirchenjahr.    Breslau  1857. 
IL  ALT  :  Der  ChrMicJie  Cultus,  IJ>d  Part  :   Das  Kirchenjahr,  2nd  ed, 

Berlin  1860. 

L.  HEXSLEY:  Art.  Easter  in  Smith  and  Chectham  (1875),  I.  586-595. 
F.X  KKAUS  (KG.):  Art.  Feste  in  "R.Encytt.  der  Christl.  Alter  thumer," 

vol.  I.  (1881),  pp.  486-502,  and  the  lit.  quoted  there.    The  article  is 

written  by  several  authors,  the  section  on  Easter  and  Pentecost  hy 

Dr.  Funk  of  Tubingen. 

The  yearly  festivals  of  this  period  were  Easter,  Pentecost, 
and  Epiphany.  They  form  the  rudiments  of  the  church  year, 
and  keep  within  the  limits  of  the  facts  of  the  New  Testament. 

Strictly  speaking  the  ante-Nicene  church  had  two  annual 
festive  seasons,  the  Passover  in  commemoration  of  the  suffering 
of  Christ,  and  the  Pentecoste  in  commemoration  of  the  resur- 
rection and  exaltation  of  Christ,  beginning  with  Easter  and 
ending  with  Pentecost  proper.  But  Passover  and  Easter  were 
connected  in  a  continuous  celebration,  combining  the  deepest 
sadness  with  the  highest  joy,  and  hence  the  term  pascha  (in  Greek 
and  Latin)  is  often  used  in  a  wider  sense  for  the  Easter  season, 
as  is  the  case  with  the  French  pdque  or  p&ques,  and  the  Italian 
pasqua.  The  Jewish  passover  also  lasted  a  whole  week,  and 
after  it  began  their  Pentecost  or  feast  of  weeks.  The  death  of 
Christ  became  fruitful  in  the  resurrection,  and  has  no  re- 
demptive power  without  it.  The  commemoration  of  the  death 
of  Christ  was  called  the  paseha  staurosimon  or  the  Passover 
proper.1  The  commemoration  of  the  resurrection  was  called 


Pascha,  ndaxa,  is  not  from  the  verb  mf^v,  to  suffer  (though  often  con 


§  61.  THE  CHRISTIAN  PASSOVER.    (EASTER.)         207 

the  pasoha  anastasimon,  and  afterwards  Easter.1  The  former 
corresponds  to  the  gloomy  Friday,  the  other  to  the  cheerful 
Sunday,  the  sacred  days  of  the  week  in  commemoration  of  those 
great  events. 

The  Christian  Passover  naturally  grew  out  of  the  Jewish 
Passover,  as  the  Lord's  Day  grew  out  of  the  Sabbath ;  the 
paschal  lamb  being  regarded  as  a  prophetic  type  of  Christ,  the 
Lamb  of  God  slain  for  our  sins  (1  Cor.  5 :  7,  8),  and  the  de- 
liverance from  the  bondage  of  Egypt  as  a  type  of  the  redemp- 
tion from  sin.  It  is  certainly  the  oldest  and  most  important 
annual  festival  of  the  church,  and  can  be  traced  back  to  the 
first  century,  or  at  all  events  to  the  middle  of  the  second,  when 
it  was  universally  observed,  though  with  a  difference  as  to  the 
day,  and  the  extent  of  the  fast  connected  with  it.  It  is  based 
on  the  view  that  Christ  crucified  and  risen  is  the  centre  of  faith. 
The  Jewish  Christians  would  very  naturally  from  the  beginning 
continue  to  celebrate  the  legal  passover,  but  in  the  light  of  its 
fulfillment  by  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  and  would  dwell  chiefly 

founded  with  it  and  with  the  Latin  passio  by  the  Fathers,  who  were  ignorant  of 
Hebrew),  but  from  the  Hebrew  HDS^  and  the  Chaldee  KJJDS^  (comp.  the-verb 
hD3^  to  pass  over,  to  spare).  See  Ex.  chs.  12  and  13;  Lev.  23:  4-9;  Num. 
ch.  9.  It  has  three  meanings  in  the  Sept.  and  the  N.  T. .  1)  the  paschal  fes- 
tival, called  "  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread,"  and  lasting  from  the  fourteenth 
to  the  twentieth  of  Nisan,  in  commemoration  of  the  sparing  of  the  first-bora 
and  the  deliverance  of  Israel  from  Egypt;  2)  the  paschal  lamb  which  was 
slain  between  the  two  evenings  (3-5  P.M.)  on  the  14th  of  Nisan;  3)  the 
paschal  supper  on  the  evening  of  the  same  day,  which  marked  the  beginning 
of  the  15th  of  Nisan,  or  the  first  day  of  the  festival.  In  the  first  sense  it  cor- 
responds to  the  Christian  Easter-festival,  as  the  type  corresponds  to  the  sub- 
stance. Nevertheless  the  translation  Easter  for  Passover  in  the  English  ver- 
sion, Acts  12 :  4,  is  a  strange  anachronism  (corrected  in  the  Ee vision). 

1  Easter  is  the  resurrection  festival  which  follows  the  Passover  proper,.but 
is  included  in  the  same  festive  week.  The  English  Easter  (Anglo-Saxon  easier, 
efatran,  G-erman  Ostern)  is  connected  with  East  and  sunrise,  and  is  akin  to 
7J6?,  oriensy  awora  (comp.  Jac.  Grimm's  Deutsche  Mythol.  1835,  p.  181  and  349, 
and  Skeat's.liifcym.  Diet.  E.  Lang,  sub  Easter).  The  comparison  of  sunrise  and 
the  natural  spring  with  the  new  moral  creation  in  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
and  the  transfer  of  the  celebration  of  Ostara,  the  old  German  divinity  of  the 
rising,  health-bringing  light,  to  the  Christian  Easter  festival,  was  easy  and 
natural,  because  all  nature  is  a  symbol  of  spirit,  and  the  heathen  myths  are 
clim  presentiments  and  carnal  anticipations  of  Christian  truths. 


208  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

on  the  aspect  of  the  crucifixion.  The  Gentile  Christians,  for 
whom  the  Jewish  passover  had  no  meaning  except  through 
reflection  from  the  cross,  would  chiefly  celebrate  the  Lord's 
resurrection  as  they  did  on  every  Sunday  of  the  week.  Easter 
formed  at  first  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  year,  as  the  month 
of  Xisaii,  which  contained  the  vernal  equinox  (corresponding  to 
our  Slarch  or  April),  began  the  sacred  year  of  the  Jews.  Be- 
tween the  celebration  of  the  death  and  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
lay  "the  great  Sabbath,"1  on  which  also  the  Greek  church 
fasted  by  way  of  exception ;  and  "  the  Easter  vigils," 2  which 
were  kept,  with  special  devotion,  by  the  whole  congregation  till 
the  break  of  day,  and  kept  the  more  scrupulously,  as  it  was 
generally  believed  that  the  Lord's  glorious  return  would  occur 
on  this  night.  The  feast  of  the  resurrection,  which  completed 
the  whole  work  of  redemption,  became  gradually  the  most 
prominent  part  of  the  Christian  Passover,  and  identical  with 
Easter.  But  the  crucifixion  continued  to  be  celebrated  on  what 
is  called  "Good  Friday.'73 

The  paschal  feast  was  preceded  by  a  season  of  penitence  and 
fasting,  which  culminated  in  "  the  holy  week."  *  This  fasting 
varied  in  length,  in  different  countries,  from  one  day  or  forty 
hours  to  six  weeks ; 5  but  after  the  fifth  century,  through  the 

J  To  jufya  adp3arov,  r&  aytov  cdppaTov,  Sabbatum  magnum. 
»  TLawvxtie$<  vigilice  paschce,  Easter  Eve.    Good  Friday  and  Easter  Eve  were 
a  continuous  fast,  which  was  prolonged  till  midnight  or  cock-crow.    See  Tertull. 
Ad  vxor.  II.  4;  Euseb.  H.  E.  VI.  34;  Apost.  Const.  V.  18;  VII.  23. 

3  Various  names :  wax*  ffravp^uov  (as  distinct  from  it.  avaardaifiov],  fy£pa> 
eravpov,  frapaaKswj  ^yahj  or  ety/a,  parasceue,  feria  sexto,  major,  Good  Friday, 
Charfreiiag  (from  #a/wc  or  from  carus,  dear).  But  the  celebration  seems  not  to 
have  been  universal ;  for  Augustan  says  in  his  letter  Ad  Januar.,  that  he  did 
not  consider  this  day  holy.  See  Siegel,  Handbuch  der  christl.  kircM.  Alter* 
tkumer,  I.  374  sqq. 

*  From  Palm  Sunday  to  Easter  Eve.  'E/Stfopaf  t&ydTuj,  or  TOV  irdcxa,  heb- 
domas  magna,  hebdomas  nigra  (in  opposition  to  dominica  in  albis),  hebdomas 
crucis,  Charwoche. 

6  Irenseus,  in  his  letter  to  Victor  of  Borne  (Euseb.  V.  24) :  "Not  only  is  the 
dispute  respecting  the  day,  but  also  respecting  the  manner  of  fasting.  For 
some  think  that  they  ought  to  fast  only  one  day,  some  two,  some  more 
days ;  some  compute  their  day  as  consisting  of  forty  hours  night  and  day ;  and 


1  62.   THE  PASCHAL  COtfTKOVERSIES.  209 

influence  of  Rome,  it  was  universally  fixed  at  forty  days,1  with 
reference  to  the  forty  days'  fasting  of  Christ  in  the  wilderness 
and  the  Old  Testament  types  of  that  event  (the  fasting  of  Moses 
and  Elijah).2 

§  62.  The  Pasehal  Controversies. 

L  The  sources  for  the  paschal  controversies : 

Fragments  from  MELITO,  APOLLINARITTS,  POLYCBATES,  CLEMEST  of 
Alexandria,  IEEN^EUS,  and  HIPPOLYTTJS,  preserved  in  EUSEB.  H.E. 
IV.  3,  26 ;  V.  23-25 ;  VI.  13 ;  the  CHEONICOX  PASCH.  1. 12  sqq.,  a 
passage  in  the  Philosophumena  of  HIPPOLYTCS,  Lib.  VIII.  cap.  18 
(p.  435,  ed.  Duncker  &  Schneidewin,  1859),  a  fragment  from 
ETTSEBIUS  in  Angelo  Mai's  Nova  P.  P.  Bibl  T.  IV.  209-216,  and  the 
Hceresies  of  EPIPHANTUS,  Hcer.  LXX.  1-3 ;  LXX.  9. 

II.   Eecent  works,  occasioned  mostly  by  the  Johannean  con- 
troversy : 

WEITZEL:  Die  OhristL  Passafeier  der  drei  ersfen  Jahrh.  Pforzheim, 
1848  (and  in  the  "Studien  und  Kritiken,"  1848,  No.  4,  against 
Baur). 

BAUR:  Das  Christenthum  der  3  ersten  Jahrh.  (1853).  Tub.  3rd  ed.  1863, 
pp.  156-169.  And  several  controversial  essays  against  Steitz. 

HlLGEOTELD  :  Der  Paschastreit  und  das  Evang.  Johannis  (in  "  TheoL 
Jahrbucher "  for  1849) ;  Nock  tin  Wort  fiber  den  Passalistreit  (ibid. 
1858) ;  and  Der  Paschastreit  der  alien  Kirche  naeh  seiner  Bedeutung 
fur  die  Kirchengesch.  und  fur  die  JEvangelienforschung  ur&undlich 
dargestellL  Halle  1860  (410  pages). 

STEITZ:    Several  essays  on  the  subject,  mostly  against  Baur,  in  the 

'  "Studien  u.  Kritiken,"  1856,  1857,  and  1859;   in  the   "TheoL 

Jalirbucher,"  1857,  and  art.  Passah  in  "  Herzog's  Encycl."  vol.  XIL 

(1859),  p.  149  sqq.,  revised  in  the  new  ed.,  by  Wagenmann,  XL 

270  sqq. 

WILLIAM  MILLIGAN*  :  The  Easter  Controversies  of  the  second  Century  in 
their  relation  to  the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  in  the  "  Contemporary  Re- 
view" for  Sept.  1867  (p.  101-118). 

EMIL  SCHTIREB,  :  De  Controversiis  paschalibus  sec.  post  Chr.  SCBC.  exortis. 
Lips,  1869.  By  the  same :  Die  PascTiastreitigJceiten  des  2*^  Jahrh., 

this  diversity  existing  among  those  thai  observe  it,  is  not  a  matter  that  has  just 
sprung  up  in  onr  times,  but  long  ago  among  those  before  us,  who  perhaps  not 
having  ruled  with  sufficient  strictness,  established  the  practice  that  arose  from 
their  simplicity  and  ignorance." 


2 Matt.  4:  2;  comp.  Ex.  34:  28;  1  Kings  19:  8. 

Vnl.  TT.      U 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

in  Kahilis'  "  Zeitschriffc  fur  hist  Theol."  1870,  pp.  182-284.    Very 

full  and  able. 
0.  Jos.  vos  HEFELE  (R.  C.) :  Coneilienge&cUchte,  I.  86-101  (second  ed. 

Freib.  1873;  with  some  important  changes). 
ABBE  DUCHESXE:   La  question  de  la  Pdque,  in  "Revue  des  question* 

historiques,"  July  1880. 
fteAX :  L'tglito  chr'et.  445-461;  and  K  Aurlle,  194r-206  (la  question  de 

la  Pdgue). 

Respecting  the  time  of  the  Christian  Passover  and  of  the 
fast  connected  with  it,  there  was  a  difference  of  observance 
which  created  violent  controversies  in  the  ancient  church,  and 
almost  as  violent  controversies  in  the  modern  schools  of  theology 
in  connection  with  the  questions  of  the  primacy  of  Rome,  and 
the  genuineness  of  John's  Gospel.1 

The  paschal  controversies  of  the  ante-Nicene  age  are  a  very 
complicated  chapter  in  ancient  church-history,  and  are  not  yet 
sufficiently  cleared  up.  They  were  purely  ritualistic  and  disci- 
plinary, and  involved  no  dogma;  and  yet  they  threatened  to  split 
the  churches ;  both  parties  laying  too  much  stress  on  external 
uniformity.  Indirectly,  however,  they  involved  the  question  of 
the  independence  of  Christianity  on  Judaism.2 

Let  us  first  consider  the  difference  of  observance  or  die  sub- 
ject of  controversy. 

The  Christians  of  Asia  Minor,  following  the  Jewish  chrono- 
logy, and  appealing  to  the  authority  of  the  apostles  John  'and 
Philip,  celebrated  the  Christian  Passover  uniformly  on  the  four- 
teenth of  Nisan  (which  might  fall  on  any  of  the  seven  days  of 
the  week)  by  a  solemn  fast;  they  fixed  the  close  of  the  fast  ac- 
cordingly, and  seem  to  have  partaken  on  the  evening  of  this 
day,  as  the  close  of  the  fast,  not  indeed  of  the  Jewish  paschal 
lamb,  as  has  sometimes  been  supposed/  but  of  the  commu- 

1  See  note  at  the  end  of  the  section. 

1  So  Eenan  regards  the  controversy,  Marc-Aurfle,  p.  194,  as  a  conflict  be- 
tween two  kinds  of  Christianity,  "le  chj*istianisme  qui  Jerwi&ageait  comme  une 
suite  dujudatinw,9'  and  "  le  christianime  gui  jenmsageait  comme  la  destruction  du 


3  By  Mosheim  (De  rebus  chrisL  ante  Const.  M.  Corn.,  p.  435  sqq.)  and  Neander 
(in  the  first  edition  of  his  Church  Hist ,  I.  518,  but  not  in  the  second  I.  512, 


§62.  THE  PASCHAL  CONTROVERSIES.  211 

nion  and  love-feast,  as  the  Christian  passover  and  the  festi- 
val of  the  redemption  completed  by  the  death  of  Christ.1  The 
communion  on  the  evening  of  the  14th  (or,  according  to  the 
Jewish  mode  of  reckoning,  the  day  from  sunset  to  sunset,  on  the 
beginning  of  the  15th)  of  Nisan  was  in  memory  of  the  last  pas- 
chal supper  of  Christ.  This  observance  did  not  exclude  the 
idea  that  Christ  died  as  the  true  paschal  Lamb.  For  we  find 
among  the  fathers  both  this  idea  and  the  other  that  Christ  ate 
the  regular  Jewish  passover  with  his  disciples,  which  took  place 
on  the  14th.2  From  the  day  of  observance  the  Asiatic  Chris- 
tians were  afterwards  called  Quartadecimanians*  Hippolytus 
of  Rome  speaks  of  them  contemptuously  as  a  sect  of  contentious 
and  ignorant  persons,  who  maintain  that  "the  pascha  should  be 
observed  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  first  month  according  to 
the  law,  no  matter  on  what  day  of  the  week  it  might  fall." 4 
Nevertheless  the  Quartadecimanian  observance  was  probably  the 
oldest  and  in  accordance  with  the  Synoptic  tradition  of  the  last 
Passover  of  our  Lord,  which  it  commemorated.5 

Germ,  ed.,  I,  298  in  Torrey's  translation).  There  is  no  trace  of  such  a  Jewish 
custom  on  the  part  of  the  Quartadecimani.  This  is  admitted  by  Hefele  (I. 
87),  who  formerly  held  to  three  parties  in  this  controversy ;  but  there  were 
only  two. 

1  The  celebration  of  the  eucharist  is  not  expressly  mentioned  by  Eusebius, 
but  may  be  inferred.    He  says  (H.  E.  V.  23):  "The  churches  of  all  Asia, 
guided  by  older  tradition  (£c  SK  Trapa66u£o$  apxtuorepas,  older  than  that  of 
Rome),  thought  that  they  were  bound  to  keep  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  moon, 
on  (or  at  the  time  of)  the  feast  of  the  Saviour's  Passover  (eirl  r^f  TOV  cunjpiav 
irdff%a  toprifg),  that  day  on  which  the  Jews  were  commanded  to  kill  the  paschal 
lamb ;  it  being  incumbent  on  them  by  all  means  to  regulate  the  close  of  the 
fast  by  that  day  on  whatever  day  of  the  week  it  might  happen  to  fall." 

2  Justin  M.  Dial.  c.  Ill;  Iren.  Adv.  Hcer.  II.  22,  3;  Tert.  De  Bapt.  19; 
Origen,  In  Matih.;  Epiph.  Hcer.  XLIL    St.  Paul  first  declared  Christ  to  be 
our  passover  (1  Cor.  5:7),  and  yet  his  companion  Luke,  with  whom  his  own 
account  of  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper  agrees,  represents  Christ's 
passover  meal  as  taking  place  on  the  14th. 

8  The  *<5'=14,  qwrta  decima.  See  Ex.  12 :  6 ;  Lev.  23 :  5,  where  this  day 
is  prescribed  for  the  celebration  of  the  Passover.  Hence  TtEffcrapecKaideKaTtrai, 
Qwrtodeeimani,  more  correctly  Quartadecimani.  This  sectarian  name  occurs 
in  the  canons  of  the  councils  of  Laodicea,  364,  Constantinople,  381,  etc. 

*  Philosoph.  or  Rejutat.  ofaUHceres.  VIII.  18. 

5  So  also  Eenan  regards  it,  L'eqL  chrft^  p,  445  sq..  but  he  brings  it,  like 


212  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

The  Roman  church,  on  the  contrary,  likewise  appealing  10 
early  custom,  celebrated  the  death  of  Jesus  always  on  a  Friday, 
the  day  of  the  week  on  which  it  actually  occurred,  and  bis 
resurrection  always  on  a  Sunday  after  the  March  full  moon, 
and  extended  the  paschal  fast  to  the  latter  day ;  considering  it 
improper  to  terminate  the  fast  at  an  earlier  date,  and  to  celebrate 
the  communion  before  the  festival  of  the  resurrection.  Nearly 
all  the  other  churches  agreed  with  the  Roman  in  this  observance, 
and  laid  the  main  stress  on  the  resurrection-festival  on  Sunday. 
This  Roman  practice  created  an  entire  holy  week  of  solemn 
fasting  and  commemoration  of  the  Lord's  passion,  while  the 
Asiatic  practice  ended  the  fast  on  the  14th  of  Nisan,  which  may 
fall  sometimes  several  days  before  Sunday. 

Hence  a  spectacle  shocking  to  the  catholic  sense  of  ritualistic 
propriety  and  uniformity  was  frequently  presented  to  the  world, 
that  one  part  of  Christendom  was  fasting  and  mourning  over 
the  death  of  our  Saviour,  while  the  other  part  rejoiced  in  the 
glory  of  the  resurrection.  "Wre  cannot  be  surprised  that  contro- 
versy arose,  and  earnest  efforts  were  made  to  harmonize  the  op- 
posing sections  of  Christendom  in  the  public  celebration  of  the 
fundamental  facts  of  the  Christian  salvation  and  of  the  most 
sacred  season  of  the  church-year- 

The  gist  of  the  paschal  controversy  was,  whether  the  Jewish 
paschal-day  (be  it  a  Friday  or  not),  or  the  Christian  Sunday, 
should  control  the  idea  and  time  of  the  entire  festival.  The 
Johannean  practice  of  Asia  represented  here  the  spirit  of  adhe- 
sion to  historical  precedent,  and  had  the  advantage  of  an  im- 
movable Easter,  without  being  Judaizing  in  anything  but  the 
observance  of  a  fixed  day  of  the  month.  The  Roman  custom 
represented  the  principle  of  freedom  and  discretionary  change, 
and  the  independence  of  the  Christian  festival  system.  Dog- 
matically stated,  the  difference  would  be,  that  in  the  former  case 
the  chief  stress  was  laid  on  the  Lord's  death •  in  the  latter;  on 
his  resurrection.  But  the  leading  interest  of  the  question  for 

Baur,  in  conflict  with  the  chronology  of  the  fourth  Gospel.     He  traces  the 
"Roman  custom  from  the  pontificate  of  Xystus  and  Telesphorus,  A.B.  120. 


262.  THE  PASCHAL  CONTROVERSIES.  213 

the  *aarly  Church  was  not  the  astronomical,  nor  the  dogmatical, 
but  the  ritualistic.  The  main  object  was  to  secure  uniformity 
of  observance,  and  to  assert  the  originality  of  the  Christian  fes- 
tive  cycle,  and  its  independence  of  Judaism;  for  both  reasons 
the  Roman  usage  at  last  triumphed  even  in  the  East.  Hence 
Easter  became  a  movable  festival  whose  date  varies  from  the 
end  of  "March  to  the  latter  part  of  April. 

The  history  of  the  controversy  divides  itself  into  three  acts. 

1.  The  difference  came  into  discussion  first  on  a  visit  of  Poly- 
carp,  bishop  of  Smyrna,  to  Anicetus,  bishop  of  Rome,  between 
A.D.  150  and  155.1  It  was  not  settled;  yet  the  two  bishops 
parted  in  peace,  after  the  latter  had  charged  his  venerable  guest 
to  celebrate  the  holy  communion  in  his  church.  We  have  a 
brief,  but  interesting  account  of  this  dispute  by  Irenseus,  a  pupil 
of  Polycarp,  which  is  as  follows:2 

"  When  the  blessed  Polycarp  sojourned  at  Rome  in  the  days  of  Anice- 
tus, and  they  had  some  little  difference  of  opinion  likewise  with  regard 
to  other  points,3  they  forthwith  came  to  a  peaceable  understanding  on 
this  head  [the  observance  of  Easter],  having  no  love  for  mutual  disputes. 
For  neither  could  Anicetus  persuade  Polycarp  not  to  observe*  inasmuch 
as  he  [Pol.]  had  always  observed  with  John,  the  disciple  of  our  Lord,  and 
the  other  apostles,  with  whom  he  had  associated ;  nor  did  Polycarp  per- 
suade Anicetus  to  observe  (TTJPEIV),  who  said  that  he  was  bound  to  main- 
tain the  custom  of  the  presbyters  (=  bishops)  before  him.  These  things 
being  so,  they  communed  together  5  and  in  the  church  Anicetus  yielded 
to  Polycarp,  out  of  respect  no  doubt,  the  celebration  of  the  eucharist 
(rrjv  evxapurriav),  and  they  separated  from  each  other  in  peace,  all  the 
church  being  at  peace,  both  those  that  observed  and  those  that  did  not 
observe  [the  fourteenth  of  Nisan],  maintaining  peace." 

This  letter  proves  that  the  Christians  of  the  days  of  Polycarp 

1  Benan  (I  c.,  p.  447)  conjectures  that  Irenseus  and  Florinus  accompanied 
Polycarp  on  that  journey  to  Borne.    Neander  and  others  give  a  wrong  date, 
162,     Polycarp  died  in  155,  see  ?  19,  p.  51.    The  pontificate  of  Anicetus  began 
in  154  or  before. 

2  In  a  fragment  of  a  letter  to  the  Boman  bishop  Victor,  preserved  by  Ense- 
bius,  H.  E.  V.  c.  24  (ed.  Heinichen,  I.  253). 

8  Kal  irept  aM,uv  TLV&V  [UKpa  <7#<5vr£ f  (or  exovrsc)  ^pof  akMjtove. 

4  pft  TJjpelY,  i.  e.  the  fourteenth  of  Nisan,  as  appears  from  the  connection  and 
from  ch.  23.  The  rrjpslv  consisted  mainly  in  fasting,  and  probably  also  the 
celebration  of  the  eucharist  in  the  evening.  It  was  a  technical  term  for  legal 
observances,  comp.  John  9:  16. 


214  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

knew  how  to  keep  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  without  uniformity 
of  rites  and  ceremonies.  "  The  very  difference  in  our  fasting/' 
says  Irenseus  in  the  same  letter,  "establishes  the  unanimity  in 
our  faith." 

2.  A  few  years  afterwards,  about  A.D.  170,  the  controversy 
broke  out  in  Laodicea,  but  was  confined  to  Asia,  where  a  differ- 
ence had  arisen  either  among  the  Quartadeeimanians  •  them- 
selves, or  rather  among  these  and  the  adherents  of  the  Western 
observance.  The  accounts  on  this  interimistic  sectional  dispute 
are  incomplete  and  obscure.  Eusebius  merely  mentions  that  at 
that  time  Melito  of  Sardis  wrote  two  works  on  the  Passover.1 
But  these  are  lost,  as  also  that  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  on  the 
same  topic.2  Our  chief  source  of  information  is  Claudius 
Apolinarius  (Apollinaris),3  bishop  of  Hierapolis,  in  Phrygia,  in 
two  fragments  of  his  writings  upon  the  subject,  which  have  been 
preserved  in  the  Chronicon  PffW^fc.4  These  are  as  follows : 

u  There  are  some  now  who,  from  ignorance,  loye  to  raise  strife  about 
these  things,  being  guilty  in  this  of  a  pardonable  offence;  for  ignorance 
does  not  so  much  deserve  blame  as  nssd  instruction.  And  they  say 
that  on  the  fourteenth  [of  Nisan]  the  Lord  ate  the  paschal  lamb  (rb 
irp6parov  E<fKrye)  with  his  disciples,  but  i&at  He  himself  suffered  on  the 
great  day  of  unleavened  bread 5  [i.  e.  the  fifteenth  of  Nisan] ;  and  they 
interpret  Matthew  as  favoring  their  view:  from  which  it  appears  tha* 
their  view  does  not  agree  with  the  law,6  and  t*i*t  the  Gospels  seew,  ac* 
cording  to  them,  to  be  at  variance."  * 

1 H.  E.  IV.  26. 

*  With  the  exception  of  a  few  fragments  in  the  Cbrpwwi  Pwj&ale. 

*  Ensebius  spells  his  name  '  Anofavdptoe  (IV.  21  and  26,  27,  see  Heinichen'0 
ed.);  and  so  do  Photius,  and  the  Ohron.  Paschale  in  most  MSS.    But  the  Latins 
spell  his  name  ApoUinaris.    He  lived  under  Marcus  Aurelius  (161-180),  was 
apologist  and  opponent  of  Montanism  which  flourished  especially  in  Phrygia, 
and  must  not  be  confounded  with  one  of  the  two  Apollinarius  or  AjDollinaris, 
father  and  son,  of  Laodicea  in  Syria,  who  flourished  in  the  fourth  century. 

*  Ed.  Dindorf  1. 13 ;  in  Bouth's  BeUquice  Sacra  I.  p.  160.    Quoted  and  dis- 
cussed by  Milligan,  /.  c.  p.  109  sq. 

*  If  this  is  the  genuine  Quartadecimanian  view,  it  proves  conclusively  that 
it  agreed  with  the  Synoptic  chronology  as  to  the  day  of  Christ's  death,  and  that 
Weiteel  and  Steitz  are  wrong  on  this  point. 

*  Since  according  to  the  view  of  Apolinarius,  Christ  as  the  true  niLfillmsnt  o* 
the  law,  must  have  died  on  the  14th,  the  day  of  the  legal  passover. 

7  This  seems  to  be  the  meaning  of  oracLa&iv  fowl,  w^  avrovg, 


8  62.   THE  PASCHAL  CONTROVERSIES.  2 1 5 

"  The  fourteenth  is  the  true  Passover  of  the  Lord,  the  great  sacrifice,  the 
Bon  of  God1  in  the  place  of  the  lamb  ....  who  was  lifted  up  upon  the 
horns  of  the  unicorn  ....  and  who  was  buried  on  the  day  of  the  Pass- 
over, the  stone  having  been  placed  upon  his  tomb." 

.  Here  Apolinarius  evidently  protests  against  the  Quartadeci- 
manian  practice,  yet  simply  as  one  arising  from  ignorance,  and 
not  as  a  blameworthy  heresy.  He  opposes  it  as  a  chronological 
and  exegetical  mistake,  and  seems  to  hold  that  the  fourteenth, 
and  not  the  fifteenth,  is  the  great  day  of  the  death  of  Christ  as 
the  true  Lamb  of  God,  on  the  false  assumption  that  this  truth 
depends  upon  the  chronological  coincidence  of  the  crucifixion 
and  the  Jewish  passover.  But  the  question  arises :  Did  he  pro- 
test from  the  Western  and  Roman  standpoint  which  had  many 
advocates  in  the  East,2  or  as  a  Quartadecimanian?3  In  the 
latter  case  we  would  be  obliged  to  distinguish  two  parties  of 
Quartadecimanians,  the  orthodox  or  catholic  Quartadecimanians, 
who  simply  observed  the  14th  Nisan  by  fasting  and  the  evening 
communion,  and  a  smaller  faction  of  heretical  and  schismatic 
Quartadecimanians,  who  adopted  the  Jewish  practice  of  eating 
a  paschal  lamb  on  that  day  in  commemoration  of  the  Saviour's 
last  passover.  But  there  is  no  evidence  for  this  distinction  in 
the  above  or  other  passages.  Such  a  grossly  Judaizing  party 
would  have  been  treated  with  more  severity  by  a  catholic  bishop. 
Even  the  Jews  could  no  more  eat  of  the  paschal  lamb  after  the 
destruction  of  the  temple  in  which  it  had  to  be  slain.  There  is 
no  trace  of  such  a  party  in  Irenseus,  Hippolytus4  and  Eusebius 
who  speak  only  of  one  class  of  Quartadecimanians.5 

iTiter  se  pugncvre,  etc.  On  the  assumption  namely  that  John  fixes  the  death  of 
Christ  on  the  fourteenth  of  Nisan,  which,  however,  is  a  point  in  dispute.  The 
opponents  who  started  from  the  chronology  of  the  Synoptists,  could  retort  this 
objection. 

1  The  same  argument  is  urged  in  the  fragments  of  Hippolytus  in  the  Chroni- 
con  Paschale.  But  that  Jesus  was  the  true  Paschal  Lamb  is  a  doctrine  in 
which  all  the  churches  were  agreed. 

»  So  Baur  (p.  163  sq.)  and  the  Tubingen  School  rightly  maintain. 

*  As  Weitzel,  Steitz,  and  Lechler  assume  in  opposition  to  Baur. 

4  In  the  passage  of  the  Phttosoph.  above  quoted,  and  in  the  fragments  of  the 
Paschal  Chronicle. 

6  Epiphanius,  it  is  true,  distinguishes  different  opinions  among  the  Quart* 


216  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Hence  we  conclude  that  Apolinarius  protests  against  the  whole 
Quartadecimanian  practice,  although  very  mildly  and  charitably 
The  Laodicean  controversy  was  a  stage  in  the  same  controversy 
which  was  previously  discussed  by  Polycarp  and  Anicetus  ID 
Christian  charity,  and  was  soon  agitated  again  by  Polycrates  and 
Victor  with  hierarchical  and  intolerant  violence. 

3.  Much  more  important  and  vehement  was  the  third  stage 
of  the  controversy  between  190  and  194,  which  extended  over 
the  whole  church,  and  occasioned  many  synods  and  synodical 
letters.1  The  Eoman  bishop  Victor,  a  very  different  man  from 
his  predecessor  Anicetus,  required  the  Asiatics,  in  an  imperious 
tone,  to  abandon  their  Quartadecimanian  practice.  Against  this 
Polycrates,  bishop  of  Ephesus,  solemnly  protested  in  the  name 
of  a  synod  held  by  him,  and  appealed  to  an  imposing  array  'of 
authorities  for  their  primitive  custom.  Eusebius  has  preserved 
his  letter,  which  is  quite  characteristic. 

"  We"  wrote  the  Ephesian  bishop  to  the  Eoman  pope  and  his  church, 
*'  We  observe  the  genuine  day;  neither  adding  thereto  nor  taking  there- 
from. For  in  Asia  great  lights2  have  fallen  asleep,  which  shall  rise 
again  in  the  day  of  the  Lord's  appearing,  in  which  he  will  come  with 
glory  from  heaven,  and  will  raise  up  all  the  saints  :  Philip,  one  of  the 
twelve  apostles,  who  sleeps  in  Hierapolis,  and  his  two  aged  virgin 
daughters;  his  other  daughter,  also,  who  having  lived  under  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Holy  Spirit,  now  likewise  rests  in  Ephesus  ;  moreoverf 
John,  who  rested  upon  the  bosom  of  our  Lord,3  who  was  also  a  priest, 
and  bore  the  sacerdotal  plate,4  both  a  martyr  and  teacher;  he  is  buried 
in  Ephesus.  Also  Polycarp  of  Smyrna,  both  bishop  and  martyr,  and 
Thraseas,  both  bishop  and  martyr  of  Eumenia,  who  sleeps  in  Smyrna. 
Why  shonld  I  mention  Sagaris,  bishop  and  martyr,  who  sleeps  in 
Laodicea;  moreover,  the  blessed  Papirius,  and  Melito,  the  eunuch 

decimanians  (Seer.  L.  cap.  1-3  Contra  Qwrfa^imanas),  but  he  makes  no 
mention  of  the  practice  of  eating  a  Paschal  Iamb,  or  of  any  difference  in  this 
chronology  of  the  death  of  Christ. 
1  Eosebius,  JZ  E^  V.  23-25. 


orotxtia  in  the  sense  of  stars  used  Ep.  ad  Diog.  7;  Justin  Dial  c. 
23  (r&  avpdvia 


6  knl  rb  ory&of  row  tcvptov  avairtc&v.    Comp.  John  13  :  25  ;  21:  20.    This 
designation,  as  Eenan  admits  (Mm-AurtHe,  p.  196,  note  2),  implies  that  Poly- 
crates  acknowledged  the  Gos?*1  of  John  as  genuine. 
*  rd  fffrcOw.    Cs  this  fib^c/ar  expression,  which  is  probably  figure  K-  foi 
holiness,  see  voL  L  p  431,  z^e  1. 


3  62.   THE  PASCHAL  CONTROVERSIES-  217 

[celibate],  who  lived  altogether  under  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
who  now  rests  in  Sardis,  awaiting  the  episcopate  from  heaven,  in  which 
he  shall  rise  from  the  dead.  All  these  observed  the  fourteenth  day  of  the 
passover  according  to  the  gospel,  deviating  in  no  respect,  but  following  the 
rule  of  faith. 

"  Moreover,  I,  Polycrates,  who  am  the  least  of  you,  according  to  the 
tradition  of  my  relatives,  some  of  whom  I  have  followed.  For  seven  of 
my  relatives  were  bishops,  and  I  am  the  eighth ;  and  my  relatives  always 
observed  the  day  when  the  people  of  the  Jews  threw  away  the  leaven, 
I,  therefore,  brethren,  am  now  sixty-five  years  in  the  Lord,  who  having 
conferred  with  the  brethren  throughout  the  world,  and  having  studied 
the  whole  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  am  not  at  all  alarmed  at  those  things 
with  which  I  am  threatened,  to  intimidate  me.  For  they  who  are 
greater  than  I  have  said,  *  we  ought  to  obey  God  rather  than  men.' .... 
I  could  also  mention  the  bishops  that  were  present,  whom  you  requested 
me  to  summon,  and  whom  I  did  call;  whose  names  would  present  a 
great  number,  but  who  seeing  my  slender  body  consented  to  my  epistle, 
well  knowing  that  I  did  not  wear  my  gray  hairs  for  nour?  ^ut  that  I 
did  at  all  times  regulate  my  life  in  the  Lord  Jesus." ' 

Victor  turned  a  deaf  ear  to  this  remonstrance,  Drauded  .  ae 
Asiatics  as  heretics,  and  threatened  to  excommunicate  them.2 

But  many  of  the  Eastern  bishops,  and  even  Irenseus,  in  the 
name  of  the  Gallic  Christians,  though  he  agreed  with  Victor  on 
the  disputed  point,  earnestly  reproved  him  for  such  arrogance, 
and  reminded  him  of  the  more  Christian  and  brotherly  conduct 
of  his  predecessors  Anicetus,  Pius,  Hyginus,  Telesphorus,  and 
Xystus,  who  sent  the  eucharist  to  their  dissenting  brethren* 
He  dwelt  especially  on  the  fraternal  conduct  of  Anicetus  to 
Polycarp.  Irenseus  proved  himself  on  this  occasion,  as  Eusebius 
remarks,  a  true  peacemaker,  and  his  vigorous  protest  seems  to 
have  prevented  the  schism. 

We  have  from  the  same  Irenseus  another  utterance  on  this 
controversy,^  saying:  "Thu  apostles  have  ordered  that  we 
should  'judge  no  one  in  meat  or  in  drink,  or  in  respect  to  a 
feast-day  or  a  new  moon  or  a  sabbath  day3  (Col.  2:  16). 
Whence  then  these  wars  ?  Whence  these  schisms  ?  We  keep 
the  feasts,  but  in  the  leaven  of  malice  by  tearing  the  church  of 

1  Enseb.  Y.  24  (ed.  Heinichen,  I.  p.  250  sqq). 

2  He  is  probably  the  author  of  the  pseudo-Cyprianic  homily  against  dice- 
players  (De  Aleatoribus),  which  assumes  the  tone  of  a  papal  encyclical. 

*  In  the  third  Fragment  discovered  by  P&ff,  probably  from  his  book  against 
Blastus.  See  Opera,  ad.  Stieren,  I.  887. 


218  SECOND  PEBI01X    A.B  100-311. 

God  and  observing  what  is  outward,  in  order  to  reject  what 
is  better,  faith  and  charity.  That  such  feasts  and  fasts  are 
displeasing  to  the  Lord,  we  have  heard  from  the  Prophets." 
A  truly  evangelical  sentiment  from  one  who  echoes  the  teaching 
of  St.  John  and  his  last  words :  "  Children,  love  one  another/3 

4.  In  the  course  of  the  third  century  the  Eoman  practice 
gained  ground  everywhere  in  the  East,  and,  to  anticipate  the 
result,  was  established  by  the  council  of  Nicsea  in  325  as  the  law 
of  the  whole  church.  This  council  considered  it  unbecoming  in 
Christians  to  follow  the  usage  of  the  unbelieving,  hostile  Jews, 
and  ordained  that  Easter  should  always  be  celebrated  on  the  first 
Sunday  after  the  first  full  moon  succeeding  the  vernal  equinox 
(March  21),  and  always  after  the  Jewish  passover.1  If  the  full 
moon  occurs  on  a  Sunday,  Easter-day  is  the  Sunday  after.  By 
this  arrangement  Easter  may  take  place  as  early  as  March  22, 
or  as  late  as  April  25. 

Henceforth  the  Quartadecimanians  were  universally  regarded 
as  heretics,  and  were  punished  as  such.  The  Synod  of  Antioch, 
341,  excommunicated  them.  The  Montanists  and  Novatians 
were  also  charged  with  the  Quartadecimanian  observance.  The 
last  traces  of  it  disappeared  in  the  sixth  century. 

But  the  desired  uniformity  in  the  observance  of  Easter  was 
still  hindered  by  differences  in  reckoning  the  Easter  Sunday  ac- 
cording to  the  course  of  the  moon  and  the  vernal  equinox,  which 
the  Alexandrians  fixed  on  the  21st  of  March,  and  the  Romans 
on  the  18th;  so  that  in  the  year  387,  for  example,  the  Eomans 
kept  Easter  on  the  21st  of  March,  and  the  Alexandrians  not  till 
the  25th  of  April.  In  the  West  also  the  computation  changed 

1  In  the  Synodical  letter  which  the  fathers  of  Nicsea  addressed  to  the 
churches  of  Egypt,  Libya,  and  Pentapolis  (Socrates,  H.  K  I.  c.  9),  it  is  said: 
"  We  have  also  gratifying  intelligence  to  communicate  to  you  relating  to  the 
unity  of  judgment  on  the  subject  of  the  most  holy  feast  of  Easter;  ....  that 
all  the  brethren  in  the  East  who  have  heretofore  kept  this  festival  at  the  same 
time  as  the  Jews,  will  henceforth  conform  to  the  Eomans  and  to  us,  and  to  all 
who  from  the  earliest  time  have  observed  our  period  of  celebrating  Easter." 
Eusebius  reports  (Vita  Const.  III.  19)  that  especially  the  province  of  Asia 
acknowledged  the  decree.  He  thinks  that  only  God  and  the  emperor  Con- 
stantine  could  remove  this  evil  of  two  conflicting  celebrations  of  Easter. 


{  62.  THE  PASCHAL  CONTBOVEBSIES.  219 

and  caused  a  renewal  of  the  Easter  controversy  in  the  sixth  and 
seventh  centuries.  The  old  British,  Irish  and  Scotch  Christians, 
and  the  Irish  missionaries  on  the  Continent  adhered  to  the  older 
cycle  of  eighty-four  years  in  opposition  to  the  later  luonysian 
or  Eoman  cycle  of  ninety-five  years,  and  hence  were  styled 
"Quartadecinmnians"  by  their  Anglo-Saxon  and  Roman  oppo- 
nents, though  unjustly;  for  they  celebrated  Easter  always  on  a 
Sunday  between  the  14th  and  the  20th  of  the  month  (the  Eo- 
mans  between  the  15th  and  21st).  The  Roman  practice  tri- 
umphed. But  Rome  again  changed  the  calendar  under  Gregory 
XIII.  (A.  D.  1583).  Hence  even  to  this  day  the  Oriental 
churches  who  hold  to  the  Julian  and  reject  the  Gregorian 
calendar,  differ  from  the  Occidental  Christians  in  the  time  of 
the  observance  of  Easter. 

All  these  useless  ritualistic  disputes  might  have  been  avoided 
if,  with  some  modification  of  the  old  Asiatic  practice  as  to  the 
close  of  the  fast,  Easter,  like  Christmas,  had  been  made  an  im- 
movable feast  at  least  as  regards  the  week,  if  not  the  day,  of  its 
observance. 

NOTE. 

The  bearing  of  this  controversy  on  the  Johannean  origin  of  the  fourth 
Gospel  has  been  greatly  overrated  by  the  negative  critics  of  the  Tubingen 
School.  Dr.  Baur,  Schwegler,  Hilgenfeld,  Straus  (Leben  Jesu,  new  ed. 
1864,  p.  76  sq.),  Schenkel,  Scholten,  Samuel  Davidson,  Benan  (Marc- 
Aurlle,  p.  196),  use  it  as  a  fatal  objection  to  the  Johannean  authorship. 
Their  argument  is  this :  "The  Asiatic  practice  rested  on  the  belief  that 
Jesus  ate  the  Jewish  Passover  with  his  disciples  on  the  evening  of  the  14th 
of  Nisan,  and  died  on  the  15th ;  this  belief  is  incompatible  with  the  fourth 
Gospel,  which  puts  1ihe  death  of  Jesus,  as  the  true  Paschal  Lamb,  on  the 
14th  of  Nisan,  just  before  the  regular  Jewish  Passover;  therefore  the 
fourth  Gospel  cannot  have  existed  when  the  Easter  controversy  first 
broke  out  about  A.  D.  160 ;  or,  at  all  events,  it  cannot  be  the  work  of  John 
to  whom  the,  Asiatic  Christians  so  confidently  appealed  for  their  paschal 
observance." 

But  leaving  out  of  view  the  early  testimonies  for  the  authenticity  of 
John,  which  reach  back  to  the  first  quarter  of  the  second  century,  the 
minor  premise  is  wrong,  and  hence  the  conclusion  falls.  A  closer  exam- 
ination of  the  relevant  passages  of  John  leads  to  the  result  that  he  agrees 
with  the  Synoptic  account,  which  puts  the  last  Supper  on  the  14th,  and 


220  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  crucifixion  on  the  15th  of  Nisan.  (Coinp.  ou  this  chronological  dii 
ficulty  vol.  1. 133  sqq. ;  and  the  authorities  quoted  there,  especially  Job.is 
Lightibot,  Wieseler,  Eobinson,  Lange,  Kirchner,  and  McClellan.) 

Weilzel,  Steitz,  and  Wagenmann  deny  the  inference  of  the  Tiibinger 
School  by  disputing  the  major  premise,  and  argue  that  the  Asiatic  obser 
vance  (in  agreement  with  the  Tubingen  school  and  their  own  interpreta- 
tion of  John's  chronology )  implies  that  Christ  died  as  the  true  pascal 
lamb  on  the  14th,  and  not  on  the  loth  of  Nisan.  To  this  view  we  object: 
1)  It  conflicts  with  the  extract  from  Apolinarius  in  the  Chronicot 
Paschale  as  given  p.  214  2)  There  is  no  contradiction  between  the  idea 
that  Christ  died  as  the  true  paschal  lamb,  and  the  Synoptic  chronology; 
for  the  former  was  taught  by  Paul  (1  Cor.  5:7),  who  was  quoted  for  the 
Eoman  practice,  and  both  were  held  by  the  fathers ;  the  coincidence  in 
the  time  being  subordinate  to  the  fact.  3)  A  contradiction  in  the  primi- 
tive tradition  of  Christ's  death  is  extremely  improbable,  and  it  is  much 
easier  to  conform  the  Johannean  chronology  to  the  Synoptic  than  vice 
versa. 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  Asiatic  observance  of  the  14th  of  Nisan  was  in 
commemoration  of  the  last  passover  of  the  Lord,  and  this  of  necessity 
implied  also  a  commemoration  of  his  death,  like  every  celebration  of  the 
Lord's  Supper.  In  any  case,  however,  these  ancient  paschal  controver- 
sies did  not  hinge  on  the  chronological  question  or  the  true  date  of 
Christ's  death  at  all,  but  on  the  week-day  and  the  manner  cf  its  annual 
observance.  The  question  was  whether  the  paschal  communion  should 
be  celebrated  on  the  14th  of  Nisan,  or  on  the  Sunday  of  the  resurrection 
festival,  without  regard  to  the  Jewish  chronology. 


§  63.  Pentecost. 

Easter  was  followed  by  the  festival  of  PENTECOST.1  It 
rested  on  the  Jewish  feast  of  harvest.  It  was  universally  ob- 
served, as  early  as  the  second  century,  in  commemoration  of  the 
appearances  and  heavenly  exaltation  of  the  risen  Lord,  and  had 
throughout  a  joyous  character.  It  lasted  through  fifty  days  — 
Q&inquagesima  —  which  were  celebrated  as  a  continuous  Sunday, 
by  daily  communion,  the  standing  posture  in  prayer,  and  the 
absence  of  all  fasting.  Tertullian  says  that  all  the  festivals  of 
the  heathen  put  together  will  not  make  up  the  one  Pentecost  of 


J$p&pa),  Quin^uagesima,  is  the  fiftieth  day  after  the  Passover 
Sabbath,  see  vol.  L  225  sqq.  It  is  used  by  the  fathers  in  a  wider  sense  for  the 
whole  period  of  fifty  days,  from  Easter  to  Whitsunday,  and  in  a  narrower  sense 
"or  the  single  festival  of  Whitsunday. 


\  61  THE  EPIPHANY.  221 

the  Christians.1  During  that  period  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
were  read  in  the  public  service  (and  are  read  to  this  day  in  the 
Greek  church). 

Subsequently  the  celebration  was  limited  to  the  fortieth  day 
as  the  feast  of  the  Ascension,  and  the  fiftieth  day,  or  Pentecost 
proper  (Whitsunday)  as  the  feast  of  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  the  birthday  of  the  Christian  Church.  In  this  re- 
stricted sense  Pentecost  closed  the  cycle  of  our  Lord's  festivals 
(the  semestre  Domini),  among  which  it  held  the  third  place 
(after  Easter  and  Christmas).2  It  was  also  a  favorite  time  for 
baptism,  especially  the  vigil  of  the  festival* 

§64.  The  Epiphany. 

The  feast  of  the  EPIPHANY  is  of  later  origin,3  It  spread 
from  the  East  towards  the  Vest,  but  here,  even  in  the  fourth 
century,  it  was  resisted  by  such  parties  as  the  Donatists,  and 
condemned  as  an  oriental  innovation.  It  was,  in  general,  the 
feast  of  the  appearance  of  Christ  in  the  flesh,  and  particularly 
of  the  manifestation  of  his  Messiahship  by  his  baptism  in  the 
Jordan,  the  festival  at  once  of  his  birth  and  his  baptism.  It- 
was  usually  kept  on  the  6th  of  January.  When  the  East 
adopted  from  the  West  the  Christmas  festival,  Epiphany  was 
restricted  to  the  celebration  of  the  baptism  of  Christ,  and  made 
one  of  the  three  great  reasons  for  the  administration  of  baptism. 

In  the  West  it  was  afterwards  made  a  collective  festival  of 
several  events  in  the  life  of  Jesus,  as  the  adoration  of  the  Magi, 
the  first  miracle  of  Cana,  and  sometimes  the  feeding  of  the  five 

i  De  Idol  c.  12 ;  comp.  De  Bapt.  c.  19 ;  Const.  Apost.  V.  20. 

3  In  this  sense  Pentecoste  is  first  used  by  the  Council  of  Elvira  (Granada) 
A.  D.  306,  can.  43.  The  week  following  was  afterwards  called  Hebdomada* 
Spiritus  Sancti. 

3  il  iirtQ&veta,  r&  hriQdvta,  y  tieofdveia,  faepa  TQV  Q&rovi  Epiphanic^ 
Theophania,  Dies  laminum,  Festum  Trium  Regum,  etc.  The  feast  is  first  men- 
tioned by  Clement  of  Alex,  as  the  annual  commemoration  of  trie  baptism  of 
Christ  by  the  Gnostic  sect  of  the  Basilidians  (Strom.  I.  21).  Neander  supposes 
that  they  derived  it  from  the  Jewish  Christians  in  Palestine.  Chrysostom 
often  alludes  to  it. 

«  Augustin,  Serm.  202,  §  2. 


222  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

thousand.  It  became  more  particularly  the  "  feast  of  the  threo 
kings,"  that  is,  the  wise  men  from  the  East,  and  was  placed  in 
special  connexion  with  the  mission  to  the  heathen.  The  legend 
of  the  three  kings  (Caspar,  Melchior,  Baltazar)  grew  up  gradu- 
ally from  the  recorded  gifts,  gold,  frankincense,  and  myrrh, 
which  the  Magi  offered  to  the  new-born  King  of  the  Jews.1 

Of  the  CHRISTMAS  festival  there  is  no  clear  trace  before  the 
fourth  century ;  partly  because  the  feast  of  the  Epiphany  in  a 
measure  held  the  place  of  it;  partly  because  the  birth  of  Christ, 
the  date  of  which,  at  any  rate,  was  uncertain,  was  less  promi- 
nent in  the  Christian  mind  than  his  death  and  resurrection.  It 
was  of  Western  (Eoman)  origin,  and  found  its  way  to  the  East 
after  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century ;  for  Chrysostom,  in  a 
Homily,  which  was  probably  preached  Dec.  25,  386,  speaks  of 
the  celebration  of  the  separate  day  of  the  Nativity  as  having 
been  recently  introduced  in  Antioch. 

§  65.  The  Order  of  Public  Worship. 

The  earliest  description  of  the  Christian  worship  is  given  us 
by  a  heathen,  the  younger  Pliny,  A.  D.  109;  in  his  well-known 
letter  to  Trajan,  which  embodies  the  result  of  his  judicial  in- 
vestigations in  Bithynia.2  According  to  this,  the  Christians 
assembled  on  an  appointed  day  (Sunday)  at  sunrise,  sang  respon- 
sively  a  song  to  Christ  as  to  God,3  and  then  pledged  themselves 
by  an  oath  (sacramentum)  not  to  do  any  evil  work,  to  commit 
no  theft,  robbery,  nor  adultery,  not  to  break  their  word,  nor 
sacrifice  property  intrusted  to  them.  Afterwards  (at  evening) 
they  assembled  again,  to  eat  ordinary  and  innocent  food  (the 
agape). 

This  account  of  a  Eoman  official  then  bears  witness  to  the 

i  Matt  2 :  11.  The  first  indistinct  trace,  perhaps,  is  in  Tertullian,  Adv.  Jud. 
c.  9 :  Nam  et  Magos  reges  fere  habuit  Oriens."  The  apocryphal  Gospels  of  the 
infancy  give  us  no  fiction  on  that  point. 

8  Comp.  \  17,  p.  46,  and  G.  Boissier,  De  Fauthenticite  de  la  kttre  de  Pline  au 
lujet  des  Chretiens,  in  the  "  Revue  Arche*oL,"  1876,  p.  114r-125. 

s  "  Quod  essent  soliti  stato  die  ante  lucem  convenire,  carm&nque  Cftnsto,  quart 
Deo,  dicere  secum  invicem." 


865.  THE  ORDER  OF  PUBLIC  WORSHIP. 

primitive  observance  of  Sunday,  the  separation  of  the  love-feast 
from  the  morning  worship  (with  the  communion),  and  the  wor- 
ship of  Christ  as  God  in  song. 

Justin  Martyr,  at  the  close  of  his  larger  Apology,1  describes 
the  public  worship  more  particularly,  as  it  was  conducted  about 
the  year  140.  After  giving  a  full  account  of  baptism  and  the 
holy  Supper,  to  which  we  shall  refer  again,  he  continues  : 

"  On  Sunday  2  a  meeting  of  all,  who  live  in  the  cities  and 
villages,  is  held,  and  a  section  from  the  Memoirs  of  the  Apostles 
(the  Gospels)  and  the  writings  of  the  Prophets  (the  Old  Testa- 
ment) is  read,  as  long  as  the  time  permits.3  When  the  reader 
has  finished,  the  president,4  in  a  discourse,  gives  an  exhortation5 
to  the  imitation  of  these  noble  things.  After  this  we  all  rise  in 
common  prayer.6  At  the  close  of  the  prayer,  as  we  have  before 
described/  bread  and  wine  with  water  are  brought.  The  presi- 
dent offers  prayer  and  thanks  for  them,  according  to  the  power 
given  him,8  and  the  congregation  responds  the  Amen.  Then 
the  consecrated  elements  are  distributed  to  each  one,  and  par- 
taken, and  are  carried  by  the  deacons  to  the  houses  of  the  absent. 
The  wealthy  and  the  willing  then  give  contributions  according 
to  their  free  will,  and  this  collection  is  deposited  with  the 
president,  who  therewith  supplies  orphans  and  widows,  poor 

1  Apol  I.  c.  65-67  (Opera,  ed.  Otto  IK  Tom.  I.  P.  1.  177-188).  The  passage 
quoted  is  from  ch.  67. 
8  TV  TOT)  * 


4  *0  7rp0£<jr<yc,  the  presiding  presbyter  or  bishop. 
6  Tijv  vov&taiav  Kal  Trap&K^ijatv. 

6  Ei»^3f  irefMTrofjLev,  preces  ernittimus, 

7  Chap.  65. 

8  *Qaij  Sbvaw  avry,  fchat  is  probably  pro  viribus,  quantum  potesi;  or  like 
Tertullian's  "  de  pectore  "  and  "  ex  proprio  ingenio"    Others  translate  wrongly  : 
lotis  viribus,  with  all  his  might,  or  with  a  clear,  loud  voice,    Comp.  Otto,  I.  c. 
187.    The  passages,  however,  in  no  case  contain  any  opposition  to  forms  of 
prayer  which  were  certainly  in  use  already  at  that  time,  and  familiar  without 
book  to  every  worshipper  ;  above  all  the  Lord's  Prayer.    The  whole  liturgical 
literature  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  presupposes  a  much  older  liturgical 
tradition.    The  prayers  in  the  eighth  book  of  the  Apost.  Constitutions  ar* 
probably  among  the  oldest  portions  of  the  work, 


224  SECOND  PERIOD.    A  D.  100-311. 

and  needy,  prisoners  and  strangers,  and  takes  care  of  all  who 
are  in  want.  We  assemble  in  common  on  Sunday,  oecause  this 
is  the  first  day,  on  which  God  created  the  world  and  the  light, 
and  because  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour  on  the  same  day  rose  from 
the  dead  and  appeared  to  his  disciples." 

Here,  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  preaching  (and  that  as  an 
episcopal  function),  prayer,  and  communion.,  plainly  appear  as 
the  regular  parts  of  the  Sunday  worship ;  all  descending,  no 
doubt,  from  the  apostolic  age.  Song  is  not  expressly  mentioned 
here,  but  elsewhere.1  The  communion  is  not  yet  clearly  separated 
from  the  other  parts  of  worship.  But  this  was  done  towards 
the  end  of  the  second  century. 

The  same  parts  of  worship  are  mentioned  in  different  placei 
by  Tertullian.2 

The  eighth  book  of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions  contains 
already  an  elaborate  service  with  sundry  liturgical  prayers.3 

§  66.    Parts  of  Worship. 

1.  The  READING  OF  SCRIPTURE  LESSONS  from  the  Old 
Testament  with  practical  application  and  exhortation  passed 
from  the  Jewish  synagogue  to  the  Christian  church.  The 
lessons  from  the  New  Testament  came  prominently  into  use  as 
the  Gospels  and  Epistles  took  the  place  of  the  oral  instruction 
of  the  apostolic  age.  The  reading  of  the  Gospels  is  expressly 
mentioned  by  Justin  Martyr,  and  the  Apostolical  Constitutions 
add  the  Epistles  and  the  Acts.4  During  the  Pentecostal  season 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  furnished  the  lessons.  But  there  was 
no  uniform  system  of  selection  before  the  Nicene  age.  Besides 
the  canonical  Scripture,  post-apostolic  writings,  as  the  Epistle  of 
Clement  of  Rome,  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  and  the  Pastor  of 
Hennas,  were  read  in  some  congregations,  and  are  found  in 

1  Cap.  13.    Justin  himself  wrote  a  book  entitled  ^d/lr^. 

*  See  the  passages  quoted  by  Otto,  I  c.  184  sq. 

8  B.  VIII.  3  sqq.    Also  VTL  33  sqq.    See  translation  in  the  "  Ante-Nicene 
Library,"  vol.  XVII,  P.  II.  191  saa.  and  212  sqq. 

*  BE,  VIL  5. 


2  66.  PABTS  OF  WORSHIP.  225 

important  MSS.  of  the  New  Testament1    The  Acts  of  Martyrs 
were  also  read  on  the  anniversary  of  their  martyrdom. 

2.  The  SERMON  2  was  a  familiar  exposition  of  Scripture  and 
exhortation  to  repentance  and  a  holy  life,  and  gradually  assumed 
in  the  Greek  church  an  artistic,  rhetorical  character.    Preaching 
was  at  first  free  to  every  member  who  had  the  gift  of  public 
speaking,  but  was  gradually  confined  as  an  exclusive  privilege  of 
the  clergy,  and  especially  the  bishop.     Origen  was  called  upon 
to  preach  before  his  ordination,  but  this  was  even  then  rather 
an  exception.     The  oldest  known  homily,  now  recovered  in  full 
(1875),  is  from  an  unknown  Greek  or  Eoman  author  of  the 
middle  of  the  second  century,  probably  before  A.D.  140  (for- 
merly ascribed  to  Clement  of  Rome).     He  addresses  the  hearers 
as  "brothers"  and  "  sisters/' and  read  from  manuscript.3    The 
homily  has  no  literary  value,  and  betrays  confusion  and  intel- 
lectual poverty,  but  is  inspired  by  moral  earnestness  and  tri- 
umphant faith.    It  closes  with  this  doxology:  "To  the  only 
God  invisible,  the  Father  of  truth,  who  sent  forth  unto  us  the 
Saviour  and  Prince  of  immortality,  through  whom  also  He 
made  manifest  unto  us  the  truth  and  the  heavenly  life,  to  Him 
j>e  the  glory  forever  and  ever.     Amen."  4 

3.  PRAYER.     This  essential  part  of  all  worship  passed  like- 

1  The  Ep.  of  Clemens  in  the  Codex  Alexandrinus  (A) ;  Barnabas  and  Her- 
mas  in  the  Cod  Sinaiticus. 

2  'QfuMdj  arfyof,  sermo,  tractatus. 

3  §  19,  avayiv&aia>  fyiv.     But  the  homily  may  have  first  heen  delivered 
extempore,  and  taken  down  hy  short-hand  writers  (ra^y/wfow,  notara).    See 
Lightfoot,  p.  306. 

4  Ed.  by  Bryennios  (1875),  and  in  the  Pair.  Apost.  ed.  by  de  Gebhardt  and 
Harnack,  I.  111-143.    A  good  translation  by  Lightfoot,  S.  Clement  of  JSoww, 
Appendix,  380-390.    Lightfoot  says:  '« If  the  first  Epistle  of  Clement  is  the 
earliepJt  foreshadowing  of  a  Christian  liturgy,  the  so  called  Second  Epistle  is 
the  fij^st  example  of  a  Christian  homily."    He  thinks  that  the  author  was  a, 
bishop;  I  Harnack,  that  he  was  a  layman,  as  he  seems  to  distinguish  himself 
fromth$  presbyters.    Lightfoot  assigns  him  to  Corinth,  and  explains  in  this 
way  tb£e  fact  that  the  homily  was  bound  up  with  the  letter  of  Clement  to  the 
Corindiians ;  while  Harnack  ably  maintains  the  Roman  origin  from  the  time 
andjarcle  of  Hermas.    Bryennios  ascribes  it  to  Clement  of  Rome  (which  is 
qu'lieimpossible),  ffilgenfeld  to  Clement  of  Alexandria  (which  is  equally 
i«$»08sible). 

Vol.  II.    15- 


226  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

wise  from  the  Jewish  into  the  Christian  service.  The  oldest 
prayers  of  post-apostolic  times  are  the  eucharistic  thanksgivings  in 
the  Didache,  and  the  intercession  at  the  close  of  Clement's  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians,  which  seems  to  have  been  used  in  the  Eoman 
church.1  It  is  long  and  carefully  composed,  and  largely  inter- 
woven with  passages  from  the  Old  Testament.  It  begins  with 
an  elaborate  invocation  of  God  in  antithetical  sentences,  contains 
intercession  for  the  afflicted,  the  needy,  the  wanderers,  and  pris- 
oners, petitions  for  the  conversion  of  the  heathen,  a  confession 
of  sin  and  prayer  for  pardon  (but  without  a  formula  of  absolu- 
tion), and  closes  with  a  prayer  for  unity  and  a  doxology.  Very 
touching  is  the  prayer  for  rulers  then  so  hostile  to  the  Chris- 
tians, that  God  may  grant  them  health,  peace,  concord  and  sta- 
bility. The  document  has  a  striking  resemblance  to  portions  of 
the  ancient  liturgies  which  begin  to  appear  in  the  fourth  century, 
but  bear  the  names  of  Clement,  James  and  Mark,  and  probably 
include  some  primitive  elements.2 

The  last  book  of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions  contains  the 
pseudo-  or  post-Clementine  liturgy,  with  special  prayers  for 
believers,  catechumens,  the  possessed,  the  penitent,  and  even  for 
the  dead,  and  a  complete  eucharistic  service.3 

The  usual  posture  in  prayer  was  standing  with  outstretched 
arms  in  Oriental  fashion. 

4.  SONG.  The  Church  inherited  the  psalter  from  the  syna- 
gogue, and  has  used  it  in  all  ages  as  an  inexhaustible  treasury 
of  devotion.  The  psalter  is  truly  catholic  in  its  spirit  and  aim ; 
it  springs  from  the  deep  fountains  of  the  human  heart  in  its 
secret  communion  with  God,  and  gives  classic  expression  to  the 

lAd  Cor.  ch.  59-61,  discovered  and  first  published  by  Bryennios,  1875.  We 
give  Clement's  prayer  below,  p.  228  s-j.  The  prayers  of  the  Didache  (chs.  9 
and  10),  brought  to  light  by  Bryeuni  »s,  1883,  are  still  older,  and  breaifee  the 
spirit  of  primitive  simplicity.  See  §  68. 

2  See  vol.  III.  517  sqq.,  and  add  to  the  literature  there  quoted,  PRO^T  (R. 
C.),  Die  Liturgie  der  3  ersten  Jahrh.,  Tub.,  1870 ;  C.  A.  HAMMOND,    .indent 
JLUurgies  (with  introduction,  notes,  and  liturgical  glossary),  Oxford  and  >Lond 
1878. 

9Ap.  Const.,  Bk>  YIJL,  also  in  the  liturgical  collections  of  Daniel, 
Hammond,  eta 


8  66.  PARTS  OF  WOESHIP.  227 

jeligious  experience  of  all  men  in  every  age  and  tongue.  This 
is  the  best  proof  of  its  inspiration.  Nothing  like  it  can  be 
found  in  all  the  poetry  of  heathendom.  The  psalter  was  first 
enriched  by  the  inspired  hymns  which  saluted  the  birth  of  the 
Saviour  of  the  world,  the  Magnificat  of  Mary,  the  Benedivtus  of 
Zacharias,  the  Gloria  in  Hxcelsis  of  the  heavenly  host,  and  the 
Nunc  Dimittis  of  the  aged  Simeon.  These  hymns  passed  as 
once  into  the  service  of  the  Church,  to  resound  throi^-  ^1!  suc- 
cessive centuries,  as  things  of  beauty  which  are  "a  joy  forever.* 
Traces  of  primitive  Christian  poems  can  be  found  throughout 
the  Epistles  and  the  Apocalypse.  The  angelic  anthem  (Luke 
2 :  14)  was  expanded  into  the  Gloria  in  Excdsis,  first  in  the 
Greek  church,  in  the  third,  if  not  the  second,  century,  and  after- 
wards in  the  Latin,  and  was  used  as  the  morning  hymn.1  It  is 
one  of  the  classical  forms  of  devotion,  like  the  Latin  Te  Deum 
of  later  date.  The  evening  hymn  of  the  Greek  church  is  less 
familiar  and  of  inferior  merit. 
The  following  is  a  free  translation : 

"Hail !  cheerful  Light,  of  His  pure  glory  poured, 

Who  is  tli*  Immortal  Fattier,  Heavenly,  Blesfy 
Holiest  of  Holies — Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  1 

Now  are  we  come  to  the  Sun's  hour  of  rest, 
The  lights  of  Evening  round  us  shine, 
We  sing  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  Divine! 

Worthiest  art  Thou  at  all  times,  to  be  sung 

With  undefiled  tongue, 
Son  of  our  God,  Giver  of  Life  alone ! 
Therefore,  in  all  the  world,  Thy  glories,  Lord,  we  own.  "* 

*  Const.  Apost.  lib.  VH.  47.  Also  in  Daniel's  Thesaurus  Hymnol.,  torn.  HI, 
p.  4,  where  it  is  called  vpvog  iu$tv6$  (as  in  Cod.  Alex.),  and  commences: 
Ad£a  ev  injjiffTo^  Qsu.  Comp.  Tom.  IL  268  sqq.  It  is  also  called  hymnus  angel- 
icu$,  while  the  Ter  Sanctus  (from  Isa.  6:  3)  came  afterwards  to  be  distinguished 
a^mnus  seraphieus.  Daniel  ascribes  the  former  to  the  third  century,  Bouth 
to-  second.  It  is  found  with  slight  variations  at  the  end  of  the  Alexandrian 
Coo^5  of  the  Bible  (in  the  British  Museum),  and  in  the  Zurich  Psalter  re- 
print by  Tischendorf  in  his  Monvmenfa  Sacra.  The  Latin  form  is  usually 
traced  to  Hilary  of  Poictiers  in  the  fourth  century. 
2  Daniel,  I  c.  vol.  HI.  p.  5.  Comp.  in  part  Const.  Ap.  VHL  37. 
or  v/ivof  row  toxyuwv*  commences: 

$5f  i'Aapbv  tyiag  66&et 
'A&avfcov  ffarpoc  ovpavtov. 


228  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

An  author  towards  the  close  of  the  second  century l  could 
appeal  against  the  Artemonites,  to  a  multitude  of  hymns  in 
proof  of  the  faith  of  the  church  in  the  divinity  of  Christ: 
"  How  many  psalms  and  odes  of  the  Christians  are  there  not, 
which  have  been  written  from  the  beginning  by  believers,  and 
which,  in  their  theology,  praise  Christ  as  the  Logos  of  God?" 
Tradition  says,  that  the  antiphonies,  or  responsive  songs,  were 
introduced  by  Ignatius  of  Antioch.  The  Gnostics,  Valentine 
and  Bardesanes,  also  composed  religious  songs ;  and  the  church 
surely  learned  the  practice  not  from  them,  but  from  the  Old 
Testament  psalms. 

The  oldest  Christian  poem  preserved  to  us  which  can  be  traced 
to  an  individual  author  is  from  the  pen  of  the  profound  Chris- 
tian philosopher/Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  taught  theology  in 
that  city  before  A.  D.  202.  It  is  a  sublime  but  somewhat  turgid 
song  of  praise  to  the  Logos,  as  the  divine  educator  and  leader  of 
the  human  race,  and  though  not  intended  and  adapted  for  public 
worship,  is  remarkable  for  its  spirit  and  antiquity.2 

NOTES. 

L  The  Prayer  of  the  Eoman  Church  from  the  newly  recovered  portion  of 
the  Epistle  of  Clement  to  the  Corinthians,  ch.  59-61  (in  Bishop  Lightfootfs 
translation,  St.  Clement  of  Borne,  Append,  pp.  376-378) : 

u  Grant  unto  us,  Lord,  that  we  may  set  our  hope  on  Thy  Name  which  is  the 
primal  source  of  all  creation,  and  open  the  eyes  of  our  hearts,  that  we  may 
know  Thee,  who  alone  abidest  Highest  in  the  highest,  Holy  in  the  holy;  who 
fayest  low  the  insolence  of  the  proud:  who  scatterest  the  imaginings  of  nations;  who 
Mttest  the  lowly  on  high,  and  bringest  the  lofly  low;  who  make&t  rich  and  makest 
poor;  who  kfflest  and  makest  alive  ;  who  alone  art  the  Benefactor  of  spirits  and 
the  God  of  all  flesh ;  who  hokest  into  the  abysses,  who  scannest  the  works  of 

1  In  Euseb.  3.  E.  V.  28. 

*  In  the  PGK%.  HI.  12  (p.  311  ed.  Pott) ;  also  in  Daniel's  Thesaurus  hym- 
nohgicus  III.  p.  3  and  4.  Daniel  calls  it  "  vetttstissimus  hymnus  ecdesice,"  but 
the  Gloria  in  Excelsis  may  dispute  this  claim.  The  poem  has  been  often  trans- 
lated into  German,  by  Munter  (in  Rambach's  Anthologfe  christt.  Gesange,  I.  p. 
35);  Dorner  (Christologie,  I.  293);  Fortlage  (Gesange  christl.  Vorseit,  1844,  p. 
38) ;  and  in  rhyme  by  Eagenbach  (Die  K  G.  der  3  ersten  Jahrh.  p.  222  sq.). 
An  English  translation  may  be  found  in  Mrs.  Charles :  The  Voice  of  Christian 
Life  in  Song,  !N".  York,  1858,  p.  44  sq.,  and  a  closer  one  in  the  « Ante-Nicene 
Christian  Library,"  vol.  V.  p.  343  sq. 


?66.  PABTS  OF  WOESHTP.  229 

man ;  the  Succor  of  them  that  are  in  peril,  the  Saviour  of  them  that  are  in 
despair  ;  the  Creator  and  Overseer  of  every  spirit ;  who  multiplies!  the  nations 
upon  earth,  and  hast  chosen  out  from  all  men  those  that  love  Thee  through 
Jesus  Christ,  Thy  beloved  Son,  through  whom  Thou  didst  instruct  us,  didst 
sanctify  us,  didst  honor  us.  We  beseech  Thee,  Lord  and  Master,  to  be  our 
help  and  succor.  Save  those  among  us  who  are  in  tribulation ;  have  mercy  on 
the  lowly ;  lift  up  the  fallen  j  show  Thyself  unto  the  needy ;  heal  the  ungodly ; 
convert  the  wanderers  of  Thy  people;  feed  the  hungry;  release  our  prisoners; 
raise  up  the  weak ;  comfort  the  faiut-hearted.  Let  all  the  Gentiles  know  that 
Thou  art  God  alone,  and  Jesus  Christ  is  Thy  Son,  and  we  are  Thy  people  and 
the  sheep  of  Thy  pasture. 

"  Thou  through  Thine  operations  didst  make  manifest  the  everlasting  fabric 
of  the  world.  Thou,  Lord,  didst  create  the  earth.  Thou  that  art  faithful 
throughout  all  generations,  righteous  in  Thy  judgments,  marvellous  in  strength 
and  excellence.  Thou  that  art  wise  in  creating  and  prudent  in  establishing 
that  which  Thou  hast  made,  that  art  good  in  the  things  which  are  seen  and 
faithful  with  them  that  trust  on  Thee,  pitiful  and  compassionate,  forgive  us  our 
iniquities  and  our  unrighteousnesses  and  our  transgressions  and  shortcomings. 
Lay  not  to  our  account  every  sin  of  Thy  servants  and  Thine  handmaids,  but 
cleanse  us  with  the  cleansing  of  Thy  truth,  and  guide  our  steps  to  walk  in 
holiness  and  righteousness  and  singleness  of  heart,  and  to  do  such  things  as  are 
good  and  well-pleasing  in  Thy  sight  and  in  the  sight  of  our  rulers.  Yea,  Lord, 
make  Thy  face  to  shine  upon  us  in  peace  for  our  good,  that  we  may  be  sheltered 
by  Thy  mighty  hand  and  delivered  from  every  sin  by  Thine  uplifted  arm.  And 
deliver  us  from  them  that  hate  us  wrongfully.  Give  concord  and  peace  to  us 
and  to  all  that  dwell  on  the  earth,  as  thou  gavest  to  our  fathers,  when  they 
called  on  Thee  in  faith  and  truth  with  holiness,  that  we  may  be  saved,  while 
we  render  obedience  to  Thine  almighty  and  most  excellent  Name,  and  to  our 
rulers  and  governors  upon  the  earth. 

"  Thou,  Lord  and  Master,  hast  given  them  the  power  of  sovereignty  through 
Thine  excellent  and  unspeakable  might,  that  we  knowing  the  glory  and  honor 
which  Thou  hast  given  them  may  submit  ourselves  unto  them,  in  nothing 
resisting  Thy  will.  Grant  unto  them  therefore,  0  Lord,  health,  peace,  concord, 
stability,  that  they  may  administer  the  government  which  Thou  hast  given 
them  without  failure.  For  Thou,  O  heavenly  Master,  King  of  the  ages,  givest 
to  the  sons  of  men  glory  and  honor  and  power  over  all  things  that  are  upon 
earth.  Do  Thou,  Lord,  direct  their  counsel  according  to  that  which  is  good 
and  well  pleasing  in  Thy  sight,  that,  administering  in  peace  and  gentleness 
with  godliness  the  power  which  Thou  hast  given  them,  they  may  obtain  Thy 
favor.  0  Thou,  who  alone  art  able  to  do  these  things  and  things  far  more 
exceeding  good  than  these  for  us,  we  praise  Thee  through  the  High-priest  and 
Guardian  of  our  souls,  Jesus  Christ,  through  whom  be  the  glory  and  the 
majesty  unto  Thee  both  now  and  for  all  generations  and  for  ever  and  ever. 
Amen." 

II.  A  literal  translation  of  the  poem  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  in  praise  of 
Christ  T/tvog  TOV  Swr^pof  Xptarov.  (Sro/ifov  TTO&WV 


230 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-811. 


"  Bridle  of  untamed  colts, 
Wing  of  unwandering  birds, 
Sure  Helm  of  babes, 
Shepherd  of  royal  lambs ! 
Assemble  Thy  simple  children, 
To  praise  holily, 
To  hymn  guilelessly 
With  innocent  mouths 
Christ,  the  guide  of  children. 

O  King  of  saints, 
All-subduing  Word 
Of  the  most  high  Father, 
Prince  of  wisdom, 
Support  of  sorrows, 
That  rejoicest  in  the  ages, 
Jesus,  Saviour 
Of  the  human  race, 
Shepherd,  Husbandman, 
Helm,  Bridle, 
Heavenly  Wing, 
Of  the  all  holy  flock, 
Fisher  of  men 
Who  are  saved, 
Catching  the  chaste  fishes 
With  sweet  life 
From  the  hateful  wave 
Of  a  sea  of  vices. 

Guide  [us],  Shepherd 
Of  rational  sheep; 
Guide  harmless  children, 
0  holy  King. 


0  footsteps  of  Christ, 

0  heavenly  way, 

Perennial  Word, 

Endless  age, 

Eternal  Light, 

Fount  of  mercy, 

Performer  of  virtue. 

Noble  [is  the]  life  of  those 

Who  praise  God, 

0  Christ  Jesus, 

Heavenly  milk 

Of  the  sweet  breasts 

Of  the  graces  of  the  Bride, 

Pressed  out  of  Thy  wisdom. 

Babes,  nourished 

With  tender  mouths, 

Filled  with  the  dewy  spirit 

Of  the  spiritual  breast, 

Let  us  sing  together 

Simple  praises 

True  hymns 

To  Christ  [the]  King, 

Holy  reward 

For  the  doctrine  of  life. 

Let  us  sing  together, 

Sing  in  simplicity 

To  the  mighty  Child. 

0  choir  of  peace, 

The  Christ  begotten, 

0  chaste  people 

Let  us  praise  together 

The  God  of  peace." 


This  poem  was  for  sixteen  centuries  merely  a  hymnological  curiosity, 
until  an  American  Congregational  minister,  Dr.  HENBY  MARTYET  DEX- 
TEE,  l>y  a  happy  reproduction,  in  1846,  secured  it  a  place  in  modern 
hymn-books.  While  preparing  a  sermon  (as  he  informs  me)  on  "some 
prominent  characteristics  of  the  early  Christians"  (text,  Deut.  32:  7, 
•*  Remember  the  days  of  old"),  he  first  wrote  down  an  exact  translation 
of  the  Greek  hymn  of  Clement,  and  then  reproduced  and  modernized  it 
for  the  use  of  his  congregation  in  connection  with  the  sermon.  It  is 
veil  known  that  many  Psalms  of  Israel  have  inspired  some  of  the  nobles^ 


\  67.  DIVISION  OF  DIYESfE  SERVICE. 


231 


Christian  hymns.  The  46th  Psalm  gave  the  key-note  of  Luther's 
triumphant  war-hymn  of  the  Eeformation :  " Ein'  feste  Burg"  John 
Mason  Neale  dug  from  the  dust  of  ages  many  a  Greek  and  Latin 
hymn,  to  the  edification  of  English  churches,  notably  some  portions  of 
Bernard  of  Cluny's  De  Contemptu  Mundi,  which  runs  through  nearly 
three  thousand  dactylic  hexameters,  and  furnished  the  material  for 
"Brief  life  is  here  our  portion,"  "For  thee,  0  dear,  dear  Country,"  and 
"Jerusalem  the  golden."  We  add  Dexter's  hymn  as  a  fair  specimen  of 
a  useful  transfusion  and  rejuvenation  of  an  old  poem. 


1.  Shepherd  of  tender  youth, 
Guiding  in  love  and  truth 

Through  devious  ways; 
Christ,  our  triumphant  King, 
We  come  Thy  name  to  sing ; 
Hither  our  children  bring 

To  shout  Thy  praise  I 

2.  Thou  art  our  Holy  Lord, 
The  all-subduing  Word, 

Healer  of  strife! 
Thou  didst  Thyself  ahase, 
That  from  sin's  deep  disgrace 
Thou  mightest  save  our  race, 

And  give  us  life.     . 

3.  Thou  art  the  great  High  Priest; 
Thou  hast  prepared  the  feast 

Of  heavenly  love; 
While  in  our  mortal  pain 


None  calls  on  Thee  in  vain; 
Help  Thou  dost  not  disdain-- 
Help from  above. 

4.  Ever  be  Thou  our  Guide, 
Our  Shepherd  and  our  Pride, 

Our  Staff  and  Song! 
Jesus,  Thou  Christ  of  God, 
By  Thy  perennial  Word 
Lead  us  where  Thou  hast  trod, 

Make  our  faith  strong. 

5.  So  now,  and  till  we  die, 
Sound  we  Thy  praises  high, 

And  joyful  sing: 
Infants,  and  the  glad  throng 
Who  to  Thy  Church  belong, 
Unite  to  swell  the  song 

To  Christ  our  King! 


§  67.    Division  of  D-ivine  Service.     The  Disdplina  Aroani. 

BICHAED  E.OTHE :  De  Discipline?.  Arcani,  guce  dicttur^  in  Ecclesfa  Christ. 

Origine.    Heidelb.  1841 ;  and  his  art.  on  the  subject  in  the  first  ed.  of 

Herzog  (vol.  I.  469-477). 
C.  A.  GEBH.  VOisr  ZEZSCBTWITZ:  System  der  christl.  Mrchlichen  JZatechetib. 

Leipz.  1863,  vol.  I.  p.  154-227.    See  also  his  art.  in  the  second  ed.  of 

Herzog,  I.  637-645  (abridged  in  Schaff's  "Eel.  Enc.")- 
G.  NATH.  BONWETSCH  (of  Dorpat) :    Wesen,  Entstehung  und  Fortgang 

der  Arfamdisciplin,  in  Kahnis3  "  Zeitschrift  fur  hist.  Theol."  1873,  pp. 

203  sqq. 
J.  P.  LUNDY:  Monumental  Christianity.    N.  York,  1876,  p.  62-86. 


232  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Comp.  also  A.  W.  HADDAN  in  Smith  &  Cheetham,  I.  564-566  ; 

DI5GEE,  in  Wetzer  &  Welte,  new  ed.  vol.  I.  (1882),  1234^1238.  Older 
dissertations  on  the  subject  by  SCHELSTE^TE  (1678),  MEIEE  (1679), 
TENZELL  (1863),  SCHOLLIKER  (1756),  LLENHABDT  (1829),  TOKLOT 
(1836),  FBOMMASN  (1833),  SIEGEL  (1836,  1.  506  sqq.). 

The  public  service  was  divided  from  the  middle  of  the  second 
century  down  to  the  close  of  the  fifth,  into  the  worship  of  the 
catechumens,1  and  the  worship  of  the  faithful.2  The  former 
consisted  of  scripture  reading,  preaching,  prayer,  and  song,  and 
was  open  to  the  unbaptized  and  persons  under  penance.  The 
latter  consisted  of  the  holy  communion,  with  its  liturgical  appen- 
dages ;  none  but  the  proper  members  of  the  church  could  attend 
it;  and  before  it  began,  all  catechumens  and  unbelievers  left  the 
assembly  at  the  order  of  the  deacon,3  and  the  doors  were  closed 
or  guarded* 

The  earliest  witness  for  this  strict  separation  is  Tertullian, 
who  reproaches  the  heretics  with  allowing  the  baptized  and  the 
onbaptized  to  attend  the  same  prayers,  and  casting  the  holy  even 
before  the  heathens.4  He  demands,  that  believers,  catechumens, 
and  heathens  should  occupy  separate  places  in  public  worship. 
The  Alexandrian  divines  furnished  a  theoretical  ground  for  this 


1  Aetrovpyia  T&V  Karrixwptvuv,  Missa  Cafechumenorum.  The  name  missa 
(from  which  our  moss  is  derived)  occurs  first  in  Augustin  and  in  the  acts  of 
the  council  of  Carthage,  A.D.  398,  It  arose  from  the  formula  of  dismission  at 
the  close  of  each  part  of  the  service,  and  is  equivalent  to  missio,  di&mMo. 
Augustin  (Serm.  49,  c.  8)  :  "  Take  notice,  after  the  sermon  the  dismissal  (miasa) 
of  the  catechumens  takes  place  ;  the  faithful  will  remain."  Afterwards  missa 
came  to  designate  exclusively  the  communion  service.  In  the  Greek  church 
faiTovpyia  or  tarwpy/a,  semce,  is  the  precise  equivalent  for  missa. 

1  \eiTctopyia  T£W  xurrov,  Missa  Fiddium. 

5  M#  Tl  £  TWV   KQTTlXOVfAtvOV,  [if]  Tl£   TOV  OKpQQfJ.iv(Wt  fjfi  Tig  TQfl>   CLirtOTQV,  HJ)   Tlf 

irEpo66jw}  "  Let  none  of  the  catechumens,  let  none  of  the  hearers,  let  none  of 
the  unbelievers,  let  none  of  the  heterodox,  stay  here."  Const.  Apost.  viii.  12. 
Comp.  Chrysostom,  Horn,  in  Watt,  raiii. 

*  De  Prascr.  Hcer.  c.  41  :  "  Quis  catechumenus,  quis  jidelis,  incertum  est  "  (that 
is,  among  the  heretics)  ;  "pariter  adeunt,  pariter  want,  etiam  ethnici,  si  superve- 
Mrint;  sanctum  canibus  et  porcis  margartias,  licet  non  veras  "  (since  they  have  no 
proper  sacraments),  "jactabunt."  But  this  does  not  apply  to  all  heretics,  least 
of  all  to  the  Manichaeans,  who  carried  the  notion  of  myrtery  in  the  sacramento 
much  further  than  the  Catholics. 


?67.  DIVISION  OP  DIVINE  SEEVICB.  233 

practice  by  their  doctrine  of  a  secret  tradition  for  the  esoteric. 
Besides  the  communion,  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  ^rith  its 
accompanying  confession,  was  likewise  treated  as  a  mystery  for 
the  initiated/  and  withdrawn  from  the  view  of  Jews  and 
heathens. 

We  have  here  the  beginnings  of  the  Christian  mystery-wor- 
ship, or  what  has  been  called  since  1679  "the  Secret  Discipline," 
(Disdplina  Arcani),  which  is  presented  in  its  fall  development 
in  the  liturgies  of  the  fourth  century,  but  disappeared  from  the 
Latin  church  after  the  sixth  century,  with  the  dissolution  of 
heathenism  and  the  universal  introduction  of  infant  baptism. 

The  "Secret  Discipline  had  reference  chiefly  to  the  celebration 
of  the  sacraments  of  baptism  and  the  eucharist,  but  included 
also  the  baptismal  symbol,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen,  Cyril  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  other  fathers  make  a  distinction  between  lower  or 
elementary  (exoteric)  and  higher  or  deeper  (esoteric)  doctrines, 
and  state  that  the  latter  are  withheld  from  the  uninitiated  out 
of  reverence  and  to  avoid  giving  offence  to  the  weak  and  the 
heathen.  This  mysterious  reticence,  however,  does  not  justify 
the  inference  that  the  Secret  Discipline  included  transubstantia- 
tion,  purgatory,  and  other  Roman  dogmas  which  are  not  ex- 
pressly taught  in  the  writings  of  the  fathers.  The  argument 
from  silence  is  set  aside  by  positive  proof  to  the  contrary.2 
Modern  Roman  archaeologists  have  pressed  the  whole  symbolism 
of  the  Catacombs  into  the  service  of  the  Secret  Discipline,  but 
without  due  regard  to  the  age  of  those  symbolical  repre- 
sentations. 

The  origin  of  the  Secret  Discipline  has  been  traced  by  some  to 


1  Mfyrot,  im&ofc* 

2  The  learned  Jesuit  Emanuel  von  Schelstrate  first  used  this  argument  in 
Antiqwfas  tilustrafa  (Antv.  1678),  and  De  Disdplina,  Arcani  (Bom.  1685)  ;  but 
he  was  refuted  by  the  Lutheran  W.  Ernst  Tentzel,  in  his  Dissert  de  Disc. 
Arcani,  Lips-  1683  and  1692.  Tentzel,  Casaubon,  Bingham,  Bothe,  and  Zetz- 
schwitz  are  wrong,  however,  in  confining  the  Disc.  Art.  to  the  ritual  and  ex- 
cluding the  dogma.    See  especially  Cyril  of  Jerus.  Katech.  XVI.  26  j  XYHL 
32,  S3. 


1>3  \  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  apostolic  age,  ou  thu  ground  of  the  distinction  made  between 
"milk  for  babes "  and  *' strong  meat"  for  those  "of  full  age," 
and  between  speaking  to  "carnal"  and  to  "spiritual"  hearers.1 
But  this  distinction  has  no  reference  to  public  worship,  and 
Justin  Martyr,  in  hte  first  Apology,  addressed  to  a  heathen 
emperur,  describes  the  celebration  of  baptism  and  the  eucharist 
without  die  least  reserve.  Others  derive  the  institution  from  the 
sacerdotal  and  hierarchical  spirit  which  appeared  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  second  century,  and  which  no  doubt  favored  and 
strengthened  it;2  still  others,  from  the  Greek  and  Roman  mys- 
tery worship,  which  would  best  explain  many  expressions  and 
formulas,  together  with  all  sorts  of  unscriptural  pedantries  con- 
nected with  these  mysteries.3  Yet  the  first  motive  must  be  sought 
rather  in  an  opposition  to  heathenism ;  to  wit,  in  the  feeling  of  the 
necessity  of  guarding  the  sacred  transactions  of  Christianity,  the 
embodiment  of  its  deepest  truths,  against  profanation  in  the  midst 
of  a  hostile  world,  according  to  Matt.  7:6;  especially  when  after 
Hadrian,  perhaps  even  from  the  time  of  Nero,  those  transactions 
came  to  be  so  shamefully  misunderstood* and  slandered.  To  this 
must  be  added  a  proper  regard  for  modesty  and  decency  in  the 
administration  of  adult  baptism  by  immersion.  Finally — and 
this  is  the  chief  cause — the  institution  of  the  order  of  catechu- 
mens led  to  a  distinction  of  half-Christians  and  full-Christians, 
exoteric  and  esoteric,  and  this  distinction  gradually  became 

1  Heb.  5 : 12-14;  1  Cor.  3:  1,  2.    So  some  fathers  who  carry  the  Disc.  Arc,. 
back  to  the  Lord's  command,  Matt.  7 :  6,  and  in  recent  times  Credner  (1844), 
and  Wandinger  (in  the  new  ed.  of  Wetzer  and  Welte,  1. 1237).  St.  Paul,  1  Cor. 
14 :  23-25,  implies  the  presence  of  strangers  in  the  public  services,  but  not 
necessarily  during  the- communion. 

2  Bo  Bonwetsch,  Lc.,  versus  Eothe  and  Zetzchwitz. 

3  The  correspondence  is  very  apparent  in  the  ecclesiastical  use  of  such  terms 
as  uvorypiov,  eMolov,  pi'qaic,  pvarayQyeiv,  mdapaie,  refatoate,  Qvnc^g  (of  bap- 
tism), etc.    On  the  G-reek,  and  especially  the  Eleusinian  cultus  of  raysUries, 
com  p.  Lobeck,  Aglaophanus,  Konigsberg,  1829;  several  articles  of  Preller  in 
Pauly's   Rxdeneyklop.    der  Altertkumswissensehaft   III.  83  sqq.,  V.  311  sqq., 
Zetzschwitz,  I.  c.  156  sqq.,  and  Liibker's  Reattex.  des  class.  Atierthums,  5th  ed. 
by  Erler  (1877),  p.  762.    Lobeck  has  refuted  the  older  view  of  Warburton 
and  Creuzer,  that  a  secret  wisdom,  and  especially  the  traditions  of  a  primitive 
revelation,  were  propagated  in  the  Greek  mysteries. 


{  68.  CELEBRATION  OF  THE  EUCHARIST.  235 

established  in  the  liturgy.  The  secret  discipline  was  therefore 
a  temporary,  educational  and  liturgical  expedient  of  the  ante- 
Nicene  age.  The  catechurnenate  and  the  division  of  the  acts  of 
worship  grew  together  and  declined  together.  \Vith  the  disap- 
pearance of  adult  catechumens,  or  with  the  general  use  of  infant 
baptism  and  the  union  of  church  and  state,  disappeared  also  the 
secret  discipline  in  the  sixth  century:  " cessante  causa  cessat 
effedus" 

The  Eastern  church,  however,  has  retained  in  her  liturgies  to 
this  day  the  ancient  form  for  the  dismission  of  catechumens, 
the  special  prayers  for  them,  the  designation  of  the  sacraments 
as  "  mysteries,"  and  the  partial  celebration  of  the  mass  behind 
the  veil ;  though  she  also  has  for  centuries  had  no  catechumens 
in  the  old  sense  of  the  word,  that  is,  adult  heathen  or  Jewish 
disciples  preparing  for  baptism,  except  in  rare  cases  of  excep- 
tion, or  on  missionary  ground. 

§  68.  Celebration  of  the  Eucharist 

The  celebration  of  the  Eucharist  or  holy  communion  with 
appropriate  prayers  of  the  faithful  was  the  culmination  of  Chris- 
tian worship.1  Justin  Martyr  gives  us  the  following  descrip- 
tion, which  still  bespeaks  the  primitive  simplicity:2  "After  the 
prayers  [of  the  catechumen  worship]  we  greet  one  another  with 
the  brotherly  kiss.  Then  bread  and  a  cup  with  water  and  wine 
are  handed  to  the  president  (bishop)  of  the  brethren.  He  re- 
ceives them,  and  offers  praise,  glory,  and  thanks  to  the  Father 
of  all,  through  the  name  of  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  for 
these  his  gifts.  When  he  has  ended  the  prayers  and  thanks- 
giving, the  whole  congregation  responds :  '  Amen.'  For  c  Amen J 
in  the  Hebrew  tongue  means :  '  Be  it  so.'  Upon  this  the  dea- 
cons, as  we  call  them,  give  to  each  of  those  present  some  r  *  the 
blessed  bread,3  and  of  the  wine  mingled  with  water,  and  carry 
it  to  the  absent  in  their  dwellings.  This  food  is  called  'Vrith  us 

1  Names :  evxaptariaj  Kotvurvia,  ewharfetia,  communio,  commuiiicatio,  etc. 
*  Apol  I.  c.  65,  66. 


23  D  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  euckaristy  of  which  none  can  partake,  but  the  believing  and 
baptized,  who  live  according  to  the  commands  of  Christ.  For 
we  use  these  not  as  common  bread  and  common  drink ;  but  like 
as  Jesus  Christ  our  Eedeemer  was  made  flesh  through  the  word 
of  God,  and  took  upon  him  flesh  and  blood  for  our  redemption ; 
so  we  are  taught,  that  the  nourishment  blessed  by  the  word  of 
prayer,  by  which  our  flesh  and  blood  are  nourished  by  trans- 
formation (assimilation),  is  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  incarnate 
Jesus." 

Then  he  relates  the  institution  from  the  Gospels,  and  men- 
tions the  customary  collections  for  the  poor. 

We  are  not  warranted  in  carrying  back  to  this  period  the  full 
liturgical  service,  which  we  find  prevailing  with  striking  unifor- 
mity in  essentials,  though  with  many  variations  in  minor  points, 
in  all  quarters  of  the  church  in  the  Nicene  age.  A  certain  sim- 
plicity and  freedom  characterized  the  period  before  us.  Even 
the  so-called  Clementine  liturgy,  in  the  eighth  book  of  the 
pseudo-Apostolical  Constitutions,  was  probably  not  composed 
and  written  out  in  this  form  before  the  fourth  century.  There  is 
no  trace  of  written  liturgies  during  the  Diocletian  persecution.  But 
the  germs  date  from  the  second  century.  The  oldest  eucharistic 
prayers  have  recently  come  to  light  in  the  Didache,  which 
contains  three  thanksgivings  for  the  cup,  the  broken  bread, 
and  for  all  mercies,  (chs.  9  and  10.) 

From  scattered  statements  of  the  ante-Nicene  fathers  we  may 
gather  the  following  view  of  the  eucharistic  service  as  it  may 
have  stood  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  if  not  earlier. 

The  communion  was  a  regular  and  the  most  solemn  part  of 
the  Sunday  worship;  or  it  was  the  worship  of  God  in  the 
stricter  sense,  in  which  none  but  full  members  of  the  church 
could  engage.  In  many  places  and  by  many  Christians- it  was 
celebrated  even  daily,  after  apostolic  precedent,  and  according  to 
the  very  common  mystical  interpretation  of  the  fourth  petition 
of  the  Lord's  prayer.1  The  service  began,  after  the  dismission  of 

1  CJyprian  speaks  of  daily  sacrifices.    Ep.  54:  "Sacerdotes  qui  sacrifice  Dei 
ftotidie  cdfaamw:*    So  Ambrose,  Ep.  14  ad  MarceU.,  and  the  oldest  liturgio*! 


2  68.  CELEBBATION  OF  THE  EUCHAEIST.  237 

the  catechumens,  with  the  kiss  of  peace,  given  by  the  men  to 
men,  and  by  the  women  to  women,  in  token  of  mutual  recogni- 
tion as  members  of  one  redeemed  family  in  the  midst  of  a 
heartless  and  loveless  world.  It  was  based  upon  apostolic 
precedent,  and  is  characteristic  of  the  childlike  simplicity,  and 
love  and  joy  of  the  early  Christians.1  The  service  proper  con- 
sisted of  two  principal  acts :  the  oblation?  or  presenting  of  the 
offerings  of  the  congregation  by  the  deacons  for  the  ordinance 
itself,  and  for  the  benefit  of  the  clergy  and  the  poor;  and  the 
communion,  or  partaking  of  the  consecrated  elements.  In  the 
oblation  the  congregation  at  the  same  time  presented  itself  as  a 
living  thank-offering ;  as  in  the  communion  it  appropriated  anew 
in  faith  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  and  united  itself  anew  with  its 
Head.  Both  acts  were  accompanied  and  consecrated  by  prayer 
and  songs  of  praise. 

In  the  prayers  we  must  distinguish,  first,  the  general  thanks- 
giving (the  eucharist  in  the  strictest  sense  of  the  word)  for  all 
the  natural  and  spiritual  gifts  of  God,  commonly  ending  with 
the  seraphic  hymn,  Isa.  6:3;  secondly,  the  prayer  of  consecra- 
tion, or  the  invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit3  upon  the  people  and 

works.  But  that  the  observance  was  various,  is  certified  by  Augustin,  among 
others.  Ep.  118  ad  Janucvr.  c.  2 :  '*  Alii  quotidie  communicant  corpori  et  sanguini 
Dominico;  alii  certis  dubus  accipiunt;  alibi  nuttus  dies  intermitttiur  quo  non 
offeratur;  alibi  sabbato  tantum  et  dominico;  alibi  tantum  dominico."  St.  Basil 
says  (Ep.  289) :  tl  We  commune  four  times  in  the  week,  on  the  Lord's  Day, 
the  fourth  day,  the  preparation  day  [Friday],  and  the  Sabbath."  Chrysostom 
complains  of  the  small  number  of  communicants  at  the  daily  sacrifice. 

1  Bom.  16:16;  1  Cor.  16:20;  2  Cor.  13:12;  1  Thess.  5 :  26 ;  !Pet5:14. 
The  Kiss  of  Peace  continued  in  the  Latin  church  till  the  end  of  the  thirteenth 
century,  and  was  then  transferred  to  the  close  of  the  service  or  exchanged  for 
a  mere  form  of  words :  Pax  tibi  et  ecclesice.    In  the  Eussian  church  the  clergy 
kiss  each  other  during  the  recital  of  the  Nicehe  Creed  to  show  the  nominal 
union  of  orthodoxy  and  charity  (so  often  divided).    In  the  Coptic  church  the 
primitive  custom  is  still  in  force,  and  in  some  small  Protestant  sects  it  has  been 
revived. 

2  Hpoc<f>opdt 

3  'Efl-j'/cyUpcnf  rov  Hv.  'Ay.    Irenseus  derives  this  inwcatio  Spiritus  S.,  as  well  as 
the  oblation  and  the  thanksgiving,  from  apostolic  instruction.    See  the  2nd 
fragment,  in  Stieren,  I.  854.    It  appears  in  all  the  Greek  liturgies.    In  the 
Liturgia,  Jacobi  it  reads  thus :  Kal  If aK6<rretkn>  £$'  i}/iof  *al  M  ra 


238  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  elements,  usually  accompanied  by  the  recital  of  the  words 
of  institution  and  the  Lord's  Prayer;  and  finally,  the  general 
intercessions  for  all  classes,  especially  for  the  believers,  on  the 
ground  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  on  the  cross  for  the  salvation 
of  the  world.  The  length  and  order  of  the  prayers,  however, 
were  not  uniform  ;  nor  the  position  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  which 
sometimes  took  the  place  of  the  prayer  of  consecration,  being 
reserved  for  the  prominent  part  of  the  service.  Pope  Gregory 
I.  says  that  it  "  was  the  custom  of  the  Apostles  to  consecrate 
the  oblation  only  by  the  Lord's  Prayer."  The  congregation 
responded  from  time  to  time,  according  to  the  ancient  Jewish 
and  the  apostolic  usage,  with  an  audible  "Amen,"  or  "Kyrie 
eleison/"  The  "  Sursum  corda,"  also,  as  an  incitement  to  devo- 
tion, with  the  response,  "Habernus  ad  Dominum,"  appears  at 
least  as  early  as  Cyprian's  time,  who  expressly  alludes  to  it,  and 
in  all  the  ancient  liturgies.  The  prayers  were  spoken,  not  read 
from  a  book.  But  extemporaneous  prayer  naturally  assumes  a 
fixed  form  by  constant  repetition. 

The  elements  were  common  or  leavened  bread1  (except  among 
the  Ebionites,  who,  like  the  later  Roman  church  from  the 
seventh  century,  used  unleavened  bread),  and  wine  mingled 
with  water.  This  mixing  was  a  general  custom  in  antiquity, 
but  came  now  to  have  various  mystical  meanings  attached  to  it. 
The  elements  were  placed  in  the  hands  (not  in  the  mouth)  of 
each  communicant  by  the  clergy  who  were  present,  or,  according 
to  Justin,  by  the  deacons  alone,  amid  singing  of  psalms  by  the 
congregation  (Psalm  34),  with  the  words:  "The  body  of 
Christ;"  "The  blood  of  Christ,  the  cup  of  life;"  to  each  of 


ravra  rb  Hvsvftd  aov  rb  vrava-ytov,  TO  Kvpiov  /cat  Zuoxotfiv  .  .  .  Iva  .  .  . 
KOL  KoifysTf  rbv  fih  aprov  TOVTOV  a&pa  ayurv  rov  Xpicrov  aw,  KOI  rb  Trorfptov  TOVTO 
aiua  Ti/iiov  rov  Xp.  cov,  ha  ywrpai  Tram  roig  kt;  avr&v  fJLera^/i^dvovffLV  sl$  &<f>sati> 
L  £t£  $wjv  altiviov,  etg  dyiaapbv  ipvx&v  Kal  au/idrcw,  elf 


<5/>rof,  says  Justin,  while  in  view  of  its  sacred  import  he  calls  it  also 
uncommon  bread  and  drink.  The  use  of  leavened  or  unleavened  bread 
became  afterwards,  as  is  well  known,  a  point  of  controversj  between  the  Koman 
and  Greek  churches. 


2  68.  CELEBRATION  OF  THE  EUCHARIST.  239 

which  the  recipient  responded  "  Amen."  l  The  -whole  congre- 
gation thus  received  the  elements,  standing  in  the  act.2  Thanks- 
giving and  benediction  concluded  the  celebration. 

After  the  public  service  the  deacons  carried  the  consecrated 
elements  to  the  sick  and  to  the  confessors  in  prison.  Many  took 
portions  of  the  bread  home  mth  them,  to  use  in  the  family  at 
morning  prayeir.  This  domestic  communion  was  practised  par-* 
ticularly  in  North  Africa,,  and  furnishes  the  first  example  of  a 
commmio  sub  una  specie.  In  the  same  country,  in  Cyprian's 
time,  we  find  the  custom  of  infant  communion  (administered 
with  wine  alone),  which  was  justified  from  John  6  :  53,  and  has 
continued  in  the  Greek  (and  Russian)  church  to  this  day,  though 
irreconcilable  with  the  apostle's  requisition  of  a  preparatory  ex- 
amination (1  Cor.  11  :  28). 

At  first  the  communion  was  joined  with  a  LOVE  FEAST,  and 
was  then  celebrated  in  the  evening,  in  memory  of  the  last 
supper  of  Jesus  with  his  disciples.  But  so  early  iis  the  begin- 
ning of  the  second  century  these  two  exercises  were  separated, 
and  the  communion  was  placed  in  the  morning,  the  love  feast 
in  the  evening,  except  on  certain  days  of  special  observance.3 


simplest  form  of  distribution,  "Zaua  "Zp'orovf  and  "Akc  Xp., 
icorfptov  £6)370,"  occurs  in  the  Clementine  liturgy  of  the  Apostolic  G  'imitations, 
YHL  13j  and  seems  to  be  the  oldest.  The  Didache  gives  no  ibrin  ox  distribution. 
1  The  standing  posture  of  the  congregation  during  the  principal  prayers, 
and  in  the  communion  itself,  seems  to  have  been  at  first  universal.  For  this 
was,  indeed,  the  custom  always  on  the  day  of  the  resurrection  in  distinction 
from  Friday  ("stantes  oramus,  quod  est  signum  resurrectionis"  says  Augiistinl  ; 
besides,  the  communion  was,  in  the  highest  sense,  a  ceremony  of  festivity  and 
joy  ;  and  finally,  Justin  expressly  observes:  "  Then  we  all  stand  up  to  prayer." 
After  the  twelfth  century,  kneeling  in  receiving  the  elements  became  general, 
and  passed  from  the  Catholic  church  into  the  Lutheran  and  Anglican,  while 
most  of  the  Reformed  churches  returned  to  the  original  custom  of  standing. 
Sitting  in  the  communion  was  first  introduced  after  the  Reformation  by  the 
Presbyterian  church  of  Scotland,  and  is  very  common  in  the  United  States. 
the  deacons  or  elders  handing  the  bread  and  cup  to  the  communicants  in  theii 
pews.  A  curious  circumstance  is  the  sitting  posture  of  the  Pope  in  the  com- 
munion, which  Dean  Stanley  regards  as  a  relic  of  the  reclining  or  recumbent 
posture  of  the  primitive  disciples.  See  his  Ckrkt.  Instit.  p.  250  sqq. 

8  On    Maundy-Thursday,  according  to  Augustin's    testimony,  the    com- 
munion continued  to  be  celebrated  in  the  evening,  "tanqwm  ad  in&igniarm 


240  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Tertullian  gives  a  detailed  description  of  the  Agape  in  re- 
futation of  the  shameless  calumnies  of  the  heathens.1  But  the 
growth  of  the  churches  and  the  rise  of  manifold  abuses  led  to 
the  gradual  disuse,  and  in  the  fourth  century  even  to  the  formal 
prohibition  of  the  Agape,  which  belonged  in  fact  only  to  the 
childhood  and  first  love  of  the  church.  It  was  a  family  feast, 
where  rich  and  poor,  master  and  slave  met  on  the  same  footing, 
partaking  of  a  simple  meal,  hearing  reports  from  distant  con- 
gregations, contributing  to  the  necessities  of  suffering  brethren, 
and  encouraging  each  other  in  their  daily  duties  and  trials. 
Augustin  describes  his  mother  Monica  as  going  to  these  feasts 
with  a  basket  full  of  provisions  and  distributing  them. 

The  communion  service  has  undergone  many  changes  in  the 
course  of  time,  but  still  substantially  survives  with  all  its  primi- 
tive vitality  and  solemnity  in  all  churches  of  Christendom, — a  per- 
petual memorial  of  Chrisfs  atoning  sacrifice  and  saving  love  to 
the  human  race.  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  are  institutions 
which  proclaim  from  day  to  day  the  historic  Christ,  and  can  never 
be  superseded  by  contrivances  of  human  ingenuity  and  wisdom. 

commemorationem."  So  on  high  feasts,  as  Christinas  night,  Epiphany,  and 
Easter  Eve,  and  in  fasting  seasons.  See  Ambrose,  Sewn.  viii.  in  Ps.  118. 

J  Apd.  c.  39 :  "  About  the  modest  supper-room  of  the  Christians  alone  a 
great  ado  is  made.  Our  feast  explains  itself  by  its  name.  The  Greeks  call  it 
love-  Whatever  it  costs,  our  outlay  in  the  name  of  piety  is  gain,  since  with 
the  good  things  of  the  feast  we  benefit  the  needy,  not  as  it  is  with  you,  do 
parasites  aspire  to  the  glory  of  satisfying  their  licentious  propensities,  selling 
themselves  for  a  belly-feast  to  all  disgraceful  treatment — but  as  it  is  with  God 
himself,  a  peculiar  respect  is  shown  to  the  lowly.  If  the  object  of  our  feast 
be  good,  in  the  light  of  that  consider  its  further  regulations.  As  it  is  an  act 
of  religious  service,  it  permits  no  vileness  or  immodesty.  The  participants, 
before  reclining,  taste  first  of  prayer  to  God.  As  much  is  eaten  as  satisfies  the 
cravings  of  hunger;  as  much  is  drunk  as  befits  the  chaste.  They  say  it  is 
enough,  as  those  who  remember  that  even  during  the  night  they  have  to  wor- 
ship God ;  they  talk  as  those  who  know  that  the  Lord  is  one  of  their  auditors. 
After  the  washing  of  hands  and  the  bringing  in  of  lights,  each  is  asked  to 
stand  forth  and  sing,  as  he  can,  a  hymn  to  God,  either  one  from  the  holy 
Scriptures  or  one  of  his  own  composing — a  proof  of  the  measure  of  our  drink- 
ing. As  the  feast  commenced  with  prayer,  so  with  prayer  it  closed.  We  go 
from  it,  not  like  troops  of  mischief-doers,  nor  bands  of  roamers,  nor  to  break 
out  into  licentious  acts,  but  to  have  as  much  care  of  our  modesty  and  chastity 
as  if  we  had  been  at  a  school  of  virtue  rather  t&an,  a  banquet"  (Transl^tioij 
from  the  "  Ante-Mcene  Library  >;J. 


§69.  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  EUCHAKIST.  241 

§  69.  Tlie  Doctrine  of  the  Eucharist. 

Literature.  See  the  works  quoted,  vol.  I.  472,  by  WATEEI«AST>  (Episc. 
d.  1740),  D8LLI2TGBE  (R.  Oath.,  1826;  since  1870  Old  Oath.), 
EBRARD  (Calvinistic,  1845],  XEYIX  (Calvinistic,  1846),  KAHSTS 
(Luth.  1851,  but  changed  his  view  in  his  Dogmatik],  E.  B.  FUSJSY 
(high  Anglic.,  1855),  KUCKEBT  (Rationalistic,  1856),  VOGAX  (high 
Anglic.,  1871),  HARRISON  (Evang.  Angl,  1871),  STANLEY  (Broad 
Church  Episc.,  1881),  GrUDE  (Lutheran,  1887). 

On  the  Eucharistic  doctrine  of  Ignatius,  Justin,  Irenseus,  and  Tertullian, 
there  are  also  special  treatises  by  THIERSCH  (1841),  SEMISCH  (1842), 
ENGELHARDT  (1842),  BAUR  (1839  and  1857),  STEITZ  (1864),  and 
others, 

H6FLING :  Die  Lehre  der  altesten  Kirche  vom  Opfer  im  Leben  und  Callus  der 
Christen.  Erlangen,  1851. 

Dean  STANLEY :  The  Eucharistic  Sacrifice.  In  "  Christian  Institutions" 
(N.  Y.  1881)  p.  73  sqq. 

The  doctrine  concerning  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper, 
not  coming  into  special  discussion,  remained  indefinite  and 
obscure.  The  ancient  church  made  more  account  of  the  worthy 
participation  of  the  ordinance  than  of  the  logical  apprehension 
of  it.  She  looked  upon  it  as  the  holiest  mystery  of  the  Chris- 
tian worship,  and  accordingly  celebrated  it  with  the  deepest 
devotion,  without  inquiring  into  the  mode  of  Christ's  presence, 
nor  into  the  relation  of  the  sensible  signs  to  his  flesh  and  blood. 
It  is  unhistorical  to  carry  any  of  the  later  theories  back  into 
this  age ;  although  it  has  been  done  frequently  in  the  apologetic 
and  polemic  discussion  of  this  subject. 

I.  THE  EUCHAKIST  AS  A  SACRAMENT. 

The  Didache  of  the  Apostles  contains  eucharistic  prayers,  but 
no  theory  of  the  eucharist.  Ignatius  speaks  of  this  sacrament 
in  two  passages,  only  by  way  of  allusion,  but  in  very  strong, 
mystical  terms,  calling  it  the  flesh  of  our  crucified  and  risen 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  consecrated  bread  a  medicine  of 
immortaliiy  and  an  antidote  of  spiritual  death.1  This  view, 

1  Ad  Smyrn.  c.  7 ;  against  the  Bocetists,  who  deny  rvjv  ev%apioriav  a&pm  eivac 
rov  aarijpQg  jfJL&w  'I.  Xp.,  K.  r.  A. ;  and  Ad  Ephes*  c.  20 :  nOg  (sc.  dprof )  &mv 
tiavaaiac,  avridoros  rov  [i%  airodavelv,  d^,Ad  £igv  ev  'Ijycrov  Xp*ory  did 
Both  passages  axe  wanting  in  the  Syriac  version.    Bat  the  fort  if 
Vol.  II.    16. 


212  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

closely  connected  with  his  high-churchly  tendency  in  general, 
no  doubt  involves  belief  in  the  real  presence,  and  ascribes  to 
the  holy  Supper  an  effect  on  spirit  and  body  at  once,  with 
reference  to  the  future  resurrection,  but  is  still  somewhat  ob- 
scure, and  rather  an  expression  of  elevated  feeling,  than  a  logical 
definition. 

The  same  may  be  said  of  Justin  Martyr,  when  he  compares 
the  descent  of  Christ  into  the  consecrated  elements  to  his  incar- 
nation for  our  redemption.1 

Irenseus  says  repeatedly,  in  combating  the  Gnostic  Docetism,2 
that  bread  and  wine  in  the  sacrament  become,  by  the  presence 
of  the  Word  of  God,  and  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ,  and  that  the  receiving  of  them 
strengthens  soul  and  body  (the  germ  of  the  resurrection  body) 
unto  eternal  life.  Yet  this  would  hardly  warrant  our  ascribing 
either  transubstantiation  or  consubstantiation  to  Ireneeus.  For 
in  another  place  he  calls  the  bread  and  wine,  after  consecration, 
"antitypes,"  implying  the  continued  distinction  of  their  sub- 
stance from  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.3  This  expression  in 
itself,  indeed,  might  be  understood  as  merely  contrasting  here 
the  Supper,  as  the  substance,  with  the  Old  Testament  passover, 
its  type;  as  Peter  calls  baptism  the  antitype  of  the  saving 

cited  by  Theodoret,  Dial.  HI.  p.  231,  and  must  therefore  have  been  known 
even  in  the  Syrian  church  in  his  time. 

1  Apol.  I.  66  (1. 182,  third  ed.  of  Otto).    Here  also  occurs  already  the  term 
fteraj3o%ij,  which  some  Roman  controversialists  use  at  once  as  an  argument  for 
transubstantiation.    Justin  says:    'Ef  fo  (i.  e.  Tpoffiq)  atya  KOI  capKsg  Kara 
perapoMfr  rpi^avrat  ^wv,  ex  quo  alim&ito  sanguis  et  carries  nostra  per  mutatwn&n 
aluntur.    But  according  to  the  context,  this  denotes  by  no  means  a  transmu- 
tation of  the  elements,  but  either  the  assimilation  of  them  to  the  body  of  the 
receiver,  or  the  operation  of  them  upon  the  body,  with  reference  to  the  future 
resurrection.    Comp.  John  6:  54  sqq,,  and  like  passages  in  Ignatius  and 
Irenseus. 

2  Adv.  Jusr.  IV.  18,  and  passim. 

8  In  the  second  of  the  Fragments  discovered  by  Pfaff  (Opp.  Iren.  ed.  Stieren, 
vol.  L  p.  855),  which  Mafiei  and  other  Roman  divines  have  unwarrantably 
declared  spurious.  It  is  there  said  that  the  Christians,  after  the  offering  of  the 
eucharistic  sacrifice,  call  upon  the  Holy  Ghost,  STTO^  a7ro<$vy  r%v  tivaiav  ravnjv 
col  TOV  aprov  aQpa  TOV  Xpurrov,  Kal  rb  irorqptov  TO  alpa  TOV  Xp.,  Iva  ol  v.ETa%afi6vre( 
vvruv  T&V  avrirvTruv,  rfjs  affoeue  i&w  fyapriuv  nal  rfc  fujJG  aluviov 


?  69.  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  EUCHARIST.  243 

water  of  the  flood.1  But  the  connection,  and  the  i&sus  loqwndi 
of  the  earlier  Greek  fathers,  require  us  to  take  the  term  antitype 
in  the  sense  of  type,  or,  more  precisely,  as  the  antithesis  of 
archetype.  The  bread  and  wine  represent  and  exhibit  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ  as  the  archetype,  and  correspond  to  them, 
as  a  copy  to  the  original.  In  exactly  the  same  sense  it  is  said 
in  Heb.  9 :  24 — comp.  8 :  5 — that  the  earthly  sanctuary  is  the 
antitype,  that  is  the  copy,  of  the  heavenly  archetype.  Other 
Greek  fathers  also,  down  to  the  fifth  century,  and  especially  the 
author  of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions,  call  the  consecrated 
elements  "antitypes"  (sometimes,  like  Theodoretus,  "types") 
of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.2 

A  different  view,  approaching  nearer  the  Calvinistie  or  Re- 
formed, we  meet  with  among  the  African  fathers.  Tertullian 
makes  the  words  of  institution :  HOG  est  corpus  meum,  equiva- 
lent to :  figura  corpora  mei,  to  prove,  in  opposition  to  Marcion's 
docetism,  the  reality  of  the  body  of  Jesus — a  mere  phantom 
being  capable  of  no  emblematic  representation.3  This  involves, 
at  all  events,  an  essential  distinction  between  the  consecrated 
elements  and  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  Supper.  Yet 
Tertullian  must  not  be  understood  as  teaching  a  m&rdy  sym- 
bolical presence  of  Christ;  for  in  other  places  he  speaks,  accord- 
ing to  his  general  realistic  turn,  in  almost  materialistic  language 
of  an  eating  of  the  body  of  Christ,  and  extends  the  participa- 
tion even  to  the  body  of  the  receiver.4  Cyprian  likewise  ap- 

UPet.  3:  20,21. 

2  Const  Apost.  1.  V.  c.  14 :     Ta  avrirvRa  [tverffpta  TOV  TIU'LOV  o&fusrot^  avrcrv 
KOI  alparos.    So  VI.  30,  and  in  a  eucharistie  prayer,  VTL  25.    Other  passages 
of  the  Greek  fathers  see  in  Stieren,  1.  c.  p.  884  sq.    Comp.  also  Bleek's  learned 
remarks  in  his  large  Com,  on  Heb.  8 :  5,  and  9 :  24. 

3  Adv.  Marc.  IV.  40 ;  and  likewise  ILL  19.    This  interpretation  is  plainly 
very  near  that  of  (Ecolampadius,  who  pats  the  figure  in  the  predicate,  and  who 
attached  no  small  weight  to  Tertullian's  authority.    But  the  Zwinglian  view, 
which  puts  the  figure  in  the  eon,  instead  of  the  predicate,  appears  also  in  Ter- 
tullian, Adv.  Marc.  I.  H  *n  tne  ^ords:   "  Pcmem  qui  ipsum  corpus  suum  rep- 
rcesentat"    The  two  interpretations  are  only  grammatical  modifications  of  the 
same  symbolical  theory. 

*  De  ResiLT.  Camis,  c.  8.    *'  Caro  corpore  et  sanguine  Chrish  vescitur,  ut  et  anima 
fe  Deo  saginetur"    De  Pudic.  c.  9,  he  refers  the  fatted  calf;  in  the  parable  of 


SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

pears  to  favor  a  symbolical  interpretation  of  the  words  of  insti- 
tution, yet  not  so  clearly.  The  idea  of  the  real  presence  would 
have  much  better  suited  his  sacerdotal  conception  of  the  ministry. 
In  the  customary  mixing  of  the  wine  with  water  he  sees  a  type 
of  the  union  of  Christ  with  his  church,1  and,  on  the  authority 
of  John  6 :  53,  holds  the  communion  of  the  Supper  indispensa- 
ble to  salvation.  The  idea  of  a  sacrifice  comes  out  very  boldly 
in  Cyprian. 

The  Alexandrians  are  here,  as  usual,  decidedly  spiritualistic. 
Clement  twice  expressly  calls  the  wine  a  symbol  or  an  allegory 
of  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  says,  that  the  communicant  receives 
not  the  physical,  but  the  spiritual  blood,  the  life,  of  'Christ ;  as, 
indeed,  the  blood  is  the  life  of  the  body.  Origen  distinguishes 
still  more  definitely  the  earthly  elements  from  the  heavenly 
bread  of  life,  and  makes  it  the  whole  design  of  the  supper  to 
feed  the  soul  with  the  divine  word.2  Applying  his  unsound 
allegorical  method  here,  he  makes  the  bread  represent  the  Old 
Testament,  the  wine  the  New,  and  the  breaking  of  the  bread 
the  multiplication  of  the  divine  word !  But  these  were  rather 
private  views  for  the  initiated,  and  can  hardly  be  taken  as  pre- 
senting the  doctrine  of  the  Alexandrian  church. 

We  have,  therefore,  among  the  ante-Nicene  fathers,  three  dif- 

the  prodigal  son,  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  says :  "  Opimitate  Dominid  corporis 
vesctiw,  eucharistia  scilicet."  De  Orat.  c.  6 :  "  Quod  et  corpus  Ohristi  in  pane  cense- 
tw"  which  should  probably  be  translated :  is  to  be  understood  by  the  bread 
(not  contained  in  the  bread). 

1  For  this  reason  he  considers  the  mixing  essential.    Epist.  63  (ed.  Bal.)  c. 
13:  ''Sivinum  fantum  quis  o/erat,  sanguis  Christi  incipit  esse  sine  nobis;  si  vero 
aqw  sit  sola,  plebs  incipit  esse  sine  Christo.    Quando  autem  utrumque  miscetur  et 
adumtione  confusa  sibi  invicem  copulatur,  tune  sacramentum  spirituale  et  codeste 
perfieitur." 

2  Comment,  ser.  in  Mm.  c.  85  (HI-  898):   "Pants  iste,  quern  Deus  Verbtm 
[Logos]  corpus  suum  esse  fatetur,  verbum  est  nutritorium  animarum,  verbum  de 
Deo  Verbo  procedens}  et  panis  de  pani  ccelesti.   ....  Non  enim  panem  ilium  visi- 
btiem,  quern  tenebat  in  manibus,  corpus  suum  dicebat  Deus  Verbum,  sed  verbum,  in 
cuius  mysterio  fuerat  panis  tile  frangendus"    Then  the  same  of  the  wine. 
Origen  evidently  goes  no  higher  than  the  Zwinglian  theory,  while  Clement 
approaches  the  Calvinistic  view  of  a  spiritual  real  fruition  of  Ohrisf  s  life  in 
the  eucharist 


I  69.  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  EQCHAEIST.  245 

ferent  views,  an  Oriental,  a  North-  African,  and  an  Alexandrian. 
The  first  view,  that  of  Ignatius  and  Irenaeus,  agrees  most  nearly 
with  the  mystical  character  of  the  celebration  of  the  eucharist, 
and  with  the  catholicizing  features  of  the  age. 

2.  THE  EUCHARIST  AS  A  SACRIFICE. 

This  point  is  very  important  in  relation  to  the  doctrine,  and 
still  more  important  in  relation  to  the  cultus  and  life,  of  the 
ancient  church.  The  Lord's  Supper  was  universally  regarded 
not  only  as  a  sacrament,  but  also  as  a  sacrifice,1  the  true  and 
eternal  sacrifice  of  the  new  covenant,  superseding  all  the  pro- 
visional and  typical  sacrifices  of  the  old;  taking  the  place 
particularly  of  the  passover,  or  the  feast  of  the  typical  redemp- 
tion 'from  Egypt.  This  eucharistic  sacrifice,  however,  the  ante- 
Nicene  fathers  conceived  not  as  an  unbloody  repetition  of  the 
atoning  sacrifice  of  Christ  on  the  cross,  but  simply  as  a  com- 
memoration and  renewed  appropriation  of  that  atonement,  and, 
above  all,  a  thank-offering  of  the  whole  church  for  all  the 
favors  of  God  in  creation  and  redemption.  Hence  the  current 
name  itself  —  eucharist;  which  denoted  in  the  first  place  the 
prayer  of  thanksgiving,  but  afterwards  the  whole  rite.2 

The  consecrated  elements  were  regarded  in  a  twofold  light,  as 
representing  at  once  the  natural  and  the  spiritual  gifts  of  God, 
which  culminated  in  the  self-sacrifice  of  Christ  on  the  cross. 
Hence  the  eucharistic  prayer,  like  that  connected  with  the  typical 
passover,  related  at  the  same  time  to  creation  and  redemption, 
which  were  the  more  closely  joined  in  the  mind  of  the  church 
for  their  dualistic  separation  by  the  Gnostics.  The  earthly  gifts 
of  bread  and  wine  were  taken  as  types  and  pledges  of  the 
heavenly  gifts  of  the  same  God,  who  has  both  created  and 
redeemed  the  world. 

Upon  this  followed  the  idea  of  the  self-sacrifice  of  the  wor- 
shipper himself,  the  sacrifice  of  renewed  self-consecration  to 


,  ftvaia,  oblatw,  sam/wmm. 
2  So  among  the  Jews  the  cup  of  wine  at  the  paschal  supper  was  called  "  the 
cup  of  blessing/'  norfpiov  eMoym?  =  ei^apitrn'af  ,  comp.  1  Cor.  10  :  16. 


246  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

Christ  in  return  for  his  sacrifice  on  the  cross,  and  also  the 
sacrifice  of  charity  to  the  poor.  Down  to  the  twelfth  and 
thirteenth  centuries  the  eucharistic  elements  were  presented  as  a 
thank-offering  by  the  members  of  the  congregation  themselves, 
and  the  remnants  went  to  the  clergy  and  the  poor.  In  these 
gifts  the  people  yielded  themselves  as  a  priestly  race  and  a 
living  thank-offering  to  God,  to  whom  they  owed  all  the 
blessings  alike  of  providence  and  of  grace.  In  later  times  the 
priest  alone  offered  the  sacrifice.  But  even  the  Eoman  Missal 
retains  a  recollection  of  the  ancient  custom  in  the  plural  form, 
"  We  offer/'  and  in  the  sentence :  "  All  you,  both  brethren  and 
sisters,  pray  that  my  sacrifice  and  your  sacrifice,  which  is  equally  . 
yours  as  well  as  mine,  may  be  meat  for  the  Lord." 

This  subjective  offering  of  the  whole  congregation  on  the 
ground  of  the  objective  atoning  sacrifice  of  Christ  is  the  real 
centre  of  the  ancient  Christian  worship,  and  particularly  of  the 
communion.  It  thus  differed  both  from  the  later  Catholic  mass, 
which  has  changed  the  thank-offering  into  a  sin-offering,  the 
congregational  offering  into  a  priest  offering;  and  from  the  com- 
mon Protestant  cultus,  which,  in  opposition  to  the  Eoman  mass, 
has  almost  entirely  banished  the  idea  of  sacrifice  from  the  cele- 
bration of  the  Lord's  Supper,  except  in  the  customary  offerings 
for  the  poor. 

The  writers  of  the  second  century  keep  strictly  within  the 
limits  of  the  notion  of  a  congregational  rfAafti-offering.  Thus 
Justin  says  expressly,  prayers  and  thanksgivings  alone  are  the 
true  and  acceptable  sacrifices,  which  the  Christians  offer.  Irenseus 
has  been  brought  as  a  witness  for  the  Eoman  doctrine,  only 
on  the  ground  of  a  false  reading.1  The  African  fathers,  in  the 
third  century,  v/ho  elsewhere  incline  to  the  symbolical  interpre- 
tation of  the  words  of  institution,  are  the  first  to  approach  on 

i  Adv.  Har.  IV.  c.  18,  §  4:  "  Verbum  [the  Logos]  quod  offvrtwr  Deo;"  instead 
of  which  should  be  read,  according  to  other  manuscripts:  "Verbum  per  quod 
o/erfur/'— which  suits  the  connexion  much  better.  Comp.  IV.  17,  g  6:  "Per 
«7as.  Christum  o/ert  eccksia."  Stieren  reads  "  Verbum  qwd"  but  refers  it  not 
to  Christ,  but  to  the  word  of  the  prayer.  The  passage  is,  at  all  eventg,  too 
nbscure  and  too  isolated  to  build  a  dogma  upon. 


?  70.    THE  CELEBRATION  OF  BAPTISM.  247 

this  point  the  later  Eoman  Catholic  idea  of  a  sin-offering; 
especially  Cyprian,  the  steadfast  advocate  of  priesthood  and  of 
episcopal  authority.1  The  ideas  of  priesthood,  sacrifice,  and 
altar,  are  intimately  connected,  and  a  Judaizing  or  paganizing 
conception  of  one  must  extend  to  all. 

§  70.     The  Celebration  of  Baptim,. 

The  Lit.  see  in  vol.  I.  ?  54,  p.  465  sq.,  especially  WALL  and  HOFLTSG. 
On  the  archaeology  of  baptism  see  BIXGHAM'S  Antiquities,  Arausri's 
Denkwurdigkeiten,  the  first  voL  of  BrxTEBnr,  and  the  art.  Baptism  in 
SMITH  and  CHEETHAM,  1. 155-172.  Also  SCHAFF,  on  the  Didaehe  (1885), 
p.  29-56.  For  pictorial  illustrations  see  the  monumental  works  of  Cav. 
DE  Rossi,  GABEUCCI,  KOLLEE,  on  the  catacombs,  and  SCHAPF,  I  c. 

The  "Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles"  (ch.  7,)  enjoins 
baptism,  after  chatechetical  instruction,  in  these  words:  "Baptize 
into  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  living  (running)  water.  But  if  thou  hast  not  living 
water,  baptize  into  other  water ;  and  if  thou  canst  not  in  cold, 
then  in  warm.  But  if  thou  hast  neither,  pour  (sx^so^  water 
upon  the  head  thrice,  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Ghost." 

Justin  Martyr  gives  the  following  account  of  baptism:2 
"  Those  who  are  convinced  of  the  truth  of  our  doctrine,  and 
have  promised  to  live  according  to  it,  are  exhorted  to  prayer, 
fasting  and  repentance  for  past  sins;  we  praying  and  fasting 
with  them.  Then  they  are  led  by  us  to  a  place  where  is  water, 
and  in  this  way  they  are  regenerated,  as  we  also  have  been  regen- 
erated ;  that  is,  they  receive  the  water-bath  in  the  name  of  God, 
the  Father  and  Ruler  of  all,  and  of  our  Eedeemer  Jesus  Christ, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  For  Christ  says :  Except  ye  be  born 
again,  ye  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  (John  3 :  5.) 
Thus,  from  children  of  necessity  and  ignorance,  we  become 

1  Epist.  63  ad  Ccecil.  c.  14:  "Si  Jesus  Ckristus,  Dominus  et  Dews  noster,  ipse 
est  summus  sacerdos  Dei  Patris  et  sacrificium  Patri  seipsum  primus  obtulti  et  hoe 
fieri  in  sui  commemorationem  prcecepit:  utlque  &k  sacerdos  vice  Christi  verefunffitur, 
gui  id,  quod-Ckristus fecit,  imitatur  d  saerifeium  verum  4, plenum  tujw  ofert." 

*ApoL  I,  a  61  (1. 164  ed.  Otto). 


248  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

children  of  choice  and  of  wisdom,  and  partakers  of  the  forgive* 

ness  of  former  sins The  baptismal  bath  is  called 

also  illumination  (<p<0Ti<rp6s\  because  those  who  receive  it  are 
enlightened  in  the  understanding." 

This  account  may  be  completed  by  the  following  particulars 
from  Tertullian  and  later  writers. 

Before  the  act  the  candidate  was  required  in  a  solemn  vow  to 
renounce  the  service  of  the  devil,  that  is,  all  evil/  give  himself 
to  Christ,  and  confess  the  sum  of  the  apostolic  faith  in  God  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit.2  The  Apostles'  Creed,  there- 
fore, is  properly  the  baptismal  symbol,  as  it  grew,  in  fact,  out  of 
the  baptismal  formula. 

This  act  of  turning  from  sin  and  turning  to  God,  or  of  repen- 
tance and  faith,  on  the  part  of  the  candidate,  was  followed  by 
an  appropriate  prayer  of  the  minister,  and  then  by  the  baptism 
itself  into  the  triune  name,  with  three  successive  immersions  in 
which  the  deacons  and  deaconesses  assisted.  The  immersion 
consisted  in  thrice  dipping  the  head  of  the  candidate  who  stood 
nude  in  the  water.3  Single  immersion  seems  to  have  been 

1  Abrenunciatio  didboli.  Tertullian :  "  Henunciare  didbolo  et  pompce  et  omgdis 
ijv&?  Const.  Apost. :  'AiroTaaaopat  TU  2a,7avp  not  rolf  tpyois  &VTOV  Kal  ratg 
?ro/K7raZf  avrov,  KOI  TaZf  farpeUuf  CLVTOV,  ical  iraffi  roig  VTT*  avr6v.  This  renuncia- 
tion of  the  devil  was  made,  at  least  in  the  fourth  century,  as  we  learn  from 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  in  the  vestibule  of  the  baptistery,  with  the  face  towardi 
the  west,  and  the  hand  raised  in  the  repelling  posture,  as  if  Satan  were  present 
(of  naptivri  aTrordffGsa&e  Sanrvp),  and  was  sometimes  accompanied  with  exsuf- 
flations,  or  other  signs  of  expulsion  of  the  evil  spirit. 

*  '0/wArfy^Hf,  professio.    The  creed  was  either  said  by  the  catechumen  after 
the  priest,  or  confessed  in  answer  to  questions,  and  with  the  face  turned  east- 
wards towards  the  light 

*  See  the  authorities  quoted  in  Smith  and  Cheetham,  1. 161,  and  more  fully  in 
Augusti,  1.  c.  "  Ter  mcrgtiamur,"  says  Tertullian.    Immersion  was  very  natural 
in  Southern  climates.    The  baptisteries  of  the  Nicene  age,  of  which  many  re- 
main in  Asia,  Africa,  and  Southern  Europe,  were  built  for  immersion,  and  all 
Oriental  churches  still  adhere  to  this  mode.    Garrucci   (Storia  della  Arte 
Gri&iana,  I.  27)  says :  «  Antickissimo  e  solenne  fa,  il  rito  cP  immergere  la  persona 
net?  acquOj  e  tre  volte  anche  U  capo,  d  pronunziare  del  ministro  i  tre  nomi" 
Schultze  (Die  Katalsom&en,  p.  136) :  "Die  Taufdarstdlungen,  mkonstantinmher 
Zeit,  deren  ZaM  sieh  auf  drd  bdauft,  zeigen  tammtlich  erwacfe&ne  Taufiinge,  in 
awe*  Fatten  Knaben  von  etwa  miolf  Jahren,  im  dritten  Fztte  einen  Jmaling.    Der 
Ac*  vird  durch  Untertawheri  votissogen."  •  Bean  Stanley  delights  in  pictorial 


\  70.  THE  CELEBKATION  OF  BAPTISM.  249 

introduced  by  Eunomius  about  360,  but  was  condemned  on  pain 
of  degradation,  yet  it  reappeared  afterwards  in  Spain,  and  Pope 
Gregory  I.  declared  botli  forms  valid,  the  trine  immersion  as 
setting  forth  the  Trinity,  the  single  immersion  the  Unity  of  the 
Godhead.1  The  Eastern  church,  however,  still  adheres  strictly 
to  the  trine  immersion.2  Baptism  by  pouring  water  from  a 
shell  or  vessel  or  from  the  hand  on  the  head  of  the  candidate 
very  early  occurs  also  and  was  probably  considered  equiva- 
lent to  immersion.3  The  Didache  allows  pouring  in  cases  of 
scarcity  of  water.  But  afterwards  this  mode  was  applied  only 
to  infirm  or  sick  persons;  hence  called  clinical  baptism.4  The 
validity  of  this  baptism  was  even  doubted  by  many  in  the  third 

exaggeration  of  the  baptismal  immersion  in  patristic  times  as  contrasted  with 
modern  sprinkling.  *'  Baptism,"  he  says,  *  was  not  only  a  bath,  but  a  plunge— 
an  entire  submersion  in  the  deep  water,  a  leap  as  into  the  rolling  sea  or  the 
rushing  river,  where  for  the  moment  the  waves  close*over  the  bather's  head, 
and  he  emerges  again  as  from  a  momentary  grave ;  or  it  was  a  shock  of  a 
shower-bath — the  rush  of  water  passed  over  the  whole  person  from  capacious 
vessels,  so  as  to  wrap  the  recipient  as  within  the  veil  of  a  splashing  cataract 
This  was  the  part  of  the  ceremony  on  which  the  Apostles  laid  so  much  siress. 
It  was  to  them  like  a  burial  of  the  old  former  self  and  the  rising  up  again  of 
the  new  self."  Christian  Institutions,  (1881),  p.  9.  See  Sehaff,  1.  c.  p.  41  sqq. 

1  JSp.  I.  41  in  reply  to  Leander,  bishop  of  Hispala.  Thomas  Aquinas 
(Summa  TheoL,  Tom.  IV.,  £  615,  ed.  Migne)  quotes  this  letter  with  approval, 
but  gives  the  preference  to  trina  immersiOj  as  expressing  "triduum  sepultures 


2  The  Russian  Orthodox  Catechism  defines  baptism  as  "  a  sacrament,  in 
which  a  man  who  believes,  having  his  body  thrice  plunged  in  water  in  the  name 
of  God  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  dies  to  the  carnal  life  of  sin, 
and  is  born  again  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  a  life  spiritual  and  holy."  In  the  case 
of  infants  the  act  is  usually  completed  by  pouring  water  over  the  head,  the 
rest  of  the  body  being  immersed.  So  I  was  informed  by  a  Greek  priest. 

8  Pouring  or  affusion  is  the  present  practice  of  the  Boman  Catholic  church. 
It  is  first  found  on  pictures  in  the  Boman  catacombs,  one  of  which  De 
Bosssi  assigns  to  the  second  century  (in  the  cemetry  of  Calixtus).  "  It  is  re- 
markable that  in  almost  all  the  earlfe&t  representations  of  baptism  that  have 
been  preserved  to  us,  this  [the  pouring  of  water  from  vessels  over  the  bod'  ] 
is  the  special  act  represented."  Marriott  in  Smith  and  Cheetham,  I.  1*M 
But  the  art  of  painting  can  only  represent  a  part  of  the  act,  not  the  whole 
process ;  and  in  all  the  Catacomb  pictures  the  candidate  stands  with  the  feet  in 
water,  and  is  undressed  as  for  immersion,  total  or  partial. 

*"Bapti$mus  dinicorum^  (KAtvucoit  from  /cAIi^,bed).  Cftnicus  or  yrablntai  itts 
designated  one  who  was  baptised  on  the  sick  bed. 


250  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

century;  and  Cyprian  wrote  in  its  defence,  taking  the  Aground 
that  the  mm  lu  of  application  of  water  was  a  matter  of  minor 
importance,  provided  that  faith  was  present  in  the  recipient  and 
ministraiit.1  According  to  ecclesiastical  law  clinical  baptism  at 
least  incapacitated  for  the  clerical  office.3  Yet  the  Roman  bishop 
Fabian  ordained  Xovatian  a  presbyter,  though  he  had  been 
baptized  on  a  sick-bed  by  aspersion.3 

1  Ep.  69  fill.  75),  ad  Xagnum.  He  answered  the  question  as  best  he  could 
in  the  ab-ence  of  any  ecclesiastical  decision  at  that  time.  This  Epistle,  next 
to  Tertullian's  opposition  to  infant  baptism,  is  the  oldest  document  in  the 
rrmfrnrrm'fil  baptismal  literature.  Cyprian  quotes  (ch.  12)  several  passages 
from  the  0.  T.  where  "sprinkling"  is  spoken  of  as  an  act  of  cleansing  (Ez. 
36:  25,26;  Num.  8:  5-7;  19:  8-13),  and  then  concludes:  "Whence  it  ap- 
pears that  sprinkling  also  of  water  prevails  equally  with  the  salutary  washing 
I  wlspert'ionem  qu  'fqae  aquae  instar  saiutaris  lavacri  obtinere) ;  and  that  when  this 
i.<  dune  in  the  church  where  the  faith  both  of  the  receiver  and  the  giver  is  sound 
(ubt  sit  et  accipitntis  et  dantis  fides  integra),  all  things  hold  and  may  be  consum- 
mated and  perfected  by  the  majesty  of  the  Lord  and  by  the  truth  of  faith." 
JBut  in  the  same  Ep.,  Cyprian  denies  the  validity  of  heretical  and  schismatic 
baptism  in  any  form.  See  below,  §  74. 

-  The  twelfth  canon  of  the  Council  of  Neo-Csesarea  (after  314)  ordains : 
**  Whosoever  has  received  clinical  baptism  cannot  be  promoted  to  the  priest- 
hood, because  his  [profession  of]  faith  was  not  from  free  choice,  but  from  me- 
ce?sity  (£*  avayKW,  fear  of  death),  unless  he  excel  afterwards  in  zeal  and  faith, 
or  there  is  a  deficiency  of  [able]  men."  This  canon  passed  into  the  Corpus 
JUT.  can.  c.  1  Diet.  57.  See  Heiele,  Conciliengeschj  L  249  (2nd  ed.). 

3  Pouring  and  sprinkling  were  still  exceptional  in  the  ninth  century  accord- 
ing to  Walafrid  Strabo  (De  Ed.  Ecd.,  c.  26),  but  they  made  gradual  progress 
with  the  spread  of  infant  baptism,  as  the  most  convenient  mode,  especially  in 
Northern  climates,  and  came  into  common  use  in  the  West  at  the  end  of  the 
thirteenth  century.  Thomas  Aquinas  (d.  1274)  says,  that  although  it  may  be 
safer  to  baptize  by  immersion,  yet  pouring  and  sprinkling  are  also  allowable 
(Summa  Theoi  P.  III.  Qu.  LXVI.  De  Bapt.  art.  7;  in  Migne's  ed.  Tom.  IV: 
fol.  614):  "  Si  totum  corpus  aqud  non  possit  perfundi  propter  aquce  paudfatem,  vel 
propter  aliqumn  aliam  causam,  opportet  caput  perfundere,  in  quo  manifestotur  prin- 
dpium  animalis  vitce."  In  Ireland  aspersion  seems  to  have  been  practiced  very 
early  along  with  immersion.  "Trine  immersion,  with  the  alternative  of  asper- 
sion, is  ordered  in  the  earliest  extant  Irish  Baptismal  Office,  in  the  compo- 
sition of  which,  however,  Roman  influence  is  strongly  marked."  F.  E. 
Warren,  The  Liturgy  and  fiitual  of  the  Celtic  Ctiurch,  Oxford  (Clarendon  Press), 
1S31,  p.  65.  Prof.  Norman  Pox  and  other  Baptist  writers,  think  that 
"  neither  infant  baptism  nor  the  use  of  pouring  and  sprinkling  for  baptism 
would  ever  have  been  thought  of  but  for  the  superstitious  idea  that  baptism 
was  necessary  to  salvation."  But  this  idea  prevailed  among  the  fathers  and 


J70.  THE  CELEBRATION  OF  BAPTISM.      251 

Thanksgiving,  benediction,  and  the  brotherly  kiss  concluded 
the  sacred  ceremony. 

Besides  these  essential  elements  of  the  baptismal  rite,  we  find, 
so  early  as  the  third  century,  several  other  subordinate  usages, 
which  have  indeed  a  beautiful  symbolical  meaning,  but,  like  all 
redundancies,  could  easily  obscure  the  original  simplicity  of  this 
sacrament,  as  it  appears  in  Justin  Martyr's  description.  Among 
these  appendages  are  the  signing  of  the  cross  on  the  forehead 
and  breast  of  the  subject,  as  a  soldier  of  Christ  under  the  banner 
of  the  cross ;  giving  him  milk  and  honey  (also  salt;  in  token  of 
sonship  with  God,  and  citizenship  in  the  heavenly  Canaan ;  also 
the  unction  of  the  head,  the  lighted  taper,  and  the  white  robe. 

Exorcism,  or  the  expulsion  of  the  devil,  which  is  not  to  be 
confounded  with  the  essential  formula  of  renunciation,  was 
probably  practised  at  first  only  in  special  cases,  as  of  demoniacal 
possession.  But  after  the  council  of  Carthage,  A.  D.  256,  we  find 
it  a  regular  part  of  the  ceremony  of  baptism,  preceding  the  bap- 
tism proper,  and  in  some  cases,  it  would  seem,  several  times 
repeated  during  the  course  of  catechetical  instruction.  To  under- 
stand fully  this  custom,  we  should  remember  that  the  early 
church  derived  the  whole  system  of  heathen  idolatry,  which  it 
justly  abhorred  as  one  of  the  greatest  crimes,1  from  the  agency 

in  the  Greek  church  fully  as  much  as  in  the  Eoman,  while  it  is  rejected  in 
most  Protestant  churches  -where  sprinkling  is  practiced. 

Luther  sought  to  restore  immersion,  but  without  effect.  Calvin  took  a  simi- 
lar view  of  the  subject  as  Thomas  Aquinas,  but  he  went  farther  and  declared 
the  mode  of  application  to  be  a  matter  of  indifference,  Ijist.  IV.  ch.  15,  §  19: 
"  Whether  the  person  who  is  baptized  be  wholly  immersed  (mergatur  totus), 
and  whether  thrice  or  once,  or  whether  water  be  only  poured  (wi/ztsa)  or 
sprinkled  upon  him  (aspergatur),  is  of  no  importance  (minimum  refert) :  but 
this  should  be  left  free  to  the  churches  according  to  the  difference  of  countries. 
Yet  the  very  word  baptize  signifies  to  immerse  (mergers) ;  and  it  is  certain  that 
immersion  was  the  practice  of  the  ancient  church."  Most  Protestants  agree 
with  Calvin,  except  the  Baptists,  who  revived  the  ancient  practice,  but  only  in 
part  (single  instead  of  trine  immersion),  and  without  the  patristic  ideas  of  bap- 
tismal regeneration,  infant  baptism,  and  the  necessity  of  baptism  for  salvation. 
They  regard  baptism  as  a  mere  symbol  which  exhibits  the  fact  that  regenera- 
tion and  conversion  have  already  taken  place. 

1  Tertullian  calls  it  "principale  Crimea  generis  humani"  (De  idoL  c.  1),  and 
Qyprian,  "summum  delicUm"  (Ep>  *.)• 


252  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

of  Satan.  The  heathen  deities,  although  they  had  been  eminent 
men  during  their  lives,  were,  as  to  their  animating  principle, 
identified  with  demons — either  fallen  angels  or  their  progeny. 
These  demons,  as  we  may  infer  from  many  passages  of  Justin, 
Minutius  Felix,  Tertullian,  and  others,  were  believed  to  traverse 
the  air,  to  wander  over  the  earth,  to  deceive  and  torment 
the  race,  to  take  possession  of  men,  to  encourage  sacrifices,  to 
lurk  in  statues,  to  speak  through  the  oracles,  to  direct  the  flights 
of  birds,  fco  work  the  illusions  of  enchantment  and  necromancy, 
to  delude  the  senses  by  false  miracles,  to  incite  persecution 
against  Christianity,  and,  in  fact,  to  sustain  the  whole  fabric  of 
heathenism  with  all  its  errors  and  vices.  But  even  these  evil 
spirits  were  subject  to  the  powerful  name  of  Jesus.  Tertullian 
openly  challenges  the  pagan  adversaries  to  bring  demoniacs 
before  the  tribunals,  and  affirms  that  the  spirits  which  possessed 
them,  would  bear  witness  to  the  truth  of  Christianity. 

The  institution  of  sponsors*  first  mentioned  by  Tertullian,  arose 
no  doubt  from  infant  baptism,  and  was  designed  to  secure  Christian 
training,  without  thereby  excusing  Christian  parents  from  their 
duty. 

Baptism  might  be  administered  at  any  time,  but  was  commonly 
connected  with  Easter  and  Pentecost,  and  in  the  East  with 
Epiphany  also,  to  give  it  the  greater  solemnity.  The  favorite 
hour  was  midnight  lit  up  by  torches.  The  men  were  baptized 
first,  the  women  afterwards  During  the  week  following,  the 
neophytes  wore  white  garments  as  symbols  of  their  purity. 

Separate  chapels  for  baptism,  or  BAPTISTEKIES,  occur  first  in 
the  fourth  century,  and  many  of  them  still  remain  in  Southern 
Europe.  Baptism  might  be  performed  in  any  place,  whore,  as 
Justin  says,  "water  was."  Yet  Cyprian,  in  the  middle  of  the 
third  century,  and  the  pseudo- Apostolical  Constitutions,  require 
the  element  to  be  previously  consecrated,  that  it  may  become  the 
vehicle  of  the  purifying  energy  of  the  Spirit.  This  corresponded 
to  the  consecration  of  the  bread  and  wine  in  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per, and  involved  no  transformation  of  the  substance. 


?  71.  THE  DOCTEINE  OF  BAPTISM.  253 

§  71.  The  Doctrine  of  Baptism. 

This  ordinance  was  regarded  in  the  ancient  church  as  the 
sacrament  of  the  new  birth  or  regeneration,  and  as  the  solemn 
rite  of  initiation  into  the  Christian  Church,  admitting  to  all  her 
benefits  and  committing  to  all  her  obligations.  It  was  sup- 
posed to  be  preceded,  in  the  case  of  adults,  by  instruction  on  the 
part  of  the  church,  and  by  repentance  and  faith  (i.  e.  conversion) 
on  the  part  of  the  candidate,  and  to  complete  and  seal  the  spirit- 
ual process  of  regeneration,  the  old  man  being  buried,  and  the 
new  man  arising  from  the  watery  grave.  Its  effect  consists  in 
the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  the  communication  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Justin  calls  baptism  "the  water-bath  for  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins  and  regeneration/'  and  Cl  the  bafch  of  conversion  and 
the  knowledge  of  God."  It  is  often  called  also  illumination", 
spiritual  circumcision,  anointing,  sealing,  gift  of  grace,  symbol 
of  redemption,  death  of  sins,  &C.1  Tertullian  describes  its  effect 
thus  :  "When  the  soul  comes  to  faith,  and  becomes  transformed 
through  regeneration  by  water  and  power  from  above,  it  dis- 
covers, after  the  veil  of  the  old  corruption  is  taken  away,  ite 
whole  light.  It  is  received  into  the  fellowship  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  }  and  the  soul,  which  unites  itself  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  is 
followed  by  the  body."  He  already  leans  towards  the  notion 
of  a  magical  operation  of  the  baptismal  water.  Yet  the  sub- 
jective condition  of  repentance  and  faith  was  universally  required. 
Baptism  was  not  only  an  act  of  God,  but  at  the  same  time  the 
most  solemn  surrender  of  man  to  God,  a  vow  for  life  and 
death,  to  live  henceforth  only  to  Christ  and  his  people.  The 
keeping  of  this  vow  was  the  condition  of  continuance  in  the 
church  ;  the  breaking  of  it  must  be  followed  either  by  repent- 
ance or  excommunication. 

From  John  3:  5  and  Mark  16:  16,  Tertullian  and  other 


1  The  patristic  terms  for  baptism  expressive  of  doctrine  are 
rrahyysveffta  (and  Tiovrpbv  wafayyeveoias,  Tit.  3  :  5),  faoyheotc,  regeneratio,  se- 
cwnda  or  spiritualis  iiatimfaa,  renascentia,  ;  also  Qariff^G,  f&ria/ta,  itturnvnaMo, 
(Tftpayie,  signaculumj  seal,  JJLVTJCI^  jMorayuyia,  initiation  into  the  mysteries  (the  sac- 
raments). The  sign  was  almost  identified  with  the  thing  itself. 


254  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

fathers  argued  the  necessity  of  baptism  to  salvation.  Clement 
of  Alexandria  supposed,  with  the  Roman  Hennas  and  others, 
that  even  the  saints  of  the  Old  Testament  were  baptized  in 
Hades  by  Christ  or  the  apostles.  But  exception  was  made  in 
favor  of  the  bloody  baptism  of  martyrdom  as  compensating  the 
want  of  baptism  with  water;  and  this  would  lead  to  the  evan- 
gelical principle,  that  not  the  omission,  but  only  the  contempt 
of  the  sacrament,  is  damning.1 

The  effect  of  baptism,  however,  was  thought  to  extend  only 
to  sins  committed  before  receiving  it.  Hence  the  frequent 
postponement  of  the  sacrament,3  which  Tertullian  very  earnestly 
recommends,  though  he  censures  it  when  accompanied  "with 
moral  levity  and  presumption.3  Many,  like  Constantino  the 
Great,  put  it  off  to  the  bed  of  sickness  and  of  death.  They 
preferred  the  risk  of  dying  unbaptized  to  that  of  forfeiting  for- 
ever the  baptismal  grace.  Death-bed  baptisms  were  then  what 
death-bed  repentances  are  now. 

But  then  the  question  arose,  how  the  forgiveness  of  sins  com- 
mitted after  baptism  could  be  obtained  ?  This  is  the  starting 
point  of  the  Korrian  doctrine  of  the  sacrament  of  penance.  Ter- 
tullian4 and  Cyprian5  were  the  first  to  suggest  that  satisfaction 
must  be  made  for  such  sins  by  self-imposed  penitential  exercises  ' 
and  good  works,  such  as  prayers  and  almsgiving.  Tertullian 
held  seven  gross  sins,  which  he  denoted  mortal  sins,  to  be  un- 
pardonable after  baptism,  and  to  be  left  to  the  uncovenanted 
mercies  of  God;  but  the  Catholic  church  took  a  milder  view, 
and  even  received  back  the  adulterers  and  apostates  on  their 
public  repentance. 

1  "Non  defectus  (or  privatio),  sed  contemtus  savramenti  damnat."    This  leaves 
the  door  open  for  the  salvation  of  Quakers,  unbaptized  children,  and  elect 
heathen  who  die  with  a  desire  for' sal  ration. 

2  Procrastinatio  baptimi. 

3  So  the  author  of  the  Apost*  Cwistit.,  VI.  15,  disapproves  those  who  say: 

on  5rav  T&SVTO,  ^airri^ofiat^  Iva  fity  afiapTqco  Kal  ftviravQ  rb 

4  De  Pcenitientia. 

5  De  Opere  et  Eleemosynis* 


?72.  CATECHETICAL  INSTRUCTION.  255 

NOTES. 

In  reviewing  the  patristic  doctrine  of  baptism  which  was  sanctioned  by  the 
Greek  and  Roman,  and,  with  some  important  modifications,  also  by  the  Lutheran 
and  Anglican  churches,  we  should  remember  that  during  the  first  three  centu- 
ries, and  even  in  the  age  of  Constantine,  adult  baptism  was  the  rule,  and  that 
the  actual  conversion  of  the  candidate  was  required  as  a  condition  before  ad- 
ministering the  sacrament  (as  is  still  the  case  on  missionary  ground).  Hence 
the  preceding  catechetical  instruction,  the  renunciation  of  the  devil,  and  the 
profession  of  faith.  But  when  the  same  high  view  is  applied  without  qualifi- 
cation to  infant  baptism,  we  are  confronted  at  once  with  the  difficulty  that  in- 
fants cannot  comply  with  this  condition.  They  may  be  regenerated  (this  being 
an  act  of  God),  but  they  cannot  be  converted,  i.  e.  they  cannot  repent  and  believe, 
nor  do  they  need  repentance,  having  not  yet  committed  any  actual  trans- 
gression. Infant  baptism  is  an  act  of  consecration,  and  looks  to  subsequent 
instruction  and  personal  conversion,  as  a  condition  to  full  membership  of  the 
church.  Hence  confirmation  came  in  as  a  supplement  to  infant  baptism. 

The  strict  Roman  Catholic  dogma,  first  clearly  enunciated  by  St.  Augustin 
(though  with  reluctant  heart  and  in  the  mildest  form),  assigns  all  unbaptized  in- 
fants to  hell  on  the  ground  of  Adam's  sin  and  the  absolute  necessity  of  baptism 
for  salvation.  A  dogma,  horribile,  butfalswn.  Christ,  who  is  the  truth,  blessed 
unbaptized  infants,  and  declared  :  "  To  such  belongs  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 
The  Augsburg  Confession  (Art.  IX.)  still  teaches  against  the  Anabaptists: 
"guod  baptwnus  sit  necesscirius  ad  salutem"  but  the  lea-ding  Lutheran  divines 
reduce  the  absolute  necessity  of  baptism  to  a  relative  or  ordinary  necessity; 
and  the  Reformed  churches,  under  the  influence  of  Calvin's  teaching,  went 
further  by  making  salvation  depend  upon  divine  election,  not  upon  the  sacra- 
ment, and  now  generally  hold  to  the  salvation  of  all  infants  dying  in  infancy. 
The  Second  Scotch  Confession  (A.  D.  1580)  was  the  first  to  declare  its  abhor- 
rence of  "the  cruel  [popish]  judgment  against  infants  departing  without  the 
sacrament,"  and  the  doctrine  of  "the  absolute  necessity  of  baptism." 

§  72.     Catechetical  Instruction  and  Confirmation. 

LITERATURE. 


L  CYRIL  (Kvpftfof)  of  Jerusalem  (315-386)  r  Eighteen  Catechetical  Lec- 
tures, addressed  to  Catechumens  (Karyxfous  QUTI&UEVUV),  and  Five 
Mystagogical  Lectures,  addressed  to  the  newly  baptized.  Best  ed.  by 
Touttee,  Par.  1720,  reprinted  in  Migne's  Patrol  Or.  vol.  33. 

AUGUSTUS  (d.  430)  :  De  Catechizandis  Eudibus. 

II.  BINGHAM  :  Antiquities,  X.  2. 

ZEZSCHWITZ  (Luth.)  :  System  der  christl.  Mrchl.  Katechetik*  Leipzig, 
vol.  I.  1863;  vol.  II.  in  2  Parts,  1869  and  1872. 

JOH.  MAYER  (E.  0.)  :  Geschichte  des  Katcchumenats,  and  der  Katechese 
in  den  ersten  sec/is  Jahrh.  Kempten,  1866. 

A.  WEISS  (B.  C.)  :  Die  altkirchliche  Padagogits  dargestellt  in  Eatechumena* 
und  Katechese  der  ersten  seeks  Jahrh.  Freiburg,  1869. 


256  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 


FB.  X.  Fura  (E.  C)  :  Die  Kateckumenats-classen  des  chrlstl.  Alterfhum^ 
in  the  Tubing.  "Theol.  Quartalschrift,"  Tub.  1883,  p.  41-77. 

1.  THE  CATECHTTMENATE  or  preparation  for  baptism  was  a 
very  important  institution  of  the  early  church.  It  dates  sub- 
stantially from  apostolic  times.  Theophilus  was  "instructed"  in 
the  main  facts  of  the  gospel  history  ;  and  Apollos  was  "  instructed  " 
in  the  way  of  the  Lord.1  As  the  church  was  set  in  the  midst  of 
a  heathen  world,  and  addressed  herself  in  her  missionary  preach- 
ing in  the  first  instance  to  the  adult  generation,  she  saw  the 
necessity  of  preparing  the  susceptible  for  baptism  by  special 
instruction  under  teachers  called  "catechists,"  who  were  generally 
presbyters  and  deacons.2  The  catechumenate  preceded  baptism 
(of  adults)  ;  whereas,  at  a  later  period,  after  the  general  intro- 
duction of  infant  baptism,  it  followed.  It  was,  on  the  one  hand, 
a  bulwark  of  the  church  against  unworthy  members;  on  the 
other,  a  bridge  from  the  world  to  the  church,  a  Christian 
novitiate,  to  lead  beginners  forward  to  maturity.  The  catechu- 
mens or  hearers3  were  regarded  not  as  unbelievers,  but  as  half- 
Christians,  and  were  accordingly  allowed  to  attend  all  the 
exercises  of  worship,  except  the  celebration  of  the  sacraments. 
They  embraced  people  of  all  ranks,  ages,  and  grades  of  culture, 
even  philosophers,  statesmen,  and  rhetoricians,  —  Justin,  Athe- 
nagoras,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Tertullian,  Cyprian,  Arnobius, 
Lactantius,  w3io  all  embraced  Christianity  in  their  adult  years. 

The  Didacke  contains  in  the  first  six  chapters,  a  high-toned 
moral  catechism  preparatory  to  baptism,  based  chiefly  on  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount. 

There  was  but  one  or  at  most  two  classes  of  Catechumens. 
The  usual  division  into  three  (or  four)  classes  rests  on  confusion 
with  the  classes  of  Penitents.4 


:  4  (/car^tfityf  )  ;  Acts  18:  25  (Kar^/^vo?  )  ;  comp.  Bom.  2:  18; 
1  Cor.  14:  19  j  Gal.  6:6;  Heb.  5:  12.  The  verb  Karvxfo  means  1)  to  re- 
sound ;  2)  to  teach,  hy  word  of  mouth  ;  3)  in  Christian  writers,  to  instruct  in 
the  elements  of  religion. 

*  KaTvxvrai,  doctores  audientium.    The  term  designates  a  function,  not  a  spe- 
cial office  or  class. 

3  KaT7ix°f}V?vo'.l  aKooarat,  wtditores,  audi&ntes. 

*  >A.Kpo&[un>oit  or  auctientes;  yovvKMvovree,  or  genufleetentes  ;  and  $w£6nt\oi, 
or  competentes.    So  Ducange,  Augusti,  Neander,  Hofling,  Hcfele  (in  the  first 
eel-  of  his  Cbflcifo'e^s"^,  but  modified  in  the  second,  vol.  I,  246,  248), 


{  72.  CATECHETICAL  INSTRUCTION.  257 

The  catechetical  school  of  Alexandria  was  particularly  re- 
nowned for  its  highly  learned  character. 

The  duration '  of  this  catechetical  instruction  was  fixed  some- 
times at  two  years l  sometimes  at  three,2  but  might  be  shortened 
according  to  circumstances.  Persons  of  decent  moral  character 
and  general  intelligence  were  admitted  to  baptism  without  delay* 
The  Councils  allow  immediate  admission  in  cases  of  sickness. 

2.  CONFIRMATION3  was  originally  closely  connected  with 
baptism,  as  its  positive  complement,  and  was  performed  by  the 
imposition  of  hands,  and  the  anointing  of  several  parts  of  the 
body  with  fragrant  balsam-oil,  the  chrism,  as  it  was  called. 
These  acts  were  the  medium  of  the  communication  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  of  consecration  to  the  spiritual  priesthood.  Later, 
however,  it  came  to  be  separated  from  baptism,  especially  in  the 
case  of  infants,  and  to  be  regarded  as  a  sacrament  by  itself. 
Cyprian  is  the  first  to  distinguish  the  baptism  with  water  and 
the  baptism  with  the  Spirit  as  two  sacraments ;  yet  this  term, 
sacrament,  was  used  as  yet  very  indefinitely,  and  applied  to  all 
sacred  doctrines  and  rites. 

The  Western  church,  after  the  third  century,  restricted  the 
power  of  confirmation  to  bishops,  on  the  authority  of  Acts  8 : 
17;  they  alone,  as  the  successors  of  the  apostles,  being  able  to 
impart  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Greek  church  extended  this  func- 
tion to  priests  and  deacons.  The  Anglican  church  retains  the 
Latin  practice.  Confirmation  or  some  form  of  solemn  recep- 
tion into  full  communion  on  personal  profession  of  faith,  after 
proper  instruction,  was  regarded  as  a  necessary  supplement  to 
infant  baptism,  and  afterwards  as  a  special  sacrament. 

witz,  Herzog,  and  many  others.  Bona  and  Bingham  add  even  a  fourth  claw 
(efa&ovfievot).  But  this  artificial  classification  (as  Dr.  Funk  has  shown,  I  c.) 
arose  from  a  misunderstanding  of  the  fifth  canon  of  Neocaesarea  (between  314 
and  325),  which  mentions  one  yfov  idiivuw,  but  as  representing  a  class  of  peni- 
tents, not  of  catechumens.  Suicer,  Mayer,  and  Weiss  assume  but  two  classes, 
audi&ntes  and  competences.  Funk  maintains  that  the  candidates  for  baptism 
(Qontfftevoi,  competentes  or  decti  baptizandi)  were  already  numbered  among  the 
feithfdl  (fideles),  and  that  there  was  only  one  clas*  of  catechumens. 

*  Cone,  of  Elvira,  can.  42.  *  Const.  Apo$t>  VIII.  32. 

8  S^ayfc,  xpl<*iJ>a,  confirmatio,  obsigmtio,  signaculum. 
Vol.  IL— 17 


258  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A. D.  100-311. 

§  73.  Infant  Baptim. 

On  IOTANT  BAPTISM  comp.  JUST.  M.:  Dial  c.  Tryph.  Jud.  c.  43. 
IBEN.  :  Adv.  Ear.  II.  22,  $  4,  compared  with  III.  17,  \  1,  and  othei 
passages.  TERTUL.  :  De  Baptismo,  c.  18.  CYPR.  :  Epist.  LIX.  ad 
Rdum.  CLEM.  ALEX.  :  P&dag.  III.  247.  ORIG.  :  Comm.  in  Rom. 
F.  Opp.  IV.  565,  and  ffomil.  XIV.  in  Luc. 

See  Lit.  in  vol.  1. 463  sq.,  especially  WALL.  Comp.  also  W.  R.  POWERS  : 
Irenceus  and  Infant  Baptism,  in  the  "Am.  Presb.  and  Theol.  Rev." 
K  Y.  1867,  pp.  239-267. 

While  the  church  was  still  a  missionary  institution  in  the  midst 
of  a  heathen  world,  infant  baptism  was  overshadowed  by  the 
baptism  of  adult  proselytes ;  as,  in  the  following  periods,  upon 
the  union  of  church  and  state,  the  order  was  reversed.  At 
that  time,  too,  there  could,  of  course,  be  no  such  tiling,  even  on 
the  part  of  Christian  parents,  as  a  compulsory  baptism,  which 
dates  from  Justinian's  reign,  and  which  inevitably  leads  to  the 
profanation  of  the  sacrament.  Constantine  sat  among  the 
fathers  at  the  great  Council  of  Mcsea,  and  gave  legal  effect  to  its 
decrees,  aud  yet  put  off  his  baptism  to  his  deathbed.  The  cases 
of  Gregory  of  Nazianzum,  St.  Chrysostom,  and  St.  Augustin, 
who  had  mothers  of  exemplary  piety,  and  yet  were  not  baptized 
before  early  manhood,  show  sufficiently  that  considerable  free- 
dom prevailed  in  this  respect  even  in  the  Nicene  and  post- 
Nicene  ages.  Gregory  of  Nazianzum  gives  the  advice  to  put 
off  the  baptism  of  children,  where  there  is  no  danger  of  death, 
to  their  third  year.1 

At  the  same  time  it  seems  an  almost  certain  fact,  though  by 
many  disputed,  that,  with  the  baptism  of  converts,  the  optional 
baptism  of  the  children  of  Christian  parents  in  established  con- 
gregations, comes  down  from  the  apostolic,  age.2  Pious  parents 
would  naturally  feel  a  desire  to  consecrate  their  offspring  from 
the  very  beginning  to  the  service  of  the  Redeemer,  and  find  a 
precedent  in  the  ordinance  of  circumcision.  This  desire  would 

1  Qrat.  XL. 

*  Comp.  I.  469  sq.  The  fact  is  not  capable  of  positive  proof,  but  rests  on 
Btrong  probabilities.  The  Baptists  deny  it.  So  does  Neander,  but  he  approve 
the  practice  of  infant  baptism  as  springing  from  the  spirit  of  Christianity, 


i  73.  INFANT  BAPTISM.  259 

be  strengthened  in  cases  of  sickness  by  the  prevailing  notion  of 
the  necessity  of  baptism  for  salvation.  Among  the  fathers, 
Tertullian  himself  not  excepted — for  he  combats  only  its 
expediency — there  is  not  a  single  voice  against  the  lawful- 
ness and  the  apostolic  origin  of  infant  baptism.  No  time  caix 
be  fixed  at  which  it  was  first  introduced.  Tertullian  suggests, 
that  it  was  usually  based  on  the  invitation  of  Christ :  "  Suffer 
the  little  children  to  come  unto  me,  and  forbid  them  not."  The 
usage  of  sponsors,  to  which  Tertullian  himself  bears  witness, 
although  he  disapproves  of  it,  and  still  more,  the  almost  equally 
ancient  abuse  of  infant  communion,  imply  the  existence  of  infant 
baptism.  Heretics  also  practised  it,  and  were  not  censured  for  it 
The  apostolic  fathers  make,  indeed,  no  mention  of  it.  But 
their  silence  proves  nothing ;  for  they  hardly  touch  upon  bap- 
tism at  all,  except  Hennas,  and  he  declares  it  necessary  to 
salvation,  even  for  the  patriarchs  in  Hades  (therefore,  as  we 
may  well  infer,  for  children  also).  Justin  Martyr  expressly 
teaches  the  capacity  of  all  men  for  spiritual  circumcision  by 
baptism ;  and  his  u  all "  can  with  the  less  propriety  be  limited, 
since  he  is  here  speaking  to  a  Jew.1  He  also  says  that  many 
old  men  and  women  of  sixty  and  seventy  years  of  age  have  been 
from  childhood  disciples  of  Christ.2  Polycarp  was  eighty-six 
years  a  Christian,  and  must  have  been  baptized  in  early  youth. 
According  to  Irenseus,  his  pupil  and  a  faithful  bearer  of  Johan- 
nean  tradition,  Christ  passed  through  all  the  stages  of  life,  to  sanc- 
tify them  all,  and  came  to  redeem,  through  himself,  "  all  who 
through  him  are  born  again  unto  God,  sucklings,  children,  boys, 
youths,  and  adults." 3  This  profound  view  seems  to  involve  an 

1  Did,,  c.  Tr.  c.  43. 

2  Apol  I.  c.  15  (Otto  I.  48) :  OS  lie  ircd6uv  c/m&Treinfyffav  T$  Xpurrp. 

»  Adv.  Hcer.  II.  22,  ?  4 :  "  Omnes  venit  per  semetipsum  salvare  ;  wines,  inqucm 
qui  per  eim  renascuntur  in  Deum,  infantes  et  parvulos  et  pueros  et  juvenes  c 
seniores.  Ideo  per  omn&m  venit  aetatem,  et  infantibus  infans  factus,  sanctificans 
infantes;  in  parvulis  parvdus,  sanctificans  hanc  ipsam  habentes  aetatem;  simul  et 
wemplum  Mis  pietatis  efectus  et  justitia  et  subjectionis,  in  juvenibus  juvenis"  etc. 
Neander,  in  discussing  this  passage  remarks,  that  "from  this  idea,  founded  on 
what  is  inmost  in  Christianity,  becoming  prominent  in  the  feelings  of  Chris 
tians,  resulted  the  practice  of  infant  baptism"  (I.  312,  Boston  ed.) 


260  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

acknowledgment  not  only  of  the  idea  of  infant  baptism*  bat 
also  of  the  practice  of  it;  for  in  the  mind  of  Irenseus  and 
the  ancient  church  baptism  and  regeneration  were  intimately 
connected  and  almost  identified.1  In  an  infant,  in  fact,  any 
regeneration  but  through  baptism  cannot  be  easily  conceived, 
A.  moral  and  spiritual  regeneration,  as  distinct  from  sacra- 
mental, would  imply  conversion,  and  this  is  a  conscious  act  of 
the  will,  an  exercise  of  repentance  and  faith,  of  which  the  infant 
is  not  capable. 

In  the  churches  of  Egypt  infant  baptism  must  have  been 
practised  from  the  first.  For,  aside  from  some  not  very  clear 
expressions  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen  distinctly  derives 
it  from  the  tradition  of  the  apostles ;  and  through  his  jour- 
neys in  the  East  and  West  he  was  well  acquainted  with  the 
practice  of  the  church  in  his  time.2 

1  Ire&3eus  speaks  of  "the  washing  of  regeneration/'  and  of  the  "baptism  of 
regeneration  unto  God,"  rb  ^dima^Q,  ryg  e*f  tfe&y  kvayew%aeQ$  (Adv.  Ha&r.  I. 
c.  21,  ?  1) ;  he  identifies  the  apostolic  commission  to  baptize  with  the  potestas 
regeneration^  in  Deum  (III.  17,  J  1) ;  he  says  that  Christ  descending  into 
Hades,  regenerated  the  ancient  patriarchs  (III.  c.  22,  §  4 :  "  in  sinum  suum 
recvpiens  pristinos  patres  regeneravit  eos  in  vitam  Dei"),  by  which  he  probably 
meant  baptism  (according  to  the  fancy  of  Hennas,  Clement  of  Alex.,  and 
others).    Compare  an  examination  of  the  various  passages  of  Irenojns  in  the 
article  by  Powers,  who  comes  to  the  conclusion  (L  c.  p.  267)  that  "Irenoaus 
everywhere  implies  baptism  in  the  regeneration  he  so  often  names." 

2  In  Ep.  ad  Earn.  (Opera,  vol.  IV.  col.  1047  ed.  Migne;  or  IV.  565  ed. 
Delarue) :   *'  Pro  hoc  et  Ecdesia,  ab  apostolis  traditionem  suscepit,  etiam  parvulis 
baptimum  dare"    In  Levti.  Horn.  VIII.  (II.  496  in  Migne),  he  says  that 
ft  s&undwn  EcelesMS  observantiam'1  baptism  was  given  also  to  children  (etitm 
parridis).    Comp.  his  Com.  in  Matt.  XV.  (III.  1268  sqq.)  where  be  seems  to 
infer  this  custom  from  the  example  of  Christ  blessing  little  children.    That 
Origen  himself  was  baptized  in  childhood  (185  or  soon  after),  is  nowhere  ex- 
pressly stated  in  his  works  (as  far  as  I  know),  but  may  be  inferred  as  probable 
from  his  descent  of,  and  early  religious  instruction,  by  Christian  parents  (re* 
ported  by  Eoseb  H.  E.  VI.  19 :  r$  'Optyfaei  ra  rye  Kara  Xpurrbv  ftdaffKoMaf 
SK  irpoy6vuv  torero),  in  connection   with   the   Egyptian   custom.    Comp. 
Eedepenning,  Origenes,  1. 49.    It  would  certainly  be  more  difficult  to  prove 
that  he  was  not  baptized  in  infancy.    He  could  easily  make  room  for  infant 
baptism  in  his  theological  system,  which  involved  the  Platonic  idea  of  a  pre- 
historic fell  of  the  individual  soul.    But  the  Cyprianic  and  Augustinian 
theology  connected  it  with  the  historic  fall  of  Adam,  and  the  consequent 
hereditary  depravity  and  guilt. 


§  73.  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

The  only  opponent  of  infant  baptism  among  the  fathers  is 
the  eccentric  and  schismatic  Tertullian,  of  North  Africa.  He 
condemns  the  hastening  of  the  innocent  age  to  the  forgh  eness 
of  sins,  and  intrusting  it  with  divine  gifts,  while  we  would  not 
commit  to  it  earthly  property.1  Whoever  considers  the  solem- 
nity of  baptism,  will  shrink  more  from  the  receiving,  than  from 
the  postponement  of  it.  But  the  very  manner  of  Tertullian's 
opposition  proves  as  much  in  favor  of  infant  baptism  as  against 
it.  He  meets  it  not  as  an  innovation,  but  as  a  prevalent  cus- 
tom ;  and  he  meets  it  not  with  exegetical  nor  historical  argu- 
ments, but  only  with  considerations  of  religious  prudence.  His 
opposition  to  it  is  founded  on  his  view  of  the  regenerating 
effect  of  baptism,  and  of  the  impossibility  of  having  mortal 
sins  forgiven  in  the  church  after  baptism ;  this  ordinance  cannot 
be  repeated,  and  washes  out  only  the  guilt  contracted  before  its 
reception.  On  the  same  ground  he  advises  healthy  adults, 
especially  the  unmarried,  to  postpone  this  sacrament  until  they 
shall  be  no  longer  in  danger  of  forfeiting  forever  the  grace  of 
baptism  by  committing  adultery,  murder,  apostasy,  or  any  other 
of  the  seven  crimes  which  he  calls  mortal  sins.  On  the  same 
principle  his  advice  applies  only  to  healthy  children,  not  to 
sickly  ones,  if  we  consider  that  he  held  baptism  to  be  the  in- 
dispensable condition  of  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  taught  the 
doctrine  of  hereditary  sin.  With  him  this  position  resulted 
from  moral  earnestness*,  and  a  lively  sense  of  the  great  solem- 
nity of  the  baptismal  vow.  But  many  put  off  baptism  to  their 
death-bed,  in  moral  levity  and  presumption,  that  they  might 
sin  as  long  as  they  could. 

Tertullian's  opposition,  moreover,  had  no  influence,  at  least 
no  theoretical  influence,  even  in  North  Africa.  His  disciple 
Cyprian  differed  from  him  wholly.  In  his  day  it  was  no  ques- 
tion, whether  the  children  of  Christian  parents  might  and 

1 "  Quidfestinat  innocens  aetas  ad  retnis&ion&m,  peccatorum  f  "  The  "  innoc&nx  " 
here  is  to  be  taken  only  in  a  relative  sense;  for  Tertullian  in  other  places 
teaches  a  vitium  originis,  or  hereditary  sin  and  guilt,  although  not  as  distinctly 
and  clearly  as  Augustin. 


262  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

should  be  baptized — on  this  all  were  agreed, — but  whether  they 
might  be  baptized  so  early  as  the  second  or  third  day  after 
birth,  or,  according  to  the  precedent  of  the  Jewish  circumcision, 
on  the  eighth  day.  Cyprian,  and  a  council  of  sixty-six  bishops 
held  at  Carthage  in  253  under  his  lead,  decided  for  the  earlier 
time,  yet  without  condemning  the  delay.1  It  was  in  a  measure 
the  same  view  of  the  almost  magical  effect  of  the  baptismal 
water,  and  of  its  absolute  necessity  to  salvation,  which  led  Cyp- 
rian to  hasten,  and  Tertullian  to  postpone  the  holy  ordinance ; 
one  looking  more  at  the  beneficent  effect  of  the  sacrament  in 
regard  to  past  sins,  the  other  at  the  danger  of  sins  to  come. 

§  74.  Heretioal  Baptism. 

On  HEEETICAL  BAPTISM  comp.  ETTSEBIUS:  H.  K  VII.  3-5.  CYPEIAN: 
Epist.  LXX.-LXXVL  The  Acts  of  the  Councils  of  Carthage,  A.  D. 
255  and  256,  and  the  anonymous  tractj  De  ftebaptismatej  among 
CYPRIAN'S  works,  and  in  ROTTTH'S  jReliquice  Sacra,  vol.  v.  283-328. 

HEFELE:  ConciliengesMchtej  1. 117-132  (second  ed.). 

G.  E.  STEITZ:  Ketsertaufe,  in  Herzog,  rev.  ed.,  VII.  652-661. 

Heretical  baptism  was,  in  the  third  century,  the  subject  of  a 
violent  controversy,  important  also  for  its  bearing  on  the  ques- 
tion of  the  authority  of  the  Eoman  see. 

Cyprian,  whose  Epistles  afford  the  clearest  information  on 
this  subject,  followed  Tertullian2  in  rejecting  baptism  by  here- 
tics as  an  inoperative  mock-baptism,  and  demanded  that  all 
heretics  coming  over  to  the  Catholic  church  be  baptized  (he 
would  not  say  re-baptized).  His  position  here  was  due  to  his 
high-church  exclusiveness  and  his  horror  of  schism.  As  the 
one  Catholic  church  is  the  sole  repository  of  all  grace,  there  can 
be  no  forgiveness  of  sins,  no  regeneration  or  communication  of 
the  Spirit,  no  salvation,  and  therefore  no  valid  sacraments,  out  of 
her  bosom.  So  far  he  had  logical  consistency  on  his  side.  But, 

1  A  later  council  of  Carthage  of  the  year  418  went  further  and  decreed : 
"Item  placuit,  ut  quusunque  parwlos  recentes  ab  uteris  matrum  baptizandos  negat 
, . .  anathema  sit" 

2  De  Bavt.  c.  15.    Comp.  also  Clement  of  Alex.,  Strom.  I.  375. 


{  74.  HERETICAL  BAPTISM.  263 

on  the  other  hand,  he  departed  from  the  objective  view  of  the 
church,  as  the  Donatists  afterwards  did,  in  making  the  efficacy 
of  the  sacrament  depend  on  the  subjective  holiness  of  the  priest. 
"  How  can  one  consecrate  water,"  he  asks,  "  who  is  himself  un- 
holy, and  has  not  the  Holy  Spirit?"  He  was  followed  by  the 
North  African  church,  which,  in  several  councils  at  Carthage  in 
the  years  255-6,  rejected  heretical  baptism ;  and  by  the  church 
of  Asia  Minor,  which  had  already  acted  on  this  view,  and  now, 
in  the  person  of  the  Cappadocian  bishop  Firmilian,  a  disciple 
and  admirer  of  the  great  Origen,  vigorously  defended  it  against 
Borne,  using  language  which  is  entirely  inconsistent  with  the 
claims  of  the  papacy.1 

The  Eoman  bishop  Stephen  (253-257)  appeared  for  the  op- 
posite doctrine,  on  the  ground  of  the  ancient  practice  of  his 
church.2  He  offered  no  argument,  but  spoke  with  the  con- 
sciousness of  authority,  and  followed  a  catholic  instinct.  He 
laid  chief  stress  on  the  objective  nature  of  the  sacrament,  the 
virtue  of  which  depended  neither  on  the  officiating  priest,  nor 
on  the  receiver,  but  solely  on  the  institution  of  Christ.  Hence 
he  considered  heretical  baptism  valid,  provided  only  it  was  ad- 
ministered with  intention  to  baptize  and  in  the  right  form,  to 
wit,  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  or  even  of  Christ  alone;  so  that 
heretics  coming  into  the  church  needed  only  confirmation,  or 
the  ratification  of  baptism  by  the  Holy  Ghost  "  Heresy,"  says 
he,  "produces  children  and  exposes  them;  and  the  church  takes 
up  the  exposed  children,  and  nourishes  them  as  her  own,  though 
she  herself  has  not  brought  them  forth." 

The  doctrine  of  Cyprian  was  the  more  consistent  from  the 

1  See  p.  162.  Some  Roman  divines  (Molkenkuhr  and  Tizzani,  as  quoted  by 
Hefele,  p.  121)  thought  that  such  an  irreverent  Epistle  as  that  of  Firmilian 
(the  75th  among  Cyprian's  Epp.)  cannot  be  historical,  and  that  the  whole  story 
of  the  controversy  between  Pope  Stephen  and  St.  Cyprian  must  be  a  fabrica- 
tion !  Dogma  versus  facts. 

*  According  to  Hippolytus  (Philosoph.),  the  rebaptism  of  heretics  was  un- 
known before  Callistus,  A.D.  218-223.  Cyprian  does  not  deny  the  antiquity 
of  the  Roman  custom,  but  pleads  that  truth  is  better  than  custom  ("guaxi  am-- 
wetodo  major  sit  veritate").  Hefele,  I.  p.  121.  The  Epistles  of  Stephen  are 
lost,  and  we  must  learn  his  position  from  his  opponents. 


264  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

hierarchical  point  of  view;  that  of  Stephen,  from  the  sacra- 
mental. The  former  was  more  logical,  the  latter  more  practica 
and  charitable.  The  one  preserved  the  principle  of  the  exclu- 
siveness  of  the  church ;  the  other,  that  of  the  objective  force  ol 
the  sacrament,  even  to  the  borders  of  the  opus  operatum  theory, 
Both  were  under  the  direction  of  the  same  churchly  spirit,  anc 
the  same  hatred  of  heretics ;  but  the  Roman  doctrine  is  after  all 
a  happy  inconsistency  of  liberality,  an  inroad  upon  the  principle 
of  absolute  exclusiveness,  an  involuntary  concession,  that  bap- 
tism, and  with  it  the  remission  of  sin  and  regeneration,  therefore 
salvation,  are  possible  outside  of  Kornan  Catholicism.1 

The  controversy  itself  was  conducted  with  great  warmth, 
Stephen,  though  advocating  the  liberal  view,  showed  the  genu- 
ine papal  arrogance  and  intolerance.  He  would  not  even  adrnil 
to  his  presence  the  deputies  of  Cyprian,  who  brought  him  the 
decree  of  the  African  synod,  and  he  called  this  bishop,  who 
in  every  respect  excelled  Stephen,  and  whom  the  Eoman  church 
now  venerates  as  one  of  her  greatest  saints,  a  false  Christ  and 
false  apostle,2  He  broke  off  all  intercourse  with  the  African 
church,  as  he  had  already  with  the  Asiatic.  But  Cyprian  and 
Firmilian,  nothing  daunted,  vindicated  with  great  boldness,  the 
latter  also  with  bitter  vehemence,  their  different  view,  and  con- 
tinued in  it  to  their  death.  The  Alexandrian  bishop  Dionysius 
endeavored  to  reconcile  the  two  parties,  but  with  little  success. 
The  Valerian  persecution,  which  soon  ensued,  and  the  martyr- 
dom of  Stephen  (257)  and  of  Cyprian  (258),  suppressed  this 
internal  discord. 

In  the  course  of  the  fourth  century,  however,  the  Roman 
theory  gradually  gained  on  the  other,  received  the  sanction 

1  Unless  it  be  maintained  that  the  baptismal  grace,  if  received  outside  of  the 
Catholic  communion,  is,  of  no  use,  but  rather  increases  the  guilt  (like  the 
knowledge  of  the  heathen),  and  becomes  available  only  by  the  subjective  con- 
version and  regular  confirmation  of  the  heretic.  This  was  the  view  of  Augus- 
tin ;  see  Steitz,  1.  c.,  p.  655  sq. 

.  *  "Pseudocforistum,  pseudoa/postolum,  et  doksum  operarium."  Firmil.  Ad  Oyp. 
towards  the  end  (Ep.  75).  Hefele"(L  120)  calls  this  unchristian  intolerance 
ot  Stephen  very  mildly  "vine  grosse  Unfr&undliehkett." 


874.  HERETICAL  BAPTISM.  265 

of  the  oecumenical  Council  of  INicsea  in  325,  was  adopted  in 
North  Africa  during  the  Donatistic  controversies,  by  a  Synod  of 
Carthage,  348,  defended  by  the  powerful  dialectics  of  St.  Au- 
gustin  against  the  Donatists,  and  was  afterwards  confirmed  by 
the  Council  of  Trent  with  an  anathema  on  the  opposite  view. 

NOTE. 

The  Council  of  Trent  declares  (Sessio  Sept.,  March  3, 1547,  canon  4): 
"  If  any  one  says  that  the  baptism,  which  is  even  given  by  heretics  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  with 
the  intention  of  doing  what  the  church  doth,  is  not  true  baptism:  let  him 
be  anathema."  The  Greek  church  likewise  forbids  the  repetition  of 
baptism  which  has  been  performed  in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  but 
requires  trine  immersion.  See  the  Orthodox  Conf.  Quaest.  CII.  (in 
SchafPs  Creeds  II.  376),  and  the  Russian  Catch.  (II.  493),  which  says: 
*'  Baptism  is  spiritual  birth :  a  man  is  born  but  once,  therefore  he  is  also 
baptized  but  once."  But  the  same  Catechism  declares  "trine  immer- 
sion" to  be  "most  essential  in  the  administration  of  baptism"  (II.  491). 

The  Roman  church,  following  the  teaching  of  St.  Augustin,  bases  upon 
the  validity  of  heretical  and  schismatical  baptism  even  a  certain  legal 
claim  on  all  baptized  persons,  as  virtually  belonging  to  her  communion, 
and  a  right  to  the  forcible  conversion  of  heretics  under  favorable  circum- 
stances.1 But  as  there  may  be  some  doubt  about  the  orthodox  form  and 
intention  of  heretical  baptism  in  the  mind  of  the  convert  (e.  g.  if  he  be  a 
Unitarian),  the  same  church  allows  a  conditional  rebaptism  with  the 
formula :  "  If  thou  art  not  yet  baptized,  I  baptize  thee,"  etc. 

Evangelical  creeds  put  their  recognition  of  Roman  Catholic  or  any 
other  Christian  baptism  not  so  much  on  the  theory  of  the  objective  virtue 
of  the  sacrament,  as  on  a  more  comprehensive  and  liberal  conception 
of  the  church.  Where  Christ  is,  there  is  the  church,  and  there  are  true 
ordinances.  The  Baptists  alone,  among  Protestants,  deny  the  validity  of 
any  other  baptism  but  by  immersion  (in  this  respect  resembling  the 
Greek  church),  but  are  very  far  on  that  account  from  denying  the  Chris- 
tian status  of  other  denominations,  since  baptism  with  them  is  only  a 
sign  (not  a  means)  of  regeneration  or  conversion,  which  precedes  the 
rite  and  is  independent  of  it. 

1  Augustin  thus  misinterpreted  the  "Goge  intrare,"  Luke  14:  22,  23,  as  justi- 
fying persecution  (Ep.  ad  Bowifac.,  c.  6).  If  the  holy  bishop  of  Hippo  had 
foreseen  the  fearful  consequences  of  his  exegesis,  he  would  have  shrunk  from  it 
in  horror. 


CHAPTER  YL 

CHBISTIAN    ART* 

§75.  Literature. 
Comp.  the  Lit.  on  the  Catacombs,  ch.  V1L 

FB.  MteTEB :  Sinnbilder  u.  Kunstvorstellungen  der  alien  Christen.  Al- 
tona,  1825. 

GBUNEISEN:  Ueber  die  Ursachen  des  Kunstfiasses  in  den  drei  ersten 
Jahrhunderten.  Stuttg.  1831. 

HELMSD6BFEB :  Christl.  Kunstsymbolik  u.  Ikonoyraphie.    Frtf.  18S9. 

F.  PIPEB  :  Mythologie  u.  Symbolik  der  christl.  Kunst-  2  vols.  Weimar, 
1847-51.  Ueb&r  den  christl  Bilder&reis.  Berl.  1852  (p.  3-10).  By 
the  same :  Einleitung  in  die  monumentale  Theologie.  Gotha,  1867. 

J.  B.  DE  Eossi  (E.  C.) :  De  Christianis  wonumentis  Ix&bv  exhibentibus, 
in  the  third  volume  of  PITBA'S  u  Spicilegium  Solesmense."  Paris, 
1855.  Also  his  great  work  on  the  Eoman  Catacombs  (Itoma 
Sotteranea,  1864-1867),  and  his  Archseol.  "Bulletin"  (Bulletino  di 
Archeologia  cristiana,  since  1863). 

A.  WELBY  PTOIN  (architect  and  Prof,  of  Eccles.  Antiquities  at  Oscott, 
a  convert  to  the  E.  C.  Ch.,  d.  1852) :  Glossary  of  Ecclesiastical  Orna- 
ment and  Costume.  Lond.  1844,  4°,  third  ed.  1868,  revised  and  en- 
larged by  B.  Smith,  with  70  plates.  See  the  art.  "  Cross." 

P.  EAFFAELLE  GABRUCCI  (Jesuit):  Storia  dellaArte  Cristiana nei primi 
otto  secoli  della  chiesa.  Prato,  1872-'80,  6  vols.  fol.,  with  500  magni- 
ficent plates  and  illustrations.  A  most  important  work,  but  intense- 
ly Eomish.  By  the  same:  II  erocifisso  graffito  in  casa  dei  Cesari. 
Eom.  1857. 

FB.  BECKEB  :  Die  Darstellung  Jesu  Christi  unter  dem  Bilde  des  Fische* 
aiif  den  Monumenten  der  Kirche  der  Katakowiben,  erldutert.  Breslau, 
1866.  The  same :  Jbas  Spott-Crucifix  der  romischen  Kaiserpalaste  atw 
dem  Anfang  des  dritten  Jahrh.  Breslau,  1866  (44  pp.).  The  same : 
Die  Wand-und  Deckengemalde  der  rom.  KatcLkomben.  Gera,  1876. 

Abb6  Jos.  AL.  MAE.TIGHTZ-  :  Diction,  des  Antiquites  Chretiennes.  Paris, 
1865,  second  ed.,  1877.  (With  valuable  illustrations). 

F.  X.  KBAUS  (E.  C.) :  Die  christl.  Kunst  in  ihren  fruhesten  Anfangen. 
Leipzig,  1873  (219  pages  and  53  woodcuts).  Also  several  articles 
in  his  "  Eeal-Encyklop.  der.  christl.  Alterthumer,"  Freiburg  i.  B. 
1880  sqq.  (The  cuts  mostly  from  Martigny). 


{  76.  ORIGIN  OF  CHRISTIAN  ART.  267 

B.  ACHELIS  :  Das  Symbol  d.  Fisches  u.  d.  Fisckdenkmaler,  Marb.,  1888. 

C.  W.  BENNETT  :  Christian  Archaeology,  N.  York,  1888. 

§  76.  Origin  of  Christian  Art. 

CHRISTIANITY  owed  its  origin '  neither  to  art  nor  to  science, 
and  is  altogether  independent  of  both.  But  it  penetrates  and 
pervades  them  with  its  heaven-like  nature,  and  inspires  them 
with  a  higher  and  nobler  aim.  Art  reaches  its  real  perfection 
in  worship,  as  an  embodiment  of  devotion  in  beautiful  forms, 
which  afford  a  pure  pleasure,  and  at  the  same  time  excite  and 
promote  devotional  feeling.  Poetry  and  music,  the  most  free 
and  spiritual  arts,  which"  present  their  ideals  in  word  and  tone, 
and  lead  immediately  from  the  outward  form  to  the  spiritual 
substance,  were  an  essential  element  of  worship  in  Judaism,  and 
passed  thence,  'in  the  singing  of  psalms,  into  the  Christian  church. 

Not  so  with  the  plastic  arts  of  sculpture  and  painting,  which 
employ  grosser  material — stone,  wood,  color — >as  the  medium 
of  representation,  and,  with  a  lower  grade  of  culture,  tend 
almost  invariably  to  abuse  when  brought  in  contact  with  wor- 
ship. Hence  the  strict  prohibition  of  these  arts  by  the  Mono- 
theistic religions.  The  Mohammedans  follow  in  this  respect 
the  Jews ;  their  mosques  are  as  bare  of  images  of  living  beings 
as  the  synagogues,  and  they  abhor  the  image  worship  of  Greek 
and  Roman  Christians  as  a  species  of  idolatry. 

The  ante-Nicene  church,  inheriting  the  Mosaic  decalogue,  and 
engaged  in  deadly  conflict  with  heathen  idolatry,  was  at  first 
averse  to  those  arts.  Moreover  her  humble  condition,  her  con- 
tempt for  all  hypocritical  show  and  earthly  vanity,  her  en- 
thusiasm for  martyrdom,  and  her  absorbing  expectation  of  the 
speedy  destruction  of  the  world  and  establishment  of  the  mil- 
lennial kingdom,  made  her  indifferent  to  the  ornamental  part  of 
life.  The  rigorous  Montanists,  in  this  respect  the  forerunners 
of  the  Puritans,  were  most  hostile  to  art.  But  even  the  highly 
cultivated  Clement  of  Alexandria  put  the  spiritual  worship  of 
God  in  sharp  contrast  to  the  pictorial  representation  of  the 
divine.  "  The  habit  of  daily  view/3  he  says,  "  lowers  the 


U68  SECOND  PEKIOb.    A.  D.  100-311. 

nity  of  the  divine,  which  cannot  be  honored,  but  is  only  de- 
graded, by  sensible  material/' 

Yet  this  aversion  to  art  seems  not  to  have  extended  to  mere 
symbols  such  as  we  find  even  in  the  Old  Testament,  as  the 
brazen  serpent  and  the  cherubim  in  the  temple.  At  all  events, 
after  the  middle  or  close  of  the  second  century  we  find  the  rude 
beginnings  of  Christian  art  in  the  form  of  significant  symbols 
in  the  private  and  social  life  of  the  Christians,  and  afterwards 
in  public  worship.  This  is  evident  from  Tertullian  and  other 
writers  of  the  third  century,  and  is  abundantly  confirmed  by 
the  Catacombs,  although  the  age  of  their  earliest  pictorial  re- 
mains is  a  matter  of  uncertainty  and  dispute. 

The  origin  of  these  symbols  must  be  found  in  the  instinctive 
desire  of  the  Christians  to  have  visible  tokens  of  religious  truth, 
which  might  remind  them  continually  of  their  Redeemer  and 
their  holy  calling,  and  which  would  at  the  same  time  furnish 
them  the  best  substitute  for  the  signs  of  heathen  idolatry.  For 
every  day  they  were  surrounded  by  mythological  figures,  not 
only  in  temples  and  public  places,  but  in  private  houses,  on  the 
walls,  floors,  goblets,  seal-rings,  and  grave-stones.  Innocent  and 
natural  as  this  effort  was,  it  could  easily  lead,  in  the  less  intelli- 
gent multitude,  to  confusion  of  the  sign  with  the  thing  signified, 
and  to  many  a  superstition.  Yet  this  result  was  the  less  apparent 
in  the  first  three  centuries,  because  in  that  period  artistic  works 
were  mostly  confined  to  the  province  of  symbol  and  allegory. 

From  the  private  recesses  of  Christian  homes  and  catacombs 
artistic  representations  of  holy  things  passed  into  public  churches 
in  the  fourth  century,  but  under  protest  which  continued  for  a 
long  tune  and  gave  rise  to  the  violent  image  controversies  which 
were  not  settled  until  the  second  Council  of  Nicsea  (787),  in 
favor  of  a  limited  image  worship.  The  Spanish  Council  of 
Elvira  (Granada)  in  306  first  raised  such  a  protest,  and  pro- 
hibited (in  the  thirty-sixth  canon)  "pictures  in  the  church  (pio* 
twos  in  ecclesio),  lest  the  objects  of  veneration  and  worship 
should  be  depicted  on  the  walls."  This  sounds  almost  icono- 
clastic and  puritanic;  but  ia  view  of  the  numerous  ancient  pic- 


g  77.  THE  CROSS  AND  THE  CRUCIFIX.  269 

tures  and  sculptures  in  the  catacombs,  the  prohibition  must  be 
probably  understood  as  a  temporary  measure  of  expediency  in 
that  transition  period.1 

§  77.  The  Gross  and  the  Crucifix. 

"  Religion  des  J&euzes,  nur  du  verknupfest  in  Einem  Krauze 
Der  Demutk  und  Kraft  doppelte  Palme  zugleich? — (SCHILLER).* 

Comp.  the  works  quoted  in  ?  75,  and  the  lists  in  Zockler  and  Fulda. 

JUSTUS  Lirsius  (R.  C.,  d.  1606,  as  Prof,  at  Louvain) :  De  Oruce  lihri  tres, 

ad  sacram  profanamque  historiam  utiles.     Antw.,  1595,  and  later 

editions. 
J  &.C.  GRETSER  (Jesuit) :  De  Crucc  Chrisfi  rebusque  ad  earn  pertinentibus. 

Ingolst.,  1598-1005,  3  vols.  4to;  3rd  ed,  revised,  1608;  also  in  his 

Opera,  Ratisb.,  1734,  Tom.  I.-IIL 
WM.  HASLAM:  The  Cross  and  the  Serpent:  being  a  brief  History  of  tht 

triumph  nfthe  Cross.    Oxford,  1849. 
W.  R.  ALGER:  History  of  the  Cross.    Boston,  1858. 
GABB.  DE  MORTILLET:  Le  Signe  de  la  Croix  avant  le  Christianisme. 

Paris,  1866. 
A.  CH.  A.  ZESTEBMANN  :  Die  bildliche  Darstellung  des  Krewses  und  der 

Kreuzigung  historisch  entwic&elt.    Leipzig,  1867  and  1868. 
J.  STOCKBAUER  (R.  0.) :  Kunstgeschichte  des  Kr&uzes.    Scliaffhausen, 

1870. 
0.  ZCECKLER  (Prof,  in  Greifewald) :   Das  Kreuz  Christi.    Jteligionshis- 

torische  und    fcirchlich-archaeologische    Untersuchungen.     Giitersloh, 

1875  (484  pages,  with  a  large  list  of  works,  pp.  xiii.-xxiv.).   English 

translation  by  M.  G.  Evans,  Lond.,  1878. 
ERNST  v.  BUNSEN  :  Das  Symbol  des  Kreinzes  bei  alien  Nationen  und  die 

IMstehung  des  Ereuzsymbols  der  christlichen  Kirche.    Berlin,  1876. 

(Full  of  hypotheses.) 
HERMANN  FULDA  :  Das  Ereuz  und  die  Kreuzigung.    Dine  antiquarische 

Unt&rwchung.    Breslau,  1878.    Polemical  against  the  received  views 

since  Lipsius.    See  a  full  list  of  literature  in  Fulda,  pp.  299-328. 

E.  DOBBERT  :  Zur  JSntstehungsgeschichte  des  Krauzes,  Leipzig,  1880. 

* 

The  oldest  and  dearest,  but  also  the  most  abused,  of  the  prim- 
itive Christian  symbols  is  the  CROSS,  the  sign  of  redemption, 
sometimes  alone,  sometimes  with  the  Alpha  and  Omega,  some- 
times with  the  anchor  of  hope  or  the  palm  of  peace.  Upon  this 
arose,  as  early  as  the  second  century,  the  custom  of  making  the 

1  See  above,  p.  180.  *  "Der  deutschen  Muse  sctionstes  Dittichon." 


270  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A..  D.  100-311. 

sign  of  the  cross1  on  rising,  bathing,  going  out,  eating,  in  shorty 
on  engaging  in  any  affairs  of  e  very-day  life;  a  custom  probably 
attended  in  many  cases,  even  in  that  age,  with  superstitious  con- 
fidence in  the  magical  virtue  of  this  sign;  hence  Tertullian 
found  it  necessary  to  defend  the  Christians  against  the  heathen 
charge  of  worshipping  the  cross  (staurolatria)? 

Cyprian  and  the  Apostolical  Constitutions  mention  the  sign 
of  the  cross  as  a  part  of  the  baptismal  rite,  and  Lactantius  speaks 
of  it  as  effective  against  the  demons  in  the  baptismal  exorcism. 
Prudentius  recommends  it  as  a  preservative  against  temptations 
and  bad  dreams.  We  find  as  frequently,  particularly  upon  or- 
naments and  tombs,  the  monogram  of  the  name  of  Christ,  X  P, 
usually  combined  in  the  cruciform  character,  either  alone,  or 
with  the  Greek  letters  Alpha  and  Omega,  "the  first  and  the 
last;"  in  later  cases  with  the  addition:  "In  the  sign."3  Soon 
after  Constantine's  victory  over  Maxentius  by  the  aid  of  the 
Labarum  (312),  crosses  were  seen  on  helmets,  bucklers,  stand- 
ards, crowns,  sceptres,  coins  and  seals,  in  various  forms.4 

1  Signaculum,  or  slgnum  crucis- 

2  Apol  c.  16;  Ad  Nat.  1. 12.    Julian  the  Apostate  raised  the  same  charge 
against  the  Christians  of  his  day. 

8  "In  signo,"  i.  e.  "In  hoc  signo  vinces,"  the  motto  of  Constantine. 
4  Archaeologists  distinguish  seven  or  more  forms  of  the  cross ; 

(a)  crux  decussata  (St.  Andrew's  cross),  x 

(6)  crux  comtnissa  (the  Egyptian  cross),  "f 

(c)  crw  immissa  or  ordinaria  (the  upright  Latin  cross), "["" 

(d)  The  inverted  Latin  cross  of  St.  Peter,  who  considered  himself  un- 
worthy to  suffer  in  the  upright  position  like  his  Lord,  _L 

(e)  The  Greek  cross,  consisting  of  four  equally  long  arms,  + 
(/)  The  double  cross,   -  - 

(g)  The  triple  cross  (used  by  the  Pi/pe),    — p- 
The  chief  forms  of  the  monogram  are :  1 

*     t.    X     *     ...      . 

The  story  of  the  miraculous  invention  and  raising  of  the  true  cross  of  Christ 
by  Helena,  the  mother  of  Consiantine,  belongs  to  the  Nicene  age.  The  con- 
nection of  the  cross  with  the  a  and  w  arose  from  the  Apocalyptic  designation 
of  Christ  (Rev.  1:  8;  21:  6;  22: 13),  which  is  thus  explained  by  Prudentius 
(Cathm.  hymn.  IX.  10-12) : 


§  77.  THE  CROSS  AND  THE  CRUCIFIX.  271 

The  cross  was  despised  by  the  heathen  Komans  on  account 
of  the  crucifixion,  the  disgraceful  punishment  of  slaves  and  the 
worst  criminals;  but  the  Apologists  reminded  them  of  the 
unconscious  recognition  of  the  salutary  sign  in  the  form  of  their 
standards  and  triumphal  symbols,  and  of  the  analogies  in  na- 
ture, as  the  form  of  man  with  the  outstretched  arm,  the  flying- 
bird,  and  the  sailing  ship.1  Nor  was  the  symbolical  use  of  the 
cross  confined  to  the  Christian  church,  but  is  found  among  the 
ancient  Egyptians,  the  Buddhists  in  India,  and  the  Mexicans 
before  the  conquest,  and  other  heathen  nations,  both  as  a  sym- 
bol of  blessing  and  a  symbol  of  curse.2 

The  cross  and  the  Lord's  Prayer  may  be  called  the  greatest 
martyrs  in  Christendom.  Yet  both  the  superstitious  abuse  and 
the  puritanic  protest  bear  a  like  testimony  to  the  significance  of 
the  great  fact  of  which  it  reminds  us. 

The  CRUCIFIX,  that  is  the  sculptured  or  carved  representation 
of  our  Saviour  attached  to  th,e  cross,  is  of  much  later  date,  and 
cannot  be  clearly  traced  beyond  the  middle  of  the  sixth  cen- 

"  Alpha  et  Omega  cognominatus;  ipsefons  et  dausufa, 
Omnia  qu&  sunt,  juerunt,  quosque  postfulura  sunt" 

1  Minut.  Felix,  Octav.  c.  29 :   ct  Tropcsa  vestra  wcfncia  non  tantum  simplicit 
crucisfaciem,  verum  etiam  adfxi  hominis  imitantur.    Signum  sane  Gratis  naturalitet 
visimus  m  navi,  cum  velis  tumentibus  vehitur,  cum,  expansis  palmulis  labitur  ;  et  cum 
crigitur  jugum,  crucis  signum  est;  et  cum  homo  porrectis  manibus  Deum  pura  mentt 
veneratur.    Ita  signo  crucis  aut  raiw  natwd'is  innititur,  aut  vestra  religio  forma- 
far"    Comp.  a  very  similar  passage  in  Tertul.,  Apol.  c.  16 ;  and  Ad  Nat*  1. 12  ; 
also  Justin  M.,  Apol.  I.  55. 

2  When  the  temple  of  Serapis  was  destroyed  (A.  D.  390),  signs  of  the  cross 
were  found  beneath  the  hieroglyphics,  and  heathen  and  Christians  referred  it 
to  their  religion.    Socrates,  H.E.V.  17;  Sozomenus,  VII.  15;  Theodoret 
V.  22.    On  the  Buddhist  cross  see  Medhurst,  China,  p.  217.    At  the  discovery 
of  Mexico  the  Spaniards  found  the  sign  of  the  cross  as  an  object  of  worship 
in  the  idol  temples  at  Anahuac.    Preacott,  Conquest  of  Mexico,  TIL  338-340. 
See  on  the  heathen  use  of  the  Cross,  Haslam,  Mortillet,  Zockler  (1.  c.,  7  sqq.)t 
and  Brinton,  Myths  of  the  New  World ;  also  an  article  on  '*  The  pre-CAnsto'an 
Cross,"  in  the  "Edinburgh  Review,"  Jan,  1870.    Zockler  says  (p.  95):  "Attei 
Fluch  wid  Segen,  alles   Todeselend  und  die  Lebensherrlichkeit,  die  durch  du 
vorchristtiche  Menschheit   ausg&brdtet   gewesen,   erscheinen  in  dem  J&euze   auj 
Golgotha  concentrirt  zum  vwndervolkten  QebUde  der  religios 

ynseres  Geschlechtes" 


272  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

toy.  It  is  not  mentioned  by  any  writer  of  the  Nicene  and 
Chalcedonian  age.  One  of  the  oldest  known  crucifixes,  if  not 
the  very  oldest,  is  found  in  a  richly  illuminated  Syrian  copy  of 
the  Gospels  in  Florence  from  the  year  586.1  Gregory  of  Tours 
(d,  595)  describes  a  crucifix  in  the  church  of  St.  Genesius,  in 
Narbonne,  which  presented  the  crucified  One  almost  entirely 
naked.2  But  this  gave  offence,  and  was  veiled,  by  order  of  tha 
bishop,  with  a  curtain,  and  only  at  times  exposed  to  the  people. 
The  Venerable  Bede  relates  that  a  crucifix,  bearing  on  one  side 
the  Crucified,  on  the  other  the  serpent  lifted  up  by  Moses,  was 
brought  from  Rome  to  the  British  cloister  of  Weremouth  in 
686.3 

NOTE. 

The  first  symbol  of  the  crucifixion  was  the  cross  alone ;  then  followed 
the  cross  and  the  lamb — either  the  lamb  with  the  cross  on  the  head  or 
shoulder,  or  the  lamb  fastened  on  the  cross ;  then  the  figure  of  Christ  in 
connection  with  the  cross— either  Christ  holding  it  in  his  right  hand  (on 
the  sarcophagus  of  Probus,  d.  395),  or  Christ  with"  the  cross  in  the  back- 
ground (in  the  church  of  St.  Pudentiana,  built  398) ;  at  last  Christ  nailed 
to  the  cross. 

An  attempt  has  been  made  to  trace  the  crucifixes  back  to  the  third 
or  second  century,  in  consequence  of  the  discovery,  in  1857,  of  a  mock- 
crucifix  on  the  wall  in  the  ruins  of  the  imperial  palaces  on  the  western 
declivity  of  the  Palatine  hill  in  Eome,  which  is  preserved  in  the  Museo 
Kircheriano.  It  shows  the  figure  of  a  crucified  man  with  the  head  of  an 
ass  or  a  horse,  and  a  human  figure  kneeling  before  it,  with  the  inscrip- 
tion: "Alexamenos  worships  his  God.7'*  This  figure  was  no  doubt 
scratched  on  the  wall  by  some  heathen  enemy  to  ridicule  a  Christian 
slave  or  page  of  the  imperial  household,  or  possibly  even  the  emperor 
Alexander  Severus  (222-235),  who,  by  his  religious  syncretism,  exposed 
himself  to  sarcastic  criticism.  The  date  of  the  caricature  is  uncertain  ; 
but  we  know  that  in  the  second  century  the  Christians,  like  the  Jews 

1  See  Becker,  L  c.,  p.  38,  Westwood's  Pdceographia  Sacra,  and  Smith  and 
Cheetham,  I  515. 


De  Gloria  Martyrum,  lib.  I.  c.  28. 

8  Opera,  ed.  Giles,  iv.  p.  376.  A  crucifix  is  found  ?n  an  Irish  MS.  written 
about  800.  See  Westwood,  as  quoted  in  Smith  and  Cheetham,  I.  516. 

4  'Afegdpevoe  atper  [cu]  $e6v.  The  monument  was  first  published  by  the 
Jesuit  Garrucci,  and  is  fully  discussed  by  Becker  in  the  essay  quoted.  4 
woodcut  is  also  given  in  Smith  and  Cheetham,  I.  516. 


§78.  OTHER  CHKISTIAN  SYMBOLS.  273 

before  them,  were  charged  with  the  worship  of  an  ass,  and  that  at  that 
time  there  were  already  Christians  in  the  imperial  palace.1  After  the 
daird  century  this  silly  charge  disappears.  Roman  archaeologists  (P. 
Garrucci,  P.  Mozzoni,  and  Martigny)  infer  from  this  mock-crucifix  that 
crucifixes  were  in  use  among  Christians  already  at  the  close  of  the  second 
century,  since  the  original  precedes  the  caricature.  But  this  conjecture 
is  not  supported  by  any  evidence.  The  heathen  Csecilius  in  Minucius 
Felix  (ch.  10)  expressly  testifies  the  absence  of  Christian  simulacra.  As 
the  oldest  pictures  of  Christ,  so  far  as  we  know,  originated  not  among 
the  orthodox  Christians,  but  among  the  heretical  and  half  heathenish 
Gnostics,  so  also  the  oldest  known  representation  of  the  crucifix  was  a 
mock-picture  from  the  hand  of  a  heathen — an  excellent  illlustration  of 
the  word  of  Paul  that  the  preaching  of  Christ  crucified  is  foolishness  to 
the  Greeks. 

§  78.  Other  Christian  Symbcls. 

The  following  symbols,  borrowed  from  the  Scriptures,  were 
frequently  represented  in  the  catacombs,  and  relate  to  the  virtues 
and  duties  of  the  Christian  life :  The  dove,  with  or  without  the 
olive  branch,  the  type  of  simplicity  and  innocence;2  the  ship, 
representing  sometimes  the  church,  as  safely  sailing  through  the 
flood  of  corruption,  with  reference  to  Noah's  ark,  sometimes  the 
individual  soul  on  its  voyage  to  the  heavenly  home  under  the 
conduct  of  the  storm-controlling  Saviour;  the  palm-branch, 
which  the  seer  of  the  Apocalypse  puts  into  the  hands  of  the 
elect,  as  the  sign  of  victory;3  the  anchor,  the  figure  of  hope;4 
the  lyre,  denoting  festal  joy  and  sweet  harmony ; 5  the  cock,  an 
admonition  to  watchfulness,  with  reference  to  Peter's  fall ; 6  the 
hart  which  pants  for  the  fresh  water-brooks;7  and  the  vine 
which,  with  its  branches  and  clusters,  illustrates  the  union  of 

1  Comp.  on  the  supposed  bvoTiarpeta  of  the  Christians,  Tertullian,  ApoL  3.  15 
("Nam  et  somniastis  caput  aminum  esse  Deum  nostrum'9  etc.) ;  Ad  mticmes  I- 
11,  14;  Minut.  Felix,  Octav.  9.  Tertullian  traces  this  absurdity  to  Cornelius 
Tacitus,  who  charges  it  upon  the  Jews  (Hist.  V.  4). 

«  Comp.  Matt.  3:  16;  10:  16;  Gen.  8:  11;  Cant.  6:  9. 

8  Kev.  7 :  9.  The  palm  had  a  similar  significance  with  the  heathen.  Horace 
Yiites  (Od.  1. 1) :  "Palmaque  nobUis  Terrarum  dominos  evehft  ad  deo*." 

*  Heb.  6 :  19.    Likewise  among  the  heathen. 

*  Comp.  Eph.  5 :  19. 

6  Matt.  26:  34,  and  parallel  passages. 
'Ps.42:  1. 
Vol.  II.— 18 


274  SECOND  PERIOD,    A.D.  100-311. 

the  Christians  with  Christ  according  to  the  parable,  and  the 
richness  and  joyfulness  of  Christian  life.1 

The  phenix,  a  symbol  of  rejuvenation  and  of  the  resurrection, 
is  derived  from  the  well-known  heathen  myth.2 

§  79.  Historical  and  Allegorical  Pictures. 

From,  these  emblems  there  was  but  one  step  to  iconographic 
representations.  The  Bible  furnished  rich  material  for  his- 
torical,  typical,  and  allegorical  pictures,  which  are  found  in  the 
catacombs  and  ancient  monuments.  Many  of  them  date  from 
the  third  or  even  the  second  century. 

The  favorite  pictures  from  the  Old  Testament  are  Adam  and 
Eve,  the  rivers  of  Paradise,  the  ark  of  Noah,  the  sacrifice  of 
Isaac,  the  passage  through  the  Eed  Sea,  the  giving  of  the  law, 
Moses  smiting  the  rock,  the  deliverance  of  Jonah,  Jonah  naked 
under  the  gourd,  the  translation  of  Elijah,  Daniel  in  the  lions7 
den,  the  three  children  in  the  fiery  furnace.  Then  we  have 
scenes  from  the  Gospels,  and  from  apostolic  and  post-apostolic 
history,  such  as  the  adoration  of  the  Magi,  their  meeting  with 
Herod,  the  baptism  of  Jesus  in  the  Jordan,  the  healing  of  the 
paralytic,  the  changing  of  water  into  wine,  the  miraculous  feed- 
ing of  five  thousand,  the  ten  virgins,  the  resurrection  of  Lazarus, 
the  entry  into  Jerusalem,  the  Holy  Supper,  the  portraits  of  St. 
Peter  and  St.  Paul.3 

1  John  15 :  1-6.    The  parables  of  the  Good  Shepherd,  and  of  the  Vine  and 
the  Branches,  both  recorded  only  by  St.  John,  seem  to  have  been  the  most 
prominent  in  the  mind  of  the  primitive  Christians,  as  they  are  in  the  cata- 
combs.   "What  they  valued"  (says  Stanley,  Christ.  Iwt.,  p.  288),  "  what  they 
felt,  was  a  new  moral  influence,  a  new  life  stealing  through  their  veins,  a  new 
health  imparted  to  their  frames,  a  new  courage  breathing  in  their  faces,  like 
wine  to  a  weary  laborer,  like  sap  in  the  hundred  branches  of  a  spreading  tree, 
like  juice  in  the  thousand  clusters  of  a  spreading  vine."    But  more  important 
than  this  was  the  idea  of  vital  union  of  the  believers  with  Christ  and  among 
each  other,  symbolized  by  the  vine  and  its  branches. 

2  The  fabulous  phenix:  is  nowhere  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  and  is  first  used 
by  Clement  of  Rome,  Ad  Cor.  c.  25,  and  by  Tertullian,  De  Evwrr.  c.  13.   Comp. 
Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.  XIII.  4. 

8  For  details  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  great  illustrated  works  of  Ferret, 
De  Rossi,  Gfarrucci,  Parker,  Eoller,  Northcote  aad  Brownlow,  etc. 


§  79.  OTHER  CHRISTIAN  SYMBOLS.  275 

Tlie  passion  and  crucifixion  were  never  represented  in  the 
early  monuments,  except  by  the  symbol  of  the  cross. 

Occasionally  we  find  also  mythological  representations,  as 
Psyche  with  wings,  and  playing  with  birds  and  flowers  (an  em- 
blem of  immortality),  Hercules,  Theseus,  and  especially  Orpheus, 
who  with  Ms  magic  song  quieted  the  storm  and  tamed  the  wild 
feasts. 

Perhaps  Gnosticism  had  a  stimulating  effect  in  art,  as  it  had 
in  theology.  At  all  events  the  sects  of  the  Carpocratians,  the 
Basilideans,  and  the  Manichaeans  cherished  art.  Nationality  also 
had  something  to  do  with  this  branch  of  life.  The  Italians  are  by 
nature  an  artistic  people,  and  shaped  their  Christianity  according- 
ly. Therefore  Eome  is  preeminently  the  home  of  Christian  art. 

The  earliest  pictures  in  the  catacombs  are  artistically  the  best, 
and  show  the  influence  of  classic  models  in  the  beauty  and  grace 
of  form.  From  the  fourth  century  there  is  a  rapid  decline  to 
rudeness  and  stiffness,  and  a  transition  to  the  Byzantine  type. 

Some  writers 1  have  represented  this  primitive  Christian  art 
merely  as  pagan  art  in  its  decay,  and  even  the  Good  Shepherd 
as  a  copy  of  Apollo  or  Hermes.  But  while  the  form  is  often 
an  imitation,  the  spirit  is  altogether  different,  and  the  myths  are 
understood  as  unconscious  prophecies  and  types  of  Christian 
verities,  as  in  the  Sibylline  books.  The  relation  of  Christian 
art  to  mythological  art  somewhat  resembles  the  relation  of  bibli- 
cal Greek  to  classical  Greek.  Christianity  could  not  at  once 
invent  a  new  art  any  more  than  a  new  language,  but  it  emanci- 
pated the  old  from  the  service  of  idolatry  and  immorality,  filled 
it  with  a  deeper  fiaeaning,  and  consecrated  it  to  a  higher  aim. 

The  blending  of  classical  reminiscences  and  Christian  ideas 
is  best  embodied  in  the  beautiful  symbolic  pictures  of  the  Good 
Shepherd  and  of  Orpheus.2 

The  former  was  the  most  favorite  figure,  not  only  in  the 
Catacombs,  but  on  articles  of  daily  use,  as  rings,  cups,  and 

1  Raoul-Bochette  (M&noires  swr  les  antiquit£s  chr&iennes ;  and  Tableau,  des 
Gatocombes),  and  Betian  (Mare-Awtte,  p.  542  sqq.). 
« See  the  illustrations  at  the  end  of  the  volume. 


276  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

lamps.  Nearly  one  hundred  and  fifty  such  pictures  have  come 
down  to  us.  The  Shepherd,  an  appropriate  symbol  of  Christ, 
is  usually  represented  as  a  handsome,  beardless,  gentle  youth,  in 
light  costume,  with  a  girdle  and  sandals,  with  -the  flute  and  pas-, 
toral  staff,  carrying  a  lamb  on  his  shoulder,  standing  between 
two  or  more  sheep  that  look  confidently  up  to  him.  ^  Sometimes 
he  feeds  a  large  flock  on  green  pastures.  If  this  was  the  popu- 
lar conception  of  Christ,  it  stood  in  contrast  with  the  contempo- 
raneous theological  idea  of  the  homely  appearance  of  the 
Saviour,  and  anticipated  the  post-Constantinian  conception. 

The  picture  of  Orpheus  is  twice  found  in  the  cemetery  of 
Domitilla,  and  once  in  that  of  Callistus.  One  on  the  ceiling  in 
Domitilla,  apparently  from  the  second  century,  is  especially 
rich :  it  represents  the  mysterious  singer,  seated  in  the  centre  on 
a  piece  of  rock,  playing  on  the  lyre  his  enchanting  melodies  to 
wild  and  tame  animals — the  lion,  the  wolf,  the  serpent,  the 
horse,  the  ram — at  his  feet — and  the  birds  in  the  trees ; l  around 
the  central  figure  are  several  biblical  scenes,  Moses  smiting  the 
rock,  David  aiming  the  sling  at  Goliath  (?),  Daniel  among  the 
lions,  the  raising  of  Lazarus,  The  heathen  Orpheus,  the  re- 
puted author  of  monotheistic  hymns  (the  Orphica),  the  centre 
of  so  many  mysteries,  the  fabulous  charmer  of  all  creation, 
appears  here  either  as  a  symbol  and  type  of  Christ  himself,2  or 
rather,  like  the  heathen  Sibyl,  as  an  antitype  and  unconscious 
prophet  of  Christ,  announcing  and  foreshadowing  Him  as  the 
conqueror  of  all  the  forces  of  nature,  as  the  harmoniiier  of  all 
discords,  and  as  ruler  over  life  and  death, 

§  80.  Allegorical  Representations  of  Chrisi 
Pictures  of  Christ  came  into  use  slowly  and  gradually,  as  the 
conceptions  concerning  his  personal  appearance  changed.    The 

1  Comp.  Horace,  De  Arte  Poet.,  391  sqq. 

Sikestres  homines  sacer  tnt&rpresque  deorwn 
Gzdibus  et  victufado  deterruit  Orpheus, 
Dictus  ob  hoc  lenire  tigres  rabidosgue  kones. 

1  This  is  the  explanation  of  nearly  all  archaeologists  since  Bosio,  except 
Schultze  (Die  Katak.,  p.  105). 


§80.  ALLEGORICAL  KEPBESENTAT10NS  OF  CHE1ST.    277 

Evangelists  very  wisely  keep  profound  silence  on  the  subject, 
and  no  ideal  which  human  genius  may  devise,  can  do  justice  to 
Him  who  was  God  manifest  in  the  flesh. 

In  the  ante-Nicene  age  the  strange  notion  prevailed  that  our 
Saviour,  in  the  state  of  his  humiliation,  was  homely,  according 
to  a  literal  interpretation  of  the  Messianic  prophecy :  "  He  hath 
no  form  nor  comeliness." l  This  was  the  opinion  of  Justin 
Martyr/  Tertullian,3  and  even  of  the  spiritualistic  Alexan- 
drian divines  Clement/  and  Origen.5  A  true  and  healthy 
feeling  leads  rather  to  the  opposite  view;  for  Jesus  certainly 
had  not  the  physiognomy  of  a  sinner,  and  the  heavenly  purity 
and  harmony  of  his  soul  must  in  some  way  have  shone  through 
the  veil  of  his  flesh,  as  it  certainly  did  on  the  Mount  of  Trans- 
figuration. Physical  deformity  is  incompatible  with  the  Old 
Testament  idea  of  the  priesthood,  how  much  more  with  the  idea 
of  the  Messiah. 

Those  fathers,  however,  had  the  state  of  humiliation  alone  in 
their  eye.  The  exalted  Redeemer  they  themselves  viewed  as 
clothed  with  unfading  beauty  and  glory,  which  was  to  pass 
from  Him,  the  Head,  to  his  church  also,  in  her  perfect  millennial 
state.6  We  have  here,  therefore,  not  an  essential  opposition 

1  Isa.53:  2,  3;  52:  14;  comp.  Ps.  22. 

2  Dwlo  c.  Iryphone  Judoeo  c.  14  (elf  rrjv  irp&Tijv  irapoveiav  rov  Xptarov,  fa  <$ 
Kal    oLTifJLog  Kal  aeidrjf    Kal    iIH^rdf  Qavfiffsa'd-at    K£Kqpvy/ji£vo£  ecr/v);  c.  49 
(TraiVdf  Kal  ar^og  Kal  o£i%);  85,  88,  100,  110,  121. 

3  Adv.  Jud.  c.  14 :    '* ne  aspectu  quidem  honestus"  and  then  he  quotes  Isa. 
53 :  2  sqq. ;  8 :  14 ;  Ps.  22.    De  carne  Christi,  c.  9 :  "nee  hur/iance  honestatis 
corpus  fuit,  nedum  ccelestis  daritatis" 

*  Paedag.  III.  1,  p,  252 ;  Strom.  lib.  II.  c.  5,  p.  440;  IH.  c.  17,  p.  559 ;  VI. 
c.  17,  p.  818  (ed.  Potter). 

6  Contr.  Cels.  VI.  c.  75,  where  Origen  quotes  from  Celsus  that  Christ's  person 
did  not  differ  from  others  in  grandeur  or  beauty  or  strengf-h,  but  was,  as  the 
Christians  report,  "little,  ill-favored  and  ignoble"  (rb  itfya  fiKpbv  KOI  Svasites 
Kal  a-yevte  jjv).  He  admits  the  "ill-favored,"  but  denies  the  "ignoble,"  and 
doubts  the  "little,"  of  which  there  is  no  certain  evidence.  He  then  quotes  the 
language  of  Isaiah  53,  but  adds  the  description  of  Ps,  45 :  3,  4  (Sept.),  which 
represents  the  Messiah  as  a  king  arrayed  in  beauty.  Celsus  used  this  false 
tradition  of  the  supposed  uncomeliness  of  Jesus  as  an  argument  against  his 
divinity,  and  an  objection  to  the  Christian  religion. 

6  Comp.  Tertullian,  Adv.  Jud.  c.  14  (Opera,  ed.  Oehler  IT.  740),  where  he 


278  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

made  between  holiness  and  beauty,  but  only  a  temporary  sepa- 
ration. Nor  did  the  ante-Nicene  fathers  mean  to  deny  that 
Christ,  even  in  the  days  of  his  humiliation,  had  a  spiritual 
beauty  which  captivated  susceptible  souls.  Thus  Clement  of 
Alexandria  distinguishes  between  two  kinds  of  beauty,  the  out- 
ward beauty  of  the  flesh,  which  soon  fades  away,  and  the 
beauty  of  the  soul,  which  consists  in  moral  excellence  and  is 
permanent.  "  That  the  Lord  Himself,"  he  says,  "  was  uncomely 
in  aspect,  the  Spirit  testifies  by  Isaiah :  '  And  we  saw  Him,  and 
he  had  no  form  nor  comeliness ;  but  his  form  was  mean,  inferior 
to  men/  Yet  who  was  more  admirable  than  the  Lord  ?  But 
it  was  not  the  beauty  of  the  flesh  visible  to  the  eye,  but  the 
true  beauty  of  both  soul  and  body,  which  He  exhibited,  which 
in  the  former  is  beneficence ;  in  the  latter — that  is,  the  flesh — 
immortality."1  Chrysostom  went  further:  he  understood 
Isaiah's  description  to  refer  merely  to  the  scenes  of  the  passion, 
and  took  his  idea  of  the  personal  appearance  of  Jesus  from  the 
forty-fifth  Psalm,  where  be  is  represented  as  "  fairer  than  the 
children  of  men/'  Jerome  and  Augustin  had  the  same  view, 
but  there  was  at  that  time  no  authentic  picture  of  Christ,  and 
the  imagination  was  left  to  its  own  imperfect  attempts  to  set 
forth  that  human  face  divine  which  reflected  the  beauty  of  sin- 
less holiness. 

The  first  representations  of  Christ  were  purely  allegorical. 
He  appears  now  as  a  shepherd,  who  lays  down  his  life  for  the 

quotes  Dan.  7:  13  sq.,  and  Ps.  45:  3,  4,  for  the  heavenly  beauty  and 
glory  of  the  exalted  Saviour,,  and  says :  u  Primo  sordibus  indutus  est,  id  est 

carnis  passibilis  et  mortdis  indignitate dehinc  spoliatus  pristine,  sorde, 

exornatMS  podere  et  mitra  et  tidari  munda,  id  est  secundi  adventus;  quoniam 
gloriam  et  honorem  adeptus  demonstrator."  Justin  Martyr  makes  the  same  dis- 
tinction between  the  humility  of  the  first  and  the  glory  of  the  second  appear* 
ance.  Dial.  c.  Ttyph.  Jud.  c.  14  and  c.  49,  etc.  So  does  Origen  in  the  passage 
just  quoted. 

1  Paedag.  lib.  III.  c.  1,  which  treats  of  true  beauty.  Compare  also  the  last 
chapter  in  the  second  book,  which  ia  directed  against  the  extravagant  fondness 
of  females  for  dress  and  jewels,  and  contrasts  with  these  meretricious  orna- 
ments the  true  beauty  of  the  soul,  which  ''blossoms  out  in  the  flesh,  exhibiting 
the  amiable  comeliness  of  self-control,  whenever  the  character,  like  a  beam  of 
light,  gleams  in  the  form." 


J80.  ALLEGORICAL  KEPKESENTATIONS  OF  CHKIST.    279 

sheep/  or  carries  the  lost  sheep  on  his  shoulders ; 2  now  as  a 
lamb,  who  bears  the  sin  of  the  world;3  more  rarely  as  a  ram, 
with  reference  to  the  substituted  victim  in  the  history  of  Abra- 
ham and  Isaac;4  frequently  as  a  fisher.5  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, in  his  hymn,  calls  Christ  the  "  Fisher  of  men  that  are 
saved,  who  with  his  sweet  life  catches  the  pure  fish  out  of  the- 
hostile  flood  in  the  sea  of  iniquity ." 

The  most  favorite  symbol  seems  to  have  been  that  of  the  fish. 
It  was  the  double  symbol  of  the  Redeemer  and  the  redeemed. 
The  corresponding  Greek  ICHTHYS  is  a  pregnant  anagram,  con- 
taining the  initials  of  the  words :  "  Jesus  Christ,  Son  of  God, 
Saviour." 6  In  some  pictures  the  mysterious  fish  is  swimming 
in  the  water  with  a  plate  of  bread  and  a  cup  of  wine  on 
his  back,  with  evident  allusion  to  the  Lord's  Supper.  At  the 
same  time  the  fish  represented  the  soul  caught  in  the  net  of 
the  great  Fisher  of  men  and  his  servants,  with  reference  to 
Matt.  4 :  19 ;  comp.  13 :  47.  Tertullian  connects  the  symbol 
with  the  water  of  baptism,  saying : 7  "  We  little  fishes 
(pisGiGuli)  are  born  by  our  Fish  (secundum  'IXQTN  nos- 
trum), Jesus  Christ,  in  water,  and  can  thrive  only  by  con- 
tinuing in  the  water ; "  that  is  if  we  are  faithful  to  our  bap- 

1  John  10 :  11.    Comp.  above,  p.  276. 

2  Luke  15:  3-7;  comp.  Isa.  40:  11;  Ez.  34:  11-15;  Ps.  23. 
sjohnl:  29;  1  Pet.  1 :  19;  Rev.5:  12.  *Gen.22:  13. 
«  Christ  calls  the  apostles  "fishers  of  men,"  Matt.  4 :  19. 

«  'IX9TS  =  'I-qaov?  %.-pwrbg  Q-eov  Y-I6f  2-wr#p.  Comp.  Augustin,  De  Civii. 
Dd  xviii.  23  (Jesus  Chrisfas  Dei  Filius  Safoator).  The  acrostic  in  the 
Sibylline  Books  (lib.  viii.  vs.  217  sqq.)  adds  to  this  word  oravp6^  the  cross. 
Schultze  (KataL,  p.  129),  not  satisfied  with  this  explanation,  goes  back  to  Matt, 
7 :  10,  where  fiflh  (lx$fy )  and  serpent  (fyq)  are  contrasted,  and  suggested  a 
contrast  between  Christ  and  the  devil  (comp.  Apoc.  12 :  14,  15 ;  2  Cor.  11 :  3). 
Bather  artificial.  Merz  derives  the  symbol  from  fyov  (hence  btpaptov  in  John 
21 :  9)  in  the  sense  of  "  fish,  flesh."  In  Palestine  fish  was,  next  to  bread,  the 
principal  food,  and  a  savory  accompaniment  of  bread.  It  figures  prominently 
in  the  miraculous  feeding  of  the  multitude  (John  6:  9,  11),  and  in  the  meal 
of  the  risen  Saviour  on  the  shores  of  the  Lake  of  Tiberias  (John  21 :  9- 
bty&ptov  Kol  aprov).  By  an  allegorical  stretch,  the  fish  might  thus  become  to 
the  mind  of  the  early  church  a  symbol  of  Christ's  body,  as  the  heavenly  foci 
which  he  gave  for  the  salvation  of  men  (John  6 :  51). 

7  De  Baptismo,  c.  1. 


280  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

tismal  covenant,  and  preserve  the  grace  there  received.  The 
pious  fancy  made  the  fish  a  symbol  of  the  whole  mystery  of 
the  Christian  salvation.  The  anagrammatic  or  hieroglyphic 
use -of  the  Greek  ICHTHYS  and  the  Latin  PiBCis-Cii JUSTUS 
belonged  to  the  DisGiplina  Arcani,  and  was  a  testimony  of  the 
ancient  church  to  the  faith  in  Christ's  person  as  the  Son  of  God, 
and  his  work  as  the  Saviour  of  the  world.  The  'origin  of  this 
symbol  must  be  traced  beyond  the  middle  of  the  second  century, 
perhaps  to  Alexandria,  where  there  was  a  strong  love  for 
mystic  symbolism,  both  among  the  orthodox  and  the  Gnostic 
heretics.1 4  It  is  familiarly  mentioned  by  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria, Origen,  and  Tertullian,  and  is  found  on  ancient  remains 
in  the  Roman  catacombs,  marked  on  the  grave-stones,  rings, 
lamps,  vases,  and  wall-pictures.2 

The  Ichthys-symbol  went  out  of  use  before  the  middle  of 
the  fourth  century,  after  which  it  is  only  found  occasionally  as 
a  reminiscence  of  olden  times. 

Previous  to  the  time  of  Constantine,  we  find  no  trace  of  an 
image  of  Christ,  properly  speaking,  except  among  the  Gnostic 
Carpocratians,3  and  in  the  case  of  the  heathen  emperor  Alex- 
ander Severus,  who  adorned  his  domestic  chapel,  as  a  sort  of 
syncretistic  Pantheon,  with  representatives  of  all  religions.4 
The  above-mentioned  idea  of  the  uncomely  personal  appearance 

1  So  Pitra,  De  Pisce  symbolico,  in  "  Spicil.  Solesm./'  III.  524.  Comp;  Mar- 
riott, The  Testimony  of  the  Catacombs,  p.  120  sqq. 

a  The  oldest  Ichthys-monument  known  so  far  was  discovered  in  186f5  in  the 
Ccemeterium  Domitillse,  a  hitherto  inaccessible  part  of  the  Eoman  catacombs, 
and  is  traced  by  Cavalier  De  Eossi  to  the  first  century,  by  Becker  to  the  first 
half  of  the  second.  It  is  in  a  wall  picture,  rep-resenting  three  persona  with 
three  loaves  of  bread  and  a  fish.  In  other  pictures  we  find  fish,  bread,  and 
wine,  with  evident  allusion  to  the  miraculous  feeding  (Matt.  15 :  17),  and  the 
meals  of  the  risen  Saviour  with  his  disciples  (Luke,  ch.  24;  John,  ch.  21). 
Paulinus  calls  Christ  "paras  ipse  verus  et  aqua  vivce  piscis."  See  the  interesting 
illustrations  in  Garrucci,  Martigny,  Kraus,  and  other  archaeological  works. 

8  Irenseus,  Adv.  Haer.  I.  25.  The  Carpocratians  asserted  that  even  Pilate 
ordered  a  portrait  of  Christ  to  be  made.  Comp.  Hippolytua,  Phttos.,  VII.  c. 
32;  Epiphanius,  Adv.  Haer.  XXVL  6;  Augustin,  De  Ear.  c.  7. 

*Apollonius,  Orpheus,  Abraham,  and  Christ  See  Lampridius,  Vita  Alex. 
&0.C.29. 


§81.  PICTUBES  OF  THE  VIRGIN  MARY.  281 

or  Jesus,  the  entire  silence  of  the  Gospels  about  it,  and  the  Old 
Testament  prohibition  of  images,  restrained  the  church  from 
making  either  pictures  or  statues  of  Christ,  until  in  the  Nicene 
age  a  great  change  took  place,  though  not  without  energetic  and 
long-continued  opposition.  Eusebius  gives  us,  from  his  own 
observation,  the  oldest  report  of  a  statue  of  Christ,  which  was 
said  to  have  been  erected  by  the  woman  with  the  issue  of  blood, 
together  with  her  own  statue,  in  memory  of  her  cure,  before 
her  dwelling  at  Csesarea  Philippi  (Paneas).1  But  the  same 
historian,  in  a  letter  to  the  empress  Constantia  (the  sister  of 
Constantine  and  widow  of  Licinius),  strongly  protested  against 
images  of  Christ,  who  had  laid  aside  his  earthly  servant  form, 
and  whose  heavenly  glory  transcends  the  conception  and  artistic 
skill  of  man.2 

§  81.  Pictures  of  the  Virgin  Mary. 

DE  Eossi:  Imagines  selectee  Deiparce  Virginis  (Rome,  1863);  MAR- 
RIOTT: Catacombs  (Lond.  1870,  pp.  1-63);  MARTIGBTY:  Diet,  sub 
"Vierge;"  KRAUS:  Die  christl  Eunst  (Leipz.  1873,  p.  105); 
NORTHCOTE  and  BROWNLOW  :  Roma  Softer.  (2nd  ed.  Lond.  1879, 
Pt.  II.  p.  133  sqq.);  WlTHROW:  Catacombs  (N.  Y.  1874,  p.  305 
sqq.);  SCHULTZE:  Die  Marienbilder  der  altchristl.  Kunst,  and 
Die  Katacomben  (Leipz.  1882,  p.  150  sqq.);  VON  LEHNER:  Die 
Marienverehrung  in  den  3  ersten  Jahrh.  (Stuttgart,  1881,  p.  282  sqq.). 

It  was  formerly  supposed  that  no  picture  of  the  Virgin 
existed  before  the  Council  of  Ephesus  (431),  which  condemned 
Nestorius  and  sanctioned  the  theotokos,  thereby  giving  solemn 
sanction  and  a  strong  impetus  to  the  cultus  of  Mary.  But 
several  pictures  are  now  traced,  with  a  high  degree  of  proba- 
bility, to  the  third,  if  not  the  second  century.  From  the  first 

i  JET.  E.  VII.  18.  Comp.  Matt.  9 :  20.  Probably  that  alleged  statue  of 
Christ  was  a  monument  of  Hadrian,  or  some  other  emperor  to  whom  the 
Phoenicians  did  obeisance,  in  the  form  of  a  kneeling  woman.  Similar  repre- 
sentations are  seen  on  coins,  particularly  from  the  age  of  Hadrian.  Julian 
the  Apostate  destroyed  the  two  statues,  and  substituted  his  own,  which  was 
riyen  by  lightning  (Sozom.  V.  21). 

*  A  fragment  of  this  letter  is  preserved  in  the  acts  of  the  iconoclastic  Coun- 
cil of  754,  and  in  the  sixth  act  of  the  Second  Council  of  Niccea,  787.  See 
Euseb.  Opp.  ed,  Migne,  II.  col.  1545,  and  Harduin,  Cone.  IV.  406. 


282  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

five  centuries  nearly  fifty  representations  of  Mary  have  so  far 
been  brought  to  the  notice  of  scholars,  most  of  them  in  connec- 
tion with  the  infant  Saviour. 

The  oldest  is  a  fragmentary  wall-picture  in  the  cemetery  of 
Priscilla :  it  presents  Mary  wearing  a  tunic  and  cloak,  in  sitting 
posture,  and  holding  at  her  breast  the  child,  who  turns  his  face 
round  to  the  beholder.  Near  her  stands  a  young  and 
beardless  man  (probably  Joseph)  clothed  in  the  pallium,  holding 
a  book-roll  in  one  hand,  pointing  to  the  star  above  with  the 
other,  and  looking  upon  the  mother  and  child  with  the  ex- 
pression of  joy ;  between  and  above  the  figures  is  the  star  of 
Bethlehem;  the  whole  represents  the  happiness  of  a  family 
without  the  supernatural  adornments  of  dogmatic  reflection.1 
In  the  same  cemetery  of  Priscilla  there  are  other  frescos, 
representing  (according  to  De  Eossi  and  Garrucci)  the  annuncia- 
tion by  the  angel,  the  adoration  of  the  Magi,  and  the  finding 
of  the  Lord  in  the  temple.  The  adoration  of  the  Magi  (two  or 
four,  afterwards  three)  is  a  favorite  part  of  the  pictures  of  the 
holy  family.  In  the  oldest  picture  of  that  kind  in  the  cemetery 

1  See  the  picture  in  De  Eossi,  Plate  iv.,  Northcote  and  Brownlow,  P)ale  xx 
(II.  140),  and  in  Scliultze,  jEtefc.,  p.  151.  De  Rossi  ("  Bulletino,"  1865,  23,  as 
quoted  by  N/and  B.)  declares  it  either  coeval  with  the  first  Christian  art,  or 
little  removed  from  it,  either  of  the  age  of  the  FJavii  or  of  Trajan  and 
Hadrian,  or  at  the  very  latest,  of  the  first  Antonines.  "  On  'the  roof  of  this 
tomb  there  was  figured  in  fine  stucco  the  Good  Shepherd  between  two  sheep, 
and  some  other  subject,  now  nearly  defaced."  De  Rossi  supports  his  view  of 
the  high  antiquity  of  this  Madonna  by  the  superior,  almost  classical  style  of 
art,  and  by  the  fact  that  the  catacomb  of  Priscilla,  the  mother  of  Pudens,  is 
one  of  the  oldest.  But  J.  H.  Parker,  an  experienced  antiquary,  assigns  this 
picture  to  A.  D.  523.  The  young  man  is,  according  to  De  Rossi,  Isaiah  or 
some  other  prophet;  but  Marriott  and  Schultze  refer  him  to  Joseph,  which  is 
more  probable,  although  the  later  tradition  of  the  Greek  church  derived  from 
the  Apocryphal  Gospels  and  strengthened  by  the  idea  of  the  perpetual  vir- 
ginity, represents  him  as  an  old  man  with  several  children  from  a  previous 
marriage  (the  brethren  of  .Tesus,  changed  into  cousins  by  Jerome  and  the 
Latin  church).  JSTorthcote  and  Brownlow  (II.  141)  remark:  "St.  Joseph 
certainly  appears  in  some  of  the  sarcophagi ;  and  in  the  most  ancient  of  them 
as  a  young  and  beardless  man,  generally  clad  in  a  tunic.  In  the  mosaics  of 
St.  Mary  Major's,  which  are  of  the  fifth  century,  and  in  which  he  appears 
four  or  five  times,  he  is  shown  of  mature  age,  if  not  old ;  and  from  that  tim* 
forward  this  became  the  more  common  mode  of  representing  him.'' 


J81.  PICTURES  OF  THE  VIRGIN  MARY.  283 

of  SS.  Peter  and  Marcellinus,  Mary  site  on  a  chair,  holding 
the  babe  in  her  lap,  and  receiving  the  homage  of  two  Magi, 
one  on  each  side,  presenting  their  gifts  on  a  plate.1  In  later  pic- 
tures the  manger,  the  ox  and  the  ass;  and  the  miraculous  stai 
are  added  to  the  scene. 

The  frequent  pictures  of  a  lady  in  praying  attitude,  with 
uplifted,  or  outstretched  arms  (Orans  or  Orante),  especially 
when  found  in  company  with  the  Good  Shepherd,  are  explained 
by  Roman  Catholic  archaeologists  to  mean  the  church  or  the 
blessed  Virgin,  or  both-  combined,  praying  for  sinners.2  But 
figures  of  praying  men  as  well  as  women  are  abundant  in  the 
catacombs,  and  often  represent  the  person  buried  in  the  adjacent 
tomb,  whose  names  are  sometimes  given.  No  Ora  pro  nobis, 
no  Ave  Maria,  no  Theotokos  or  Deipara  appears  there.  The 
pictures  of  the  Orans  are  like  those  of  other  women,  and  show 
no  traces  of  Mariolatry.  Np-arly  all  the  representations  in  the 
catacombs  keep  within  the  limits  of  the  gospel  history.  But 
after  the  fourth  century,  and  in  the  degeneracy  of  art,  Mary 
was  pictured  in  elaborate  mosaics,  and  on  gilded  glasses,  as  the 
crowned  queen  of  heaven,  seated  on  a  throne,  in  bejewelled 
purple  robes,  and  with  a  nimbus  of  glory,  worshipped  by  angels 
and  saints. 

The  noblest  pictures  of  Mary,  in  ancient  and  modern  times, 
endeavor  to  set  forth  that  peculiar  union  of  virgin  purity  and 
motherly  tenderness  which  distinguish  "the  Wedded  Maid 

1  See  Plate  xx.  in  N.  and  B.  n.  140.    Schultze  (p.  153)  traces  this  picture 
to  the  beginning  of  the  third  century. 

2  According  to  the  usual  Roman  Catholic  interpretation  of  the  apocalyptic 
rision  of  the  woman  clothed  with  the  sun,  and  bringing  forth  a  man-child 
[12:  1,  5).    Cardinal  Newman  reasons  inconclusively  in  a  letter  to  Dr.  Pusey  - 
)n  his  Eirenicon  (p.  62) :  "  I  do  not  deny  that,  under  the  image  of  the  woman, 
•he  church  is  signified ;  but  ....  the  holy  apostle  would  not  have  spoken  of 
Jie  church  under  this  particular  image  unless  there  had  existed  a  blessed 
Virgin  Mary,  who  was  exalted  on  high,  and  the  object  of  veneration  of  all 
,he  faithful."    When  accompanied  by  the  Good  Shepherd  the  Orans  is  sup- 
posed by  Northcpte  and  Brownlow  (II.  137)  to  represent  Mary  as  the  new 
Eve,  as  the  Shepherd  is  the  new  Adam.    It  must  be  admitted  that  the  paralle1 
>etween  Mary  and  Eve  is  as  old  as  Irenseus,  and  contains  the  fruitful  germ  of 
Mariolatry,  but  in  those  pictures  no  such  contrast  is  presented. 


284  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

and  Virgin  Mother "  from  ordinary  women,  and  exert  such  a 
powerful  charm  upon  the  imagination  and  feelings  of 
Christendom.  No  excesses  of  Mariolatry,  sinful  as  they  are, 
should  blind  us  to  the  restraining  and  elevating  effect  of  con- 
templating, with  devout  reverence, 

*  The  ideal  of  all  womanhood, 
So  mild,  so  merciful,  so  strong,  so  good, 
So  patient,  peaceful,  loyal,  loving,  pure." 


CHAPTEE  VII. 

THE  CHURCH  IS  THE  CATACOMBS. 

§  82.  Literature. 

Oomp.  the  works  quoted  in  ch.  VI,  especially  GARRTJCCI  (6  vols.),  and 
the  Table  of  Illustrations  at  the  end  of  this  volume. 

I.  Older  works.     By  Bosio  (Roma,  Sotterranea,  Rom.  1632 ;  abridged 

edition  by  P.  GIOVANNI  SEVERANI  da  S.  Severino,  Bom.  1710, 
very  rare);  BOLDETTI  (1720);  BOTTARI  (1737);  D'AGINCOTJRT 
(1825) ;  ROSTELL  (1830) ;  MARCHI  (1844) ;  MAITLAND  (The  Church 
in  the  Catacombs,  Lond.  1847);  LOT/IS  PERRET  (Catacombes  de 
Home,  etc.  Paris,  1853  sqq.  5  vols.,  with  325  splendid  plates,  but 
with  a  text  that  is  of  little  value,  and  superseded). 

II.  More  recent  works. 

*Giov  ANNI  BATTISTA  DE  Rossi  (the  chief  authority  on  the  Catacombs) : 
La  Roma  Sotterranea  Cristiana  descritta  et  illustrata,  publ.  by  order 
of  Pope  Pio  Nono,  Roma  (cromolitografia  Pontificia),  Tom.  1. 1864, 
Tom.  II.  1867,  Tom.  III.  1877,  in  3  vols.  fol.  with  two  additional 
vols.  of  plates  and  inscriptions.  A  fourth  volume  is  expected. 
Comp.  his  articles  in  the  bimonthly  "Bulletino  di  archeologia 
Cristiana,"  Rom.  1863  sqq.,  and  several  smaller  essays.  Roller 
calls  De  Rossi  "  le  fouilleur  le  mieux  qualifie',  fervent  catholique,  mais 
critique  serieuz*" 

*J.  SPENCER  NORTHCOTE  (Canon  of  Birmingham)  and  W.  R.  BROWNLOW 
(Canon  of  Plymouth):  Roma  Sotterranea.  London  (Longmans, 
Green  &  Co.,  1869;  second  edition,  "rewritten  and  greatly  enlarged," 
1879,  2  vols.  The  first  vol.  contains  the  History,  the  second,  Chris- 
tian Art.  This  work  gives  the  substance  of  the  investigations  of  Com- 
mendatore  De  Rossi  by  his  consent,  together  with  a  large  number  of 
chromo-lithographic  plates  and  wood-engravings,  with  special  refer- 
ence to  the  cemetery  of  San  Callisto.  The  vol.  on  Inscriptions  is 
separate,  see  below. 

F.  X,  KRAUS  (R  C.),  Roma  Sotterranea.  Die  Rom.  Katakomben. 
Freiburg,  i.  B.  (1873),  second  ed.  1879.  Based  upon  De  Kossi  and 
the  first  eel.  of  Northcote  &  Brownlow. 

D.  DE  RICHEMONT  :  Les  catacombes  de  Rome.    Paris,  1870. 

WHARTON  B.  MARRIOTT,  B.  S.  F.  S.  A.  (Ch.  of  England) :  The  Testi* 

285 


286  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

mony  of  the  Catacombs  and  of  other  Monuments  of  Christian  Art  from 
the  second  to  the  eighteenth  century,  concerning  questions  of  Doctrine 
now  disputed  in  the  Church.  London,  1870  (223  pages  with  illustra- 
tions). Discusses  the  monuments  referring  to  the  cultus  of  the 
Virgin  Mary,  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope,  and  the  state  after  death. 

F.  BECKER  :  Horns  altchristliche  Cometerien.    Leipzig,  1874. 

W.  H.  WITHROW  (Methodist) :  The  Catacombs  of  Rome  and  their  Testi- 
mony relative  to  Primitive  Christianity.  New  York  (Nelson  & 
Phillips),  1874.  Polemical  against  Romanism.  The  author  says 
(Pref.,  p.  6):  "The  testimony  of  the  catacombs  exhibits,  more 
strikingly  than  any  other'  evidence,  the  immense  contrast  between 
primitive  Christianity  and  modern  Romanism." 

•JOHN  P.  LUNDY  (Episc.) :  Monumental  Christianity:  or  the  Art  and 
Symbolism  of  the  Primitive  Church  as  Witnesses  and  Teachers  of  the 
one  Catholic  Faith  and  Practice.  New  York,  1876.  New  ed.  en- 
larged, 1882,  453  pages,  richly  illustrated. 

*JoHN  HENRY  PARKER  (Episc.) :  The  Archaeology  of  Rome.  Oxford 
and  London,  1877.  Parts  IX.  and  x. :  Tombs  in  and  near  Rome, 
and  Sculpture ;  Part  xn. :  The  Catacombs.  A  standard  work,  with 
the  best  illustrations. 

*  TH&OPHILE  ROLLER  (Protest.) :  Les  Gatacombes  de  Rome.    Histoire  de 

Vart  et  des  croyances  religieuses  pendant  les  premiers  sibcles  du  Ckris- 
tianisme.  Paris,  1879-1881,  2  vols.  fol.  720  pages  text  and  100  excel- 
lent plates  en  heliogravure,  and  many  illustrations  and  inscriptions. 
The  author  resided  several  years  at  Naples  and  Rome  as  Reformed 
pastor. 

M.  ARMELLINI  (R.  C.):  Le  Catacombe  Romane  descritte.  Roma,  1880 
(A  popular  extract  from  De  Rossi,  437  pages).  By  the  same  the 
more  important  work:  II  Cimiterio  di  S.  Agnese  sulla  via  Nomentana. 
Rom.  1880. 

DEAN  STANLEY:  The  Roman  Catacombs,  in  his  "Christian  Institutions." 
Lond.  and  N.  York,  1881  (pp.  272-295). 

*  VICTOR  SCHTTLTZE  (Lutheran) :   Archceologische  Studien  uber  altchrist- 

liche  Mbnumente.  Mt  26  Holzschnitten.  Wien,  1880  j  Die  Kata- 
komben.  Die  altchristlichen  Grabstatten.  Ihre  Geschichte  und  ihre 
Mbnumente  (with  52  illustrations).  Leipzig,  1882  (342  pages) ;  Die 
Katakomben  von  San  Gennaro  dei  Poveri  in  NeapeL  Jena,  1877, 
Also  the  pamphlet :  Der  theolog.  Ertrag  der  Katalcombenforsc.hung. 
Leipz.  1882  (30  pages).  The  last  pamphlet  is  against  Harnack's 
review,  who  charged  Schultze  with  overrating  the  gain  of  the 
catacomb-investigations  (see  the  "  Theol.  Literaturzeitung,"  1S82.J 

Bishop  W.  J.  KIP  :  The  Catacombs  of  Rome  as  illustrating  the  Church 
of  the  First  Three  Centuries.  N.  York,  1853,  6th  ed.,  1887  (212  pages). 

K.  RONNEKE  :  Rom's  christliche  Katahomben.     Leipzig,  1886. 

Comp.  also  EDMUND  YENABLES  in  Smith  and  Chcctham,  1.  294-317; 


{  88.    ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY  OP  THE  CATACOMBS.    287 

HEINEICH  MERZ  in  Herzog,  VII  559-568;  THEOD.  MOMMSEN 
on  the  Roman  Catac.  in  uThe  Contemp.  Review."  voL  XVII.  160- 
175  (April  to  July,  1871) ;  the  relevant  articles  in  the  Archaeol.  Diets, 
of  MARTIGNY  and  KRAUS,  and  the  Archaeology  of  BENNETT  (1888). 

III.  Christian  Inscriptions  in  the  catacombs  and  other  old  monuments. 

*Commendatore  J.  B.  DE  Eossi :  Inscriptions  Christiana  Urbis  Roma 
septimo  seculo  antiquiores.  Romse,  1861  (XXIII.  and  619  pages). 
Another  vol.  is  expected.  The  chief  work  in  this  department, 
Many  inscriptions  also  in  his  Roma  Sott.  and  "  Bulletino." 

EDWARD  LE  BLANT  :  Inscriptions  chretiennes  de  la  Oaule  anterieures  au 
VIIIme  siecle.  Paris,  1856  and  1865,  2  vols.  By  the  same:  Manuel 
d' Jj/pigraphie  chretienne.  Paris,  1869, 

JOHN  McCAUL :  Christian  Epitaphs  of  the  First  Six  Centuries.  Toronto, 
1869.  Greek  and  Latin,  especially  from  Eome. 

F.  BECKER  :  Die  Inschriften  der  romischen  Cometerien.    Leipzig,  1878. 

*  J.  SPENCER  NORTHCOTE  (E.  C.  Canon  of  Birmingham) :  Epitaphs  of 
the  Catacombs  or  Christian  Inscriptions  in  Rome  during  the  First  Four 
Centuries.  Lond.,  1878  (196  pages). 

G.  T.  STOKES  on  Greek  and  Latin  Christian  Inscriptions;  two  articles  in 

the  "Contemporary  Review"  for  1880  and  1881. 

V.  SCHULTZE  discusses  the  Inscriptions  in  the  fifth  section  of  his  work 
Die  Katakomben  (1882),  pp.  235-274,  and  gives  the  literature. 

The  Corpus  In»criptionum  Gr&carum  by  BOCKH,  and  KIRCHHOFF, 
and  the  Corpus  Ins'criptionum  Zat ,  edited  for  the  Berlin  Academy  by 
TH.  MOMMSBK  and  others,  1863  sqq.  (not  yet  completed),  contain 
also  Christian  Inscriptions.  Prof.  E.  HUBNEK  has  added  those  of 
Spain  (1871)  and  Britain  (1873).  G.  PETRIE  has  collected  the  Chris- 
tian Inscriptions  in  the  Irish  language,  ed.  by  STOKES.  Dublin, 
1870  sqq.  Comp.  the  art.  "Inscriptions,"  in  Smith  and  Cheetham, 
1.841. 

§  83.  Origin  and  JBfetory  of  the  Catacombs. 

THE  Catacombs  of  Eome  and  other  cities  open  a  new  chapter 
•jf  Church  history,  which  has  recently  been  dug  up  from  the 
bowels  of  the  earth.  Their  discovery  was  a  revelation  to  the 
world  as  instructive  and  important  as  the  discovery  of  the  long 
lost  cities  of  Pompeii  and  Herculaneura,  and  of  Nineveh  and 
Babylon.  Eusebius  says  nothing  about  them;  the  ancient 
Fathers  scarcely  allude  to  them,  except  Jerome  and  Prudentius, 
and  even  they  give  us  no  idea  of  their  extent  and  importance. 
Hence  the  historians  till  quite  recently  have  passed  them  by  in 


288  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

silence.1  But  since  the  great  discoveries  of  Commendatore 
De  Eossi  and  other  archaeologists  they  can  no  longer  be  ignored. 
They  confirm,  illustrate,  and  supplement  our  previous  know- 
ledge derived  from  the  more  important  literary  remains. 

The  name  of  the  Catacombs  is  of  uncertain  origin,  but  is 
equivalent  to  subterranean  cemeteries  or  resting-places  for  the 
dead.2  First  used  of  the  Christian  cemeteries  in  the  neighbor- 
hood of  Home,  it  was  afterwards  applied  to  those  of  Naples, 
Malta,  Sicily,  Alexandria,  Paris,  and  other  cities. 

It  was  formerly  supposed  that  the  Roman  Catacombs  were 
originally  sand-pits  (arenarice)  or  stone-quarries  (lapididnce), 
excavated  by  the  heathen  for  building  material,  and  occasionally 
used  as  receptacles  for  the  vilest  corpses  of  slaves  and  criminals/* 
But  this  view  is  now  abandoned  on  account  of  the  difference  of 
construction  and  of  the  soil.  A  few  of  the  catacombs,  however, 
about  five  out  of  thirty,  are  more  or  less  closely  connected  with 
abandoned  sand-pits.4 

1  Mosheim  and  Gibbon  in  the  last  century,  and  even  Neander,  Gieseler,  and 
Baur,  in  our  age,  ignore  the  very  existence  of  the  catacombs,  except  that 
Gieseler  quotes  the  well-known  passage  of  Jerome.    But  Dean  Milman,  in  his 
History  of  Christianity,  Hase,  Kurtz,  Kraus,  and  others,  in  their  manuals,  take 
brief  notice  of  them. 

2  KaraKvju/Siov,  catacumba,,  also  (in  some  MSS.)  catatumba.    Various  deriva- 
tions:   1)  From  Kara   (down  from,  downwards,  as  in  Karafiaivu,   KardKSiiLUu, 
KaransfjLTru},  and  rfyu/fof    (compare  the  late  Latin  tumba,  the  French  tonibe, 
tombeau,  and  the  English  tomb,  grave],  i.  e.  a  tomb  down  in  the  earth,  as  distinct 
from  tombs  on  the  surface.    This  corresponds  best  to  the  thing  itsejf.    2)  Frony 
KCLT&  and  Kotp&u  (to  sleep),  which  would  make  it  equivalent  to  Mi^ri^m^ 
dormitorium,  skeping  place.    3)  From  KUT&  and  ri^fa  (the  hollow  of  ajdssel)  or 
Kvpfog  (cup),  Kv/iftiov  (a  small  cup,  Lat.  cymbium),  which  would  simply  give  us 
the  idea  of  a  hollow  place.    So  Venahles  in  Smith  and  Cheetham,    Very  un- 
likely.   4)  A  hybrid  term  from  Kard  and  the  Latin  decumbo,  to  lie  down,  to 
recline.    So  Marchi,  and  Northcote  and  Brownlow  (I.  263).    The  word  first 
occurs  in  a-Christian  calendar  of  the  third  or  fourth  century  (in  Catacumbas), 
and  in  a  letter  of  Gregory  I.  to  the  Empress  Constantia,  towards  the  end  of 
the  sixth  century  (Epp.  III.  30),  with  a  special  local  application  to  San 
Sebastian.    The  earlier  writers  use  the  terms  Koiwrfpta,  cometeria  (whence  our 
wnetery),  also  cryptce,  crypts. 

9  So  Aringhi,  Baronius,  Severano,  Bottari,  Boldetti,  and  all  writers  prior  to 
Marchi,  and  his  pupils,  the  two  brothers  De  Rossi,  who  turned  the  current  of 
opinion.  See  Northcote  and  Br.  I.  377  sqq. 

«  The  sand-pits  and  stone-quarries  were  made  wide  enou^fc  for  a  horse  an<* 


283.   ORIGIN  AND  HISTOEY  OF  THE  CATACOMBS.     289 

The  catacombs,  therefore,  with  a  few  exceptions,  are  of  Chris- 
tian origin,  and  were  excavated  for  the  express  purpose  of 
Christian  burial.  Their  enormous  extent,  and  the  mixture  of 
heathen  with  Christian  symbols  and  inscriptions,  might  suggest 
that  they  were  used  by  heathen  also ;  but  this  is  excluded  by 
the  fact  of  the  mutual  aversion  of  Christians  and  idolaters  to 
associate  in  life  and  in  death.  The  mythological  features  are 
few,  and  adapted  to  Christian  ideas.1 

Another  erroneous  opinion,  once  generally  entertained,  re- 
garded the  catacombs  as  places  of  refuge  from  heathen  persecu- 
tion. But  the  immense  labor  required  could  not  have  escaped 
the  attention  of  the  police.  They  were,  on  the  contrary,  the 
result  of  toleration.  The  Roman  government,  although  (like 
all  despotic  governments)  jealous  of  secret  societies,  was  quite 
liberal  towards  the  burial  clubs,  mostly  of  the  poorer  classes, 
or  associations  for  securing,  by  regular  contributions,  decent  in- 
terment with  religious  ceremonies.2  Only  the  worst  criminals, 

cart,  and  are  cut  in  the  tufa,  litoide  and  pozsolana  pura,  which  furnish  the 
best  building  material  in  Kome ;  while  the  catacombs  have  generally  very 
narrow  passages,  run  in  straight  lines,  often  cross  each  other  at  sharp  angles, 
and  are  excavated  in  the  tufa  granulare,  which  is  too  soft  for  building-stone* 
and  too  much  mixed  with  earth  to  be  used  for  cement,  but  easily  worked,  and 
adapted  for  the  construction  of  galleries  and  chambers.  See  Northcote  and 
Br.  I.  376-390.  The  exceptions  are  also  stated  by  these  authors.  J.  EL 
Parker  has  discovered  loeuli  for  Christian  burial  in  the  recesses  of  a  deserted 
sand-pit. 

1  See  the  remarks  of  Northcote  and  Br.  I.  276  against  J.  H.  Parker,  who 
asserts  the  mixed  use  of  the  catacombs  for  heathens  and  Christians. 

2  This  view  is  supported  by  Professor  Mommsen,  the  Eoman  historian,  who 
says  (in  "Contemporary  Review,"  vol.  xxvii.p.  168):   "Associations  of  poor 
people  who  clubbed  together  for  the  burial  of  their  members  were  not  only 
tolerated  but  supported  by  the  imperial  government,  which  otherwise  was  very 
strict  against  associations.    From  this  point  of  view,  therefore,  there  was  no 
legal  impediment  to  the  acquisition  of  these  properties.    Christian  association* 
have  from  the  very  beginning  paid  great  attention  to  their  burials ;  it  was  con- 
sidered the  duty  of  the  wealthier  members  to  provide  for  the  burial  of  the 
poor,  and  St.  Ambrose  still  allowed  churches  to  sell  their  communion  plate,  in 
order  to  enlarge  the  cemeteries  of  the  faithful.    The  catacombs  show  what 
could  be  achieved  by  such  means  at  Kome.   Even  if  iheir  fabulous  dimensions 
are  reduced  to  their  right  measure,  they  form  an  immense  work,  without 
beauty  and  ornament,  despising  in  architecture  and  inscription  not  only  pomp 

Vol.  II.    19, 


290  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-31U 

traitors,  suicides,  and  those  struck  down  by  lightning  (touched 
by  the  gods)  were  left  unburied.  The  pious  care  of  the  dead  is 
an  ifistinct  of  human  nature,  and  is  found  among  all  nations. 
Death  is  a  mighty  leveler  of  distinctions  and  preacher  of  tolera- 
tion and  charity  ;  even  despots  bow  before  it,  and  are  reminded 
of  their  own  vanity  ;  even  hard  hearts  are  moved  by  it  to  pity 
and  to  tears.  "  De  mortuis  nihil  nisi  loniJtm" 

The  Christians  enjoyed  probably  from  the  beginning  the 
privilege  of  common  cemeteries,  like  the  Jews,  even  without  an 
express  enactment.  Galienus  restored  them  after  their  tem- 
porary confiscation  during  the  persecution  of  Valerian  (260).1 

Being  mostly  of  Jewish  and  Oriental  descent,  the  Roman 
Christians  naturally  followed  the  Oriental  custom  of  cutting 
their  tombs  in  rocks,  and  constructing  galleries.  Hence  the 
close  resemblance  of  the  Jewish  and  Christian  cemeteries  in 
Rome.2  The  ancient  Greeks  and  Romans  under  the  empire 
were  in  the  habit  of  burning  the  corpses  (crematio)  for  sanitary 

and  empty  phraseology,  but  even  nicety  and  correctness,  avoiding  the  splendor 
and  grandeur  as  well  as  the  tinsel  and  vanity  of  the  life  of  the  great  town  that 
was  hurrying  and  throbbing  above,  the  true  commentary  of  the  words  of 
Christ  —  '  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world/  " 
1  Euseb.  H.  E.  VII.  13:   I,   r&  TQV 


*  Boiler  says  (in  Lichtenberger's  Encyd.  des  Sc.  Ed.  II.  685).  "Les  juifi 
ensevelissaient  dans  le  roc.  A  Rome  its  out  creuse  de  grandes  catacombes  presqw 
idmtiques  d  ceUes  des  Chretiens-  Oeux-ci  ont  $t$  lews  imitateurs.  Les  Etrusques 
9e  serwtent  OMSSI  de  grottes;  mais  Us  ne  les  reliaient  point  par  des  gtieries 
ittimitees."  Dean  Stanley  (L  c,  p.  274):  "The  Catacombs  are  the  standing 
monuments  of  the  Oriental  and  Jewish  character,  even  of  Western  Chris- 
tianity. The  fact  that  they  are  the  counterparts  of  the  rock-hewn  tombs  of 
Palestine,  and  yet  more  closely  of  the  Jewish  cemeteries  in  the  neighborhood 
of  Borne,  corresponds  to  the  fact  that  the  early  Boman  Church  was  not  a 
Latin  but  an  Eastern  community,  speaking  Greek  and  following  the  usages  of 
Syria.  And  again,  the  ease  with  which  the  Boman  Christians  had  recourse  to 
these  cemeteries  is  an  indication  of  the  impartiality  of  the  Boraan  law,  which 
extended  (as  De  Bossi  has  well  pointed  out)  to  this  despised  sect  the  same 
protection  in  regard  to  burial,  even  during  the  times  of  persecution,  that  was 
accorded  to  the  highest  in  the  land.  They  thus  bear  witness  to  the  uncon- 
scious fostering  care  of  the  Imperial  Government  over  the  infant  church. 
They  aw  thus  monuments,  not  BO  much  of  the  persecution  as  of  the  toleration 
which  the  Christians  received  at  the  bands  of  the  Roman  Empire/' 


J83.  OEIQIN  AND  HISTORY  OF  THE  CATACOMBS.     291 

reasons,  but  burial  in  the  earth  (humcdio),  outside  of  the  city 
near  the  public  roads,  or  on  hills,  or  in  natural  grottos,  was 
the  older  custom ;  the  rich  had  their  own  sepulchres  (sepukra). 

In  their  catacombs  the  Christians  could  assemble  for  worship 
and  take  refuge  in  times  of  persecution.  Very  rarely  they 
were  pursued  in  these  silent  retreats.  Once  only  it  is  re* 
ported  that  the  Christians  were  shut  up  by  the  heathen  in  a 
cemetery  and  smothered  to  death. 

Most  of  the  catacombs  were  constructed  during  the  first  three 
centuries,  a  few  may  be  traced  almost  to  the  apostolic  age.1  After 
Constantino,  when  the  temporal  condition  of  the  Christians  im- 
proved, and  they  could  bury  their  dead  without  any  disturbance 
in  the  open  air,  the  cemeteries  were  located  above  ground, 
especially  above  the  catacombs,  and  around  the  basilicas,  or  on 
other  land  purchased  or  donated  for  the  purpose.  Some  cata- 
combs owe  their  origin  to  individuals  or  private  families,  who 
granted  the  use  of  their  own  grounds  for  the  burial  of  their 
brethren;  others  belonged  to  churches.  The  Christians  wrote 
on  the  graves  appropriate  epitaphs  and  consoling  thoughts,  and 
painted  on  the  walls  their  favorite  symbols.  At  funerals  they 
turned  these  dark  and  cheerless  abodes  into  chapels ;  under  the 
dim  light  of  the  terra-cotta  lamps  they  committed  dust  to  dust, 
ashes  to  ashes,  and  amidst  the  shadows  of  death  they  inhaled 
the  breath  of  the  resurrection  and  life  everlasting.  But  it  is  an 
error  to  suppose  that  the  catacombs  served  as  the  usual  places  of 
worship  in  times  of  persecution ;  for  such  a  purpose  they  were 
entirely  unfitted ;  even  the  largest  could  accommodate,  at  most, 
only  twenty  or  thirty  persons  within  convenient  distance.2 

1  De  Rossi  (as  "quoted  by  Northcote  and  Brownlow,  1. 112):  '*  Precisely  in 
those  cemeteries  to  which  history  or  tradition  assigns  apostolic  origin,  I  see,  in 
the  light  of  the  most  searching  archaeological  criticism,  the  cradle  hoth  of 
Christian  subterranean  sepulchres,  of  Christian  art>  and  of  Christian  inscrip- 
tions ;  there  I  find  memorials  of  persons  who  appear  to  belong  to  the  times «/ 
the  Flavii  and  of  Trajan;  and  finally  I  discover  precise  dates  of  those  times/' 

2  Schultze  (Die  Eatak.,  p.  73  and  83)  maintains  in  opposition  to  Marchi, 
that  the  catacombs  were  nothing  but  burial  places,  and  used  only  for  the 
burial  service,  and  that  the  little  chapels  (ecdesiol(s)  were  either  private  se- 
pulchral chambers  or  post-Constantinian  structures. 


292  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

The  devotional  use  of  the  catacombs  began  in  the  Mcene  age, 
and  greatly  stimulated  the  worship  of  martyrs  and  saints. 
When  they  ceased  to  be  used  for  -burial  they  became  resorts  of 
pious  pilgrims.  Little  chapels  were  built  for  -the  celebration  of 
the  memory  of  the  martyrs.  St.  Jerome  relates/  how,  while  a 
school-boy,  about  A.  r>.  350,  he  used  to  go  with  his  companions 
every  Sunday  to  the  graves  of  the  apostles  and  martyrs  in  the 
crypts  at  Borne,  "where  in  subterranean  depths  the  visitor 
passes  to  and  fro  between  the  bodies  of  the  entombed  on  both 
walls,  and  .where  all  is  so  dark,  that  the  prophecy  here  finds  its 
fulfillment  :  The  living  go  down  into  Hades.2  Here  and  there 
a  ray  from  above,  not  falling  in  through  a  window,  but  only 
pressing  in  through  a  crevice,  softens  the  gloom  ;  as  you  go  on- 
ward, it  fades  away,  and  in  the  darkness  of  night  which  sur- 
rounds you,  that  verse  of  Virgil  comes  to  your  mind  : 

*  Horror  ubique  animos,  simul  ipsa  silentia  terrent."  3 

The  poet  Prudentius  also,  In  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century, 
several  times  speaks  of  these  burial  places,  and  the  devotions 
held  within  them.4 

Pope  Damasus  (366-384)  showed  his  zeal  in  repairing  and 
decorating  the  catacombs,  and  erecting  new  stair-cases  for  the 
convenience  of  pilgrims.  His  successors  kept  up  the  interest, 
but  by  repeated  repairs  introduced  great  confusion  into  the 
chronology  of  the  works  of  art. 

The  barbarian  invasions  of  Alaric  (410),  Genseric  (455), 
Ricimer  (472),  Vitiges  (537),  Totila  (546),  and  the  Lombards 
(754),  turned  Eome  into  a  heap  of  ruins  and  destroyed  many 
valuable  treasures  of  classical  and  Christian  antiquity.  But 
the  pious  barbarism  of  relic  hunters  did  much  greater  damage, 

1  Om.  in  Ez.  ch.  40. 

*  He  refers  to  such  passages  as  Ps.  55  :  15  ;  Num.  16  :  3& 


"  Horror  on  every  side,  and  terrible  even  the  silence** 
Or  in  German  : 

a  Gfrauen  rings  um  mich  her}  und  sckreckoott  sdber  die  Stilte* 
*  Peristeph.  XI.  153  sqq. 


?83.  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY  OF  THE  CATACOMBS.     293 

The  tombs  of  real  and  imaginary  saints  were  rifled,  and  cart- 
loads of  dead  men's  bones  were  translated  to  the  Pantheon  and 
churches  and  chapels  for  more  convenient  worship.  In  this 
way  the  catacombs  gradually  lost  all  interest,  and  passed  into 
decay  and  complete  oblivion  for  more  than  six  centuries. 

In  the  sixteenth  century  the  catacombs  were  rediscovered, 
and  opened  an  interesting  field  for  antiquarian  research.  The 
first  discovery  was  made  May  31,  1578,  by  some  laborers  in  a 
vineyard  on  the  Via  Salaria,  who  were  digging  pozsolana,  and 
came  on  an  old  subterranean  cemetery,  ornamented  with  Chris- 
tian paintings,  Greek  and  Latin  inscriptions  and  sculptured 
sarcophagi.  "In  that  day,"  says  De  Bossi,  "was  born  the 
name  and  the  knowledge  of  Roma  Sotterranea."  One  of  the 
first  and  principal  explorers  was  Antonio  Bosio,  "  the  Columbus 
of  this  subterranean  world."  His  researches  were  published 
after  his  death  (Roma,  1632).  Filippo  Neri,  Carlo  Borromeo, 
and  other  restorers  of  Romanism  spent,  like  St.  Jerome  of  old, 
whole  nights  in  prayer  amid  these  ruins  of  the  age  of  martyrs. 
But  Protestant  divines  discredited  these  discoveries  as  inventions 
of  Romish  divines  seeking  in  heathen  sand-pits  for  Christian 
saints  who  never  lived,  and  Christian  martyrs  who  never  died.1 

In  the  present  century  the  discovery  and  investigation  of  the 
catacombs  has  taken  a  new  start,  and  is  now  an  important 
department  of  Christian  archaeology.  The  dogmatic  and  sec- 
tarian treatment  has  given  way  to  a  scientific  method  with  the 
sole  aim  to  ascertain  the  truth.  The  acknowledged  pioneer  in 
this  subterranean  region  of  ancient  church  history  is  the 
Cavalier  John  Baptist  de  Rossi,  a  devout,  yet  liberal  Roman 
Catholic.  His  monumental  Italian  work  (Roma  Sotterranea, 
1864r-1877)  has  been  made  accessible  in  judicious  condensations 
to  French,  German,  and  English  readers  by  Allard  (1871), 

1  E.  g.  Bishop  Burnet  (who  visited  the  catacombs  in  1685) :  Letters  from 
Italy  and  SiffUzerland  in  1685  and  1686.  He  believed  that  the  catacombs  were 
the  common  burial  places  of  the  ancient  heathen.  G.  S.  Cyprian  (1699),  J. 
Basnage  (1699),  and  Peter  Zorn  (1703),  wrote  on  the  subject  in  polemical  in- 
terest against  Borne. 


294  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Kraus  (1873  and  1879),  Northcote  &  Brownlow  (1869  and 
1879).  •  Other  writers,  Protestant  as  well  as  Eoman  Catholic, 
are  constantly  adding  to  our  stores  of  information.  Great  pro- 
gress has  been  made  in  the  chronology  and  the  interpretation 
of  the  pictures  in  the  catacombs. 

And  yet  the  work  is  only  begun.  More  than  one  half  of 
ancient  Christian  cemeteries  are  waiting  for  future  exploration. 
De  Eossi  treats  chiefly  of  one  group  of  Eoman  catacombs,  that 
of  Callistus.  The  catacombs  in  Naples,  Syracuse,  Girgenti, 
Melos,  Alexandria,  Gyrene,  are  very  imperfectly  known ;  still 
others  in  the  ancient  apostolic  churches  may  yet  be  discovered, 
and  furnish  results  as  important  for  church  history  as  the  dis- 
coveries of  Ilium,  Mycense,  and  Olyrupia  for  that  of  classical 
Greece. 

§  84.  Description  of  the  Catacombs. 

The  Eoman  catacombs  are  long  and  narrow  passages  or  gal- 
leries and  cross-galleries  excavated  in  the  bowels  of  the  earth 
in  the  hills  outside  and  around  the  city,  for  the  burial  of  the 
dead.  They  are  dark  and  gloomy,  with  only  an  occasional  ray 
of  light  from  above.  The  galleries  have  two  or  more  stories, 
all  filled  with  tombs,  and  form  an  intricate  net-work  or  subter- 
ranean labyrinth.  Small  compartments  (loculi)  were  cut  out 
like  shelves  in  the  perpendicular  walls  for  the  reception  of  the 
dead,  and  rectangular  chambers  (cubicula)  for  families,  or  dis- 
tinguished martyrs.  They  were  closed  with  a  slab  of  marble 
or  tile.  The  more  wealthy  were  laid  in  sarcophagi.  The  ceiling 
is  flat,  sometimes  slightly  arched.  Space  was  economized  so  as 
to  leave  room  usually  only  for  a  single  person ;  the  average 
width  of  the  passages  being  2|  to  3  feet.  This  economy  may 
be  traced  to  the  poverty  of  the  early  Christians,  and  also  to 
their  strong  sense  of  community  in  life  and  in  death.  The 
little  oratories  with  altars  and  episcopal  chairs  cut  in  the  tufa 
are  probably  of  later  construction,  and  could  accommodate  only 
a  few  persons  at  a  time.  They  were  suited  for  funeral  services 
and  private  devotion,  but  not  for  public  worship. 


g  84.  DESCRIPTION  OR  THE  CATACOMBS.  295 

The  galleries  were  originally  small,  but  gradually  extended 
to  enormous  length.  Their  combined  extent  is  counted  by 
hundreds  of  miles,  and  the  number  of  graves  by  millions.1 

The  oldest  and  best  known  of  the  Roman  cemeteries  is  that 
of  St.  SEBASTIAN,  originally  called  Ad  Cataoumbas,  on  the 
Appian  road,  a  little  over  two  miles  south  of  the  city  walls. 
It  was  once,  it  is  said,  the  temporary  resting-place  of  the  bodies 
of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  before  their  removal  to  the  basilicas 
named  after  them ;  also  of  forty-six  bishops  of  Borne,  and  of  a 
large  number  of  martyrs. 

The  immense  cemetery  of  Pope  CALLISTUS  (218-223)  on  the 
Via  Appia  consisted  originally  of  several  small  and  independent 
burial  grounds  (called  Lucinse,  Zephyrini,  Callisti,  Hippoliti). 
It  has  been  thoroughly  investigated  by  De  Eossi.  The  most 
ancient  part  is  called  after  Lucina,  and  measures  100  Eoman 
feet  in  breadth  by  180  feet  in  length.  The  whole  group  bears 
the  name  of  Callistus,  probably  because  his  predecessor, 
Zephyrinus  "set  him  over  the  cemetery"  (of  the  church  of 
Rome).2  He  was  then  a  deacon.  He  stands  high  in  the  esti- 
mation of  the  Roman  church,  but  the  account  given  of  him  by 
Hippolytus  is  quite  unfavorable.  He  was  certainly  a  remarkable 
man,  who  rose  from  slavery  to  the  highest  dignity  of  the  church. 

1 1  hesitate  to  state  the  figures.  Eoman  archaeologists,  as  Marchi,  J.  B.  de 
Eossi  and  his  brother  Michael  de  B.  (a  practical  mathematician),  Martigny 
and  others  estimate  the  length  of  the  Eoman  catacombs  variously  at  from  350 
to  900  miles,  or  as  "  more  than  the  whole  length  of  Italy"  (Northcote  and 
Brownlow,  I.  2).  Allowance  is  made  for  from  four  to  seven  millions  of 
graves  I  It  seems  incredible  that  there  should  have  been  so  many  Christians 
in  Borne  in  four  centuries,  even  if  we  include  the  numerous  strangers.  All 
such  estimates  are  purely  conjectural.  See  Smith  and  Cheetham,  I.  301. 
Smyth  (I  c»  p.  15)  quotes  tfcawlinson  as  saying  that  7,000,000  of  graves  in  400 
years'  time  gives  an  average  population  of  from  500,000  to  700,000.  Total 
population  of  Borne,  1,500,000  to  2,000,000  at  the  beginning  of  the  empire. 

»  This  is  so  stated  by  Hippolytus,  Philosoph.  IX.  11.  Zephyrinus  was  buried 
there  contrary  to  the  custom  of  burying  the  popes  in  St.  Peter's  crypt  in  the 
Vatican.  Callistus  was  hurled  from  a  window  in  Trastevere,  and  hastily  re- 
moved to  the  nearest  cemetery  on  the  Via  Aurelia.  The  whole  report  ot 
Hippolytus  about  Callistus  is  discredited  by  Northcote  and  Brownlow  (I.  497 
•qq.),  but  without  good  reason. 


296  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

The  cemetery  of  DOMITILLA  (named  in  the  fourth  century 
St.  Petronillse,  Nerei  et  Achillei)  is  on  the  Via  Ardeatina,  and 
its  origin  is  traced  back  to  Flavia  Domitilla,  grand-daughter  or 
great-grand-daughter  of  Vespasian.  She  was  banished  by 
Domitian  (about  A.  D.  95)  to  the  island  of  Pontia  "for  pro- 
fessing Christ."1  Her  chamberlains  (eunuehi  cubicularii), 
Nerus  and  Achilleus,  according  to  an  uncertain  tradition,  were 
baptized  by  St.  Peter,  suffered  martyrdom,  and  were  buried  in 
a  farm  belonging  to  their  mistress.  In  another  part  of  this 
cemetery  De  Eossi  discovered  the  broken  columns  of  a  subter- 
ranean chapel  and  a  small  chamber  with  a  fresco  on  the  wall, 
which  represents  an  elderly  matron  named  "  Veneranda,"  and  a 
young  lady,  called  in  the  inscription  "  PETRCXNILLA  martyr," 
and  pointing  to  the  Holy  Scriptures  in  a  chest  by  her  side,  as 
the  proofs  of  her  faith.  The  former  apparently  introduces  the 
latter  into  Paradise.3  The  name  naturally  suggests  the  legend- 
ary daughter  of  St.  Peter.3  But  Koman  divines,  reluctant  to 
admit  that  the  first  pope  had  any  children  (though  his  marriage 
is  beyond  a  doubt  from  the  record  of  the  Gospels),  understand 
Petronilla  to  be  a  spiritual  daughter,  as  Mark  was  a  spiritual 
son,  of  the  apostle  (1  Pet.  5:  13),  and  make  her  the  daughter 
of  some  Roman  Petronius  or  Petro  connected  with  the  family 
of  Domitilla. 

Other  ancient  catacombs  are  those  of  Prsetextatus,  Priscilla 
(St.  Silvestri  and  St.  Marcelli),  Basilla  (S.  Hermetis,  Basillse, 
Proti,  et  Hyacinthi),  Maximus,  St.  Hippolytus,  St.  Laurentius, 
St.  Peter  and  Marcellinus,  St.  Agnes,  and  the  Ostrianum  (Ad 
Nymphas  Petri,  or  Fons  Petri,  where  Peter  is  said  to  have  bap- 
tised from  a  natural  well).  De  Eossi  gives  a  list  of  forty-two 

1  Eusebius,  H.  E.  III.  18.  De  Rossi  distinguishes  two  Christian  Domi- 
tillas,  and  defends  this  view  against  Mommsen.  See  "  Bulletino,"  1875,  pp. 
69-77,  and  Mommsen,  Corp.  Inscript.  Lat.t  Tom.  VI.  p.  172,  as  quoted  by 
Northcote  and  Br.  L  86.  See  also  Mommsen  in  "The  Contemp.  Review,'' 
XVII.  169  pq. ;  Lightfoot.  Phi'Iippians,  p.  22,  and  &  Clement  of  R,  257. 

'See  the  picture  in  Northcote  and  Br.  L  182,  and  on  the  whole  subject  of 
Petronilla,  pp.  122, 176-186. 

1  Acta  Sanct.  Maii,  III.  11, 


i  84.  DESCRIPTION  OP  THE  CATACOMBS. 

greater  or  lesser  cemeteries,  including  isolated  tombs  of  martyrs, 
in  and  near  Rome,  which  date  from  the  iirst  four  centuries,  and 
are  mentioned  in  ancient  records.1 

The  FURNITURE  of  the  catacombs  is  instructive  and  interest- 
ing, but  most  of  it  has  been  removed  to  churches  and  museums, 
and  must  be  studied  outside.  Articles  of  ornament,  rings,  seals, 
bracelets,  neck-laces,  mirrors,  tooth-picks,  ear-picks,  buckles, 
brooches,  rare  coins,  innumerable  lamps  of  clay  (terra-cotta),  or 
of  bronze,  even  of  silver  and  amber,  all  sorts  of  tools,  and  in 
the  case  of  children  a  variety  of  playthings  were  inclosed  with 
the  dead.  Many  of  these  articles  are  carved  with  the  monogram 
of  Christ,  or  other  Christian  symbols.  (The  lamps  in  Jewish 
cemeteries  bear  generally  a  picture  of  the  golden  candlestick). 

A  great  number  of  flasks  and  cups  also,  with  or  without  or- 
namentation, are  found,  mostly  outside  of  the  graves,  and 
fastened  to  the  grave-lids.  These  were  formerly  supposed  to 
have  been  receptacles,  for  tears,  or,  from  the  red,  dried  sediment 
in  them,  for  the  blood  of  martyrs.  But  later  archaeologists 
consider  them  drinking  vessels  used  in  the  agapse  and  oblations. 
A  superstitious  habit  prevailed  in  the  fourth  century,  although 
condemned  ty  a  council  of  Carthage  (397),  to  give  to  the  dead 
the  eucharistic  wine,  or  to  put  a  cup  with  the  consecrated  wine 
in  the  grave.2 

The  instruments  of  torture  which  the  fertile  imagination  of 

1  See  also  the  list  in  N.  and  Br.  L  pp.  xx-xxi,  and  in  Smith  and  Cheetham, 
I.  315. 

3  The  curious  controversy  about  these  blood-stained  phials  is  not  yet  closed. 
Chemical  experiments  have  led  to  no  decided  results.  The  Congregation  of 
Kites  and  Belies  decided,  in  1668,  that  the  phiolos  cruenta  or  ampuUce  sanguino- 
tenfa  were  blood-vessels  of  martyrs,  and  Pius  IX.  confirmed  the  decision  in 
1863.  It  was  opposed  by  distinguished  Eoman  scholars  (Mabillon,  Tillemont, 
Muratori,  the  Jesuit  Pe"re  de  Buck  (De  phicdis  rubricatis,  Brussels,  1855),  but 
defended  again,  though  cautiously  and  to  a  very  limited  extent  by  De  Eossi 
(III.  602),  Northcote  and  Brownlow  fIL  330-343),  and  "fry  F.  X.  Kraus  (Dw 
Blutamputt&n  der  rom.  Katakomben,  1868,  and  Ueber  den  gegenw.  Stand  der 
Frage  nach  dem  Inhalt  und  der  Bedeutung  der  rom.  Blutamputten,  1872).  Com  p. 
also  Schultze :  Die  sogen  Blutglaser  d&r  Horn.  Kat.  (1880),  and  Die  Kataknmben 
\1882,  pp.  226-232).  Roller  thinks  that  the  phials  contained  probably  per 
fbmery,  or  perhaps  eucharistic  wine. 


298  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  TX  100-311. 

credulous  people  had  discovered,  and  which  were  made  to  prove 
that  almost  every  Christian  buried  in  the  catacombs  was  a 
martyr,  are  simply  implements  of  handicraft.  The  instinct  of 
nature  prompts  the  bereaved  to  deposit  in  the  graves  of  their 
kindred  and  friends  those  things  which  were  constantly  used  by 
them.  The  idea  prevailed  also  to  a  large  extent  that  the  future 
life  was  a  continuation  of  the  occupations  and  amusements  of 
the  present,  but  free  from' sin  and  imperfection. 

On  opening  the  graves  the  skeleton  appears  frequently  even 
now  very  well  preserved,  sometimes  in  dazzling  whiteness,  as 
covered  with  a  glistening  glory;  but  falls  into  dust  at  the 
touch. 

§  85.  Pictures  and  Sculptures. 

The  most  important  remains  of  the  catacombs  are  the  pictures, 
sculptures,  and  epitaphs. 

I.  Pictures.  These  have  already  been  described  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter.  They  are  painted  al  fresco  on  the  wall  and 
ceiling,  and  represent  Christian  symbols,  scenes  of  Bible  history, 
and  allegorical  conceptions  of  the  Saviour*  A  few  are  in  pure 
classic  style,  and  betray  an  early  origin  when  Greek  art  still 
flourished  in  Rome;  but  most  of  them  belong  to  the  period  of 
decay.  Prominence  is  given  to  pictures  of  the  Good  Shepherd, 
and  those  biblical  stories  which  exhibit  the  conquest  of  faith 
and  the  hope  of  the  resurrection.  The  mixed  character  of  some 
of  the  Christian  frescos  may  be  explained  partly  from  the  em- 
ployment of  heathen  artists  by  Christian  patrons,  partly  from 
oil?  reminiscences.  The  Etrurians  and  Greeks  were  in  the  habit 
of  renting  their  tombs,  and  Christian  Greeks  early  saw  the 
value  of  pictorial  language  as  a  means  of  instruction.  In 
technical  skill  the  Christian  art  is  inferior  to  the  heathen,  but 
rbs  subjects  are  higher,  and  its  meaning  is  deeper. 

IL  The  works  of  sculpture  are  mostly  found  on  sarcophagi 
Many  of  them  are  collected  in  the  Lateran  Museum.  Few  of 
them  date  from  the  ante-Nicene  age.1  They  represent  in  relief 

1  Eenan  dates  the  oldest  sculptures  from  the  end  of  the  third  century :  "Leu 


2  86.  EPITAPHS.  299 

the  same  subjects  as  the  wall-pictures,  as  far  as  they  could  be 
worked  in  stone  or  marble,  especially  the  resurrection  of 
Lazarus,  Dauiel  among  the  lious,  Moses  smiting  the  rock,  the 
sacrifice  of  Isaac. 

Among  the  oldest  Christian  sarcophagi  are  those  of  St. 
Helena,  the  mother  of  Constantine  (d.  328),  and  of  Constantia, 
his  daughter-  (d.  354),  both  of  red  porphyry,  and  preserved  in 
the  Vatican  Museum.  The  sculpture  on  the  former  probably 
represents  the  triumphal  entry  of  Constantine  into  Borne  aftei 
his  victory  over  Maxentius ;  the  sculpture  on  the  latter,  the  cul- 
tivation of  the  vine,  probably  with  a  symbolical  meaning.1 

The  richest  and  finest  of  all  the  Christian  sarcophagi  is  thai 
of  Junius  Bassus,  Prefect  of  Koine,  A.  D.  359,  and  five  times 
Consul,  in  the  crypt  of  St.  Peter's  in  the  Vatican.3  It  was 
found  in  the  Vatican  cemetery  (1595).  It  is  made  of  Parian 
marble  in  Corinthian  style.  The  subjects  represented  in  the 
upper  part  are  the  sacrifice  of  Abraham,  the  capture  of  St. 
Peter,  Christ  seated  between  Peter  and  Paul,  the  capture  of 
Christ,  and  Pilate  washing  his  hands ;  in  the  lower  part  are  the 
temptation  of  Ada*m  and  Eve,  suffering  Job,  Christ's  entrance 
into  Jerusalem,  Daniel  among  the  lions,  and  the  capture  of  St 
Paul. 

§  86.  'Epitaphs. 

"Budely  written,  but  each  letter 
Full  of  hope,  and  yet  of  heart-break, 
Pull  of  all  the  tender  pathos  of  the  Here 
and  the  Hereafter." 

To   perpetuate,  by  means  of  sepulchral    inscriptions,  the 

sarcophages  swlptfo,  repr&entant  des  scenes  sacrSes,  apparaissent  vers  la  fn  du  III* 
si&jfe.  Comme  les  p&intures  chr&tiennes,  its  ne  s'frartent  guere,  tauf  pour  le  sujet, 
des  habitudes  de  rart  paien  du  m&me  temps."  (Marc  Aurfte,  p.  546).  Comp 
also  Schultze,  Die  KataL  165-186,  and  especially  the  IX&  part  of  John  Henrj 
Parker's  great  work,  which  treats  on  the  Tombs  in  and  near  Rom*,  1877. 

1  See  photographs  of  both  in  Parker,  Part  IX,  Nos.  209  and  210,  and  pp. 
41  and  42. 

2  See  a  photograph  in  Parker,  I  c.t  Plate  XIH;  also  in  Lundy,  Monum 
Christianity,  p.  112. 


300  SECOND  PEBIOD.  A.  D.  100-311. 

memory  of  relatives  and  friends,  and  to  record  the  sentiments 
of  love  and  esteem,  of  grief  and  hope,  in  the  face  of  death  and 
eternity,  is  a  custom  common  to  all  civilized  ages  and  nations. 
These  epitaphs  are  limited  by  space,  and  often  provoke  rather 
than  satisfy  curiosity,  but  contain  nevertheless  in  poetry  or 
prose  a  vast  amount  of  biographical  and  historical  information. 
Many  a  grave-yard  is  a  broken  record  of  the  church  to  which 
it  belongs. 

The  Catacombs  abound  in  such  monumental  inscriptions, 
>ftreek  and  Latin,  or  strangely  mixed  (Latin  words  in  Greek 
characters),  often  rudely  written,  badly  spelt,  mutilated,  and 
almost  illegible,  with  and  without  symbolical  figures.  The 
classical  languages  were  then  in  a  process  of  decay,  like  classical 
eloquence  atid  art,  and  the  great  majority  of  Christians  were 
poor  .and  illiterate  people.  One  name  only  is  given  in  the 
earlier  epitaphs,  sometimes  the  age,  and  the  day  of  burial,  but 
not  the  date  of  birth . 

More  than  fifteen  thousand  epitaphs  have  been  collected/ 
classified,  and  explained  6y  De  Eossi  from  the  first  six  centuries 
in  Borne  alone,  and  theu  number  is  constantly  increasing. 
Benedict  XIV.  founded,  in  J750,  a  Christian  Museum,  and 
devoted  a  hall  in  the  Vatican  to  the  collection  of  ancient 
sarcophagi.  Gregory  XVL  and  Pius  IX.  patronized  it.  In 
this  Lapidarian  Gallery  the  costly  pagan  and  the  simple  Chris- 
tian inscriptions  and  sarcophagi  confront  each  other  on  opposite 
walls,  and  present  a  striking  contrast.  Another  important  col- 
lection is  in  the  Kircherian  Museum,  ui  the  Eoman  College, 
another  in  the  Christian  Museum  of  the  University  of  Berlin.1 
The  entire  field  of  ancient  epigraphy,  heathen  and  Christian  in 
Italy  and  other  countries,  has  been  made  accessible  by  the  in- 
dustry and  learning  of  Gruter,  Muratori,  Marchi,  De  Eossi,  Le 

1  Under  the  care  of  Professor  Piper  (a  pupil  of  Neander),  who  even  before 
De  Rossi  introduced  a  scientific  knowledge  of  the  sepulchral  moaumptitH  and 
inscriptions.    Comp.  his  "Monumental  Theology,"  and  his  essay  "  Uebttr  d® 
kirchenhistorischen  Gewinn  CMW  Inschrijten,  in  the  "  Jahrbiicher  f.  D,  Theologie," 
L875. 


286.  EPITAPHS.  301 

Blant,  Boeckh,  Kirchhoff,  Orelli,  Mommsen,  Henzen,  Hiibner, 
Waddiugton,  McCaul. 

The  most  difficult  part  of  this  branch  of  archseology  is  the 
chronology  (the  oldest  inscriptions  being  mostly  undated).1 
Their  chief  interest  for  the  church  historian  is  their  religion,  as 
far  as  it  may  be  inferred  from  a  few  words. 

The  key-note  of  the  Christian  epitaphs,  as  compared  with, 
the  heathen,  is  struck  by  Paul  in  his  words  of  comfort  to  the 
Thessalonians,  that  they  should  not  sorrow  like  the  heathen 
who  luivo  no  hope,  but  remember  that,  as  Jesus  rose  from  the 
dead,  so  God  will  raLso  them  also  that  are  fallen  asleep  in  Jesus. 

Hence,  while  the  heathen  epitaphs  rarely  express  a  belief  in 
immortality,  but  often  describe  death  as  an  eternal  sleep,  the 
grave  as  a  final  home,  and  are  pervaded  by  a  tone  of  sadness, 
the  Christian  epitaphs  are  hopeful  and  cheerful.  The  farewell 
on  earth  is  followed  by  a  welcome  from  heaven.  Death  is  but 
a  short  sleep ;  the  soul  is  with  Christ  and  lives  in  God,  the  body 
waits  for  a  joyful  resurrection :  this  is  the  sum  and  substance  of 
the  theology  of  Christian  epitaphs.  The  symbol  of  Christ 
(Ichthys)  is  often  placed  at  the  beginning  or  end  to  show  the 
ground  of  this  hope.  Again  and  again  we  find  the  brief,  but 
significant  words  :  "  in  peace ; " 2  "  he  "  or  "  she  sleeps  in 
peace;"3  "live  in  God,"  or  "in  Christ;"  "live  forever." * 
"  He  rests  well."  "  God  quicken  thy  spirit."  "  Weep  not,  my 
child;  death  is  not  eternal."  "Alexander  is  not  dead,  but  livea 
above  the  stars,  and  his  body  rests  in  this  tomb."5  "Here 

*  De  Rossi  traces  some  up  to  the  first  century,  but  Renan  (Marc-Aurele,  p. 
536)  maintains :  *'  Les  inscriptions  chrStiennes  des  catacombes  ne  remontent  grf  au 
commencement  du  III6  sfede" 

2  In  pace:  ev  eipforf.    Frequent  also  in  the  Jewish  cemeteries  (shalom). 

3  Dormit  in  pace;  requiescit  in  pace;  in  pace  Domini;  KoifiaraL  h  elpfog. 
The  pagan  formula  "depositus"  also  occurs,  but  with  an  altered  meaning :  a 
precious  treasure  intrusted  to  faithful  keeping  for  a  short  time. 

4  Vivas,  or  vive  in  Deo  ;  vivas  in  cetemum  ;  vivas  inter  sanctos.    Contrast  with 
these  the  pagan  acclamations:   Sit  tibi  terra  l&vis;  Ossa  tua  lent  quiescant, 
Ave;  Vale. 

6  This  inscription  in  the  cemetery  of  Callistus  dates  from  the  time  of  persecu* 
fe'on,  probably  in  the  third  century,  and  alludes  to  it  in  these  words:  "  For  while 


302  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Gordian,  the  courier  from  Gaul,  strangled  for  the  faith,  with 
his  whole  family,  rests  in  peace.  The  maid  servant,  Theophila, 
erected  this." l 

At  the  same  time  stereotyped  heathen  epitaphs  continued  to 
be  used  (but  of  course  not  in  a  polytheistic  sense),  as  "  sacred  to 
the  funeral  gods,"  or  te  to  the  departed  spirits." 2  The  laudatory 
epithets  of  heathen  epitaphs  are  rare,3  but  simple  terms  of 
natural  affection  very  frequent,  as  "  My  sweetest  child  j "  "  In- 
nocent little  lamb;"  "My  dearest  husband;"  "My  dearest 
wife ; "  "  My  innocent  dove ; "  "  My  well-deserving  father,"  or 
"mother."4  A.  and  B.  "lived  together"  (for  15,  20,  30,  50, 
or  even  60  years)  "  without  any  complaint  or  quarrel,  without 
taking  or  giving  offence."5  Such  commemoration  of  conjugal 
happiness  and  commendations  of  female  virtues,  as  modesty, 
chastity,  prudence,  diligence,  frequently  occur  also  on  pagan 
monuments,  and  prove  that  there  were  many  exceptions  to  the 
corruption  of  Roman  society,  as  painted  by  Juvenal  and  the 
satirists. 

Some  epitaphs  contain  a  request  to  the  dead  in  heaven  to 
pray  for  the  living  on  earth.6  At  a  later  period  we  find  requests 

on  his  knees,  and  about  to  sacrifice  to  the  true  God,  he  was  led  a\vay  to  execu- 
tion. 0  sad  times !  in  which  among  sacred  rites  and  prayers,  even  in  caverns, 
we  are  not  safe.  What  can  be  more  wretched  than  such  a  life  ?  and  what  than 
such  a  death  ?  when  they  cannot  be  buried  by  their  friends  and  relations — still 
at  the  end  they  shine  like  stars  in  heaven  (tandem  in  codo  corruscant)"  See 
Maitland,  The  Church  in  the  Cat.,  second  ed.  p.  40. 

1  This  inscription  is  in  Latin  words,  but  in  Greek  uncial  letters.    See  Per- 
ret,  JI.  152,  and  Aringhi,  p.  387. 

2  D.  M.  or  D.  3/.  S.  =  Dis  Manihus  sacrum  (others  explain :    Deo  Magno 
or  Maximo) ;  memories  ceternoB,  etc.    See  Schultze,  p.  250  sq.    Sometimes  the 
monogram  of  Christ  is  inserted  before  S,  and  then  the  meaning  may  be  Deo 
Magno  Christo  Sacrum,  or  Christo  Salvatori.    So  Northcote,  p.  99,  who  refers  to 
Tit.  2:  13. 

3  More  frequent  in  those  after  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century,  as  incom- 
parabilis,  mirce  sapientics  or  innocently  rarissimi  exempli,  eximice  bonitatis. 

*  Duleis,  dulcissimus,  or  dulcimma,  carus,  or  cara,  earissitmis,  optimus,  incom- 
par  abUiB,  famulus  Dei,  puella  Deo  pladta,  aya&6^  a-yioc,  tieoaepfa,  cepvd^  etc. 

5  Sine  idla  querela,  sine  utta  contumelia,  sine  Iceslone  animi,  sine  ulla  qffensa,  sine 
jurgio,  sine  lite  molesta,  etc. 

6  "Pete,  or  roga,  ora,  pro  nobis,  pro  parentibus,  pro  eonjuge,  profiliis,pro  sorore.* 
iheae  petitions  are  comparatively  rare  among  the  thousands  of  undated  IA- 


|86.  EPITAPHS.  303 

for  intercession  in  behalf  of  the  departed  when  once,  chiefly 
through  the  influence  of  Pope  Gregory  I.;  purgatory  became  an 
article  of  general  belief  in  the  Western  church.1  But  the  over- 
whelming testimony  of  the  oldest  Christian  epitaphs  is  that  the 
pious  dead  are  already  in  the  enjoyment  of  peace,  and  this 
accords  with  the  Saviour's  promise  to  the  penitent  thief,  and 
with  St.  Paul's  desire  to  depart  and  be  with  Christ,  which  is  far 
better.2  Take  but  this  example :  "  Prima,  thou  livest  in  the 
glory  of  God,  and  in  the  peace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  3 

NOTES. 
L  SELECTION  OF  ROMAN  EPITAPHS. 

The  following  selection  of  brief  epitaphs  in  the  Eoman  catacombs  is 
taken  from  De  Eossi,  and  Northcote,  who  give  fac-simites  of  the  original 
Latin  and  Greek.  Comp.  also  the  photographic  plates  in  Roller,  vol.  I. 
Nos.  x,  xxxi,  xxxn,  and  xxxm ;  and  vol.  II.  Nos.  LXI,  LSII,  LXV, 
and  LXVI. 

1.  To  dear  Oyriacus,  sweetest  son.     Mayest  thou  live  in  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

2.  Jesus  Christ,  Son  of  God,  Saviour.    To  Pastor,  a  good  and  innocent 
son,  who  lived  4  years,  5  months  and  26  days.    Yitalis  and  Marcellina, 
his  parents. 

3-  In  eternal  sleep  (somno  aet&rnali}.  Aurelius  Gemellus,  who  lived 
.  .  .  years  and  8  months  and  18  day*.  !Ls  mother  made  this  for  her 

scriptions  before  Constantine,  and  mostly  confined  to  members  of  the  family. 
The  Autun  inscription  (probably  from  the  fourth  century)  ends  with  the  peti- 
tion of  Pectorius  to  his  departed  parents,  to  think  of  him  as  often  as  they  look 
upon  Christ.  See  Marriott,  p.  185. 

1  Dr.  McCaul,  of  Toronto  (as  quoted  in  Smith  and  Cheetham,  I  856)  says : 
"  I  recollect  but  two  examples  in  Christian  epitaphs  of  the  first  six  centuries  of 
the  address  to  the  reader  for  his  prayers,  so  common  in  medieval  times.*' 

a  Luke  23:  43  ;  Phil.  1:  23;  2  Cor.  5:  8. 

*  Prima,  mvis  in  gloria  Dei  et  in  pace  Domini  nostril  Scratched  in  the 
mortar  round  a  grave  in  the  cemetery  of  Thraso,  in  Borne,  quoted  by  North- 
cote,  p.  89.  He  also  quotes  Paulinus  of  Nola,  who  represents  a  whole  host  of 
saints  going  forth  from  heaven  to  receive  the  soul  of  St.  Felix  as  soon  as  it 
had  left  the  body,  and  conducting  it  in  triumph  before  the  throne  of  God.  A 
distinction,  however,  was  made  by  Tertullian  and  other  fathers  between  Para- 
dise or  Abraham's  bosom,  whither  the  pious  go,  and  heaven  proper.  Comp. 
Boiler's  discussion  ,?  the  idea  of  refrig&nwm,  whfoj  often  meets  us  in  the  epi- 
taphs, Les  Qatacwnbes,  I.  225  sqq. 


304  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

dearest  well-deserving  son.    In  peace.    I  commend  [to  thee],  Bassilla, 
the  innocence  of  Gemellus. 

4.  Lady  Bassilla  [=  Saint  Bassilla],  we,  Crescentius   and   Micina, 
commend  to  thee  our  daughter  Crescen  [tana],  who  lived  10  months  and 
.  .  .  days. 

5.  Matronata  Matrona,  who  lived  a  year  and  62  days.    Pray  for  thy 
parents. 

6.  Anatolius  made  this  for  his  well-deserving  son,  who  lived  7  years, 
7  months  and  20  days.    May  thy  spirit  rest  well  in  God.    Pray  for  thy 
sister. 

7.  Regina,  mayest  thou  live  in  the  Lord  Jesus  (vivas  in  Domino 
Jesu). 

8.  To  my  good  and  sweetest  husband  Castorinus,  who  lived  61  years, 
5  months  and  10  days;  well-deserving.    His  wife  made  this.    Live  in 
God! 

9.  Amerimnus  to  his  dearest,  well-deserving  wife,  Rufina.    May  God 
refresh  thy  spirit. 

10.  Sweet  Faustina,  mayest  thou  live  in  God. 

11.  Eefresh,  0  God,  the  soul  of  .... 

12.  Bolosa,  may  God  refresh  thee,  who  lived  31  years;  died  on  the 
19th  of  September.    In  Christ. 

13.  Peace  to  thy  soul,  Oxyeholis. 

14.  Agape,  thou  shalt  live  forever. 

15.  In  Christ.    To  Paulinus,  a  neophyte.    In  peace.    Who  lived  8 
years. 

16.  Thy  spirit  in  peace,  Filmeni 

17.  In  Christ.    ^Estonia,  a  virgin;  a  foreigner,  who  lived  41  years 
and  8  days.    She  departed  from  the  body  on  the  26th  of  February. 

18.  Victorina  in  peace  and  in  Christ. 

19.  Dafhen,  a  widow,  who  whilst  she  lived  burdened  the  church  in 
nothing. 

20.  To  Leopardus,  a  neophyte,  who  lived  3  years,  11  months.    Buried 
on  the  24th  of  March.    In  peace. 

21.  To  Felix,  their  well-deserving  son,  who  lived  23  years  and  10 
days ;  who  went  out  of  the  world  a  virgin  and  a  neophyte.    In  peace. 
His  parents  made  this.    Buried  on  the  2<*  of  August. 

22.  Lucilianus  to  Bacius  Valerius,  who  lived  9  years,  8  [months],  22 
days.    A  catechumen. 

23.  Septimius  Praetextatus  Csecilianus,  servant  of  God,  who  has  led 
a  worthy  life.    If  I  ha^  served  Thee  [0  Lord],  I  have  not  repented, 
and  I  will  give  thanks  to  Thy  name.    He  gave  up  his  soul  to  God  (at 
the  age  of)  thirty-three  years  and  six  months.     [Jfe  the  crypt  of  S,t 


{  86.  EPITAPHS.  305 

Cecilia  in  St.  Oallisto.  Probably  a  member  of  some  noble  femily,  the 
third  name  is  mutilated.  De  Eossi  assigns  this  epitaph  to  the  beginning 
of  the  third  century.] 

24.  Cornelius.    Martyr.    Ep.  [iscopus]. 
II.  THE  AUTUN  INSCRIPTION. 

This  Greek  inscription  was  discovered  A.  D.  1839  in  the  cemetery  Saint 
Pierre  TEstrier  near  Autun  (Augustodunum,  the  ancient  capital  of 
Gallia  jEduensis),  first  made  known  by  Cardinal  Pitra,  and  thoroughly 
discussed  by  learned  archaeologists  of  different  countries.  See  the 
ftpitilegium  Mesmerise  (ed.  by  Pitra),  vols.  I.-IIL,  Ra£  Garrucci,  Monu- 
ments d'  epigraphie  andenne,  Paris  1856, 1857 ;  F.  Lenormant,  Memoire 
sur  V  inscription  d9  Autun,  Paris  1855 ;  H.  B.  Marriott,  The  Testimony 
of  the  Catacombs,  Lond.  1870,  pp.  113-188.  The  Jesuit  fathers  Secchi 
and  Garrucci  find  in  it  conclusive  evidence  of  transubstantiation  and 
purgatory,  but  Marriott  takes  pains  to  refute  them.  Comp.  also 
Schultze,  Katak.  p.  118.  The  Ichthys-symbol  figures  prominently  in 
the  inscription,  and  betrays  an  early  origin,  but  archaeologists  differ  : 
Pitra,  Garrucci  and  others  assign  it  to  A.  D.  160-202 ;  Kirchhoff,  Marriott, 
and  Schultze,  with  greater  probability,  to  the  end  of  the  fourth  or  the 
beginning  of  the  fifth  century,  Lenormant  and  Le  Blant  to  the  fifth  .or 
sixth.  De  Eossi  observes  that  the  characters  are  not  so  old  as  the  ideas 
which  they  express.  The  inscription  has  some  gaps  which  must  be 
filled  out  by  conjecture.  It  is  a  memorial  of  Pectorius  to  his  parents  and 
friends,  in  two  parts ;  the  first  six  lines  are  an  acrostic, (Ichthys),  and  eon- 
tain  words  of  the  dead  (probably  the  mother) ;  in  the  second  part  the  son 
speaks.  The  first  seems  to  be  older.  Schultze  conjectures  that  it  is  an 
old  Christian  hymn.  The  inscription  begins  with  'I^rJwof  o  [vpaviov  ay] 
iov  [or  perhaps  $elov]  yhos,  and  concludes  with  fwfoso  Ue/cropiou,  who  pre- 
pared the  monument  for  his  parents.  The  following  is  the  translation 
(partly  conjectural)  of-  Marriott  (L  c.  118)  : 

*  Offspring  of  the  heavenly  ICHTHYS,  see  that  a  heart  of  holy  rever- 
ence be  thine,  now  that  from  Divine  waters  thou  hast  received,  while 
yet  among  mortals,  a  fount  of  life  that  is  to  immortality.  Quicken  thy 
soul,  beloved  one,  with  ever-flowing  waters  of  wealth-giving  wisdom, 
and  receive  the  honey-sweet  food  of  the  Saviour  of  the  saints.  Eat  with 
"  a  longmg  hunger,  holding  Ichthys  in  thine  hands/ 

'  To  Ichthys  ....  Come  nigh  unto  me,  my  Lord  [and]  Saviour  [be 
thou  my  Guide]  I  entreat  Thee,  Thou  Light  of  them  for  whom  the  hour 
of  death  is  past/ 

'Aschandius,  mv  Father,  dear  unto  mine  heart,  and  thou   [sweet 
Mother,  and  fill !  thnf,  are  mine  ....  remember  Pectorius/ 
Vol.  II. 


306  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

§  87.  Lessons  of  the  Catacombs. 

The  catacombs  represent  the  subterranean  Christianity  of  the 
srnte-Nicene  age.  They  reveal  the  Christian  life  in  the  face  of 
death  and  eternity.  Their  vast  extent,  their  solemn  darkness, 
their  labyrinthine  mystery,  their  rude  epitaphs,  pictures,  and 
sculptures,  their  relics  of  handicraft,  worship,  and  martyrdom 
give  us  a  lively  and  impressive  idea  of  the  social  and  domestic 
condition,  the  poverty  and  humility,  the  devotional  spirit,  the 
trials  and  sufferings,  the  faith  and  hope  of  the  Christians  from 
the  death  of  the  apostles  to  the  conversion  of  Constantine.  A 
modern  visitor  descending  alive  into  this  region  of  the  dead, 
receives  the  same  impression  as  St.  Jerome  more  than  fifteen 
centuries  ago :  he  is  overcome  by  the  solemn  darkness,  the  ter- 
rible silence,  and  the  sacred  associations;  only  the  darkness  is 
deeper,  and  the  tombs  are  emptied  of  their  treasures.  "He 
who  is  thoroughly  steeped  in  the  imagery  of  the  catacombs," 
says  Dean  Stanley,  not  without  rhetorical  exaggeration,  "  will 
be  nearer  to  the  thoughts  of  the  early  church  than  he  who  has 
learned  by  heart  the  most  elaborate  treatise  even  of  Tertullian 
or  of  Origen." l 

The  discovery  of  this  subterranean  necropolis  has  been  made 
unduly  subservient  to  polemical  and  apologetic  purposes  both 
by  Roman  Catholic  and  Protestant  writers.  The  former  seek 
and  find  in  it  monumental  arguments  for  the  worship  of  saints, 
images,  and  relics,  for  the  cultus  of  the  Yirgin  Mary,  the 
primacy  of  Peter,  the  seven  sacraments,  the  real  presence,  even 
for  transubstantiation,  and  purgatory;  while  the  latter  see 
there  the  evidence  of  apostolic  simplicity  of  life  and  worship, 
and  an  illustration  of  Paul's  saying  that  God  chose  the  foolish, 
the  weak,  and  the  despised  things  of  the  world  to  put  to  shame 
fchem  that  are  wise  and  strong  and  mighiy.1 

*  Study  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  prefixed  to  his  Lectures  on  the  History  of  the 
Eastern  Qhwrch,  p.  59. 

1  The  apologetic  interest  for  Romanism  is  represented  by  Marchi,  De  Rossi, 
jrarrucci,  Le  Blant,  D.  de  Richemond,  Armellini,  Bartoli,  Maurus.  Wolter 
[Die  rom.  Katakomben  und  die  Sdkramente  der  kath.  Kirche,  1866),  Martigny 


2  87.  LESSONS  OF  THE  CATACOMBS.  307 

A  full  solution  of  the  controversial  questions  would  depend 
upon  the  chronology  of  the  monuments  and  inscriptions,  but 
this  is  exceedingly  uncertain.  The  most  eminent  archaeologists 
hold  widely  differing  opinions.  John  Baptist  de  Kossi,  of 
Rome,  the  greatest  authority  on  the  Roman  Catholic  side, 
traces  some  paintings  and  epitaphs  in  the  crypts  of  St.  Lucina 
and  St.  Domitilla  back  even  to  the  close  of  the  first  century  or 
the  beginning  of  the  second.  On  the  other  hand,  J.  H.  Parker, 
of  Oxford,  an  equally  eminent  archaeologist,  maintains  that 
"  fully  three-fourths  of  the  fresco-paintings  belong  to  the  latest 
restorations  of  the  eighth  and  ninth  centuries,"  and  that  "  of 
the  remaining  fourth  a  considerable  number  are  of  the  sixth 
century."  He  also' asserts  that  in  the  catacomb  pictures  "there 
are  no  religious  subjects  before  the  time  of  Constantine,"  that 
"  during  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  they  are  entirely  confined 
to  Scriptural  subjects,"  and  that  there  is  "  not  a  figure  of  a  saint 
or  martyr  before  the  sixth  century,  and  very  few  before  the 
eighth,  when  they  became  abundant." l  Renan '  assigns  the 
earliest  pictures  of  the  catacombs  to  the  fourth  century,  very  few 
(in  Domitilla)  to  the  third.2  Theodore  Mommsen  deems  De 
Rossi's  argument  for  the  early  date  of  the  Coemeterium  Domilifla 
before  A.  D.  95  inconclusive,  and  traces  it  rather  to  the  times  of 
Hadrian  and  Pius  than  to  those  of  the  Flavian  emperors.3 

(Dictionaire,  etc,,  1877),  A.  Kuhn  (1877),  Northcote  and  Brownlow  (1879), 
F.  X:  Kraus  (Real-^ncykl  der  christl.  AUerthumer,  1880  sqq.),  Diepolder 
(1882),  and  among  periodicals,  by  De  Bossi's  Bulletino,  the  Ovmltb  Cattolica, 
the  R&uue  de  Fart  chr&tieri,  and  the  Ifavue  ar<Mologiqw>  Among  the  Protestant 
writers  on  the  catacombs  are  Piper,  Parker,  Maitland,  Lundy,  Withrow, 
Becker,  Stanley,  Schultze,  Heinrici,  and  Boiler.  See  among  others :  Heinrici, 
Jgfor  Deutung  der  Bildw&rke  aMirixtlwher  Qrabstatten,  in  the  "Sludien  und 
Kritiken"  for  1882,  p.  720-743,  and  especially  Piper,  Monumentale  Theokgie- 

1  Catacombs,  Pref.  p.  xi.  The  writer  of  the  article  Catacombs  in  the  "  Encycl. 
Brit."  v.  214  (ninth  ed.)»  is  of  the  same  opinion :  "  It  is  tolerably  certain  that 
the  existing  frescos  are  restorations  of  the  eighth,  or  even  a  later  century,  from 
which  the  character  of  the  earlier  work  can  only  very  imperfectly  he  dis- 
covered.'' He  then  refers  to  Parker's  invaluable  photographs  taken  in  the 
catacombs  by  magnesian  light,  and  condemns,  with  Milman,  the  finished 
drawings  in  Perretf  s  costly  work  as  worthless  to  the  historian,  who  wants  truth 
and  fidelity. 

a  Marc-Aur&e,  p.  543.  8  "  Contemp.  Bev."  for  May,  187 J,  p.  170. 


306  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

§  87.  Lessons  of  the  Catacombs. 

The  catacombs  represent  the  subterranean  Christianity  of  the 
ante-Nicene  age.  They  reveal  the  Christian  life  in  the  face  of 
death  and  eternity.  Their  vast  extent,  their  solemn  darkness, 
their  labyrinthine  mystery,  their  rude  epitaphs,  pictures,  and 
sculptures,  their  relics  of  handicraft,  worship,  and  martyrdom 
give  us  a  lively  and  impressive  idea  of  the  social  and  domestic 
condition,  the  poverty  and  humility,  the  devotional  spirit,  the 
trials  and  sufferings,  the  faith  and  hope  of  the  Christians  from 
the  death  of  the  apostles  to  the  conversion  of  Constantine.  A 
modern  visitor  descending  alive  into  this  region  of  the  dead, 
receives  the  same  impression  as  St.  Jerome  more  than  fifteen 
centuries  ago :  he  is  overcome  by  the  solemn  darkness,  the  ter- 
rible silence,  and  the  sacred  associations ;  only  the  darkness  is 
deeper,  and  the  tombs  are  emptied  of  their  treasures.  "He 
who  is  thoroughly  steeped  in  the  imagery  of  the  catacombs/' 
says  Dean  Stanley,  not  without  rhetorical  exaggeration,  "  will 
be  nearer  to  the  thoughts  of  the  early  church  than  he  who  has 
learned  by  heart  the  most  elaborate  treatise  even  of  Tertullian 
or  of  Origen." x 

The  discovery  of  this  subterranean  necropolis  has  been  made 
unduly  subservient  to  polemical  and  apologetic  purposes  both 
by  Eoman  Catholic  and  Protestant  writers.  The  former  seek 
and  find  in  it  monumental  arguments  for  the  worship  of  saints, 
images,  and  relics,  for  the  cultus  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  the 
primacy  of  Peter,  the  seven  sacraments,  the  real  presence,  even 
for  transubstantiation,  and  purgatory;  while  the  latter  see 
there  the  evidence  of  apostolic  simplicity  of  life  and  worship, 
and  an  illustration  of  Paul's  saying  that  God  chose  the  foolish, 
the  weak,  and  the  despised  things  of  the  world  to  put  to  shame 
them  that  are  wise  and  strong  and  mighty.1 

i  Study  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  prefixed  to  his  Lectures  on  the  History  of  the 
Eastern  Church,  p.  59. 

1  The  apologetic  interest  for  Eomanism  is  represented  by  Marchi,  De  Rossi, 
Garrucci,  Le  Blant,  D.  de  Kichemond,  Armellini,  Bartoli,  Maurus,  Wolter 
(Die  rom.  Katakomben  und  die  Sakramente  der  kath.  Kirche,  1866),  Martigny 


2  87.  LESSONS  OF  THE  CATACOMBS.  307 

A  full  solution  of  the  controversial  questions  would  depend 
upon  the  chronology  of  the  monuments  and  inscriptions,  but 
this  is  exceedingly  uncertain.  The  most  eminent  archaeologists 
hold  widely  differing  opinions.  John  Baptist  de  Eossi,  of 
Borne,  the  greatest  authority  on  the  Eoman  Catholic  side, 
traces  some  paintings  and  epitaphs  in  the  crypts  of  St.  Lucina 
and  St.  Domitilla  back  even  to  the  close  of  the  first  century  or 
the  beginning  of  the  second.  On  the  other  hand,  J.  H.  Parker, 
of  Oxford,  an  equally  eminent  archaeologist,  maintains  that 
"  fully  three-fourths  of  the  fresco-paintings  belong  to  the  latest  * 
restorations  of  the  eighth  and  ninth  centuries,"  and  that  "  of 
the  remaining  fourth  a  considerable  number  are  of  the  sixth 
century."  He  also 'asserts  that  in  the  catacomb  pictures  "there 
are  no  religious  subjects  before  the  time  of  Constantine/'  that 
"  during  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  they  are  entirely  confined 
to  Scriptural  subjects,"  and  that  there  is  "  not  a  figure  of  a  saint 
or  martyr  before  the  sixth  century,  and  very  few  before  the 
eighth,  when  they  became  abundant." l  Eenan  assigns  the 
earliest  pictures  of  the  catacombs  to  the  fourth  century,  very  few 
(in  Domitilla)  to  the  third.2  Theodore  Mommsen  deems  De 
Rossi's  argument  for  the  early  date  of  the  Coemeterium  DomitiUce 
before  A.  D.  95  inconclusive,  and  traces  it  rather  to  the  times  of 
Hadrian  and  Pius  than  to  those  of  the  Flavian  emperors.3 

(Dictionaire,  etc,,  1877),  A.  Kuhn  (1877),  Northcote  and  Brownlow  (1879), 
F.  X:  Kraus  (Bed=EncyU.  der  chri&U.  Atierthumer,  1880  sqq.);  Diepolder 
(1882),  and  among  periodicals,  by  De  Bossi's  Euttetino,  the  Oimltd,  Cattdica, 
the  fiffuue  de  fart  chr$tien,  and  the  Revue  arcMohgique.  Among  the  Protestant 
writers  on  the  catacombs  are  Piper,  Parker,  Maitland,  Lundy,  Withrow, 
Becker,  Stanley,  Schultze,  Heinrici,  and  Boiler.  See  among  others :  Eeinrici, 
Zur  Deutung  far  Bildwerke  dtchristlicher  Grabstatien,,  in  the  "  Studien  und 
Kritiken"  for  1882,  p.  720-743,  and  especially  Piper,  Monwrnentale  Theologie. 

1  Catacombs,  Pref.  p.  xi.   The  writer  of  the  article  Catacombs  in  the  "  Encycl. 
Brit"  v.  214  (ninth  ed.)»  is  of  the  same  opinion :   "It  is  tolerably  certain  that 
the  existing  frescos  are  restorations  of  the  eighth,  or  even  a  later  century,  from 
which  the  character  of  the  earlier  work  can  only  very  imperfectly  be  dis- 
covered."   He  then  refers  to  Parker's  invaluable  photographs  taken  in  the 
catacombs  by  magnesian  light,  and  condemns,  with  Milman,  the  finished 
drawings  in  Ferret's  costly  work  as  worthless  to  the  historian,  who  wants  truth 
and  fidelity. 

2  Warc-Aurtte,  p.  543.  8  "  Contemp.  Eev.J)  for  May,  187J,  p.  170. 


o08  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

But  in  any  case  it  is  unreasonable  to  seek  in  the  catacombs 
for  a  complete  creed  any  more  than  in  a  modern  grave-yard. 
All  we  can  expect  there  is  the  popular  elements  of  eschatology, 
or  the  sentiments  concerning  death  and  eternity,  with  incidental 
traces  of  the  private  and  social  life  of  those  times.  Heathen, 
Jewish,  Mohammedan,  and  Christian  cemeteries  have  their 
characteristic  peculiarities,  yet  all  have  many  things  in  common 
which  are  inseparable  from  human  nature.  Eoman  Catholic 
cemeteries  are  easily  recognized  by  crosses,  crucifixes,  and  refer- 
ence to  purgatory  and  prayers  for  the  dead ;  Protestant  ceme- 
teries by  the  frequency  of  Scripture  passages  in  the  epitaphs, 
and  the  expressions  of  hope  and  joy  in  prospect  of  the  imme- 
diate transition  of  the  pious  dead  to  the  presence  of  Christ. 
The  catacombs  have  a  character  of  their  own,  >which  dis- 
tinguishes them  from  Roman  Catholic  as  well  as  Protestant 
cemeteries. 

Their  most  characteristic  symbols  and  pictures  are  the  Good 
Shepherd,  the  Fish,  and  the  Vine.  These  symbols  almost 
wholly  disappeared  after  the  fourth  century,  but  to  the  mind  of 
the  early  Christians  they  vividly  expressed,  in  childlike  sim- 
plicity, what  is  essential  to  Christians  of  all  creeds,  the  idea  of 
Christ  and  his  salvation,  as  the  only  comfort  in  life  and  in 
death.  The  Shepherd,  whether  from  the  Sabine  or  the  Galilean 
hills,  suggested  the  recovery  of  the  lost  sheep,  the  tender  care 
and  protection,  the  green  pasture  and  fresh  fountain,  the  sacrifice 
of  life :  in  a  word,  the  whole  picture  of  a  Saviour.1  The  popu- 

1  Stanley,  I  c.,  p.  283:  "What  was  the  popular  Religion  of  the  first  Chris- 
tians? It  was,  in  one  word,  the  Religion  of  the  Good  Shepherd.  The  kind- 
ness, the  courage,  the  grace,  the  love,  the  beauty  of  the  Good  Shepherd  was  to 
them,  if  we  may  so  say,  Prayer  Book  and  Articles,  Creeds  and  Canons,  all  in 
one.  They  looked  on  that  figure,  and  it  conveyed  to  them  all  that  they 
wanted.  As  ages  passed  on,  the  Good  Shepherd  faded  away  from  the  mind 
of  the  Christian  world,  and  other  emblems  of  the  Christian  faith  have  taken 
his  place.  Instead  of  the  gracious  and  gentle  Pastor,  there  came  the  Omni- 
potent Judge  or  the  Crucified  Sufferer,  or  the  Infant  in  His  Mother's  arms,  or 
the  Master  in  His  Parting  Supper,  or  the  figures  of  innumerable  saints  and 
<aigel8,  or  the  elaborate  expositions  of  the  various  forms  of  theological  con- 
troversy." 


g  87.  LESSONS  OF  THE  CATACOMBS.  309 

rarity  of  this  picture  enables  us  to  understand  the  immense 
popularity  of  the  Pastor  of  Hennas,  a  religious  allegory  which 
was  written  in  Eome  about  the  middle  of  the  second  century, 
and  read  in  many  churches  till  the  fourth  as  a  part  of  the  New 
Testament  (as  in  the  Sinaitic  Codex).  The  Fish  expressed  the 
same  idea  of  salvation,  under  a  different  form,  but  only  to  those 
who  were  familiar  with  the  Greek  (the  anagrammatic  meaning 
of  Ichthys)  and  associated  the  fish<  with  daily  food  and  the  bap- 
tismal water  of  regeneration.  The  Vine  again  sets  forth  the 
vital  union  of  the  believer  with  Christ  and  the  vital  communion 
of  all  believers  among  themselves. 

Another  prominent  feature  of  the  catacombs  is  their  hopeful 
and  joyful  eschatology.  They  proclaim  in  symbols  and  words 
a  certain  conviction  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul  and  the 
resurrection  of  the  body,  rooted  and  grounded  in  a  living  union 
with  Christ  in  this  world.1  These  glorious  hopes  comforted 
and  strengthened  the  early  Christians  in  a  time  of  poverty,  trial, 
and  persecution.  This  character  stands  in  striking  contrast  with 
the  preceding  .and  contemporary  gloom  of  paganism,  for  which 
the  future  world  was  a  blank,  and  with  the  succeeding  gloom 
of  the  mediaeval  eschatology  which  presented  the  future  world 
to  the  most  serious  Christians  as  a  continuation  of  penal  suffer- 
ings. This  is  the  chief,  we  may  say,  the  only  doctrinal,  lesson 
of  the  catacombs. 

On  some  other  points  they  incidentally  shed  new  light,  espe- 
jially  on  the  spread  of  Christianity  and  the  origin  of  Christian 
art.  Their  immense  extent  implies  that  Christianity  was 

1  See  the  concluding  chapter  in  the  work  of  Koller,  II.  347  sqq.  Baoul- 
Bochette  characterizes  the  art  of  the  Catacombs  as  "un  sysi&me  cPfllvsions  con- 
solantes."  Schultze  sees  in  the  sepulchral  symbols  chiefly  Avferstehungs- 
gedanken  and  Auferstehungshofnungen.  Heinrici  dissents  from  him  by  extend- 
ing the  symbolism  to  the  present  life  as  a  life  of  hope  in  Christ.  lc  Nicht  der 
Gedanlse  an  die  Auferste&ung  des  Fleischesf&r  sich,  sondem  die  christiicheHoffnung 
uberhaupt,  wie  sie  aiw  der  sicheren  Lebensgemeinschaft  mit  Christus  erblilht  und 
Leben  wie  Sterben  des  Qldubigen  beherrscht,  bedingt  die  WaM  der  religios  bedeutsa- 
men  Eild&r.  Sie  md  nicht  Symbole  der  einstigen  Auferstehung,  sondern  des 
mverlierbaren  Hefisbesitsses  in  Christus."  ("Studien  und  Krit."  1842,  p.  729). 


310  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

numerically  much  stronger  in  heathen  Rome  than  was  generally 
supposed.1  Their  numerous  decorations  prove  conclusively, 
either  that  the  primitive  Christian  aversion  to  pictures  and 
sculptures,  inherited  from  the  Jews,  was  not  so  general  nor  so 
long  continued  as  might  be  inferred  from  some  passages  of 
ante-Nicene  writers,  or,  what  is  more  likely,  that  the  popular 
love  for  art  inherited  from  the  Greeks  and  Romans  was  little 
affected  by  the  theologians,  and  ultimately  prevailed  over  the 
scruples  of  theorizers. 

The  first  discovery  of  the  catacombs  was  a  surprise  to  the 
Christian  world,  and- gave  birth  to  wild  fancies  about  the  incal- 
culable number  of  martyrs,  the  terrors  of  persecution,  the  sub- 
terranean assemblies  of  the  early  Christians,  as  if  they  lived 
and  died,  by  necessity  or  preference,  in  darkness  beneath  the 
earth.  A  closer  investigation  has  dispelled  the  romance,  and 
deepened  the  reality. 

There  is  no  contradiction  between  the  religion  of  the  ante- 
Nicene  monuments  and  the  religion  of  the  ante-Nicene  litera- 
ture. They  supplement  and  illustrate  each  other.  Both  exhibit 
to  us  neither  the  mediaeval  Catholic  nor  the  modern  Protestant, 
but  the  post-apostolic  Christianity  of  confessors  and  martyrs, — 
simple,  humble,  unpretending,  unlearned,  unworldly,  strong  in 
death  and  in  the  hope  of  a  blissful  resurrection ;  free  from  the 
distinctive  dogmas  and  usages  of  later  times;  yet  with  that 
strong  love  for  symbolism,  mysticism,  asceticism,  and  popular 
superstitions  which  we  find  in  the  writings  of  Justin  Martyr, 
Tertullian,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  Origen. 

1  Theodore  Mommsen  (in  "The  Contemp.  Rev."  for  May,  1871,  p.  167): 
"  The  enormous  space  occupied  by  the  burial  vaults  of  Christian  Rome,  in 
their  extent  not  surpassed  even  by  the  system  of  cloacse  or  sewers  of  Republi- 
can Borne,  is  certainly  the  work  of  that  community  which  St.  Paul  addressed 
in  his  EpistJe  to  the  Romans — a  living  witness  of  its  immense  development^ 
corresponding  to  the  importance  of  the  capital." 


CHAPTEE  VIIL 

CHBISTIAN  UFE  IN  CONTRAST  WITH  PAGAN  CORBUPTKXfir. 

§  88.  Literatwe. 

I.  SouECES:   The  works  of  the  APOSTOLIC  FATHEES.    The  Apologies 

of  JUSTIN.  The  practical  treatises  of  TERTULLIAN.  The  Epistles 
of  CYPRIAN.  The  Canons  of  Councils.  The  APOSTOLICAL  CONSTI- 
TUTIONS and  CANONS.  The  Acts  of  Martyrs.— On  the  condition 
of  the  Roman  Empire:  the  Histories  of  TACITUS,  SUETONIUS,  and 
DION  CASSIUS,  the  writings  of  SENECA,  HORACE,  JUVENAL, 
PEESIUS,  MARTIAL. 

II.  LITEEATURE  :    W.  CAVE;  Primitive  Christianity,  or  the  Religion  of 
the  Ancient  Christians  in  the  first  ages  of  the  Gospel.    London,  fifth 
ed.  1689. 

G.  AENOLD:    Erste  Liebe,  d.  i.  Wahre  Abbildung  der  ersten  Christen 

nach  ihrem  lebendigen  Glauben  und  heil.  Leben.    Frankf.  1696,  and 

often  since. 
NEANDEE  :  Denkwurdigkeiten  aus  der  Geschichte  des  christlichen  Lebens 

(first  1823),  vol.  i.  third  ed.    Hamb.  1845.    The  same  in  English 

by  Eyland:    Neander's  Memorials  of    Christian  Life,  in   Bohn's 

Library,  1853. 
L.  COLEMAN  :  Ancient  Christianity  exemplified  in  the  private,  domestic, 

social,  and  civil  Life  of  the  Primitive  Christians,  etc.    Phil.  1853. 
C.  SCHMIDT  :  Essai  historique  sur  la  society  dans  le  monde  Romain,  et  sur 

la  transformation  par  le  Christianisme.    Par.  1853.    The  same  transl. 

into  German  by  A.  V.  Richard.    Leipz.  1857. 
'  E.  L.  CHASTEL  :  &udes  historigues  sur  I'influence  de  la  charite  durant 

les  premiers   siecles  chret.     Par.   1853.    Crowned  by  the  French 

Academic.     The  same  transl.  into   English  (The    Charity  of  the 

Primitive  Churches],  by  G.  A.  Matile.    Phila.  1857. 
A.  Fr.  VILLEMAIN  :  Nouveaux  essais  sur  Vinfl.  du  Christianisme  dans  le 

monde  Grec  et  Latin.    Par.  1853. 
BENJ.  CONSTANT  MAETHA  (Member  of  the  Acad&mie  des  sciences  morales 

et  politiques,  elected  in  1872):  Les  Mbralistes  sous  V  Empire  romain. 

Paris  1854,  second  ed.  1866  (Crowned  by  the  French  Academy). 
FR.  J.  M.  TH.  CHAMPAGNY  :   Les  premiers  siecles  de  la  charite.    Paris, 

1854.    Also   his  work  Les  Antonins.    Paris,  1863,  third  ed,  1874, 

3  vols. 


312  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

a 

J.  DENIS:    Histoire  des  theories  et  des  idtes  murales  dans  Vantiquitb. 

Paris,  1856,  2  torn. 
P.  JANET  :  Histoire  de  la  philosophie  morale  et  politique.    Paris,  1858, 

2  torn. 

G.  RATZINGER  :  Gesch.  der  Urchlichen  Armenpflege.    Freib.  1859. 
W.  E.  H.  LECKY  :  History  of  European  Morals  from  Augustus  to  Charle* 

magne.    Lond.  and  N.  Y.  1869,  2  vols.,  5th  ed.  Lond.  1882.    Ger- 
man transl.  by  Dr.  H.  Jalowicz. 
MARiE-Louis-GASTON  BoissiER:   La  Religion  romaine  d'Auguste  aux 

Antonins.    Paris,  1874,  2  vols. 

BESTMASTK:  Geschiehte  der  christlichen  Sitte.    Nordl.  Bd.  I.  1880. 
W.  GASS :  Gesehichte  der  christlichen  Ethik.     Berlin,  1881  (vol.  I.  49-107). 
G.  UHLHORN":  Die  christliche  Liebesthatigkeit  in  der  alten  Kirche.  Stuttg, 

1881.    English  translation  (Christian  Charity  in  the  Antieivt  Church). 

Edinb.  and  N.  York,  1883  (424  pages). 
CHARLES  L.  BRACE  :   Gesta  Christi :  or  a  History  of  humane  Progress 

under  Christianity.    N.  York,  1883  (500  pages). 

§  89.  Moral  Corruption  of  the  Roman  Empire. 

Besides  the  Lit.  quoted  in  J  88,  comp.  tfoe  historical  works  on  the  Boman 
Empire  by  GIBBON,  MERIVALE,  and  BAFKE;  also  J.  J.  A. 
AMPERE'S  Histoire  Romaine  4  Rome  (1856-64,  4  vols.). 

FRIEDLAENDER'S  Sittengeschichte  Roms  (from  Augustus  to  the  An- 
tonines.  Leipzig,  3  vols.,  5th  ed.  1881);  and  MARQUARDT  and 
MOMMSEN'S  Handbuch  der  romischen  Alterthumer  (Leipz.  1871,  sec- 
ond ed.  1876,  7  vols.,  divided  into  Staatsrecht,  Staatsverwaltung, 
Privatleben). 

CHRISTIANITY  is  not  only  the  revelation  of  truth,  but  also 
the  fountain  of  holiness  under  the  unceasing  inspiration  of  the 
spotless  example  of  its  Founder,  which  is  more  powerful  than 
all  the  systems  of  moral  philosophy.  It  attests  its  divine  origin 
as  much  by  its  moral  workings  as  by  its  pure  doctrines.  By  its 
own  inherent  energy,  without  noise  and  commotion,  without  the 
favor  of  circumstances,  nay,  in  spite  of  all  possible  obstacles,  it 
has  gradually  wrought  the  greatest  moral  reformation,  we  should 
rather  say,  regeneration  of  society  which  history  has  ever  seen  ; 
while  its  purifying,  ennobling,  and  cheering  effects  upon  the 
private  life  of  countless  individuals  are  beyond  the  reach  of  the 
historian,  though  recorded  in  God's  book  of  life  to  be  opened  on 
the  day  of  judgment. 


?89.  MORAL  CORRUPTION  OF  THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE.  313 

To  appreciate  this  work,  we  must  first  review  the  moral  con- 
dition of  heathenism  in  its  mightiest  embodiment  in  history. 

When  Christianity  took  firm  foothold  on  earth,  the  pagan 
civilization  and'the  Roman  empire  had  reached  their  zenith.  The 
reign  of  Augustus  was  the  golden  age  of  Eoman  literature ;  his 
successors  added  Britain  and  Dacia  to  the  conquests  of  the  Re- 
public; internal  organization  was  perfected  by  Trajan  and  the 
Antonines.  The  fairest  countries  of  Europe,  and  a  considerable 
part  of  Asia  and  Africa  stood  under  one  imperial  government 
with  republican  forms,  and  enjoyed  a  well-ordered  jurisdiction. 
Piracy  on  the  seas  was  abolished ;  life  and  property  were  secure. 
Military  roads,  canals,  and  the  Mediterranean  Sea  facilitated 
commerce  and  travel;  agriculture  was  improved,  and  all 
branches  of  industry  flourished.  Temples,  theatres,  aqueducts, 
public  baths,  and  magnificent  buildings  of  every  kind  adorned 
the  great  cities;  institutions  of  learning  disseminated  culture; 
two  languages  with  a  classic  literature  were  current  in  the 
empire,  the  Greek  in  the  East,  the  Latin  in  the  West ;  the  book 
trade,  with  the  manufacture  of  paper,  was  a  craft  of  no  small 
importance,  and  a  library  belonged  to  every  respectable  house. 
The  book  stores  and  public  libraries  were  in  the  most  lively 
streets  of  Rome,  and  resorted  to  by  literary  people.  Hundreds 
of  slaves  were  employed  as  scribes,  who  wrote  simultaneously 
at  the  dictation  of  one  author  or  reader,  and  multiplied  copies 
almost  as  fast  as  the  modern  printing  press.1  The  excavations 
of  Pompeii  and  Herculaneum  reveal  a  high  degree  of  con- 
venience and  taste  in  domestic  life  even  in  provincial  towns ; 


i  Friedlaender,  III.  369  sqq.  (5th  ed.),  gives  much  interesting  information 
about  the  book  trade  in  Eorae,  which  was  far  more  extensive  than  is  generally 
supposed,  and  was  facilitated  by  slave-labor.  Books  were  cheap.  The  first 
book  of  Martial  (over  700  verses  in  118  poems)  cost  in  the  best  outfit  only  5 
denarii  (80  cts.)  Julius  Ctesar  conceived  the  plan  of  founding  public  libraries, 
but  was  prevented  from  carrying  it  into  effect.  In  the  fourth  century  there  were 
no  less  than  twenty-eight  public  libraries  in  Rome.  The  ease  and  enjoyment 
of  reading,  however,  were  considerably  diminished  by  the  many  errors,  the 
absence  of  division  and  punctuation.  Asinius  Pollio  introduced  the  custom 
of  public  readings  of  new  works  before  invited  circles. 


314  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

and  no  one  can  look  without  amazement  at  the  sublime  and 
eloquent  ruins  of  Rome,  the  palaces  of  the  Caesars,  the 
Mausoleum  of  Hadrian,  the  Baths  of  Caracalla,  the  Aqueducts, 
the  triumphal  arches  and  columns,  above  all  the  Colosseum, 
built  by  Vespasian,  to  a  height  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  feet, 
and  for  more  than  eighty  thousand  spectators.  The  period  of. 
eighty-four  years  from  the  accession  of  Nerva  to  the  death  of 
Marcus  Aurelius  has  been  pronounced  by  high  authority  "  the 
most  happy  and  prosperous  period  in  the  history  of  the  world." 1 
But  this  is  only  a  surface  view.  The  inside  did  not  corre- 
spond to  the  outside.  Even  under  the  Antonines  the  majority  of 
men  groaned  under  the  yoke  of  slavery  or  poverty ;  gladiatorial 
shows  brutalized  the  people;  fierce  wars  were  raging  on  the 
borders  of  the  empire ;  and  the  most  virtuous  and  peaceful  of 
subjects — the  Christians, — had  no  rights,  and  were  liable  at 
any  moment  to  be  thrown  before  wild  beasts,  for  no  other 
reason  than  the  profession  of  their  religion.  The  age  of  the 
full  bloom  of  the  Grseco-Roman  power  was  also  the  beginning 
of  its  decline.  This  imposing  show  concealed  incurable  moral 
putridity  and  indescribable  wretchedness.  The  colossal  piles 
of  architecture  owed  their  erection  to  the  bloody  sweat  of  in- 
numerable slaves,  who  were  treated  no  better  than  so  many 
beasts  of  burden;  on  the  Flavian  amphitheatre  alone  toiled 
twelve  thousand  Jewish  prisoners  of  war ;  and  it  was  built  to 
gratify  the  cruel  taste  of  the  people  for  the  slaughter  of  wild 
animals  and  human  beings  made  in  the  image  of  God.  The 
influx  of  wealth  from  conquered  nations  diffiised  the  most  ex- 
travagant luxury,  which  collected  for  a  single  meal  peacocks 
from  Samos,  pike  from  Pessinus,  oysters  from  Tarentum,  dates 
from  Egypt,  nuts  from  Spain,  in  short  the  rarest  dishes  from  all 
parts  of  the  world,  and  resorted  to  emetics  to  stimulate  appetite 
and  to  lighten  the  stomach.  "  They  eat,"  says  Seneca,  "  and 
then  they  vomit;  they  vomit,  and  then  they  eat."  Apieius, 
who  lived  under  Tiberius,  dissolved  pearls  in  lihe  wine  he  drank, 

1  Gibbon,  Decline  and  Fatt,  ch.  HI/  Eenan  expresses  the  same  view. 


2  89.  MORAL  CORRUPTION  OF  THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE.   815 

squandered  an  enormous  fortune  on  the  pleasures  of  the  table, 
and  then  committed  suicide.1  He  found  imperial  imijtators  in 
Vitellius  and  Heliogabalus  (or  Elagabal).  A  special  class  of 
servants,  the  cosrnetes,  had  charge  of  the  dress,  the  smoothing 
of  the  wrinkles,  the  setting  of  the  false  teeth,  the  painting  of 
bhe  eye-brows,  of  wealthy  patricians.  Hand  in  hand  with  this 
luxury  came  the  vices  of  natural  and  even  unnatural  sensuality, 
which  decency  forbids  to  name.  Hopeless  poverty  stood  in 
crying  contrast  with  immense  wealth;  exhausted  provinces, 
with  revelling  cities.  Enormous  taxes  burdened  the  people, 
and  misery  was  terribly  increased  by  war,  pestilence,  and 
famine.  The  higher  or  ruling  families  were  enervated,  and 
were  not  strengthened  or  replenished  by  the  lower.  The  free 
citizens  lost  physical  and  moral  vigor,  and  sank  to  an  inert 
mass.  The  third  class  was  the  huge  body  of  slaves,  who  per- 
formed all  kinds  of  mechanical  labor,  even  the  tilling  of  the 
soil,  and  in  times  of  danger  were  ready  to  join  the  enemies  of 
the  empire.  A  proper  middle  class  of  industrious  citizens,  the 
only  firm  basis  of  a  healthy  community,  cannot  coexist  with 
slavery,  which,  degrades  free  labor.  The. army,  composed 

1  Either  from  disgust  of  life,  or  because  he  thought  he  could  not  live  of  the 
remaining  ten  million  of  sesterces,  after  he  had  wasted  sixty  or  a  hundred 
million.  Seneca,  Ad  Helv.  x.  9.  Heliogabalus  chose  Apicius  as  his  model. 
These,  however,  are  exceptional  cases,  and  became  proverbial.  See  on 
this  whole  subject  of  Eoman  luxury  the  third  volume  of  Friedlaender*s 
Stitengeschichte,  pp.  1-152.  He  rather  modifies  the  usual  view,  and  thinks  that 
Apicius  had  more  imitators  among  French  epicures  under  Louis  XIV.,  XV., 
and  XVI.  than  among  the  Roman  nobles,  and  that  some  petty  German  princes 
of  the  eighteenth  century,  like  King  August  of  Saxony  (who  wasted  eighty 
thousand  thalers  on  a  single  opera),  and  Duke  Karl  of  Wurttemberg,  almost 
equalled  the  heathen  emperors  in  extravagance  and  riotous  living,  at  the 
expense  of  their  poor  subjects.  The  wealth  of  the  old  Romans  was  much  sur- 
passed by  that  of  some  modem  Russian  and  English  noblemen,  French 
bankers,  and  American  merchant  princes,  but  had  a  much  greater  purchasing 
value.  The  richest  Romans  were  Ca»  Lentulus,  and  Narcissus  (a  freedman  of 
Nero),  and  their  fortune  amounted  to  four  hundred  million  sesterces  (from 
sixty-five  to  seventy  million  marks) ;  while  Mazarin  left  two  hundred  million 
francs,  Baron  James  Rothschild  (d.  1868)  two  thousand  million  francs  (1.  c.  p. 
13  sqq.).  The  architecture  of  the  imperial  age  surpassed  all  modern  palaces 
in  extravagance  and  splendor,  but  in  parks  and  gardens  the  modern  English 
far  surpass  the  ancient  Romans  (p.  78  sqq.)- 


316  SEUXND  PEK10.D.    A.  D.  100-311. 

largely  of  the  rudest  citizens  and  of  barbarians,  was  the  strength 
of  the-  nation,  and  gradually  stamped  the  government  with  tha 
character  of  military  despotism.  The  virtues  of  patriotism 
and  of  good  faith  in  public  intercourse,  were  extinct.  The 
basest  warice,  suspicion  and  envy,  usuriousness  and  bribery,, 
insolence  and  servility,  everywhere  prevailed- 

The  work  of  demoralizing  the  people  was  systematically 
organized  and  sanctioned  from  the  highest  places  downwards. 
There  were,  it  is  true,  some  worthy  emperors  of  old  Roman 
energy  and  justice,  among  whom  Trajan,  Antoninus  Pius,  and 
Marcus  Aurelius  stand  foremost;  all  honor  to  their  memory. 
But  the  best  they  could  do  was  to  check  the  process  of  internal 
putrefaction,  and  to  conceal  the -sores  for  a  little  while;  they 
could  not  heal  them.  Most  of  the  emperors  were  coarse  mili- 
tary despots,  and  some  of  them  monsters  of  wickedness.  There 
is  scarcely  an  age  in  the  history  of  the  world,  in  which  so  many 
and  so  hideous  vices  disgraced  the  throne,  as  in  the  period 
from  Tiberius  to  Domitian,  and  from  Commodus  to  Galerius. 
"  The  annals  of  the  emperors,"  says  Gibbon,  "  exhibit  a  strong 
aud  various  picture  of  human  nature,  which  we  should  vainly 
seek  among  the  mixed  and  doubtful  characters  of  modern  his- 
tory. In  the  conduct  of  those  monarchs  we  may  trace  the 
utmost  lines  of  vice  and  virtue;  the  most  exalted  perfection 
and  the  meanest  degeneracy  of  our  own  species."  l  "  Never, 
probably,"  says  Canon  Farrar,  "  was  there  any  age  or  any  place 
where  the  worst  forms  of  wickedness  were  practised  with  a 
more  unblushing  effrontery  than  in  the  city  of  Rome  under  the 
government  of  the  Csesars." 2  We  may  not  even  except  the 
infamous  period  of  the  papal  pornocracy,  and  the  reign  of 
Alexander  Borgia,  which  were  of  short  duration,  and  excited 
"disgust  and  indignation  throughout  the  church. 

The  Pagan  historians  of  Rome  have  branded  and  immortal- 
ized the  vices  and  crimes  of  the  Caesars:  the  misanthropy, 
cruelty,  and  voluptuousness  of  Tiberius ;  the  ferocious  madness 

1  Decline  and  Fall,  ch.  III.  2  Seek&rs  after  God,  p.  37. 


g89.  MORAL  CORRUPTION  OF  THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE.  317 

of  Cains  Caligula,  who  had  men  tortured,  beheaded,  or  sawed 
in  pieces  for  his  amusement,  who  seriously  meditated  the  butch- 
ery of  the  whole  senate,  raised  his  horse  to  the  digniiy  of  consul 
and  priest,  and  crawled  under  the  bed  in  a  storm ;  the  bottom- 
less vileness  of  Nero,  "the  inventor  of  crime,"  who  poisoned 
or  murdered  his  preceptors  Burrhus  and  Seneca,  his  half-brother 
and  brother-in-law  Britannicus,  his  mother  Agrippina,  his  wife 
Octavia,  his  mistress  Poppsea,  who  in  sheer  wantonness  set  fire 
to  Konie,  and  then  burnt  innocent  Christians  for  it  as  torches  in 
his  gardens,  figuring  himself  as  charioteer  in  the  infernal  spec- 
tacle; the  swinish  gluttony  of  Vitellius,  who  consumed  mil- 
lions of  money  in  mere  eating;  the  refined  wickedness  of 
Domitian,  who,  more  a  cat  than  a  tiger,  amused  himself  most 
with  the  torments  of  the  dying  and  with  catching  flies;  the 
shameless  revelry  of  Oommodus  with  his  hundreds  of  concu- 
bines, and  ferocious  passion  for  butchering  men  and  beasts  on  the 
arena ;  the  mad  villainy  of  Heliogabalus,  who  raised  the  lowest 
men  to  the  highest  dignities,  dressed  himself  in  women's  clothes, 
married  a  dissolute  boy  like  himself,  in  short,  inverted  all  the 
laws  of  nature  and  of  decency,  until  at  last  he  was  butchered 
with  his  mother  by  the  soldiers,  and  thrown  into  the  muddy 
Tiber.  And  to  fill  the  measure  of  impiety  and  wickedness, 
such  imperial  monsters  were  received,  after  their  death,  by  a 
formal  decree  of  the  Senate,  into  the  number  of  divinities,  and 
their  abandoned  memory  was  celebrated  by  festivals,  temples, 
and  colleges  of  priests!  The  emperor,  in  the  language  of 
Gibbon,  was  at  once  "a  priest,  an  atheist,  and  a  god."  Some 
added  to  it  the  dignity  of  amateur  actor  and  gladiator  on  the 
stage.  Domitian,  even  in  his  lifetime,  caused  himself  to  be 
called  "  Domino  et  Deus  nost&r"  and  whole  herds  of  animals 
to  be  sacrificed  to  his  gold  and  silver  statues.  It  is  impossible 
to  imagine  a  greater  public  and  official  mockery  of  all  religion. 
The  wives  and  mistresses  of  the  emperors  were  not  much 
better.  They  revelled  in  luxury  and  vice,  swept  through  the 
streets  in  chariots  drawn  by  silver- shod  mules,  wasted  fortunes 
on  a  single  dress,  delighted  in  wicked  intrigues,  aided  their 


318  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

husbands  in  dark  crimes,  and  shared  at  last  in  their  tragic  fate, 
Messalina,  the  wife  of  Claudius,  was  murdered  by  the  order  of 
her  husband  in  the  midst  of  her  nuptial  orgies  with  one  of  he] 
favorites;  and  the  younger  Agrippina,  the  mother  of  !s"ero 
after  poisoning  her  husband,  was  murdered  by  her  own  son 
who  was  equally  cruel  to  his  wives,  kicking  one  of  them  tc 
death  when  she  was  in  a  state  of  pregnancy.  These  female 
monsters  were  likewise  deified,  and  elevated  to  the  rank  of  June 
er  Venus. 

From  the  higher  regions  the  corruption  descended  into  the 
masses  of  the  people,  who  by  this  time  had  no  sense  for  any- 
thing but  "Panem  et  Ciroenses"  and,  in  the  enjoyment  of  these, 
looked  with  morbid  curiosity  and  interest  upon  the  most  flagrant 
vices  of  their  masters. 

No  wonder  that  Tacitus,  who  with  terse  eloquence  and  old 
Koinan  severity  exposes  the  monstrous  characters  of  Nero  and 
other  emperors  to  eternal  infamy,  could  nowhere,  save  perhaps 
among  the  barbarian  Germans,  discover  a  star  of  hope,  and 
foreboded  the  fearful  vengeance  of  the  gods,  and  even  the 
speedy  destruction  of  the  empire.  And  certainly  nothing  could 
save  it  from  final  doom,  whose  approacli  was  announced  with 
ever-growing  distinctness  by  wars,  insurrections,  inundations^ 
earthquakes,  pestilence,  famine,  irruption  of  barbarians,  and 
prophetic  calamities  of  every  kind.  Ancient  Rome,  in  the  slow 
but  certain  process  of  dissolution  and  decay,  teaches  tie 

" .  .  sad  moral  of  all  human  tales; 

'Tis  but  the  same  rehearsal  of  the  past; 
first  freedom,  and  then  glory— when  that  fails, 
Wealth,  vice,  corruption,  barbarism  at  last," 

§  90.  Stoie  Morality. 

ED.  ZELLEK  :  The  Stoics,  Epicureans,  and  Sceptics.    Translated  from  tht 

German  ly  0.  J.  Reichel    London  (Longman,  Green  &  Co.),  1870. 

Chs.  x-xii  treat  of  the  Stoic  Ethics  and  Religion. 
P.  W.  FARKAB  (Canon  of  Westminster) :   Seekers  after  God.    London 

(Macmillan  &  Co.),  first  ed.  n.  d.  (1869),  new  ed.  1877  (Seneca, 

Epictetus,  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  336  pages). 


g  90.  STOIC  MORA  LITY.  319 

Oomp.  also  the  essays  on  Seneca  and  Paul  by  FLETJRY,  AUBEETIN, 
BAUR,  LIGHTFOOT,  and  EETJSS  (quoted  in  vol.  I.  283). 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  bright  side  of  heathen  morals,  as 
exhibited  in  the  teaching  and  example  of  Epictetus,  Marcus 
Aurelius,  and  Plutarch — three  pure  and  noble  characters— one 
a  slave,  the  second  an  emperor,  the  third  a  man  of  letters,  twc 
of  them  Stoics,  one  a  Platonist.  It  is  refreshing  to  look  upon 
a  few  green  spots  in  the  moral  desert  of  heathen  Rome.  We 
may  trace  their  virtue  to  the  guidance  of  conscience  (the  good 
demon  of  Socrates),  or  to  the  independent  working  of  the  Spirit 
of  God,  or  to  the  indirect  influence  of  Christianity,  which 
already  began  to  pervade  the  moral  atmosphere  beyond  the 
limits  of  the  visible  church,  and  to  infuse  into  legislation  a 
spirit  of  humanity  and  justice  unknown  before,  or  to  all  these 
causes  combined.  It  is  certain  that  there  was  in  the  second 
century  a  moral  current  of  unconscious  Christianity,  which  met 
the  stronger  religious  current  of  the  church  and  facilitated  her 
ultimate  victory. 

It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  two  men  who  represent  the  ex- 
tremes of  society,  the  lowest  and  the  highest,  were  the  last  and 
greatest  teachers  of  natural  virtue  in  ancient  Rome.  They 
shine  like  lone,  stars  in  the  midnight  darkness  of  prevailing 
corruption.  Epictetus  the  slave,  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  the 
crowned  ruler  of  an  empire,  are  the  purest  among  the  heathen 
moralists,  and  furnish  the  strongest  *  testimonies  of  the  naturally 
Christian  soul" 

Both  belonged  to  the  school  of  Zeno. 

The  Stoic  philosophy  was  born  in  Greece,  but  grew  into  man- 
hood in  Rome.  It  was  predestinated  for  that  stern,  grave, 
practical,  haughty,  self-governing  and  heroic  character  which 
from  the  banks  of  the  Tiber  ruled  over  the  civilized  world.1 

1  Zeller,  I.  c.  p.  37 :  "  Nearly  all  the  most  important  Stoics  before  the  Chris- 
tian era  belong  by  birth  to  Asia  Minor,  to  Syria,  and  to  the  islands  of  the 
Eastern  Archipelago.  Then  follow  a  line  of  Roman  Stoics,  among  whom  the 
Phrygian  Epictetus  occupies  a  prominent  place;  but  Greece  proper  is  ex- 
clusively represented  by  men  of  third  or  fourth-rate  capacity.'' 


320  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

In  the  Republican  period  Cato  of  Utica  lived  and  died  by  his  own 
hand  a  genuine  Stoic  in  practice,  without  being  one  in  theory. 
Seneca,  the  contemporary  of  St.  Paul,  was  a  Stoic  in  theory,  but 
belied  his  almost  Christian  wisdom  in  practice,  by  his  insatiable 
avarice,  anticipating  Francis  Bacon  as  "  the  wisest,  brightest, 
meanest  of  mankind." l  Half  of  his  ethics  is  mere  rhetoric. 
In  Epictetus  and  Marcus  Aurelius  the  Stoic  theory  and  practice 
'  met  in  beautiful  harmony,  and  freed  from  its  most  objectionable 
features.  They  were  the  last  and  the  best  of  that'  school  which 
taught  men  to  live  and  to  die,  and  offered  an  asylum  for  indi- 
vidual virtue  and  freedom  when  the  Roman  world  at  large  was 
rotten  to  the  core. 

Stoicism  is  of  all  ancient  systems  of  philosophy  both  nearest 
to,  and  furthest  from,  Christianity :  nearest  in  the  purity  and 
sublimity  of  its  maxims  and  the  virtues  of  simplicity,  equa- 
nimity, self-control,  and  resignation  to  an  all-wise  Providence ; 
furthest  in  the  spirit  of  pride,  self-reliance,  haughty  contempt, 

1  Niebuhr  says  of  Seneca :  "  He  acted  on  the  principle  that  he  could  dis« 
pense  with  the  laws  of  morality  which  he  laid  down  for  others."  Macaulay : 
"The  business  of  the  philosopher  was  to  declaim  in  praise  of  poverty,  with 
two  millions  sterling  at'  usury ;  to  meditate  epigrammatic  conceits  about  the 
evils  of  luxury  in  gardens  which  moved  the  envy  of  sovereigns;  to  rant 
about  liberty  while  fawning  on  the  insolent  and  pampered  freedman  of  a 
tyrant;  to  celebrate  the  divine  beauty  of  virtue  w'm  the  same  pen  which  had 
just  before  written  a  defense  of  the  murder  of  a  mother  by  a  son."  Farrar 
(L  c.  p.  161) :  "In  Seneca's  life,  we  see  as  clearly  as  in  those  of  many  pro- 
fessed Christians  that  it  is  impossible  to  be  at  once  worldly  and  righteous. 
His  utter  failure  was  due  to  the  vain  attempt  to  combine  in  his  own  person 
*wo  opposite  characters — that  of  a  Stoic  and  that  of  a  courtier  ....  In  him 
we  see  some  of  the  most  glowing  pictures  of  the  nobility  of  poverty  combined 
with  the  most  questionable  avidity  in  the  pursuit  of  wealth."  For  a  con- 
venient collection  of  Seneca's  resemblances  to  Scripture,  see  Farrar,  ch.  XV., 
174-185.  The  most  striking  passages  are :  "  A  sacred  spirit  dwells  within  us, 
the  observer  and  guardian  of  all  our  evil  and  our  good  .  .  .  there  is  no  good 
man  without  God."  Ep.  ad  LuriL  41.  Comp.  1  Cor.  3 :  16.  "  Not  one  of  us 
is  without  fault  ...  no  man  is  found  who  can  acquit  himself."  De  Ira  1. 14  ; 
II,  27.  Comp.  1  John  1:8.  "  Eiches  ....  the  greatest  source  of  human 
trouble."  De  Frangu.  An.  8.  Comp.  1  Tim.  6:  10.  "You  must  live  foi 
another,  if  you  wish  to  live  for  yourself."  Ep.  48.  Comp.  Eom.  12 :  10. 
"  Let  him  who  hath  conferred  a  favor  hold  his  tongue."  De  Bentf.  II.  11 
Comp.  Matt.  6 :  3. 


191.  EPICTETUS.  321 

and  cold  indifference.  Pride  is  the  basis  of  Stoic  virtue,  while 
humility  is  the  basis  of  Christian  holiness ;  the  former  is  in- 
spired by  egotism,  the  latter  by  love  to  God  and  man;  the 
Stoic  feels  no  need  of  a  Saviour,  and  calmly  resorts  to  suicide 
when  the  house  smokes ;  while  the  Christian  life  begins  with  a 
sense  of  sin,  and  ends  with  triumph  over  death ;  the  resignation 
of  the  Stoic  is  heartless  apathy  and  a  surrender  to  the  iron 
necessity  of  fate ;  the  resignation  of  the  Christian,  is  cheerful 
submission  to  the  will  of  an  all-wise  and  all-merciful  Father  in 
heaven ;  the  Stoic  sage  resembles  a  cold,  immovable  statue,  the 
Christian  saint  a  living  body,  beating  in  hearty  sympathy  with 
every  joy  and  grief  of  his  fellow-men.  At  best,  Stoicism  is 
only  a  philosophy  for  the  few,  while  Christianity  is  a  religion 
for  all. 

§  91.  Epictetus. 

EPICTETI.    Dissertationum  ab  Arriano  digestarum  Libri  IV.  HJuiusdem 

Enchiridion  et  ex  deperditis  Sermonibus  Fragmenta  . . .  recensuit . . 

JOH.  ScHWEiGHlusER.    Lips.  1799, 1800.  5  vols.    The  Greek  text 

with  a  Latin  version  and  notes. 
The  Works  of  EPICTETUS.     Consisting  of  Ms  Discourses,  in  four  'books, 

the  Enchiridion,  and  Fragments.    A  translation  from  the  Greek,  based 

on  that  of  Mrs.  Elizabeth  Carter,  by  THOMAS  WENTWORTH  HlGOrsr- 

SON.    Boston  (Little,  Brown  &  Co.),  1865.    A  fourth  ed.  of  Mrs. 

Carter's  translation  was  published  in  1807,  with  introduction  and 

notes. 
The  Discourses  of  EPICTETUS,  with  the  Enchiridion   and  Fragments. 

Translated,  with  Notes,  etc.,  by  GEORGE  LONG.    London  (George 

Bell  &  Sons),  1877. 

There  are  also  other  English,  as  well  as  German  and  French, 

versions. 

Epictetus  was  born  before  the  middle  of  the  first  century,  at 
Hierapolis,  a  city  in  Phrygia,  a  few  miles  from  Colossse  and 
Laodicea,  well  known  to  us  from  apostolic  history.  He  was  a 
compatriot  and  contemporary  of  Epaphras,  a  pupil  of  Paul, 
and  founder  of  Christian  churches  in  that  province.1  There  ia 

Vol.II.    21.  '001.1:7;  4:  12, 13. 


322  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

a  bare  possibility  that  he  had  a  passing  acquaintance  with  him, 
if  not  with  Paul  himself.  He  came  as  a  slave  to  Eome  with 
his  master,  Epaphroditus,  a  profligate  freedman  and  favorite  of 
Nero  (whom  he  aided  in  committing  suicide),  and  was  after- 
wards set  at  liberty.  He  rose  above  his  condition.  "  Freedom 
and  slavery,"  he  says  in  one  of  his  Fragments,  "  are  but  names 
of  virtue  and  of  vice,  and  both  depend  upon  the  will.  No  one 
is  a  slave  whose  will  is  free."  He  was  lame  in  one  foot  and 
in  feeble  health.  The  lameness,  if  we  are  to  credit  the  report 
of  Origen,  was  the  result  of  ill  treatment,  which  he  bore 
heroically.  When  his  master  put  his  leg  in  the  torture,  he 
quietly  said :  "  You  will  break  my  leg ; "  and  when  the  leg  was 
broken,  he  added :  "  Did  I  not  tell  you  so  ?  "  This  reminds 
<Mie  of  Socrates  who  is  reported  to  have  borne  a  scolding  and 
subsequent  shower  from  Xantippe  with  the  cool  remark :  After 
the  thunder  comes  the  rain.  Epictetus  heard  the  lectures  of 
Musonius  Eufus,  a  distinguished  teacher  of  the  Stoic  philosophy 
under  Nero  and  Vespasian,  and  began  himself  to  teach.  He 
was  banished  from  Eome  by  Domitian,  with  all  other  philoso- 
phers, before  A.  D.  90.  He  settled  for  the  rest  of  his  life  in 
Nicopolis,  in  Southern  Epirus,  not  far  from  the  scene  of  the 
battle  of  Actium.  There  he  gathered  around  him  a  large  body 
of  pupils,  old  and  young,  rich  and  poor,  and  instructed  them, 
as  a  second  Socrates,  by  precept  and  example,  in  halls  and  public 
places.  The  emperor  Hadrian  is  reported  to  have  invited  him 
back  to  Rome  (117),  but  in  vain.  The  date  of  his  death  is 
unknown. 

Epictetus  led  from  principle  and  necessity  a  life  of  poverty 
and  extreme  simplicity,  after  the  model  of  Diogenes,  the  arch- 
Cynic.  His  only  companions  were  an  adopted  child  with  a 
nurse.  His  furniture  consisted  of  a  bed,  a  cooking  vessel  and 
earthen  lamp.  Lucian  ridicules  one  of  his  admirers,  who 
bought  the  lamp  for  three  thousand  drachmas,  in  the  hope  of 
becoming  a  philosopher  by  using  it.  Epictetus  discouraged 
marriage  and  the  procreation  of  children.  Marriage  might  do 
well  in  a  "  community  of  wise  men,"  but  "  in  the  present  state 


291.  EPICTETUS.  323 

of  things/'  which  he  compared  to  "  an  army  in  battle  array,"  it 
is  likely  to  withdraw  the  philosopher  from  the  service  of  God.1 
This  view,  as  well  as  the  reason  assigned,  resembles  the  advice 
of  St.  Paul,  with  the  great  difference,  that  the  apostle  had  the 
highest  conception  of  the  institution  of  marriage  as  reflecting 
the  mystery  of  Christ's  union  with  the  church.  "  Look  at  me," 
says  Epictetus,  "who  am  without  a  city,  without  a  house, 
without  possessions,  without  a  slave ;  I  sleep  on  the  ground ;  I 
have  no  wife,  no  children,  no  prsetorium,  but  only  the  earth  and 
the  heavens,  and  one  poor  cloak.  And  what  do  I  want?  Am 
I  not  without  sorrow  ?  Am  I  not  without  fear  ?  Am  I  not 
free  ?  .  .  .  Did  I  ever  blame  God  or  man  ?  .  .  .  "Who,  when 
he  sees  me,  does  not  think  that  he  sees  his  king  and  master?" 
His  epitaph  fitly  describes  his  character :  "  I  was  Epictetus,  a 
slave,  and  maimed  in  body,  and  a  beggar  for  poverty,  and  dear 
to  the  immortals." 

Epictetus,  like  Socrates,  his  great  exemplar,  ^wrote  nothing 
himself,  but  he  found  a  Xenophon.  His  pupil  and  friend, 
Flavins  Arrianus,  of  Nicomedia,  in  Bithynia,  the  distinguished 
historian  of  Alexander  the  Great,  and  a  soldier  and  statesman 
under  Hadrian,  handed  to  posterity  a  report  of  the  oral  instruc- 
tions and  familiar  conversations  (dearptftal)  of  his  teacher. 
Only  four  of  the  original  eight  books  remain.  He  also  col- 
lected his  chief  maxims  in  a  manual  (Enchiridion).  His 
biography  of  that  remarkable  man  is  lost. 

Epictetus  starts,  like  Zeno  and  Cleanthes,  with  a  thoroughly 
practical  view  of  philosophy,  as  the  art  and  exercise  of  virtue, 
in  accordance  with  reason  and  the  laws  of  nature.  He  bases 
virtue  on  faith  in  God,  as  the  supreme  power  of  the  universe, 
who  directs  all  events  for  benevolent  purposes.  The  philosopher 
is  a  teacher  of  righteousness,  a  physician  and  surgeon  of  the 
srck  who  feel  their  weakness,  and  are  anxious  to  be  cured.  He 

1  Disc.  in.  22.  Comp.  1  Cor.  7 :  35 ;  but  also  Eph.  5 :  28-33.  Farrar,  L  c., 
p.  213,  thinks  that  the  philosopher  and  the  apostle  agree  in  recommending 
celihacy  as  "a  counsel  of  perfection."  But  this  is  the  Boman  Catholic,  not 
the  Scripture  view. 


324  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

is  a  priest  and  messenger  of  the  gods  to  erring  men,  that  the; 
might  learn  to  be  happy  even  in  utter  want  of  earthly  posses- 
sions. If  we  wish  to  be  good,  we  must  first  believe  that  we  are 
bad.  Mere  knowledge  without  application  to  life  is  worthless. 
Every  man  has  a  guardian  spirit,  a  god  within  him  who  never 
sleeps,  who  always  keeps  him  company,  even  in  solitude ;  this 
is  the  Sooratic  daimonion,  the  personified  conscience.  We  must 
listen  to  its  divine  voice.  "  Think  of  God  more  often  than  you 
breathe.  Let  discourse  of  God  be  renewed  daily,  more  surely 
than  your  food."  The  sum  of  wisdom  is  to  desire  nothing  but 
freedom  and  contentment,  and  to  bear  and  forbear.  All  una- 
voidable evil  in  the  world  is  only  apparent  and  external,  and 
does  not  touch  our  being.  Our  happiness  depends  upon  our 
own  will,  which  even  Zeus  cannot  break.  The  wise  man  joy- 
ously acquiesces  in  what  he  cannot  control,  knowing  that  an 
all-wise  Father  rules  the  whole.  "  We  ought  to  have  these  two 
rules  always  in  readiness :  that  there  is  nothing  good  or  evil 
texcept  in  the  will ;  and  that  we  ought  not  to  lead  events,  but  to 
follow  them." J  If  a  brother  wrongs  me,  that  is  his  fault  •  my 
business  is  to  conduct  myself  rightly  towards  him.  The  wise 
man  is  not  disturbed  by  injury  and  injustice,  and  loves  even  his 
enemies.  All  men  are  brethren  and  children  of  God.  They 
own  the  whole  world ;  and  hence  even  banishment  is  no  evil. 
The  soul  longs  to  be  freed  from  the  prison  house  of  the  body 
and  to  return  to  God. 

Yet  Epictetus  does  not  clearly  teach  the  immortality  of  the 
soul.  He  speaks  of  death  as  a  return  ..to  the  elements  in  suc- 
cessive conflagrations.  Seneca  approaches  much  more  nearly 
the  Platonic  and  Socratic,  we  may  say  Christian,  view  of  im- 
mortality. The  prevailing  theory  of  the  Stoics  was,  that  at  the 
end  of  the  world  all  individual  souls  will  be  resolved  into  the 
primary  substance  of  the  Divine  Being.2 

1  Discourses,  III.  10.  Here  E.  discusses  the  manner  in  which  we  ought  to 
bear  sickness. 

f  The  only  point  about  which  the  Stoics  were  undecided  was,  whether  all 
souls  would  last  until  that  time  as  separate  souls,  or  whether,  as  Chrysippue 
held,  only  the  souls  of  the  wise  would  survive."  Zeller,  L  c.,  p.  205. 


2  92.  MARCUS  AUBELICIS.  325 

Epictetus  nowhere  alludes  directly  to  Christianity,  but  he 
speaks  once  of  "  Galileans/'  who  by  enthusiasm  or  madness 
were  free  from  all  fear.1  He  often  recurs  to  his  predecessors, 
Socrates,  Diogenes,  Zeno;  Musonius  Rufus.  His  ethical  ideal 
is  a  Cynic  philosopher,  naked,  penniless,  wifeless,  childless, 
without  want  or  desire,  without  passion  or  temper,  kindly, 
independent,  contented,  impert-urbable,  looking  serenely  or 
indifferently  at  life  and  death.  It  differs  as  widely  from  the 
true  ideal  as  Diogenes  who  lived  in  a  tub,  and  sought  with  a 
lantern  in  day-light  for  "  a  man,"  differs  from  Christ  who,  in- 
deed, had  not  where  to  lay  his  head,  but  went  about  doing  good 
to  the  bodies  and  souls  of  men. 

Owing  to  the  purity  of  its  morals,  the  Enchiridion  of 
Epictetus  was  a  favorite  book.  Simplicius,  a  Neo-Platonist, 
wrote  an  elaborate  commentary  on  it ;  and  monks  in  the  middle 
ages  reproduced  and  Christianized  it.  Origen  thought  Epictetus 
had  done  more  good  than  Plato.  Niebuhr  says:  "His  great- 
ness cannot  be  questioned,  and  it  is  impossible  for  any  person 
of  sound  mind  not  to  be  charmed  by  his  works."  Higginson 
says :  "  I  am  acquainted  with  no  book  more  replete  with  high 
conceptions  of  the  deity  and  noble  aims  of  man/'  This  is,  of 
course,  a  great  exaggeration,  unless  the  writer  means  to  confine 
his  comparison  to  heathen  works. 

§  92.  Marcus  Aurdius. 

Mdp/coo)  'A.VTQVLVOVTOV  avroKp&ropog  T&>  el?  cdvrov  fiijftda  t^'(De Eebus swis 
libri  -x.il).  Ed.  by  THOMAS  G-ATAKER,  with  a  Latin  Version  and 
Notes  (including  those  of  Casanbon).  Trajecti  ad  Bhenum,  1697, 
2  vols.  fol.  The  second  vol.  contains  critical  dissertations.  (The 

1  Disc.  IV.  7 :  "Through  madness  (fab  ftaviag)  it  is  possible  for  a  man  to 
be  so  disposed  towards  these  things  and  through  habit  (fab  Iflwf),  as  the 
Galileans."  By  Galileans  he  no  doubt  means  Christians,  and  the  allusion  is 
rather  contemptuous,  like  the  allusion  of  Marcus  Aurelius  to  the  martyrs, 
with  this  difference  that  the  emperor  attributes  to  obstinacy  what  Epictetus 
attributes  to  "  habit."  But  Schweighauser  (II.  913  sq.)  suspects  that  the  read- 
ing fab  Z&ov?  is  false,  and  that  Arrian  wrote  fab  aKcrvoiag,  &$  ol  Tab,.,  so  that 
Epictetus  ascribed  to  the  Christians  fury  and  desperation  or  dementia.  To 
the  Greeks  the  gospel  is  foolishness,  1  Cor.  1 :  22. 


326  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

first  ed.  appeared  at  Cambridge,  1652,  in  1  vol.)    English  translation 
by  GEORGE  LONG,  revised  ed.    London,  1880. 

See  the  liter,  quoted  in  J  20,  p.  52  sq.  (especially  Benan's  Mdro 
Aurlk,  1882). 

Marcus  Aurelius,  the  last  and  best  representative  of  Stoicism, 
ruled  thje  Roman  Empire  for  twenty  years  (A.  D.  161-180)  at 
the  height  of  its  power  and  prosperity.  He  was  born  April  26, 
121,  in  Rome,  and  carefully  educated  and  disciplined  in  Stoic 
wisdom.  Hadrian  admired  him  for  his  good  nature,  docility, 
and  veracity,  and  Antoninus  Pius  adopted  him  as  his  son  and 
successor.  He  learned  early  to  despise  the  vanities  of  the 
world,  maintained  the  simplicity  of  a  philosopher  in  the 
splendor  of  the  court,  and  found  time  for  retirement  and 
meditation  amid  the  cares  of  government  and  border  wars,  in 
which  he  was  constantly  engaged.  Epictetus  was  his  favorite 
author.  He  left  us  his  best  thoughts,  a  sort  of  spiritual  auto- 
biography, in  the  shape  of  a  diary  which  he  wrote,  not  without 
some  self-complacency,  for  his  own  improvement  and  enjoy- 
ment during  the  last  years  of  his  life  (172-175)  in  the  military 
camp  among  the  barbarians.  He  died  in  Panonia  of  the  pes- 
tilence which  raged  in  the  army  (March  17,  ISO).1  His  last 
words  were :  "  Weep  not  for  me,  weep  over  the  pestilence  and 
the  general  misery,2  and  save  the  army.  Farewell  I"  He 
dismissed  his  servants  and  friends,  even  his  son,  after  a  last 
interview,  and  died  alone. 

The  philosophic  emperor  was  a  sincere  believer  in  the  gods, 
their  revelations  and  all-ruling  providence.  His  morality  and 
religion  were  blended.  But  he  had  no  clear  views  of  the 
divinity.  He  alternately  uses  the  language  of  the  polytheist, 
the  deist,  and  the  pantheist*  He  worshipped  the  deity  of  the 
universe  and  in  his  own  breast.  He  thanks  the  gods  for  his 
good  parents  and  teachers,  for  his  pious  mother,  for  *  a  wife, 

1  According  to  less  probable  accounts  he  died  of  suicide,  or  of  poison  ad- 
ministered to  him  by  order  of  his  son,  Commodus.  See  Benan,  p.  485. 

*  '*  Quid  me  fletis,  et  non  magis  de  pestilentia  et  eonmum  morte  cogitati*?* 
Capitolinua,  M.  Aurelius. 


892.  MARCUS  AUEELIUS.  327 

whom  he  blindly  praises  as  "  amiable,  affectionate,  and  pure/' 
and  for  all  the  goods  of  life.  His  motto  was  "  never  to  wrong 
any  man  in  deed  or  word." l  He  claimed  no  perfection,  yet 
was  conscious  of  his  superiority,  and  thankful  to  the  gods  that 
he  was  better  than  other  men.  He  traced  the  sins  of  men  merely 
to  ignorance  and  error.  He  was  mild,  amiable,  and  gentle;  in 
these  respects  the  very  reverse  of  a  hard  and  severe  Stoic,  and 
nearly  approaching  a  disciple  of  Jesus.  We  must  admire  his 
purity,  truthfulness,  philanthropy,  conscientious  devotion  to 
duty,  his  serenity  of  mind  in  the  midst  of  the  temptations  of 
power  and  severe  domestic  trials,  and  his  resignation  to  the  will 
of  providence.  He  was  fully  appreciated  in  his  time,  and  uni- 
versally beloved  by  his  subjects.  We  may  well  call  him  among 
the  heathen  the  greatest  and  best  man  of  his  age.2  "  It  seems  " 
(says  an  able  French  writer,  Martha),  "  that  in  him  the  philo- 
sophy of  heathenism  grows  less  proud,  draws  nearer  and  nearer 
to  a  Christianity  which  it  ignored  or  which  it  despised,  and  is 
ready  to  fling  itself  into  the  arms  of  the  '  Unknown  God/  In 
the  sad  Meditations  of  Aurelius  we  find  a  pure  serenity,  sweet- 
ness, and  docility  to  the  commands  of  God,  which  before  him 
were  unknown,  and  which  Christian  grace  has  alone  surpassed. 
If  he  has  not  yet  attained  to  charity  in  all  that  fullness  of 
meaning  which  Christianity  has  given  to  the  world,  he  has 

1  Medit.  v.  31. 

2  So  Benan,  Marc- Aurfle,  p.  488,  without   qualification :    '*  Avec  lui,  la 
ph'Hosophie  a  r$gn&.     Un  moment,  grdce  ci  tui}  le  monde  a  &£  gow)&rn£  par  rhomane 
le  meiUeur  et  le  plvs  grand  de  son  si&cle"    But  elsewhere  he  puts  Antoninus  Pius 
above  Aurelius.     "Of  the  two/'  he  says  (Conferences  d'Angleterre,  translated 
by  Clara  Erskine  Clement,  p.  140  sq.):   "I  consider  Antonine  the  greatest. 
His  goodness  did  not  lead  him  into  .faults :   he  was  not  tormented  with  that 
internal  trouble  which  disturbed,  without  ceasing,  the  heart  of  his  adopted 
son.    This  strange  malady,  this  restless  study  of  himself,  this  demon  of 
scrupulousness,  this  fever  of  perfection,  are  signs  of  a  less  strong  and  distin- 
guished nature.     As  the  finest  thoughts  are  those  which  are  not  written, 
Anlonine  had  in  this  respect  also  a  superiority  over  Marcus  Aurelius.    But 
let  us  add,  that  we  should  be  ignorant  of  Antonine,  if  Marcus  Aurelius  had 
not  transmitted  to  us  that  exquisite  portrait  of  his  adopted  father,  in  which 
he  seems  to  have  applied  himself  through  humility,  to  painting  the  picture  of 
a  better  man  than  himself." 


328  SECOND  PEBTOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

already  gained  its  unction,  and  one  cannot  read  his  book,  unique 
in  the  history  of  Pagan  philosophy,  without  thinking  of  the 
sadness  of  Pascal  and  the  gentleness  of  F6n6lon." 

The  Meditations  of  Marcus  Aurelius  are  full  of  beautiful 
moral  maxims,  strung  together  without  system.  They  bear  a 
striking  resemblance  to  Christian  ethics.  They  rise  to  a  certain 
universalism  and  humanitarianism  which  is  foreign  to  the 
heathen  spirit,  and  a  prophecy  of  a  new  age,  but  could  only  be 
realized  on  a  Christian  basis.  Let  us  listen  to  some  of  his  most 
characteristic  sentiments  : 

"It  is  sufficient  to  attend  to  the  demon  [the  good  genius] 

within,  and  to  reverence  it  sincerely.     And  reverence  for  the 

demon  consists  in  keeping  it  pure  from  passion  and  thoughtless- 

ness and  dissatisfaction  with  what  comes  from  God  and  men."  l 

"  Do  not  act  as  if  thou  wert  going  to  live  ten  thousand  years. 

Death  hangs  over  thee.    While  thou  livest,  while  it  is  in  thy 

power,  be  good."  2    "  Do  not  disturb  thyself.    Make  thyself  all 

simplicity.    Does  any  one  do  wrong  ?    It  is  to  himself  that  he 

does  the  wrong.     Has  anything  happened  to  thee  ?    "Well  ;  out 

of  the  universe  from  the  beginning  everything  which  happens 

has  been  apportioned  and  spun  out  to  thee.    In  a  word,  thy 

life  is  short.    Thou  must  turn  to  profit  the  present  by  the  aid 

of  reason  and  justice.     Be  sober  in  thy  relaxation.    Either  it  is 

a  well-arranged  universe  or  a  chaos  huddled  together,  but  still 

a  universe,"  3    "A  man  must  stand  erect,  and  not  be  kept  erect 

by  others."  *    "Have  I  done  something  for  the  general  interest  ? 

Well,  then,  I  have  had  my  reward.    Let  this  always  be  present 

to  my  mind,  and  never  stop  [doing  good]."  5    "  What  is  thy 

art  ?  to  be  good."  6    "It  is  a  man's  duty  to  comfort  himself,  and 

to  wait  for  the  natural  dissolution,  and  not  to  be  vexed  at  the 

delay."  7    "  O  Nature  :  from  thee  are  all  things,  in  thee  are  all 

things,  to  thee  all  things  return."'8     "  Willingly  give  thyself 

up  to  Clotho  "  [one  of  the  fates],  "  allowing  her  to  spin  thy 

thread  into  whatever  things  she  pleases.     Every  thing  is  only 


.  13.  2IV.17.  3  IV.  26,  27.  *III.  5. 

6  IX.  4.  e  IX.  5.  »  V-  10.  «  IV.  23. 


2  92.  MARCUS  AUEELIUS.  329 

for  a  day,  both  that  which  remembers  and  that  which  is  remem- 
bered." 1  "  Consider  that  before  long  thou  wilt  be  nobody  and 
nowhere,  nor  will  any  of  the  things  exist  which  thou  now 
seest,  nor  any  of  those  who  are  now  living.  For  all  things  are 
formed  by  nature  to  change  and  be  turned,  and  to  perish,  in 
order  that  other  things  in  continuous  succession  may  exist."2 
"It  is  best  to  leave  this  world  as  early  as  possible,  and  to  bid  it 
friendly  farewell/'  3 

These  reflections  are  pervaded  by  a  tone  of  sadness;  they 
excite  emotion,  but  no  enthusiasm;  they  have  no  power  to 
console,  but  leave  an  aching  void,  without  hope  of  an  immor- 
tality, except  a  return  to  the  bosom  of  mother  nature.  They 
are  the  rays  of  a  setting,  not  of  a  rising,  sun  ;  they  are  the  swan- 
song  of  dying  Stoicism.  The  end  of  that  noble  old  Roman  was 
virtually  the  end  of  the  antique  world.* 

The  cosmopolitan  philosophy  of  Marcus  Aurelius  had  no 
sympathy  with  Christianity,  and  excluded  from  its  embrace  the 
most  innocent  and  most  peaceful  of  his  subjects.  Htf  makes 
but  one  allusion  to  the  Christians,  and  unjustly  traces  their 
readiness  for  martyrdom,  to  '  {  sheer  obstinacy  "  and  a  desire  for 
"  theatrical  display."  6  ^He  may  have  had  in  view  some  fanatical 
enthusiasts  who  rushed  into  the  fire,  like  Indian  gymnosophists, 
but  possibly  such  venerable  martyrs  as  Polycarp  and  those  of 
Southern  Gaul  in  his  own  reign.  Hence  the  strange  phe- 
nomenon that  the  wisest  and  best  of  Eoman  emperors  permitted 
(we  cannot  say,  instigated,  or  even  authorized)  some  of  the  most 
cruel  persecutions  of  Christians,  especially  in  Lugdunum  and 


1  IV.  34,  35.  2  Xn.  21.  8  IX.  2,  3  ;  XL  3. 

4  The  significant  title  of  Benan's  book  is  Marc-Aurtte  et  la  jm  du  mmde 
witique. 

6  XL  3  :  "What  a  soul  that  is  which  is  ready,  if  at  any  moment  it  must  be 
separated  from  the  body,  and  ready  either  to  be  extinguished  or  dispersed,  or 
continue  to  exist;  but  so  that  this  readiness  comes  from  a  man's  own  judgment, 
not  from  m&re  obstinacy,  as  wi&  the  Christians,  but  considerately  and  with  dig- 
nity, and  in  a  way  to  persuade  another  without  scenic  show  (aTpaytiSoc)."  I 
have  availed  myself  in  these  extracts  of  Long's  excellent  translation,  but  com- 
pared them  with  the  Greek  original  in  Gataker's  edition. 


330  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Vienne.  We  readily  excuse  him  on  the  ground  of  ignorance 
He  probably  never  saw  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  nor  read  any 
of  the  numerous  Apologies  addressed  to  him. 

But  persecution  is  not  the  only  blot  on  his  reputation.  He 
wasted  his  affections  upon  a  vicious  and  worthless  son,  whom 
he  raised  in  his  fourteenth  year  to  full  participation  of  the 
imperial  power,  regardless  of  the  happiness  of  millions,  said 
upon  a  beautiful  but  faithless  and  wicked  wife,  whoa*  he 
hastened  after  her  death  to  cover  with  divine  honors.  His 
conduct  towards  Faustina  was  either  hypocritical  or  un- 
principled.1 After  her  death  he  preferred  a  concubine  to  a 
second  wife  and  stepmother  of  his  children. 

His  son  and  successor  left  the  Christians  in  peace,  but  was 
one  of  the  worst  emperors  that  disgraced  the  throne,  and  undid 
all  the  good  which  his  father  had  done.2 

Aristotle  was  the  teacher  of  Alexander ;  Seneca,  the  teachei 
of  Nero ;  Marcus  Aurelius,  the  father  of  Commodus. 

§  93.  Plutarch. 

UZovTdpxov  row  Xaipuveuc  rd  'H#i/oS.    Ed.  Tauchnitz  Lips-    The   same 
with,  a  Latin  version  and  notes  in 

1  At  his  earnest  request  the  obsequious  Senate  "declared  Faustina  a  goddess; 
she  was  represented  in  her  temples  with  the  attributes  of  Juno,  Venus,  and 
Ceres ;  and  it  was  decreed  that  on  the  day  of  their  nuptials  the  youth  of  both 
sexes  should  pay  their  vows  before  the  altar  of  this  adulterous  woman.  See 
Gibbon,  ch.  IV.  A  bas-relief  in  the  museum  of  the  Capitol  at  Borne  repre- 
sents Faustina  borne  to  heaven  by  a  messenger  of  the  gods,  and  her  husband 
looking  at  her  with  admiration  and  love.  Kenan  apologizes  for  his  favorite 
hero  on  the  ground  of  the  marvellous  beauty  of  Faustina,  and  excuses  her, 
because  she  naturally  grew  tired  of  the  dull  company  of  an  ascetic  philosopher ! 

3  Kenan  thus  describes  the  sudden  relapse  (p.  490):  "Horrible  deception 
pour  les  gens  de  lien !  Tant  de  vertu,  tant  o? amour  ri aboutissant  qu'd  mettre  le 
monde  entre  les  mains  (fun  Squarrisseur  de  Mies,  tfun  gladiateur  !  Aprfa  cette 
belle  apparition  £un  monde  elyseen  sur  la  terre,  retomber  dans  I'enfer  des  Cesars, 
qu'on  croyaitfermG  pour  toujours  I  La,  foi  dans  le  bien  Jut  alors  perdue.  Apres 
Caligula,  apres  N&ron,  apres  Domitien,  on  avait  pu  esperer  encore.  Les  experiences 
ri  avaientpas  ete  decisives.  Maintenant,  desl  apres  '&  plus  grand  effort  de  rational- 
isme  gouvememental,  aprds  quatre-ving  quatre  ans  d?un  regime  excellent,  apr&sNerva, 
Trajan,  Adrien,  Antonin,  Marc-Aurdle,  que  le  rtgne  du  mal  recommence,  pire  que 
jamais.  Adieu,  vertu;  adieu,  raison.  Puisque  Marc-AurtU  n'a  pas  pu 
U  monde,  qui  le  sauvera  ?  " 


893.  PLUTARCH.  331 

PLTJTARCHI  Chceronensis  Horalia,  id  est,  Opera,  exc&ptis  vitis,  reliqua. 
Ed.  by  DANIEL  WYTTENBACH.  Oxon.  1795-1800,  8  vols.  (includ- 
ing 2  Index  vols.).  French  ed.  by  Dubner,  in  the  Didot  collection. 

PLUTAECH'S  Morals.  Translated  from  the  Greek  by  several  Sands. 
London,  1684-'94,  5th  ed.  1718.  The  same  as  corrected  and  revised 
by  WILLIAM  W.  GOODWIN  (Harvard  University).  With  an  intro- 
duction by  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson.  Boston,  1870,  5  vols. 

OCTAVE  GREARD  :  De  la  moralise  de  Plutarque.    Paris,  1866. 

RICHARD  CHENEVIX  TRENCH  (Archbishop  of  Dublin) :  Plutarch,  his 
Life,  his  Parallel  Lives,  and  his  Morals.  London  (Macmillan  &  Co.), 
2nd  ed.  1874. 

W.  MOLLER  :  Ueber  die  Religion  des  Plutarch.    Kiel,  1881. 

JULIA  WEDGWOOD  :  Plutarch  and  the  unconscious  Christianity  of  the  first 
two  centuries.  In  the  " Contemporary  Review"  for  1881,  pp.  44-60. 

Equally  remarkable,  as  a  representative  of  "unconscious 
Christianity"  and  "seeker  after  the  unknown  God,"  though 
from  a  different  philosophical  standpoint,  is  the  greatest 
biographer  and  moralist  of  classical  antiquity. 

It  is  strange  that  Plutarch's  contemporaries  are  silent  about 
him.  His  name  is  not  even  mentioned  by  any  Roman  writer. 
What  we  know  of  him  is  gathered  from  his  own  works.  He 
lived  between  A.  D.  50  and  125,  mostly  in  his  native  town  of 
Chseroneia,  in  Boeotia,  as  a  magistrate  and  priest  of  Apollos. 
He  was  happily  married,  and  had  four  sons  and  a  daughter, 
who  died  young.  His  Conjugal  Precepts  are  full  of  good 
advice  to  husbands  and  wives.  The  letter  of  consolation  he 
addressed  to  his  wife  on  the  death  of  a  little  daughter, 
Timoxena,  while  she  was  absent  from  home,  gives  us  a 
favorable  impression  of  his  family  life,  and  expresses  his  hope 
of  immortality.  "  The  souls  of  infants,"  he  says  at  the  close 
of  this  letter,  "  pass  immediately  into  a  better  and  more  divine 
state\"  He  spent  some  time  in  Eome  (at  least  twice,  probably 
under  Vespasian  and  Domitian),  lectured  on  moral  philosophy 
to  select  audiences,  and  collected  material  for  his  Parallel  Lives 
of  Greeks  and  Romans.  He  was  evidently  well-bred,  in  good 
circumstances,  familiar  with  books,  different  countries,  and 
human  nature  and  society  in  all  its  phases.  In  his  philosophy 
lie  stands  midway  between  Platonism  and  Neo-Platonism.  He 


332  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311, 

was  "  a  Platonist  with  an  Oriental  tinge." 1  He  was  equally 
opposed  to  Stoic  pantheism  and  Epicurean  naturalism,  and 
adopted  the  Platonic  dualism  of  God  and  matter.  Pie  recog- 
nized a  supreme  God,  and  also  the  subordinate  divinities  of  the 
Hellenic  religion.  The  gods  are  good,  the  demons  are  divided 
between  good  and  bad,  the  human  soul  combines  both  qualities. 
He  paid  little  attention  to  metaphysics,  and  dwelt  more  on  the 
practical  questions  of  philosophy,  dividing  his  labors  between 
historical  and  moral  topics.  He  was  an  utter  stranger  to  Chris- 
tianity, and  therefore  neither  friendly  nor  hostile.  There  is  in 
all  his  numerous  writings  not  a  single  allusion  to  it,  although  at 
his  time  there  must  have  been  churches  in  every  considerable 
city  of  the  empire.  He  often  speaks  of  Judaism,  but  very 
superficially,  and  may  have  regarded  Christianity  as  a  Jewish 
sect.  But  his  moral  philosophy  makes  a  very  near  approach  to 
Christian  ethics. 

His  aim,  as  a^  writer,  was  to  show  the  greatness  in  the  acts 
and  in  the  thoughts  of  the  ancients,  the  former  in  his  "  Parallel 
Lives,"  the  latter  in  his  "  Morals,"  and  by  both  to  inspire  his 
contemporaries  to  imitation.  They  constitute  together  an 
encyclopaedia  of  well-digested  Greek  and  Eoman  learning. 
He  was  not  a  man  of  creative  genius,  but  of  great  talent,  exten- 
sive information,  amiable  spirit,  and  universal  sympathy. 
Emerson  calls  him  "  the  chief  example  of  the  illumination  of 
the  intellect  by  the  force  of  morals." 1 

Plutarch  endeavored  .to  build  up  morality  on  the  basis  of 
religion.  He  is  the  very  opposite  of  Lucian,  who  as  an  archi- 
tect of  ruin,  ridiculed  and  undermined  the  popular  religion. 
He  was'  a  strong  believer  in  God,  and  his  argument  against 
atheism  is  well  worth 'quoting.  "There  has  never  been,"  he 
says,  "a  state  of  atheists.  You  may  travel  over  the  world, 
and  you  may  find  cities  without  walls,  without  king,  without 

1  So  Trench  calls  him,  I  c.  p.  112.  The  best  account  of  his  philosophy  is 
given  by  Zeller  in  his  Philosophie  der  Griechen,  Part  III.,  141-182;  and  mor* 
briefly  by  Ueberweg,  Hist,  of  Phil.  (Eiig.  Ver.)  I.  234-236. 

1  Introduction  to  Goodwin's  ed.  p.  zi. 


?93.  PLUTAECH.  333 

mint,  without  theatre  or  gymnasium ;  but  you  will  never  find  a 
city  without  God,  without  prayer,  without  oracle,  without  sacri- 
fice. Sooner  may  a  city  stand  without  foundations,  than  a  state 
without  belief  in  the  gods.  This  is  the  bond  of  all  society  and 
the  pillar  of  all  legislation." l 

In  his  treatise  on  The  Wrong  Fear  of  the  Gods,  he  contrasts 
superstition  with  atheism  as  the  two  extremes  which  often  meet, 
and  commends  piety  or  the  right  reverence  of  the  gods  as  the 
golden  mean.  Of  the  two  extremes  he  deems  superstition  the 
worse,  because  it  makes  the  gods  capricious,  cruel,  and  revenge- 
ful, while  they  are  friends  of  men,  saviours  (crajr^sc),  and  not 
destroyers.  (Nevertheless  superstitious  people  can  more  easily 
be  converted  to  true  faith  than  atheists  who  have  destroyed  all 
religious  instincts.) 

His  remarkable  treatise  on  The  Delays  of  Divine  Justice  in 
punishing  the  wicked*  would  do  credit  to  any  Christian  theo- 
logian. It  is  his  solution  of  the  problem  of  evil,  or  his 
theodicy.  He  discusses  the  subject  with  several  of  his  relatives 
(as  Job  did  with  his  friends),  and  illustrates  it  by  examples. 
He  answers  the  various  objections  which  arise  from  the  delay  of 
justice,  and  vindicates  Providence  in  his  dealings  with  the 
sinner.  He  enjoins  first  modesty  and  caution  in  view  of  our 
imperfect  knowledge.  God  only  knows  best  when  and  how  and 
how  much  to  punish.  He  ofiers  the  following  considerations : 

1)  God  teaches  us  to  moderate  our  anger,  and  never  to  punish 
in  a  passion,  but  to  imitate  his  gentleness  and  forbearance. 

2)  He  gives  the  wicked  an  opportunity  to  repent  and  reform. 

3)  He  permits  them  to  live  and  prosper  that  he  may  use  them 
as  executioners  of  his  justice  on  others.    He  often  punishes  the 
sinner  by  the  sinner.    4)  The  wicked  are  sometimes  spared  that 
they  may  bless  the  world  by  a  noble  posterity.     5)  Punishment 
is  often  deferred  that  the  hand  of  Providence  may  be  more 
conspicuous    in    its    infliction.     Sooner  or  later  sin  will  be 
punished,  if  not  in  this  world,  at  least  in  the  future  world,  to 

:  Adv.  Colotem,  (an  Epicurean),  c.  31  (Moralw,  ed.  Tauchnitz,  VI.  265). 
a  De  Sera  Numinis  Vindicta.    In  Goodwin's  ed.  vol.  IV.  140-188. 


334  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

which  Plutarch  points  as  the  final  solution  of  the  mysteries  of 
Providence.  He  looked  upon  death  as  a  good  thing  for  the 
good  soul,  which  shall  then  live  indeed  ;  while  the  present  life 
"  resembles  rather  the  vain  illusions  of  some  dream." 

The  crown  of  Plutarch's  character  is  his  humility,  which  was 
so  very  rare  among  ancient  philosophers,  especially  the  Stoics, 
and  which  comes  from  true  self-knowledge.  He  was  aware  of 
the  native  depravity  of  the  soul,  which  he  calls  "  a  storehouse 
and  treasure  of  many  evils  and  maladies."  l  Had  he  known 
the  true  and  radical  remedy  for  sin,  he  would  no  doubt  have 
accepted  it  with  gratitude. 

We  do  not  know  how  far  the  influence  of  these  saints  of 
aucient  paganism,  as  we  may  call  Epictetus,  Marcus  Aurelius, 
and  Plutarch,  extended  over  the  heathens  of  their  age,  but  we 
do  know  that  their  writings  had  and  still  have  an  elevating 
and  ennobling  effect  upon  Christian  readers,  and  hence  we  may 
infer  that  their  teaching  and  example  were  among  the  moral 
forces  that  aided  rather  than  hindered  the  progress  and  final 
triumph  of  Christianity.  But  this  religion  alone  could  bring 
about  such  a  general  and  lasting  moral  reform  as  they  them- 
selves desired. 

§  94.  Christian  Morality. 

The  ancient  world  of  classic  heathenism,  having  arrived  at 
the  height  of  its  glory,  and  at  the  threshold  of  its  decay,  had 
exhausted  all  the  resources  of  human  nature  left  to  itself,  and 
possessed  no  recuperative  force,  no  regenerative  principle.  A 
regeneration  of  society  could  only  proceed  from  religion.  But 
the  heathen  religion  had  no  restraint  for  vice,  no  comfort  for 
the  poor  and  oppressed  ;  it  was  itself  the  muddy  fountain  of 
immorality.  God,  therefore,  who  in  his  infinite  mercy  desired 
not  the  destruction  but  the  salvation  of  the  race,  opened  in  the 
midst  of  this  hopeless  decay  of  a  false  religion  a  pure  fountain 


n  KOI  TroAvTradef  KaK&v  rapetav  Kal  dqaavpLGfj.^  <&f  fa/ct 
Animi  Tie  an  corporis  afectiones  sint  pejores,  c.  2  (in  Wyttenbach's  ed.    Tom. 
III.  p.  17). 


894.  CHRISTIAN  MOEAL1TY.  335 

o^  holiness,  love,  and  peace,  in  the  only  true  and  universal 
religion  of  his  Son  Jesus  Christ. 

In  the  cheerless  waste  of  pagan  corruption  the  small  and 
despised  band  of  Christians  was  an  oasis  fresh  with  life  and 
hope.  It  was  the  salt  of  the  earth,  and  the  light  of  the  world. 
Poor  in  this  world's  goods,  it  bore  the  imperishable  treasures 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Meek  and  lowly  in  heart,  it  was 
destined,  according  to  the  promise  of  the  Lord,  without  a  stroke 
of  the  sword,  to  inherit  the  earth.  In  submission  it  conquered ; 
by  suffering  and  death  it  won  the  crown  of  life. 

The  superiority  of  the  principles  of  Christian  ethics  over  the 
heathen  standards  of  morality  even  under  its  most  favorable 
forms  is  universally  admitted.  The  superiority  of  the  example 
of  Christ  over  all  the  heathen  sages  is  likewise  admitted.  The 
power  of  that  peerless  example  was  and  is  now  as  great  as  the 
power  of  his  teaching.  It  is  reflected  in  every  age  and  every 
type  of  purity  and  goodness.  But  every  period,  while  it  shares 
in  the  common  virtues  and  graces,  has  its  peculiar  moral 
physiognomy.  The  ante^Nicene  age  excelled  in  unworldliness, 
in  the  heroic  endurance  of  suffering  and  persecution,  in  the 
contempt  of  death,  and  the  hope  of  resurrection,  in -the  strong 
sense  of  community,  and  in  active  benevolence. 

Christianity,  indeed,  does  not  come  "  with  observation."  Its 
deepest  workings  are  silent  and  inward.  The  operations  of 
divine  grace  commonly  shun  the  notice  of  the  historian,  and 
await  their  revelation  on  the  great  day  of  account,  when  all 
that  is  secret  shall  be  made  known.  Who  can  measure  the 
depth  and  breadth  of  all  those  blessed  experiences  of  forgive- 
ness, peace,  gratitude,  trust  in  God,  love  for  God  and  love  for 
man,  humility  and  meekness,  patience  and  resignation,  which 
have  bloomed  as  vernal  flowers  on  the  soil  of  the  renewed  heart 
since  the  first  Christian  Pentecost?  Who  can  tell  the  number 
and  the  fervor  of  Christian  prayers  and  intercessions  which 
have  gone  up  from  lonely  chambers,  caves,  deserts,  and  martyrs' 
graves,  in  the  silent  night  and  the  open  day,  for  friends  and 
foes,  for  all  classes  of  mankind,  even  for  cruel  persecutors,  to 


336  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  throne  of  the  exalted  Saviour  ?  But  where  this  Christian 
life  has  taken  root  in  the  depths  of  the  soul  it  must  show  itself 
in  the  outward  conduct,  and  exert  an  elevating  influence  on 
every  calling  and  sphere  of  action.  The  Christian  morality 
surpassed  all  that  the  noblest  philosophers  of  heathendom  had 
ever  taught  or  labored  for  as  the  highest  aim  of  man.  The 
masterly  picture  of  it  in  the  anonymous  Epistle  to  Diognetus 
is  no  mere  fancy  sketch,  but  a  faithful  copy  from  real  life.1 

When  the  apologists  indignantly  repel  the  heathen  calumnies, 
and  confidently  point  to  the  unfeigned  piety,  the  brotherly  love, 
the  love  for  enemies,  the  purity  and  chastity,  the  faithfulness 
and  integrity,  the  patience  and  gentleness,  of  the  confessors  of 
the  name  of  Jesus,  they  speak  from  daily  experience  and  per. 
sonal  observation.     "  We,  who  once  served  lust,"  could  Justin 
Martyr  say  without  exaggeration,  "  now  find  our  delight  only 
in  pure  morals ;  we,  who  once  followed  sorcery,  have  now  con- 
secrated ourselves  to  the  eternal  good  God ;  we,  who  once  loved 
gain  above  all,  now  give  up  what  we  have  for  the  common  use, 
and  share  with  every  needy  one ;  we,  who  once  hated  and  killed 
each   other;   we,  who   would  have  no  common   hearth  with 
foreigners  for  difference  of  customs,  now,  since  the  appearance 
of  Christ,  live  with  them,  pray  for  our  enemies,  seek  to  con- 
vince those  who  hate  us  without  cause,  that  they  may  regulate 
their  life  according  to  the  glorious  teaching  of  Christ,  and 
receive  from  the  all-ruling  God  the  same  blessings  with  our- 
selves."    Tertullian  could  boast  that  he  knew  no  Christians 
who  suffered  by  the  hand  of  the  executioner,  except  for  their 
religion.    Minutius  Felix  tells  the  heathens 2 :  "  You  prohibit 
adultery  by  law,  and  practise  it  in  secret ;  you  punish  wicked- 
ness only  in  the  overt  act ;  we  look  upon  it  as  criminal  even  in 
thought.    You  dread  the  inspection  of  others;  we  stand  in 
awe  of  nothing  but  our  own  consciences  as  becomes  Christians. 
And  finally  your  prisons  are  overflowing  with  criminals ;  but 
they  are  all  heathens,  not  a  Christiaa  is  there,  unless  he  be  an 

2  See  $  2,  p.  9.  sq.  »  O&avius,  cap.  3§- 


2  94.  CHRISTIAN  MORALITY.  337 

apostate."  Even  Pliny  informed  Trajan,  that  the  Christians, 
whom  he  questioned  on  the  rack  respecting  the  character  of 
their  religion,  had  bound  themselves  by  an  oath  never  to  commit 
theft,  robbery,  nor  adultery,  nor  to  break  their  word — and  this, 
too,  at  a  time  when  the  sins  of  fraud,  uncleanness,  and  las- 
civiousness  of  every  form  abounded  all  around.  Another 
heathen,  Lucian,  bears-  testimony  to  their  benevolence  and 
charity  for  their  brethren  in  distress,  while  he  attempts  to 
ridicule  this  virtue  as  foolish  weakness  in  an  age  of  unbounded 
selfishness. 

The  humble  and  painful  condition  of  the  church  under 
civil  oppression  made  hypocrisy  more  rare  than  in  times  of 
peace,  and  favored  the  development  of  the  heroic  virtues.  The 
Christians  delighted  to  regard  themselves  as  soldiers  of  Christ, 
enlisted  under  the  victorious  standard  of  the  cross  against  sin, 
the  world,  and  the  devil.  The  baptismal  vow  was  their  oath 
of  perpetual  allegiance;1  the  Apostles'  creed  their  parole;2  the 
sign  of  the  cross  upon  the  forehead,  their  mark  of  service ;  3 
temperance,  courage,  and  faithfulness  unto  death,  their  cardinal 
virtues;  the  blessedness  of  heaven,  their  promised  reward. 
"  No  soldier,"  exclaims  Tertullian  to  the  Confessors,  "goes  with 
his  sports  or  from  his  bed-chamber  to  the  battle ;  but  from  th« 
camp,  where  he  hardens  and  accustoms  himself  to  every  incon- 
venience. Even  in  peace  warriors  learn  to  bear  labor  ancl 
fatigue,  going  through  all  military  exercises,  that  neither  soul 

nor  body  may  flag Ye  wage  a  good  warfare,  in  which 

the  living  God  is  the  judge  of  the  combat,  the  Holy  Spirit  the 
leader,  eternal  glory  the  prize."  To  this  may  be  added* the 
eloquent  passage  of  Minutius  Felix4 :  " How  fair  a  spectacle  in 
the  sight  of  God  is  a  Christian  entering  the  lists  with  affliction, 
and  with  noble  firmness  combating  menaces  and  tortures,  or 
with  a  disdainful  smile  marching  to  death  through  the  clamors 
of  the  people,  and  the  insults  of  the  executioners;  when  he 
bravely  maintains  his  liberty  against  kings  and  princes,  and 

1  Sacramentum  militia  Christiana.  *  Symbolum,  or,  tessera  mMtarris. 

3  Character  mititaris,  stigma  mttitare.  *  Otfavius,  cap.  37 

v0l.  II.— 22 


338  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

submits  to  God,  whose  servant  he  is ;  when,  like  a  conqueror, 
he  triumphs  over  the  judge  that  condemns  him.  For  he  cer- 
tainly is  victorious  who  obtains  what  he  fights  for.  He  fights 
under  the  eye  of  God,  and  is  crowned  with  length  of  days. 
You  have  exalted  some  of  your  stoical  sufferers  to  the  skies  ; 
such  as  Scaevola  who,  having  missed  his  aim  in  an  attempt  to 
kill  the  king,  voluntarily  burned  the  mistaking  hand.  Yet 
how  many  among  us  have  suffered  not  only  the  hand,  but  the 
whole  body  to  be  consumed  without  a  complaint,  when  their 
deliverance  was  in  their  own  power !'  But  why  should  I  com- 
pare our  elders  with  your  Mutius,  or  Aquilius,  or  Regulus, 
when  our  very  children,  our  sons  and  daughters,  inspired  with 
patience,  despise  your  racks  and  wild  beasts,  and  all  other 
instruments  of  cruelty?  Surely  nothing  but  the'  strongest 
reasons  could  persuade  people  to  suffer  at  this  rate;  and 
nothing  else  but  Almighty  power  could  support  them  under 
their  sufferings." 

Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Christian  life  of  the  period  before 
Constantine  has  been  often  unwarrantably  idealized.  In  a 
human  nature  essentially  the  same,  we  could  but  expect  the 
same  faults  which  we  found  even  in  the  apostolic  churches. 
The  Epistles  of  Cyprian  afford  incontestable  evidence,  that, 
especially  in  the  intervals  of  repose,  an  abatement  of  zeal  soon 
showed  itself,  and,  on  the  reopening  of  persecution,  the  Chris- 
tian name  was  dishonored  by  hosts  of  apostates.  '  And  not 
seldom  did  the  most  prominent  virtues,  courage  in  death,  and 
strictness  of  morals,  degenerate  into  morbid  fanaticism  and  un- 
natural rigor. 

§  95.  The  Church  and  Public  Amusements. 

TERTTTLLIAN  :  De  Spectaculis.    On  the  Eoman  Spectacles  see  the  abun- 
dant references  in  FKIEDLAEBTDER,  II.  255-580  (5th  ed.) 

Christianity  is  anything  but  sanctimonious  gloominess  and 
misanthropic  austerity.  It  is  the  fountain  of  true  joy,  and  of 
that  peace  which  "passeth  all  understanding."  But  this  joy 
wells  up  from  the  consciousness  of  pardon  and  of  fellowship 


\  95.   THE  CHUECH  AND  PUBLIC  AMUSEMENTS.       339 

with  God,  is  inseparable  from  holy  earnestness,  and  has  no  con- 
cord with  worldly  frivolity  and  sensual  amusement,  which  carry 
the  sting  of  a  bad  conscience,  and  beget  only  disgust  and  bitter 
remorse.  "What  is  more  blessed,"  asks  Tertullian,  "than 
reconciliation  with  God  our  Father  and  Lord ;  than  the  revela- 
tion of  the  truth,  the  knowledge  of  error ;  than  the  forgiveness 
of  so  great  past  misdeeds  ?  Is  there  a  greater  joy  than  the  dis- 
gust with  earthly  pleasure,  than  contempt  for  the  whole  world, 
than  true  freedom,  than  an  unstained  "conscience,  than  content- 
ment in  life  and  fearlessness  in  death  ?  " 

Contrast  with  this  the  popular  amusements  of  the  heathen : 
the  theatre,  the  circus,  and  the  arena.  They  were  originally 
connected  with  the  festivals  of  the  gods,  but  had  long  lost  their 
religious  character  and  degenerated  into  nurseries  of  vice.  The 
theatre,  once  a  school  -jf  public  morals  in  the  best  days  of 
Greece,  when  Aeschylos  anc1  Sophocles  furnished  the  plays,  had 
since  the  time  of  Augustus  room  only  for  low  comedies  and 
unnatural  tragedies,  with  splendid  pageantry,  frivolous  music, 
and  licentious  dances.1  Tertullian  represents  it  as  the  temple 
of  Venus  and  Bacchus,  who  are  close  allies  as  patrons  of  lust 
and  drunkenness.2  The  circus  was  devoted  to  horse  and  chariot 
races,  hunts  of  wild  beasts,  military  displays  and  athletic  games, 
and  attracted  immense  multitudes.  "The  impatient  crowd," 
says  the  historian  of  declining  Kome,3  "  rushed  at  the  dawn  of 
day  to  secure  their  places,  and  there  were  many  who  passed  a 
sieepless  and  anxious  night  in  the  adjacent  porticos.  From  the 
morning  to  the  evening,  careless  of  the  sun  or  of  the  rain,  the 
spectators,  who  sometimes  amounted  to  the  number  of  four 
hundred  thousand,  remained  in  eager  attention ;  their  eyes  fixed 
on  the  horses  and  charioteers,  their  minds  agitated  with  hope 

1  Friedlaender,  II.  391 :  "  Neben  den  gewcdtigen  Aufregungen,  die  Cvrcus  und 
Arena  botent  konnte  die  Buhne  ihre  Amdehungskrafi  JUT  die  Massen  nur  durcb 
unedle  Mittel  behav/pten,  durch  rohe  Bdustigung  und  rajfinirten  Sinnenkitssel :  und 
so  hat  sie,  statt  dem  vwderblichen  Einfluss  jener  anderen  Schauspiele  die  Wage  z* 
halten,  vw  Corruption  und  Verwtid&rung  Horns  nicht  am  wenigsten  beigetragcn," 

2  De  Spectac.  c.  10.     Comp.Minut,  Felix,  Octav.  c.  37, 
s  Gibbon,  ch.  XXXI.  (yol.  HI.  384,  ed.  Smith), 


340  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

and  fear  for  the  success  of  the  colors  which  they  espoused ;  and 
the  happiness  of  Rome  appeared  to  hang  on  the  event  of  a  race. 
The  same  immoderate  ardor  inspired  their  clamors  and  their 
applause  as  often  as  they  were  entertained  with  the  hunting  of 
wild  beasts  and  the  various  modes  of  theatrical  representation." 

The  most  popular,  and  at  the  same  time  the  most  inhuman 
and  brutalizing  of  these  public  spectacles  were  the  gladiatorial 
fights  in  the  arena.  There  murder  was  practised  as  an  art, 
from  sunrise  to  sunset,  and  myriads  of  men  and  beasts  were 
sacrificed  to  satisfy  a  savage  curiosity  and  thirst  for  blood.  At 
the  inauguration  of  the  Flavian  amphitheatre  from  five  to  nine 
thousand  wild  beasts  (according  to  different  accounts)  were  slain 
in  one  day.  No  less  than  ten  thousand  gladiators  fought  in  the 
feasts  which  Trajan  gave  to  the  Romans  after  the  conquest  of 
Dacia,  and  which  lasted  four  months  (A.  D.  107).  Under 
Probus  (A.  D.  281)  as  many  as  a  hundred  lions,  a  hundred 
lionesses,  two  hundred  leopards,  three  hundred  bears,  and  a 
thousand  wild  boars  were  massacred  in  a  single  day.1  The 
spectacles  of  the  worthless  Carinus  (284)  who  selected  his 
favorites  and  even  his  ministers  from  the  dregs  of  the  populace, 
are  said  to  have  surpassed  those  of  all  his  predecessors.  The 
gladiators  were  condemned  criminals,  captives  of  war,  slaves, 
and  professional  fighters;  in  times  of  persecution  innocent 
Christians  were  not  spared,  but  thrown  before  lions  and  tigers. 
Painted  savages  from  Britain,  blonde  Germans  from  the  Rhine 
and  Danube,  negroes  from  Africa,  and  wild  beasts,  then  much 
more  numerous  than  now,  from  all  parts  of  the  world,  were 
brought  to  the  arena.  Domitian  arranged  fights  of  dwarfs  ancl 
women. 

The  emperors  patronized  these  various  spectacles  as  the  surest 
means  of  securing  the  favor  of  the  people,  which  clamored  for 
"  Panem  et  Circenses"  Enormous  sums  were  wasted  on  them 
from  the  public  treasury  and  private  purses.  Augustus  set  the 
example.  Nero  was  so  extravagantly  liberal  in  this  direction 

1  Gibbon,  ch.  XII.  (I.  646). 


*95.   THE  CHUECH  AND  PUBLIC  AMUSEMENTS.        341 

that  the  populace  forgave  his  horrible  vices,  and  even  wished 
his  return  from  death.  The  parsimonious  Vespasian  built  the 
most  costly  and  colossal  amphitheatre  the  world  has  ever  seex^ 
incrusted  with  marble,  decorated  with  statues,  and  furnished 
with  gold,  silver,  and  amber.  Titus  presented  thousands  of 
Jewish  captives  after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  to  the  provinces 
of  the  East  for  slaughter  in  the  arena.  Even  Trajan  and 
Marcus  Aurelius  made  bountiful  provision  for  spectacles,  and 
the  latter,  Stoic  as  he  was,  charged  the  richest  senators  to 
gratify  the  public  taste  during  his  absence  from  Rome.  Some 
emperors,  as  Nero,  Commodus,  and  Caracalla,  were  so  lost  to 
all  sense  of  dignity  and  decency  that  they  delighted  and  gloried 
in  histrionic  and  gladiatorial  performances.  Nero  died  by  his 
own  hand,  with  the  explanation :  "  "What  an  artist  perishes  in 
me."  Commodus  appeared  no  less  than  seven  hundred  and 
thirty-five  times  on  the  stage  in  the  character  of  Hercules,  with 
club  and  lion's  skin,  and  from  a  secure  position  killed  countless 
beasts  and  men. 

The  theatrical  passion  was  not  confined  to  Rome,  it  spread 
throughout  the  provinces.  Every  considerable  city  had  an 
amphitheatre,  and  that  was  the  most  imposing  building,  as  may 
be  seen  to  this  day  in  the  ruins  at  Pompeii,  Capua,  Puteoli, 
Verona,  Nismes,  Autun  (Augustodunum),  and  other  places.1 

Public  opinion  favored  these  demoralizing  amusements  almost 
without  a  dissenting  voice.3  Even  such  a  noble  heathen  as 
Cicero  commended  them  as  excellent  schools  of  courage  and 
contempt  of  death.  Epictetus  alludes  to  them  with  indifference. 
Seneca  is  the  only  Roman  author  who,  in  one  of  his  latest 
writings,  condemned  the  bloody  spectacles  from  the  standpoint 
of  humanity,  but  without  effect.  Paganism  had  no  proper 
conception  of  the  sanctity  of  human  life;  and  even  the  Stoic 

1  See  the  long  list  of  amphitheatres  in  Friedlaender,  II.  502-566. 

*  Friedlaender,  H  370 :  "  In  der  ganzen  romischen  Literatur  begegnen  mr  kaum 
einer  Aeusserung  des  Abscheus,  den  die  keutige  Welt  gegen  diese  unmenschlichen 
ZflislbarJceiten  evnpfindet.  In  der  Hegel  werdm  die  Fechterspiele  mit  der  gr'dssten 
Gleichgiltigkeit  erwahnt.  Die  Kinder  spielm  Gladiatoren  wie  jetzt  in  Andalusun 
Sticr  und  Matadvr." 


342  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

philosophy,  while  it  might  disapprove  of  bloody  games  as  brutal 
and  inhuman,  did  not  condemn  them  as  the  sin  of  murder. 

To  this  gigantic  evil  the  Christian  church  opposed  an  inexo- 
rable Puritanic  rigor  in  the  interest  of  virtue  and  humanity. 
No  compromise  was  possible  with  such  shocking  public  im- 
morality. Nothing  would  do  but  to  flee  from  it  and  to  warn 
against  it.  The  theatrical  spectacles  were  included  in  "  the 
pomp  of  the  devil/'  which  Christians  renounced  at  their  bap- 
tism. They  were  forbidden,  on  pain  of  excommunication,  to 
attend  them.  It  sometimes  happened  that  converts,  who  were 
overpowered  by  their  old  habits  and  visited  the  theatre, 
either  relapsed  into  heathenism,  or  fell  for  a  long  time  into  a 
state  of  deep  dejection.  Tatianus  calls  the  spectacles  ter- 
rible feasts,  in  which  the  soul  feeds  on  human  flesh  and 
blood.  Tertullian  attacked  them  without  mercy,  even  before 
he  joined  the  rigorous  Montanists.  He  reminds  the  catechu- 
mens,  who  were  about  to  consecrate  themselves  to  the  service 
of  God,  that  "  the  condition  of  faith  and  the  laws  of  Christian 
discipline  forbid,  among  other  sins  of  the  world,  the  pleasures 
of  the  public  shows."  They  excite,  he  says,  all  sorts  of  wild 
and  impure  passions,  anger,  fury,  and  lust ;  while  the  spirit  of 
Christianity  is  a  spirit  of  meekness,  peace,  and  purity.  "  What 
a  man  should  not  say  he  should  not  hear.  All  licentious 
speech,  nay,  every  idle  word  is  condemned  by  God.  The 
things  which  defile  a  man  in  going  out  of  his  mouth,  defile  him 
also  when  they  go  in  at  his  eyes  and  ears.  The  true  wrestlings 
of  the  Christian  are  to  overcome  unchastity  by  chastity,  perfidy 
by  faithfulness,  cruelty  by  compassion  and  charity."  Tertullian 
refutes  the  arguments  with  which  loose  Christians  would  plead 
for  those  fascinating  amusements;  their  appeals  to  the  silence 
of  the  Scriptures,  or  even  to  the  dancing  of  David  before  the 
ark,  and  to  Paul's  comparison  of  the  Christian  life  with  the 
Grecian  games.  He  winds  up  with  a  picture  of  the  fast 
approaching  day  of  judgment,  to  which  we  should  look  for- 
ward. He  inclined  strongly  to  the  extreme  view,  that  all  art 
is  a  species  of  fiction  and  falsehood,  and  inconsistent  with 


{  96.   SECULAR  CALLINGS  AND  CIVIL  DUTIES.         343 

Christian  truthfulness.  In  two  other  treatises l  he  warned  the 
Christian  women  against  all  displa7  of  dress,  in  which  the 
heathen  women  shone  in  temples,  theatres,  and  public  places. 
Visit  not  such  places,  says  he  to  them,  and  appear  in  public 
only  for  earnest  reasons.  The  handmaids  of  God  must  distin- 
guish themselves  even  outwardly  from  the  handmaids  of  Satan, 
and  set  the  latter  a  good  example  of  simplicity,  decorum,  and 
chastity. 

The  opposition  of  the  Church  had,  of  course,  at  first  only  a 
moral  effect,  but  in  the  fourth  century  it  began  to  affect  legis- 
lation, and  succeeded  at  last  in  banishing  at  least  the  bloody 
gladiatorial  games  from  the  civilized  world  (with  the  single 
exception  of  Spain  and  the  South  American  countries,,  which 
still  disgrace  themselves  by  bull-fights).  Constantine,  even  as 
late  as  313,  committed  a  great  multitude  of  defeated  barbarians 
to  the  wild  beasts  for  the  amusement  of  the  people,  and  was 
highly  applauded  for  this  generous  act  by  a  heathen  orator; 
but  after  the  Council  of  Nicsea,  in  325,  he  issued  the  first  pro- 
hibition of  those  bloody  spectacles  in  times  of  peace,  and  kept 
them  out  of  Constantinople.2  "There  is  scarcely,"  says  a 
liberal  historian  of  moral  progress,  "  any  other  single  reform  so 
important  in  the  moral  history  of  mankind  as  the  suppression 
of  the  gladiatorial  shows,  and  this  feat  must  be  almost  exclu- 
sively ascribed  to  the  Christian,  church.  When  we  remember 
how  extremely  few  of  the  best  and  greatest  men  of  the  Eoman 
world  had  absolutely  condemned  the  games  of  the  amphitheatre, 
it  is  impossible  to  regard,  without  the  deepest  admiration,  the 
unwavering  and  uncompromising  consistency  of  the  patristic 
denunciations." 3 

§  96.  Secular  Callings  and  OiM  Duties. 

As  to  the  various  callings  of  life,  Christianity  gives  the  in- 
struction :  "  Let  each  man  abide  in  that  calling  wherein  he  was 

1  De  HMtu  Muliebri,  and  De  Otdtu  Feminarum. 

a  On  the  action  of  his  successors,  see  vol.  III.  122  sq. 

»  Lecky,  Hist.  ofJSurap.  Morals,  II.  36  sq. 


344  SECOND  PERIOD.  *A.D.  100-311. 

called." l  It  forbids  no  respectable  pursuit,  and  only  requires 
that  it  be  followed  in  a  new  spirit  to  the  glory  of  God  and  the 
benefit  of  men.  This  is  one  proof  of  its  universal  application 
— its  power  to  enter  into  all  the  relations  of  human  life  and 
into  all  branches  of  society,  under  all  forms  of  government. 
This  is  beautifully  presented  by  the  unknown  author  of  the 
Epistle  to  Diognetus.  Tertullian  protests  to  the  heathens:2 
"  We  are  no  Brahmins  nor  Indian  gymnosophists,  no  hermits, 
no  exiles  from  life.3  We  are  mindful  of  the  thanks  we  owe  to 
God,  our  Lord  and  Creator ;  we  despise  not  the  enjoyment  of 
his  works ;  we  only  temper  it,  that  we  may  avoid  excess  and 
abuse.  We  dwell,  therefore,  with  you  in  this  world,  not  with- 
out markets  and  fairs,  not  without  baths,  inns,  shops,  and 
every  kind  of  intercourse.  We  carry  on  commerce  and  war,4 
agriculture  and  trade  with  you.  We  take  part  in  your  pursuits, 
and  give  our  labor  for  your  use/' 

But  there  were  at  that  time  some  callings  which  either 
ministered  solely  to  sinful  gratification,  like  that  of  the  stage- 
player,  or  were  intimately  connected  with  the  prevailing 
idolatry,  like  the  manufacture,  decoration,  and  sale  of  mytho- 
logical images  and  symbols,  the  divination  of  astrologers,  and 
all  species  of  magic.  These  callings  were  strictly  forbidden 
in  the  church,  and  must  be  renounced  by  the  candidate  for 
baptism.  Other  occupations,  which  were  necessary  indeed,  but 
commonly  perverted  by  the  heathens  to  fraudulent  purposes — 
inn-keeping,  for  example — were  elevated  by  the  Christian  spirit. 
Theodotus  at  Ancyra  made  his  house  a  refuge  for  the  Christians 
and  a  place  of  prayer  in  the  Diocletian  persecution,  in  which  he 
himself  suffered  martyrdom. 

In  regard  to  military  and  civil  offices  under  the  heathen 
government,  opinion  was  divided.  Some,  on  the  authority  of 
such  passages  as  Matt.  5 :  39  and  26 :  52,  condemned  all  war 
as  unchristian  and  immoral;  anticipating  the  views  of  ttie 
Mennonites  and  Friends.  Others  appealed  to  the  good 

* 1  Cor.  7*  20.  '  Apol  c.  42.  «  Ernies  vitcc. 

4  "Mlitcmus,"  which  proves  that  many  Christians  served  in  the* army. 


J96.   SECULAB  CALLINGS  AND  CIVIL  DUTIES.         345 

centurion  of  Capernaum  and  Cornelius  of  Csesarea,  and  held 
the  military  life  consistent  with  a  Christian  profession.  The 
tradition  of  the  legio  fulminatrisG  indicates  that  there  were 
Christian  soldiers  in  the  Koman  armies  under  Marcus  Aurelius, 
and  at  the  time  of  Diocletian  the  number  of  Christians  at  the 
court  and  in  civil  office  was  very  considerable. 

But  in  general  the  Christians  of  those  days,  with  their  lively 
sense  of  foreignness  to  this  world,  and  their  longing  for  the 
heavenly  home,  or  the  millennial  reign  of  Christ,  were  averse 
to  high  office  in  a  heathen  state.    Tertullian  expressly  says, 
that  nothing  was  more  alien  to  them  than  politics.1    Their 
conscience   required    them  to  abstain   scrupulously  from  all 
idolatrous  usages,  sacrifices,  libations,  and  flatteries  connected 
with  public  offices ;  and  this  requisition  must  have  come  into 
frequent  collision  with  their  duties  to  the  state,  so  long  as  the 
state  remained  heathen.     They  honored  the  emperor  as  ap- 
pointed to  earthly  government  by  God,  and  as  standing  nearest 
of  all  men  to  him  in  power;  and  they  paid  their  taxes,  as 
Justin  Martyr  expressly  states,  with  exemplary  faithfulness. 
But  their  obedience  ceased  whenever  the  emperor,  as  he  fre- 
quently did,  demanded   of  them  idolatrous  acts.    Tertullian 
thought  that  the  empire  would  last  till  the  end  of  the  world, 
then  supposed  to  be  near  at  hand,  and  would  be  irreconcilable 
with  the  Christian  profession.    Against  the  idolatrous  worship 
of  the  emperor  he  protests  with  Christian  boldness :  "Augustus, 
the  founder  of  the  empire,  would  never  be  called  Lord;  for 
this  is  a  surname  of  God.    Yet  I  wiy.  freely  call  the  emperor 
so,  only  not  in  the  place  of  God.    Otherwise  I  am  free  from 
him ;  for  I  have  only  one  Lord,  the  almighty  and  eternal  God, 

who  also  is  the  emperor's  Lord Far  be  it  from  me  to 

call  the  emperor  God,  which  is  not  only  the  most  shameful,  but 
the  most  pernicious  flattery." 

The  comparative  indifference  and  partial  aversion  of  the 
Christians  to  the  affairs  of  the  state,  to  civil  legislation  and 

1  Apol  c.  38 :  "Nee  vlla  res  diem  magis  qwm publica.'^ 


346  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-31L 

administration  exposed  them  to  the  frequent  reproach  and  con- 
tempt of  the  heathens*  Their  want  of  patriotism  was  partly 
the  result  of  their  superior  devotion  to  the  church  as  their 
country,  partly  of  their  situation  in  a  hostile  world.  It  must 
not  be  attributed  to  an  "  indolent  or  criminal  disregard  for  the 
public  welfare  "  (as  Gibbon  intimates),  but  chiefly  to  their  just 
abhorrence  of  the  innumerable  idolatrous  rites  connected  with 
the  public  and  private  life  of  the  heathens.  While  they  refused 
to  incur  the  guilt  of  idolatry,  they  fervently  and  regularly 
prayed  for  the  emperor  and  the  state,  their  enemies  and  perse- 
cutors.1 They  were  the  most  peaceful  subjects,  and  'luring  this 
long  period  of  almost  constant  provocation,  ab'ise,  and  persecu- 
tions, they  never  took  part  in  those  frequent  Insurrections  and 
rebellions  which  weakened  and  undermined  the  empire.  They 
renovated  society  from  within,  by  revealing  in  their  lives  as 
well  as  in  their  doctrine  a  higher  order  of  'private  and  public 
virtue,  and  thus  proved  themselves  patriots  in  the  best  sense  of 
the  word. 

The  patriotism  of  ancient  Greece  and  republican  Borne,  while 
it  commands  our  admiration  by  the  heroic  devotion  and  sacrifice 
to  the  country,  was  after  all  an  extended  selfishness,  and  based 
upon  the  absolutism  of  the  State  and  the  disregard  of  the  rights 
of  the  individual  citizen  and  the  foreigner.  It  was  undermined 
by  causes  independent  of  Christianity.  The  amalgamation  of 
different  nationalities  in  the  empire  extinguished  sectionalism 
and  exclusivism,  and  opened  the  wide  view  of  a  universal 
humanity.  Stoicism  gaye  this  cosmopolitan  sentiment  a  philo- 
sophical and  ethical  expression  in  the  writings  of  Seneca, 
Epictetus,  and  Marcus  Aurelius.  Terence  embodied  it  in  his 
famous  line :  "  Homo  sum :  humani  nihil  a  me  alienwn  puto." 
But  Christianity  first  taught  the  fatherhood  of  God,  the  re- 
demption by  Christ,  the  common  brotherhood  of  believers,  the 
duty  of  charity  for  all  men  made  in  the  image  of  God.  It  is 
true  that  monasticism,  which  began  to  develop  itself  already  in 

1  See  the  prayer  for  rulers  in  the  newly  discovered  portions  of  the  Epistle 
of  Clement  of  Rome,  quoted  in  J  66,  p.  228. 


g97.  THE  CHUECH  AKD  SLAVERY.  3,47 

the  third  century,  nursed  indifference  to  the  state  and  even  to 
the  family,  and  substituted  the  total  abandonment  of  the  world 
for  its  reformation  and  transformation.  It  withdrew  a  vast 
amount  of  moral  energy  and  enthusiasm  from  the  city  to  the 
desert,  and  left  Roman  society  to  starvation  and  consumption. 
But  it  preserved  and  nursed  in  solitude  the  heroism  of  self- 
ienial  and  consecration,  which,  in  the  collapse  of  the  Roman 
empire,  became  a  converting  power  of  the  barbarian  conquerors, 
and  laid  the  foundation,  for  a  new  and  better  civilization.  The 
decline  and  fall  of  the  Roman  empire  was  inevitable;  Chris- 
tianity  prolonged  its  life  in  the  East,  and  diminished  the  catas- 
trophe of  its  collapse  in  the  West,  by  converting  and  humanizing 
the  barbarian  conquerors.1  St.  Augustin  pointed  to  the  remark- 
able fact  that  amid  the  horrors  of  the  sack  of  Rome  by  the 
Goth's,  "the  churches  of  the  apostles  and  the  crypts  of  the 
martyrs  were  sanctuaries  for  all  who  fled  to  them,  whether 
Christian  or  pagan,"  and  "  saved  the  lives  of  multitudes  who 
impute  to  Christ  the  ills  that  have  befallen  their  city/'  * 

§  97.  The  Church  and  Slavery. 

See  Lit.  vol.  I.  ?  48,  p.  444,  especially  WALLON'S  JSistoire  de  I'esclavage 
(Paris,  new  ed.  1879,  3  vols).  Comp.  also  V.  LECHXEB:  Sldav&rei 
und  Christenthum.  Leipzig,  1877, 1878;  THEOD.  ZAHff:  Sklaverri 
und  Christenthum  in  der  alten  Welt.  Heidelberg,  1879.  OvEEBECK  : 
Verb.  d.  alt&n  Kirche  zur  Sclaverei  im  rom.  JReiche.  1875. 

i  Gibbon,  ch.  36,  admits  this  in  part.  "If  the  decline  of  the  Eoman  em- 
pire was  hastened  by  the  conversion  of  Constantine,  the  victorious  religion 
broke  the  violence  of  the  fall,  and  mollified  the  ferocious  temper  of  the  con- 
querors." Milman  says  of  the  Church:  "If  treacherous  (?)  to  the  interests 
of  the  Roman  empire,  it  was  true  to  those  of  mankind  "  (III.  48).  Lecky  (II. 
153)  says :  "  It  is  impossible  to  deny  that  the  Christian  priesthood  contributed 
materially  both  by  their  charity  and  by  their  arbitration,  to  mitigate  the 
calamities  that  accompanied  the  dissolution  of  the  empire;  and  it  is  equally 
impossible  to  doubt  that  their  political  attitude  greatly  increased  their  power 
for  good.  Standing  between  the  conflicting  forces,  almost  indifferent  to  the 
issue,  and  notoriously  exempt  from  the  passions  of  the  combat,  they  obtained 
with  the  conqueror,  and  used  for  the  benefit  of  the  conquered,  a  degree  of  in- 
fluence they  would  never  have  possessed  .had  they  been  regarded  as  Eoman 
patriots." 

«  De  Civ.  Dei,  I.  c.  1 


348  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

Heathenism  had  no  conception  of  the  general  and  iiaturai 
rights  of  men.  The  ancient  republics  consisted  in  the  exclusive 
dominion  of  a  minority  over  an  oppressed  majority.  The 
Greeks  and  Romans  regarded  only  the  free,  i.  e.  the  free-born 
rich  and  independent  citizens  as  men  in  the  full  sense  of  the 
term,  and  denied  this  privilege  to  the  foreigners,  the  laborers, 
the  poor,  and  the  slaves.  They  claimed  the  natural  right  to 
make  war  upon  all  foreign  nations,  without  distinction  of  race, 
in  order  to  subject  them  to  their  iron  rule.  Even  with  Cicero 
the  foreigner  and  the  enemy  are  synonymous  terms.  The 
barbarians  were  taken  in  thousands  by  the  chance  of  war  (above 
100,000  in  the  Jewish  war  alone)  and  sold  as  cheap  as  horses. 
Besides,  an  active  slave-trade  was  carried  on  in  the  Euxiiie,  the 
eastern  provinces,  the  coast  of  Africa,  and  Britain.  The  greater 
part  of  mankind  in  the  old  Roman  empire  was  reduced  to  a 
hopeless  state  of  slavery,  and  to  a  half  brutish  level.  And  this 
evil  of  slavery  was  so  thoroughly  interwoven  with  the  entire 
domestic  and  public  life  of  the  heathen  world,  and  so  deliber- 
ately regarded,  even  by  the  greatest  philosophers,  Aristotle  for 
instance,  as  natural  and  indispensable,  that  the  abolition  of 
it,  even  if  desirable,  seemed  to  belong  among  the  impossible 
things. 

Yet  from  the  outset  Christianity  has  labored  for  this  end ; 
not  by  impairing  the  right  of  property,  not  by  outward  vio- 
lence, nor  sudden  revolution ;  this,  under  the  circumstances, " 
would  only  have  made  the  evil  worse ;  but  by  its  moral  power, 
by  preaching  the  divine  descent  and  original  unity  of  all  men, 
't^eir  common  redemption  through  Christ,  the  duty  of  brotherly 
love,  and  the  true  freedom  of  the  spirit.  It  placed  slaves  and 
masters  on  the  same  footing  of  dependence  on  God  and  of  free- 
dom in  God,  the  Father,  Redeemer,  and  Judge  of  both.  It 
conferred  inward  freedom  even  under  outward  bondage,  and 
taught  obedience  to  God  and  for  the  sake  of  God,  even  in  the 
enjoyment  of  outward  freedom.  This  moral  and  religious 
freedom  must  lead  at  last  to  the  personal  and  civil  liberty  of 
the  individual.  Christianity  redeems  not  only  the  soul  but  the 


?97.  THE  CHTJKCH  AND  SLAVERY.  349 

body  also,  and  the  process  of  regeneration  will  end  in  the  resur- 
rection and  glorification  of  the  entire  natural  world. 

In  the  period  before  us,  however,  the  abolition  of  slavery, 
save  in  isolated  cases  of  manumission,  was  utterly  out  of  ques- 
tion, considering  only  the  enormous  number  of  the  slaves.  The 
world  was  far  from  ripe  for  such  a  step.  The  church,  in  her 
persecuted  condition,  had  as  yet  no  influence  at  all  over  the 
machinery  of  the  state  and  the  civil  legislation.  And  she  was 
at  that  time  so  absorbed  in  the  transcendent  importance  of  the 
higher  world  and  in  her  longing  for  the  speedy  return  of  the 
Lord,  that  she  cared  little  for  earthly  freedom  or  temporal 
happiness.  Hence  Ignatius,  in  his  epistle  to  Polycarp,  counsels 
servants  to  serve  only  the  more  zealously  to  the  glory  of  the 
Lord,  that  they  may  receive  from  God  the  higher  freedom ;  and 
not  to  attempt  to  be  redeemed  at  the  expense  of  their  Christian 
brethren,  lest  they  be  found  slaves  to  their  own  caprice.  From 
this  we  see  that  slaves,  in  whom  faith  awoke  the  sense  of  manly 
dignity  and  the  desire  of  freedom,  were  accustomed  to  demand 
their  redemption  at  the  expense  of  the  church,  as  a  right,  and 
were  thus  liable  to  value  the  earthly  freedom  more  than  the 
spiritual.  Tertullian  declares  the  outward  freedom  worthless 
without  the  ransom  of  the  soul  from  the  bondage  of  sin. 
"  How  can  the  world/'  says  he,  " make  a  servant  free?  All  is 
mere  show  in  the  world,  nothing  truth.  For  the  slave  is 
already  free,  as  a  purchase  of  Christ ;  and  the  freedman  is  a 
servant  of  Christ.  If  thou  takest  the  freedom  which  the  world 
can  give  for  true,  thou  hast  thereby  become  again  the  servant 
of  man,  and  hast  lost  the  freedom  of  Christ,  in  that  thou 
thinkest  it  bondage."  Chrysostom,  in  the  fourth  century,  was 
the  first  of  the  fathers  to  discuss  the  question  of  slavery  at 
large  in  the  spirit  of  the  apostle  Paul,  and  to  recommend, 
though  cautiously,  a  gradual  emancipation. 

But  the  church  before  Constantine  labored  with  great  success 
to  elevate  the  intellectual  and  moral  condition  of  the  slaves,  to 
adjust  inwardly  the  inequality  between  slaves  and  masters,  as 
the  first  and  efficient  step  towards  the  final  outward  abolition 


350  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

of  the  evil,  and  to  influence  the  public  opinion  even  of  the 
heathens.  Here  the  church  was  aided  by  a  concurrent  move- 
ment in  philosophy  and  legislation.  The  cruel  views  of  Cato, 
who  advised  to  work  the  slaves,  like  beasts  of  burden,  to  death 
rather  than  allow  them  to  become  old  and  unprofitable,  gave 
way  to  the  milder  and  humane  views  of  Seneca,  Pliny,  and 
Plutarch,  who  very  nearly  approach  the  apostolic  teaching.  To 
the  influence  of  the  later  Stoic  philosophy  must  be  attrib- 
uted many  improvements  in  the  slave-code  of  imperial 
Rome.  But  the  most  important  improvements  were  made  from 
the  triumph  of  Constantine  to  the  reign  of  Justinian,  under 
directly  Christian  influences,  Constantine  issued  a  law  in  315, 
forbidding  the  branding  of  slaves  on  the  face  to  prevent  tne 
disfiguration  of  the  figure  of  celestial  beauty  (i.  e.  the  image  of 
God).1  He  also  facilitated  emancipation,  in  an  edict  of  316, 
by  requiring  only  a  written  document,  signed  by  the  master, 
instead  of  the  previous  ceremony  in  the  presence  of  the  prefect 
and  his  lictor. 

It  is  here  to  be  considered,  first  of  all,  that  Christianity  spread 
freely  among  the  slaves,  except  where  they  were  so  rude  and 
degraded  as  to  be  insensible  to  all  higher  impressions.  They 
were  not  rarely  (as  Origen  observes)  the  instruments  of  the 
conversion  of  their  masters,  especially  of  the  women,  and  chil- 
dren, whose  training  was  frequently  intrusted  to  them.  Not  a 
few  slaves  died  martyrs,  and  were  enrolled  among  the  saints ; 
'as  Onesimus,  Eutyches,  Victorinus,  Maro,  Nereus,  Achilleus, 
Blandina,  Potamiaena,  Felicitas.  Tradition  fhakes  Onesimus, 
the  slave  of  Philemon,  a  bishop.  The  church  of  St.  Vital  at 
Ravenna — the  first  and  noblest  specimen  of  Byzantine  archi- 
tecture in  Italy — was  dedicated  by  Justinian  to  the  memory  of 
a  martyred  slave.  But  the  most  remarkable  instance  is  that 
of  Callistus,  who  was  originally  a  slave,  and  rose  to  the  chair 
of  St.  Peter  in  Rome  (218-223).  Hippolytus,  who  acquaints 
us  with  his  history,  attacks  his  doctrinal  and  disciplinarian 

1  "  Fades,  qua  ad  simUitudinem  pukhrttudinis  est  coelestis  figurafa.''  Qod.  Ji#£ 
IX  17,17, 


?97.  THE  CHUEGH  AND  SLAVERY.        351 

views,  but  does  not  reproach  him  for  his  former  condition. 
Callistus  sanctioned  the  marriages  between  free  Christian  women 
and  Christian  slaves.  Celsus  cast  it  up  as  a  reproach  to  Chris- 
tianity, that  it  let  itself  down  so  readily  to  slaves,  fools,  women, 
and  children.  But  Origen  justly  saw  an  excellence  of  the  new 
religion  in  this  very  fact,  th'at  it  could  raise  this  despised  and,, 
in  the  prevailing  view,  irreclaimable  class  of  men  to  the  level 
of  moral  purity  and  worth.  If,  then,  converted  slaves,  with 
the  full  sense  of  their  intellectual  and  religious  superiority,  still 
remained  obedient  to  their  heathen  masters,  and  even  served 
them  more  faithfully  than  before,  resisting  decidedly  only  their 
immoral  demands  (like  Potarnisena,  and  other  chaste  women  and 
virgins  in  the  service  of  voluptuous  masters) — they  showed,  in 
this  very  self-control,  the  best  proof  of  their  ripeness  for  civil 
freedom,  and  at  the  same  time  furnished  the  fairest  memorial  of 
that  Christian  faith,  which  raised  the  soul,  in  the  enjoyment  of 
sonship  with  God  and  in  the  hope  of  the  blessedness  of  heaven, 
above  the  sufferings  of  earth.  Euelpistes,  a  slave  of  the  im- 
perial household,  who  was  carried  with  Justin  Martyr  to  the 
tribunal  of  Rusticus,  on  being  questioned  concerning  his  con- 
dition, replied :  "  I  am  a  slave  of  the  emperor,  but  I  am  also  a 
Christian,  and  have  received  liberty  from  Jesus  Christ ;  by  his 
grace  I  have  the  same  hope  as  my  brethren."  "Where  the 
owners  of  the  slaves  themselves  became  Christians,  the  old  rela- 
tion virtually  ceased ;  both  came  together  to  the  table  of  the 
Lord,  and  felt  themselves  brethren  of  one  family,  in  striking 
contrast  with  the  condition  of  things  among  their  heathen 
neighbors  as  expressed  in  the  current  proverb:  "As  many 
enemies  as  slaves." l  Clement  of  Alexandria  frequently  urges 
that  "  slaves  are  men  like  ourselves,"  though  he  nowhere  con- 
demns the  institution  itself.  That  there  actually  were  such 

1  *'  Totidem,  esse  hostes,  guot  servos"  Seneca,  Ep.  47.  Prom  the  time  of  the 
Senile  Wars  the  Komans  lived  in  constant  fear  of  slave  conspiracies  and  in- 
surrections. The  slaves  formed  nearly  one  half  of  the  population,  and  in 
some  agricultural  districts,  as  in  Sicily  and  Calabria,  they  were  largely  in  the 
majority. 


352  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

cases  of  fraternal  fellowship,  like  that  which  St.  Paul  recom- 
mended to  Philemon,  we  have  the  testimony  of  Lactantius,  at 
the  end  of  our  period,  who  writes,  in  his  Institutes,  no  doubt 
from  life :  "  Should  any  say :  Are  there  not  also  among  you 
poor  and  rich,  servants  and  masters,  distinctions  among  indi- 
viduals ?  No ;  we  call  ourselves  brethren  for  no  other  reason, 
than  that  we  hold  ourselves  all  equal.  For  since  we  measure 
everything  human  not  by  its  outward  appearance,  but  by  its 
intrinsic  value,  we  have,  notwithstanding  the  difference  of  out- 
ward relations,  no  slaves,  but  we  call  them  and  consider  them 
brethren  in  the  Spirit  and  fellow-servants  in  religion." l  The 
same  writer  says :  "  God  would  have  all  men  equal.  .  .  .  With 
him  there  is  neither  servant  nor  master.  If  he  is  the  same 
Father  to  all,  we  are  all  with  the  same  right  free.  So  no  one 
is  poor  before  God,  but  he  who  is  destitute  of  righteousness ;  no 
one  rich,  but  he  who  is  full  of  virtues/' 2 

The  testimony  of  the  catacombs,  as  contrasted  with  pagan 
epitaphs,  shows  that  Christianity  almost  obliterated  the  distinc- 
tion between  the  two  classes  of  society.  Slaves  are  rarely  men- 
tioned. "  While  it  is  impossible,"  says  De  Eossi,  "  to  examine 
the  pagan  sepulchral  inscriptions  of  the  same  period  without 
finding  mention  of  a  slave  or  a  freedman,  I  have  not  met  with 
one  well-ascertained  instance  among  the  inscriptions  of  the 
Christian  tombs." s 

The  principles  of  Christianity  naturally  prompt  Christian 
slave-holders  to  actual  manumission.  The  number  of  slave- 
holders before  Constantine  was  very  limited  among  Christians, 
who  were  mostly  poor.  Yet  we  read  in  the  Acts  of  the  mar- 

1  Lib.  v.  c.  15  (ed.  Fritzsche.    Lips.  1842,  p.  257). 

3  Inst.  v.  14  (p.  257) :  "Deus  enim,  gui  homines  generat  et  insp*.rat,  omnes  aequos, 
id  est  pares  esse  voluit;  eandem  conditionem  vivendi  omnibus  posuit;  omnes  ad 
mpientiam  genuit;  omnibus  immortalitatem  spopondit,  nemo  a  beneficiis  coelestibus 
segregatur.  ....  Nemo  apud  eum  serous  est,  nemo  dominus;  si  enim  cwnctis  idem 
Pater  est,  aeqwjure  omnes  liberi  sumus." 

8  "Buttetino  for  1866,  p.  24.  V.  Schultze  (Die  KataJc&mben,  p.  258)  infers 
from  the  monuments  that  in  the  early  Christian  congregations  slavery  w»s  re- 
duced to  a  minimum. 


g  97.  THE  CHURCH  AND  SLAVERY.       353 

fcyrdom  of  the  Eoman  bishop  Alexander,  that  a  Roman  pre- 
fect. Hennas,  converted  by  that  bishop,  in  the  reign  of  Trajan, 
received  baptism  at  an  Easter  festival  with  his  wife  and  children 
and  twelve  hundred  and  fifty  slaves,  and  on  this  occasion  gave 
all  his  slaves  their  freedom  and  munificent  gifts  besides.1  So  in 
the  martyrology  of  St.  Sebastian,  it  is  related  that  a  wealthy 
Boman  prefect,  Chromatius,  under  Diocletian,  on  embracing 
Christianity,  emancipated  fourteen  hundred  slaves,  after  having 
them  baptized  with  himself,  because  their  sonship  with  God  put 
an  end  to  their  servitude  to  man.2  Several  epitaphs  in  the 
catacombs  mention  the  fact  of  manumission.  In  the  beginning 
of  the  fourth  century  St.  Cantius,  Cantianus,  and  Cantianilla, 
of  an  old  Human  family,  set  all  their  slaves,  seventy-three  in 
number,  at  liberty,  after  they  had  received  baptism.3  St. 
Melania  emancipated  eight  thousand  slaves ;  St.  Ovidius,  five 
thousand;  Hermes,  a  prefect  in  the  reign  of  Trajan,  twelve 
hundred  and  fifty.4 

These  legendary  traditions  may  indeed  be  doubted  as  to  the 
exact  facts  in  the  case,  and  probably  are  greatly  exaggerated ; 
but  they  are  nevertheless  conclusive  as  the  exponents  of  the 
spirit  which  animated  the  church  at  that  time  concerning  the 
duty  of  Christian  masters.  It  was  felt  that  in  a  thoroughly 
Christianized  society  there  can  be  no  room  for  despotism  on  the 
one  hand  and  slavery  on  the  other. 

After  the  third  century  the  manumission  became  a  solemn 
act,  which  took  place  in  the  presence  of  the  clergy  and  the 
congregation.  It  was  celebrated  on  church  festivals,  especially 
on  Easter.  The  master  led  the  slave  to  the  altar;  there  the 
document  of  emancipation  was  read,  the  minister  pronounced 
the  blessing,  and  the  congregation  received  him  as  a  free  brother 
with  equal  rights  and  privileges.  Constantine  found  this  cus- 
tom already  established,  and  African  councils  of  the  fourth 

1  Acta  Sanct.  Boll.  Maj.  torn.  i.  p.  371. 
*  Acfa  Sanct.  Ian.  torn.  iii.  275. 

3  Acta  Sanct.  Maj.  torn.  vi.  777. 

4  Champagny,  Chariti  chret,  p.  210  (as  quoted  by  Lecky,  II.  74), 

Vol.  11—23 


354  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

century  requested  the  emperor  to  give  it  general  force.    He 
placed  it  under  the  superintendence  of  the  clergy. 

NOTES. 

H.  WALLON,  in  his  learned  and  able  Histoire  de  Vesclavage  dans  PantiqutiS 
(second  ed.  Paris,  1879,  3  vols.),  shows  that  the  gospel  in  such  passages  as 
Matt.  23:  8;  Gal.  3:  28;  Col.  3:  11;  1  Cor.  12:  13  sounded  the  dtath  knell 
of  slavery,  though  it  was  very  long  in  'dying,  and  thus  sums  up  ihe  teaching 
of  the  ante-Nicene  church  (III.  237) :  "  Minutius  Felix,  Tertullien  et  tons  ceux 
qui  ont  lent  dans  cette  p&*wde  ou  Pfiglise  a  srwrtout  soufert,  invoquent  de  meme  cette 
eommunautZ  de  nature,  cette  communaute'  depcdrie  dans  la  r&publique  du  mvnde,  en 
un  language  familier  d,  la  philosophic,  mais  qui  frouvcvit  parmi  les  Chretiens  avec 
une  sanction  plus  haute  et  un  sens  plus  complet,  une  application  plus  $£rieuse. 
Devant  ce  droit  commun  des  hommes,  fonde  sur  le  droit  divin,  le  pritendu  droit  des 
gens  n'etafo  plus  qu'  une  monstrueuse  injustice"  For  the  views  of  the  later 
fathers  and  the  influence  of  the  church  on  the  imperial  legislation,  see  ch. 
VIII.  to  X.  in  his  third  volume. 

LECKY  discusses  the  relation  of  Christianity  to  slavery  in  the  second  vol.  of 
his  History  of  European  Morals,  pp.  66-90,  and  justly  remarks :  "  The  services 
of  Christianity  in  this  sphere  were  of  three  kinds.  It  supplied  a  new  order 
of  relations,  in  which  the  distinction  of  classes  was  unknown. "  It  imparted  a 
moral  dignity  to  the  servile  classes,  and  it  gave  an  unexampled  impetus  to  the 
movement  of  enfranchisement.11 

§  98,  The  Heathen  Family. 

In  ancient  Greece  and  Eome  the  state  was  the  highest  object 
of  life,  and  the  only  virtues  properly  recognized — wisdom, 
courage,  moderation,  and  justice — were  political  virtues.  Aris- 
totle makes  the  state,  that  is  the  organized  body  of  free  citizens l 
(foreigners  and  slaves  are  excluded),  precede  the  family  and  the 
individual,  and  calls  man  essentially  a  "  political  animal."  In 
Plato's  ideal  commonwealth  the  state  is  everything  and  owns 
everything,  even  the  children. 

This  political  absolutism  destroys  the  proper  dignity  and 
rights  of  the  individual  and  the  family,  and  materially  hinders 
the  development  of  the  domestic  and  private  virtues.  Marriage 
was  allowed  no  moral  character,  but  merely  a  political  import 
for  the  preservation  of  the  state,  and  could  not  be  legally  con- 
tracted except  by  free  citizens.  Socrates,  in  instructing  his  son 


?  98.  THE  HEATHEN  FAMILY.  355 

concerning  this  institution,  tells  him,  according  to  Xenophon, 
that  we  select  only  such  wives  as  we  hope  will  yield  beautiful 
children.  Plato  recommends  even  community  of  women  to  the 
class  of  warriors  in  his  ideal  republic,  as  the  best  way  to  secure 
vigorous  citizens.  Lycurgus,  for  similar  reasons,  encouraged 
adultery  under  certain  circumstances,  requiring  old  men  to  lend 
their  young  and  handsome  wives  to  young  and  strong  men. 

Woman  was  placed  almost  on  the  same  level  with  the  slave. 
She  differs,  indeed,  from  the  slave,  according  to  Aristotle,  but 
has,  after  all,  really  no  will  of  her  own,  and  is  hardly  capable 
of  a  higher  virtue  than  the  slave.  Shut  up  in  a  retired  apart- 
ment of  the  house,  she  spent  her  life  with  the  slaves.  As 
human  nature  is  essentially  the  same  in  all  ages,  and  as  it  is 
never  entirely  forsaken  by  the  guidance  of  a  kind  Providence, 
we  must  certainly  suppose  that  female  virtue  was  always  more 
or  less  maintained  and  appreciated  even  among  the  heathen. 
Such  characters  as  Penelope,  Nausicaa,  Andromache,  Antigone, 
Iphigenia,  and  Diotima,  of  the  Greek  poetry  and  history,  bear 
witness  of  this.  Plutarch's  advice  to  married  people,  and  his 
letter  of  consolation  to  his  wife  after  the  death  of  their  daughter, 
breathe  a  beautiful  spirit  of  purity  and  affection.  But  the  general 
position  assigned  to  woman  by  the  poets,  philosophers,  and  legis- 
lators of  antiquity,  was  one  of  social  oppression  and  degradation. 
In  Athens  she  was  treated  as  a  minor  during  lifetime,  and  could 
not  inherit  except  in  the  absence  of  male  heirs.  To  the  ques- 
tion of  Socrates :  "  Is  there  any  one  with  whom  you  converse 
less  than  with  the  wife  ?  "  his  pupil,  Aristobulus,  replies :  "  No 
one,  or  at  least  very  few."  If  she  excelled  occasionally,  in 
Greece,  by  wit  and  culture,  and,  like  Aspasia,  Phryne,  Lais, 
Theodota,  attracted  the  admiration  and  courtship  even  of 
earnest  philosophers  like  Socrates,  and  statesmen  like  Pericles, 
she  generally  belonged  to  the  disreputable  class  of  the  hetwrce 
or  arnica.  In  Corinth  they  were  attached  to  the  temple  of 
Aphrodite,  and  enjoyed  the  sanction  of  religion  for  the  practice 
of  vice.1  These  dissolute  women  were  esteemed  above  house- 

1  Their  name  traipat  was  an  Attic  euphonism  for  ndpvai.    In  the  temple  of 


356  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

wives,  and  became  the  proper  and  only  representatives  of  some 
sort  of  female  culture  and  social  elegance.  To  live  with  them 
openly  was  no  disgrace  even  for  married  men.1  How  could 
there  be  any  proper  conception  and  abhorrence  of  the  sin  of 
licentiousness  and  adultery,  if  the  very  gods,  a  Jnpiter,  a  Mars, 
and  a  Venus,  were  believed  to  be  guilty  of  those  sins  I  The 
worst  vices  of  earth  were  transferred  to  Olympus. 

Modesty  forbids  the  mention  of  a  still  more  odious  vice, 
which  even  depraved  nature  abhors,  which  yet  was  freely  dis- 
cussed and  praised  by  ancient  poets  and  philosophers,  practised 
with  neither  punishment  nor  dishonor,  and  likewise  divinely 
sanctioned  by  the  example  of  Apollo  and  Hercules,  and  by  the 
lewdness  of  Jupiter  with  Ganymede. 2 

Aphrodite  at  Corinth  more  than  a  thousand  hetarcB  were  employed  as  hierodvlce* 
snd  were  the  ruin  of  foreigners  (Strabo,  YI1L  6,  20).  JLopiv&ia  Kop?/  was 
a  synonym  for  hetcera,  and  expressive  of  the  acme  of  voluptuousness.  A 
full  account  of  these  hetcera  and  of  the  whole  domestic  life  of  the  ancient 
Greeks  may  he  found  in  Becker's  Charides,  translated  by  Metcalf,  third  ed. 
London,  1866.  Becker  says  (p,  242),  that  in  the  period  of  the  greatest  refine- 
ment of  classical  Greece,  "  sensuality,  if  not  the  mother,  was  at  all  events  the 
nurse  of  the  Greek  perception  of  the  beautiful."  Plato  himself,  even  in  his 
ideal  state,  despaired  of  restricting  his  citizens  to  the  lawful  intercourse  of 
marriage. 

1  Aspasia  bewitched  Pericles  by  her  beauty  and  genius ;  and  Socrates  ac- 
knowledged his  deep  obligation  to  the  instructions  of  a  courtesan  named 
Diotima. 

8  Lecky  (II.  311)  derives  this  unnatural  vice  of  Greece  from  the  influence  of 
the  public  games,  which  accustomed  men  to  the  contemplation  of  absolute  nudity, 
and  awoke  unnatural  passions.  See  the  thirteenth  book  of  Athenaeus,  Grote 
on  the  Symposium  of  Plato,  and  the  full  account  in  Dollinger's  Heidenthum  und 
Judenthum,  1857,  p.  684  sqq.  He  says:  "£ei  den  Griechen  tritt  das  Laster  der 
Pcederastie  mit  align,  Symptomen  einer  grossen  natwnalen  J&ankheit,  gleichsam  eines 
zthischen  Miasma  auf;  eszeigtsich  alsein  Gejuhl,  das  starker  and  hef tiger  wirfae,  als 
die  Weiberliebe  bei  andern  Volkem,  masslos&Tj  leidenschafilieher  in  seinen  Aus- 

bruchen  war In  der  ganeen  Literatur  der  wrchristlichen  Periode  ist  kaum 

ein  SchriftsteUer  aufinden,  der  sich  entschieden  dagegen  erklart  hatte.  Vielmehr 
war  die  ganze  Gesellschaft  davon  angestecktj  und  man  athmete  das  Miasma,  so  w, 
sagent  mit  der  Luft  ein"  Even  Socrates  and  Plato  gave  this  morbid  vice  the 
sanction  of  their  great  authority,  if  not  in  practice,  at  least  in  theory.  Comp. 
Xenophon's  Mem.  VIII.  2,  Plato's  Charmides,  and  his  descriptions  of  Eros, 
and  Dollinser,  I  c.  p.  686  sq.  Zeno,  the  founder  of  the  austere  sect  of  Stoics, 
was  praised  for  the  moderation  with  which  Ke  practiced  this  vice. 


2  98.  THE  HEATHEN  FAMILY.         357 

The  Romans  were  originally  more  virtuous,  domestic,  and 
chaste,  as  they  were  more  honest  and  conscientious,  than  the 
Greeks.  With  them  the  wife  was  honored  by  the  title  domitia, 
matrona,  materfamilias.  At  the  head  of  their  sacerdotal  system 
stood  the  flamens  of  Jupiter,  who  represented  marriage  in  its 
purity,  and  tho  vestal  virgins,  who  represented  virginity.  The 
Sabine  women  Interceding  between  their  parents  and  their  hus- 
bands, saved  ,fche  republic;  the  mother  and  the  wife  of 
Coriolanus  by  her  prayers  averted  his  wrath,  and  raised  the 
siege  of  the  Yolscian  army ;  Lucretia  who  voluntarily  sacri- 
ficed her  life  to  escape  the  outrage  to  her  honor  offered  by  king 
Tarquin,  and  Virginia  who  was  killed  by  her  father  to  save 
her  from  slavery  and  dishonor,  shine  in  the  legendary  history 
of  Eome  as  bright  examples  of  unstained  purity.  But  even  in 
the  best  days  of  the  republic  the  legal  status  of  woman  was 
very  low.  The  Romans  likewise  made  marriage  altogether 
subservient  to  the  interest  of  the  state,  and  allowed  it  in  its 
legal  form  to  free  citizens  alone.  The  proud  maxims  of  the 
republic  prohibited  even  the  legitimate  nuptials  of  a  Roman 
with  a  foreign  queen;  and  Cleopatra  and  Berenice  were,  as 
strangers,  degraded  to  the  position  of  concubines  of  Mark 
Antony  and  Titus.  According  to  ancient  custom  the  husband 
bought  his  bride  from  her  parents,  and  she  fulfilled  the  coemp- 
tion by  purchasing,  with  three  pieces  of  copper,  a  just  introduc- 
tion to  his  house  and  household  deities.  But  this  was  for  her 
^simply  an  exchange  of  one  servitude  for  another.  She  became 
the  living  property  of  a  husband  who  could  lend  her  out,  as 
Cato  lent  his  wife  to  his  friend  Hortensius,  and  as  Augustus 
took  Livia  from  Tiberius  Nero.  "Her  husband  or  master," 
says  Gibbon,1  "was  invested  with  the  plenitude  of  paternal 
power.  By  his  judgment  or  caprice  her  behavior  was  approved 
or  censured,  or  chastised;  he  exercised  the  jurisdiction  of  life 
and  death;  and  it  was  allowed,  that  in  cases  of  adultery  or 
drunkenness,  the  sentence  might  be  properly  inflicted  She 
acquired  and  inherited  for  the  sole  profit  of  her  lord.;  and  so 
1  Chapter  XLIV.,  where  he  discusses  at  length  the  Eoman  code  of  laws. 


358  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

clearly  was  woman  defined,  not  as  a,  person,  but  as  a  thing,  that, 
if  the  original  title  were  deficient,  she  might  be  claimed  like 
other  movables,  by  the  use  and  possession  of  an  entire  year." 

Monogamy  was  the  .rule  both  in  Greece  and  in  Rome,  but  did 
not  exclude  illegitimate  connexions.  Concubinage,  in  its  proper 
legal  sense,  was  a  sort  of  secondary  marriage  with  a  woman  of 
servile  or  plebeian  extraction,  standing  below  the  dignity  of  a 
matron  and  above  the  infamy  of  a  prostitute.  It  was  sanc- 
tioned and  regulated  by  law ;  it  prevailed  both  in  the  East  and 
the  West  from  the  age  of  Augustus  to  the  tenth  century,  and 
was  preferred  to  regular  marriage  by  Vespasian,  and  the  two 
Antonines,  the  best  Eoman  emperors.  Adultery  was  severely 
punished,  at  times  even  with  sudden  destruction  of  the  offender; 
but  simply  as  an  interference  with  the  rights  and  property  of  a 
free  man.  The  wife  had  no  legal  or  social  protection  against 
the  infidelity  of  her  husband.  The  Romans  worshipped  a 
peculiar  goddess  of  domestic  life ;  but  her  name  Viriplaea,  the 
appeaser  of  husbands,  indicates  her  partiality.  The  intercourse 
of  a  husband  with  the  slaves  of  his  household  and  with  public 
prostitutes  was  excluded  from  the  odium  and  punishment  of 
adultery.  We  say  nothing  of  that  unnatural  abomination 
alluded  to  in  Rom.  1 :  26,  27,  which  seems  to  have  passed  from 
the  Etruscans  and  Greeks  to  the  Romans,  and  prevailed  among 
the  highest  as  well  as  the  lowest  classes.  The  women,  how- 
ever, were  almost  as  corrupt  as  their  husbands,  at  least  in  the 
imperial  age.  Juvenal  calls  a  chaste  wife  a  "rara  avis  m 
terris"  Under  Augustus  free-born  daughters  could  no  longer 
be  found  for  the  service  of  Vesta,  and  even  the  severest  laws 
of  Domitian  could  not  prevent  the  six  priestesses  of  the  pure 
goddess  from  breaking  their  vow.  The  pantomimes  and"  the 
games  of  Flora,  with  their  audacious  indecencies,  were  favorite 
amusements.  "The  unblushing,  undisguised  obscenity  of  the 
Epigrams  of  Martial,  of  the  Romances  of  Apuleius  and 
Petronius,  and  of  some  of  the  Dialogues  of  Lucian,  reflected 
but  too  faithfully  the  spirit  of  their  times."  l 
1  Lecky,  II.  321. 


§  98.  THE  HEATHEN  FAMILY.  359 

Divorce  is  said  to  have  been  almost  unknown  in  the  ancient 
days  of  the  Eoman  republic,  and  the  marriage  tie  was  regarded 
as  indissoluble.  A  senator  was  censured  for  kissing  his  wife  in 
the  presence  of  their  daughter.  But  the  merit  of  this  virtue  is 
greatly  diminished  if  we  remember  that  the  husband  always 
had  an  easy  outlet  for  his  sensual  passions  in  the  intercourse 
with  slaves  and  concubines.  Nor  did  it  outlast  the  republic. 
After  the  Punic  war  the  increase  of  wealth  and  luxury,  and  the 
influx  of  Greek  and  Oriental  licentiousness  swept  away  the  stern 
old  Roman  virtues.  The  customary  civil  and  religious  rites 
of  marriage  were  gradually  disused ;  the  open  community  of 
life  between  persons  of  similar  rank  was  taken  as  sufficient  evi- 
dence of  their  nuptials;  and  marriage,  after  Augustus,  fell  to 
the  level  of  any  partnership,  which  might  be  dissolved  by  the 
abdication  of  one  of  the  associates.  "Passion,  interest,  or 
caprice,"  says  Gibbon  on  the  imperial  age,  "suggested  daily 
motives  for  the  dissolution  of  marriage ;  a  word,  a  sign,  a  mes- 
sage, a  letter,  the  mandate  of  a  freedman,  declared  the  separa- 
tion ;  the  most  tender  of  human  connections  was  degraded  to  a 
transient  society  of  profit  or  pleasure." l 

1  Gibbon  (ch.  XLIV.)  confirms  the  statement  by  several  examples,  to  which 
more  might  be  added.  Maecenas,  *'  gui  uxores  mitties  duxit"  (Seneca,  JBp.  114) 
was  as  notorious  for  his  levity  in  forming  and  dissolving  the  nuptial  tie,  as 
famous  for  his  patronage  of  literature  and  art.  Martial  (Epigr.  VI.  7),  though 
in  evident  poetical  exaggeration,  speaks  of  ten  husbands  in  one  month. 
Juvenal  (Satir.  VI.  229)  exposes  a  matron,  who  in  five  years  submitted  to  the 
embraces  of  eight  husbands.  Jerome  (Ad  Gerontiam)  "saw  at  Rome  a 
triumphant  husband  bury  his  twenty-first  wife,  who  had  interred  twenty-two 
of  his  less  sturdy  predecessors.*'  These  are  extreme  cases,  and  hardly  furnish 
*  a  sufficient  basis  for  a  general  judgment  of  the  state  of  society  in  Rome, 
much  less  in  the  provinces.  We  should  not  forget  the  noble  and  faithful 
Roman  women  even  in  the  days  of  imperial  corruption,  as  Mallonia,  who  pre- 
ferred suicide  to  the  embraces  of  Tiberius ;  Helvia,  the  mother  of  Seneca,  and 
Taulina  his  wife,  who  opened  her  veins  to-accompany  him  to  the  grave ;  the 
elder  Arria  who,  when  her  husband  Psetus  was  condemned  to  death  under 
Claudius  (42),  and  hesitated  to  commit  suicide,  plunged  the  dagger  in  her 
breast,  and,  drawing  it  out,  said  to  him  with  her  dying  breath :  "  My  Psetus, 
It  does  not  pain  "  (Paste,  non  dolet) ;  and  her  worthy  daughter,  Caecinia  Arria, 
the  wife  of  Thrasea,  who  was  condemned  to  death  (66),  and  her  grand- 
daughter Fannia,  who  accompanied  her  husband  Helvidius  Prisons  twice  into 


360  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Various  remedies  were  tardily  adopted  as  the  evil  spread,  but 
iliey  proved  inefficient,  until  the  spirit  of  Christianity  gained 
the  control  of  public  opinion  and  improved  the  Eoman  legisla- 
tion, which,  however,  continued  for  a  long  time  to  fluctuate 
between  the  custom  of  heathenism  and  the  wishes  of  the  church, 

Another  radical  evil  of  heathen  family  life,  which  the  church 
had  to  encounter  throughout  the  whole  extent  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  was  the  absolute  tyrannical  authority  of  the  parent 
over  the  children,  extending  even  to  the  power  of  life  and  death, 
and  placing  the  adult  son  of  a  Roman  citizen  on  a  level  with 
the  movable  things  and  slaves,  "  whom  the  capricious  master 
might  alienate  or  destroy,  without  being  responsible  to  any 
earthly  tribunal." 

With  this  was  connected  the  unnatural  and  monstrous  custom 
of  exposing  poor,  sickly,  and  deformed  children  to  a  cruel  death, 
or  in  many  cases  to  a  life  of  slavery  and  infamy — a  custom  ex- 
pressly approved,  for  the  public  interest,  even  by  a  Plato,  an 
Aristotle,  and  a  Seneca !  "  Monstrous  offspring,"  says  the  great 
Stoic  philosopher,  "we  destroy;  children  too,  if  born  feeble  and 
ill-formed,  we  drown.  It  is  not  wrath,  but  reason,  thus  to  sepa- 
rate the  useless  from  the  healthy."  "  The  exposition  of  chil- 
dren " — to  quote  once  more  from  Gibbon — "  was  the  prevailing 
and  stubborn  vice  of  antiquity:  it  was  sometimes  prescribed, 

banishment,  and  suffered  a  third  for  his  sake  after  his  execution  (93).  See 
Pliny,  Epist.  III.  16;  Tacitus,  Ann.  XVI.  30-34;  Friedlaender,  I.  459  sqq. 
Nor  should  we  overlook  the  monumental  evidences  of  conjugal  devotion  and 
happiness  in  numerous  Eoman  epitaphs.  See  Friedlaender,  I.  463.  Yet 
sexual  immorality  reached  perhaps  its  lowest  depths  in  imperial  Rome,  far 
lower  than  in  the  worst  periods  of  the  dark  ages,  or  in  England  under  Charles 
II.,  or  in  France  under  Louis  XIV.  and  XV.  And  it  is  also  certain,  as  Lecky 
says  (EL  326),  "that  frightful  excesses  of  unnatural  passion,  of  which  the 
most  corrupt  of  modern  courts  present  no  parallel,  were  perpetrated  with  but 
little  concealment  on  the  Palatine."  Prenuptial  unchastity  of  men  was  all 
but  universal  among  the  Romans,  according  to  Cicero's  testimony.  Even 
Epictetus,  the  severest  among  the  Stoic  moralists,  enjoins  only  moderation, 
not  entire  abstinence,  from  this  form  of  vice.  Lampridius  relates  of  Alex- 
ander Severus,  who  otherwise  legislated  against  vice,  that  he  provided  his 
unmarried  provincial  governors  with  a  concubine  as  a  part  of  their  outfit, 
because  "they  coald  not  exist  without  one"  (quod  sine  con<m&wm  esse  nw 
poxcnt)." 


g  99.  THE  CHRISTIAN  FAMILY.  361 

often  permitted,  almost  always  practised  with  impunity  by  the 
nations  who  never  entertained  the  Eoman  ideas  of  paternal 
power;  and  the  dramatic  poets,  who  appeal  to  the  human  heart, 
represent  with  indifference  a  popular  custom  which  was  palliated 
by  the  motives  of  economy  and  compassion.  .  .  .  The  Eoman 
Empire  was  stained  with  the  blood  of  infants,  till  such  murders 
were  included,  by  Valentinian  and  his  colleagues,  in  the  letter 
and  spirit  of  the  Cornelian  law.  The  lessons  of  jurisprudence 
and  Christianity  had  been  insufficient  to  eradicate  this  inhuman 
practice,  till  their  gentle  influence  was  fortified  by  the  terrors  of 
capital  punishment/' l 

§  99.  The  Christian  Family. 

Such  was  the  condition  of  the  domestic  life  of  the  ancient 
world,  when  Christianity,  with  its  doctrine  of  the  sanctity  of 
marriage,  with  its  injunction  of  chastity,  and  with  its  elevation 
of  woman  from  her  half-slavish  condition  to  moral  dignity  and 
'equality  with  man,  began  the  work  of  a  silent  transformation, 
which  secured  incalculable  blessings  to  generations  yet  unborn. 
It  laid  the  foundation  for  a  well-ordered  family  life.  It  turned 
the  eye  from  the  outward  world  to  the  inward  sphere  of  affec- 
tion, from  the  all-absorbing  business  of  politics  and  state-life 
into  the  sanctuary  of  home;  and  encouraged  the  nurture  of  those 
virtues  of  private  life,  without  which  no  true  public  virtue  can 
exist.  But,  as  the  evil  here  to  be  abated,  particularly  the  degra- 
dation of  the  female  sex  and  the  want  of  chastity,  was  so  deeply 
rooted  and  thoroughly  interwoven  in  the  whole  life  of  the  old 
world,  this  ennobling  of  the  family,  like  the  abolition  of  slavery, 
was  necessarily  a  very  slow  process.  "We  cannot  wonder, 
therefore,  at  the  high  estimate  of  celibacy,  which  in  the  eyes  of 
many  seemed  to  be  the  only  radical  escape  from  the  impurity 
and  misery  of  married  life  as  it  generally  stood  among  the  hea- 
then. But,  although  the  fathers  are  much  more  frequent  and 
enthusiastic  in  the  praise  of  virginity  than  in  tbat  of  marriage, 

1  Ch.  XLIV.    See  a  good  chapter  on  the  exposure  of  children  in  Brace, 
Gesta  Chmti,  p.  72-83. 


362  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

yet  their  views  on  this  subject  show  an  immense  advance  upon 
the  moral  standard  of  the  greatest  sages  and  legislators  of  Greece 
and  Borne. 

CHASTITY  hefore  marriage,  in  wedlock,  and  in  celibacy,  in 
man  as  well  as  in  woman,  so  rare  in  paganism,  was  raised  to  the 
dignity  of  a  cardinal  virtue  and  made  the  corner-stone  of  the 
family.  Many  a  female  martyr  preferred  cruel  torture  and 
death  to  the  loss  of  honor.  When  St.  Perpetua  fell  half  dead 
from  the  horns  of  a  wild  bull  in  the  arena,  she  instinctively 
drew  together  her  dress,  which  had  been  torn  in  the  assault. 
The  acts  of  martyrs  and  saints  tell  marvellous  stories,  exagge- 
rated no  doubt,  yet  expressive  of  the  ruling  Christian  sentiment, 
about  heroic  resistance  to  carnal  temptation,  the  sudden  punish- 
ment of  unjust  charges  of  impurity  by  demoniacal  possession  or 
instant  death,  the  rescue  of  courtesans  from  a  life  of  shame  and 
their  radical  conversion  and  elevation  even  to  canonical  sanctity.1 
The  ancient  councils  deal  much  with  carnal  sins  so  fearfully 
prevalent,  and  unanimously  condemn  them  in  every  shape  and 
form.  It  is  true,  chastity  in  the  early  church  and  by  the  unani- 
mous consent  of  the  fathers  was  almost  identified  with  celibacy, 
as  we  shall  see  hereafter ;  but  this  excess  should  not  blind  us  to 
the  immense  advance  of  patristic  over  heathen  morals. 

WOMAN  was  emancipated,  in  the  best  sense  of  the  term,  from 
the  bondage  of  social  oppression,  and  made  the  life  and  light  of 
a  Christian  home.  Such  pure  and  hert>ic  virgins  as  the  mar- 
tyred Blandina,  and  Perpetua,  and  such  devoted  mothers  as 
Nonna,  Anthusa,  and  Monica,  we  seek  in  vain  among  the  ancient 
Greek  and  Eoman  maidens  and  matrons,  and  we  need  not  won- 
der that  the  heathen  Libanius,  judging  from  such  examples  as 

1  Among  the  converted  courtesans  of  the  ancient  church  in  the  Roman 
calendar  are  St.  Mary  Magdalene,  St.  Mary  of  Egypt,  St.  Afra,  St.  Pelagia, 
St.  Thais,  and  St.  Theodota.  See  Charles  de  Bussy,  Les  Courtisanes  saintes. 
St.  Vitalius,  it  is  said,  visited  dens  of  vice  every  night,  gave  money  to  the  in- 
mates to  keep  them  from  sin,  and  offered  up  prayers  for  their  conversion.  A 
curious  story  is  told  of  St.  Serapion,  who  went  to  such  a  place  by  appoint 
ment,  and  prayed  and  prayed  and  prayed  till  the  unfortunate  courtesar  was 
converted  and  fell  half  dead  at  his  feet.  See  Lecky,  II.  338. 


2  99.  THE  CHRISTIAN  FAMILY.  363 

the  mother  of  his  pupil  Chrysostom,  reluctantly  exclaimed: 
"  What  women  have  these  Christians  I"  The  schoolmen  of  the 
middle  ages  derived  from  the  formation  of  woman  an  ingenious 
argument  for  her  proper  position :  Eve  was  not  taken  from  the 
feet  of  Adam  to  be  his  slave,  nor  from  his  head  to  be  his  ruler, 
but  from  his  side  to  be  his  beloved  partner.1 

At  the  same  time  here  also  we  must  admit  that  the  ancient 
church  was  yet  far  behind  the  ideal  set  up  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  counterbalanced  the  elevation  of  woman  by  an  extra- 
vagant over-estimate  of  celibacy.  It  was  the  virgin  far  more 
than  the  faithful  wife  and  mother  of  children  that  was  praised 
and  glorified  by  the  fathers ;  and  among  the  canonized  saints  of 
the  Catholic  calendar  there  is  little  or  no  room  for  husbands  and 
wives,  although  the  patriarchs,  Moses,  and  some  of  the  greatest 
prophets  (Isaiah,  Ezekiel),  and  apostles  (Peter  taking  the  lead) 
lived  in  honorable  wedlock. 

MAEBIAGE  was  regarded  in  the  church  from  the  beginning 
as  a  sacred  union  of  body  and  soul  for  the  propagation  of  civil 
society,  and  the  kingdom  of  God,  for  the  exercise  of  virtue  and 
the  promotion  of  happiness.  It  was  clothed  with  a  sacramental 
or  semi-sacramental  character  on  the  basis  of  Paul's  comparison 
of  the  marriage  union  with  the  relation  of  Christ  to  his  church.2 

1  This  beautiful  idea  (often  attributed  to  Matthew  Henry,  the  commentator) 
was  first  suggjsted  by  Augustin.  De  Genesi  ad  Literam,  1.  IX.  c.  13  ^in  Migne's 
ed.  of  Opera,  III.  col.  402),  and  fully  stated  by  Peter  the  Lombard,  Sentent.  1. 
II.  Dist.  XVIII.  (deformatione  mulieris) :  "  Mulier  de  viro,  non  de  qualibet  parte 
corporis  viri,  sed  de  latere  eius  formata  est,  ut  ostenderetur  quia  in  consortium 
creabatur  dilectionis,  ne  forte  si  faisset  de  eapite  facia,  viro  ad  dominationem  vide- 
retur  prefcrenda;   aut  si  de  pedibus,  ad  servitutem  svbjicienda.     Qnia  igitur 
viro  nee  domina,  nee  ancitta  parabatur,  sed  socia,  nee  capite,  nee  de  pedibus,  sed  de 
latere  fuwjLt  producenda,  utjuxta  se  ponendam  cognosceret  quam  de  suo  latere  sump- 
tarn  didicisset."     And  again  by  Thomas  Aquinas  Summa   Theol  Pars.   1. 
Quacst.  XCIT,  Art.  III.  (in  Migne's  ed.  I.  col.  1231). 

2  Eph.  5 :  28-32.    The  Vulgate  translates  rb  fivar^ptov  in  ver.  32  by  sacra- 
mentomij  an<i  thus  furnished  a  quasi-exegetical  foundation  to  the  Catholic  doc- 
trine of  the  sacrament  of  marriage.    The  passage  is  so  used  by  the  Council  of 
Trent  and  in  the  Roman  Catechism.    Ellicott  (in  he.}  judges  that  "  the  words 
cannot  possibly  be  urged  in  favor  of  the  sacramental  nature  of  marriage,  but 
that  the  very  fact  of  the  comparison  does  place  marriage  on  a  far  holier  and 
higher  basis  than  modern  theories  are  disposed  to  admit."    Bengel  refers  "the 


364  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

It  was  in  its  nature  indissoluble  except  in  case  of  adultery,  and 
this  crime  was  charged  not  only  to  the  woman,  but  to  the  man 
as  even  the  more  guilty  party,  and  to  every  extra-connubial  car- 
nal connection.  Thus  the  wife  was  equally  protected  against 
the  wrongs  of  the  husband,  and  chastity  was  made  the  general 
law  of  the  family  life. 

"We  have  a  few  descriptions  of  Christian  homes  from  the 
ante-Mcene  age,  one  from  an  eminent  Greek  father,  another 
from  a  married  presbyter  of  the  Latin  church. 

Clement  of  Alexandria  enjoins  upon  Christian  married  per- 
sons united  prayer  and  reading  of  the  Scriptures,1  as  a  daily 
morning  exercise,  and  very  beautifully  says :  "  The  mother  is 
the  glory  of  her  children,  the  wife  is  the  glory  of  her  husband, 
both  are  the  glory  of  the  wife,  God  is  the  glory  of  all  together." ' 

Tertullian,  at  the  close  of  the  book  which  he  wrote  to  his  wife, 
draws  the  following  graphic  picture,  which,  though  somewhat 
idealized,  could  be  produced  only  from  the  moral  spirit  of  the 
gospel  and  actual  experience  :3  "How  can  I  paint  the  happiness 
of  a  marriage  which  the  church  ratifies,  the  oblation  (the  cele- 
bration of  the  communion)  confirms,  the  benediction  seals,  angels 
announce,  the  Father  declares  valid.  Even  upon  earth,  indeed, 
sons  do  not  legitimately  marry  without  the  consent  of  their 
fathers.  What  a  union  of  two  believers — one  hope,  one  vow, 
one  discipline,  and  one  worship !  They  are  brother  and  sister, 
two  fellow-servants,  one  spirit  and  one  flesh.  Where  there  is 
one  flesh,  there  is  also  one  spirit.  They  pray  together,  fast  to- 
gether, instruct,  exhort,  and  support  each  other.  They  go 
together  to  the  church  of  God,  and  to  the  table  of  the  Lord. 
They  share  each  other's  tribulation,  persecution,  and  revival. 
Neither  conceals  anything  from  the  other ;  neither  avoids,  nei- 
ther annoys  the  other.  They  delight  to  visit  the  sick,  supply 

mystery"  not  to  marriage,  but  to  the  union  of  Christ  with  the  church  ("non 
matrimonium  humanum  sed  ipsa  conjunct™  Christi  et  ecclesice").  Meyer  refers  it 
to  the  preceding  quotation  from  Genesis ;  Estius  and  Ellicott  to  the  intimate 
conjugal  relationship. 

l  avdyvuw         2  P<B<%.  Ill  250.         8  Ad  Uxor&m,  1.  II.  c.  8. 


|99.  THE  CHKISTTAN  FAMILY.  365 

the  needy,  give  alms  without  constraint,  and  in  daily  zeal  lay 
their  offerings  before  the  altar  without  scruple  or  hindrance. 
They  do  not  need  to  keep  the  sign  of  the  cross  hidden,  nor  to 
express  slyly  their  Christian  joy,  nor  to  suppress  the  blessing. 
Psalms  and  hymns  they  sing  together,  and  they  vie  with  each 
other  in  singing  to  God.  Christ  rejoices  when  he  sees  and  hears 
this.  He  gives  them  his  peace.  Where  two  are  together  in  his 
name,  there  is  he ;  and  where  he  is,  there  the  evil  one  cannot 
come." 

A  large  sarcophagus  represents  a  scene  of  family  worship :  on 
the  right,  four  men,  with  rolls  in  their  hands,  reading  or  sing- 
ing ;  on  the  left,  three  women  and  a  girl  playing  a  lyre. 

For  the  conclusion  of  a  marriage,  Ignatius1  required  "the 
consent  of  the  bishop,  that  it  might  be  a  marriage  for  God,  and 
not  for  pleasure.  All  should  be  done  to  the  glory  of  God."  In 
Tertullian's  time,2  as  may  be  inferred  from  the  passage  just 
quoted,  the  solemnization  of  marriage  was  already  at  least  a  re- 
ligious act,  though  not  a  proper  sacrament,  and  was  sealed  by 
the  celebration  of  the  holy  communion  in  presence  of  the  con- 
gregation. The  Montanists  were  disposed  even  to  make  this 
benediction  of  the  church  necessary  to  the  validity  of  marriage 
among  Christians.  All  noisy  and  wanton  Jewish  and  heathen 
nuptial  ceremonies,  and  at  first  also  the  crowning  of  the  bride, 
were  discarded ;  but  the  nuptial  ring,  as  a  symbol  of  union,  was 
retained. 

In  the  catacombs  the  marriage  ceremony  is  frequently  repre- 
sented by  the  man  and  the  woman  standing  side  by  side  and 
joining  hands  in  token  of  close  union,  as  also  on  heathen  docu- 
ments. On  a  gilded  glass  of  the  fourth  century,  the  couple 
join  hands  over  a  small  nuptial  altar,  and  around  the  figures  are 
inscribed  the  words  (of  the  priest) :  "May  ye  live  in  God."3 

1  Ad  Polye.  c.  5.    In  the  Syr.  version,  c.  2. 

*  Tert.  Ad  Uxor.  II.  8 ;  comp.  De  Mowg.  c.  11 ;  De  Pudic.  c.  4. 

s  Vivatis  in  Deo-  See  the  picture  in  Northcote  and  Brownlow,  II.  303.  In 
other  and  later  pictures  the  ceremony  is  presided  over  by  Christ,  who  either 
crowns  the  married  couple,  or  is  represented  bj  his  monogram.  Ibid.  p.  302. 


366  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

MIXED  MARRIAGES  with  heathens,  and  also  with  heretics, 
were  unanimously  condemned  by  the  voice  of  the  church  in 
agreement  with  the  Mosaic  legislation,  unless  formed  before 
conversion,  in  which  case  they  were  considered  valid.1  Tertul- 
lian  even  classes  such  marriages  with  adultery.  What  heathen, 
asks  he,  will  let  his  wife  attend  the  nightly  meetings  of  the 
church,  and  the  slandered  supper  of  the  Lord,  take  care  of  the 
sick  even  in  the  poorest  hovels,  kiss  the  chains  of  the  martyrs 
in  prison,  rise  in  the  night  for  prayer,  and  show  hospitality  to 
strange  brethren  ?  Cyprian  calls  marriage  with  an  unbeliever 
a  prostitution  of  the  members  of  Christ.  The  Council  of  Elvira 
in  Spain  (306)  forbade  such  mixed  marriages  on  pain  of  excom- 
munication, but  did  not  dissolve  those  already  existing.  We 
shall  understand  this  strictness,  if,  to  say  nothing  of  the  heathen 
marriage  rites,  and  the  wretchedly  loose  notions  on  chastity  and 
conjugal  fidelity,  we  consider  the  condition  of  those  times,  and 
the  offences  and  temptations  which  met  the  Christian  in  the 
constant  sight  of  images  of  the  household  ^gods,  mythological 
pictures  on  the  walls,  the  floor,  and  the  furniture ;  in  the  liba- 
tions at  table ;  in  short,  at  every  step  and  turn  in  a  pagan  house. 

SECOND  MARRIAGE. — From  the  high  view  of  marriage,  and 
also  from  an  ascetic  over-estimate  of  celibacy,  arose  a  very  pre- 
valent aversion  to  re-marriage,  particularly  of  widows.  The 
Shepherd' of  Hennas  allows  this  reunion  indeed,  but  with  the 
reservation,  that  continuance  in  single  life  earns  great  honor 
with  the  Lord.  Athenagoras  goes  so  far  as  to  call  the  second 
marriage  a  "decent  adultery."2 

The  Montanists  and  Novatians  condemned  re-marriage,  and 
made  it  a  subject  of  discipline. 

1  According  to  1  Cor.  7 :  12,  16. 

2  Legat.  33 :   '0  devTepog  y&po$  evwpeirifc  kori  jBo^fte.    According  to  Origen, 
digamists  may  be  saved,  but  will  not  be  crowned  by  Christ  (Horn.  XVII.  in 
IMC.).    Theophilus,  Ad  Autol.  III.  15,  nays  that  with  the  Christians  eyKpfceta 
doKtlTcu,  ftovo-yafjia  TTipelrcu.    Perhaps  even  Irenseus  held  a  similar  view,  to 
judge  from  the  manner  in  which  he  speaks  of  the  woman  of  Samaria  (John 
4 :  7),  "  quos  in  uno  viro  non  mansit,  sed  fornieata  est  in  mvltis  muptiis."    Adu 
Boer.  III.  17,  ?  2. 


g  99.  THE  CHRISTIAN  FAMILY.  367 

Tertullian  came  forward  with  the  greatest  decision,  as  advo- 
cate of  monogamy  against  both  successive  and  simultaneous 
polygamy.1  He  thought  thus  to  occupy  the  true  middle  ground 
between  the  ascetic  Gnostics,  who  rejected  marriage  altogether, 
and  the  Catholics,  who  allowed  more  than  one.2  In  the  earlier 
period  of  his  life,  when  he  drew  the  above  picture  of  Christian 
marriage,  before  his  adoption  of  Montanism,  he  already  placed 
a  high  estimate  on  celibacy  as  a  superior  grade  of  Christian  ho- 
liness, appealing  to  1  Cor.  7 :  9,  and  advised  at  least  his  wife,  in 
case  of  his  death,  not  to  marry  again,  especially  with  a  heathen  ; 
but  in  his  Montanistic  writings,  "  De  Exhortations  Castitatis" 
and  "  De  Monogamia"  he  repudiates  second  marriage  from 
principle,  and  with  fanatical  zeal  contends  against  it  as  unchris- 
tian, as  an  act  of  polygamy,  nay  of  "stuprum"  and  " '  adulterium" 
He  opposes  it  with"  all  sorts  of  acute  argument;  now,  on  the 
ground  of  an  ideal  conception  of  marriage  as  a  spiritual  union 
of  two  souls  for  time  and  eternity;  now,  from  an  opposite  sen- 
suous view;  and  again,  on  principles  equally  good  against  all 
marriage  and  in  favor  of  celibacy.  Thus,  on  the  one  hand,  he 
argues,  that  the  second  marriage  impairs  the  spiritual  fellowship 
with  the  former  partner,  which  should  continue  beyond  the 
grave,  which  should  show  itself  in  daily  intercessions  and  in 
yearly  celebration  of  the  day  of  death,  and  which  hopes  even 
for  outward  re-union  after  the  resurrection.3  On  the  other  hand, 
however,  he  places  the  essence  of  marriage  in  the  communion  of 
flesh,4  and  regards  it  as  a  mere  concession,  which  God  makes  to 

1  Comp.  Hauber :  Tertuttian's  Rampf  gegen  die  zweite  Ehe,  in  the  "  Studien 
und  Kritiken"  for  1845,  p.  607  sqq. 

2  De  Monog.  1 :  "Hoeretid  nuptias  auferunt,  psychici  ingerunt;  itti  nee  semel, 


8  De  Exhort  Cast.  e.  11 :  '*  Duplex  rubor  est,  guia  in  secundo  mafyimonw  duce 
mores  eundem  circumstant  maritumt  una  spiritu,  alia  in  carne.  Neque  enim  pristi- 
nam,  poteris  odisse,  cui  etia/m  religiosiorem  reservas  affectionem  ut  jam  receptce  apud 
Dominum,  pro  cujus  spiritu  postulas,  pro  qua  oblationes  annuas  reddis.  Sfabis 
ergo  ad  Dominum  cum  tot  uxoribus  guot  in  oratione  commemoras,  et  offeres  pro 
tuttbus"  etc. 

'    4  De  Exhort  Oast.  c.  9 :  '*  Leges  videntur  matrimonii  et  stupri  differentiamfacere, 
per  diverwtatem  illiciti,  wn  per  conditionem  rei  ipsius ....   Nuptws  ipscs  ex  69 


368  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

our  sensuality,  and  which  man  therefore  should  not  abuse  by 
repetition.  The  ideal  of  the  Christian  life,  with  him,  not  only 
for  the  clergy,  but  the  laity  also,  is  celibacy.  He  lacks  clear 
perception  of  the  harmony  of  the  moral  and  physical  elements 
which  constitutes  the  essence  of  marriage]  and  strongly  as  he 
elsewhere  combats  the  Gnostic  dualism,  he  here  falls  in  with  it 
in  his  depreciation  of  matter  and  corporeity,  as  necessarily  in- 
compatible with  spirit.  His  treatment  of  the  exegetical  argu- 
ments of  the  defenders  of  second  marriage  is  remarkable.  The 
levirate  law,  he  says,  is  peculiar  to  the  Old  Testament  economy. 
To  Bom.  7 :  2  he  replies,  that  Paul  speaks  here  from  the  posi- 
tion of  the  Mosaic  law,  which,  according  to  the  same  passage,  is 
no  longer  binding  on  Christians.  In  1  Cor.  ch.  7,  the  apostle 
allows  second  marriage  only  in  his  subjective,  human  judgment, 
and  from  regard  to  our  sensuous  infirmity;  but  in  the  same 
chapter  (ver.  40)  he  recommends  celibacy  to  all,  and  that  on  the 
authority  of  the  Lord,  adding  here,  that  he  also  has  the  Holy 
Spirit,  i.  e.  the  principle,  which  is  active  in  the  new  prophets  of 
Montanism.  The  appeal  to  1  Tim.  3:2;  Tit.  1 :  6,  from  which 
the  right  of  laymen  to  second  marriage  was  inferred,  as  the  pro- 
hibition of  it  there  related  only  to  the  clergy,  he  met  with  the 
doctrine  of  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers,  which  admitted 
them  all  both  to  the  privileges  and  to  the  obligations  of  priests. 
But  his  reasoning  always  amounts  in  the  end  to  this :  that  the 
state  of  original  virgin  purity,  which  has  nothing  at  all  to  do 
with  the  sensual,  is  the  best.  The  true  chastity  consists,  there- 
fore, not  in  the  chaste  spirit  of  married  partners,  but  in  the  entire 
continence  of  "virgines"  and  " spadones"  The  desire  of  pos- 
terity, he,  contrary  to  the  Old  Testament,  considers  unworthy 
of  a  Christian,  who,  in  fact,  ought  to  break  away  entirely  from 
the  world,  and  renounce  all  inheritance  in  it.  Such  a  morality, 
forbidding  the  same  that  it  allows,  and  rigorously  setting  as  an 
ideal  what  it  must  in  reality  abate  at  least  for  the  mass  of  man- 
kind, may  be  very  far  above  the  heathen  level,  but  is  still  plainly 
foreign  to  the  deeper  substance  and  the  world-sanctifying  prin- 
ciple of  Christianity. " 


2  99.  THE  CHRISTIAN  FAMILY.  369 

The  Catholic  church,  indeed,  kept  aloof  from  this  Montanistic 
extravagance,  and  forbade  second  marriage  only  to  the  clergy 
(which  the  Greek  church  does  to  this  day) ;  yet  she  rather  ad- 
vised against  it,  and  leaned  very  decidedly  towards  a  preference 
for  celibacy,  as  a  higher  grade  of  Christian  morality.1 

As  to  the  relation  of  PARENTS  and  CHILDREN,  Christianity 
exerted  from  the  beginning  a  most  salutary  influence.  It  re- 
strained the  tyrannical  power  of  the  father.  It  taught  the  eter- 
nal value  of  children  as  heirs  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and 
commenced  the  great  work  of  education  on  a  religious  and  moral 
basis.  It  resisted  with  all  energy  the  exposition  of  children, 
who  were  then  generally  devoured  by  dogs  and  wild  beasts,  or, 
if  found,  trained  up  for  slavery  or  doomed  to  a  life  of  infamy. 
Several  apologists,  the  author  to  the  Epistle  of  Diognetus,  Jus- 
tin Martyr,2  Minutius  Felix,  Tertullian,  and  Arnobius  speak 
with  just  indignation  against  this  unnatural  custom.  Athena- 
goras  declares  abortion  and  exposure  to  be  equal  to'  murder.3 
No  heathen  philosopher  had  advanced  so  far.  Lactaatius  also 
puts  exposure  on  a  par  with  murder  even  of  the  worst  kind, 
and  admits  no  excuse  on  the  ground  of  pity  or  poverty,  since 
God  provides  for  all  his  creatures.*  The  Christian  spirit  of 

1  " Nbn  prohibemus  secundas  nuptias"  says  Ambrose,  '* sed  non  sitademus." 
None  of  the  fathers  recommends  re-marriage  or  even  approves  of  it.    Jerome 
represented  the  prevailing  view  of  the  Nieene  age.    He  took  the  lowest  view 
of  marriage  as  a  mere  safeguard  against  fornication  and  adultery,  and  could 
conceive  of  no  other  motive  for  second  or  third  marriage  but  animal  passion. 
"  The  first  Adam,"  he  says,  "  had  one  wife ;  the  second  Adam  had  no  wife. 
Those  who  approve  of  digamy  hold  forth  a  third  Adam,  who  was  twice  mar- 
ried, whom  they  follow"  (Contra  Jwin.  1).    Gregory  of  Nazianzum  infers 
from  the  analogy  of  marriage  to  the  union  of  Christ  with  his  church  that 
second  marriage  is  to  be  reproved,  as  there  is  but  one  Christ  and  one  church 
(Orat.  XXXI). 

2  Apol.  I.  27  and  29.    3  Apol.  c.  35. 

*  Inst.  Div.  vi.  20  (p.  48  ed.  Lips.) :  "Let  no  one  imagine  that  even  this  is 
allowed,  to  strangle  newly-born  children,  which  is  the  greatest  impiety ;  for 
God  breathes  into  their  souls  for  life,  and  not  for  death.  But  men  (that  there 
may  be  no  crime  with  which  they  may  not  pollute  their  hands)  deprive  souls 
as  yet  innocent  and  simple  of  the  light  which  they  themselves  have  not  given. 
Can  they  be  considered  innocent  who  expose  their  own  offspring  &»  a  prey  to 
dogs,  and  as  far  as  it  depends  upon  themselves,  kill  them  in  a  more  cruel 
Vol,  II.— 24 


370  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

humanity  gradually  so  penetrated  the  spirit  of  the  age  that 
the  better  emperors,  from  the  time  of  Trajan,  began  to  direct 
their  attention  to  the  diminution  of  these  crying  evils ;  but  the 
best  legal  enactments  would  never  have  been  able  to  eradicate 
them  without  the  spiritual  influence  of  the  church.  The  insti-, 
tutions  and  donations  of  Trajan,  Antonius  Pius,  Septimius  Se- 
verus,  and  private  persons,  for  the  education  of  poor  children, 
boys  and  girls,  were  approaches  of  the  nobler  heathen  towards 
the  genius  of  Christianity.  Constantine  proclaimed  a  law  in  315 
throughout  Italy  "to  turn  parents  from  using  a  parricidal  hand 
on  their  new-born  children,  and  to  dispose  their  hearts  to  the 
best  sentiments."  The  Christian  fathers,  councils,  emperors,  and 
lawgivers  united  their  efforts  to  uproot  this  monstrous  evil  and 
to  banish  it  from  the  civilized  world.1 

§  100,  Brotherly  Love,  and  Love  for  Enemies. 

SCHATJBACH  :  Das  Verhaltniss  der  Moral  des  classischen  Alt&rthums  zur 
christlichen,  beleuchtet  duroh  v&rgleichende  Erorterung  der  Lehre  von 
der  Feindestiebe,  in  the  "Studien  und  Kritiken"  for  1851,  p.  59-121. 

Also  the  works  of  SCHMIDT,  CHASTEL,  UBXHOEN,  etc.,  quoted  at  \  88. 

IT  is  generally  admitted,  that  selfishness  was  the  soul  of  hea- 
then morality.  The  great  men  of  antiquity  rose  above  its  sor- 
did forms,  love  of  gain  and  love  of  pleasure,  but  were  the  more 

manner  than  if  they  had  strangled  them  ?  Who  can  douht  that  he  is  impious 
who  gives  occasion  for  the  pity  of  others?  For,  although  that  which  he  has 
wished  should  befall  the  child— namely,  that  it  should  be  brought  up — he  has 
certainly  consigned  his  own  offspring  either  to  servitude  or  to  the  brothel? 
But  who  does  not  understand,  who  is  ignorant  what  things  may  happen,  or  are 
accustomed  to  happen,  in  the  case  of  each  sex,  even  through  error  ?  For  this 
is  shown  by  the  example  of  GEdipus  alone,  confused  with  twofold  guilt.  It  is 
therefore  as  wicked  to  expose  as  it  is  to  kill.  But  truly  parricides  complain 
of  the  scantiness  of  their  means,  and  allege  that  they  have  not  enough  for 
bringing  up  more  children;  as  though,  in  truth,  their  means  were  in  the 
power  of  those  who  possess  them,  or  God  did  not  daily  make  the  rich  poor, 
and  the  poor  rich.  Wherefore,  if  any  one  on  account  of  poverty  shall  be 
unable  to  bring  up  children,  it  is  better  to  abstain  from  marriage  than  with 
wicked  hands  to  mar  the  work  of  God." 

1  For  further  details  see  Brace,  1.  c.  79  sqq.,  and  Terme  et  Monfalcon,  J3wt 
des  enfants  trowoes.    Paris,  184.0. 


§  100.  BROTHERLY  LOVE,  A.ND  LOVE  FOR  ENEMIES.  371 

under  the  power  of  ambition  and  love  of  fame.  It  was  for  fame 
that  Miltiades  and  Themistocles  fought  against  the  Persians; 
that  Alexander  set  out  on  his  tour  of  conquest ;  that  Herodotus 
wrote  his  history,  that  Pindar  sang  his  odes,  that  Sophocles 
composed  his  tragedies,  that  Demosthenes  delivered  his  orations, 
that  Phidias  sculptured  his  Zeus.  Fame  was  set  forth  in  the 
Olympian  games  as  the  highest  object  of  life ;  fame  was  held  up 
by  jEschylus  as  the  last  comfort  of  the  suffering ;  fame  was  de- 
clared by  Cicero,  before  a  large  assembly,  the  ruling  passion  of 
the  very  best  of  men.1  Even  the  much-lauded  patriotism  of  the 
heroes  of  ancient  Greece  and  Rome  was  only  an  enlarged  ego- 
tism. In  the  catalogue  of  classical  virtues  we  look  in  vain  for 
the  two  fundamental  and  cardinal  virtues,  love  and  humility. 
The  very  word  which  corresponds  in  Greek  to  humility2  signi- 
fies generally,  in  classical  jisage,  a  mean,  abject  mind.  The  no- 
blest and  purest  form  of  love  known  to  the  heathen  moralist  is 
friendship,  which  Cicero  praises  as  the  highest  good  next  to 
wisdom.  But  friendship  itself  rested,  as  was  freely  admitted, 
on  a  utilitarian,  that  is,  on  an  egotistic  basis,  and  was  only  pos- 
sible among  persons  of  equal  or  similar  rank  in  society.  For 
the  stranger,  the  barbarian,  and  the  enemy,  the  Greek  and  Ro- 
man knew  no  love,  but  only  contempt  and  hatred.  The  jus 
talionis,  the  return  of  evil  for  evil,  was  universally  acknowledged 
throughout  the  heathen  world  as  a  just  principle  and  maxim,  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  plainest  injunctions  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment.3 "We  must  offend  those  who  offend  us,  says  JEschylus.4 
Not  to  take  revenge  was  regarded  as  a  sign  of  weakness  and 
cowardice.  To  return  evil  for  good  is  devilish ;  to  return  good 
for  good  is  human  and  common  to  all  religions ;  to  return  good 

1  Pro  Archia  poeta,  c.  11 :   "  Frahimur  omnes  laudis  studio,  et  optimus  quisque 
maxime  gloria  dueitur" 

2  TaTTEtvde,  TaTreivdQpuv,  raTmvdrtff,  TOKeivofypoobvi). 

3  Matt,  5 :  23,  24,  44 ;  6 :  12 ;  18 :  21.    Rom.  12 :  17, 19,  20.    1  Cor.  13 :  7. 
IThess.  5:  15.    lPet.3:  9. 

4  Prom.  Vinct.  y.  1005,  comp.  1040.    Many  passages  of  similar  import  from 
Homer,  Hesiod,  Sophocles,  Euripides,  etc.,  see  quoted  on  p.  81  sqq..  of  the 
Article  of  Schaubach  referred  to  above, 


372  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

for  evil  is  Christlike  and  divine,  and  only  possible  in  the  Chris* 
tian  religion. 

On  the  other  hand,  however,  we  should  suppose  that  every 
Christian  virtue  must  find  some  basis  in  the  noblest  moral  in- 
stincts and  aspirations  of  nature;  since  Christianity  is  not  against 
nature,  but  simply  above  it  and  intended  for  it.  Thus  we  may 
regard  the  liberality,  benevolence,  humanity  and  magnanimity 
which  we  meet  with  in  heathen  antiquity,  as  an  approximation 
to,  and  preparation  for,  the  Christian  virtue  of  charity.  The 
better  schools  of  moralists  rose  more  or  less  above  the  popular 
approval  of  hatred  of  the  enemy,  wrath  and  revenge.  Aristotle 
and  the  Peripatetics,  without  condemning  this  passion  as  wrong 
in  itself,  enjoined  at  least  moderation  in  its  exercise.  The  Stoics 
went  further,  and  required  complete  apathy  or  suppression  of  all 
strong  and  passionate  affections.  Cicero  even  declares  placability 
and  clemency  one  of  the  noblest  traits  in  the  character  of  a  great 
man,1  and  praises  Csesar  for  forgetting  nothing  •  except  injuries. 
Seneca,  Epictetus,  Plutarch,  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  who  were 
already  indirectly  and  unconsciously  under  the  influence  of  the 
atmosphere  of  Christian  morality,  decidedly  condemn  anger  and 
vindictiveness,  and  recommend  kindness  to  slaves,  and  a  gene- 
rous treatment  even  of  enemies. 

But  this  sort  of  love  for  an  enemy,  it  should  be  remembered, 
in  the  first  place,  does  not  flow  naturally  from  the  spirit  of  hea- 
thenism, but  is,  as  it  were,  an  accident  and  exception ;  secondly, 
it  is  not  enjoined  as  a  general  duty,  but  expected  only  from  the 
great  and  the  wise;  thirdly,  it  does  not  rise  above  the  conception 
of  magnanimity,  which,  more  closely  considered,  is  itself  con- 
nected with  a  refined  form  of  egotism,  and  with  a  noble  pride 
that  regards  it  below  the  dignity  of  a  gentleman  to  notice  the 
malice  of  inferior  men;3  fourthly,  it  is  commended  only  in  its 

1  De  Offic.  I.  25 :  *'  Nildl  enim  laudabttius,  nihil  magno  et  prcedaro  viro  dignius 
placabttitate  et  dementia" 

*Comp.  Seneca,  De  ira  IT.  32:  "Magni  animi  est  injurias  despicere.  Ille 
magnus  et  twbilis  est,  qui  more  magnoe  feres  lattratus  miwtorwm  canum  secwn/a 


§100,  BROTHERLY  LOVE,  AND  LOVE  FOR  ENEMIES.  373 

negative  aspect  as  refraining  from  the  right  of  retaliation,  not  as 
active  benevolence  and  charity  to  the  enemy,  which  returns  good 
for  evil;  and  finally,  it  is  nowhere  derived  from  a  religious 
principle,  the  love  of  God  to  man,  and  therefore  has  no  proper 
root,  and  lacks  the  animating  soul. 

No  wonder,  then,  that  in  spite  of  the  finest  maxims  of  a  few 
philosophers,  the  imperial  age  was  controlled  by  the  coldest  sel- 
fishness, so  that,  according  to  the  testimony  of  Plutarch,  friend- 
ship had  died  out  even  in  families,  and  the  love  of  brothers  and 
sisters  was  supposed  to  be  possible  only  in  a  heroic  age  long 
passed  by.  The  old  Roman  world  was  a  world  without  charity. 
Julian  the  Apostate,  who  was  educated  a  Christian,  tried  to 
engraft  charity  upon  heathenism,  but  in  vain.  The  idea  of  the 
infinite  value  of  each  human  soul,  even  the  poorest  and  hum- 
blest, was  wanting,  and  with  it  the  basis  for  true  charity. 

It  was  in  such  an  age  of  universal  egotism  that  Christianity 
first  revealed  the  true  spirit  of  love  to  man  as  flowing  from  the 
love  of  God,  and  exhibited  it  in  actual  life.  This  cardinal  vir- 
tue we  meet  first  within  the  Church  itself,  as  the  bond  of  union 
among  believers,  and  the  sure  mark  of  the  genuine  disciple  of 
Jesus.  "  That  especially,"  says  Tertullian  to  the  heathen,  hi  a 
celebrated  passage  of  his  Apologeticus,  "which  love  works  among 
us,  exposes  us  to  many  a  suspicion.  c  Behold/  they  say, '  how 
they  love  one  another!'  Yea,  verily  this  must  strike  them  \  for 
they  hate  each  other.  '  And  how  ready  they  are  to  die  for  one 
another!'  Yea,  truly ;  for  they  are  rather  ready  to  kill  one  an- 
other. And  even  that  we  call  each  other  { brethren/  seems  to 
them  suspicious  for  no  other  reason,  than  that,  among  them,  all 
expressions  of  kindred  are  only  feigned.  We  are  even  your 
brethren,  in  virtue  of  the  common  nature,  which  is  the  mother 
of  us  all ;  though  ye,  as  evil  brethren,  deny  your  human  nature. 
But  how  much  more  justly  are  those  called  and  considered 
brethren,  who  acknowledge  the  one  God  as  their  Father ;  wha 
have  received  the  one  Spirit  of  holiness;  who  have  awaked  from 
the  same  darkness  of  uncertainty  to  the  light  of  the  same  truth  ? 
. .  .  And  we,  who  are  united  in  spirit  and  in  soul,  do  not  hesi- 


374  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

tate  to  have  also  all  things  common,  except  wives.  For  we 
break  fellowship  just  where  other  men  practice  it." 

This  brotherly  love  flowed  from  community  of  life  in  Christ. 
Hence  Ignatius  calls  believers  "Christ-bearers"  and  "God- 
bearers."1  The  article  of  the  Apostles'  Creed:  "I  believe  in 
the  communion  of  saints;"  the  current  appellation  of  "brother" 
and  "sister;"  and  the  fraternal  kiss  usual  on  admission  into  the 
church,  and  at  the  Lord's  Supper,  were  not  empty  forms,  nor 
even  a  sickly  sentimentalism,  but  the  expression  of  true  feeling 
and  experience,  only  strengthened  by  the  common  danger  and 
persecution.  A  travelling  Christian,  of  whatever  language  or 
country,  with  a  letter  of  recommendation  from  his  bishop,2  was 
everywhere  hospitably  received  as  a  long  known  friend.  It  was 
a  current  phrase  :  In  thy'  brother  thou  hast  seen  the  Lord  him- 
self. The  force  of  love  reached  beyond  the  grave.  Families 
were  accustomed  to  celebrate  at  appointed  times  the  memory  of 
their  departed  members;  and  this  was  one  of  the  grounds  on 
which  Tertullian  opposed  second  marriage. 

The  brotherly  love  expressed  itself,  above  all,  in  the  most 
self-sacrificing  beneficence  to  the  poor  and  sick,  to  widows  and 
orphans,  to  strangers  and  prisoners,  particularly  to  confessors  in 
bonds.  It  magnifies  this  virtue  in  our  view,  to  reflect,  that  the 
Christians  at  that  time  belonged  mostly  to  the  lower  classes,  and 
in  times  of  persecution  often*  lost  all  their  possessions.  Every 
congregation  was  a  charitable  society,  and  in  its  public  worship 
took  regular  collections  for  its  needy  members.  The  offerings  at 
the  communion  and  love-feasts,  first  held  on  the  evening,  after- 
wards on  the  morning  of  the  Lord's  Day,  were  considered  a  part 
of  worship.3  To  these  were  added  numberless  private  charities, 
given  in  secret,  which  eternity  alone  will  reveal.  The  church  at 
Rome  had  under  its  care  a  great  multitude  of  widows,  orphans, 


*  TpdpftaTa  TSTvrruph'a  or  KQwuvtKd)  epistofa  or  Kterce  formates  ;  so  called, 
because  composed  after  a  certain  riirog  or  forma,  to  guard  against  frequeDl 
forgeries. 

*  Oomp.  James  1  :  27,  HeLr.  13:  1-3,  16. 


J100.  BEOTHEELY  LOVE,  AND  LOVE  FOB  ENEMIES.  375 

blind,  lame,  and  sick,1  whom  the  deacon.Laurentius,  in  the  De- 
cian  persecution,  showed  to  the  heathen  prefect,  as  the  most  pre- 
cious treasures  of  the  church.  It  belonged  to  the  idea  of  a 
Christian  housewife,  and  was  particularly  the  duty  of  the  dea- 
conesses, to  visit  the  Lord,  to  clothe  him,  and  give  him  meat  and 
drink,  in  the  persons  of  his  needy  disciples.  Even  such  oppo- 
nents of  Christianity  as  Lucian  testify  to  this  zeal  of  the  Chris- 
tians in  labors  of  love,  though  they  see  in  it  nothing  but  an 
innocent  fanaticism.  "It  is  incredible/'  says  Lucian,  "to  see 
the  ardor  with  which  the  people  of  that  religion  help  each  other 
in  their  wants.  They  spare  nothing.  Their  first  legislator  has 
put  into  their  heads  that  they  are  all  brethren."2 

This  beneficence  reached  beyond  the  immediate  neighborhood. 
Charity  begins  at  home,  but  does  not  stay  at  home.  In  cases 
of  general  distress  the  bishops  appointed  special  collections,  and 
also  fasts,  by  which  food  might  be  saved  for  suffering  brethren. 
The  Eoman  church  sent  its  charities  great  distances  abroad.3 
Cyprian  of  Carthage,  who,  after  his  conversion,  sold  his  own 
estates  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor,  collected  a  hundred  thousand 
sestertia,  or  more  than  three  thousand  dollars,  to  redeem  Chris- 
tians of  Numidia,  who  had  been  taken  captive  by  neighboring 
barbarians;  and  he  considered  it  a  high  privilege  "to  be  able  to 
ransom  for  a  small  sum  of  money  Trim,  who  has  redeemed  us 
from  the  dominion  of  Satan  with  his  own  blood."  A  father, 
who  refused  to  give  alms  on  account  of  his  children,  Cyprian 
charged  with  the  additional  sin  of  binding  his  children  to  an 
earthly  inheritance,  instead  of  pointing  them  to  the  richest  and 
most  loving  Father  in  heaven. 

Finally,  this  brotherly  love  expanded  to  love  even  for  ene- 
mies, which  returned  the  heathens  good  for  evil,  and  not  rarely, 
in  persecutions  and  public  misfortunes,  heaped  coals  of  fire  on 
their  heads.  During  the  persecution  under  Gallus  (252),  when 
the  pestilence  raged  in  Carthage,  and  the  heathens  threw  out 
their  dead  and  sick  upon  the  streets,  ran  away  from  them  foi 

1  Cornelius,  in  Euseb.  H.  E.  VI.  43.  2  De  Morte  Peregr.  c.  13, 

»  Dionysius  of  Corinth,  in  Eus.  IV.  23. 


376  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311 

fear  of  the  contagion,  and  cursed  the  Christians  as  the  supposed 
authors  of  the  plague,  Cyprian  assembled  his  congregation,  and 
exhorted  them  to  love  their  enemies;  whereupon  all  went  to 
work;  the  rich  with  their  money,  the,jpoor  with  their  hands, 
and  rested  not,  till  the  dead  were  buried,  the  sick  cared  for,  and 
the  ciiy  saved  from  desolation.  The  same  self-denial  appeared 
in  the  Christians  of  Alexandria  during  a  ravaging  plague  under 
the  reign  of  Gallienus.  These  are  only  a  few  prominent  mani- 
festations *of  a  spirit  which  may  be  traced  through  the  whole 
history  of  martyrdom  and  the  daily  prayers  of  the  Christians  for 
their  enemies  and  persecutors.  For  while  the  love  of  friends, 
says  Tertullian,  is  common  to  all  men,  the  love  of  enemies  is  a 
virtue  peculiar  to  Christians.1  "You  forget,"  he  says  to  the 
heathens  in  his  Apology,  "that,  notwithstanding  your  persecu- 
tions, far  from  conspiring  against  you,  as  our  numbers  would 
perhaps  furnish  us  with  the  means  of  doing,  we  pray  for  you 
and  do  good  to  you ;  that,  if  we  give  nothing  for  your  gods,  we 
do  give  for  your  poor,  and  that  our  charity  spreads  more  alms 
in  your  streets  than  the  offerings  presented  by  your  religion  in 
your  temples." 

The  organized  congregational  charity  of  the  ante-Nicene  age 
provided  for  all  the  immediate  wants.  When  the  state  professed 
Christianity,  there  sprang  up  permanent  charitable  institutions 
for  the  poor,  the  sick,  for  strangers,  widows,  orphans,  and  help- 
less old  men.2  The  first  clear  proof  of  such  institutions  we  find 
in  the  age  of  Julian  the  Apostate,  who  tried  to  check  the  pro- 
gress of  Christianity  and  to  revive  paganism  by  directing  the 
high  priest  of  Galatia,  Arsacius,  to  establish  in  every  town  a 
Xenodochium  to  be  supported  by  the  state  and  also  by  private 
contributions;  for,  he  said,  it  was  a  shame  that  the  heathen 

4 

*  Ad  Smputam,  c.  1 :   "  Ita  enim  disciplina  jubemur  dilig&re  inimicos  quoque  el 
orare  pro  iis  qui  nos  persequuntur,  vt  haec  sit  perfecta  et  propria  bonitas  nostra, 
non  communis.    Arnicas  enim  dilig&re  omnium  estt  inimicos  autem  solorum,  Chris* 
tianorum.'*  ' 

*  Nosocomia,  Ptochotrophia,  Xenodochia,  Cherotrophia,  Orphanotrophia 
Brephotrophia,  Gerontocomia  (for  old  menl 


{  102.  TREATMENT  OF  THE  DEAD.  381 

the  general  custom  of  surrounding  the  funeral  with  solemn  rites 
and  prayers,  and  giving  the  tomb  a  sacred  and  inviolable  cha- 
racter. The  profane  violation  of  the  dead  and  robbery  of  graves 
were  held  in  desecration,  and  punished  by  law.1  No  traditions 
and  laws  were  more  sacred  among  the  Egyptians,  Greeks,  and 
Eomans  than  those  that  guarded  and  protected  the  shades  of  the 
departed  who  can  do  no  harm  to  any  of  the  living.  "  It  is  the 
popular  belief/'  says  Tertullian,  "  that  the  dead  cannot  enter 
Hades  before  they  are  buried."  Patroclus  appears  after  his 
death  to  his  friend  Achilles  in  a  dream,  and  thus  exhorts  him  to 
provide  for  his  speedy  burial : 

"Achilles,  sleepest  them,  forgetting  me? 
Never  of  me  unmindful  in  my  life, 
Thou  dost  neglect  me  dead.    O,  bury  me 
Quickly,  and  give  me  entrance  through  the  gates 
Of  Hades ;  for  the  souls,  the  forms  of  those 
Who  live  no  more,  repulse  me,  suffering  not 
That  I  should  join  their  company  beyond 
The  river,  and  I  now  must  wander  round 
The  spacious  portals  of  the  House  of  Death."1 

Christianity  intensified  this  regard  for  the  departed,  and  gave 
it  a  solid  foundation  by  the  doctrine  of  the  immortality  of  the 
soul  and  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  Julian  the  Apostate 
traced  the  rapid  spread  and  power  of  that  religion  to  three 
causes :  benevolence,  care  of  the  dead,  and  honesty.3  After  the 
persecution  under  Marcus  Aurelius,  the  Christians  in  Southern 
Gaul  were  much  distressed  because  the  enraged  heathens  would 
not  deliver  them  the  corpses  of  their  brethren  for  burial.4 
Sometimes  the  vessels  of  the  church  were  sold  for  the  purpose. 
During  the  ravages  of  war,  famine,  and  pestilence,  they  con- 
sidered it  their  duty  to  buiy  the  heathen  as  well  as  their  fellow- 

1  And  it  occurs  occasionally  even  among  Christian  nations.  The  corpse  of 
the  richest  merchant  prince  of  New  York,  Alexander  T.  Stewart  (d.  1876), 
was  stolen  from  St.  Mark's  grave-yard,  and  his  splendid  mausoleum  in  Gar- 
den City  on  Long  Island  is  empty, 

>  Iliad  XXIII.  81-88,  in  Bryanf  s  translation  (II.  284). 

8  Epist.  XLIX.  ad  Arsacium,  the  pagan  high-priest  in 

*  Bus.  IX.  8, 


382  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

Christians.  When  a  pestilence  depopulated  the  cities  in  the 
reign  of  the  tyrannical  persecutor  Maximinus,  "  the  Christians 
were  the  only  ones  in  the  midst  of  such  distressing  circumstances 
that  exhibited  sympathy  and  humanity  in  their  conduct.  They 
continued  the  whole  day,  some  in  the  care  and  burial  of  the 
dead,  for  numberless  were  they  for  whom  there  was  none  to 
care;  others  collected  the  multitude  of  those  wasting  by  the 
famine  throughout  the  city,  and  distributed  bread  among  all. 
So  that  the  fact  was  cried  abroad,  and  men  glorified  the  God  of 
the  Christians,  constrained,  as  they  were  by  the  facts,  to  acknow- 
ledge that  these  were  the  only  really  pious  and  the  only  real 
worshippers  of  God."1  Lactantius  says:  "The  last  and  greatest 
office  of  piety  is  the  burying  of  strangers  and  the  poor;  which 
subject  these  teachers  of  virtue  and  justice  have  not  touched 
upon  at  all,  as  they  measure  all  their  duties  by  utility.  "We  will 
not  sufier  the  image  and-  workmanship  of  God  to  lie  exposed  as 
a  prey  to  beasts  and  birds  ;  but  we  will  restore  it  to  the  earth, 
from  which  it  had  its  origin  ;  and  although  it  be  in  the  case  of 
an  unknown  man,  we  will  fulfil  the  office  of  relatives,  into 
whose  place,  since  they  are  wanting,  let  kindness  succeed  ;  and 
wherever  there  shall  be  need  of  man,  there  we  will  think  that 
our  duty  is  required."2 

The  early  church  differed  from  the  pagan  and  even  from  the 
Jewish  notions  by  a  cheerful  and  hopeful  view  of  death,  and 
by  discarding  lamentations,  rending  of  clothes,  and  all  signs  of 
extravagant  grief.  The  terrors  of  the  grave  were  dispelled  by  the 
light  of  the  resurrection,  and  the  idea  of  death  was  transformed 
into  the  idea  of  a  peaceful  slumber.  No  one,  says  Cyprian, 
should  be  made  sad  by  death,  since  in  living  is  labor  and  peril, 
In  dying  peace  and  the  certainty  of  resurrection  ;  and  he  quotes 
the  examples  of  Enoch  who  was  translated,  of  Simeon  who 
wished  to  depart  in  peace,  several  passages  from  Paul,  and  the 
assurance  of  the  Lord  that  he  went  to  the  Father  to  prepare 
heavenly  mansions  for  us.3  The  day  of  a  believer's  death,  espe- 


1  Eustbhis,  IT.  E.  V.  I         *  jwtit  piVm  VL  c.  12-        3  Testim.  I  III.  c-  5a 


8  102.  TEEATMENT  OF  THE  DEAD.  383 

cially  if  he  were  a  martyr,  was  called  the  day  of  his  heavenly 
birth.  His  grave  was  surrounded  with  symbols  of  hope  and  of 
victory;  anchors,  harps,  palms,  crowns.  The  primitive  Chris- 
tians always  showed  a  tender  care  for  the  dead ;  under  a  vivid 
impression  of  the  unbroken  communion  of  saints  and  the  future 
resurrection  of  the  body  in  glory.  For  Christianity  redeems  the 
body  as  well  as  the  soul,  and  consecrates  it  a  temple  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Hence  the  Greek  and  Eoman  custom  of  burning  the 
corpse  (erematio)  was  repugnant  to  Christian  feeling  and  the 
sacredness  of  the  body.1  Tertullian  even  declared  it  a  symbol 
of  the  fire  of  hell,  and  Cyprian  regarded  it  as  equivalent  to 
apostasy.  In,  its  stead,  the  church  adopted  the  primitive 
Jewish  usage  of  burial  (inhumatio),2  practiced  also  by  the  Egyp- 
tians and  Babylonians.  The  bodies  of  the  dead  were  washed,3 
wrapped  in  linen  cloths,4  sometimes  embalmed/  and  then,  in  the 
presence  of  ministers,  relatives,  and  friends,  with  prayer  and 
singing  of  psalms,  committed  as  seeds  of  immortality  to  the 
bosom  of  the  earth.  Funeral  discourses  were  very  common  as 
early  as  the  Nicene  period.6  But  in  the  times  of  persecution  the 
interment  was  often  necessarily  performed  as  hastily  and  secretly 
as  possible.  The  death-days  of  martyrs  the  church  celebrated 
annually  at  their  graves  with  oblations,  love-feasts,  and  the 
Lord's  Supper.  Families  likewise  commemorated  their  departed 
members  in  the  domestic  circle.  The  current  prayers  for  the 
dead  were  originally  only  thanksgivings  for  the  grace  of  God 

1  Comp.  1  Cor.  3:  16;  6:  19;  2  Cor.  6:  16.  '  Burial  was  the  prevailing 
Oriental  and  even  the  earlier  Roman  custom  before  the  empire,  and  was 
afterwards  restored,  no  doubt  under  the  influence  of  Christianity.    Minucius 
Felix  says  (Oetav.  c.  34):    "  Veterem  et  meliorem  consuetudinem  Jiumandi  fre- 
]u*ntamus."   Comp.  Cicero,  De  Leg.  II.  22;  Pliny,  Hist.  JVaf.  VII.  54;  Augus- 
tin,  De  Civ.  Dei  1. 12,  13.    Sometimes  dead  Christians  were  burned  during  the 
persecution  by  the  heathen  to  ridicule  their  hope  of  a  resurrection. 

2  Comp.  Gen.  23:  19;  Matt.  27:  60;  John  11:  17;  Acts  5    6;  8:  2. 
8  Acts  9:  37. 

*  Matt.  27:  59;  Luke  23:  53;  John  11:  44. 

*  John  19:  39  eq.;  12:  7. 

*  We  have  the  funeral  orations  of  Ensebius  at  the  death  of  Constantine,  of 
Gregory  of  Nazianzum  on  his  father,  brother,  and  sister,  of  Ambrose  on 
Theodosius. 


384  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

manifested  to  them.  But  they  afterwards  passed  into  interces- 
sions, without  any  warrant  in  the  teaching  of  the  apostles,  and 
in  connection  with  questionable  views  in  regard  to  the  interme- 
diate state.  Tertullian,  for  instance,  in  his  argument  against 
second  marriage,  says  of  the  Christian  widow,  she  prays  for  the 
soul  of  her  departed  husband/  and  brings  her  annual  offering 
on  the  day  of  his  departure. 

The  same  feeling  of  the  inseparable  communion  of  saints  gave 
rise  to  the  usage,  unknown  to  the  heathens,  of  consecrated  places 
of  common  burial.2  For  these  cemeteries,  the  Christians,  in  the 
times  of  persecution,  when  they  were  mostly  poor  and  enjoyed 
no  corporate  rights,  selected  remote,  secret  spots,  and  especially 
subterranean  vaults,  called  at  first  crypts,  but  after  the  sixth 
century  commonly  termed  catacombs,  or  resting-places,  which 
have  been  discussed  in  a  previous  chapter. 

We  close  with  a  few  stanzas  of  the  Spanish  poet  Prudentius 
(d.  405),  in  which  he  gives  forcible  expression  to  the  views  and 
feelings  of  the  ancient  church  before  the  open  grave  :3 

"No  more,  ah,  no  more  sad  complaining; 

Resign  these  fond  pledges  to  earth: 
Stay,  mothers,  the  thick-falling  tear-drops; 
This  death  is  a  heavenly  birth. 

Take,  Earth,  to  thy  bosom  so  tender,— » 

Take,  nourish  this  body.    How  fair, 
How  noble  in  death  I  We  surrender 

These  relics  of  man  to  thy  care. 

This,  this  was  the  home  of  the  spirit, 

Once  built  by  the  breath  of  our  God; 
And  here,  in  the  light  of  his  wisdom, 

Christ,  Head  of  the  risen,  abode. 

1  u  Pro  anima,  qus  orof."  Compare,  however,  the  prevailing  cheerful  tone 
of  the  epigraphs  in  the  catacombs,  p.  301-303. 

*  KoLfajT^pta,  cimeteria,  darmitoria,  areas. 

8  From  his  Tarn  mossta  quiesce  qu&refa,  the  concluding  part  of  his  tenth 
Oz&emermon,  Opera,  ed.  Obbarius  (1845),  p.  41;  Schaff,  Christ  in  Song,  p.  506 
i1  London  ed.).  Another  version  by  E.  Gaswall:  "Cease,  ye  tearful  mourners. 
Thus  your  heart*  to  rend :  Death  is  life's  beginning  Bather  than  its  end." 


g  103.  SUMMAKY  OF  MORAL  EEFOKMS.  385 

Guard  well  the  dear  treasure  we  lend  thee 

The  Maker,  the  Saviour  of  men: 
Shall  never  forget  His  beloved, 

But  claim  His  own  likeness  again.5*  t 

§  103.  Summary  of  Moral  Reforms. 

Christianity  represents  the  thoughts  and  purposes  of  God  in 
history.  They  shine  as  so  many  stars  in  the  darkness  of  sin  and 
error.  They  are  unceasingly  opposed,  but  make  steady  progress 
and  are  sure  of  final  victory.  Heathen  ideas  and  practices  with 
their  degrading  influences  controlled  the  ethics,  politics,  litera- 
ture, and  the  house  and  home  of  emperor  and  peasant,  when  the 
little  band  of  despised  and  persecuted  followers  of  Jesus  of  Na- 
zareth began  the  unequal  struggle  against  overwhelming  odds 
and  stubborn  habits.  It  was  a  struggle  of  faith  against  super- 
stition, of  love  against  selfishness,  of  purity  against  corruption, 
of  spiritual  forces  against  political  and  social  power. 

Under  the  inspiring  influence  of  the  spotless  purity  of  Christ's 
teaching  and  example,  and  aided  here  and  there  by  the  nobler 
instincts  and  tendencies  of  philosophy,  the  -Christian  church 
from  the  beginning  asserted  the  individual  rights  of  man,  recog- 
nized the  divine  image  in  every  rational  being,  taught  the  com- 
mon creation  and  common  redemption,  the  destination  of  all  for 
immortality  and  glory,  raised  the  humble  and  the  lowly,  comforted 
the  prisoner  and  captive,  the  stranger  and  the  exile,  proclaimed 
chastity  as  a  fundamental  virtue,  elevated  woman  to  dignity  and 
equality  with  man,  upheld  the  sanctity  and  inviolability  of  the 
marriage  tie,  laid  the  foundation  of  a  Christian  family  and  happy 
home,  moderated  the  evils  and  undermined  the  foundations  of 
slavery,  opposed  polygamy  and  concubinage,  emancipated  the 
children  from  the  tyrannical  control  of  parents,  denounced  the 
exposure  of  children  as  murder,  made  relentless  war  upon  the 
bloody  games  of  the  arena  and  the  circus,  and  the  shocking  in- 
decencies of  the  theatre,  upon  cruelty  and  oppression  and  every 
vice,  infused  into  a  heartless  and  loveless  world  the  spirit  of 
love  and  brotherhood,  transformed  sinners  into  saints,  frail 

VoL  IL-25 


386  SJSOXS'D  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

women  into  heroines,  aiid  lit  up  the  darkness  of  the  tomb  by  the 
bright  ray  of  unending  bliss  in  heaven. 

Christianity  reformed  society  from  the  bottom,  and  built  up- 
wards until  it  reached  the  middle  and  higher  classes,  and  at  last 
the  emperor  himself.  Then  soon  after  the  conversion  of  Con- 
stantine  it  began  to  influence  legislation,  abolished  cruel  insti- 
tutions, and  enacted  laws  which  breathe  the  spirit  of  justice  and 
humanity.  We  may  deplore  the  evils  which  followed  in  the 
train  of  the  union  of  church  and  state,  but  we  must  not  over- 
look its  many  wholesome  effects  upon  the  Justinian  code  which 
gave  Christian  ideas  an  institutional  form  and  educational  power 
for  whole  generations  to  this  day.  From  that  time  on  also  be- 
gan the  series  of  charitable  institutions  for  widows  and  orphans, 
for  the  poor  and  the  sick,  the  blind  and  the  deaf,  the  intempe- 
rate and  criminal,  and  for  the  care  of  all  unfortunate, — institu- 
tions which  we  seek  in  vain  in  any  other  but  Christian  countries. 

Xor  should  the  excesses  of  asceticism  blind  us  against  the 
moral  heroism  of  renouncing  rights  and  enjoyments  innocent 
in  themselves,  but  so  generally  abused  and  poisoned,  that  total 
abstinence  seemed  to  most  of  the  early  fathers  the  only  radical 
and  effective  cure.  So  in  our  days  some  of  the  best  of  men 
regard  total  abstinence  rather  than  temperance,  the  remedy  of 
the  fearful  evils  of  intemperance. 

Christianity  could  not  prevent  the  irruption  of  the  Northern 
barbarians  and  the  collapse  of  the  Eoman  empire.  The  pro- 
cess of  internal  dissolution  had  gone  too  far;  nations  as  well 
«is  individuals  may  physically  and  morally  sink  so  low  that  they 
are  beyoud  the  possibility  of  recovery.  Tacitus,  the  heathen 
Stoic  in  the  second  century,  and  Salvianus,  the  Christian  pres- 
byter in  the  fiftn,  each  a  Jeremiah  of  his  age,  predicted  the 
approaching  doom  and  destruction  of  Roman  society,  looked 
towards  the  savage  races  of  the  North  for  fresh  blood  and  new 
vigor.  But  the  Keltic  and  Germanic  conquerors  would  have 
turned  Southern  Europe  into  a  vast  solitude  (as  the  Turks  have 
laid  waste  the  fairest  portions  of  Asia),  if  they  had  not  embraced 
the  principles,  laws,  and  institutions  of  the  Christian  church. 


CHtlPTER  IX. 

ASCETIC    TENDENCIES. 

§  104.  Aseetic  Virtiw  and  Piety. 

'JD.  M6HLEB  (R.  C.) :  Geschichte  des  Mbnchthums  in  der  Zeit  seiner  ersfen 

Entstehung  u.  ersten  Ausbildung,  1836  ("  Vermisclite  Schriften/'  ed. 

Dollinger.     Eegensb.  1839,  II.  p.  165  sqq.). 
Is.  TAYLOR  (Independent) :  Ancient  Christianity,  4th  ed.   London,  1844, 

I.  133-299  (anti-Puseyite  and  anti  Catholic). 
H.  BUFFNER  (Presbyt.) :    The  Fathers  of  the  Desert;  or  an  Account  of 

the  Origin  and  Practice  of  Monkery  among  heathen  nations ;  its  pas' 

sage  into  the  church ;  and  some  wonderful  Stories  of  the  Fathers  con- 

cerning  the  primitive  Monks  and  Hermits.     N.  York,  1850.     2  vols. 
OTTO  Z6CKLEK  (Lutheran) ;  Kritische  Geschichte  der  Askese.     Frkf.  and 

Erlangen,  1863  (434  pages). 
P.  E.  Lucius :   Die  Therapeuten  und  ihre  Stellung  in  der  Geschichte  der 

Askese.     Strasburg,  1879. 
H.  WEINGAHTEN  :    Ueber  den  Ursprung  des  Monchthums  im  nach-Kon- 

stantinischen  Zeitalter.    Gotha,  1877.    And  his  article  in  Herzog's 

"Encykl."  new  ed.  yol.  X.  (1882)  p.  758  sqq.  (abridged  in  Schaff's 

Herzog,  yol.  II.  1551  sqq.    N.  Y.  1883). 
AJ>.  HARNACK  :   Das  Monchthum,  seine  Ideale  und   seine   Geschichte. 

Giessen,  1882. 
The  general  literature  on  Monasticism  is  immense,  but  belongs  to 

the  next  period.    See  voL  III.  147  sq.,  and  the  list  of  books  in 

Zockler,  1.  c.  p.  10-16. 

HEBE  we  enter  a  field  where  the  early  church  appears  most 
remote  from  the  free  spirit  of  evangelical  Protestantism  and 
modern  ethics,  and  stands  nearest  the  legalistic  and  monastic 
ethics  of  Greek  and  Roman  Catholicism.  Christian  life  was 
viewed  as  consisting  mainly  in  certain  outward  exercises,  rather 
than  an  inward  disposition,  in  a  multiplicity  of -acts  rather  than 
a  life  of  faith.  The  great  ideal  of  virtue  was,  according  to  the 
prevailing  notion  of  the  fathers  and  councils,  not  so  much  to 
transform  the  world  and  sanctify  the  natural  things  and  reia- 

387 


388  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 


tions  created  by  God,  as  to  flee  from  the  'rcorld  into  monastic 
seclusion,  and  voluntarily  renounce  property  and  marriage. 
The  Pauline  doctrine  of  faith  and  of  justification  by  grace 
alone  steadily  retreated,  or  rather,  it  was  never  yet  rightly  en- 
throned in  the  general  thought  and;  life  of  tjie  church.  The 
qualitative  view  of  morality  yielded  more  and  more  to  quanti- 
tative calculation  by  the  number  of  outward  meritorious  and 
even  supererogatory  works,  prayer,  fasting,  alms-giving,  volun- 
tary poverty,  and  celibacy.  This  necessarily  brought  with  it  a 
Judaizing  self-righteousness  and  over-estimate  of  the  ascetic 
life,  which  developed,  by  an  irresistible  impulse,  into  the  her- 
niit-life  and  monasticism  of  the  Nicene  age.  All  the  germs  of 
this  asceticism  appear  in  the  second  half  of  the  third  century, 
and  even  earlier. 

Asceticism  in  general  is  a  rigid  outward  self-discipline,  by 
which  the  spirit  strives  after  full  dominion  over  the  flesh,  and 
a  superior  grade  of  virtue.1  It  includes  not  only  that  true 
moderation  or  restraint  of  the  animal  appetites,  which  is  a 
universal  Christian  duty,  but  total  abstinence  from  enjoyments 
in  themselves  lawful,  from  wine,  animal  food,  property,  and 
marriage,  together  with  all  kinds  of  penances  and  mortifications 
of  the  body.  In  the  union  of  the  abstractive  and  penitential 
elements,  or  of  self-denial  and  self-punishment,  the  catholic 
asceticism  stands  forth  complete  in  light  and  shade  ;  exhibiting, 
on  the  one  hand,  wonderful  examples  of  heroic  renunciation 


ie,  from  affKsu,  to  exercise,  to  strengthen;  primarily  applied  to  athletic 
and  gymnastic  exercises,  but  used  also,  even  by  the  heathens  and  by  Philo,  of 
moral  self-discipline.  Clement  of  Alex,  represents  the  whole  Christian  life  as 
an  acKTimc  (Strom.  IV.  22)  and  calls  the  patriarch  Jacob  an  (wr/c^r^f  (Pcedag. 
L  7).  But  at  the  same  time  the  term  acKtjrai  was  applied  from  the  middle  of 
the  second  century  by  Athenagoras,  Tertullian,  Origen,  Eusebius,  Athanasius, 
Epiphaniue,  Jerome,  etc.,  to  a  special  class  of  self-denying  Christiana. 
Clement  of  Alex,  styles  them  Mfi/crwD  eKfaKrfospoi  (Quis  Dives  salv.  36  ;  Strom. 
VIII.  15V  Thus  '*  ascetics"  assumed  the  same  meaning  as  *'  religious  "  in  the 
middle  ages.  Zockler  takes  a  comprehensive  view  of  asceticism,  and  divides 
it  into  eight  branches,  1)  the  asceticism  of  penal  discipline  and  self-castigation  ; 
2)  of  domestic  life;  3)  of  diet  (fasting,  abstinence)  ;  4)  of  sexual  life  (celibacy)- 
5)  of  devotion;  6)  of  contemplation  ;  7)  of  practical  hTej  8)  of  social  life 
(solitude,  poverty,  obedience). 


2  104.  ASCETIC  VIKTUE  AND  PIETY.  389 

of  self  and  the  world,  but  very  often,  on  the  other,  a  total  mis- 
apprehension and  perversion  of  Christian  morality ;  the  renun- 
ciation involving  more  or  less  a  Gnostic  contempt  of  the  gifts 
and  ordinances  of  the  God  of  nature,  and  the  penance  or  self- 
punishment  running  into  practical  denial  of  the  all-sufficient 
merits  of  Christ.  The  ascetic  and  monastic  tendency  rests 
primarily  upon  a  lively,  though  morbid  sense  of  the  sinfulness 
of  the  flesh  and  the  corruption  of  the  world ;  then  upon  the 
desire  for  solitude  and  exclusive  occupation  with  divine  things ; 
and  finally,  upon  the  ambition  to  attain  extraordinary  holiness 
and  merit.  It  would  anticipate  upon  earth  the  life  of  angels  in 
heaven.1  It  substitutes  an  abnormal,  self-appointed  virtue  and 
piety  for  the  normal  forms  prescribed  by  the  Creator;  and  not 
rarely  looks  down  upon  the  divinely-ordained  standard  with 
spiritual  pride.  It  is  a  mark  at  once  of  moral  strength  and 
moral  weakness.  It  presumes  a  certain  degree  of  culture,  in 
which  man  has  emancipated  himself  from  the  powers  of  nature 
and  risen  to  the  consciousness  of  his  moral  calling ;  but  thinks 
to  secure  itself  against  temptation  only  by  entire  separation 
from  the  world,  instead  of  standing  in  the  world  to  overcome  it 
and  transform  it  into  the  kingdom  of  God. 

Asceticism  is  by  no  means  limited  to  the  Christian  church, 
but  it  there  developed  its  highest  and  noblest  form.  TFe  observe 
kindred  phenomena  long  before  Christ;  among  the  Jews,  in  the 
Nazarites,  the  Essenes,  and  the  cognate  Therapeutse,2  and  still 
more  among  the  heathens,  in  the  old  Persian  and  Indian  re- 
ligions, especially  among  the  Buddhists,  who  have  even  a  fully 
developed  system  of  monastic  life,  which  struck  some  Eoman 

1  Matt.  22 :  30.    Hence  the  frequent  designation  of  monastic  life  as  a  vita 
angelica. 

2  As  described   by  Philo  in  his  tract  De  vita  contemplativa   (irspl  fiov 
fauprrrtKov).    Eusebius  (II.  17)  mistook  the  Therapeutse  for  Christian  ascetics, 
and  later  historians  for  Christian  monks.    It  was  supposed  that  Philo  was 
converted  by  the  Apostle  Peter.    This  error  was  not  dispelled  till  after  the 
Reformation.     Lucius,  in  his  recent  monograph,  sees  in  that  tract  an  apology 
of  Christian  asceticism  written  at  the  close  of  the  third  century  under  the 
uame  of  Philo.    But  Weingarten  (in  Herzog  X.  761  sqq.)  again  argues  for 
the  Jewish,  though  post-Philonic  origin  of  that  book. 


390  SECOND  PEEIOB.    A.  D.  100-311. 

missionaries  as  the  devil's  caricature  of  the  Catholic  system. 
In  Egypt  the  priests  of  Serapis  led  a  monastic  life.1  There  is 
something  in  the  very  climate  of  the  land  of  the  Pharaohs,  in 
its  striking  contrast  between  the  solitude  of  the  desert  and  the 
fertility  of  the  banks  of  the  Xile,  so  closely  bordering  on  each 
other,  and  in  the  sepulchral  sadness  of  the  people,  which  induces 
men  to  withdraw  from  the  busy  turmoil  and  the  active  duties 
of  life.  It  is  certain  that  the  first  Christian  hermits  and  monks 
were  Egyptians.  Even  the  Grecian  philosophy  was  conceived 
by  the  Pythagoreans,  the  Platonists,  and  the  Stoics,  not  as 
theoretical  knowledge  merely,  but  also  as  practical  wisdom,  and 
frequently  joined  itself  to  the  most  rigid  abstemiousness,  so  that 
"philosopher"  and  "ascetic"  were  interchangeable  terms. 
Several  apologists  of  the  second  century  had  by  this  prac- 
tical philosophy,  particularly  the  Platonic,  been  led  to  Chris- 
tianity; and  they  on  this  account  retained  their  simple  dress 
and  mode  of  life.  Tertullian  congratulates  the  philosopher's 
cloak  on  having  now  become  the  garb  of  a  better  philosophy. 
In  the  show  of  self-denial  the  Cynics,  the  followers  of  Diogenes, 
went  to  the  extreme ;  but  these,  at  least  in  their  later  degenerate 
days,  concealed  under  the  guise  of  bodily  squalor,  untrimmed 
nails,  and  uncombed  hair,  a  vulgar  cynical  spirit,  and  a  bitter 
hatred  of  Christianity. 

In  the  ancient  church  there  was  a  special  class  of  Christians 
of  both  sexes  who,  under  the  name  of  "ascetics"  or  "ab- 
stinents," 2  though  still  living  in  the  midst  of  the  community, 
retired  from  society,  voluntarily  renounced  marriage  and  prop- 
erty, devoted  themselves  wholly  to  fasting,  prayer,  and  religious 
contemplation,  and  strove  thereby  to  attain  Christian  perfection. 
Sometimes  they  formed  a  society  of  their  own,3  for  mutual  im- 

1  The  Serapis  monks  have  been  made  known  by  the  researches  of  Letronne, 
Boissier,  and  especially  Bmnet  de  Presle  (M&moire  aw  le  Sfrapeum  de  Memphis, 
1852  and  1865).  Weingarten  derives  Christian  monasticisin  from  this  source, 
and  traces  the  resemblance  of  the  two.  Pachomius  was  himself  a  monk  of 
Serapis  before  his  conversion.  See  Eevillout,  Le  redus  du  S&rapeum  (Paris 
1880,  quoted  by  Weingarten  in  Herzog  X.  784). 

*  'Aff/aTraf,  continentes;  also  xap&hot,  virgines. 


g  104.  ASCETIC  VIRTUE  AND  PIETY.  391 

provement,  an  ccclesiola  in  ecdesia,  in  which  even  children 
could  be  received  and  trained  to  abstinence.  They  shared  with 
the  confessors  the  greatest  regard  from  their  fellow-Christians, 
had  a  separate  seat  in  the  pnblic  worship,  and  were  considered 
the  fairest  ornaments  of  the  church.  In  times  of  persecution 
they  sought  with  enthusiasm  a  martyr's  death  as  the  crown  of 
perfection. 

While  as  yet  each  congregation  was  a  lonely  oasis  in  the 
desert  of  the  world's  corruption,  and  stood  in  downright  opposi- 
tion to  the  surrounding  heathen  world,  these  ascetics  had  no 
reason  for  separating  from  it  and  flying  into  the  desert.  It  was 
under  and  after  Constantine,  and  partly  as  the  result  of  the 
union  of  church  and  state,  the  consequent  transfer  of  the  world 
into  the  church,  and  the  cessation  of  martyrdom,  that  asceticism 
developed  itself  to  anchoretism  and  monkery,  and  endeavored 
thus  to  save  the  virgin  purity  of  the  church  by  cariying  it  into 
the  wilderness.  The  first  Christian  hermit,  Paul  of  Thebes,  is 
traced  back  to  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  but  is  lost  in  the 
mist  of  fable ;  St.  Anthony,  the  real  father  of  monks,  belongs 
to  the  age  of  Constantine.1  At  the  time  of  Cyprian  2  there  was 
as  yet  no  absolutely  binding  vow.  The  early  origiii  and  wide 
spread  of  this  ascetic  life  are  due  to  the  deep  moral  earnestness 
of  Christianity,  and  the  prevalence  of  sin  in  all  the  social  rela- 
tions of  the  then  still  thoroughly  pagan  world.  It  was  the 

*  Paul  of  Thebes  withdrew  in  his  sixteenth  year,  under  the  Decian  persecu- 
tion (250),  to  a  cavern  in  the  lower  Thebais,  and  lived  there  for  one  hundred 
and  thirteen  years,  fed  by  a  raven,  and  known  only  to  God  until  St.  Anthony, 
about  350,  revealed  'his  existence  to  the  world.  But  his  biography  is  a  pious 
romance  of  Jerome,  the  most  zealous  promoter  of  asceticism  and  monasticism 
in  the  West.  "  The  Life  of  St.  Anthony  "  (d.  about  356)  is  usually  ascribed  to 
St.  Athanasius,  and  has  undoubtedly  a  strong  historic  foundation.  Eusebius 
never  mentions  him,  for  the  two  passages  in  the  Ckronicon  (ed.  Schone  II.  192, 
195)  belong  to  the  continuation  of  Jerome.  But  soon  after  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  <  entury  Anthony  was  regarded  as  the  patriarch  of  monasticism,  and  Jiis 
biography  exerted  great  influence  upon  Gregory  of  Nazianzum,  Jerome,  and 
Augustin.  See  vol.  III.  179  sqq.  Weingarten  denies  the  Athanasian  author- 
ship of  the  biography,  but  not  the  historic  existence  of  Ajnthony  (in  Herzo& 
revised  ed.  vol.  X-  774). 

» BpiBt,  LXIL 


392  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311, 

excessive  development  of  the  negative,  world-rejecting  element 
in  Christianity,  which  preceded  its  positive  effort  to  transform 
and  sanctify  the  world* 

The  ascetic  principle,  however,  was  not  confined,  in  its  influ- 
ence, to  the  proper  ascetics  and  monks.  It  ruled  more  or  less 
the  entire  morality  and  piety  of  the  ancient  and  mediaeval 
church ;  though,  on  the  other  hand,  there  were  never  wanting 
in  her  bosom  protests  of  the  free  evangelical  spirit  against 
moral  narrowness  and  excessive  regard  to  the  outward  works 
of  the  kw.  The  ascetics  were  but  the  most  consistent  repre- 
sentatives of  the  old  catholic  piety,  and  were  commended  as 
such  by  the  apologists  to  the  heathens.  They  formed  the  spirit- 
ual nobility,  the  flower  of  the  church,  and  served  especially  as 
examples  to  the  clergy. 

§  105.  Heretical  and  Catholic  Asceticism. 

But  we  must  now  distinguish  two  different  kinds  of  asceticism 
in  Christian  antiquity :  a  heretical  and  an  orthodox  or  catholic. 
The  former  rests  on  heathen  philosophy,  the  latter  is  a  develop- 
ment of  Christian  ideas. 

The  heretical  asceticism,  the  beginnings  of  which  are  resisted! 
in  the  New  Testament  itself,1  meets  us  in  the  Gnostic  and 
Manichaean  sects.  It  is  descended  from  Oriental  and  Platonic* 
ideas,  and  is  based  on  a  dualistic  view  of  the  world,  a  con- 
fusion of  sin  with  matter,  and  a  perverted  idea  of  God  and! 
the  creation.  It  places  God  and  the  world  at  irreconcilable 
enmity,  derives  the  creation  from  an  inferior  being,  considers; 
the  human  body  substantially  evil,  a  product  of  the  devil  or  the 
demiurge,  and  makes  it  the  great  moral  business  of  man  to  rid 
himself  of  the  same,  or  gradually  to  annihilate  it,  whether  by 
excessive  abstinence  or  by  unbridled  indulgence.  Many  of  the 
Gnostics  placed  the  fall  itself  in  the  first  gratification  of  the 
sexual  desire,  which  subjected  man  to  the  dominion  of  t^e 
Hyle. 

*  I  Tim.  4:  3;  Col.  2 :  16  sqq.    Comp.  Rom.  14. 


2 105.  HERETICAL  AND  CATHOLIC  ASCETICISM      393 

The  orthodox  or  catholic  asceticism  starts  from  a  literal  and 
overstrained  construction  of  certain  passages  of  Scripture.  It 
admits  that  all  nature  is  the  work  of  God  and  the  object  of  his 
love,  and  asserts  the  divine  origin  and  destiny  of  the  human 
body,  without  which  there  could,  in  fact,  be  no  resurrection^ 
and  hence  no  admittance  to  eternal  glory.1  It  therefore  aims 
not  to  mortify  the  body,  but  perfectly  to  control  and  sanctify  it. 
For  the  metaphysical  dualism  between  spirit  and  matter,  it  sub- 
stitutes the  ethical  conflict  between  the  spirit  and  the  flesh. 
But  in  practice  it  exceeds  the  simple  and  sound  limits  of  the 
Bible,  falsely  substitutes  the  bodily  appetites  and  affections,  or 
sensuous  nature,  as  such,  for  the  flesh,  or  the  principle  of  selfish- 
ness, which  resides  in  the  soul  as  well  as  the  body ;  and  thus, 
with  all  its  horror  of  heresy,  really  joins  in  the  Gnostic  and 
Manichsean  hatred  of  the  body  as  the  prison  of  the  spirit.  This 
comes  out  especially  in  the  depreciation  of  marriage  and  the 
family  life,  that  divinely  appointed  nursery  of  church  and  state, 
and  in  excessive  self-inflictions,  to  which  the  apostolic  piety 
affords  not  the  remotest  parallel.  The  heathen  Gnostic  prin- 
ciple of  separation  from  the  world  and  from  the  body,2  as  a 
means  of  self-redemption,  after  being  theoretically  exterminated, 
stole  into  the  church  by  a  back  door  of  practice,  directly  in  face 
of  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  high  destiny  of  the  body  and 
perfect  redemption  through  Christ. 

The  Alexandrian  fathers  furnished  a  theoretical  basis  for 
this  asceticism  in  the  distinction  of  a  lower  and  "higher  morality, 
which  corresponds  to  the  Platonic  or  Pythagorean  distinction 
-between  the  life  according  to  nature  and  the  life  above  nature, 
•or  the  practical  and  contemplative  life.  It  was  previously  sug- 
gested by  Hermas  about  the  middle  of  the  second  century.3  Ter- 

1  The  51st  Apostolic  Canon,  while  favoring  asceticism  as  a  useful  discipline, 
condemns  those  who  "abhor"  things  in  themselves  innocent,  as  marriage,  01 
flesh,-or  wine,  and  "blasphemously  slander  God's  work,  forgetting  that  all 
things  are  very  good,  and  that  God  made  man,  male  and  female."  The 
Canon  implies  that  there  were  such  heretical  ascetics  in  the  chorch,  and  they 
Are  threatened  with  excommunication. 

1  Entwetilichung  and  Entleiblichung. 

*  Pastor  Hermes.    Simtt.  V.  3.    "  I*  j^u  do  any  good  beyond  or  outsit  o) 


39i  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

tullian  made  a  corresponding  opposite  distinction  of  mortal  and 
venial  sins.1  Here  was  a  source  of  serious  practical  errors,  and 
an  encouragement  both  to  moral  laxity  and  ascetic  extravagance 
The  ascetics,  and  afterwards  the  monks,  formed  or  claimed  to 
be  a  moral  nobility,  a  spiritual  aristocracy,  above  the  common 
Christian  people  ;  as  the  clergy  stood  in  a  separate  caste  of  in- 
violable dignity  above  the  laity,  who  were  content  with  a  lower 
grade  of  virtue.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  otherwise  remarkable 
for  his  elevated  ethical  views,  requires  of  the  sage  or  gnostic, 
that  he  excel  the  plain  Christian  not  only  by  higher  knowledge, 
but  also  by  higher,  emotionless  virtue,  and  stoical  superiority  to 
all  bodily  conditions;  and  he  inclines  to  regard  the  body,  with 
Plato,  as  the  grave  and  fetter2  of  the  soul.  How  little  he  un- 
derstood the  Pauline  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  may  be 
inferred  from  a  passage  in  the  Stromata,  where  he  explains  the 
word  of  Christ  :  "  Thy  faith  hath  saved  thee,"  as  referring,  not 
to  faith  simply,  but  to  the  Jews  only,  who  lived  according  to 
the  law;  as  if  faith  was  something  to  be  added  to  the  good 
works,  instead  of  being  the  source  and  principle  of  the  holy  life.3 
Origen  goes  still  further,  and  propounds  quite  distinctly  the 
catholic  doctrine  of  two  kinds  of  morality  and  piety,  a  lower 
for  all  Christians,  and  a  higher  for  saints  or  the  select  few.4  He 


what  is  commanded  by  God  (e/crdf  rfc  hro^g  rov  #eo5),  you  will  gain  for 
yourself  more  abundant  glory  (fiut;av  ireptcaQTEpav),  and  will  be  more  honored 
by  God  than  you  would  otherwise  be." 
1  Peccata  irremissibilia  and  remissibilia,  or  -/nortalia  and  venialia. 


3  Strom.  VI.  14  :  «  When  we  hear,  '  Thy  faith  hath  saved  thee'  (Mark  5  :  34), 
we  do  not  understand  him  to  say  absolutely  that  those  who  have  believed  in 
any  way  whatever  shall  be  saved,  unless  also  works  follow.    But  it  was  to  the 
Jews  alone  that  he  spoke  this  utterance,  who  kept  the  law  and  lived  blame- 
lessly, who  wanted  only  faith  in  the  Lord." 

4  j?ji  Ep.  ad  Earn.  c.  iii.  ed.  de  la  Rue  iv.  p.  507  :  "  Donee  gui&  hoc  tantumfacit, 
quod  debet,  i.  e.  qua  prcecepfa  sunt,  inutilis  servus.    Si  autem  addas  aliquid  ad 
prcBceptum,  tune  non  jam  inutilis  seivus  em,  sed  dicetur  ad  te  :  Euge  serve  bone  ef 
fidelis.     Quid  autem  sit  quod  addatur  prceceptis  et  supra  debitum  fiat  Paulus  op. 
dixit  :   De  mrginibus  autem  prceeeptum  Domini  non  habeo,  consilium  autem  do, 
tamyuam  misericordiam  assecu'us  a  Domino  (1  Cor.  7  :  25).     Hoc  opus  super 
prceceptum  est.     Et  iterum  prceeeptum  est,  ut  hi  qui  evangeliwm,  nundantj  de 
ecangdio  vimnt.    Paulus  autem  dicit,  quia  nullo  korum  usus  $um:  et  ideo  non 
intttUis  erit  smitf,  sedjidelis  et  vrudens." 


105.  HERETICAL  AND  CATHOLIC  ASCETICISM.        395 


1  i.  e.. 


includes  in  the  higher  morality  works  of  supererogation; 
works  not  enjoined  indeed  in  the  gospel,  yet  recommended  as 
counsels  of  perfection/  which  were  supposed  to  establish  a  pe- 
culiar merit  and  secure  a  higher  degree  of  blessedness.  He 
who  does  only  what  is  required  of  all  is  an  unprofitable  ser- 
vant;3 but  he  who  does  more,  who  performs,  for  example,  what 
Paul,  in  1  Cor.  7:  25,  merely  recommends,  concerning  the 
single  state,  or  like  him,  resigns  his  just  claim  to  temporal 
remuneration  for  spiritual  service,  is  called  a  good  and  faithful 
servant.4 

Among  these  works  were  reckoned  martyrdom,  voluntary 
poverty,  and  voluntary  celibacy.  All  three,  or  at  least  the  last 
two  of  these  acts,  in  connection  with  the  positive  Christian  vir- 
tues, belong  to  the  idea  of  the  higher  perfection,  as  distinguished 
from  the  fulfilment  of  regular  duties,  or  ordinary  morality.  To 
poverty  and  celibacy  was  afterwards  added  absolute  obedience; 
and  these  three  things  were  the  main  subjects  of  the  eonsilia 
evangelica  and  the  monastic  vow. 

The  grounds  which  these  particular  virtues  were  so  strongly 
urged  is  easily  understood.  Property,  which  is  so  closely  allied 
to  the  selfishness  of  man  and  binds  him  to  the  earth,  and  sexual 
intercourse,  which  brings  out  sensual  passion  in  its  greatest 
strength,  and  which  nature  herself  covers  with  the  veil  of  mo- 
desty;— these  present  themselves  as  the  firmest  obstacles  to  that 
perfection,  in  which  God  alone  is  our  possession,  and  Christ 
alone  our  love  and  delight. 

In  these  things  the  ancient  heretics  went  to  the  extreme. 
The  Ebionites  made  poverty  the  condition  of  salvation.  The 
Gnostics  were  divided  between  the  two  excesses  of  absolute  self- 
denial  and  unbridled  self-indulgence.  The  Marcionites,  Carpo- 
cratians,  Prodicians,  false  Basilidians,  and  Manichseans  objected 
to  individual  property,  from  hatred  to  the  material  world ;  and 

1  Opera  supererogatoria. 

2  Matt.  19 :  21 ;  Luke  14:  26 j  1  Cor.  7 ;  8«q.  25.    Hence  aomHia  evangelica, 
in  distinction  from  pracepta. 

5  Luke  17 :  10.    *  Matt.  25 :  21. 


396  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-811. 

Epiphanes,  in  a  book  "on  Justice"  about  125,  defined  virtue  as 
a  community  with  equality,  and  advocated  the  community  ot 
goods  and  women.  The  more  earnest  of  these  heretics  entirely 
prohibited  marriage  and  procreation  as  a  diabolical  work,  as 
in  the  case  of  Saturninus,  Marcion,  and  the  Encratites ;  while 
other  Gnostic  sects  substituted  for  it  the  most  shameless  promis- 
cuous intercourse,  as  in  Carpocrates,  Epiphanes,  and  the  Nico- 
laitans. 

The  ancient  church,  on  the  contrary,  held  to  the  divine  insti- 
tution of  property  and  marriage,  and  was  content  to  recommend 
the  voluntary  renunciation  of  these  intrinsically  lawful  pleasures 
to  the  few  elect,  as  means  of  attaining  Christian  perfection.  She 
declared  marriage  holy,  virginity  more  holy.  But  unquestion- 
ably even  the  church  fathers  so  exalted  the  higher  holiness  of 
virginity,  as  practically  to  neutralize,  or  at  least  seriously  to 
weaken,  their  assertion  of  the  holiness  of  marriage.  The  Eoman 
church,  in  spite  of  the  many  Bible  examples  of  married  men  oi 
God  from  Abraham  to  Peter,  can  conceive  no  real  holiness  with- 
out celibacy,  and  therefore  requires  celibacy  of  its  clergy  without 
exception. 

§  106.    Voluntary  Poverty. 

The  recommendation  of  voluntary  poverty  was  based  on  a 
literal  interpretation  of  the  Lord's  advice  to  the  rich  young 
ruler,  who  had  kept  all  the  commandments  from  his  youth  op  : 
"If  thou  wouldest  be  perfect,  go,  sell  that  thou  hast,  and  give 
to  the  poor,  and  thou  shaJt  have  treasure  in  heaven:  and  come, 
follow  me."1    To  this  were  added  the  actual  examples  of  the 
poverty  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  and  the  community  of  goods 
hi  the  first  Christian  church  at  Jerusalem.    Many  Christians, 
not  of  the  ascetics  only,  but  also  of  the  clergy,  like  Cyprian, 
accordingly  gave  up  all  their  property  at  their  conversion,  for 
the  benefit  of  the  poor.    The  later  monastic  societies  sought  to 
represent  in  their  community  of  goods  the  original  equality  and 
the  perfect  brotherhood  of  men. 
Yet  on  the  other  hand,  we  meet  with  more  moderate  view* 

1  Matt.  19:  21, 


§107.  VOLUNTARY  CELIBACY,  397 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  for  example,  in  a  special  treatise  on  the 
right  use  of  wealth/  observes,  that  the  Saviour  forbade  not  so 
much  the  possession  of  earthly  property,  as  the  love  of  it  and 
desire  for  it  •  and  that  it  is  possible  to  retain  the  latter,  even 
though  the  possession  itself  be  renounced.  The  earthly,  says  he, 
is  a  material  and  a  means  for  doing  good,  and  the  unequal  dis- 
tribution of  property  is  a  divine  provision  for  the  exercise  of 
Christian  love  and  beneficence.  The  true  riches  are  the  virtue, 
which  can  and  should  maintain  itself  under  all  outward  condi- 
tions ;  the  false  are  the  mere  outward  possession,  which  comes 
and  goes. 

§  107.    Voluntary  Celibacy. 

The  old  catholic  exaggeration  of  celibacy  attached  itself  to 
four  passages  of  Scripture,  viz.  Matt.  19:  12;  22:  30;  1  Cor. 
7:  7  sqq.;  and  Eev.  14:  4;  but  it  went  far  beyond  them,  and 
unconsciously  admitted  influences  from  foreign  modes  of  thought. 
The  words  of  the  Lord  in  Matt.  22:  30  (Luke  20:  35  sq.)  were 
most  frequently  cited ;  but  they  expressly  limit  unmarried  life 
to  the  angels,  without  setting  it  up  as  the  model  for  men.  Eev. 
14 :  4  was  taken  by  some  of  the  fathers  more  correctly  in  the 
symbolical  sense  of  freedom  from  the  pollution  of  idolatry. 
The  example  of  Christ,  though  often  urged,  cannot  here  furnish 
a  rule;  for  the  Son  of  God  and  Saviour  of  the  world  was  too  far 
above  all  the  daughters  of  Eve  to  find  an  equal  companion 
among  them,  and  in  any  case  cannot  be  conceived  as  holding 
such  relations.  The  whole  church  of  the  redeemed  is  his  pure 
bride.  Of  the  apostles  some  at  least  were  married,  and  among 
them  Peter,  the  oldest  and  most  prominent  of  all.  The  advice 
of  Paul  in  1  Cor.  ch.  7  is  so  cautiously  given,  that  even  here 
the  view  of  the  fathers  found  but  partial  support ;  especially  if 
balanced  with  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  where  marriage  is  presented 
as  the  proper  condition  for  the  clergy.  Nevertheless  he  was 
frequently  made  the  apologist  of  celibacy  by  orthodox  and 

1  Tif  6  0u±6fievoe  irTiovatoe. 


,:$fjb  SECOND  PERIOD.     A.D.  100-311. 

heretical  writers.1     Judaism — with  the  exception  of  the  pagan 
izing  Essenes,  who  abstained  from  marriage — highly  honors  the 
family  life;  it  allows  marriage  even  to  the  priests  and  the  high- 
priests,  who  had  in  fact  to  maintain  their  order  by  physical 
reproduction ;  it  considers  unfruitfulness  a  disgrace  or  a  curse. 

Heathenism,  on  the  contrary,  just  because  of  its  own  degrada- 
tion of  woman,  and  its  low,  sensual  conception  of  marriage,  fre- 
quently includes  celibacy  in  its  ideal  of  morality,  and  associates  it 
with  worship.  The  noblest  form  of  heathen  virginity  appears 
in  the  six  Vestal  virgins  of  Rome,  who,  while  girls  of  from  six 
to  ten  years,  were  selected  for  the  service  of  the  pure  goddess, 
and  set  to  keep  the  holy  fire  burning  on  its  altar ;  but,  after 
serving  thirty  years,  were  allowed  to  return  to  secular  life  and 
inarry.  The  penalty  for  breaking  their  vow  of  chastity  was  to 
be  buried  alive  in  the  campus  sceleratus. 

The  ascetic  depreciation  of  marriage  is  thus  due,  at  least  in 
part,  to  the  influence  of  heathenism.  But  with  this  was  asso- 
ciated tte  Christian  enthusiasm  for  angelic  purity  in  opposition 
to  the  horrible  licentiousness  of  the  Graeco-Roman  world.  It 
was  long  before  Christianity  raised  woman  and  the  family  life 
to  the  purity  and  dignity  which  became  them  in  the  kingdom  of 
God.  In  this  view,  we  may  the  more  easily  account  for  many 
expressions  of  the  church  fathers  respecting  the  female  sex,  and 
warnings  against  intercourse  with  women,  which  to  us,  in  the 
present  state  of  European  and  American  civilization,  sound  per- 
fectly coarse  and  unchristian.  John  of  Damascus  has  collected 
in  his  Parallels  such  patristic  expressions  as  these :  "  A  woman 
is  an  evil."  "  A  rich  woman  is  a  double  evil."  "  A  beautiful 
woman  is  a  whited  sepulchre."  "  Better  is  a  man's  wickedness 
ihan  a  woman's  goodness."  The  men  who  could  write  so,  must 

1  Thus,  for  example,  in  the  rather  worthless  apocryphal  Acfa  Pauli  et  Thedce, 
which  are  first  mentioned  by  Tertullian  (De  Baptismo,  c.  17,  as  the  production 
of  a  certain  Asiatic  presbyter),  and  must  therefore  have  existed  in  the  second 
century.  There  Paul  is  made  to  say :  Maic&ptot  ol  tyKpoTBte,  bn  avrois  Acdfaet 
.  paKdpioi  ol  excnrse  ywaiKac  <5c  $  &XOVTSS,  fci  afoot  K^povo^ffovffi  row 
> . . .  fiampia  ra  c&para  T&V  Kapdtvw,  brt  avrb  svapeffrfoovctv  r£  Qs$  ml  OVK 
ccHwv  rbv  fiLc^ov  r?f  ayveias  avr&v.  See  Tischendorf :  Aeta  Apostolorum 
Apocrypha-  Lips.  1851,  p.  42  » 


3  107.  VOLUNTARY  CELIBACY.  399 

have  forgotten  the  beautiful  passages  to  the  contrary  in  the 
proverbs  of  Solomon  •  yea,  they  must  have  forgotten  their  own 
mothers. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  may  be  said,  that  the  preference  given 
to  virginity  had  a  tendency  to  elevate  woman  in  the  social  sphere 
and  to  emancipate  her  from  that  slavish  condition  under  hea- 
thenism, where  she  could  be  disposed  of  as  an  article  of  mer- 
chandise by  parents  or  guardians,  even  in  infancy  or  childhood. 
It  should  not  be  forgotten  that  many  virgins  of  the  early  church 
devoted  their  whole  energies  as  deaconesses  to  the  care  of  the 
sick  and  the  poor,  or  exhibited  as  martyrs  a  degree  of  passive 
virtue  and  moral  heroism  altogether  unknown  before.  Such 
virgins  Cyprian,  in  his  rhetorical  language,  calls  "the  flowers  of 
the  church,  the  masterpieces  of  grace,  the  ornament  of  nature, 
the  image  of  God  reflecting  the  holiness  of  our  Saviour,  the 
most  illustrious  of  the  flock  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  commenced  on 
earth  that  life  which  we  shall  lead  once  in  heaven." 

The  excessive  regard  for  celibacy  and  the  accompanying  de- 
preciation of  marriage  date  from  about  the  middle  of  the  second 
century,  and  reach  their  height  in  the  Nicene  age. 

Ignatius,  in  his  epistle  to  Polycarp,  expresses  himself  as  yet 
very  moderately  :  "  If  any  one  can  remain  in  chastity  of  the 
flesh  to  the  glory  of  the  Lord  of  the  flesh  "  [or,  according  to  an- 
other reading,  "  of  the  flesh  of  the  Lord],  let  him  remain  thus 
without  boasting;1  if  he  boast,  he  is  lost,  and  if  it  be  made 
known,  beyond  the  bishop,2  he  is  ruined/'  What  a  stride  from 
this  to  the  obligatory  celibacy  of  the  clergy!  Yet  the  admoni- 
tion leads  us  to  suppose,  that  celibacy  was  thus  early,  in  the 
beginning  of  the  second  century,  in  many  cases,  boasted  of  as 
meritorious,  and  allowed  to  nourish  spiritual  pride.  Ignatius  is 


a  Eav  yvua&fi  ir^fyv  row  eTr/ff/afaov,  according  to  the  larger  Greek  recension, 
a,  5,  with  which  the  Syriac  (c.  2)  and  Armenian  versions  agree.  But  the 
shorter  Greek  recension  reads  nteov  for  ntip,  which  would  give  the  Beuse  : 
"  If  he  tljink  himself  (on  that  account)  above  the  (married)  bishop  ?  «i  7/10- 


400  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

the  first  to  call  voluntary  virgins  brides  of  Christ  and  jewels  of 
Christ. 

Justin  Martyr  goes  further.  He  points  to  many  Christians  of 
both  sexes  who  lived  to  a  great  age  unpolluted ;  and  he  desires 
eelibacy  to  prevail  to  the  greatest  possible  extent.  He  refers  to 
the  example  of  Christ,  and  expresses  the  singular  opinion,  that 
the  Lord  was  born  of  a  virgin  only  to  put  a  limit  to  sensual 
desire,  and  to  show  that  God  could  produce  without  the  sexual 
agency  of  man.  His  disciple  Tatian  ran  even  to  the  Gnostic 
extreme  upon  this  point,  and,  in  a  lost  work  on  Christian  per- 
fection, condemned  conjugal  cohabitation  as  a  fellowship  of  cor- 
ruption destructive  of  prayer.  At  the  same  period  Athenagoras 
wrote,  in  his  Apology:  "Many  may  be  found  among  us,  of  both 
sexes,  who  grow  old  unmarried,  full  of  hope  that  they  are  in 
this  way  more  closely  united  to  God." 

Clement  of  Alexandria  is  the  most  reasonable  of  all  the 
fathers  in  his  views  on  this  point.  He  considers  eunuchism  a 
special  gift  of  divine  grace,  but  without  yielding  it  on  this  ac- 
count preference  above  the  married  state.  On  the  contrary,  he 
vindicates  with  great  decision  the  moral  dignity  and  sanctity  of 
marriage  against  the  heretical  extravagances  of  his  time,  and 
lays  down  the  general  principle,  that  Christianity  stands  not  in 
outward  observances,  enjoyments,  and  privations,  but  in  right- 
eousness and  peace  of  heart.  Of  the  Gnostics  he  says,  that, 
under  the  fair  name  of  abstinence,  they  act  impiously  towards 
the  creation  and  the  holy  Creator,  and  repudiate  marriage  and 
procreation  on  the  ground  that  a  man  should  not  introduce 
others  into  the  world  to  their  misery,  and  provide  new  nourish- 
ment for  death.  He  justly  charges  them  with  inconsistency  in. 
despising  the  ordinances  of  God  and  yet  enjoying  the  nourish- 
ment created  by  the  same  hand,  breathing  his  air,  and  abiding 
in  his  world.  He  rejects  the  appeal  to  the  example  of  Christ, 
because  Christ  needed  no  help,  and  because  the  church  is  his 
bride.  The  apostles  also  he  cites  against  the  impugners  of  mar- 
riage. Peter  and  Philip  begot  children;  Philip  gave  his  daugh- 
ters in  marriage;  and  even  Paul  hesitated  uot  to  speak  of  Q 


1 107.  VOLUNTARY  CELIBACY.  401 

female  companion  (rather  only  of  his  right  to  lead  about  such 
an  one,  as  well  as  Peter).  TFe  seem  translated  into  an  entirely 
different,  Protestant  atmosphere,  when  in  this  genial  writer  we 
read :  The  perfect  Christian,  who  has  the  apostles  for  his  pat- 
terns, proves  himself  truly  a  man  in  this,  that  he  chooses  not  a 
solitary  life,  but  marries,  begets  children,  cares  for  the  house- 
hold, yet  under  all  the  temptations  which  his  care  for  wife  and 
children,  domestics  and  property,  presents,  swerves  not  from  his 
love  to  God,  and  as  a  Christian  householder  exhibits  a  miniature 
of  the  all-ruling  Providence. 

But  how  little  such  views  agreed  with  the  spirit  of  that  age, 
we  see  in  Clement's  own  stoical  and  Platonizing  conception  of 
the  sensual  appetites,  and  still  more  in  his  great  disciple  Origen, 
who  voluntarily  disabled  himself  in  his  youth,  and  could  hot 
think  of  the  act  of  generation  as  anything  but  polluting.  Hie- 
racas,  or  Hierax,  of  Leontopolis  in  Egypt,  who  lived  during  the 
Diocletian  persecution,  and  probably  also  belonged  to  the  Alex- 
andrian school,  is  said  to  have  carried  his  asceticism  to  a  hereti- 
cal extreme,  and  to  have  declared  virginity  a  condition  of  sal- 
vation under  the  gospel  dispensation.  Epiphanius  describes  him 
as  a  man  of  extraordinary  biblical  and  medical  learning,  who 
knew  the  Bible  by  heart,  wrote  commentaries  in  the  Greek  and 
Egyptian  languages,  but  denied  the  resurrection  of  the  material 
body  and  the  salvation  of  children^  because  there  can  be  no  re- 
ward without  conflict,  "and  no  conflict  without  knowledge  (1 
Tim.  2:  11).  He  abstained  from  wine  and  animal  food,  and 
gathered  around  him  a  society  of  ascetics,  who  were  called  Hie- 
racitse.1  Methodius  was  an  opponent  of  the  spiritualistic,  but 
not  of  the  ascetic  Origen,  and  wrote  an  enthusiastic  plea  for  vir- 
ginity, founded  on  the  idea  of  the  church  as  the  pure,  unspotted, 

i  Epiphan.  J3cer.  67 ;  August.  jETcer.  47.  Comp.  Meander,  Walch,  and  the 
articles  of  Harnack  in  Herzog  (VI.  100),  and  Salmon  in  Smith  &  Wace  (in. 
24).  Epiphanius,  the  heresy  hunter,  probably  exaggerated  the  doctrines  of 
Hieracas,  although  he  treats  his  asceticism  with  respect.  It  is  hardly  credible 
that  he  should  have  excluded  married  Christians  and  all  children  from  heaven 
onless  he  understood  by  it  only  the  highest  degree  of  blessedness,  as  Neander 
Eta. 
Vol.  1L— 26 


402  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

ever  young,  and  ever  beautiful  bride  of  God.  Yet,  quite  re- 
markably, in  his  "  Feast  of  the  Ten  Virgins/'  the  virgins  ex- 
press themselves  respecting  the  sexual  relations  with  a  minute- 
ness which,  to  our  modern  taste,  is  extremely  indelicate  and 
offensive. 

As  to  the  Latin  fathers:  The  views  of  Tertullian  for  and 
against  marriage,  particularly  against  second  marriage,  we  have 
already  noticed.1  His  disciple  Cyprian  differs  from  him  in  his 
ascetic  principles  only  by  greater  moderation  in  expression,  and, 
in  his  treatise  De  Habitu  Yirginwn,  commends  the  unmarried 
life  on  the  ground  of  Matt.  19 : 12;  1  Cor.  7,  and  Eev.  14:  4. 

Celibacy  was  most  common  with  pious  virgins,  who  married 
themselves  only  to  God  or  to  Christ,2  and  in  the  spiritual  de- 
lights of  this  heavenly  union  found  abundant  compensation  for 
the  pleasures  of  earthly  matrimony.    But  cases  were  not  rare 
where  sensuality,  thus  violently  suppressed,  asserted  itself  under 
other  forms;  as,  for  example,  in  indolence  and  ease  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  church,  which  Tertullian  finds  it  necessary  to  cen- 
sure; or  in  the  vanity  and  love  of  dress,  which  Cyprian  rebukes; 
and,  worst  of  all,  in  a  desperate  venture  of  asceticism,  which 
probably  often  enough  resulted  in  failure,  or  at  least  filled  the 
imagination  with  impure  thoughts.    Many  of  these  heavenly 
brides3  lived  with  male  ascetics,  and  especially  with  unmarried 
clergymen,  under  pretext  of  a  purely  spiritual  fellowship,  in  so 
intimate  intercourse  as  to  put  their  continence  to  the  most  peril- 
ous test,  and  wantonly  challenge  temptation,  from  which  we 
should  rather  pray  to  be  kept.    This  unnatural  and  shameless 
practice  was  probably  introduced  by  the  Gnostics;  Irenseus  at 
least  charges  it  upon  them.    The  first  trace  of  it  in  the  church 
appears  early  enough,  though  under  a  rather  innocent  allegorical 
form,  in  the  Pastor  Hermes,  which  originated  in  the  Roman 
church.*    It  is  next  mentioned  in  the  Pseudo-Clementine  Epis- 

1  See  2  99,  p.  367.  t  ^ptce  Deo,  Ckneto. 

'  'Adetytit,  sorore*  (1  Cor.  9:5);  afterwards  cleverly  called  ywaiKec  cwtioaKrot. 
mulieres  subintrodiietue.  extraneae- 
4  $imil.  IX,  c.  ]  1    (ed.  Gcbhardt  &  Haraack,   p.  218).     The 


{ 108.  CELIBACY  OF  THE  CLEKGY.  403 

ties  Ad  Virgines.  In  the  third  century  it  prevailed  widely  in 
the  East  and  West.  The  worldly-minded  bishop  Paulus  of 
Antioch  favored  it  by  his  own  example.  Cyprian  of  Carthage 
came  out  earnestly,1  and  with  all  reason,  against  the  vicious 
practice,  in  spite  of  the  solemn  protestation  of  innocence  by  these 
"  sisters/3  and  their  appeal  to  investigations  through  midwives. 
Several  councils,  at  Elvira,  Ancyra,  ]S"icsea,  &c.,  felt  called  upon 
to  forbid  this  pseudo-ascetic  scandal.  Yet  the  intercourse  of 
clergy  with  "mulieres  submtroduetce"  rather  increased  than  dimi- 
nished with  the  increasing  stringency  of  the  celibate  laws,  and 
has  at  all  times  more  or  less  disgraced  the  Roman  priesthood. 

§  108.  Celibacy  of  the  Clergy. 

G-.  CALIXTUS  (Luth.) :  De  conjug.  ckricorum.   Helmst.  1631;  ed.  emend. 

K  Ph.  Kr.  HenJce,  1784,  2  Parts. 
L0D.  THOMASSIBT  (Rom.  Cath.,  d.  1696) :    Vefus  et  Nova  Ecclesia  Pis- 

dplina.    Lucae,  1728,  3  yols.  fol. ;  Mayence,  1787,  also  in  French. 

P.  I.  L.  II.  c.  60-67. 
FR.  ZACCARIA  (E.  0.) :   Storia  polemica  del  celibaio  sacro.    Bom.  1774 ; 

and  Nuova  giustificazione  del  celibate  sacro.    Fuligno,  1785. 
F.  W.   CAROVE   (Prot.) :    Vollstandige  Samndung  der   Colibatsgesetze. 

Francf.  1823. 
J.  ANT.  &  AUG.  THEII^ER  (E.  C.) :    Die  Einfuhrung  der  erzwungenen 

Eheksigkeit  bei  den  Geistlichen  u.  ihre  Folgen.    Altenb.  1828 ;  2  vols.  ; 

second  ed.    Augsburg,  1845.    In  favor  of  the  abolition  of  enforced 

celibacy. 

who  doubtless  symbolically  represent  the  Christian  graces  (fdes,  abitinentia, 
potestaSj  patientla,  simplicitas,  innocentia,  castitas,  httaritas,  veriias,  intelligentiaj 
concordia,  and  cantos,  comp.  c.  15),  there  say  to  Hernias,  when  he  proposes  an 
evening  walk:  Oi>  tivvaaai  a<p'  IJJJ.QV  avaxupqffai  ....  Mei?'  jj/ziiv  Koi/jLirDqarji  of 
afetydg,  KOI  ovtf  &f  avfy'  ^fref/of  yap  aSe?.<pbc  el*  Ka2  rov  %oixoi>  [£&2opev 
pera  cov  KarotKetv,  ^.iav  y&p  as  a-ytt.ir5)[t£v.  Then  the  first  of  these  virgins,  fides, 
comes  to  the  blushing  Hennas,  and  begins  to  kiss  him.  The  others  do  the 
fiame ;  they  lead  him  to  the  tower  (symbol  of  the  church),  and  sport  with 
him.  When  night  comes  on,  they  retire  together  to  rest,  with  singing  and 
prayer ;  ical  enetva,  he  continues,  per1  avrw  rrjv  vvicra  nal  SKQIM&IJV  xapa  rbv 
irbpyov.  'Earpcjcrav  6$  cd  Kaptitvot  rovg  T^insvQ  xirQva^  lavrQv  xaPait  KC"  *P* 
avfafavav  etc  rb  JJL&QV  avrav,  KOI  ov6£v  6^)f  iicoiow  d  $  irpoaijvxw™'  ^7^ 
)wer'  avr&v  adiaMirruc  irpoaqvxtfJTtv.  It  cannot  be  conceived  that  the  apostolic 
Hennas  wrote  such  silly  stuff.  It  sounds  much  more  like  a  later  Hermat 
towards  the  middle  of  the  second  century. 
1  tip.  LXII,  also  V.  and  VL 


404  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

TH.  FE.  KUTSCHE  (E.  C.) :  Geschichte  des  Oolibats  (from  the  time  of  the 
Apostles  to  Gregory  VII.)  Augsb.  1830. 

A.  MOHLEE :  Beleuchtung  der  (badischen)  Denkschrift  zur  Aufhebung 
des  Colibats.  In  his  <  Gesammelte  Schriften."  Eegensb.  1839,  vol. 
I.  177  sqq. 

C.  J.  EEFELE  (R.  C.) :  Beitrage  zur  Eirchengesch.    Vol.  1. 122-139. 

A.  DE  ROSKOYA^Y  (E.  C.) :  C&libatus  et  Bremarium  ....  a  monumentis 
omnium  s&culorum  demonstrata.  Pest,  1861.  4  YO!S.  A  collection 
of  material  and  official  decisions,  Schulte  calls  it  "  dn  ganzlich 
unkritischer  Abdruch  von  Quellen." 

HENRT  C.  LEA  (Prot.) :  An  Historical  Sketch  of  Sacerdotal  Celibacy  in 
the  Christian  Church.  Philadelphia,  1867;  2d  ed.  enlarged,  Boston, 
1884  (682  pp.) ;  the  only  impartial  and  complete  history  down  to  1880. 

PROBST  (E.  C.) :  KircWche  Disciplin,  1870. 

J.  FRIED,  vox.  SCHULTE  (Prof,  of  jurisprudence  in  Bonn,  and  one  of 
the  leaders  among  the  Old  Catholics) ;  Der  Colibatszwang  mid  dessen 
Aufhebung.  Bonn  1876  (96  pages).  Against  celibacy. 

All  the  above  works,  except  that  of  Lea,  are  more  or  less  con- 
troversial. Comp.  also,  on  the  Eoman  Oath,  side,  art.  Celibacy, 
MABTIGXY,  and  in  KnArs,  "Keal-Encykl.  der  christl.  Alterthiimer" 
(1881)  I.  304-307  by  Fmre,  and  in  the  new  ed.  of  WETZER  & 
WELTE'S  ft  Kirchenlexicon ; "  on  the  Prot.  side,  BINGHAM,  Book 
IV.  ch.  V. ;  HEEZOG2,  III.  299-303 ;  and  SMITH  &  CHEETHAM,  I. 
323-527. 

As  the  clergy  were  supposed  to  embody  the  moral  ideal  of 
Christianity,  and  to  be  in  the  full  sense  of  the  term  the  heritage 
of  God,  they  were  required  to  practise  especially  rigid  sexual 
temperance  after  receiving  their  ordination.  The  virginity  of 
the  church  of  Christ,  who  was  himself  born  of  a  virgin,  seemed, 
in  the  ascetic  spirit  of  the  age,  to  recommend  a  virgin  priest- 
hood as  coming  nearest  his  example,  and  best  calculated  to  pro- 
mote the  spiritual  interests  of  the  church. 

There  were  antecedents  in  heathenism  to  sacerdotal  celibacy. 
Buddhism  rigorously  enjoined  it  under  a  penalty  of  expulsion. 
The  Egyptian  priests  were  allowed  one,  but  forbidden  a  second 
Carriage,  while  the  people  practiced  unrestrained  polygamy. 
The  priestesses  of  the  Delphic  Apollo,  the  Achaian  Juno,  the 
Scythian  Diana,  and  the  Eoman  Vesta  were  virgins. 

In  the  ante-Xicene  period  sacerdotal  celibacy  did  not  as  yet 
become  a  matter  of  law,  but  was  left  optional,  like  the  vow  of 
chastity  among  the  laity.  In  the  Pastoral  Epistles  of  Paul 


§  108.  CELIBACY  OF  THE  CLERGY.  405 

marriage,  if  not  expressly  enjoined,  is  at  least  allowed  to  all 
ministers  of  the  gospel  (bishops  and  deacons),  and  is  presumed 
to  exist  as  the  rule.1  It  is  an  undoubted  fact  that  Peter  and 
several  apostles,  as  well  as  the  Lord's  brothers,  were  married,2 
and  that  Philip  the  deacon  and  evangelist  had  four  daughters.3 
It  is  also  self-evident  that,  if  marriage  did  not  detract  from  the 
authority  and  dignity  of  an  apostle,  it  cannot  be  inconsistent 
with  the  dignity  and  purity  of  any  minister  of  Christ.  The 
marriage  relation  implies  duties  and  privileges,  and  it  is  a 
strange  perversion  of  truth  if  some  writer^  under  the  influence 
of  dogmatic  prejudice  have  turned  the  apostolic  marriages,  and 
that  between  Joseph  and  Mary  into  empty  forms.  Paul  would 
have  expressed  himself  very  differently  if  he  had  meant  to 
deny  to  the  clergy  the  conjugal  intercourse  after  ordination,  as 

1  The  passages  1  Tim.  3:  2, 12;  Tit.  1 :  5,  where  St.  Paul  directs  that  pres- 
byter-bishops and  deacons  must  be  husbands  of  "  one  wife"  (utag  ywaLKbs  avdpts), 
are  differently  interpreted.     The  Greek  church  takes  the  words  both  as  com- 
manding (fel)  one  marriage  of  the  clergy  (to  the  exclusion,  however,  of  bishops 
who  muse  be  unmarried),  and  as  prohibiting  a  second  marriage.    The  Eoman 
church  understands  Paul  as  conceding  one  marriage  to  the  weakness  of  the 
flesh,  but  as  intimating  the  better  way  of  total  abstinence  (Comp.  1  Cor.  7 :  7, 
32,  33).    Protestant  commentators  are  likewise  divided;  some  refer  the  two 
passages  to  simultaneous,  others  to  successive  polygamy.    The  former  view 
was  held  even  by  some  Greek  fathers,  Theodore  of  Mopsueste  and  Theodoret; 
but  the  parallel  expression  evof  avtipb?  >in^,  1  Tim.  5 :  9,  seems  to  favor  the 
latter  view,  since  it  is  very  unlikely  that  polyandry  existed  in  apostolic 
churches.    And  yet  Paul  expressly  allows  without  a  censure  second  marriage 
after  the  death  of  the  former  husband  or  wife,  Rom.  7 :  2,  3;  1  Cor.  7:  39; 
1  Tim.  5:  14.     For  this  reason  some  commentators   (Matthies,  Hofmann, 
Huther  in  Meyer's  Com.)  understand  the  apostle  as  prohibiting  concubinage 
or  all  illegitimate  connubial  intercourse. 

2  1  Cor.  9:5:    "  Have  we  no  right  (k^nvaiav)  to  lead  about  a  wife  that  is  a 
believer  (adstyift  jwaiKa),  even  as  the  rest  of  the  apostles  (ol  I.OLXOI  fa.}  and 
the  brothers  of  the  Lord  (ol  adstyol  T.  K«p«w),  and  Cephas?"    The  definite 
article  seems   to  indicate  that  the  majority,  if  not   all,  the   apostles  and 
brothers  of  the  Lord  were  married.     The  only  certain  exception  is  John, 
and  probably  also  Paul,  though  he  may  have  been  a  widower,    Tertullian 
in  his  blind  zeal  argued  that  •ywalKa  is  to  be  rendered  mvlierem,  not  uxor&n 
(De  Monog.  c.  8),  but  his  contemporary,  Clement  of  Alex.,  does  not  question 
the  true  interpretation,  speaks  of  Pet^r,  Paul,  and  Philip,  as  married,  and  of 
Philip  as  giving  his  daughters  in  marriage.    Tradition  ascribes  to  Peter  a 
daughter,  St  Petronilla, 

s  Acts  21 :  a  9. 


406  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  V.  100-311. 

was  done  by  the  fathers  and  councils  in  the  fourth  century.  He 
expressly  classes  the  prohibition  of  marriage  (including  its  con- 
sequences) among  the  doctrines  of  demons  or  evil  spirits  that 
control  the  heathen  religions,  and  among  the  signs  of  the 
apostacy  of  the  latter  days.1  The  Bible  represents  marriage  as 
the  first  institution  of  God  dating  from  the  state  of  man's  in- 
nocency,  and  puts  the  highest  dignity  upon  it  in  the  Old  and 
New  Covenants.  Any  reflection  on  the  honor  and  purity  of 
the  married  state  and  the  marriage  bed  reflects  on  the  patriarchs, 
Moses,  the  prophets,  and  the  apostles,  yea,  on  the  wisdom  and 
goodness  of  the  Creator.2 

There  was  an  early  departure  from  these  Scripture  views  in 
the  church  under  the  irresistible  influence  of  the  ascetic  en- 
thusiasm for  virgin  purity.  The  undue  elevation  of  vir- 
ginity necessarily  implied  a  corresponding  depreciation  of 
marriage. 

The  scanty  documents  of  the  post-apostolic  age  give  us  only 
incidental  glimpses  into  clerical  households,  yet  sufficient  to 
prove  the  unbroken  continuance  of  clerical  marriages,  especially 
in  the  Eastern  churches,  and  at  the  same  time  the  superior  esti- 
mate put  upon  an  unmarried  clergy,  which  gradually  limited  or 
lowered  the  former. 

Polycarp  expresses  his  grief  for  Valens,  a  presbyter  in  Phil- 
ippi,  "  and  his  wife,"  on  account  of  his  covetousness.3  Irenseus 
mentions  a  married  deacon  in  Asia  Minor  who  was  ill-rewarded 
for  his  hospitality  to  a  Gnostic  heretic,  who  seduced  his  wife.* 
Rather  unfortunate  examples.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  one  of 
the  most  enlightened  among  the  ante-Nicene  fathers,  describes 
the  true  ideal  of  a  Christian  Gnostic  as  one  who  marries  and  has 
children,  and  so  attains  to  a  higher  excellence,  because  he  con- 

MTim.  4:  1-3. 

*  Comp.  Heb.  13:  4:  "Let  marriage  be  had  in  honor  among  all,  and  let  the 
bed  be  undefiled  '*  (rifitoq  6  ydiws  ev  iraat,  xal  77  Koirrj  afiiavTog). 

3  JEp.  ad  PhU.  c.  11.    Some  think  that  incontinence  or  adultery  is  referred  to; 
but  the  proper  reading  is  dilapyvpia,  avaritia,  not  vfaavegia. 

*  Adv.  Hoer.  1.  13,  5  (ed.  Stieren  1. 155). 


8  108.  CELIBACY  OF  THE  CLEBGY.  407 

quers  more  temptations  than  that  of  the  single  state.1  Tertul- 
lian,  though  preferring  celibacy,  was  a  married  priest,  and  ex- 
horted his  wife  to  refrain  after  his  death  from  a  second  marriage 
in  order  to  attain  to  that  ascetic  purity  which  was  impossible  du- 
ring their  menried  life.2  He  also  draws  a  beautiful  picture  of  the 
holy  beauty  of  a  Christian  family.  An  African  priest,  Xovatus 
— another  unfortunate  example — was  arraigned  for  murdering 
his  unborn  child.3  There  are  also  examples  of  married  bishops. 
Socrates  reports  that  not  even  bishops  were  bound  in  his  age  by 
any  law  of  celibacy,  and  that  many  bishops  during  their  episco- 
pate' begat  children.4  Athanasius  says:5  "Many  bishops  have 
not  contracted  matrimony;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  monks 
have  become  fathers.  Again,  we  see  bishops  who  have  children, 
and  monks  who  take  no  thought  of  having  posterity."  The 
father  of  Gregory  of  Nazianzum  (d.  390)  was  a  married  bishop, 
and  his  mother,  Nonna,  a  woman  of  exemplary  piety,  prayed 
earnestly  for  male  issue,  saw  her  future  son  in  a  prophetic  vision, 
and  dedicated  him,  before  his  birth,  to  the  service  of  God,  and 
he  became  the  leading  theologian  of  his  age.  Gregory  of  Xyssa 
(d.  about  394)  was  likewise  a  married  bishop,  though  he  gave 
the  preference  to  celibacy.  Synesius,  the  philosophic  disciple  of 
Hypatia  of  Alexandria,  when  pressed  to  accept  the  bishopric  of 
Ptolemais  (A.  D.  410),  declined  at  first,  because  he  was  unwilling 
to  separate  from  his  wife,  and  desired  numerous  offspring :  but 

i  Strom.  VII 12,  p.  741. 

8  Ad  Uxor.  1.7 :  "  Ut  quod  in  matrimonio  non  minimus,  in  viduitate  seciemur. 
This  clearly  implies  the  continuance  of  sexual  intercourse.  Tertullian  lays 
down  the  principle :  "  Defuncto  viro  matnmonium  defungitur?' 

3  Cyprian,  Epist.  52,  cap.  2,  Oxf.  ed.  and  ed.  Hart  el  (al.  48).  He  paints  his 
schismatical  opponent  in  the  darkest  colors,  and  charges  him  with  kicking  his 
wife  in  a  state  of  pregnancy,  and  thus  producing  a  miscarriage,  but  he  does 
not  censure  him  for  his  marriage. 

*Hwt.  Etd.  V.  22:  "In  the  East  all  clergymen,  and  even  the  bishops 
themselves  abstain  from  their  wives:  but  this  shey  do  of  their  own  accord, 
there  being  no  law  in  force  to  make  it  accessary ;  for  there  have  been  among 
them  many  bisbops  who  have  hud  children  by  their  lawful  wives  during  their 
episcopate.'' 

*  In  a  letter  to  the  Egyptian  monk  Dracontius,  who  had  scruples  about  ac- 
cepting a  call  to  the  episcopate. 


408  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

he  finally  accepted  the  office  without  a  separation.  This  proves 
that  his  case  was  already  exceptional.  The  sixth  of  the  Apos- 
tolical Canons  directs :  "  Let  not  a  bishop,  a  priest,  or  a  deacon 
cast  off  his  own  wife  under  pretence  of  piety;  but  if  he  does  cast 
her  off,  let  him  be  suspended.  If  he  go  on  in  it,  let  him  be  de- 
prived." The  Apostolical  Constitutions  nowhere  prescribe  cleri- 
cal celibacy,  but  assume  the  single  marriage  of  bishop,  priest, 
and  deacon  as  perfectly  legitimate.1 

The  inscriptions  on  the  catacombs  bear  likewise  testimony  to 
clerical  marriages  down  to  the  fifth  century.2 

1  This  is  substantially  also  the  position  of  Eusebius,  Epiphanius,  and 
Chrysostom,  as  far  as  we  may  infer  from  allusions,  and  their  expositions  of  1 
Tim.  3:  2,  although  all  preferred  celibacy  as  a  higher  state.  See  Funk, 
I.  c.  p.  305.  The  Synod  of  Gangra,  after  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century, 
anathematized  (Can.  4}  those  who  maintained  that  it  was  wrong  to  attend  the 
eucharistic  services  of  priests  living  in  marriage.  See  Hefele  I.  782,  who 
remarks  against  Baronius,  that  the  canon  means  such  priests  as  not  only 
had  wives,  but  lived  with  them  in  conjugal  intercourse  (mit  denselben  ehelich 
Mben).  The  Codex  EGdesiae  Bom.  ed.  by  Quesnel  omits  this  canon. 

*  Lundy  (Monumental  Christianity,  N.  Y,  1876,  p.  343  sqq.)  quotes  the  fol- 
lowing inscriptions  of  this  kind  from  Gruter,  Bosio,  Arringhi,  Burgon,  and 
other  sources : 

''The  place  of  the  Presbyter  Basil  and  his  Felicitas. 
They  made  it  for  themselves." 

"  Susanna,  once  the  happy  daughter  of  the  Presbyter  Gabinus, 
Here  lies  in  peace  joined  with  her  father." 

"Gaudentius,  the  Presbyter,  for  himself  and  his  wife  Severn,  a  virtuous 
woman,  who  lived  42  years,  3  months,  10  days.  Buried  on  the  4th 
after  the  nones  of  April,  Timasius  and  Promus  being  consuls.*' 

"Petronia,  the  wife  of  a  Levite,  type  of  modesty.  In  this  place  I  lay 
my  bones;  spare  your  tears,  dear  husband  and  daughters,  and  believe 
that  it  is  forbidden  to  weep  for  one  who  lives  in  God.  Buried  in 
peace,  on  the  third  before  the  nones  of  October." 

The  names  of  three  children  appear  on  the  same  tablet,  and  are  no  doubt 
those  referred  to  by  Petronia  as  hers,  with  the  consular  dates  of  their  burial, 
Her  own  interment  was  A,I>.  472. 

Gruter  and  Le  Bknt  both  publish  a  very  long  and  elaborate  inscription  at 
Narbonne,  A.  D.  427,  to  the  effect  that  Busticus  the  Bishop,  son  of  Bonosius,  a 
Bishop,  nephew  of  Aratoris,  another  Bishop,  etc.,  in  connection  with  the  pres- 
byter Ursus  and  the  deacon  Hermetus,  began  to  build  the  church;  and  that 
Montanus  the  sub- deacon  finished  the  apse,  etc. 


g!08.  CELIBACY  OF  THE  CLEBGY.         409 

At  the  same  time  the  tendency  towards  clerical  celibacy  set  in 
very  early,  and  made  steady  and  irresistible  progress,  especially 
in  the  West.  This  is  manifest  in  the  qualifications  of  the  facts 
and  directions  just  mentioned.  For  they  leave  the  impression 
that  there  were  not  many  happy  clerical  marriages  and  model 
•pastors'  wives  in  the  early  centuries  ;  nor  could  there  be  so  long 
as  the  public  opinion  of  the  church,  contrary  to  the  Bible,  ele- 
vated virginity  above  marriage. 

1.  The  first  step  in  the  direction  of  clerical  celibacy  was  the 
prohibition  of  second  marriage  to  the  clergy,  on  the  ground  that 
PauFs  direction  concerning  "the  husband  of  one  wife"  is  a  re- 
striction rather  than  a  command.  In  the  Western  church,  in 
the  early  part  of  the  third  century,  there  were  many  clergymen 
who  had  been  married  a  second  or  even  a  third  time,  and 
this  practice  was  defended  on  the  ground  that  Paul  allowed 
re-marriage,  after  the  death  of  one  party,  as  lawful  without  any 
restriction  or  censure.  This  fact  appears  from  the  protest  of  the 
Montanistic  Tertullian,  who  makes  it  a  serious  objection  to  the 
Catholics,  that  they  allow  digamists  to  preside,  to  baptize,  and 
to  celebrate  the  communion.1  Hippolytus,  who  had  equally 
rigoristic  views  on  discipline,  reproaches  about  the  same  time 
the  Roman  bishop  Callistus  with  admitting  to  sacerdotal  and 
episcopal  office  those  who  were  married  a  second  and  even  a 
third  time,  and  permitting  the  clergy  to  marry  after  having 
been  ordained.2  But  the  rigorous  practice  prevailed,  and  was 
legalized  in  the  Eastern  church.  The  Apostolical  Constitutions 
expressly  forbid  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  to  marry  a  second 
time.  They  also  forbid  clergymen  to  marry  a  concubine,  or  a 
slave,  or  a  widow,  or  a  divorced  won^an,  and  extend  the  prohi- 
bition of  second  marriage  even  to  cantors,  readers,  and  porters. 
As  to  the  deaconess,  she  must  be  "a  pure  virgin,  or  a  widow 
who  has  been  but  once  married,  faithful  and  well  esteemed."3 


1  He  asks  the  Catholics  with  indignation:    "  Qwt  enim  ct  d'igami 

apud  vos,  insidtontes  utique  apo<tofa  eerie  non  wiibexcentes,  cum  hcec  sub  Mis 
legunturf  ....  Digamus  tinguisf  digamus  offers  fv    X>e  Monog.  c.  12. 

2  PkUosoph.  IX.  12. 

3  CwisL  Ap.  VI.  17. 


410  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

The  Apostolical  Canons  give  similar  regulations,  and  declare 
that  the  husband  of  a  second  wife,  of  a  widow,  a  courtezan,  an 
actress,  or  a  slave  was  ineligible  to  the  priesthood.1 

2.  The  second  step  was  the  prohibition  of  marriage  and  con- 
jugal intercourse  after  ordination.  This  implies  the  incompati- 
bility of  the  priesthood  with  the  duties  and  privileges  of  mar- 
riage. Before  the  Council  of  Elvira  in  Spain  (306)  no  distinction 
was  made  in  the  Latin  church  between  marriages  before  and 
after  ordination.2  But  that  rigoristic  council  forbade  nuptial 
intercourse  to  priests  of  all  ranks  upon  pain  of  excommunication.3 
The  Council  of  Aries  (314)  passed  a  similar  canon.4  And  so 
did  the  Council  of  Ancyra  (314),  which,  however,  allows  deacons 
to  marrv  as  deacons,  in  case  they  stipulated  for  it  before  taking 
orders.5  This  exception  was  subsequently  removed  by  the  27th 

*  Can.  17, 18, 19,  27.  The  Jewish  high-priests  were  likewise  required  to 
marrr  a  virgin  of  their  own  people.  Lev.  21 :  16, 

1  Admitted  by  Prof.  Funk  (E.  Cath.),  who  quotes  Innocent,  Ep.  ad  Epise. 
Mated,  e.  2 ;  Leo  I  Ep.  XII.  c.  5.  He  also  admits  that  Paul's  direction  ex- 
cludes such  a  distinction.  See  Ejaus,  fied-Enc.  I.  304  sq. 

3  Qan.  33 :  ft  Placuit  in  totum  prohibere  episcopis,  presbyteris,  et  diaconibvs,  vel 
omnibus  dericis  positis  in  ministerio,  abstinere  se  a  conjugibus  suis,  et  non  generare 
flios;  quicunque  vero  fecerit,  ah  konore  clericatus  exterminetur."  Hefele  says 
(1. 168} :  "This  celebrated  canon  contains  the  first  law  of  celibacy."  It  is 
strange  that  the  canon  in  its  awkward  latinity  seems  to  prohibit  the  clergy  to 
abstain  from  their  wives,  when  in  fact  it  means  to  prohibit  the  intercourse.  On 
account  of  the  words  positis  in  ministeriOj  some  would  see  here  only  a  prohibi- 
tion of  sexual  commerce  at  the  time  of  the  performance  of  clerical  functions, 
as  in  the  Jewish  law ;  but  this  was  self-understood,  and  would  not  come  up  to 
the  disciplinary  standard  of  that  age.  How  little,  however,  even  in  Spain, 
that  first  law  on  celibacy  was  obeyed,  may  be  inferred  from  the  letter  of  Pope 
Siricins  to  Bishop  Himerius  of  Tarragona,  that  there  were,  at  the  close  of  the 
fourth  century,  plurimi  sacerdotes  Christi  et  leoitce  living  in  wedlock. 

*  Can.  6  (29,  see  Hefele  1. 217) :  "  Prceterea,  quod  dignu^pudicum  et  honestum 
estj  suademus  fratribus,  ut  sacerdotes  et  levita  cum  uxoribus  suis  non  coeant,  quia 
ministerio  quotidiano  occupantur.  Quicunque  contra  hane  constitutionem  fecerit,  a 
d&ritatws  honore  deponatur" 

&  Can.  10  (Hefele,  Conciliengesch.  I.  p.  230,  2*«  Aufl.).    The  canon  is  adopted 
in  the  Corpus  juris  can.  c.  S.  Dist.  28.    The  Synod  of  Neo-Csesarea,  between 
314-325,  can.  1,  forbids  the  priests  to  marry  on  pain  of  deposition.    This  does 
not  conflict  with  the  other  canon,  and  likewise  passed  into  the  Canon  Law  c 
9,  Dist  28.    See  Hefele,  I.  244.  ' 


4 id8.  CELIBACY  OF  THE  CLERGY.  411 

Apostolic  Canon,  which  allows  only  the  lectors  and  cantors  (be- 
longing to  the  minor  orders)  to  contract  marriage.1 

At  the  GEeuinenical  Council  of  Xicaea  (325)  an  attempt  was 
made,  probably  under  the  lead  of  Hosius,  bishop  of  Cordova — • 
the  connecting  link  between  Elvira  and  Xicsea — to  elevate  the 
Spanish  rule  to  the  dignity  and  authority  of  an  oecumenical  or- 
dinance, that  is,  to  make  the  prohibition  of  marriage  after  ordi- 
nation and  the  strict  abstinence  of  married  priests  from  conjugal 
intercourse,  the  universal  law  of  the  Church ;  but  the  attempt 
was  frustrated  by  the  loud  protest  of  Paphnutius,  a  venerable 
bishop  and  confessor  of  a  city  in  the  Upper  Thebaid  of  Egypt, 
who  had  lost  one  eye  in  the  Diocletian  persecution,  and  who  had 
himself  never  touched  a  woman.  He  warned  the  fathers  of  the 
council  not  to  impose  too  heavy  a  burden  on  the  clergy,  and  to 
remember  that  marriage  and  conjugal  intercourse  were  venerable 
and  pure.  He  feared  more  harm  than  good  from  excessive  rigor. 
It  was  sufficient,  if  unmarried  clergymen  remain  single  accord- 
ing to  the  ancient  tradition  of  the  church ;  but  it  was  wrong  to 
separate  the  married  priest  from  his  legitimate  wife,  whom  he 
married  while  yet  a  layman.  This  remonstrance  of  a  strict 
ascetic  induced  the  council  to  table  the  subject  and  to  leave  the 
continuance  or  discontinuance  of  the  married  relation  to  the 
free  choice  of  every  clergyman.  It  was  a  prophetic  voice  of 
warning.2 

The  Council  of  Nicsea  passed  no  kw  in  favor  of  celibacy ;  but 
it  strictly  prohibited  in  its  third  canon  the  dangerous  and  scan- 
dalous practice  of  unmarried  clergymen  to  live  with  an  unmar- 

1  "  Of  those  who  come  into  the  clergy  unmarried,  we  permit  only  the  read- 
ers and  singers,  if  they  are  so  minded,  to  marry  afterward." 

*  This  important  incident  of  Papbnutius  rests  on  the  unanimous  testimony 
of  the  well  informed  historians  Socrates  (Hist.  Ecd.  I.  11),  Sozomen  (JET  E. 
I.  23),  and  Gelaaius  Cyzic.  (Hist.  Cone.  Nic.  II.  32) ;  see  Mansi,  Harduin,  and 
Hefele  (I.  431-435).  It  agrees  moreover  with  the  directions  of  the  Apost. 
Const  and  Canons,  and  with  the  present  practice  of  the  Eastern  churches  on 
this  subject.  The  objections  of  Baronius,  Bellarmine,  Yalesius,  and  othei 
Eomanists  are  unfounded  and  refuted  by  Natalis  Alexander,  and  Hefele 
(L  c.).  Funk  (B.  C.)  says:  "Die  J&inwendungen,  die  gegen  den  BericM 
wrgebrocht  wurden,  yind  wttig  nichtig"  (utterly  futile). 


412  SECOND  PEB10D.    A,  D.  100-311. 

ried  woman/  unless  she  be  "a  mother  or  sister  or  aant  or  a 
person  above  suspicion."*  This  prohibition  must  not  be  con- 
founded with  prohibition  of  nuptial  intercourse  #ny  more  than 
those  spiritual  concubines  are  to  be  identified  with  regular  wives. 
It  proves,  however,  that  nominal  clerical  celibacy  must  have 
extensively  prevailed  at  the  time. 

The  Greek  Church  substantially  retained  the  position  of  the 
fourth  century,  and  gradually  adopted  the  principle  and  practice 
of  limiting  the  law  of  celibacy  to  bishops  (who  are  usually  taken 
from  monasteries),  and  making  a  single  marriage  the  rule  for 
the  lower  clergy;  the  marriage  to  take  place  before  ordination, 
and  not  to  be  repeated.  Justinian  excluded  married  men  from 
the  episcopate,  and  the  Trullan  Synod  (A.  D.  692)  legalized  the 
existing  practice.  In  Russia  (probably  since  1274),  the  single 
marriage  of  the  lower  clergy  was  made  obligatory.  This  is  an 
error  in  the  opposite  direction.  Marriage,  as  well  as  celibacy, 
should  be  left  free  to  each  man's  conscience. 

3.  The  Latin  Church  took  the  third  and  last  step,  the  abso- 
lute prohibition  of  clerical  marriage,  including  even  the  lower 
orders.  This  belongs  to  the  next  period;  but  we  will  here 
briefly  anticipate  the  result  Sacerdotal  marriage  was  first  pro- 
hibited by  Pope  Siricius  (A.  D.  385),  then  by  Innocent  I.  (402), 
Leo  I.  (440),  Gregory  I.  (590),  and  by  provincial  Synods  of 
Cairthage  (390  and  401),  Toledo  (400),  Orleans  (538),  Orange 
(441),  Aries  (443  or  452),  Agde  (506),  Gerunda  (517).  The 
great  teachers  of  the  K"icene  and  post-Mcene  age,  Jerome,  Au- 
gustin,  and  Chrysostom,  by  their  extravagant  laudations  of  the 
superior  sanctity  of  virginity,  gave  this  legislation  the  weight  of 
their  authority.  St.  Jerome,  the  author  of  the  Latin  standard 

1  Euphoniously  called  (rweiffaicros,  mbintrodwsta  (introduced  as  a  companion), 
fyaTnrrf,  soror.    See  Hefele,  1. 380.    Comp.  on  this  canon  W.  Bright,  Notes 
on  the  Canons  of  the  First  Four  General  Cbimcife.    Oxford,  1882,  pp.  8,  9.    A 
Council  of  Antioch  had  deposed  Paul  of  Samosata,  bishop  of  Antioch,  for  thii 
nasty  practice,  and  for  heresy.    Euseb.  H.  E,  VII.  30. 

2  Notwithstanding  this  canonical  prohibition  the  'disreputable  practice  con' 
tinned.    Chrysostom  wrote  a  discourse  ''  against  persons  sxovrag  napftivovt 
owsiffdKrov?,"  and  another  urging  the  dedicated  virgins  not  to  live  with  them. 
Jerome  complains  of  the  "pestis  agapetarum"  (Ep.  XXIT.  11). 


§  108.  CELIBACY  OF  THE  CLEEGY.  413 

version  of  the  Bible,  took  the  lead  in  this  ascetic  crusade  against 
marriage,  and  held  up  to  the  clergy  as  the  ideal  aim  of  the 
saint,  to  "cut  down  the  wood  of  marriage  by  the  ase  of  virgin- 
ity." He  was  willing  to  praise  marriage,  but  only  as  the  nursery 
of  virgins.1 

Thus  celibacy  was  gradually  enforced  in  the  Vest  under 
the  combined  influence  of  the  sacerdotal  and  hierarchical  in- 
terests to  the  advantage  of  the  hierarchy,  but  to  the  injury  of 
morality.2 

For  while  voluntary  abstinence,  or  such  as  springs  from  a 
special  gift  of  grace,  is  honorable  and  may  be  a  great  blessing  to 
the  church,  the  forced  celibacy  of  the  clergy,  or  celibacy  as  a 
universal  condition  of  entering  the  priesthood,  does  violence  to 
nature  and  Scripture,  and,  all  sacramental  ideas  of  marriage  to 
the  contrary  notwithstanding,  degrades  this  divine  ordinance, 
which  descends  from  the  primeval  state  of  innocence,  and  sym- 
bolizes the  holiest  of  all  relations,  the  union  of  Christ  with  his 
church.  But  what  is  in  conflict  with  nature  and  nature's  God 
is  also  in  conflict  with  the  highest  interests  of  morality.  Much, 
therefore,  as  Catholicism  has  done  to  raise  woman  and  the  family 
life  from  heathen  degradation,  we  still  find,  in  general,  that  in 

1  Ep.  XXII.     "  Laudo   nuptias,  laudo   conjugium,  sed  quia  miki  virgines 
generant."    Comp.  Ep.  CXXIIJ. 

2  And  the  Boman  church  seems  to  care  more  for  the  power,  than  for  the 
purity  of  the  clergy.    Gregory  VII.,  who  used  all  his  unflinching  energy  to 
enforce  celibacy,  said  openly :  "  Non  liberari  potest  ecde&ia  a  servitude  laicQrum, 
itm  liberentwr  cferici  06  uxoribus."   As  clerical  celibacy  is  a  matter  of  discipline, 
not  of  doctrine,  the  Pope  might  at  any  time  abolish  it,  and  Aeneas  Sylvius, 
before  he  ascended  the  chair  of  Peter  as  Pius  II.  (1458  to  1464),  remarked 
that  marriage  had  been  denied  to  priests  for  good  and  sufficient  reasons,  but 
thai  still  stronger  ones  now  required  its  restoration.    The  United  Greeks  and 
Maronites  are  allowed  to  retain  their  wives.    Joseph  II.  proposed  to  extend 
the  permission.     During  the  French  Eevolution,  and  before  the  conclusion 
of  the  Concordat  (1801),  many  priests  and  nuns  were  married.    But  the 
hierarchical  interest  always  defeated  in  the  end  snch  movements,  and  preferred 
to  keep  the  clergy  aloof  from  the  laity  in  order  to  exercise  a  greater  power 
over  it.     "  The  Latin  church,"  says  Lea  in  Ms  History  of  Celibacy,  tlis  the 
most  wonderful  structure  in  history,  and  ere  its  leaders  can  consent  to  such 
a  reform  they  must  confess  that  its  career,  so  full  of  proud  recollections,  ha» 
been  an  error," 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

Evangelical  Protestant  countries,  woman  occupies  a  far  highei 
grade  of  intellectual  and  moral  culture  than  in  exclusively  Ro- 
man Catholic  countries.  Clerical  marriages  are  probably  the 
most  happy  as  a  rule,  and  have  given  birth  to  a  larger  number 
of  useful  and  distinguished  men  and  women  than  those  of  any 
other  class  of  society.1 

1  Comp.  this  History,  Vol.  VI.,  \  79,  p.  473  sqq. 


CHAPTER  X, 

MONTANISM. 
§109.  Literature* 

SOURCES: 

lie  prophetic  utterances  of  MONTAXTTS,  PEISOA  (or  PRISCILLA)  and 
MAXIMILLA,  scattered  through  Tertullian  and  other  writers,  col- 
lected by  F.  MtoTEB,  (Effata  et  Oracula  JtTontanistarum,  Hafnise, 
1829),  and  by  BOJSTWETSCH,  in  his  Qesch.  des  Mont.  p.  197-200. 

TEBTTJLLIAX'S  writings  after  A.  D.  201,  are  the  chief  source,  especially 
De  Corona  Militis;  De  Fuga  in  Persec.;  De  Cult.  Feminarum;  De 
Virg.  Velandis  ;  De  Exhort  Castitatis  ;  De  Mbnogamia  /  De  Paradiso; 
DeJejunm;  De  Pudieitia;  De  Spectaculis  ;  De  Spe  Fideliuni.  His 
seven  books  On  Ecstasy,  mentioned  by  Jerome,  are  lost.  In  his  later 
anti-heretical  writings  (Adv.  Marcionem;  Adv.  Valentin.;  Adv. 
Pracean;  DeAnima;  De  Resurr.  Carnis),  Tertullian  occasionally 
refers  to  the  new  dispensation  of  the  Spirit.  On  the  chronology  of 
his  writings  see  Uhlhorn :  Fundamenta  chronologies  Tertullianea 
(Gott.  1852),  Bonwetsch:  Die  Schriften  Tertuttians  nach  der  Zeit 
ihrer  Abfassung  (Bonn,  1878),  and  Harnack,  inBrieger^s  "  Zeitschrift 
furK.  gesch."  No.  II. 

IBEST^TTS:  Adv.  ffcer.  III.  11,  9;  IV.  33,  6  and  7.  (The  references  to 
Montanism  are  somewhat  doubtrul).  ETJSEBIUS:  H.  E.  Y.  3. 
EPIPHAN.  :  JEfor.  48  and  49. 

The  anti-Montanist  writings  of  Apolinarius  (Apollinaris)  of 
Hierapolis,  Melito  of  Sardes,  Miltiades  (^spi  rov  $  6slv  Trpo^rjnjv  h 
tKtrraffst  Xc&elv),  Apollonius,  Serapion,  Gaius,  and  an  anonymous 
autbor  quoted  by  Eu-sebius  are  lost  Comp.  on  the  sources  Soyres, 
L  c.  p.  3-24,  and  Bonwetsch,  1.  e.  p.  16-55. 

WOEKS  : 

THEOPH.  WEBXSDOBF:  Commentatio  de  Montanistis  Sacuti  JZ  vulgo 
creditis  hareticis.  Dantzig,  1781.  A  vindication  of  Montanism  as 
being  essentially  agreed  with  the  doctrines  of  the  primitive  church 
and  unjustly  condemned.  Mosheini  differs,  but  speaks  favorably  ot 
it.  *  So  also  Soyres.  Arnold  had  espoused  the  cause  of  M.  before,  in 
llis  KircJien^u,tid  Ketz&rhwtorie. 


416  SECOND  PKRiOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

MOSHEIM:  De  Eebus  Christ,  ante  Const  M.  p.  410-425  (Murdock'g  • 

I.  501-512). 

WALCH  :  Eetzerhistorie,  I.  611-666. 
KIECHXER:  De  Montanistis.    Jense,  1832. 

NEAXDEB:  Antignosticus  oder  Geist  aus  TertulHan's  ScJurifien.  Berlin, 
1825  (2ded.  1847),  and  the  second  ed.  of  his  Kirchengesch.  1843,  Bd. 

II.  877-908  (Torrey's  transl.  Boston  ed.  vol.  I.  506-526).    Neander 
was  the  first  to  give  a  calm  and  impartial  philosophical  view  of 
Montanism  as  the  realistic  antipode  of  idealistic  Gnosticism. 

A.  SCHWEGLEB,  :  Der  Montanismus  und  die  christl.  Kirche  des  2ten  Jahrh. 
Tiib.  1841.  Comp.  his  Nach-apost.  Zdtalter  (Tub.  1846).  A  very 
ingenious  philosophical  a-priori  construction  of  history  in  the  spirit 
of  'the  Tubingen  School.  Schwegler  denies  the  historical  existence 
of  Montanus,  wrongly  derives  the  system  from  Ebionism,  and  puts 
its  essence  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Paraclete  and  the  new  supernatural 
epoch  of  revelation  introduced  by  him.  Against  him  wrote  GEOBGII 
in  the  ^Deutsche  Jahrbiicher  iiir  Wissenschaffc  und  Kunst,"  1842. 
HILGENFELD  :  Die  Glossolalie  in  der  alien  Kirche.  Leipz.  1850. 
BATJR  :  Das  Wesen  des  Jfontanismus  nach  den  neusten  Forschungen,  in  the 
"Theol,  Jahrbiicher."  Tub.  1851,  p.  538  sqq.;  and  his  Gesrh.  der 
ChrML  Kirche,  I.  235-245,  288-295  (3d  ed.  of  1863).  Baur,  like 
Schwegler,  lays  the  chief  stress  on  the  doctrinal  element,  but  refutes 
his  view  on  the  Ebionitic  origin  of  Mont,  and  reviews  it  in  its  con- 
flict with  Gnosticism  and  episcopacy. 
NEEDNER:  K.  Gesch.  253  sqq.,  259  sqq. 

ALBEECHT  EITSCHL  :  Entstehung  der  alffcathol.  Kirche,  second  ed.  1857, 
p.  402-550.  R.  justly  emphasizes  the  practical  and  ethical  features 
of  the  sect. 

P.  GOTTW.ALD:  De  Montanismo  Tertuttiani.    Vratisl.  1862. 

A.  SEVILLE:  Tertullien  et  le  Montanisme,  in  the  "Bevue  des  dems 
mondes,"  Nov.  1864.  Also  his  essay  in  the  "Nouvelle  Revue  de 
Theologie"  for  1858. 

R.  A.  LIPSIUS  :  Zur  QueUerikritik  des  Epiphamos*  Wien,  1865 ;  and 
Die  Quellen  der  altesten  Ketzergeschichte.  Leipz.  1875. 

EMILE  STEdHLi^ :  Ussai  wr  le  Montanisme.    Strasbourg,  1870. 

JOHN  DE  SOYEES  :  Montanism  and  the  Primitive  Church  (Hulsean  prize 
essay).  Cambridge,  1878  (163  pages).  With  a  useful  chronological 
table. 

G.  NATHAXAEL  BO^TWETSCH  (of  Dorpat):  Die  Geschichte  des  Montanis- 
>ius.  Erlangen,  1881  (201  pages \  The  best  book  on  the  subject. 

REXAX:  3£arc-Aur&e  (1882),  ch.  XHI.  p.  207-225.    Also  Ms  essay  Le  M<m- 

lanisnie,  in  the  "  Revue  des  deux  mondes,"  Feb.  1881. 

W.  BELCK  :  Geschichte  des  Jfontanismus.    Leip2ag,  1883. 

BILGES-FEU)  :  D.  Ketzergesch.  des  Urchristenthums.    Leipzig,  1884.    (pp.  560- 

600.)  * 

The   subject    is   well  treated   by  Dr.  MOLLEB   in   Herzog    (revis.    ed 


?UO.  EXTERNAL  HISTORY  OF  TklOXTAIUSM.  417 

Bd.  X.  255-262) ;  Bp.  HEFELE  in  Wetzer  &  Welter,  Bd.  VII.  252- 
268,  and  in  his  Oonciliengesck.  revised  ed.  Bd.  I.  83  sqq. ;  and  by  Dr. 
SALMOND  in  Smith  &  Wace,  III.  935-945. 
Comp.  also  the  Lit.  on  Tertullian,  §  196  (p.  818). 

§  110.  External  History  of  Jlontanism. 

All  the  ascetic,  rigoristic,  and  chiliastic  elements  of  the  ancient 
church  combined  in  Montanisin.  They  there  asserted  a  claim  to 
universal  validity,  which  the  catholic  church  was  compelled,  for 
her  own  interest,  to  reject;  since  she  left  the  effort  after  extra- 
ordinary holiness  to  the  comparatively  small  circle  of  ascetics 
and  priests,  and  sought  rather  to  lighten  Christianity  than  add 
to  its  weight,  for  the  great  ma^s  of  its  professors.  Here  is  the 
place,  therefore,  to  speak  of  this  remarkable  phenomenon,  and 
not  under  the  head  of  doctrine,  or  heresy,  where  it  is  commonly 
placed.  sFor  Montanism  was  not,  originally,  a  departure  from 
the  faith,  but  a  morbid  overstraining  of  the  practical  morality 
and  discipline  of  the  early  church.  It  was  an  excessive  super- 
naturalism  and  puritanisio  against  Gnostic  rationalism  and 
catholic  laxity. ")  It  is  the  first  example  of  an  earnest  and  well- 
meaning,  but  gloomy  and  fanatical  hyper-Christianity,  which, 
like  all  hyper-spiritualism,  is  apt  to  end  in,  the  flesh. 

Montanism  originated  in  Asia  Minor,  the  theatre  of  many 
movements  of  the  church  in  this  period ;  yet  not  in  Ephesus  or 
any  large  city,  but  in  some  insignificant  villages  of  the  province 
of  Phrygia,  once  the  home  of  a  sensuously  mystic  and  dreamy 
nature-religion,  where  Paul  and  his  pupils  had  planted  congre- 
gations at  Colossse,  Laodicea,  and  Hierapolis.1  The  movement 

1  Neander  first  pointed  to  the  clo-e  connection  of  Montanism  with  tha 
Phrygian  nationality,  and  it  is  true  as  far  as  it  goes,  bnt  does  not  explain  the 
spread  of  the  s/stem  in  North  Africa.  Schwegler  and  Baur  protested  against 
Neander*s  view,  but  Renan  justly  reassert*  it:  tC  La  PJtrygie  etait  underpays 
de  Vantiqutte  fos  plus  partes  aux  rSoeries  religieuses.  L?s  Phrygians  vassaient,  en 
general  pour  niais  et  tdmples.  Le  ehristianisme  eut  ehez  ewe,  c?&i  rorigiiie,  un 
charac&re  essentiellement  mystique  et  asc&ique.  Dfyti,  daris  FfyUre  CLJLX  Golossiens, 
Paul  combat  des  err&urs  oft,  les  stgnes  precurseurs  du  gnoslicisine  et  les  exc&s  d?un 
o«c^wme  mal  entendu  sewhtent  se  mdler.  Presque  partout  aitteurs.  le  christtanisme 
fut  une  religion  de  grandes  vitte*  ;  -id,  comme  dans  la  Syrie  au  del& 

cefwt  une  religion  d*  bowr/ 
Vol.  IL— 27      ' 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

was  started  about  the  middle  of  the  second  century  during  th« 
reign  of  Antoninus  Pius  or  Marcus  Aurelius,  by  a  certain  Mon- 
tanus.1  He  was,  according  to  hostile  accounts,  before  his  con- 
version, a  mutilated  priest  of  Cybele,  with  no  special  talents  noi 
culture,  but  burning  with  fanatical  zeal.  He  fell  into  somnam- 
bulistic ecstasies,  and  considered  himself  the  inspired  organ  oi 
the  promised  Paraclete  or  Advocate,  the  Helper  and  Comfortei 
in  these  last  times  of  distress.  His  adversaries  wrongly  inferred 
from  the  use  of  the  first  person  for  the  Holy  Spirit  in  his  ora- 
cles, that  he  made  himself  directly  the  Paraclete,  or,  according 
to  Epiphanius,  even  God  the  Father.  Connected  with  him  were 
two  prophetesses,  Priscilla  and  Maximilla,  who  left  their  hus- 
bands. During  the  bloody  persecutions  under  the  Antonines, 
which  raged  in  Asia  Minor,  and  caused  the  death  of  Polycarp 
(155),  all  three  went  forth  as  prophets  and  reformers  of  the 
Christian  life,  and  proclaimed  the  near  approach  of  the  age  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  and  of  the  millennial  reign  in  Pepuza,  a  small 
village  of  Phrygia,  upon  which  the  new  Jerusalem  was  to  come 
down.  Scenes  took  place  similar  to  those  under  the  preaching 
of  the  first  Quakers,  and  the  glossolalia  and  prophesying  in  the 
Irvingite  congregations.  The  frantic  movement  soon  far  ex- 
ceeded the  intention  of  its  authors,  spread  to  Rome  and  North 
Africa,  and  threw  the  whole  church  into  commotion.  It  gave 
risg*  to  the  first  Synods  which  are  mentioned  after  the  apos- 
tolic age. 

The  followers  of  Montanus  were  called  Montanists,  also  Phry- 
gians, Cataphrygians  (from  the  province  of  their  origin),  Pepu- 

1  The  chronology  is  uncertain,  and  varies  between  126-180.  See  the  note 
of  Renan  in  Zlarc-Aur.  p.  209,  Hefele  (I.  85),  Soyres  (p.  25-29  and  157),  and 
Bonwetsch  (140-145).  Easebius  assigns  the  rise  of  Montanism  to  the  year, 
172,  which  is  certainly  too  late;  Epiphanius  is  confused,  but  leans  to  157. 
Soyres  dates  it  back  as  far  as  130,  Hefele  to  140,  Neander,  Bonwetsch,  and 
Molier  (in  Herzog,  new  ed.  X.  255)  to  156,  Renan  to  167.  The  recent  change 
of  the  date  of  Polycarp's  martyrdom  from  167  to  155,  establishes  the  fact  of 
persecutions  in  Asia  Minor  under  Antoninus  Pius.  Hefele  thinks  that  the 
Pasto?  Hermse,  which  was  written  before  151  under  Pius  L,  already  combats 
Montanist  opinions.  Bonwetsch  puts  the  death  of  Montanus  and  Maximilla 
between  180  and  200.  The  name  Montanus  occurs  op  Phrygian  inscriptions. 


?  HO.    EXTERNAL  HISTOKY  OF  MONTANISM.          419 

ziani,  Priseillianists  (from  Priscilla,  not  to  be  confounded  with 
the  Priscillianists  of  the  fourth  century).  They  called  them- 
selves spiritual  Christians  (nyeu/jiaTcxoc),  in  distinction  from  the 
psychic  or  carnal  Christians  ($o%txof). 

The  bishops  and  synods  of  Asia  Minor,  though  not  with  one 
voice,  declared  the  new  prophecy  the  work  of  demons,  applied 
exorcism,  and  cut  off  the  Montanists  from  the  fellowship  of  the 
church.  All  agreed  that  it  was  supernatural  (a  natural  inter- 
pretation of  such  psychological  phenomena  being  then  unknown), 
and  the  only  alternative  was  to  ascribe  it  either  to  God  or  to  his 
great  Adversary.  Prejudice  and  malice  invented  against  Mon- 
tanus  and  the  two  female  prophets  slanderous  charges  of  im- 
morality, madness  and  suicide,  which  were  readily  believed. 
Epiphanius  and  John  of  Damascus  tell  the  absurd  story,  that 
the  sacrifice  of  an  infant  was  a  part  of  the  mystic  worship  of  the 
Montanists,  and  that  they  made  bread  with  the  blood  of  mur- 
derjed  infants.1 

Among  their  literary  opponents  in  the  East  are  mentioned 
Claudius  Apolinarius  of  Hierapolis,  Miltiades,  Appollonius, 
Serapion  of  Antioch,  and  Clement  of  Alexandria. 

The  Roman  church,  during  the  episcopate  of  Eleutherus 
(177-190),  or  of  Victor  (190-202),  after  some  vacillation,  set 
itself  likewise  against  the  new  prophets  at  the  instigation  of  the 
presbyter  Caius  and  the  confessor  Praxeas  from  Asia,  who,  as 
Tertullian  sarcastically  says,  did  a  two-fold  service  to  the  devil 
at  Eome  by  driving  away  prophecy  and  bringing  in  heresy 
(patripassianism),  or  by  putting  to  flight  the  Holy  Spirit  and 
crucifying  God  the  Father.  Yet  the  opposition  of  Hippolytus 
to  Zephyrinus  and  Callistus,  as  well  as  the  later  Novation 
schism,  show  that  the  disciplinary  rigorism  of  Montanism 
found  energetic  advocates  in  Eome 'till  after  the  middle  of  the 
third  century. 

The  Gallic  Christians,  then  severely  tried   by  persecution, 

1  Renan  says  of  these  slanders  (p.  214) :  "  Ce  sont  Id,  les  cakmnies  ordinaires, 
jui  ne  manquent  jamais  sous  la  plume  des  ecrivains  orthodoxes,  qyanit  il  Jagti  de 
nvircir  ks  dissidents." 


420  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

took  a  conciliatory  posture,  and  sympathized  at  least  with  the 
moral  earnestness,  the  enthusiasm  for  martyrdom,  and  the  chili- 
astic  hopes  of  the  ilontanists.  They  sent  their  presbyter  (after- 
wards bishop)  Irenseus  to  Eleutherus  in  Rome  to  intercede  in 
their  behalf.  This  mission  seems  to  have  induced  him  or  his 
successor  to  issue  letters  of  peace,  but  they  were  soon  after- 
wards recalled.  This  sealed  the  fate  of  the  party.1 

In  Xorth  Africa  the  Montanists  met  with  extensive  sympa- 
thy, as  the  Punic  national  character  leaned  naturally  towards 
gloomy  and  rigorous  acerbity.2  Two  of  the  most  distinguished 
female  martyrs,  Perpetua  and  Felicitas,  were  addicted  to  them, 
and  died  a  heroic  death  at  Carthage  in  the  persecution  of  Septi- 
rn.ius  Severus  (203). 

Their  greatest  conquest  was  the  gifted  and  fiery,  but  eccen- 
tric and  rigoristic  Tertullian.  He  became  in  the  year  201  or 
202,  from  ascetic  sympathies,  a  most  energetic  and  influential 
advocate  of  ilontanism,  ard  helped  its  dark  feeling  towards  a 
twilight  of  philosophy,  without,  however,  formally  seceding 
from  the  Catholic  Church,  whose  doctrines  he  continued  to  de- 
fend against  the  heretics.  ^Lt  all  events,  he  was  not  excommu- 
.nicated,  and  his  orthodox  writings  were  always  highly  esteemed. 
He  is  the  only  theologian  of  this  schismatic  movement,  which 
started  in  purely  practical  questions,  and  we  derive  the  best 
of  our  knowledge  of  it  from  his  works..  Through  him,  too, 
its  principles  reacted  in  many  respects  on  the  Catholic  Church ; 
and  that  not  only  in  North  Africa,  but  also  iu  Spain,  as  we  may 
see  from  the  harsh  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Elvira  in  306.  It 
is  singular  that  Cyprian,  who,  with  all  his  high-church  tenden- 
cies and  abhorrence  of  schism,  was  a  daily  reader  of  Tertullian, 

1  Tertullian,  who  mentions  these  "litterns  pads  jam  emissas  "  in  favor  of  the 
Montanists  in  Asia  (Adv.  Prox.  1).  leaves  us  in  the  dark  as  to  the  name  of  the 
"episcopus  Romanus"  from  whom  they  proceeded  and  of  the  other  by  whom 
they  were  recalled,  and  as  to  the  cause  of  this  temporary  favor.  Victor  con- 
demned the  Quartodecimanians  with  whom  the  Montanists  were  affiliated. 
Irenseus  protested  against  it  See  Bonwetsch,  p.  173  sq. 

*  This  disposition,  an  ydo?  KtKp6v,  oKu&pvrfo,  and  <ri&yp6v9  even  Plutarch  no- 
tices in  the  Carthaginian*  (in  his  UoZumd  irapayy&ttaTa,  c.  3),  and  contrasts 
with  the  excitable  and  cheerful  character  of  the  Athenians. 


§111.    CHAEACTEB  AND  TENETS  OF  MONTANISM.      421 

makes  no  allusion  to  Montanism.  Augustin  relates  that  Ter- 
tullian  left  the  Montanists,  and  founded  a  new  sect,  which  was 
called  after  him,  but  was,  through  his  (Augustin's)  agency, 
reconciled  to  the  Catholic  congregation  of  Carthage.1 

As  a  separate  sect,  the  Montanists  or  Tertullianists,  as  they 
were  also  called  in  Africa,  run  down  into  the  sixth 'century. 
At  the  time  of  Epiphanius  the  sect  had  many  adherents  in 
Phrygia,  Galatia,  Cappadocia,  Cilicia,  and  in  Constantinople, 
The  successors  of  Constantine,  down  to  Justinian  (530),  repeat- 
edly enacted  laws  against  them.  Synodical  legislation  abou* 
the  validity  of  Montanist  baptism  is  inconsistent.2 

§  111.    Character  and  Tenets  of  Montanism. 

I.  IN  DOCTRINE,  Montanism*  agreed  in  all  essential  points 
with  the  Catholic  Church,  and  held  very  firmly  to  the  tradi- 
tional rule  of  faith.3  Tertullian  was  thoroughly  orthodox  ac- 
cording to  the  standard  of  his  age.  He  opposed  infant  baptism 
on  the  assumption  that  mortal  sins  could  not  be  forgiven  after 
baptism ;  but  infant  baptism  was  not  yet  a  catholic  dogma,  and 
was  left  to  the  discretion  of  parents.  He  contributed  to  the  de- 
velopment of  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  by  asserting 
against  Patripassianism  a  personal  distinction  in  God,  and  the 
import  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  .Montanism  was  rooted  neither,  like 
Ebionism,  injudaism,  nor,  like  Gnosticism,  in  ieattLenisma_but 
in  Christianity;  and  its  errors  consist  in  a  morbid  exaggeration 
of  Christian  ideas  and  demands.  •  Tertullian  says,  that  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  Paraclete  consists  only  in  the  reform  of  dis- 
cipline, in  deeper  understanding  of  the  Scriptures,  and  in  effort 
after  higher  perfection;  that  it  has  the  same  faith,  the  same 

1  De  Haresibus,  §  6. 

2  See  Hefele,  CoTuyHi&ngeseh.,  1. 754.    He  explains  the  inconsistency  by  the 
fact  that  the  Montanists  were  regarded  by  some  orthodox,  by  others  heretical, 
in  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

8  This  was  acknowledged  by  its  opponents.  Epiphanins,  Hcer.  XL VIII.  I, 
says,  the  Cataphrygians  receive  the  entire  Scripture  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment, and  agree  with  the  Catholic  church  in  their  views  on  the  Father,  the 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit. 


^22  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-811.. 

God,  the  same  Christ,  and  the  same  sacraments  with  the  Catho- 
lics. The  sect  combated  the  Gnostic  heresy  with  all  decision, 
and  forms  the  exact  counterpart  of  that  system,  placing  Chris- 
tianity chiefly  in  practical  life  instead  of  theoretical  speculation, 
and  looking  for  the  consummation  of  the  kingdom  of  God  on 
this  earth*,  though  not  till  the  millennium,  instead  of  transfer- 
ring it  into  an  abstract  ideal  world.  Yet  between  these  two 
systems,  as  always  between  opposite  extremes,  there  were  also 
points  of  contact ;  a  common  antagonism,  for  example,  to  the 
present  order  of  the  world,  and  the  distinction  of  a  pneumatic 
and  a  psychical  church. 

Tertullian  conceived  religion  as  a  process  of  development, 
which  he  illustrates  by  the  analogy  of  organic  growth  in  nature. 
He  distinguishes  hi  this  process  four  stages : — (1.)  Natural  reli- 
gion, or  the  innate  idea  of  God ;  (2.)  The  legal  religion  of  the 
Old  Testament;  (3.)  The  gospel  during  the  earthly  life  of  Christ; 
and  (4.)  the  revelation  of  the  Paraclete ;  that  is,  the  spiritual 
religion  of  the  Montanists,  who  accordingly  called  themselves 
the  pneujnaticS)  or  the  spiritual  church,  in  distinction  from  the 
psychical  (or  carnal)  Catholic  church.  This  is  the  first  instance 
of  a  theory  of  development  which  assumes'  an  advance  beyond 
the  Xew  Testament  and  the  Christianity  of  the  apostles ;  mis- 
applying the  parables  of  the  mustard  seed  and  the  leaven,  and 
Paul's  doctrine  of  the  growth  of  the  church  in  Christ  (but  not 
beyond  Christ).  Tertullian,  however,  was  by  no  means  ration- 
alistic in  his  view.  On  the  contrary,  he  demanded  for  all  new 
revelations  the  closest  agreement  with  the  traditional  faith  of 
the  church,  the  regula  fidei,  which,  in  a  genuine  Montanistic 
work,  he  terms  "immobilis  et  irreformabilis"  Nevertheless  he 
gave  the  revelations  of  the  Phrygian  prophets  on  matters  of 
practice  an  importance  which  interfered  with  the  sufficiency  of 
the  Scriptures. 

II.  In  the  field  of  PRACTICAL  LIFE  and  DISCIPLINE,  the 
Montanistic  movement  and  its  expectation  of  the  near  approach 
of  the  end  of  the  world  came  into  conflict  with  the  reigning 
Catholicism ;  and  this  conflict,  consistently  carried  out,  must-  of 


\  ill.  CHARACTER  AND  TENETS  OF  MOXTANISM.      423 

course  show  itself  to  some  extent  in  the  province  of  doctrine. 
Every  schismatic  tendency  is  apt  to  become  in  its  progress  zaore 
or  less  heretical. 

1.  Montanism,  in  the  first  place,  sought  a  forced  continuancf 
of  the  MIRACULOUS  GIFTS  of  the  apostolic  church,  which  gra- 
dually disappeared  as  Christianity  became  settled  in  humanity, 
and  its  supernatural  principle  was  naturalized  on  earth.1  It  as- 
serted, above  all,  the  continuance  of  prophecy,  and  hence  it  went 
generally  under  the  name  of  the  nova  prophdia.  It  appealed 
to  Scriptural  examples,  John,  Agabus,  Judas,  and  Silas,  and  for 
their  female  prophets,  to  Miriam  and  Deborah,  and  especially 
to  the  four  daughters  of  Philip,  who  were  buried  in  Hierapolis, 
the  capital  of  Phrygia.  Ecstatic  oracular  utterances  were  mis- 
taken for  divine  inspirations.  Tertullian  calls  the  mental  status 
of  those  prophets  an  "amentia"  an  "excidere  sensu"  and  de- 
scribes it  in  a  way  which  irresistibly  reminds  one  of  the  phe- 
nomena of  magnetic  clairvoyance.  Montanus  compares  a  man 
in  the  ecstasy  with  a  musical  instrument,  on  which  the  Holy 
Spirit  plays  his  melodies.  "  Behold,"  says  he  in  one  of  his  ora- 
cles, in  the  name  of  the  Paraclete,  "the  man  is  as  a  lyre,  and  I 
sweep  over  him  as  a  plectrum.  The  man  sleeps;  I  wake. 
Behold,  it  is  the  Lord  who  puts  the  hearts  of  men  out  of  them- 
selves, and  who  gives  hearts  to  men."  2  As  to  its  matter,  the 
Montanistic  prophecy  related  to  the  approaching  heavy  judg- 
ments of  God,  the  persecutions,  the  millennium,  fasting,  and 
other  ascetic  exercises,  which  were  to  be  enforced  as  laws  of  the 
church. 

The  Catholic  church  did  not  deny,  in  theory,  the  continuance 
of  prophecy  and  the  other  miraculous  gifts,  but  was  disposed 

1  In  this  point,  as  in  others,  Montanism  bears  a  striking  affinity  to  Irvingism, 
but  differs  from  it  by  its  democratic,  anti-hierarchical  constitution.  Irvingism 
asserts  not  only  the  continuance  of  the  apostolic  gifts,  but  also  of  all  the  apos- 
tolic offices,  especially  the  twelvefold  apostolate,  and  is  highly  ritualistic. 


Epiph.  Hcer.  xlviii.  4  :  'Mt   o  av&pQTroe  heel  Mpa,  /cdyw   tylm-afiat  6Jff*2 
.  6  av&pairoc  Koifiarai,  xdyo)  ypyyopQ,  itiov,  xvptoc  kartv  6  sgurr&vuv  Kapdiaf 
napdiav 


424  SECOND  PKKIOJJ.    A.  D.  100-311. 

to  derive  the  Montanistio  revelations  from  satauic  inspirations/ 
and  mistrusted  them  all  the  more  for  their  proceeding  not  from 
the  regular  clergy,  but  in  great  part  from  unauthorized  laymen 
and  fanatical  women. 

2.  This  brings  us  to  another  feature  of  the  Montanistic  move- 
ment, the  assertion  of  the  UNIVERSAL  PRIESTHOOD  of  Chris- 
tians, even  of  females,  against  the  special  priesthood  in  the 
Catholic  church.    Under  this  view  it  may  be  called  a  democratic 
reaction  against  the  clerical  aristocracy,  which  from  the  time 
of  Ignatius  had  more  and  more  monopolized  all  ministerial 
privileges  and   functions.     The  Montanists   found    the    true 
qualification  and  appointment  for  the  office  of  teacher  in  direct 
endowment  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  in  distinction  from  outward 
ordination  and  episcopal  successions ,  They  every  where  proposed 
the  supernatural  element  and  the  free  motion  of  the  Spirit 
against  the  mechanism  of  a  fixed  ecclesiastical  order. 

Here  was  the  point  where  they  necessarily  assumed  a  schis- 
matic character,  and  arrayed  against  themselves  the  episcopal 
hierarchy.  But  they  only  brought  another  kind  of  aristocracy 
into  the  place  of  the  condemned  distinction  of  clergy  and  laity. 
They  claimed  for  their  prophets  what  they  denied  to  the 
Catholic  bishops.  They  put  a  great  gulf  between  the  true 
spiritual  Christians  and  the  merely  psychical ;  and  this  induced 
spiritual  pride  and  false  pietism.  Their  affinity  with  the  Prot- 
estant idea  of  the  universal  priesthood  is  more  apparent  than 
real ;  they  go  on  altogether  different  principles. 

3.  Another  of  the  essential  and  prominent  traits  of  Montanism 
was  a  visionary  mLLEN^ARiAsriSM,  founded  indeed  on  the 
Apocalypse  and  on   the  apostolic  expectation  of  the  speedy 
return  of  Christ,  but  giving   it    extravagant   weight   and    a 
materialistic  coloring.    The  Montanists  were  the  warmest  mil- 
lennarians  in  the  ancient  church,  and  held  fast  to  the  speedy 
return  of  Christ  in  glory,  all  the  more  as  this  hope  began  to  give 

JTert.  De  Jejun.  11 :  "Spiritu*  diaboli  est,  dicis,  o  psychice."  Tertullian 
himself,  however,  always  occupied  an  honorable  rank  among  the  church 
writers,  though  not  numbered  among  the  church  fathers  in  the  technical  sense. 


2  111.  CHARACTER  AND  TENETS  OF  MONTANISM.      425 

way  to  the  feeling  of  a  long  settlement  of  the  church  on  earth, 
and  to  a  corresponding  zeal  for  a  compact,  solid  episcopal  organ- 
ization. In  praying,  "  Thy  kingdom  come,"  they  prayed  for  the 
end  of  the  world*  They  lived  under  a  vivid  impression  of  the 
great  final  catastrophe,  and  looked  therefore  with  contempt 
upon  the  present  order  of  things,  and  directed  all  their  desires 
to  the  second  advent  of  Christ.  Maximilla  says :  "  After  me 
there  is  no  more  prophecy,  but  only  the  end  of  the  world." l 

The  failure  of  these  predictions  weakened,  of  course,  all  the 
other  pretensions  of  the  system.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
abatement  of  faith  in  the  near  approach  of  the  Lord  was  cer- 
tainly accompanied  with  an  increase  of  worldliness  in  the 
Catholic  church.  The  millennarianism  of  the  Montanists  has 
reappeared  again  and  again  in  widely  differing  forms. 

4.  Finally,  the  Montanistic  sect  was  characterized  by  fanatical 
severity  in  ASCETICISM  and  CHURCH  DISCIPLINE.  It  raised  a 
zealous  protest  against  the  growing  looseness  of  the  Catholic 
penitential  discipline,  which  in  Eonie  particularly,  under 
Zephyrinus  and  Callistus,  to  the  great  grief  of  earnest  minds, 
established  a  scheme  of  indulgence  for  the  grossest  sins,  and 
began,  long  before  Constantiue,  to  obscure  the  line  between  the 
church  and  the  world.  Tertullian  makes  the  restoration  of  a 
rigorous  discipline  the  chief  office  of  the  new  prophecy.2 

But  Montanism  certainly  went  to  the  opposite  extreme,  and 
fell  from  evangelical  freedom  into  Jewish  legalism ;  while  the 
Catholic  church  in  rejecting  the  new  laws  and  burdens  defended 
the  cause  of  freedom.  Montanism  turned  with  horror  from  all 

1  Bonwetsch,  p.  149:  "Das  Wesen  des  Montanismus  ist  eine  Reaktion  angesichts 
d&r  nahen  Parusie  gegen  Verweltlichung  der  Kirche."  Baur,  too,  emphasizes  this 
point  and  puts  the  chief  difference  between  Montanism  and  Gnosticism  in  this, 
that  the  latter  looked  at  the  beginning,  the  former  at  the  end  of  all  things. 
"  Wie  die  Qnosis  den  Anfangspunkt  ins  Auge  fasst,  von  wetchem  alles  ausgeht,  die 
absoluten  Principien,  durch  welche  der  Selbstoffenbarungspmcess  Gottes  und  der 
Gang  d&r  Weltentwicklung  bedingt  fat,  so  ist  im  Montanismus  der  Hauptpunkt  um 
wekhen  sich  alles  bewegt,  das  Ende  der  Dinge,  die  Kataistrophe,  welcher  der 
Weltverlauf  entgegengeht."  (K  Gesch.  I.  235). 

a  De  Monog.  c.  2,  he  calls  the  Paraclete  "novae  disciplines  institut&r"  but  in 
c.  4  he  says,  correcting  himself:  "Paracktus  restitutor  potius,  quam  institute 
disciplinae" 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

the  enjoyments  of  life,  and  held  even  art  to  be  incompatible 
with  Christian  soberness  and  humility.  It  forbade  women  all 
ornamental  clothing,  and  required  virgins  to  be  veiled.  It 
courted  the  blood-baptism  of  martyrdom,  and  condemned  con- 
cealment or  flight  in  persecution  as  a  denial  of  Christ.  It  mul- 
tiplied fasts  and  other  ascetic  exercises,  and  carried  them  to 
extreme  severity,  as  the  best  preparation  for  the  millennium. 
It  prohibited  second  marriage  as  adultery,  for  laity  as  well  as 
clergy,  and  inclined  even  to  regard  a  single  marriage  as  a  mere 
concession  on  the  part  of  God  to  the  sensuous  infirmity  of  man. 
It  taught  the  impossibility  of  a  second  repentance,  and  refused 
to  restore  the  lapsed  to  the  fellowship  of  the  church.  Tertul- 
lian  held  all  mortal  sins  (of  which  he  numbers  seven),  committed 
after  baptism,  to  be  unpardonable,1  at  least  in  this  world,  and  a 
church,  which  showed  such  lenity  towards  gross  offenders,  as 
the  Roman  church  at  that  time  did,  according  to  the  corrobo- 
rating testimony  of  Hippolytus,  he  called  worse  than  a  "  den 
of  thieves,"  even  a  " spelunca,  mcwhorum  et  fomicatorum" * 

The  Catholic  church,  indeed,  as  we  have  already  seen,  opened 
the  door  likewise  to  excessive  ascetic  rigor,  but  only  as  an  ex- 
ception to  her  rule ;  while  the  Montanists  pressed  their  rigoristic 
demands  as  binding  upon  all.  Such  universal  asceticism  was 
simply  impracticable  in  a  world  like  the  present,  and  the  sect 
itself  necessarily  dwindled  away.  But  the  religious  earnestness 
which  animated  it,  its  prophecies  and  visions,  its  millennarianism, 
and  the  fanatical  extremes  into  which  it  ran',  have  since  reap- 
peared, under  various  names  and  forms,  and  in  new  combina- 
tions, in  ]S"ovatianism,  Donatism,  the  spiritualism  of  the  Fran- 

1  Comp.  De  Pud.  c.  2  and  19. 

1  De  Pudic.  c.  1 :  "  Audio  etiam  edictum  esse  propositum,  et  guidem  peremp- 
torium.  Pontifex  scilicet  maximusj  quod  est  epi&copus  episcoporum  (so  he  calls, 
ironically,  the  Roman  bishop ;  in  all  probability  he  refers  to  Zephyrinus  or 
^nllistus),  edicit:  Ego  et  moechics  et  fornicationis  delicta  pcenitentia  functis 
dimitto.  .  ,  .  ,  Absit,  absit  a  sponsa  Christi  tale  praeeonium !  Ilia,  quoe  vera 
est,  qwR  pi:dica,  quce  sancta,  carebit  etiam  aurium  macula.  Non  habet  quibus  hoc 
repromittit,  et  si  habuerti,  Tion  repromittat,  quoniam  et  terrenum  Dei  tent/plum  citius 
spelunca  latronum  (Matt.  21 :  13j  appeUari  potuit  a  Domino  quam  moechorum  et 
fornicatorwn." 


g  111.    CHARACTER  AND  TENETS  OF  MONTANISM.      427 

ciscans,  Anabaptism,  the  Camisard  enthusiasm,  Puritanism. 
Quakerism,  Quietism,  Pietism,  Second  Adventism,  IrvingLsm, 
and  so  on,  by  way  of  protest  and  wholesome  reaction  against 
various  evils  in  the  church.1 

1  Comp.  on  these  analogous  phenomena  Soyres,  p.  118  sqq.  and  142  sqq. 
He  also  mentions  Mormonism  as  an  analogous  movement,  and  FO  does  Renan 
(Marc-Aur$le,  p.  209),  but  this  is  unjust  to  Montanism,  which  in  its  severe 
ascetic  morality  differs  widely  from  the  polygamous  pseudo-theocracy  in  Utah* 
Montanism  much  more  nearly  resembles  Irvingisra,  vi  hose  leaders  are  emi- 
nently ]"ure  and  devout  men  (as  Irving,  Thiersch,  VT.  W.  Andrews), 


CHAPTER  XL 

THE  HERESIES  OF  THE  AOTE-NICENE  AGKE. 
§  112.  Judaism  and  Heathenism  within  the  Church. 

HAVING  described  in  previous  chapters  the  moral  and  intel- 
lectual victory  of  the  church  over  avowed  and  consistent 
Judaism  and  heathenism,  we  must  now  look  at  her  deep  and 
mighty  struggle  with  those  enemies  in  a  hidden  and  more 
dangerous  form:  with  Judaism  and  heathenism  concealed  in 
the  garb  of  Christianity  and  threatening  to  Judaize  and  paganize 
the  church.  The  patristic  theology  and  literature  can  never  be 
thoroughly  understood  without  a  knowledge  of  the  heresies  of 
the  patristic  age,  which  play  as  important  a  part  in  the  theologi- 
cal movements  of  the  ancieftt  Greek  and  Latin  churches  as 
Rationalism  with  its  various  types  in  the  modern  theology  of 
the  Protestant  churches  of  Europe  and  America. 

Judaism,  with  its  religion  and  its  sacred  writings,  and 
Grseco-Roman  heathenism,  with  its  secular  culture,  its  science, 
and  its  art,  were  designed  to  pass  into  Christianity  to  be  trans- 
formed and  sanctified.  But  even  in  the  apostolic  age  many 
Jews  and  Gentiles  were  baptized  only  with  water,  not  with  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  fire  of  the  gospel,  and  smuggled  their  old 
religious  notions  and  practices  into  the  church.  Hence  the 
heretical  tendencies,  which  are  combated  in -the  New  Testament, 
especially  in  the  Pauline  and  Catholic  Epistles.1 

The  same  heresies  meet  us  at  the  beginning  of  the  second 
century,  and  thenceforth  in  more  mature  form  and  in  greater 
extent  in  almost  all  parts  of  Christendom.  They  evince,  on  the 
one  hand,  the  universal  import  of  the  Christian  religion  in  his- 

1  Corap.  vol.  I.  564  eqq.,  tm<!  mv  Histoiy  of  the  Apost.  Church,  \  165-169. 
42S 


1 112.  JUDAISM  AXB  HEATHEXISM.  4^9 

tory,  and  its  irresistible  power  over  all  the  more  profound  and 
earnest  minds  of  the  age.  Christianity  threw  all  theii 
religious  ideas  into  confusion  and  agitation.  They  were 
so  struck  with  the  truth,  beauty,  and  vigor  of  the  new  re- 
ligion, that  they  could  no  longer  rest  eitl  er  in  Judaism  or  in 
heathenism ;  and  yefc  many  were  unable  or  unwilling  to  forsake 
inwardly  their  old  religion  and  philosophy.  Hence  strange 
medleys  of  Christian  and  unchristian  elements  in  chaotic  fer- 
ment. The  old  religions  did  not  die  without  a  last  desperate 
effort  to  save  themselves  by  appropriating  Christian  ideas. 
And  this,  on  the  other  hand,  exposed  the  specific  truth  of 
Christianity  to  the  greatest  danger,  and  obliged  the  church  to 
defend  herself  against  misrepresentation,  and  to  secure  herself 
against  relapse  to  the  Jewish  or  the  heathen  level. 

As  Christianity  was  met  at  its  entrance  into  the  world  by  two 
other  religions,  the  one  relatively  true,  and  the  other  essentially 
false,  heresy  appeared  likewise  in  the  two  leading  forms  of 
EBIONISM  and  GNOSTICISM,  the  germs  of  which,  as  already  ob- 
served, attracted  the  notice  of  the  apostles.  The  remark  of 
Hegesippus,  that  the  church  preserved  a  virginal  purity  of  doc- 
trine to  the  time  of  Hadrian,  must  be  understood  as  mwle  only 
in  view  of  the  open  advance  of  Gnosticism  in  the  second  cen- 
tury, and  therefore  as  only  relatively  true.  The  very  same 
writer  expressly  observes,  that  heresy  had  been  already  secretly 
working  from  the  days  of  Simon  Magus.  Ebionism  is  a  Judai- 
zing,  pseudo-Petrine  Christianity,  or,  as  it  may  equally  well  be 
called,  a  Christianizing  Judaism;  Gnosticism  is  a  paganizing 
or  pseudo-Pauline  Christianity,  or  a  pseudo-Christian  hea- 
thenism. 

These  two  great  types  of  heresy  are  properly  opposite  poles0 
Ebionism  is  a  particularistic  contraction  of  the  Christian  reli- 
gion ;  Gnosticism,  a  vague  expansion  of  it.  The  one  is  a  gross 
realism  and  literalism ;  the  other,  a  fantastic  idealism  and  spirit- 
ualism. In  the  former  the  spirit  is  bound  in  outward  forms ; 
in  the  latter  it  revels  in  licentious  freedom.  Ebionism  makes 
salvation  depend  on  observance  of  the  law;  Gnosticism,  on  spe- 


43U  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-31i. 

dilative  knowledge.  Under  the  influence  of  JudaLiic  legalism, 
Christianity  must  stiffen  and  petrify;  under  the  influence  of 
Gnostic  speculation,  it  must  dissolve  into  empty  notions  and 
fancies.  Ebionism  denies  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  sees  in  th: 
gospel  only  a  new  law;  Gnosticism  denies  the  true  humanity  of 
ihe  Redeemer,  and  makes  his  person  and  his  work  a  mere  phan- 
:  >m,  a  docetistic  illusion. 

The  two  extremes,  however,  meet;  both  tendencies  from 
opposite  directions  roach  the  same  result — the  denial  of  the  in- 
carnation, of  the  true  and  abiding  union  of  the  divine  and  the 
human  in  Christ  and  his  kingdom ;  and  thus  they  fall  together 
under  St.  John's  criterion  of  the  antichristian  spirit  of  error. 
In  both  Christ  ceases  to  be  mediator  and  reconciler,  and  hi« 
religion  makes  no  specific  advance  upon  the  Jewish  and  the 
heathen,  which  place  God  and  man  in  abstract  dualism,  or  allow 
them  none  but  a  transient  and  illusory  union. 

Hence,  there  were  also  some  forms  of  error,  in  which  Ebion- 
istic  and  Gnostic  elements  were  combined.  We  have  a  Gnostic 
or  theosophic  Ebionism  (the  pseudo-Clementine),  and  a  Judai- 
zing  Gnosticism  (in  Cerinthus  and  others).  These  mixed  forms 
also  we  find  combated  in  the  apostolic  age.  Indeed,  similar 
forms  of  religious  syncretism  we  meet  with  even  before  the  time 
and  beyond  the  field  of  Christianity,  in  the  Essenes,  the  Thera- 
peutse,  and  the  Platonizing  Jewish  philosopher,  Philo. 

§  113.  Nazarenes  and  Ebionites  (Elkesaites,  Mandceans). 

I.  IREN.EUS:   Adv.  Hcer.  I.  26.    HIPPOLYTUS:  Eefut.  omnium  ffcer.,  or 

Pknowphumena,  1.  IX.  13-17.  EPIPHANIUS:  H&r.  29,  30,  53. 
Scattered  notices  in  JUSTIN  M.,  TEETULLIA^,  ORIGEN,  HEGESIP- 
prs,  EUSEBITJS,  and  JEROME.  Several  of  the  Apocryphal  Gospels, 
especially  that  of  the  Hebrews.  The  sources  are  obscure  and  con- 
flicting. Comp.  the  collection  of  fragments  from  Elxai,  the  Gospel 
of  the  Hebrews,  etc.  in  Hilgenfeld's  Novum  Test,  extra  Canonem  re- 
ceptum.  Lips.  1866. 

II.  GIESELER  :  Nazaraer  u.  EUoniten  (in  the  fourth  vol.  of  Staudlin's 
and  Tzschirner's  f'Archiv."    Leipz.  1820). 

CEEDNER  :  Ueber  Essaer  und  Ebioniten  und  einen  theilweisen  Zusammen- 
hang  derselben  (in  Winer's  "Zeitschriffc  fur  wissensch.  Theol.w 
Sulzbach,  1829). 


\  113.  NAZAEENES  AND  EBION1TES.  43] 

:   DeEbionitarum  Origine  et  Docfrina  ab  Essate  repetenda.    Tub 

1831. 
SCHLIEMAKN":    Die  Clementinen  «.  der  Ebionitismus      Hamb-  1844   p 

362-552. 
RITSCHL:    Ueber  die  Secte  der  Ettesaiten  (in  Xiedner's  "Zeitschr.  fur 

hist.  Theol."  1853,  No.  4). 
D.  OHWOLSOHN  :  Die  Ssabier  und  der  Ssabismus.    St.  Petersburg,  1856, 

2  vols. 
QHLHORST:    Ebioniten  and  Elkesaiten,  in  Herzog,  new  ed.,  vol.  IV. 

(1879),  13  sqq.  and  184  sqq. 
Gr.  SALMON:    Elkesai,  Elkesaites,  in  Smith  &  "VTace,  vol.  IT.  (1830)  p. 

95-98. 
M.  N.  SlOUFFl  :    Etudes  sur  la  religion  des  Soubbas  ou  Sabeens,  leurs 

dogmes,  leurs  moeurs.    Paris,  1880. 

K.  KESSLER:  Nandaer,  in  Herzog,  revised  ed.,  IX.  '(1881  \  p.  205-222. 
AD.  HILGENFELD:  Ketzergesch.  des  Urchristenthums,  Leip.,  1SS4 


The  Jewish  Christianity,  represented  in  the  apostolic  church 
by  Peter  and  James,  combined  with  the  Gentile  Cliristianity  of 
Paul,  to  form  a  Christian  church,  in  which  "  neither  circum- 
cision availeth  anything,  nor  uncircumcision,  but  a  new  crea- 
ture in  Christ" 

I.  A  portion  of  the  Jewish  Christians,  however,  adhered  even 
after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  to  the  national  customs  of 
their  fathers,  and  propagated  themselves  in  some  chuzmches  of 
Syria  down  to  the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  under  the  name 
of  NAZARENES  ;  a  name  perhaps  originally  given  in  contempt 
by  the  Jews  to  all  Christians  as  followers  of  Jesus  of  Xazareth.1 
They  united  the  observance  of  the  Mosaic  ritual  law  with  their 
belief  in  the  Messiahship  and  divinity  of  Jesus,  used  the  Gospel 
of  Matthew  in  Hebrew,  deeply  mourned  the  unbelief  of  their 
brethren,  and  hoped  for  their  future  conversion  in  a  body,  and 
for  a  millennial  reign  of  Christ  on  the  earth.  But  they  indulged 
no  antipathy  to  the  apostle  Paul,  and  never  denounced  the  Gen- 
til^  Christians  as  heretics  for  not  observing  the  law.  They 
were,  therefore,  not  heretics,  but  stunted  separatist  Christians  ; 
they  stopped  at  the  obsolete  position  of  a  narrow  and  anxious 

1  C'ae  heather  enemies  of  Christianity,  as  Julian  the  Apostate,  called  them 
sometimes  '•  Gai^eans."  So  also  Epictetus  in  the  only  passage,  in  which  h« 
ilkuL  ->  the  Christians. 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Jewish  Christianity,  and  shrank  to  an  insignificant  sect.  Jerome 
says  of  them,  that,  wishing  to  be  Jews  and  Christians  alike,  they 
were  neither  one  nor  the  other. 

II.  From  these  Xazarenes  we  must  carefully  distinguish  the 
heretical  Jewish  Christians,  or  the  EBIOXITES,  who  were  more 
numerous.      Their  name  conies  not,  as  Tertullian  first  inti- 
mated,1 from  a  supposed  founder  of  the  sect,  Ebion,  of  whom 
we  know  nothing,  but  from  the  Hebrew  word,  t"r??,  poor.     It 
may  have  been  originally,  like  "Nazarene"  and  "Galilean,"  a 
contemptuous  designation  of  all  Christians,  the  majority  of  whom 
lived  in  needy  circumstances;2  but  it  was  afterwards  confined 
to  this  sect ;  whether  in  reproach,  to  denote  the  poverty  of  their 
doctrine  of  Christ  and  of  the  law,  as  Origen  more  ingeniously 
than  correctly  explains  it;  or,  more  probably,  in  honor,  since 
the  Ebionitcs  regarded  themselves  as  the  genuine  followers  of 
the  poor  Christ  and  his  poor  disciples,  and  applied  to  themselves 
alone  the  benediction  on  the  poor  in  spirit.    According  to  Epi- 
phanius,  Ebion  spread  his  error  first  in  the  company  of  Chris- 
tians which  fled  to  Pella  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem; 
According  to  Hegesippus  in  Eusebius,  one  Thebutis,  after  the 
death  of  the  bishop  Syineon  of  Jerusalem,  about  107,  made 
schism  among  the  Jewish  Christians,  and  led  many  of  them 
to  apostatize,  because  he  himself  was  not  elected  to  the  bish- 
opric. 

TTe  find  the  sect  of  the  Ebionites  in  Palestine  and  the  sur- 
rounding regions,  on  the  island  of  Cyprus,  in  Asia  Minor,  and 
even  in  Rome.  Though  it  consisted  mostly  of  Jews,  Gentile 
Christians  also  sometimes  attached  themselves  to  it.  It  con- 
tinued into  the  fourth  century,  but  at  the  time  of  Theodoret  wag 
entirely  extinct.  It  used  a  Hebrew  Gospel,  now  lost,  which 
was  probably  a  corruption  of  the  Gospel  of  Matthew. 

The  characteristic  marks  of  Ebionism  in  all  its  forms  are: 
legislation  of  Christianity  to  the  level  of  Judaism ;  the  princi 

1  Prcescr.  Hceret.  c.  13- 

*  Minut  Felix,  Octav.  36 :  "  Ceterum  quod  plcrique  PAUPEBES  dwimur  non  «s 
infamm  Tiosfra,  sed  gloria;  animus  enim  ut  luxu  sokitur,  ita  frugalitatefirmatwr." 


3  113.  NAZVBENES  AND  EBIONITE8.  433 

pie  of  the  universal  and  perpetual  validity  of  the  Mosaic  law; 
and  enmity  to  the  apostle  Paul.  But,  as  there  were  different 
sects  in  Judaism  itself,  we  have  also  to  distinguish  at  least  two 
branches  of  Ebionism,  related  to  each  other  as  Pharisaism  and 
Essenism,  or,  to  use  a  modern  illustration,  as  the  older  deistic 
and  the  speculative  pantheistic  rationalism  in  Germany,  or  the 
practical  and  the  speculative  schools  in  Unitarianism. 

1.  The  common  EBIO^ITES,  who  were  by  far  the  more  nume- 
rous, embodied  the  Pharisaic  legalism,  and  were  the  proper  suc- 
cessors of  the  Judaizers  opposed  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians. 
Their  doctrine  may  be  reduced  to  the  following  propositions : 

(a)  Jesus  is,  indeed,  the  promised  Messiah,  the  son  of  David, 
and  the  supreme  lawgiver,  yet  a  mere  man,  like  Moses  and 
David,  sprung  by  natural  generation  from  Joseph  and  Mary. 
The  sense  of  his  Messianic  calling  first  arose  in  him  at  his  bap- 
tism by  John,  when  a  higher  spirit  joined  itself  to  him.  Hence, 
Origen  compared  this  sect  to  the  blind  man  in  the  Gospel,  who 
called  to  the  Lord,  without  seeing  him :  "  Thou  son  of  David, 
have  mercy  on  me." 

,  (6)  Circumcision  and  the  observance  of  the  whole  ritual  law 
of  Moses  are  necessary  to  salvation  for  all  men. 

(c)  Paul  is  an  apostate  and  heretic,  and  all  his  epistles  are  to 
be  discarded.  The  sect  considered  him  a  native  heathen,  who 
came  over  to  Judaism  in  later  life  from  impure  motives. 

(c?)  Christ  is  soon  to  come  again,  to  introduce  the  glorious 
millennial  reign  of  the  Messiah,  with  the  earthly  Jerusalem  for 
its  seat. 

2.  The  second  class  of  Ebionites,  starting  with  Esserdc  no- 
tions, gave  their  Judaism  a  speculative  or  theosophic  stamp,  like 
the  errorists  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians.    They  form  the 
stepping-stone  to  Gnosticism.    Among  these  belong  the  ELKE- 
SATTES.1    They  arose,  according  to  Epiphanius,  in  the  reign  of 
Trajan,  in  the  regions  around  the  Dead  Sea,  where  the  Essenes 
lived.     Their  name  is  derived  from  their  supposed  founder, 

*  '"EfaeffaaZot  (Epiphanius) ;  'E^owa*  (Hippol/np) ;  'EZKeaaiTcu  (Origen). 
AJso  Sa/Lttyalot,  from 
Vol.  1 1.-** 


434  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Elxai  or  Elkasai,  and  is  interpreted:  "hidden  power,"  which 
(according  to  Gieseler*s  suggestion)  signifies  the  Holy  Spirit.1 
This  seems  to  have  been  originally  the  title  of  a  book,  which 
pretended,  like  the  book  of  Mormon,  to  be  revealed  by  an  angel, 
and  was  held  in  the  highest  esteem  by  the  sect.  This  secret 
writing,  according  to  the  fragments  in  Origen,  and  in  the  "Phir 
ksopkwmena"  of  Hippolytus,  contains  the  groundwork  of  the 
remarkable  pseudo-Clementine  system.2  (See  next  section.)  It 
is  evidently  of  Jewish  origin,  represents  Jerusalem  as  the  centre 
of  the  religious  world,  Christ  as  a  creature  and  the  Lord  of 
angels  and  all  other  creatures,  the  Holy  Spirit  as  a  female,  en- 
joins circumcision  as  well  as  baptism,  rejects  St.  Paul,  and  justi- 
fies the  denial  of  faith  in  time  of  persecution.  It  claims  to  date 
from  the  third  year  of  Trajan  (101).  This  and  the  requirement 
of  circumcision  would  make  it  considerably  older  than  the  Cle- 
mentine Homilies.  A  copy  of  that  book  was  brought  to  Rome 
from  Syria  by  a  certain  Alcibiades  about  A.  D.  222,  and  excited 
attention  by  announcing  a  new  method  of  forgiveness  of  sins. 

3.  A  similar  sect  are  the  MANDJEANS,  from  Manda,  know- 
ledge (fvajatz),  also  SABIANS,  i.  e.  Baptists  (from  sdbi,  to  baptize, 
to  wash),  and  MUGHTASILAH,  which  has  the  same  meaning. 
On  account  of  their  great  reverence  for  John  the  Baptist,  they 
were  called  "  Christians  of  John."3  Their  origin  is  uncertain. 
A  remnant  of  them  still  exists  in  Persia  on  the  eastern  banks  of 
the  Tigris.  Their  sacred  language  is  an  Aramaic  dialect  of 
some  importance  for  comparative  philology.4  At  present  they 
speak  Arabic  and  Persian.  Their  system  is  very  complicated 
with  the  prevalence  of  the  heathen  element,  and  comes  nearest 
to  Manichseism.5 

1  Afcvaitff  KeiuMvpgvii,  '03  Vn.  Comp.  the  6vva[u^  &aapKos  in  the  Clem. 
Homilies,  XVII.  16.  Other  derivations :  from  Elkesi,  a  village  in  Galilee 
pelitzsch) ;  from  ?V  *7K  .  from  D'EfnaS*  =  apostates. 

3  See  the  fragments  collected  in  Hilgenfeld's  Nov.  Test,  extra  Cwbonem,  recep* 
turn,  HI.  15S-167. 

8  Johanneschristen,  Chretiens  de  Saint  Jean. 

4  Mandaische  Grammatik,  by  Th.  Noldeke.    Halle,  1875. 

9  For  further  particulars  sve  the  article  of  Kessler  in  Herzog.  above  quoted 


{ 114.  THE  PSEUDO-CLEMENTINE  EBIONISM.          435 

§  114.  The  Pseudo-Clementine  Ebionim* 

I.  SOURCES: 

JL  Ta  K%qp&vTtat  or  more  accurately,  K/t^/zevrof  T&V  TLerpov  strtdq/jufiv 
KqpvypdTuv  iKiTopi,  first  published  (without  the  twentieth  and  part  of 
the  nineteenth  homily)  by  Cotelier  in  "Patres  Apost."  Par.  1672; 
Clericus  in  his  editions  of  Cotelier,  1698, 1700,  and  1724;  again  by 
Schwegler,  Stuttg.  1847  (the  text  of  Clericus);  then  first  entire, 
with  the  missing  portion,  from  a  new  codex  in  the  Ottobonian 
Library  in  the  Vatican,  by  Alb,  R.  M.  Dressel  (with  the  Latin  trans. 
of  Ootelier  and  notes),  under  the  title:  dementis  JRomani  quae 
feruntur  Homiliae  Viginti  nunc  primum  integroB.  Gott.  1853 ;  and 
by  Paul  de  Lagflrde:  Clementina  Grace.  Leipz.  1865. 

2.  CLEMENTIS  BOM.  RECOGNITIONES  ('Avay«j/>«j/iot  or  'Avap&rof),  in  ten 

books,  extant  only  in  the  Latin  translation  of  Rufinus  (d.  410) ; 
first  published  in  Basel,  1526 ;  then  better  by  Cotelier,  Gallandi,  and 
by  Gersdorfin  his  "Bibl.  Patr.  Lat."  Lips.  1838.  Vol.  I.  In 
Syriac,  ed.  by  P.  DE  LAGABDE  (dementis  Romani  Recognitiones 
Syriace}.  Lips.  1861.  An  English  translation  of  the  Recognitions 
of  Clement  by  Dr.  Thomas  Smith,  in  the  "  Ante-Xicene  Christian 
Library,"  Edinburgh,  vol.  in.  (1868),  pp.  137-471.  The  work  in 
the  MSS.  bears  different  titles,  the  most  common  is  Itinerarium  St. 
Clementis. 

3.  CLEMENTIS  EPITOME  DE  GESTIS  PETBI  (K?^.  Irrdff/c../p6i/a7c  irspi  TUV 

irpdgeuv  eiridTj/LtL&v  TS  KOL  Kypvypdruv  TLsrpov  txtroprj},  first  at  Paris,  1555 ; 
then  critically  edited  by  Cotelier,  L  c. ;  and  more  completely  with  a 
second  epitome  by  A.  R.  M-  Dressel :  Clementinorum  Epitome  ditce, 
with  valuable  critical  annotations  by  Fr.  Wiesekr.  Lips.  1859. 
The  two  Epitomes  are  only  a  summary  of  the  Homilies. 

II.  WOEKS. 

NEABTDER  and  BAUB,  in  their  works  on  Gnosticism  (vid.  the  following 

section),  and  in  their  Church  Histories. 
SCHLlEMAsrsr :   Die  Glementinen  nebst  den  verwandten  Schrifien,  u.  der 

Ebionitismus.    Hamb.  1844. 
AD.  HILGEOTELD  :    Die  Clementinischen  Eecognitionem  n.  Homilien  nach 

ihrem  Ursprung  n.  Inhalt*    Jena,  1848.     Art.  by  the  same  in  the 

"Theol.  Jahrbiicher"  for  1854  (483  sqq.),  and  1868  (357  sqq.) ;  and 

Die  Apost.  Vater.    Halle  1853,  p.  287-302. 
G.  TJHLHOlwr:    Die  Homilien  n.  RecogniMonen  des  Clemens  Eomanus. 

Gott.  1854.    Comp.  the  same  author's  article  "  Clementinen,"  in 

Herzog,  second  ed.,  vol.  ITI.  (1878),  p.  277-286. 
RITSCHL  :    Die  Entstehung  der  altkath.  Kirehe  1857  (second  ed.  p.  206- 

270). 
J.  LEHMANIT  :  Die  Clementinischen  Schriften  mit  besonderer  Riicksicht  auf 

ihr  liter.  Verhaltniss.    Gotha  1869.    He  mediates  between  Hilgen- 

feld  and  Uhlhorn.    (See  a  review  by  Lipsius  in  the  "Protest 


436  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Kirchenztg,"  1869,  477-482,  and  by  Lagarde  in  his  "  Symmicta,"  I 
1877,  pp.  2-i  and  108-112,  where  Lehmann  is  charged  with 
plagiarism). 

E.  A.  LIPSIUS  :  Die  Quetten  der  romischen  Petrus-Sage  kritish  untersucht. 
Kiel  1872.  Lipsius  finds  the  basis  of  the  whole  Clementine  litera- 
ture in  the  strongly  anti-Pauline  Ada  Petri. 

A.  B.  LtrrrERBECK  :  Die  Ctementinen  und  ihr  Verh.  z.  Unfehlbark&its* 
dogma.  Giessen,  1872. 

The  system  of  the  pseudo-Clementine  Homilies  exhibits  Ebi- 
onism  at  once  in  its  theosophic  perfection,  and  in  its  internal 
dissolution.  It  represents  rather  an  individual  opinion,  than  a 
sect,  but  holds  probably  some  connection,  not  definitely  ascer- 
tained, with  the  Elkesaites,  who,  as  appears  from  the  "  Philo- 
sophumem"  branched  out  even  to  Home.  It  is  genuinely 
Ebionitic  or  Judaistic  in  its  monotheistic  basis,  its  concealed 
antagonism  to  Paul,  and  its  assertion  of  the  essential  identity  of 
Christianity  and  Judaism,  while  it  expressly  rejects  the  Gnostic 
fundamental  doctrine  of  the  demiurge.  It  cannot,  therefore, 
properly  be  classed,  as  it  is  by  Baur,  among  the  Gnostic  schools. 

The  twenty '  Clementine  Homilies  bear  the  celebrated  name  of 
the  Roman  bishop  Clement,  mentioned  in  Phil.  4:  3,  as  a  helper 
of  Paul,  but  evidently  confounded  in  the  pseudo-Clementine 
literature  with  Flavius  Clement,  kinsman  of  the  Emperor  Do- 
mitian.  They  really  come  from  an  unknown,  philosophically 
educated  author,  probably  a  Jewish  Christian,  of  the  second 
half  of  the  second  century.  They  are  a  philosophico-religious 
romance,  based  on  some  historical  traditions,  which  it  is  now 
impossible  to  separate  from  apocryphal  accretions.  The  concep- 
tion of  Simon  as  a  magician  was  furnished  by  the  account  in  the 
aighth  chapter  of  Acts,  and  his  labors  in  Rome  were  mentioned 
by  Justin  Martyr.  The  book  is  prefaced  by  a  letter  of  Peter  to 
James,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  in  which  he  sends  him  his  sermons, 
and  begs  him  to  keep  them  strictly  secret;  and  by  a  letter  of  the 
pseudo-Clement  to  the  same  James,  in  which  he  relates  how 
Peter,  shortly  before  his  death,  appointed  him  (Clement)  his 
successor  in  Rome,  and  enjoined  upon  him  to  send  to  James  a 
vrork  composed  at  the  instance  of  Peter,  entitled  "  dementis 


1  114.  THE  FSEUDO-CLEMENTIXE  EBICXNISM.          437 

Epitome  prcedicationum  Petri  in  peregrinationibus"1  By  these 
epistles  it  was  evidently  designed  to  impart  to  the  pretended 
extract  from  the  itinerant  sermons  and  disputations  of  Peter, 
the  highest  apostolical  authority,  and  at  the  same  time  to  explain 
the  long  concealment  of  them.2 

The  substance  of  the  Homilies  themselves  is  briefly  this: 
Clement,  an  educated  Roman,  of  the  imperial  family,  not  satis- 
fied with  heathenism,  and  thirsting  for  truth,  goes  to  Judaea, 
having  heard,  under  the  reign  of  Tiberius,  that  Jesus  had  ap- 
peared there.  In  Csesarea  he  meets  the  apostle  Peter,  and  being 
instructed  and  converted  by  him,  accompanies  him  on  his  mis- 
sionary journeys  in  Palestine,  to  Tyre,  Tripolis,  Laodicea,  and 
Antioch.  He  attends  upon  the  sermons  of  Peter  and  his  long, 
repeated  disputations  with  Simon  Magus,  and,  at  the  request  of 
the  apostle,  commits  the  substance  of  them  to  writing.  Simon 
Peter  is  thus  the  proper  hero  of  the  romance,  and  appears 
throughout  as  the  representative  of  pure,  primitive  Christianity, 
in  opposition  to  Simon  Magus,  who  is  portrayed  as  a  "  man  full 
of  enmity,"  and  a  "deceiver,"  the  author  of  all  anti-  Jewish 
heresies,  especially  of  the  Marcionite  Gnosticism.  The  author 
was  acquainted  with  the  four  canonical  Gospels,  and  used  them, 
Matthew  most,  John  least  ;  and  with  them  another  work  of  the 
same  sort,  probably  of  the  Ebionitic  stamp,  but  now  unknown.3 

It  has  been  ingeniously  conjectured  by  Baur  (first  in  1831), 


T&V  Mirpov  £7n%«Sv  Kqpvyfidru 

*  The  Tubingen  School,  under  the  lead  of  Dr.  Baur,  has  greatly  exaggerated 
the  importance  of  these  heretical  fictions  which  the  unknown  author  never 
intended  to  present  as  solid  facts.  Thus  Hilgenfeld  says  (I  c.  p.  1)  :  "  There 
is  scarcely  a  single  writing  which  is  of  so  great  importance  for  the  history  of 
Christianity  in  its  first  age,  and  which  has  already  given  such  hrilliant  dis- 
closures [?]  at  the  hands  of  the  most  renowned  critics  in  regard  to  the  earliest 
history  of  the  Christian  Church,  as  the  writings  ascribed  to  the  Eoman 
Clement,  the  Recognitions  and  Homilies."  Their  importance  is  confined  to  the 
history  of  heresy,  which  with  the  Tubingen  school  is  the  most  interesting  por- 
tion of  ancient  church  history. 

3  The  Tubingen  school  first  denied  the  use  of  the  fourth  Gospel,  but  the  dis- 
covery of  the  missing  portion  by  Dressel  in  1853  has  settled  this  point,  for  it 
contains  (Horn.  XIX.  22)  a  clear  quotation  from  John  9:  1-3. 


438  SECOND  PERIOD.     A.  D.  100-311. 

and  adopted  by  his  pupils,  that  the  pseudo-Clementine  Petei 
combats,  under  the  mask  of  the  Magician,  the  apostle  Paul 
(nowhere  named  in  the  Homilies),  as  the  first  and  chief  corrupter 
of  Christianity.1  This  conjecture,  which  falls  in  easily  with 
Baur's  view  of  the  wide-spread  and  irreconcilable  antagonism  of 
Petrinism  and  Paulinism  in  the  primitive  church,  derives  some 
support  from  several  malicious  allusions  to  Paul,  especially  the 
collision  in  Antioch.  Simon  Magus  is  charged  with  claiming 
that  Christ  appeared  to  him  in  a  vision,  and  called  him  to  be  an 
apostle,  and  yet  teaching  a  doctrine  contrary  to  Christ,  hating 
his  apostles,  and  denouncing  Peter,  the  firm  rock  and  foundation 
of  the  church,  as  "self-condemned"3  But  this  allusion  is 
probably  only  an  incidental  sneer  at  Paul.  .  The  whole  design 
of  the  Homilies,  and  the  account  given  of  the  origin,  history 
and  doctrine  of  Simon,  are  inconsistent  with  such  an  identi- 
fication of  the  heathen  magician  with  the  Christian  apostle. 
Simon  Magus  is  described  in  the  Homilies*  as  a  Samaritan,  who 
studied  Greek  in  Alexandria,  and  denied  the  supremacy  of  God 
and  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  substituted  Mount  Gerizim  for 
Jerusalem,  and  declared  himself  the  true  Christ.  He  carried 
with  him  a  companion  or  mistress,  Helena,  who  descended  from 
the  highest  heavens,  and  was  the  primitive  essence  and  wisdom. 
If  Paul  had  been  intended,  the  writer  would  have  effectually 
concealed  and  defeated  his  design  by  such  and  other  traits,  which 
find  not  the  remotest  parallel  in  the  history  and  doctrine  of 
P$ul,  but  are  directly  opposed  to  the  statements  in  his  Epistles 
and  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

In  the  Recognitions  the  anti-Pauline  tendency  is  moderated, 
yet  Paul's  labors  are  ignored,  and  Peter  is  made  the  apostle  of 
the  Gentiles. 

The  doctrine  which  pseudo-Clement  puts  into  the  mouth  of 

1  The  hypothesis  has  been  most  fully  carried  out  by  lipsius  in  his  article  on 
Simon  Magus  in  Schenkel's  "BibellexicoD,"  vol.  V.  301-321. 

*  Comp.  Horn.  XVII.  19  (p.  351  sq.  ed.  Dressel)  with  Gal.  2:  11,  whew 
Paul  uses  the  same  word  KarEyvauhoe  of  Peter. 

*  H<m.  IL  22  sqq.  (p.  57  sqq*). 


$114.  THE  PSEUDO-CLEMENTINE  EBIOXISJI.  439 

Peter,  ana  very  skilfully  Interweaves  with  his  narrative,  is  a 
confused  mixture  of  Ebionitic  and  Gnostic,  ethical  and  meta- 
physical ideas  and  fancies.  He  sees  in  Christianity  only  the 
restoration  of  the  pure  primordial  religion,1  which  God  revealed 
in  the  creation,  but  which,  on  account  of  the  obscuring  power  of 
sin  and  the  seductive  influence  of  demons,  must  be  from  time  to 
time  renewed.  The  representatives  of  this  religion  are  the  pil- 
lars of  the  world :  Adam,  Enoch,  Xoah,  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob, 
Moses,  and  Christ.  These  are  in  reality  only  seven  different 
incarnations  of  the  same  Adam  or  primal  man,  the  true  prophet 
of  God,  who  was  omniscient  and  infallible.  TThat  is  recorded 
unfavorable  to  these  holy  men,  the  drunkenness  of  Noah,  the 
polygamy  of  the  patriarchs,  the  homicide  of  Moses,  and  espe- 
cially the  blasphemous  history  of  the  fall  of  Adam,  as  well  as  all 
unworthy  anthropopathical  passages  concerning  God,  were  foisted 
into  the  Old  Testament  by  the  devil  and  bis  demons.  Thus, 
where  Philo  and  Origen  resorted  to  allegorical  interpretation,  to 
remove  what  seems  offensive  in  Scripture,  pseudo-Clement  adopts 
the  still  more  arbitrary  hypothesis  of  diabolical  interpolations. 
Among  the  true  prophets  of  God,  again,  he  gives  Adam,  Moses, 
and  Christ  peculiar  eminence,  and  places  Christ  above  all, 
though  without  raising  him  essentially  above  a  prophet  and 
lawgiver.  The  history  of  religion,  therefore,  is  not  one  of  pro- 
gress, but  only  of  return  to  the  primitive  revelation.  Chris- 
tianity and  Mosaism  are  identical,  and  both  coincide  with  the 
religion  of  Adam.  Whether  a  man  believe  in  Moses  or  in 
Christ,  it  is  all  the  same,  provided  he  blaspheme  neither.  But 
to  know  both,  and  find  in  both  the  same  doctrine,  is  to  be  rich 
in  God,  to  recognize  the  new  as  old,  and  the  old  as  become  new, 
Christianity  is  an  advance  only  in  its  extension  of  the  gospel  tc 
the  Gentiles,  and  its  consequent  universal  character. 

As  the  fundamental  principle  of  this  pure  religion,  our  author 
lays  down  the  doctrine  of  one  God,  the  creator  of  the  world. 
This  is  thoroughly  Ebionitic,  and  directly  opposed  to  the  dual- 

1  The  TTptfr?  TV  avtiooirdTitpt,  waoaSo'&eTffa  corqptos  tipipKeitu 


440  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

ism  of  the  demiurgic  doctrine  of  the  Gnostics.  But  uiien  he 
makes  the  whole  stream  of  created  life  flow  forth  from  God  in 
a  long  succession  of  sexual  and  ethical  antitheses  and  syzygies, 
and  return  into  him  as  its  absolute  rest ;  here  plainly  touching 
the  pantheistic  emanation-theory  of  Gnosticism.  God  himself 
cue  from  the  beginning,  has  divided  everything  into  counter- 
parts, into  right  and  left,  heaven  and  earth,  day  and  night,  light 
and  darkness,  life  and  death.  The  monad  thus  becomes  the 
dyad.  The  better  came  first,  the  worse  followed;  but  from 
man  onward  the  order  was  reversed.  Adam,  created  in  the 
image  of  God,  is  the  true  prophet;  his  wife,  Eve,  represents 
false  prophecy.  They  were  followed,  first,  by  wicked  Cain,  and 
then  by  righteous  Abel.  So  Peter  appeared  after  Simon  Magus, 
as  light  after  darkness,  health  after  sickness.  So,  at  the  last, 
will  antichrist  precede  the  advent  of  Christ.  And  finally,  the 
whole  present  order  of  things  loses  itself  in  the  future;  the 
pious  pass  into  eternal  life ;  the  ungodly,  since  the  soul  becomes 
mortal  by  the  corruption  of  the  divine  image,  are  annihilated 
after  suffering  a  punishment,  which  is  described  as  a  purifying 
fire.1  When  the  author  speaks  of  eternal  punishment,  he  merely 
accommodates  himself  to  the  popular  notion.  The  fulfilling  of 
the  law,  in  the  Ebionitic  sense,  and  knowledge,  on  a  half-Gnos- 
tic principle,  are  the  two  parts  of  the  way  of  salvation.  The 
formeHncludes  frequent  fasts,  ablutions,  abstinence  from  animal 
food,  and  voluntary  poverty;  while  early  marriage  is  enjoined, 
to  prevent  licentiousness.  In  declaring  baptism  to  be  absolutely 
necessary  to  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  the  author  approaches  the 
catholic  system.  He  likewise  adopts  the  catholic  principle  in- 
volved, that  salvation  is  to  be  found  only  in  the  external  church. 
As  regards  ecclesiastical  organization,  he  fully  embraces  the 
monarchical  episcopal  view.  The  bishop  holds  the  place  of 
Christ  in  the  congregation,  and  has  power  to  bind  and  loose. 
Under  him  stand  the  presbyters  and  deacons.  But  singularly, 
and  again  in  true  Ebionitic  style,  James,  the  brother  of  the 

1  Uvp  Ka-frdpffiov,  ignis  purgatorius* 


8  114.  THE  PSEUDO-CLEMENTINE  EBION1SM.          441 

Lord,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  which  is  the  centre  of  Christendom, 
is  made  the  general  vicar  of  Christ,  the  visible  head  of  the 
whole  church,  the  bishop  of  bishops.  Hence  even  Peter  must 
give  him  an  account  of  his  labors;  and  hence,  too,  according  to 
the  introductory  epistles,  the  sermons  of  Peter  and  Clement's 
abstract  of  them  were  sent  to  James  for  safe-keeping,  with  the 
statement,  that  Clement  had  been  named  by  Peter  as  his  suc- 
cessor at  Rome. 

It  is  easy  to  see  that  this  appeal  to  a  pseudo-Petrine  primitive 
Christianity  was  made  by  the  author  of  the  Homilies  with  a 
view  to  reconcile  all  the  existing  differences  and  divisions  in 
Christendom.  In  this  effort  he,  of  course,  did  not  succeed,  but 
rather  made  way  for  the  dissolution  of  the  Ebionitic  element 
still  existing  in  the  orthodox  catholic  church. 

Besides  these  Homilies,  of  which  the  Epitome  is  only  a  poor 
abridgement,  there  are  several  other  works,  some  printed,  some 
still  unpublished,  which  are  likewise  forged  upon  Clement  of 
Rome,  and  based  upon  the  same  historical  material,  with  unim- 
portant deviations,  but  are  in  great  measure  free,  as  to  doctrine, 
from  Judaistic  and  Gnostic  ingredients,  and  come  considerably 
nearer  the  line  of  orthodoxy. 

The  most  important  of  these  are  the  Recognitions  of  Clement, 
in  ten  books,  mentioned  by  Origen,  but  now  extant  only  in  a 
Latin  translation  by  Rufinus.  They  take  their  name  from  the 
narrative,  in  the  last  books,  of  the  reunion  of  the  scattered 
members  of  the  Clementine  family,  who  all  at  last  find  them- 
selves together  in  Christianity,  and  are  baptized  by  Peter. 

On  the  question  of  priority  between  these  two  works,  critics 
are  divided,  some  making  the  Recognitions  an  orthodox,  or  an 
least  more  nearly  orthodox,  version  of  the  Homilies;1  others 
regarding  the  Homilies  as  a  heretical  corruption  of  the  Recogni- 
tions? But  in  all  probability  both  works  are  based  upon  older 

*  Clericus,  Mohler,  Schliemann,  UTilhorn,  Schwegler,  partly  also  Lehmann. 
TJhlhorn  has  since  modified  his  view  (1876). 

2  Particularly  Hilgenfeld  and  Ritschl,  and  among  older  writers,  Cave  and 
Whiston.  Salmon  also  assigns  the  priority  of  composition  to  the  HecognitioTis. 


442  SECOXD  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

and  simpler  Jewish-Christian  documents,  under  the  assumed 
names  of  Peter  and  Clement.1 

As  to  their  birth-place,  the  Homilies  probably  originated  in 
East  Syria,  the  JRccogiiitions  in  Koine.  They  are  assigned  to 
the  second  half  of  the  second  century. 

In  a  literary  point  of  view,  these  productions  are  remarkable, 
as  the  first  specimens  of  Christian  romance,  next  to  the  "Pastor 
fftmuc."  They  far  surpass,  in  matter,  and  especially  in  moral 
earnestness  and  tender  feeling,  the  heathen  romances  of  a  Chari- 
ton  and  an  Achilles  Tatios,  of  the  fourth  or  fifth  centuries. 
The  style,  though  somewhat  tedious,  is  fascinating  in  its  way, 
and  betrays  a  real  artist  in  its  combination  of  the  didactic  and 
historical,  the  philosophic  and  the  poetic  elements. 

NOTES. 

Lagarde  (in  the  Preface  to  his  edition  of  the  Clementina,  p.  22)  and  G.  E» 
Steitz  t  in  a  lengthy  review  of  Lagarde  in  the  "Studien  und  Kritiken1'  for  1867, 
NTo.  III.  p.  556  sqq.J  draw  a  parallel  between  the  pseudo-Clementine  fiction 
3f  Simon  and  the  German  story  of  Faust,  the  magician,  and  derive  the  latter 
Jrom  the  former  through  the  medium  of  the  Recognitions,  which  were  better 
known  in  the  church  than  the  Homilies.  George  Sabellicus,  about  A.  D.  1507, 
called  himself  FaMus  junior,  magus  secundus.  Clement's  father  is  called 
Faustus,  and  his  two  brothers,  Faustinus  and  Faustinianus  (in  the  Recognitions 
Faustus  and  Faustinas),  were  brought  up  with  Simon  the  magician,  and  at 
first  associated  with  him.  The  characters  of  Helena  and  Homunculus  appear 
in  both  stories,  though  very  differently.  I  doubt  whether  these  resemblances 
are  sufficient  to  establish  a  connection  between  the  two  otherwise  widely  diver- 
gent popular  fictions. 

§  115.  Gnosticism.     The  Literature. 
SOUECES  : 

1  Gnostic  (of  the  Valentinian  school  in  the  wider  sense)  :  PISTIS 
SOPHIA  ;  Opus  gnosticum  e  codlce  Goptico  descriptum  lot.  vertit  M.  G. 
Schwartze,  ed.  J.  K  Petermann.  Berl.  1851.  Of  the  middle  of  the 


1  The  TLspiodot  ttsrpov  tita  E^/crorof,  and  the  still  older  Kijpvyfiara  rpov 
(about  A.  D.  140-145  1,  the  contents  of  which  are  mentioned  in  Eecogn.  ILL  75, 
and  the  oldest  Ada  Petri,  parts  of  which  are  preserved  in  the  apocryphal  Acfa 
Petri  tt  Paidi.  See  Lipsius,  Quetten  tier  rom.  Petrus-Sage,  1872,  pp.  14  sqq. 
Uhlhorn  assents  in  his  last  art.  in  the  new  ed.  of  Herzog,  ILL  285.  Dr. 
Salmon  (in  Smith  and  Wace,  I.  571)  likewise  assumes  that  both  are  drawn 
from  a  common  original,  but  that  the  author  of  Homilies  borrowed  the  bio* 
graphical  portions  from  Recognitions. 


2  115.  GNOSTICISM.    THE  LITERATUBE.  443 

third  century.  An  account  of  the  fall  and  repentance  of  Sophia 
and  the  mystery  of  redemption.  Comp.  the  article  of  Kostlin  in  the 
"Tub.  Theol.  Jahrbucher,"  1854— The  Apocryphal  Gospels,  Acts, 
and  Apocalypses  are  to  a  large  extent  of  Gnostic  origin,  e.  g.  the 
Acts  of  St.  Thomas  (a  favorite  apostle  of  the  Gnostics),  John,  Peter, 
Paul,  Philip,  Matthew,  Andrew,  Paul  and  Thecla,  Some  of  them 
have  been  worked  over  by  Catholic  authors,  and  furnished  much 
material  to  the  legendary  lore  of  the  church.  They  and  the  stories 
of  monks  were  the  religious  novels  of  the  early  church.  See  the 
collections  of  the  apocryphal  literature  of  the  X.  T.  by  Fabricius, 
Thilo,  Tischendorf,  Max  Bonnet,  D.  William  Wright,  G.  Phillips, 
S.  C.  Malan,  Zahn,  and  especially  Lipsius :  Die  Apokryphen  Apos- 
telgeschichten  und  Apostellegenden  (Braunschweig,  1888,  2  vols.) 
Comp.  the  Lit  quoted  in  vol.  I.  90  sq. ;  188  sq.,  and  in  Lipsius,  I. 
34  sqq. 

tL  Patristic  (with  many  extracts  from  lost  Gnostic  writings) :  IRE^T^US  : 
Adv.  Hcereses.  The  principal  source,  especially  for  the  Valentinian 
Gnosticism.  EYPPOLYTUS:  Refutat.  omnium  Hceresium  (Philoso- 
phumena),  ed,  Duncker  and  Schneidewin.  Gott.  1859.  Based  partly 
on  Irenseus,  partly  on  independent  reading  of  Gnostic  works.  TEE- 
TOTLLIAN:  De  Piwscriptionibus  H&reticorum  ;  Adv.  Valentin; 
ficorpiace;  Adv.  Marcionem.  The  last  is  the  chief  authority  for 
Marcionism.  CLEMENS  ALEX.:  Stromata.  Scattered  notices  of 
great  value.  OEIGENES  :  Com.  in  Euang.~  Joh.  Furnishes  much 
important  information  and  extracts  from  Heracleon.  EPIPH ASTCS  : 
Tlavdptov.  Full  of  information,  but  uncritical  and  fanatically  or- 
thodox. EUSEBIUS  :  IRst  Ecd.  THEODOEET  :  Fabulce  Hcer. 

See  FE.  OEELEB/S  Corpus  Ha&%eseologicum  (a  collection  of  the  ancient 
anti-heretical  works  of  Epiphanius,  Philastrus,  Augustin,  etc.), 
Berol.  1856-1861,  5  vols. 

III.  Neo-Platonist :  PLOTENTTS:  Hpdf  rot>c  ywwrracouf  (or  Ennead.  II.  9). 

IV.  Critical :  B>.  A.  LIPSIUS  :  Zwr  (freUm-Kritik  des  Epiphanies.    Wien 
1865.    Die  Qaellen  d&r  altesten  Eetzergeschichte.  Leipz.  1875  (258  pp.) 

AD.  HAENACK  :  Zur  Quellen-Kriiik  d&r  GeschicTite  des  Gnosticismus* 
Leipz.  1873.  Comp.  his  article  in  Brieger's  "  Zeitschrift  fur  K 
Geacb-"  for  1876, 1.  Also  HiLGEirrELD :  Ketzergesch.  p.  1-83. 

WOEKS: 

MAoritTET  (E.  C.) :  Diss&rt.  de  Gnosticorum  rebus,  prefixed  to  his  edition 

of  Irenseus ;  also  in  Stieren's  edition  of  Iren.  vol.  IL  pp.  54-180. 
MOSHEIM  :  Comment,  de  rebus  ante  Const.  M.  pp.  333  sqq. 

Genet .  Enbwicldung  d&r  gnost.  Systeme.  Berl.  1818.  Comp. 
the  more  mature  exposition  in  his  Gh.  Hist.  He  first  opened  a  calm 
philosopMcal  treatment  of  Gnosticism. 

MATTER  :  Histoire  critique  du  Gnosticisme  et  de  son  influence 


444  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311*. 

sur  les  sectes  religieuses  et  philosophiques  des  six  premiers  si'ecles 
Par.  1828 ;  second  ed.  much  enlarged.  Strasb.  and  Par.  1844,  in  2 
rols. 

BURTON  :  Bampton  Lectures  on  the  Heresies  of  the  Apost.  Age.    Oxf.  1830 
MOHLER  iB.  C.j:    Der  Ursprung  des  Gnosticismus.    Tub.  1831  (in  hia 

"  Vermisehte  Schriften,"  I.  pp.  403  sqq.) 

BAUE:   Die  christliche  Gnosis  in  ihrer  geschichtl.  Entwicklung.    Tiib. 
1835.    A  masterly  philosophical  analysis,  which  includes  also  the 
systems  of  Jacob  Bohme,  Schelling,  Schleiermacher,  and  Hegel. 
Comp.  his  Kirchengesch.  vol.  I.  175-234. 
NOBTOX  :  History  of  the  Gnostics.    Boston,  1845. 
H.  ROSSEL  :    Gesch.  der  Untersuch.  uber  den  Gnostic. ;  in  his  "  TheoL 

Nachlass,"  published  by  Neander.    Berl.  1847,  vol.  2«*  p.  179  sqq, 
THIERSCH:  Kritik  der  X  Tlkhen  Schriften*    Erl.  1845  (chap.  5,  pp.  231 

sqq.  and  26$  sqq.) 

K.  A.  LEPSIUS :  Der  Gnosticismus,  sein  Wesen,  Ursprung  und  Entwick- 
lungsgang.  Leipz.  1860  (from  Ersch  and  Gruber's  "Allgem.  Encycl/' 
1.  Sect.  vol.  71).  Comp.  his  critical  work  on  the  sources  of  Gn. 
quoted  above. 

E.  WILH.  M5LLEB :  Geschichte  der  Eosmologie  in  der  griechischen  Kirche 
bis  auf  Origenes.     Mit   Spetialuntersuchungen  uber  die  gnostisohen 
System*    Halle,  1860  (pp.  189-473). 
In  Ersch  und  Gruber's  Encykl.  1860. 
C.  W.  Ki3TG :    The  Gnostics  and  their  Remains  (with  illustrations  of 

Gnostic  symbols  and  works  of  art).    Lond.,  1864. 
HENBY  L.  MAXSEL  (Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  d.  1871) :  The  Gnostic  Heresies, 

ed.  by  J.  B.  Lightfoot.    London,  1875. 

J.  B.  LIGHTFOOT:   The  Colossian  Heresy,  Excursus  in  his  Com.  on  Colos- 

sians  and  Philemon.    London,  1875,  pp,  73-113.    This  is  the  best 

account  of  Gnosticism,  written  by  an  Englishman,  but  confined  to 

the  apostolic  age. 

REJffAN.  L'  6glise  chrttienne  (Paris,  1879),  Chap.  IX.  and  X.  p,  140-185, 

and  XVin.  p.  350-363. 
J.  L.  JACOBI:  Gnosis,  in  the  new  ed.  of  Herzog,  vol.  V.  (1879),  204r-247, 

condensed  in  Schaff's  "Rel.  Encycl,"  1882,  vol.  I.  877  sqq. 
G.  SALMON,  in  SMITH  ami  WAGE,  il.  678-687, 
G.  KOFFMAXE  :  J>ie  Gnosis  nach  ihrer  Tendinz  und  Organisation.     Bres- 

lau,  1881.    (Theses,  33  pages). 

AD.  HiLGEXFELDijDze  Ketxrgewhitfite  des  Urchmtenthitms.    Leipzig  i,«84 
(p.  1G2  sqq.). 
A  number  of  monographs  on  individual  Gnostics,  see  below. 

§  116.  Meaning,  Origin  and  Character  of  Gnosticism. 
The  Judaistic  form  of  heresy  was  substantially  conquered  in 
the  apostolic  age.     More  important  and  more  widely  spread  in 


Jl]6    MEANING,  CHARACTER  AND  OEIGIN.  445 

ihe  second  period  was  the  paganizing  heresy,  known  by  the 
name  of  GNOSTICISM.  It  was  the  Rationalism  of  the  ancient 
church  ;  it  pervaded  the  intellectual  atmosphere,  and  stimulated 
the  development  of  catholic  theology  by  opposition. 

The  Greek  word  gnosis  may  denote  all  schools  of  philosophical 
or  religious  knowledge,  in  distinction  from  superficial  opinion  or 
blind,  JbeKgf.  The  New  Testament  makes  a  plain  distinction 
between  true  and  false  gnosis.  The  true  consists  in  a  deep  in- 
sight into  the  essence  and  structure  of  the  Christian  truth,  springs 
from  faith,  is  accompanied  by  the  cardinal  virtues  of  love  and 
humility,  serves  to  edify  the  church,  and  belongs  among  the 
gifts  of  grace  wrought  by  the  Holy  Spirit.1  In  this  sense,  Cle- 
ment of  Alexandria  and  Origen  aimed  at  gnosis,  and  all  specu- 
lative theologians  who  endeavor  to  reconcile  reason  and  revela- 
tion, may  be  called  Christian  Gnostics.  The  false  gnosis,2  on 
the  contrary,  against  which  Paul  warns  Timothy,  and  which  he 
censures  in  the  Corinthians  and  Colossians,  is  a  morbid  pride 
of  wisdom,  an  arrogant,  self-conceited,  ambitious  knowledge, 
which  puffs  up,  instead  of  edifying,3  runs  into  idle  subtleties 
and  disputes,  and  verifies  in  its  course  the  apostle's  word  :  "  Pro- 
fessing themselves  to  be  wise,  they  became  fools."4 

In  this  bad  sense,  the  word  applies  to  the  error  of  which  we 
now  speak,  and  which  began  to  show  itself  at  least  as  early  as 
the  days  of  Paul  and  John.  It  is  a  one-sided  intellectualism 
on  a  dualistic  heathen  basis.  It  rests  on  an  over-valuation  of 
knowledge  or  gnosis,  and  a  depreciation  of  faith  or  pistis.  The 
Gnostics  contrasted  themselves  by  this  name  with  the  Pistics,  or 
the  mass  of  believing  Christians.  They  regarded  Christianity 
as  consisting  essentially  in  a  higher  knowledge  ;  fancied  them- 
selves the  sole  possessors  of  an  esoteric,  philosophical  religion, 
which  made  them  genuine,  spiritual  men,  and  looked  down 
with  contempt  upon  the  mere  men  of  the  soul  and  of  the  body. 
They  constituted  the  intellectual  aristocracy,  a  higher  caste  in 


r,  %6-yoe  oofa?,  I  Cor.  12:  8;  comp.  13:  2,  12;  Jno.  17:  3. 

s,  1  Tim.  6  :  20. 
»lCor.  8:  1.  *  Bom.  1  :  23- 


SECOND  PEHIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  church.  They,  moreover,  adulterated  Christianity  with  sun- 
dry elements  entirely  foreign,  and  thus  quite  obscured  the  true 
essence  of  the  gospel.1 

TTe  may  parallelize  the  true  and  false,  the  believing  and  un- 
believing forms  of  Gnosticism  with  the  two  forms  of  modern 
Rationalism  and  modern  Agnosticism.  There  is  a  Christian 
Rationalism  which  represents  the  doctrines  of  revelation  as  being 
in  harmony  with  reason,  though  transcending  reason  in  its  pre- 
sent capacity;  and  there  is  an  anti-Christian  Rationalism  which 
makes  natural  reason  (ratio)  the  judge  of  revelation,  rejects  the 
specific  doctrines  of  Christianity,  and  denies  the  supernatural 
and  miraculous.  And  there  is  an  Agnosticism  which  springs 
from  the  sense  of  the  limitations  of  thought,  and  recognizes  faith 
as  the  necessary  organ  of  the  supernatural  and  absolute;2  while 
the  unbelieving  Agnosticism  declares  the  infinite  and  absolute  to 
be  unknown  and  unknowable,  and  tends  to  indifferentism  and 
atheism.3 

AYe  now  proceed  to  trace  the  origin  of  Gnosticism. 

As  to  its  substance,  Gnosticism  is  chiefly  of  heathen  descent. 
It  is  a  peculiar  translation  or  transfusion  of  heathen  philosophy 
and  religion  into  Christianity.  This  was  perceived  by  the 
church-fathers  in  their  day*  Hippolytus  particularly,  in  his 
" Philosophumena"  endeavors  to  trace  the  Gnostic  heresies  to 
the  various  systems  of  Greek  philosophy,  making  Simon  Magus, 
for  example,  dependent  on  Heraclitus,  Valentine  on  Pythagoras 
and  Plato,  Basilides  on  Aristotle,  Marcion  on  Empedocles;  and 
hence  he  first  exhibits  the  doctrines  of  the  Greek  philosophy 
from  Thales  down.  Of  all  these  systems  Platonism  had  the 
greatest  influence,  especially  on  the  Alexandrian  Gnostics; 
though  not  so  much  hi  its  original  Hellenic  form,  as  in  its  later 

1  Baur  takes  too  comprehensive  a  view  of  Gnosticism,  and  includes  in  it  all 
svstems  of  Christian  philosophy  of  religion  down  to  Schelling  and  Hegel. 

*  Sir  William  Hamilton  and"  Dean  Mansel. 

8  Hume,  Spencer,  Comte.  As  to  Kant,  he  started  from  Hume,  but  checked 
the  scepticism  of  the  theoretical  reason  by  the  categorical  imperative  of  the 
practical  reason.  See  Calderwood's  article  "Agnosticism"  in SchafPs "Eel 
Encycl."  vol.  I. 


JJ16.   MEANING,  ORIGIN  AND  CHARACTEB.  447 

orientalized  eclectic  and  mystic  cast,  of  which  Xeo-Platonism 
\vas  another  fruit.  The  Platonic  speculation  yielded  the  germs 
of  the  Gnost^  -doctrine  of  aeons,  the  conceptions  of  matter,  of 
jjhe; antithesis  of  an  ideal  and  a  real  world,  of  an  ante- mundane 
fall  "of  souls  from  the  ideal  world,  of  the  origin  of  sin  from 
•matter,  and  of  the  needed  redemption  of  the  soul  from  the  fet- 
ters of  the  body.  We  find  also  in  the  Gnostics  traces  of  the 
Pythagorean  symbolical  use  of  numbers,  the  Stoic  physics  and 
ethics,  and  some  Aristotelian  elements. 

But  this  reference  to  Hellenic  philosophy,  with  which  Mas- 
suet  was  content,  is  not  enough.  Since  Beausobre  and  Mosheim 
[he  East  has  been  rightly  joined  with  Greece,  as  the  native  home 
of  this  heresy.  This  may  be  infeired  from  the  mystic,  fantastic, 
enigmatic  form  of  the  Gnostic  speculation,  and  from  the  fact, 
that  most  of  its  representatives  sprang  from  Egypt  and  Syria. 
The  conquests  of  Alexander,  the  spread  of  the  Greek  language 
and  literature,  and  the  truths  of  Christianity,  produced  a  mighty 
agitation  in  the  eastern  mind,  which  reacted  on  the  West. 
Gnosticism  has  accordingly  been  regarded  as  more  or  less  par- 
allel with  the  heretical  forms  of  Judaism,  with  Essenism,  The- 
rapeutism,  Philo's  philosophico-religious  system,  and  with  the 
Cabbala,  the  origin  of  which  probably  dates  as  far  back  as  the 
first  century.  The  affinity  of  Gnosticism  also  with  the  Zoroas- 
trian  dualism  of  a  kingdom  of  light  and  a  kingdom  of  darkness 
is  unmistakable,  especially  in  the  Syrian  Gnostics.  Its  alliance 
with  the  pantheistic,  docetic,  and  ascetic  elements  of  Bud- 
dhism, which  had  advanced  at  the  time  of  Christ  to  western 
Asia,  is  equally  plain.  Parsic  and  Indian  influence  is  most  evi- 
dent in  Manichseism,  while  the  Hellenic  element  there  amounts 
to  very  little. 

Gnosticism,  with  its  syncretistic  tendency,  is  no  isolated  fact. 
It  struck  its  roots  deep  in  the  mighty  revolution  of  ideas  in- 
duced by  the  fall  of  the  old  religions  and  the  triumph  of  the 
new.  Philo,  of  Alexandria,  who  was  a  contemporary  of  Christ, 
but  wholly  ignorant  of  him,  endeavored  to  combine  the  Jewish 
religion,  by  allegorical  exposition,  or  rather  imposition,  with 


448  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Platonic  philosophy;  and  this  system,  according  as  it  might  be 
prosecuted  under  the  Christian  or  the  heathen  influence,  would 
prepare  the  way  either  for  the  speculative  theology  of  the  Alex- 
andrian church  fathers,  or  for  the  heretical  Gnosis.  Still  more 
nearlv  akin  to  Gnosticism  is  Xeo-Platonisna,  which  arose  a  little 
later  than  Philo's  system,  but  ignored  Judaism,  and  derived  its. 
Ideas  exclusively  from  eastern  and  western  heathenism.  The 
Gnostic  syncretism,  however,  differs  materially  from  both  the 
Philonic  and  the  Xeo-Platonic  by  taking  up  Christianity,  which 
the  Xeo-Platonists  directly  or  indirectly  opposed.  This  the 
Gnostics  regarded  as  the  highest  stage  of  the  development  of 
religion,  though  they  so  corrupted  it  by  the  admixture  of  foreign 
matter,  as  to  destroy  its  identity. 

Gnosticism  is,  therefore,  the  grandest  and  most  comprehen- 
sive form  of  speculative  religious  syncretism  known  to  history. 
It  consists  of  Oriental  mysticism,  Greek  philosophy,  Alexan- 
drian, Philonic,  and  Cabbalistic  Judaism,  and  Christian  ideas  of 
salvation,  not  merely  mechanically  compiled,  but,  as  it  were, 
chemically  combined.  At  least,  in  its  fairly  developed  form  in 
the  Yalentinian  system,  it  is,  in  its  way,  a  wonderful  structure  of 
speculative  or  rather  imaginative  thought,  and  at  the  same  time 
an  artistic  work  of  the  creative  fancy,  a  Christian  mythological 
*pic.  The  old  world  here  rallied  all  its  energies,  to  make  out 
of  its  diverse  elements  some  new  thing,  and  to  oppose  to  the 
real,  substantial  universalism  of  the  catholic  church  an  ideal, 
shadowy  universalism  of  speculation.  But  this  fusion  of  all 
systems  served  in  the  end  only  to  hasten  the  dissolution  of  east- 
ern and  western  heathenism,  while  the  Christian  element  came 
forth  purified  and  strengthened  from  the  crucible. 

The  Gnostic  speculation,  like  most  speculative  religions,  failed 
to  establish  a  safe  basis  for  practical  morals.  On  the  one  side, 
a  spiritual  pride  obscured  the  sense  of  sin,  and  engendered  a 
frivolous  antinomianism,  which  often  ended  in  sensuality  and 
debaucheries.  On  the  other  side,  an  over-strained  sense  of  sin 
often  led  the  Gnostics,  in  glaring  contrast  with  the  pagan  deifi- 
cation of  n:itmv,  to  ascribe  nature  to  the  devil,  to  abhor  the 


2  117.  THE  SYSTEM  OF  GNOSTICISM.  449 

body  as  the  seat  of  evil,  and  to  practice  extreme  austerities  upon 
themselves. 

This  ascetic  feature  is  made  prominent  by  Mohler,  the  Eoman 
Catholic  divine.  But  he  goes  quite  too  far,  when  he  derives  the 
whole  phenomenon  of  Gnosticism  (which  he  wrongly  views  as 
a  forerunner  of  Protestantism)  directly  and  immediately  from 
Christianity.  He  represents  it  as  a  hyper-Christianity,  an  ex- 
aggerated contempt  for  the  world,1  which,  when  seeking  for  itself 
a  speculative  basis,  gathered  from  older  philosophemes,  theoso- 
phies,  and  mythologies,  all  that  it  could  use  for  its  purpose. 

The  number  of  the  Gnostics  it  is  impossible  to  ascertain.  We 
find  them  in  almost  all  portions  of  the  ancient  church ;  chiefly 
where  Christianity  came  into  close  contact  with  Judaism  and 
heathenism,  as  in  Egypt,  Syria,  and  Asia  Minor;  then  in  Borne, 
the  rendezvous  of  all  forms  of  truth  and  falsehood ;  in  Gaul, 
where  they  were  opposed  by  Irenaeus;  and  in  Africa,  where 
they  were  attacked  by  Tertullian,  and  afterwards  by  Augustin, 
who  was  himself  a  Manichsean  for  several  years.  They  found 
most  favor  with  the  educated,  and  threatened  to  lead  astray  the 
teachers  of  the  church.  But  they  could  gain  no  foothold  among 
the  people ;  indeed,  as  esoterics,  they  stood  aloof  from  the  masses ; 
and  their  philosophical  societies  were,  no  doubt,  rarely  as  large 
as  the  catholic  congregations. 

The  flourishing  period  of  the  Gnostic  schools  was  the  second 
century.  In  the  sixth  century,  only  faint  traces  of  them  re- 
mained ;  yet  some  Gnostic  and  especially  Manichsean  ideas  con- 
tinue to  appear  in  several  heretical  sects  of  the  middle  ages,  such 
as  the  Priscillianists,  the  Paulicians,  the  Bogomiles,  and  the 
Catharists;  and  even  the  history  of  modern  theological  and  phi- 
losophical speculation  shows  kindred  tendencies. 

§  117.  The  System  of  Gnosticism.    Jfe  Theology. 
Gnosticism  is  a  heretical  philosophy  of  religion,  or,  more  ex- 
actly, a  mythological  theosophy,  which  reflects  intellectually  the 
peculiar,  fermenting  state  of  that  remarkable  age  of  transition 

1  He  calls  Gnosticism  a  ''Yerteufdung  der  Nater." 
Vol.  II.— W 


i50  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

from  the  heathen  to  the  Christian  order  of  things.  If  it  were 
merely  an  unintelligible  congeries  of  puerile  absurdities  and 
impious  blasphemies,  as  it  is  grotesquely  portrayed  by  older  his- 
torians,1 it  would  not  have  fascinated  so  many  vigorous  intellects 
and  produced  such  a  long-continued  agitation  in  the  ancient 
church.  It  is  an  attempt  to  solve  some  of  the  deepest  metaphy- 
sical and  theological  problems.  It  deals  with  the  great  antithe- 
ses of  God  and  world,  spirit  and  matter,  idea  and  phenomenon; 
and  endeavors  to  unlock  the  mystery  of  the  creation ;  the  ques- 
tion of  the  rise,  development,  and  end  of  the  world ;  and  of  the 
origin  of  evil.2  It  endeavors  to  harmonize  the  creation  of  the 
material  world  and  the  existence  of  evil  with  the  idea  of  an  ab- 
solute God,  who  is  immaterial  and  perfectly  good.  This  prob- 
lem can  only  be  solved  by  the  Christian  doctrine  of  redemption; 
but  Gnosticism  started  from  a  false  basis  of  dualism,  which  pre- 
vents a  solution. 

In  form  and  method  it  is,  as  already  observed,  more  Oriental 
than  Grecian.  The  Gnostics,  in  their  daring  attempt  to  unfold 
the  mysteries  of  an  upper  world,  disdained  the  trammels  of  rea- 
son, and  resorted  to  direct  spiritual  intuition.  Hence  they 
speculate  not  so  much  in  logical  and  dialectic  mode,  as  in  an 
imaginative,  semi-poetic  way,  and  they  clothe  their  ideas  not  in 
the  simple,  clear,  and  sober  language  of  reflection,  but  in  the 
many-colored,  fantastic,  mythological  dress  of  type,  symbol,  and 
allegory.  Thus  monstrous  nonsense  and  the  most  absurd  con- 
ceits are  chaotically  mingled  up  with  profound  thoughts  and 
poetic  intuitions. 

This  spurious  supernaturalism  which  substitutes  the  irrational 
for  the  supernatural,  and  the  prodigy  for  the  miracle,  pervades 

*  Even  some  of  the  more  recent  writers,  as  Bishop  Kaye  (Ecd.  History  of 
the  Second  and  Third  Centuries),  and  the  translators  of  Irenseus  in  the  "  Ante* 
Nicene  Christian  Library  "  (Edinb.  1868,  vol.  1st,  Introductory  Notice)  havt 
the  same  idea  of  the  Gnostic  systems  as  an  impenetrable  wilderness  of  absurd* 
ties.    But  Mansel,  Lightfoot,  and  Salmon  show  a  clear  knowledge  of  the  sub- 
ject, and  agree  substantially  with  Neander's  account. 

*  TL6&FV  rd  Katc6v,  or  #  KOKIO  ;  unde  raaium  *    See  Tertullian,  De  Prescript.  7  • 
<4dt.  Metre.  J.  2  j  Eoseb.  H.  E.  V.  27 ;  Baur,  Gno^  p.  19.  ' 


8  117.  THE  SYSTEM  OF  G^OSTICIStf.  451 

the  pseudo-historical  romances  of  the  Gnostic  Gospels  and  Acts. 
These  surpass  the  Catholic  traditions  in  luxuriant  fancy  and 
incredible  marvels-.  "Demoniacal  possessions/'  says  one  who 
has  mastered  this  literature/  "  and  resurrections  from  the  dead, 
miracles  of  healing  and  punishment  are  accumulated  without 
end;  the  constant  repetition  of  similar  events  gives  the  long 
stories  a  certain  monotony,  which  is  occasionally  interrupted  by 
colloquies,  hymns  and  prayers  of  genuine  poetic  value.  A  rich 
apparatus  of  visions,  angelic  appearances,  heavenly  voices, 
speaking  animals,  defeated  and  humbled  demons  is  unfolded,  a 
superterrestrial  splendor  of  light  gleams  up,  mysterious, signs 
from  heaven,  earthquakes,  thunder  and  lightning  frighten  the 
impious ;  fire,  earth,  wind  and  water  obey  the  pious ;  serpents, 
lions,  leopards,  tigers,  and  bears  are  tamed  by  a  word  of  the 
apostles  and  turn  upon  their  persecutors;  the  dying  martyrs 
are  surrounded  by  coronets,  roses,  lilies,  incense,  while  the  abyss 
opens  to  swallow  up  their  enemies." 

The  highest  source  of  knowledge,  with  these  heretics,  was  a 
secret  tradition,  in  contrast  with  the  open,  popular  tradition  of 
the  Catholic  church.  In  this  respect,  they  differ  from  Prot- 
estant sects,  which  generally  discard  tradition  altogether  and 
appeal  to  the  Bible  only,  as  understood  by  themselves.  They 
appealed  also  to  apocryphal  documents,  which  arose  in  the  sec- 
ond century  in  great  numbers,  under  eminent  names  of  apostolic 
or  pre-Christian  times.  Epiphanius,  in  his  26th  Heresy,  counts 
the  apocrypha  of  the  Gnostics  by  thousands,  and  Irenseus  found 
among  the  Yalentinians  alone  a  countless  multitude  of  such 
writings.2  And  finally,  when  it  suited  their  purpose,  the  Gnos- 
tics employed  single  portions  of  the  Bible,  without  being  able  to 
agree  either  as  to  the  extent  or  the  interpretation  of  the  same. 
The  Old  Testament  they  generally  rejected,  either  entirely,  as 

1  Dr.  Lipsius,  Die  Apohryph&n  Apostdgeschichten,  und  Apostettegenden  (1883), 
vol.  I.  p.  7. 

3  Adv.  Ha&\  I.  C.  20.  $  1;  'A/ir&qrov  7rAj7#Of  faroKpixfav  Kal  v6&uv  ypa^&y,  &f 
avrol  STrhaffav,  irapeiff<j>6povffiv  etc  KaTdirbq&v  rQv  avoftruv  *a2  ra  n?c 


452  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-811. 

in  the  case  of  the  ilarcionites  and  the  Manichseans,  or  at  least 
in  great  part;  and  in  the  Xew  Testament  they  preferred  certain 
books  or  portions,  such  as  the  Gospel  of  John,  with  its  profound 
spiritual  intuitions,  and  either  rejected  the  other  books,  or 
wrested  them  to  suit  their  ideas.  Marcion,  for  example,  thus 
mutilated  the  Gospel  of  Luke,  and  received  in  addition  to  it 
only  ten  of  Paul's  Epistles,  thus  substituting  an  arbitrary  canon 
of  eleven  books  for  the  catholic  Testament  of  twenty-seven.  In 
interpretation  they  adopted,  even  with  far  less  moderation  than 
Philo,  the  most  arbitrary  and  extravagant  allegorical  principles; 
despising  the  letter  as  sensuous,  and  the  laws  of  language  and 
exegesis  as  fetters  of  the  mind.  The  number  30  in  the  New 
Testament,  for  instance,  particularly  in  the  life  of  Jesus,  is 
made  to  denote  the  number  of  the  Valentinian  aeons ;  and  the 
lost  sheep  in  the  parable  is  Achamoth.  Even  to  heathen  au- 
thors, to  the  poems  of  Homer,  Aratus,  Anacreon,  they  applied 
this  method,  and  discovered  in  these  works  the  deepest  Gnostic 
mysteries.1  They  gathered  from  the  whole  field  of  ancient  my- 
thology, astronomy,  physics,  and  magic,  everything  which  could 
serve  in  any  way  to  support  their  fancies. 

The  common  characteristics  of  nearly  all  the  Gnostic  systems  are 
(1)  Dualism ;  the  assumption  of  an  eternal  antagonism  between 
God  and  matter.  (2)  The  demiurgic  notion ;  the  separation  of 
the  creator  of  the  world  or  the  demiurgos  from  the  proper  God. 
(3)  Docetism;  the  resolution  of  the  human  element  in  the  per- 
son of  the  Redeemer  into  mere  deceptive  appearance.2 

We  will  endeavor  now  to  present  a  clear  and  connected  view 
of  the  theoretical  and  practical  system  of  Gnosticism  in  general, 
as  it  comes  before  us  in  its  more  fully  developed  forms,  espe- 
cially the  Valentinian  school. 

1.  THE  GXOSTIC  THEOLOGY.    The  system  starts  from  abso- 
lute primal  being.    God  is  the  unfathomable  abyss,3  locked  up 
within  himself,  without  beginning,  unnamable,  and  incompre- 
hensible; on  the  one  hand,  infinitely  exalted  above  every  exist- 
1  Hippol.  Philos.  IV.  4&  V.  S,  18, 20l 


2 117.  THE  SYSTEM  OP  GNOSTICISM.  453 

ence ;  jet,  ou  the  other  hand,  the  original  seon,  the  sum  of  all 
ideas  and  spiritual  powers.  Basilides  would  not  ascribe  even 
existence  to  him,  and  thus,  like  Hegel,  starts'  from  absolute 
nonentity,  which,  however,  is  identical  with  absolute  being.1 
He  began  where  modern  Agnosticism  ends. 

2.  KOSMOLOGY.  The  abyss  opens;  God  enters  upon  a  pro- 
cess of  development,  and  sends  forth  from  his  bosom  the  several 
seons ;  that  is,  the  attributes  and  unfolded  powers  of  his  nature, 
the  ideas  of  the  eternal  spirit-world,  such  as  mind,  reason,  wis- 
dom, power,  truth,  life.2  These  emanate  from  the  absolute  in  a 
certain  order,  according  to  Valentine  in  pairs  with  sexual  pola- 
rity. The  further  they  go  from  the  great  source,  the  poorer  and 
weaker  they  become.  Besides  the  notion  of  emanation,3  the 
Gnostics  employed  also,  to  illustrate  the  self-revelation  of  the 
absolute,  the  figure  of  the  evolution  of  numbers  from  an  original 
unit,  or  of  utterance  in  tones  gradually  diminishing  to  the  faint 
echo.4  The  cause  of  the  procession  of  the  seons  is,  with  some, 
as  with  Valentine,  the  self-limiting  love  of  God ;  with  others, 
metaphysical  necessity.  The  whole  body  of  seons  forms  the 
ideal  world,  or  light-world,  or  spiritual  fulness,  the  Pleroma,  as 
opposed  to  the  Kenoma,  or  the  material  world  of  emptiness*  The 
one  is  the  totality  of  the  divine  powers  and  attributes,  the  other 
the  region  of  shadow  and  darkness.  Christ  belongs  to  the  Pie- 
roma,  as  the  chief  of  the  seons ;  the  Demiurge  or  Creator  belongs 
to  the  Kenoma.  In  opposition  to  the  incipient  form  of  this 
heresy,  St.  Paul  taught  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  whole  pleroma 

1  So  in  the  old  Hindu  philosophy,  absolute  Being  is  regarded  as  the  ground 
of  all  existence.  It  is  itself  devoid  of  qualities,  incapable  of  definition,  incon- 
ceivable, neither  one  thing  nor  another  thing,  yet  containing  in  itself  the 
possibilities  of  all  things ;  and  out  from  its  dark  depths  the  universe  was 
evolved  through  some  mysterious  impulse.  The  Vedas  describe  it  thus :  "It 
is  neither  Brahma,  nor  Vishnoo,  nor  Sivan,  but  something  back  of  these,  with» 
out  passion,  neither  great  nor  small,  neither  male  nor  female,  but  something 
far  beyond." 
.  2  Novf,  ykfyo?,  ffo^fa,  66vapt£j  a7^-&sta9  £6w£,  etc. 

3  "IIpo/Jo^  (from  TrpojS^Aw),  a  putting  forward,  a  projection. 

4 Basilides  and  Saturninus  use  the  former  illustration;  Marcos  uses  th« 
latter. 


454  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

of  the  Godhead  (Col.  1  :  19;  2  :  9),  and  the  church  the  reflected 
pleroma  of  Christ  (Eph.  1:  22). 

The  material  visible  world  is  the  abode  of  the  principle  of 
evil.  This  cannot  proceed  from  God  ;  else  he  were  himself  the 
author  of  evil.  It  must  come  from  an  opposite  principle.  This 
is  Matter  (7j)jj),  which  stands  in  eternal  opposition  to  God  and 
the  ideal  world.  The  Syrian  Gnostics,  and  still  more  the  Mani- 
chseanSj  agreed  with  Parsism  in  conceiving  Matter  as  an  intrin- 
sically evil  substance,  the  raging  kingdom  of  Satan,  at  irrecon- 
cilable warfare  with  the  kingdom  of  light.  The  Alexandrian 
Gnostics  followed  more  the  Platonic  idea  of  the  ufo),  and  con- 
ceived tli  is  as  xhuifjia,  emptiness,  in  contrast  with  nkjpujfjta, 
the  divine,  vital  fulness,  or  as  the  $  ov,  related  to  the  divine 
being  as  shadow  to  light,  and  forming  the  dark  limit  beyond 
which  the  mind  cannot  pass.  This  Matter  is  in  itself  dead,  but 
becomes  animated  by  a  union  with  the  Pleroma,  which  again  is 
variously  described.  In  the  Manichsean  system  there  are  powers 
of  darkness,  which  seize  by  force  some  parts  of  the  kingdom  of 
light.  But  usually  the  union  is  made  to  proceed  from  above. 
The  last  link  in  the  chain  of  divine  aeons,  either  too  weak  to 
keep  its  hold  on  the  ideal  world,  or  seized  with  a  sinful  passion 
for  the  embrace  of  the  infinite  abyss,  falls  as  a  spark  of  light 
into  the  dark  chaos  of  matter,  and  imparts  to  it  a  germ  of  divine 
life,  but  in  this  bondage  feels  a  painful  longing  after  redemp- 
tion, with  which  the  whole  world  of  aeons  sympathizes.  This 
weakest  aeon  is  called  by  Valentine  the  lower  "\Yisdom,  or  Acha- 
moth1,  and  marks  the  extreme  point,  where  spirit  must  surren- 
der itself  to  matter,  where  the  infinite  must  enter  into  the  finite, 
and  thus  form  a  basis  for  the  real  world.  The  myth  of  Acha- 
moth  is  grounded  in  the  thought,  that  the  finite  is  incompatible 
with  the  absolute,  yet  in  some  sense  demands  it  to  account  for 
itself. 

Here  now  comes  in  the  third  principle  of  the  Gnostic  specula- 


i  <H  Kara  co&ta,  'Axaputi  flren.I.  4  j  in  Stieren,  I  44), 
the  Chaldaic  form  of  the  Hebrew 


§  117.  THE  SYSTEM  OF  GNOSTICISM.  455 

tion,  namely,  the  world-maker,  commonly  called  the  Demiurge,1 
termed  by  Basilides  "  Archon  "  or  world-ruler,  by  the  Ophites, 
"  Jaldabaoth/'  or  son  of  chaos.  He  is  a  creature  of  the  fallen 
aeon,  formed  of  physical  material,  and  thus  standing  between 
God  and  Matter.  He  makes  out  of  Matter  the  visible  sensible 
world,  and  rules  over  it.  He  has  his  throne  in  the  planetary 
heavens,  and  presides  over  time  and  over  the  sidereal  spirits. 
Astrological  influences  were  generally  ascribed  to  him.  He  is 
the  God  of  Judaism,  the  Jehovah,  who  imagines  himself  to  be 
the  supreme  and  only  God.  But  in  the  further  development  of 
this  idea  the  systems  differ ;  the  anti- Jewish  Gnostics,  Marcion 
and  the  Ophites,  represent  the  Demiurge  as  an  insolent  being, 
resisting  the  purposes  of  God;  while  the  Judaizing  Gnostics, 
Basilides  and  Valentine,  make  him  a  restricted,  unconscious  in- 
strument of  God  to  prepare  the  way  for  redemption. 

3.  CHBISTOLOGY  and  SOTERIOLOGY.  Redemption  itself  is 
the  liberation  of  the  light-spirit  from  the  chains  of  dark  Matter, 
and  is  effected  by  Christ,  the  most  perfect  aeon,  who  is  the  me- 
diator of  return  from  the  sensible  phenomenal  world  to  the 
supersensuous  ideal  world,  just  as  the  Demiurge  is  the  mediator 
of  apostacy  from  the  Pleroma  to  the  Kenonia.  This  redeeming 
aeon,  called  by  Valentine  0wrqp  or  'fyeouc,  descends  through 
the  sphere  of  heaven,  and  assumes  the  ethereal  appearance  of  a 
body;  according  to  another  view,  unites  himself  with  the  man 
Jesus,  or  with  the  Jewish  Messiah,  at  the  baptism,  and  forsakes 
him  again  at  the  passion.  At  all  events,  the  redeemer,  however 
conceived  in  other  respects,  is  allowed  no  actual  contact  with 
sinful  matter.  His  human  birth,  his  sufferings  and  death,  are 
explained  by  Gnosticism  after  the  manner  of  the  Indian  mytho- 
logy, as  a  deceptive  appearance,  a  transient  vision,  a  spectral 
form,  which  he  assumed  only  to  reveal  himself  to  the  sensuous 
nature  of  man.  Eeduced  to  a  clear  philosophical  definition,  the 
Gnostic  Christ  is  really  nothing  more  than  the  ideal  spirit  of 
inan  himself,  as  in  the  mythical  gospel-theory  of  Strauss.  Th« 

,  a  term  used  by  Plato  in  a  similar  sense. 


456  SECOND  PEBIOIX    A.D.  100-311. 

Holy  Ghost  is  commonly  conceived  as  a  subordinate  seon.  The 
central  fact  in  the  work  of  Christ  is  the  communication  of  the 
Gnosis  to  a  small  circle  of  the  initiated,  prompting  and  enabling 
them  to  strive  with  clear  consciousness  after  the  ideal  world  and 
the  original  unity.  According  to  Valentine,  the  heavenly  Soter 
brings  Achamoth  after  innumerable  sufferings  into  the  Pleroma, 
and  unites  himself  with  her  —  the  most  glorious  seon  with  the 
lowest  —  in  an  eternal  spirit-marriage.  With  this,  all  disturb- 
ance in  the  heaven  of  aeons  is  allayed,  and  a  blessed  harmony 
and  inexpressible  delight  are  restored,  in  which  all  spiritual 
(pneumatic)  men,  or  genuine  Gnostics,  share.  Matter  is  at  last 
entirely  consumed  by  a  fire  breaking  out  from  its  dark  bosom. 

4.  The  AOTHKOPOLOGY  of  the  Gnostics  corresponds  with 
their  theology.  Man  is  a  microcosm,  consisting  of  spirit,  body, 
and  soul,  reflecting  the  three  principles,  God,  Matter,  and  Demi- 
urge, though  in  very  different  degrees.  There  are  three  classes 
of  men  :  the  spiritual}'  in  whom  the  divine  element,  a  spark  of 
light  from  the  ideal  world,  predominates  ;  the  material,2  bodily, 
carnal,  physical,  in  whom  matter,  the  gross  sensuous  principle, 
rules;  and  the  psychical*  in  whom  the  demiurgic,  quasi-divine 
principle,  the  mean  between  the  two  preceding,  prevails. 

These  three  classes  are  frequently  identified  with  the  adhe- 
rents of  the  three  religions  respectively;  the  spiritual  with  the 
Christians,  the  carnal  with  the  heathens,  the  psychical  with  the 
Jews*  But  they  also  made  the  same  distinction  among  the  pro- 
fessors of  any  one  religion,  particularly  among  the  Christians  ; 
and  they  regarded  themselves  as  the  genuine  spiritual  men  in 
the  full  sense  of  the  word  ;  while  they  looked  upon  the  great 
mass  of  Christians*  as  only  psychical,  not  able  to  rise  from 
blind  faith  to  true  knowledge,  too  weak  for  the  good,  and  too 
tender  for  the  evil,  longing  for  the  divine,  yet  unable  to  attain 
it,  and  thus  hovering  between  the  Pleroma  of  the  ideal  world 
and  the  Kenoma  of  the  sensual, 

Ingenious  as  this  thought  is,  it  is  just  the  basis  of  that  un- 


*  01 


J118.  ETHICS  OF  GNOSTICISM.  457 

Christian  distinction  of  esoteric  and  exoteric  religion,  and  that 
pride  of  knowledge,  in  which  Gnosticism  runs  directly  counter 
to  the  Christian  virtues  of  humility  and  love. 

§  118.  JSthics  of  Gnosticism. 

All  the  Gnostic  heretics  agree  in  disparaging  the  divinely 
created  body,  and  over-rating  the  intellect.  Beyond  this,  we  per- 
ceive among  them  two  opposite  tendencies:  a  gloomy  asceticism, 
and  a  frivolous  antinomianism ;  both  grounded  in  the  dualistic 
principle,  which  falsely  ascribes  evil  to  matter,  and  traces  nature 
to  the  devil.  The  two  extremes  frequently  met,  and  the  Xico- 
laitan  maxim  in  regard  to  the  abuse  of  the  flesh l  was  made  to 
«erve  asceticism  first,  and  then  libertinism. 

The  ascetic  Gnostics,  like  Marcion,  Saturninus,  Tatian,  and 
the  Manichseans,  were  pessimists.  They  felt  uncomfortable  in  the 
sensuous  and  perishing  world,  ruled  by  the  Demiurge,  and  by 
Satan ;  they  abhorred  the  body  as  formed  from  Matter,  and  for- 
bade the  use  of  certain  kinds  of  food  and  all  nuptial  intercourse, 
as  an  adulteration  of  themselves  with  sinful  Matter;  like  the 
Essenes  and  the  errorists  noticed  by  Paul  in  the  Colossians  and 
Pastoral  Epistles.  They  thus  confounded  sin  with  matter,  and 
vainly  imagined  that,  matter  being  dropped,  sin,  its  accident, 
would  fall  with  it.  Instead  of  hating  sin  only,  which  God  has 
not  made,  they  hated  the  world,  which  he  has  made. 

The  KceDtious  Gnostics,  as  the  IsTicolaitans,  the  Ophites,  the 
Carpocratians,  and  the  Antitactes,  in  a  proud  conceit  of  the 
exaltation  of  the  spirit  above  matter,  or  even  on  the  diabolical 
principle,  that  sensuality  must  be  -overcome  by  indulging  it, 
bade  defiance  to  all  moral  laws,  and  gave  themselves  up  to  the 
most  shameless  licentiousness.  It  is  no  great  thing,  said  they, 
according  to  Clement  of  Alexandria,  to  restrain  lust ;  but  it  is 
surely  a  great  thing  not  to  be  conquered  by  lust,  when  one  in- 
dulges in  it.  According  to  Epiphanius  there  were  Gnostic  sects 
in  Egypt,  which,  starting  from  a  filthy,  materialistic  pantheism 

capid,  the  flesh  must  be  abused  to  be  conquered. 


458  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

and  identifying  Christ  with  the  generative  powers  of  nature, 
practised  debauchery  as  a  mode  of  worship,  and  after  having, 
as  they  thought,  otfered  and  collected  all  their  strength,  blas- 
phemously exclaimed :  "  I  am  Christ."  From  these  pools  of 
sensuality  and  Satanic  pride  arose  the  malaria  of  a  vast  litera- 
ture, of  which,  however,  fortunately,  nothing  more  than  a  few 
names  has  come  down  to  us. 

§  119.  Cultus  and  Organization. 

In  cultus,  the  Gnostic  docetism  and  hyper-spiritualism  led 
consistently  to  naked  intellectual  simplicity ;  sometimes  to  the 
rejection  of  all  sacraments  and  outward  means  of  grace ;  if  not 
even,  as  in  the  Prodicians,  to  blasphemous  self-exaltation  above* 
all  that  is  called  God  and  worshiped.1 

But  with  this  came  also  the  opposite  extreme  of  a  symbolic 
and  mystic  pomp,  especially  in  the  sect  of  the  Marcosians. 
These  Marcosians  held  to  a  two-fold  baptism,  that  applied  to 
the  human  Jesus,  the  Messiah  of  the  psychical,  and  that  ad- 
ministered to  the  heavenly  Christ,  the  Messiah  of  the  spiritual  ; 
they  decorated  the  baptistery  like  a  banquet-hall ;  and  they  first 
introduced  extreme  unction.  As,  early  as  the  second  century 
the  Basilidcans  celebrated  the  feast  of  Epiphany.  The  Si- 
monians  and  Carpocratians  used  images  of  Christ  and  of  their 
religious  heroes  in  their  worship.  The  Valentinians  and 
Ophites  sang  in  hymns  the  deep  longing  of  Achamoth  for  re- 
demption from  the  bonds  of  Matter,  Bardesanes  is  known  as 
the  first  Syrian  hymn-writer.  Many  Gnostics,  following  their 
patriarch,  Simon,  gave  themselves  to  magic,  and  introduced 
their  arts  into  their  worship ;  as  the  Marcosians  did  in  the  cele* 
bration  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

Of  the  outward  organization  of  the  Gnostics  (with  the 
exception  of  the  Manichseans,  who  will  be  treated  separately), 
we  can  say  little.  Their  aim  was  to  resolve  Christianity  into  a 
magnificent  speculation ;  the  practical  business  of  organization 

'Comp.  2Ttess.2:  4. 


2 120.  SCHOOLS  OF  GNOSTICISM.  459 

was  foreign  to  their  exclusively  intellectual  bent.  Terrallian 
charges  them  with  an  entire  want  of  order  and  discipline.1 
They  formed,  not  so  much  a  sect  or  party,  as  a  multitude  of - 
philosophical  schools,  like  the  modern  Eationalists.  Many 
were  unwilling  to  separate  at  all  from  the  Catholic  church, 
but  assumed  in  it,  as  theosophists,  the  highest  spiritual  rank. 
Some  were  even  clothed  with  ecclesiastical  office,  as  we  must  no 
doubt  infer  from  the  Apostolic  Canons  (51  or  50),  where  it  is  said, 
with  evident  reference  to  the  gloomy,  perverse  asceticism  of  the 
Gnostics :  "  If  a  bishop,  a  priest,  or  a  deacon,  or  any  ecclesiastic 
abstain  from  marriage,  from  flesh,  or  from  wine,  not  for  practice 
in  self-denial,  but  from  disgust,2  forgetting  that  God  made 
everything  very  good,  that  he  made  also  the  male  and  the 
female,  in  fact,  even  blaspheming  the  creation ; 3  he  shall  either 
retract  his  error,  or  be  deposed  and  cast  out  of  the  church.  A 
layman  also  shall  be  treated  in  like  manner."  Here  we  per- 
ceive the  polemical  attitude  which  the  Catholic  church  was 
compelled  to  assume  even  towards  the  better  Gnostics. 

§  120.  Schools  of  Gnosticism. 

The  arbitrary  and  unbalanced  subjectivity  of  the  Gnostic 
speculation  naturally  produced  a  multitude  of  schools.  These 
Gnostic  schools  have  been  variously  classified. 

Geographically  they  may  be  reduced  to  two  great  families, 
the  Egyptian  or  Alexandrian,  and  the  Syrian,  which  are  also 
intrinsically  different.  In  the  former  (Basilides,  Valentine,  the 
Ophites),  Platonism  and  the  emanation  theory  prevail,  in  the 
latter  (Saturninus,  Bardesanes,  Tatian),  Parsism  and  dualism. 
Then,  distinct  in  many  respects  from  both  these  is  the  more 
practical  school  of  Marcion,  who  sprang  neither  from  Egypt 
nor  from  Syria,  but  from  Asia  Minor,  where  St.  Paul  had  left 
the  strong  imprint  of  his  free  gospel  in  opposition  to  Jewish 
legalism  and  bondage. 

Examined  further,  with  reference  to  its  doctrinal  character, 

1  JD«  Proper.  Hceret.,  c.  41.     3  Bd&vpta.     * 


460  SECOXD  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Gnosticism  appears  in  three  forms,  distinguished  by  the  prepon- 
derance of  the  heathen,  the  Jewish,  and  the  Christian  elements 
respectively  in  its  syncretism.  The  Simouians,  Nicolaitans, 
Ophites,  Carpocratians,  Prodicians,  Antitactes,  and  Manichseans 
belong  to  a  paganizing  class;  Cerinthus,  Basilides,  Valentine, 
and  Justin  (as  also  the  Pseudo-Clementine  Homilies,  though 
these  are  more  properly  Ebionitic),  to  a  Judaizing;  Saturninus, 
ilarciun,  Tatian,  and  the  Encratites,  to  a  Christianizing  division. 
But  it  must  be  remembered  here,  that  this  distinction  is  only 
relative;  all  the  Gnostic  systems  being,  in  fact,  predominantly 
heathen  in  their  character,  and  essentially  opposed  alike  to  the 
pure  Judaism  of  the  Old  Testament  and  to  the  Christianity  of 
the  Xew.  The  Judaism  of  the  so-called  Judaizing  Gnostics  is 
only  of  an  apocryphal  sort,  whether  of  the  Alexandrian  or  the 
Cabalistic  tinge.1 

The  ethical  point  of  view,  from  which  the  division  might  as 
well  be  made,  would  give  likewise  three  main  branches :  the 
speculative  or  theosophic  Gnostics  (Basilides,  Valentine),  the 
practical  and  ascetic  (Marcion,  Saturninus,  Tatian), -and  the 
antinomian  and  libertine  (Simonians,  Nicolaitans,  Ophites, 
Carpocratians,  Antitactes), 

Having  thus  presented  the  general  character  of  Gnosticism, 
and  pointed  out  its  main  branches,  we  shall  follow  chiefly  the 
chronological  order  in  describing  the  several  schools,  beginning 
with  those  which  date  from  the  age  of  the  apostles. 

1  Gibbon,  who  devotes  four  pages  (Ch.  XV.)  to  the  Gnostics,  dwells  ex- 
clusively on  the  anti- Jewish  feature,  and  makes  them  express  -his  own  aver- 
sion to  the  Old  Testament.  He  calls  them  (from  very  superficial  knowledge, 
but  with  his  masterly  skill  of  insinuation)  "  the  most  polite,  the  most  learned, 
and  the  most  wealthy  of  the  Christian  name,"  and  says  that,  being  mostly 
averse  to  the  pleasures  of  sense,  "they  morosely  arraigned  the  polygamy  of 
the  patriarchs,  the  gallantries  of  David,  and  the  seraglio  of  Solomon,5'  and 
were  at  a  loss  to  reconcile  "the  conquest  of  Canaan,  and  the  extirpation  of 
the  unsuspecting  natives  with  the  common  notions  of  humanity  and  justice," 


{ 121.  SIMON  MAGUS  AND  THE  SIMONIANS.  461 

§  121.  Simon  Magus  and  the  Simonians. 

L  Commentaries  on  Acts  8:  9-24,     JUSTIN  MABTYR:    Apol.  I.  26 

and   56.     The    pseudo-Clementine    Homilies    and   Recognitions. 

IBEN^EUS,  I.  23.    HIPPOLYTUS,  VI.  2-15,  etc. 
II.  SiMSOK:   Leben  und  Lehre  Simon  des  Magierz,  in  the  "Zeitschriffc 

fur  hist,  Theologie  "  for  1841. 
HiLaEtfFELD :  Der  Magier  Simonj  in  the  "  Zeischrifb  for  wissenschaftL 

Theologie31  for  1868. 
LIPSIUS:   JSmon  d.  Mag.  in  Schenkel's  "  Bibel-Lexikon,"  vol.  V.  (1875), 

p  301-321.    Comp.  the  literature  quoted  there,  p.  320. 

Simon  Magus  is  a  historical  character  known  to  us  from  the 
eighth  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.1  He  ^vas  probably 
a  native  of  Gitthon,  in  Samaria,  as  Justin  Martyr,  himself  a 
Samaritan,  reports  f  but  he  may  nevertheless  be  identical  ^ith 
the  contemporaneous  Jewish  magician  of  the  same  name,  whom 
Josephus  mentions  as  a  native  of  Cyprus  and  as  a  friend  of 
Procurator  Felix,  who  employed  him  to  alienate  Brasilia,  the 
beautiful  wife  of  king  Azizus  of  Emesa,  in  Syria,  from  her 
husband,  that  he  might  marry  her.3 

1  The  Tubingen  school,  which  denies  the  historical  character  of  the  Acts, 
resolves  also  the  story  of  Simon  into  a  Jewish  Christian  fiction,  aimed  at  the 
apostle  Paul  as  the  real  heretic  and  magician.  So  Baur,  Zeller,  and  Volkmar. 
Lipsius  ingeniously  carries  out  this  Simon-Paul  hypothesis,  and  declares 
(1.  c.  p.  303) :  ''  Der  J5Tem  der  Sage  ist  nichts  cds  ein  wUstdndiff  ausgefukrtes 
Z&rrMd  des  HeidenapostelSj  lessen  Zuge  bis  in's  einzdne  hinevn,  die  Person,  die 
Lehret  und  die  Lebenschicksale  des  Paidus  persifliren  soUen"  But  the  book  of 
Acts  give«  the  earliest  record  of  Simon  and  is  tie  production,  if  not  of  Lukt,  as 
we  believe  with  the  unanimous  testimony  of  antiquity,  at  all  events  of  a  writer 
friendly  to  Paul,  and  therefore  utterly  unlikely  to  insert  an  anti-Pauline  fiction 
which  would  stultify  the  greater  part  of  his  own  book.  Comp,  the  remarks 
above,  \  114,  p.  438. 

3  Apol.  L  26  (S^wva  piv  nva  Sa^ap^a,  rbv  airo  K&faje  feyo/tfWTf  TITTWV)  • 
comp.  Clem.  J3bm.  1. 15 ;  H.  22  (ari  Tir&ov) ;  Hippol.  PhOos.  VI.  7  (6  Tirrqvfy. 
There  was  such  a  place  as  rfrrtw,  not  far  from  Flavia  Keapolis  (Nablus), 
Justin's  birth-place.  It  is  now  called  Knryet  Jit  (Dschit).  See  Eobinson's 
Pal.  II.  308,  and  Otto's  note  on  the  passage  in  Justin  (Opera  I.  78). 

3  According  to  Josephus,  Aid.  XX.  7,  2.  The  identity  is  assumed  by  Mean- 
der, De  Wette,  Hilgenfeld.  There  was  on  the  island  of  Cyprus  a  city  named 
Kireav  (Thucyd.  1. 112, 1),  which  Justin  M.  may  possibly  have  confounded 
with  G-itthon,  in  Samaria,  as  he  confounded  Simo  and  Semo  on  the  statue  in 
Borne.  But  it  is  much  more  likely  that  Josephus  was  mistaken  on  a  question 
of  Samaria  than  Justin,  a  native  of  Fl*via  Neapolis  (the  ancient  Shechem). 


±62  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311, 

Simon  represented  himself  as  a  sort  of  emanation  of  the  deity 
("  die  Great  Power  of  God  "),'  made  a  great  noise  among  the 
half-pagan,  half-Jewish  Samaritans  by  his  sorceries,  was  bap- 
tized by  Philip  about  the  year  40,  but  terribly  rebuked  by  Peter 
for  livpocrisv  and  abuse  of  holy  things  to  sordid  ends.2  He 
thus  aifords  the  first  instance  in  church  history  of  a  confused 
syncretism  in  union  with  magical  arts  ;  and  so  far  as  this  goes, 
ilie  church  fathers  are  right  m  styling  him  the  patriarch,  or,  in 
the  words  of  Iremeus,  the  "wagister"  and  "progenitor"  of  all 
heretics,  and  of  the  Gnostics  in  particular.  Besides  him,  two 
•  rthcr  contemporaneous  Samaritans,  Dositheus  and  Menander, 
inrr«  the  reputation  of  heresiarchs.  Samaria  was  a  fertile  soil 
of  religious  syncretism  even  before  Christ,  and  the  natural 
birth-place  of  that  syncretistic  heresy  which  goes  by  the  name 
of  Gnosticism. 

The  wandering  life  and  teaching  of  Simon  were  fabulously 
garnished  in  the  second  and  third  centuries  by  Catholics  and 
heretics,  but  especially  by  the  latter  in  the  interest  of  Ebionism 
and  with  bitter  hostility  to  Paul.  In  the  pseudo-Clementine 
romances  he  represents  all  anti-Jewish  heresies.  Simon  the 
Magician  is  contrasted,  as  the  apostle  of  falsehood,  with  Simon 
Peter,  the  apostle  of  truth  ;  he  follows  him,  as  darkness  follows 
the  light,  from  city  to  city,  in  company  with  Helena  (who  had 
previously  been  a  prostitute  at  Tyre,  but  was  now  elevated  to 
the  dignity  of  divine  intelligence)  ;  he  is  refuted  by  Peter  in 
public  disputations  at  Csesarea,  Antioch,  and  Home;  at  last  he 
is  ignominiously  defeated  by  him  after  a  mock-resurrection  and 
mock-ascension  before  the  Emperor  JsTero  ;  he  ends  with  suicide, 
while  Peter  gains  the  crown  of  martyrdom.3  There  is  a  bare 


rov  #«>?>  $  Mey<Wj7,  Acts  8:  10.  According  to  the  Clementine 
Homilies  (IL  23)  and  Recognitions  (II.  7),  Simon  called  himself  "the  Supreme 
Power  of  God"  (aittranj  tfn'owf,  Virtus  Supremo). 

2  The  memoir  of  this  incident  is  perpetuated  in  the  name  of  simony  for  pro- 
fane traffic  in  ecclesiastical  offices. 

8  The  legendary  accounts,  both  catholic  and  heretical,  vary  considerably. 
Justin  M.  reports  Simon's  visit  to  Borne,  but  assigns  it  to  the  reign  of  Claudius 
(41-54),  and  says  nothing  of  an  encounter  with  Peter.  Other  reports  put  the 


2 121.  SIMON  MAGUS  AND  THE  SDIONIANS.  463 

possibility  that,  like  other  heretics  and  founders  of  sects,  he 
may  have  repaired  to  Koine  (before  Peter);  but  Justin  Martyr's 
account  of  the  ?tatue  of  Simon  is  certainly  a  mistake.1 

The  Gnosticism  which  Irenseus,  Hippolytus,  and  other  fathers 
ascribe  to  this  Simon  and  his  followers  is  crude,  and  belongs  to 
the  earlier  phase  of  this  heresy.  It  was  embodied  in  a  work 
entitled  "The  Great  Announcement"  or  "Proclamation,"2  of 
which  Hippolytus  gives  an  analysis.3  The  chief  ideas  are  "  the 
great  power,"  "  the  great  idea,"  the  male  and  female  principle. 
He  declared  himself  an  incarnation  of  the  creative  world-spirit, 
and  his  female  companion,  Helena,  the  incarnation  of  the  recep- 
tive world-soul.  Here  we  have  the  Gnostic  conception  of  the 

syzygy. 

The  sect  of  the  Simonians,  which  continued  into  the  third 
century,  took  its  name,  if  not  its  rise,  from  Simon  Magus,  wor- 
shipped him  as  a  redeeming  genius,  chose,  like  the  Cainites,  the 
most  infamous  characters  of  the  Old  Testament  for  its  heroes, 
and  was  immoral  in  its  principles  and  practices.  The  name, 
however,  is  used  in  a  very  indefinite  sense,  for  various  sorts  of 
Gnostics. 

journey  in  the  reign  of  Nero  (54-68).  According  to  Hippolytus,  Simon  was 
buried  alive  at  his  own  request,  being  confident  of  rising  again  on  the  third 
day,  as  a  pseudo-Christ.  According  to  the  Apostolical  Constitutions,  he  at- 
tempted to  fly,  but  fell  and  broke  his  thigh  and  ankle-bone  in  answer  to  the 
prayers  of  Peter,  and  died  in  consequence  of  this  injury.  According  to  Ar- 
nobius,  he  attempted  to  ascend  in  a  fiery  chariot,  like  Elijah,  but  broke  his  leg, 
and  in  the  confiision  of  shame  committed  suicide  by  throwing  himself  from  a 
high  mountain.  See  Lipsius,  I  c.  p.  310. 

1  He  reports  (Apol.  I.  26  and  56)  that  Simon  Magus  made  such  an  impres- 
sion by  his  magical  arts  upon  the  Eoman  Senate  and  people  that  they  paid 
him  divine  homage,  and  erected  a  statue  to  him  on  the  island  of  the  Tiber. 
But  he  mistook  Semo  Saneus  or  Sangus,  a  Sabine-Roman  divinity  unknown  to 
him,  for  Simo  Sanctus.  For  in  1574  a  statue  was  found  in  the  place  described, 
with  the  inscription :  Semoni  Sanco  Deo  Fidio  sacrum,  etc.  The  mistake  is 
repeated  by  Irenseus  Adv.  JBTor.  I.  23, 1,  Tertullian  Apol.  13,  and  Eusebius, 
but  Hippolytus  who  resided  at  Borne  does  not  mention  it  See  Otto's  note  OB 
Just.  I.  26,  Opera  I  79  sq.  (ed.  IH). 

jo)  fay.  *  Phttos.  VL  6  sqq. 


464  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-81L 


§  122.  The  NicolaHams. 

IBE&BUB:  Adv.  Hcer,  I.  26,  3;  CLEMENT  OF  ALEX.:  Strom.  HI.  4  (and 
in  Eu*eb.  K  E.  III.  29  j;  HIPPOLYTUS:  PMos.  VII.  24;  EPIPHA- 
S  :  Hcer.  I  2,  25. 


The  Xicolaitans  are  mentioned  as  a  licentious  sect  in  the 
Apocalypse  (2:  6,  15).  They  claimed  as  their  founder  Nicolas, 
a  proselyte  of  Antioch  and  one  of  the  seven  deacons  of  the  con- 
gregation of  Jerusalem  (Acts  6  :  5).  He  is  supposed  to  have 
apostatized  from  the  true  faith,  and  taught  the  dangerous  prin- 
ciple that  the  flesh  must  be  abused/  that  is,  at  least  as  under- 
stood by  his  disciples,  one  must  make  the  whole  round  of  sen- 
suality, to  become  its  perfect  master. 

But  the  views  of  the  fathers  are  conflicting.  Irenseus  (who 
is  followed  substantially  by  Hippolytus)  gives  a  very  unfavor- 
able account. 

"The  Xicolaitanes,"  he  says,  "are  the  followers  of  that  Mco- 
las  who  was  one  of  the  seven  first  ordained  to  the  diaconate  by 
the  apostles.  They  lead  lives  of  unrestrained  indulgence.  The 
character  of  these  men  is  very  plainly  pointed  out  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse of  John,  where  they  are  represented  as  teaching  that  it  is 
a  matter  of  indifference  to  practice  adultery,  and  to  eat  things 
sacrificed  to  idols.  Wherefore  the  Word  has  also  spoken  of 
them  thus  :  *  But  this  thou  hast,  that  thou  hatest  the  deeds  of 
the  Xicolaitanes,  which  I  also  hate/  " 

Clement  of  Alexandria  says  that  Nicolas  was  a  faithful  hus- 
band, and  brought  up  his  children  in  purity,  but  that  his  disci- 
ples misunderstood  his  saying  (which  he  attributes  also  to  the 
Apostle  Matthias),  "  that  we  must  fight  against  the  flesh  and 
abuse  it/'2 

1  AeZ  Rara%pi}<?&at  TQ  capid. 

3  He  adds  The  curions  statement  (Strom.  III.  c.  4)  that  on  a  certain  occasion 
Nicolas  was  sharply  reproved  by  the  Apostles  as  a  jealous  hushand,  and  re- 
pelled the  charge  by  offering  to  allow  his  beautifdl  wife  to  become  the  wife  of 
any  other  person.  Extremely  improbable. 


§123.  CEBIKTHUS.  465 

§123.  Cerinthus. 

IREST.  1.  (25)  26,  1  1  ;  III.  3,  84;  III.  113  j  1  ;  HIPPOL.  VII.  21  ;  EUSEB. 
ni.  28;  IV.  14.  Comp.  DOJRNBE:  Lehre  v.  der  Person  Christi,  I. 
314  sq.  Art.  Cerinth  in  "  Smith  and  Wacea"  L  447. 

Cerinthus1  appeared  towards  the  close  of  the  first  century  in 
Asia  Minor,  and  came  in  conflict  with  the  aged  Apostle  John, 
who  is  supposed  by  Irenseus  to  have  opposed  his  Gnostic  ideas 
in  the  Grospel  and  Epistles.  The  story  that  John  left  a  public 
bath  when  he  saw  Cerinthus,  the  enemy  of  the  truth,  fearing 
that  the  bath  might  fall  in,  and  the  similar  story  of  Polycarp 
meeting  Marcion  and  calling  him  "the  first  born  of  Satan," 
reveal  the  intense  abhorrence  with  which  the  orthodox  church- 
men of  those  days  looked  upon  heresy.2 

Cerinthus  was  (according  to  the  uncertain  traditions  collected 
by  Epiphanius)  an  Egyptian  and  a  Jew  either  by  birth  or  con- 
version, studied  in  the  school  of  Philo  in  Alexandria,  was  one 
of  the  false  apostles  who  opposed  Paul  and  demanded  circum- 
cision (Gal.  2:  4;  2  Cor.  11:  13),  claimed  to  have  received  an- 
gelic revelations,  travelled  through  Palestine  and  Galatia,  and 
once  came  to  Ephesus.  The  time  of  his  death  is  unknown. 

His  views,  as  far  as  they  can  be  ascertained  from  confused 
accounts,  assign  him  a  position  between  Judaism  and  Gnosticism 
proper.  He  rejected  all  the  Gospels  except  a  mutilated  Mat- 
thew, taught  the  validity  of  the  Mosaic  law  and  the  millennial 
kingdom.  He  was  so  far  strongly  Judaistic,  and  may  be 
counted  among  the  Ebionites  ;  but  in  true  Gnostic  style  he  dis- 
tinguished the  world-maker  from  God,  and  represented  the  for- 
mer as  a  subordinate  power,  as  an  intermediate,  though  not 
exactly  hostile,  being.  In  his  Christology  he  separates  the 
earthly  man  Jesus,  who  was  a  son  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  from 
the  heavenly  Christ,3  who  descended  upon  the  man  Jesus  in  the 


a  Both  recorded  by  Irenseus  HI.  c.  3,  g  4,  as  illustrating  Tit  3:  10.  But 
the  same  story  of  John  in  the  bath  is  also  told  of  Ebion,  whose  very  existence 
is  doubtful. 

8  6  avo  Xpfffrrfc.  He  also  calls  the  Holy  Spirit  7  "»<>>  ttoaw,  the  power 
from  on  high  which  came  down  upon  Jesus.  Valentine  called  the  Jewish 
Vol.  IT.—  80 


466  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

form  of  a  dove  at  the  baptism  in  the  Jordan,  imparted  to  him 
the  genuine  knowledge  of  God  and  the  power  of  miracles,  but 
forsook  him  in  the  passion,  to  rejoin  him  only  at  the  coming  of 
the  Messianic  kingdom  of  glory.  The  school  of  Valentine 
made  more  clearly  the  same  distinction  between  the  Jesus  of  the 
Jews  and  the  divine  Saviour,  or  the  lower  and  the  higher  Christ 
— a  crude  anticipation  of  the  modern  distinction  (of  Strauss) 
between  the  Christ  of  history  and  the  Christ  of  faith.  The  mil- 
lennium has  its  centre  in  Jerusalem,  and  will  be  followed  by  the 
restoration  of  all  things.1 

The  Alogi,  an  obscure  anti-trinitarian  and  anti-chiliastic  sect  of 
the  second  century,  regarded  Cerinthus  as  the  author  of  the  Apoc- 
alypse of  John  on  account  of  the  chiliasm  taught  in  it.  They 
ascribed  to  him  also  the  fourth  Gospel,  although  it  is  the  best 
possible  refutation  of  all  false  Gnosticism  from  the  highest  ex- 
perimental Gnosis  of  faith. 

Simon  Magus,  the  Nicolaitans,  and  Cerinthus  belong  to  the 
second  half  of  the  first  century.  We  now  proceed  to  the  more 
developed  systems  of  Gnosticism,  which  belong  to  the  first  half 
of  the  second  century,  and  continued  to  flourish  till  the  middle 
of  the  third. 

The  most  important  and  influential  of  these  systems  bear  the 
names  of  Basilides,  Valentinus,  and  Marcion.  They  deserve, 
therefore,  a  fuller  consideration.  They  were  nearly  contempo- 
raneous, and  matured  during  the  reigns  of  Hadrian  and  Anto- 
ninus Pius.  Basilides  flourished  in  Alexandria  A.  D.  125; 
Valentine  came  to  Rome  in  140;  Marcion  taught  in  Home  be- 
tween 140  and  150. 

§  124.  Sasilides. 

Besides  the  sources  in  IRE^US,  HIPPOLYTUS  (L.  VII,  20-27),  CLEMENS 
ALEX.  (Strom.  VIL),  EUSEBITTS  (IV.  7),  and  EPIPHANIUS,  comp. 
the  following  monographs : 

Messiah  6  KOTO  Xptcrfc.  The  best  account  of  Cerinth's  Christology  is  given 
by  Dorner. 

1  The  chiliastic  eschatologr  of  Cerinthus  is  omitted  by  Irenseus,  who  was 
himself  a  chiliast,  though  of  a  higher  spiritual  order,  but  it  is  described  b* 
Cains,  Dionysius  (in  Eusebinsj,  Theodoret,  and  Augustin. 


8124.  BASILIDES.  467 

JACOBI  :   Basilidis  philosophi  Gnostici  Sentcnt.  ex  Eippolyti  lib.  nupcr 

reperto  illustr.    Berlin,  1852.    Comp.  his  article  Gnosis  in  Herzog, 

vol.  V.  219-223,  and  in  Brieger's  IC  Zeitschrift  fur  Kirchengesch."  foi 

1876-77  (I.  481-544). 
UHLHOBN:   Das  Basilidianische  System.     Gottingen,  1855.     The  best 

analysis. 

BAUE  in  the  Tubinger  "Theol.  Jahrbucher"  for  1856,  pp.  121-162. 
HoFSTEDE  DE  GrEOOT  :    Bosilides  as  witness  for  the  Gospel  of  John,  in 

Dutch,  and  in  an  enlarged  form  in  German.    Leipz.  1868.    Apolo- 

getic for  the  genuineness  of  the  fourth  Gospel. 
Dr.  HOET  in  Smith  and  Wace,  "  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography1' 

(Lond.  1877).  I.  268-281  (comp.  "  Abrasax,"  p.  9-10).    Very  able. 
HILGENFELD,  in  his  "  Zeitschrift  fur  wissensch.  Theol."  1878,  TEXT 

228-250,  and  the  lit.  there  given. 

Basilides  (Baurdeidyc)  produced  the  first  well-developed  sys- 
tem of  Gnosis;  but  it  was  too  metaphysical  and  intricate  to  be 
popular.  He  claimed  to  be  a  disciple  of  the  apostle  Matthias 
and  of  an  interpreter  (l^vsyc)  of  St.  Peter,  named  Glaueias. 
He  taught  in  Alexandria  during  the*  reign  of  Hadrian  (A.D. 
117-138).  His  early  youth  fell  in  the  second  generation  of 
Christians,  and  this  gives  his  quotations  from  the  writings  of 
the  New  Testament  considerable  apologetic  value.  He  wrote 
(according  to  his  opponent,  Agrippa  Castor)  "  twenty-four  books 
(pcjSMa)  on  the  Gospel."  This  work  was  probably  a  commentary 
on  the  canonical  Gospels,  for  Clement  of  Alexandria  quotes  from 
"the  thirty-third  book"  of  a  work  of  Basilides  which  he  calls 


His  doctrine  is  very  peculiar,  especially  according  to  the  ex- 
tended and  original  exhibition  of  it  in  the  "  Philosophumena" 
Hippolytus  deviates  in  many  respects  from  the  statements  of 
Irenseus  and  Epiphanius,  but  derived  his  information  probably 
from  the  works  of  Basilides  himself,  and  he  therefore  must  be 

i  Comp.  Euseb.  Hist.  Ecd.  IV.  7  and  Clem.  Alex.  Strom.  IV.  12-  p.  599  sq. 
Origen  (Horn,  in  Lite.  1  :  1)  says  that  Basilides  «'had  the  audacity  (Mtyjjcsv) 
to  write  a  Gospel  according  to  Basilides  ;  "  but  he  probably  mistook  the  com- 
mentary for  an  apocryphal  Gospel.  Hippolytus  expressly  asserts  that 
Basilides,  in  his  account  of  all  things  concerning  the  Saviour  after  "  the  birth 
of  Jesus"  agreed  with  "the  Gospels." 


468  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

chiefly  followed.1  The  system  is  based  on  the  Egyptian  astro- 
nomy and  the  Pythagorean  numerical  symbolism.  It  betrays 
also  the  influence  of  Aristotle;  but  Platonism,  the  emanation- 
theory,  and  dualism  do  not  appear. 

Basilides  is  monotheistic  rather  than  dualistic  in  his  primary 
idea,  and  so  far  differs  from  the  other  Gnostics,  though  later 
accounts  make  him  a  dualist.  He  starts  from  the  most  abstract 
notion  of  the  absolute,  to  which  he  denies  even  existence,  think- 
ing of  it  as  infinitely  above  all  that  can  be  imagined  and  con- 
ceived.3 This  ineffable  and  unnamable  God,3  not  only  super- 
existent,  but  non-existent,4  first  forms  by  his  creative  word  (not 
by  emanation)  the  world-seed  or  world-embryo,5  that  is,  chaos, 
from  which  the  world  develops  itself  according  to  arithmetical 
relations,  in  an  unbroken  order,  like  the  branches  and  leaves 
of  the  tree  from  the  mustard  seed,  or  like  the  many-colored  pea- 
cock from  the  egg.  Everything  created  tends  upwards  towards 
God,  who,  himself  unmoved,  moves  all,6  and  by  the  charm  of 
surpassing  beauty  attracts  all  to  himself. 

In  the  world-seed  Basilides  distinguishes  three  kinds  of  son- 
ship,7  of  the  same  essence  with  the  non-existent  God,  but  grow- 
ing weaker  in  the  more  remote  gradations;  or  three  races  of 

1  The  prevailing  opinion  is  that  Hippolytns  gives  the  system  of  Basilides 
himself,  Irenseus  that  of  his  school.  So  Jacobi,  Uhlhorn,  Baur,  Schaff  (first 
ed.),  ^Toiler,  Mansel,  Hort.  The  opposite  view  is  defended  by  Hilgenfeld, 
Lipsins,  Yolkmar  and  Scholten.  The  reasoning  of  Hort  in  favor  of  the  for- 
mer view,  L  c.  p.  269  sq.,  is  based  on  the  extracts  of  Clement  of  Alex,  from 
the  k^Tjr^a  of  Basilides.  He  assumes  the  priority  o*f  the  Valentinian  sys- 
tem, from  which  Basilides  proceeded  to  construct  his  own  by  contrast.  But 
history  puts  Valentinus  about  a  decade  later. 

3  Herein,  as  already  remarked,  he  resembles  Hegel,  who  likewise  begins 
with  the  idea  of  absolute  non-entity,  and  reconstructs  the  universe  ex 
nihtto.  In  both  systems  "nothing"  must  be  understood  in  a  non  natural 
sense,  as  opposed  to  all  definite,  concrete  being  or  form  of  existence.  It  is  in 
fact  identical  with  the  most  abstract  conception  of  pure  being.  Nichts  ist  Sein, 
and  Sein  itf  Nichts,  but,  set  in  motion  by  a  dialectic  process,  they  produce  the 
Werden,  and  the  Harden  results  in  Dasein.  And  here  again  the  latest  German 
philosophy  meets  with  the  oldest  Hindu  mythology.  See  the  note  on  p.  453. 

8  apprrro?,  awTOvdpaGToc.  *  <J  OVK  ov  &s6c. 

5  Travansppia — a  Stoic  idea.  6  aKivyroe  Kivqrfa  1  vttrqc  rptpepfa. 


J  121  BASILIDES.  469 

elnldren  of  God,  a  pneumatic,  a  psychic,  and  a  hylic.  The  first 
sonship  liberates  itself  immediately  from  the  world-seed,  rises 
with  the  lightning-speed  of  thought  to  God,  and  remains  there 
as  the  blessed  spirit-world,  the  Pleroina.  It  embraces  the  seven 
highest  genii/  which,  in  union  with  the  great  Father,  form  the 
first  ogdoad,  the  type  of  all  the  lower  circles  of  creation.  The 
second  sonship,  with  the  help  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  whom  it  pro- 
duces, and  who  bears  it  up,  as  the  whig  bears  the  bird,  strives 
to  follow  the  first,2  but  can  only  attain  the  impenetrable  firma- 
ment,3 that  is  the  limit  of  the  Pleroma,  and  could  endure  the 
higher  region  no  more  than  the  fish  the  mountain  air.  The 
third  sonship,  finally,  remains  fixed  in  the  world-seed,  and  in 
need  of  purification  and  redemption. 

Next  Basilides  makes  two  archons  or  world-rulers  (demiurges) 
issue  from  the  world-seed.  The  first  or  great  archon,  whose 
greatness  and  beauty  and  power  cannot  be  uttered,  creates  the 
ethereal  world  or  the  upper  heaven,  the  ogdoad,  as  it  is  called  ; 
the  second  is  the  maker  and  ruler  of  the  lower  planetary  heaven 
below  the  moon,  the  hebdomad.  Basilides  supposed  in  all 
three  hundred  and  sixty-five  heavens  or  circles  of  creation,4 
corresponding  to  the  days  of  the  year,  and  designated  them  by 
the  mystic  name  Abrasax,  or  Abraxas,5  which,  according  to  the 
numerical  value  of  the  Greek  letters,  is  equal  to  365.6  This 


ic}  G0(f>iat  dbvafit^  tiLKaioffintq,  and  sip 

2  Hence  it  is  called  fj.Ljj.rjTLK.7j.    8  arepsuiia.     *  KTIGSI^  ap%ai,  6wdft£tGt 
6  'A/3pac6g,  or  'Afipagdc.    Abraxas  is  a  euphonic  inversion,  which  seems  to 
date  from  the  Latin  translator  of  Ireflseus. 

6  Thrice  a=3;  /?=2;  p=100;  <*=200;  £=60.  Epiphanius  mentions  that 
the  Basllidians  referred  the  word  to  the  365  parts  (^rj)  of  the  human  hody  as 
well  as  to  the  days  of  the  year.  But  modern  writers  are  inclined  to  think  that 
the  engravers  of  the  Abrasax  gems  and  the  Basilidians  received  the  mystic 
name  from  an  older  common  source.  Dr.  Hort  suggests  the  derivation  from 
Ab-razach,  Ab-zarach,  i.  e.  "  the  father  of  effulgence,"  a  name  appropriate  to  a 
solar  deity.  According  to  Movers,  Serach  was  a  Phoenician  name  for  Adonis, 
whose  worship  was  connected  with  the  seasons  of  the  year.  Comp.  Beller- 
mann,  Ueber  die  Oemmen  der  Alien  mtt  dem  Abraxasbitde  (Berlin,  1817,  '19)  ; 
King,  The  Gnostics  and  their  Remains  (London,  1864),  Hort,  L  c.,  Matter, 
"Abraxas,"  etc.  in  Herzog,  1.  103-107,  and  Krans,  in  his  "Beal-Encykl.  dei 
fchxistl.  Alterthiimer,"  I.  6-10  (with  illustrations). 


£70  bECOSD  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

name  also  denotes  the  great  archon  or  ruler  of  the  365  heavens, 
It  afterwards  came  to  be  used  as  a  magical  formula,  with  all 
sorts  of  strange  figures,  the  "  Abraxas  gems/'  of  which  many 
are  still  extant. 

Each  of  the  two  archons,  however,  according  to  a  higher 
ordinance,  begets  a  son,  who  towers  far  above  his  father,  com- 
municates to  him  the  knowledge  received  from  the  Holy  Spirit, 
concerning  the  upper  spirit- world  and  the  plan  of  redemption, 
and  leads  him  to  repentance.  With  this  begins  the  process  of 
the  redemption  or  return  of  the  sighing  children  of  God,  that 
is,  the  pneumatics,  to  the  supra-mundane  God.  This  is  effected 
by  Christianity,  and  ends  with  the  consummation,  or  apokatas- 
tasis  of  all  things.  Like  Valentine,  Basilides  also  properly 
held  a  threefold  Christ— the  son  of  the  first  archon,  the  son  of 
the  second  archon,  and  the  son  of  Mary.  But  all  these  are  at 
bottom  the  same  principle,  which  reclaims  the  spiritual  natures 
from  the  world-seed  to  the  original  unity.  The  passion  of 
Christ  was  necessary  to  remove  the  corporeal  and  psychical 
elements,  which  he  brought  with  him  from  the  primitive  medley 
and  confusion  (fftiftuwz  dpztrf).  His  body  returned,  after 
death,  into  shapelessness  (afjLOpqla) ;  his  soul  rose  from  the  grave, 
and  stopped  in  the  hebdomad,  or  planetary  heaven,  where  it 
belongs ;  but  his  spirit  soared,  perfectly  purified,  above  all  the 
spheres  of  creation,  to  the  blessed  first  sonship  (uloryc)  and  the 
fellowship  of  the  non-existent  or  hyper-existent  God. 

In  the  same  way  with  Jesus,  the  first-fruits,  all  other  pneu- 
matic persons  must  rise  purified  to  the  place  where  they  by  na- 
ture belcng,  and  abide  there.  For  all  that  continues  in  its  place 
is  imperishable;  but  all  that  transgresses  its  natural  limits  is 
perishable.  Basilides  quotes  the  passage  of  Paul  concerning 
the  groaning  and  travailing  of  the  creation  expecting  the  reve- 
lation of  the  sons  of  God  (Bom.  8 :  19).  In  the  process  of 
redemption  he  conceded  to  faith  (pistis)  more  importance  than 
most  of  the  Gnostics,  and  his  definition  of  faith  was  vaguely 
derived  from  Hebrews  11 :  1. 

In  his  moral  teaching  Basilides  inculcated  a  moderate  asceti- 


8124.  BASILIDES.  47 1 

cism,  from  which,  however,  his  school  soon  departed.  He  used 
some  of  Paul's  Epistles  and  the  canonical  Gospels ;  quoting,  for 
example,  John  1:  9  ("The  true  light,  which  enlightens  every 
man,  was  coming  into  the  world"),  to  identify  his  idea  of  the 
world  seed  with  John's  doctrine  of  the  Logos  as  the  light  of  the 
world.1  The  fourth  Gospel  was  much  used  and  commented 
upon  also  by  the  Ophites,  Perates,  and  Valentinians  before  the 
middle  of  the  second  century.  The  Gnostics  were  alternate!} 
attracted  by  the  mystic  Gnosis  of  that  Gospel  (especially  the 
Prologue),  and  repelled  by  its  historic  realism,  and  tried  to  make 
the  best  use  of  it.  They  acknowledged  it,  because  they  could 
not  help  it.  The  other  authorities  of  Basilides  were  chiefly  the 
secret  tradition  of  the  apostle  Matthias,  and  of  a  pretended  inter- 
preter of  Peter,  by  the  name  of  Glaucias. 

His  son  ISIDOBE  was  the  chief,  we  may  say  the  only  -impor- 
tant one,  of  his  disciples.  He  composed  a  system  of  ethics  and 
other  books,  from  which  Clement  of  Alexandria  has  preserved  a 
few  extracts.  The  Basilidians,  especially  in  the  West,  seem  to 
have  been  dualistic  and  docetic  in  theory,  and  loose,  even  disso- 
lute in  practice.  They  corrupted  and  vulgarized  the  high-pitched 
and  artificial  system  of  the  founder.  The  whole  life  of  Christ 
was  to  them  a  mere  sham.  It  was  Simon  of  Gyrene  who  was 
crucified;  Jesus  exchanged  forms  with  him  on  the  way,  and, 
standing  unseen  opposite  in  Simon's  form,  mocked  those  who 
crucified  him,  and  then  ascended  to  heaven.  They  held  it  pru- 
dent to  repudiate  Christianity  in  times  of  persecution,  regarding 
the  noble  confession  of  martyrs  as  casting  pearls  before  swine, 

1  PhilosopL,  VII.  22.  He  also  quoted  John  2:  4,  "  My  hour  is  not  yet 
come,"  and  Luke  1 :  35,  "  A  Holy  Spirit  shall  come  upon  thee,  and  a  power 
of  the  Most  High  shall  overshadow  thee."  It  is  true  that  Hippolytus  some- 
times mixes  up  the  opinions  of  the  master  with  those  of  his  followers.  Bnt 
there  is  no  ambiguity  here  where  Basilides  is  introduced  with  faai,  *  he  says/' 
while  when  quoting  from  the  school  he  uses  the  formula  "  according  to  them J> 
(KCT*  avrofc).  The  joint  testimony  of  those  early  heretics  (to  whom  we  must 
add  the  pseudo-Clementine  Homilies  and  the  heathen  Celsus)  is  overwhelming 
against  the  Tubingen  hypothesis  of  the  late  origin  of  the  fourth  Gospel.  See 
rol.  I.  p.  707,  and  Abbott,  Authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  p.  85  sqq. 


472  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

and  practiced  various  sorts  of  magic,  in  which  the  Abraxas  gems 
did  them  service.  The  spurious  Basilidian  sect  maintained  itself 
in  Egypt  till  the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  but  does  not  seem 
to  have  spread  beyond,  except  that  Marcus,  a  native  of  Mem- 
phis, is  reported  by  Sulpicius  Severus  to  have  brought  some  of 
its  doctrines  to  Spain. 

§  125.   Valenkinus. 

L  The  sources  are:  1)  Fragments  of  VALENTINUS  ;  PTOLOMEY'S  Epis- 
tola  ad  Floram;  and  exegetical  fragments  of  HERACLEOST.  2)  The 
patristic  accounts  and  refutations  of  IEEX^EUS  (I  1-21  and  through- 
out his  whole  work);  HIPPOLYTUS  (VI.  29-37);  TEETULLIAN 
(Adv.  Valentinianos]  ;  EPIPHANIUS,  (Hssr.  XXXI  ;  in  Oehler's  ed. 
I.  305-386).  The  last  two  depend  chiefly  upon  Irenseus.  See  on 
the  sources  lapsius  and  Heinrici  (p.  5-148). 

II.  BEN..  MASSUET:  Dissert  de  Hasreticis,  Art.  L  De  Valentino^  in  his  ed. 
of  Irenseus,  and  in  Stieren's  ed.  Tom.  II.  p.  54-134.  Very  learned 
and  thorough. 

GEOEGE  HBINBICI  :  Die  Valentinianische  Gnosis  und  die  hdlige  Schrift. 
Berlin,  1871  (192  pages). 

Comp.  ^EASTDEB  (whose  account  is  very  good,  but  lacks  the  additional 
information  fiirnished  by  Hippolytus)  ;  ROSSEL,  Theol.  ScTiriften 
(Berlin,  (1847),  p.  280  sqq.;  BAUB,  K.  Gesch,  I.  195-204;  and 
JACOBI,  in  Eerzog,'  vol.  V.  225-229. 

Valentinus  or  Valentine1  is  the  author  of  the  most  profound 
and  luxuriant,  as  well  as  the  most  influential  and  best  known  of 
the  Gnostic  systems.  Irenseus  directed  his  work  chiefly  against 
it,  and  we  have  made  it  the  basis  of  our  general  description  of 
Gnosticism.2  He  founded  a  large  school,  and  spread  his  doc- 
trines in  the  West.  He  claimed  to  have  derived  them  from 
Theodas  or  Theudas,  a  pupil  of  St.  Paul.3  He  also  pretended 
to  have  received  revelations  from  the  Logos  in  a  vision.  Hip- 
polytus calls  him  a  Platonist  and  Pythagorean  rather  than  a 


-  or 

1  "No  other  system,  says  Banr  (L  203),  "affords  us  such  a  clear  insight  into 
the  peculiar  character  of  the  Gnosis,  the  inner  connection  of  its  view  of  the 
world,  and  the  deeper  intellectual  character  of  the  whole." 

•Clemens  Alex.  Strain.  1.  VU.  p.  898  (ed.  Potter).  Nothing  certain  ia 
known  of  Theudas. 


3125.  VALENTIKUS.  473 

Christian.  He  was  probably  of  Egyptian  Jewish  descent  and 
Alexandrian  education.1  Tertullian  reports,  perhaps  from,  his 
own  conjecture,  that  he  broke  with  the  orthodox  church  from 
disappointed  ambition,  not  being  made  a  bishop,2  Valentine 
came  to  Kome  as  a  public  teacher  during  the  pontificate  of  Hy- 
ginus  (137-142),  and  remained  there  till  the  pontificate  of 
Anicetus  (154).3  He  was  then  already  celebrated;  for  Justin 
Martyr,  in  his  lost  "  Syntagma  against  all  Heresies,"  which  he 
mentions  in  his  "  First  Apology "  (140),  combated  the  Yalen- 
tinians  among  other  heretics  before  A.  D.  140.  At  that  time 
Eome  had  become  the  centre  of  the  church  and  the  gathering 
place  of  all  sects.  Every  teacher  who  wished  to  exercise  a  gene- 
ral influence  on  Christendom  naturally  looked  to  the  metropolis. 
Valentine  was  one  of  the  first  Gnostics  who  taught  in  Eome, 
about  the  same  time  with  Cerdo  and  Marcion ;  but  though  he 
made  a  considerable  impression  by  his  genius  and  eloquence,  the 
orthodoxy  of  the  church  and  the  episcopal  authority  were  too 
firmly  settled  to  allow  of  any  great  success  for  his  vagaries.  He 
was  excommunicated,  and  went  to  Cyprus,  where  he  died  about 
A.B.  160. 

His  system  is  an  ingenious  theogonic  and  cosmogonic  epos. 
It  describes  in  three  acts  the  creation,  the  fall,  and  the  redemp- 
tion ;  first  in  heaven,  then  on  earth.  Great  events  repeat  them- 
selves in  different  stages  of  being.  He  derived  his  material 
from  his  own  fertile  imagination,  from  Oriental  and  Greek 
speculations,  and  from  Christian  ideas.  He  made  much  use  of 
the  Prologue  of  John's  Gospel  and  the  Epistles  to  the  Colos- 
sians  and  Ephesians ;  but  by  a  wild  exegesis  he  put  his  own 
pantheistic  and  mythological  fancies  into  the  apostolic  words, 
such  as  Logos,  Only  Begotten,  Truth,  Life,  Pleroma,  Ecclesia. 

1  Epiph.  ffcer.  XXXI.  2.  The  Jewish  extraction  may  be  inferred  from 
some  of  his  terms,  as  *'  Achamoth." 

a  De  Prcesc.  Hwr.  c.  30,  and  Adv.  Valent.  c.  4.  Tertullian  and  the  orthodox 
polemics  generally  are  apt  to  trace  all  heresies  to  impure  personal  motives. 

*  Iren^  III.  4,  3.  Comp.  Euseb.  H.  E.  IV.  10, 11  (quoting  from  Irenaeus). 
All  authorities  agree  that  he  taught  at  Eome  before  the  middle  of  the  second 
century. 


474  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Valentine  starts  from  the  eternal  primal  Being,  which  he  sig. 
nificantly  calls  Bythos  or  Abyss.1  It  is  the  fathomless  depth  in 
which  the  thinking  mind  is  lost,  the  ultimate  boundary  beyond 
which  it  cannot  pass.  The  Bythos  is  unbegotten,  infinite,  invi- 
sible, incomprehensible,  nameless,  the  absolute  agnoston  ;  yet 
capable  of  evolution  and  development,  the  universal  Fatner  of 
all  beings.  He  continues  for  immeasurable  ages  in  silent  con- 
templation of  his  own  boundless  grandeur,  glory,  and  beauty. 
This  "  Silence"  or  "Solitude"  (#  artf)  is  his  Spouse  or  ff&fyoc. 
It  is  the  silent  self-contemplation,  the  slumbering  consciousness 
of  the  Infinite.  He  also  calls  it  "Thought"  (Iwoea),  and 
"Grace"  (/4/'f»V2  ^he  pre-  mundane  Bythos  includes,  therefore, 
at  least  according  to  some  members  of  the  school,  the  female  as 
well  as  the  male  principle;  for  from  the  male  principle  alone 
nothing  could  spring.  According  to  Hippolytus,  Valentine  de- 
rived this  sexual  duality  from  the  essential  nature  of  love,  and 
said:  "God  is  all  love;  but  love  is  not  love  except  there  is 
some  object  of  affection."3  He  grappled  here  with  a  pre-mun- 
dane  mystery,  which  the  orthodox  theology  endeavors  to  solve 
by  the  doctrine  of  the  immanent  eternal  trinity  in  the  divine 
essence:  God  is  love,  therefore  God  is  triune:  a  loving  sub- 
ject, a  beloved  object,  and  a  union  of  the  two.  "  Ubi  amor,  ibi 
trinitas" 

After  this  eternal  silence,  God  enters  upon  a  process  of  evo- 
lution or  emanation,  i.  e.  a  succession  of  generations  of  antithetic 
and  yet  supplementary  ideas  or  principles.  From  the  Abyss 
emanate  thirty  aeons  in  fifteen  pairs,4  according  to  the  law  of 
sexual  polarity,  in  three  generations,  the  first  called  the  ogdoad, 
the  second  the  decad,  the  third  the  dodecad.  The  JEons  are  the 
unfolded  powers  and  attributes  of  the  divinity.  They  corre- 


5f,  also  rroorrarup,  Trpoapxf;,  avToirarop. 
»  Iren.  1.  1,  \  1  ;  Tert.  Adv.  Val  c.  7. 

*  Pkihs.  VI.  24.    There  seems,  however,  to  have  been  a  difference  of  opinion 
among  the  Valentinians  on  the  companionship  of  the  Bythos,  for  in  ch.  25  we 
read  :  "The  Father  alone,  without  copulation,  has  produced  an  offspring  .... 
he  alone  possesses  the  power  of  self-generation." 

*  ai\iyot.    The  same  number  of  aeons  as  in  Hesiod's  theogony. 


4126.   VALEKTiKUS.  475 

spend  to  the  dynameis  in  the  system  of  Basilides.  God  begets 
first  the  masculine,  productive  Mind  or  Reason  (6  voDc),1  with 
the  feminine,  receptive  Truth  $  dhj&sca);  these  two  produce  the 
Word  (6  ,Wre;c)  and  the  Life  (9  :<y$);  and  these  again  the  (ideal) 
Man  (6  5y#/;oy>T0c)  and  the  (ideal)  Church  (jj  exxfyffta).  The 
influence  of  the  fourth  Gospel  is  unmistakable  here,  though  oi 
course  the  terminology  of  John  is  used  in  a  sense  different  from 
that  of  its  author.  The  first  two  syzygies  constitute  the  sacred 
Tetraktys,  the  root  of  all  things.2  The  Xous  and  the  Aletheia 
produce  ten  seons  (five  pairs);  the  Logos  and  the  Zoe,  twelve 
seons  (six  pairs).  At  last  the  Nous  or  Monogenes  and  the  Ale- 
theia bring  forth  the  heavenly  Christ  (6  dvw  Xpcaro^)  and  the 
(female)  Holy  Spirit  (TO  Trvsitpa  d.ftov\  and  therewith  complete 
the  number  thirty.  These  seons  constitute  together  the  Pkroma, 
the  plenitude  of  divine  powers,  an  expression  which  St.  Paul 
applied  to  the  historical  Christ  (Col.  2  :  9).  They  all  partake 
in  substance  of  the  life  of  the  Abyss;  but  their  form  is  condi- 
tioned by  the  Horos  (fyooc),  the  limiting  power  of  God.  This 
genius  of  limitation  stands  between  the  Pleroma  and  the  Hyste- 
rema  outside,  and  is  the  organizing  power  of  the  universe,  and 
secures  harmony.3  If  any  being  dares  to  transcend  its  fixed 
boundaries  and  to  penetrate'  beyond  revelation  into  the  hidden 
being  of  God,  it  is  in  danger  of  sinking  into  nothing.  Two 
actions  are  ascribed  to  the  Horos,  a  negative  by  which  he  limits 
every  being  and  sunders  from  it  foreign  elements,  and  the  posi- 
tive by  which  he  forms  and  establishes  it.4  The  former  action 
is  emphatically  called  Horos,  the  latter  is  called  Stauros  (cross, 
post),  because  he  stands  firm  and  immovable,  the  guardian  of 

1  Also  called  o  trarfyp  (as  immediately  proceeding  from  the  irpoTrfcup),  the 
Father,  also  6  povoyewie,  the  Only  Begotten  (comp.  John  1 :  18),  and  the  aptf 
as  the  Beginning  of  all  things  (comp.  ev  apxyt  John  1 :  1). 

2  The  Ispa  rerpaicrbs  of  the  Pythagoreans.    Tert.  (c.  7) :   "prima  quadriga 
Vde^inianafactioniSj  matrix  et  vrigo  cuncforum." 

3  «'  Es  ist  eine  tiefe  Idee  des  Valentinianischen  Systems,"  says  Neander  (II.  722), 
"doss,  we,  attes  Dasein  in  der  Sdbsibeschrankung  des  Bythos  seinen  Grand  hat,  so 
das  Dasein  otter  geschaffenen  Wesen  avf  Beschrdnkung  beruht" 

*  The  evepyeia  pepujTua}  Kal  diopumitf,  and  the  hepyda  i6paaru$  KOL  antpumicfj, 


476  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  JEons,  so  that  nothing  can  come  from  the  Hysterema  intc 
the  neighborhood  of  the  aeons  in  the  Pleroma. 

The  process  of  the  fall  and  redemption  takes  place  first  in  the 
ideal  world  of  the  Pleronia,  and  is  then  repeated  in  the  lower 
World,  In  this  process  the  lower  Wisdom  or  Sophia,  also  called 
Achamoth  or  Chakmuth  plays  an  important  part.1  She  is  the 
mundane  soul,  a  female  seon,  the  weakest  and  most  remote 
member  of  the  series  of  aeons  (in  number  the  twenty-eighth;, 
and  forms,  so  to  speak,  the  bridge  which  spans  the  abyss  be- 
tween God  and  the  real  world.  Feeling  her  loneliness  and 
estrangement  from  the  great  Father,  she  wishes  to  unite  herself 
immediately,  without  regard  to  the  intervening  links,  with  him 
who  is  the  originating  principle  of  the  universe,  and  alone  has 
the  power  of  self-generation.  She  jumps,  as  it  were  by  a  single 
bound,  into  the  depth  of  the  eternal  Father,  and  brings  forth  of 
heiself  alone  an  abortion  (l#r/?<u/*«),  a  formless  and  inchoate 
substance,2  of  which  Moses  speaks  when  he  says :  "  The  earth 
was  without  form  and  void."  By  this  sinful  passion  she  intro- 
duces confusion  and  disturbance  into  the  Pleroma.3  She  wan- 
ders about  outside  of  it,  and  suffers  with  fear,  anxiety,  and 
despair  on  account  'of  her  abortion.  This  is  the  fall ;  an  act 
both  free  and  necessary. 

But'  Sophia  yearns  after  redemption ;  the  aeons  sympathize 
with  her  sufferings  and  aspirations;  the  eternal  Father  himself 
commands  the  projection  of  the  last  pair  of  aeons,  Christ  and  the 
Holy  Spirit,  "for  the  restoration  of  Form,  the  destruction  of 
the  abortion,  and  for  the  consolation  and  cessation  of  the  groans 
of  Sophia."  They  comfort  and  cheer  the  Sophia,  and  separate 

1  UsuaJly  identified  with  Chocmah,  but  by  Lipsius  and  Jacob!  with  Chakmuth, 
the  world-mother,  which  has  a  place  in  the  system  of  Bardesanes.  The  idea 
of  Sophia  as  the  mediatrix  of  creation  is  no  doubt  borrowed  from  the  Proverbs 
and  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon.  » 

*  ofofa  apopfre  Kal  aKarasKsvasrog.  Phttos.  VI  28  (30  ed.  Duncker  and 
Schneidewin,  I.  274).  The  Thohuvabohu  of  Genesis. 

8  *  Ignorance  having  arisen  within  the  Pleroma  in  consequence  of  Sophia, 
and  shapelessness  (fyoppta)  in  consequence  of  the  oflspring  of  Sophia,  con- 
fasion  arose  in  the  pleroma  (&6pvpoc  tytwro  tv  irtypfyari)."  Phttos.  VI.  2ti 
(31  in  Duneker  and  Sdmeidewin) 


§125,  VALENTLffUS.  477 

the  abortion  from  the  Pleroma.  At  last,  the  thirty  aeons 
together  project  in  honor  of  the  Father  the  aeon  Soter  or  Jesus, 
"the  great  High  Priest/'  "the  Joint  Fruit  of  the  Pleroma," 
and  "send  him  forth  beyond  the  Pleroma  as  a  Spouse  for  So- 
phia, who  was  outside,  and  as  a  rectifier  of  those  sufferings 
which  she  underwent  in  searching  after  Christ/'  After. many 
sufferings,  Sophia  is  purged  of  all  passions  and  brought  back  as 
the  bride  of  Jesus,  together  with  all  pneumatic  natures,  into  the 
ideal  world.  The  demiurge,  the  fiery  and  jealous  God  of  the 
Jews,  as  "the  friend  of  the  bridegroom,"1  with  the  psychical 
Christians  on  the  border  of  the  Pleroma,  remotely  shares  the 
joy  of  the  festival,  while  matter  sinks  back  into  nothing. 

In  Valentine's  Christology,  we  must  distinguish  properly 
three  redeeming  beings:  (1)  The  dycu  XptGitx;  or  heavenly 
Christ,  who,  after  the  fall  of  Sophia,  emanates  from  the  seon 
t,  and  stands  in  conjunction  with  the  female  principle,  the 
He  makes  the  first  announcement  to  the  aeons  of 
the  plan  of  redemption,  whereupon  they  strike  up  anthems  of 
praise  and  thanksgiving  in  responsive  choirs.  (2)  The  ewryp 
or  'fyffouz,  produced  by  all  the  seons  together,  the  star  of  the 
Pleroma.  He  forms  with  the  redeemed  Sophia  the  last  and  high- 
est syzygy.  (3)  The  xdrw  Xptardt;,  the  psychical  or  Jewish 
Messiah,  who  is  sent  by  the  Demiurge,  passes  through  the  body 
of  Mary  as  water  through  a  pipe,  and  is  at  last  crucified  by  the 
Jews,  but,  as  he  has  merely  an  apparent  body,  does  not  really 
suffer.  With  him  Soter,  the  proper  redeemer,  united  himself 
in  the  baptism  in  the  Jordan,  to  announce  his  divine  gnosis  on 
earth  for  a  year,  and  lead  the  pneumatic  persons  to  perfection. 

NOTES. 

Dr.  Baur,  the  great  critical  historian  of  ancient  Gnosticism  and  the  master 
spirit  of  modern  Gnosticism,  ingeniously  reproduces  the  Valentinian  system 
in  Hegelian  terminology.  I  quote  the  chief  part,  as  a  fair  specimen  of  his 
historic  treatment,  from  his  Evrchengeschichte,  vol.  I.  201  sqq.  (comp.  his 
Gnosk,  p.  124  sqq.) : 

rov  wpQtov,  John  3:  29. 


478  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

"  Der  Geist,  oder  Gott  als  der  Geist  an  sich,  geht  aus  sich  heraus,  in  dieser 
Sebsto/enbarung  Gottes  entsteht  die  Welt,  die  in  ihrem  Unterschied  von  Gott  auch 
icieder  an  sich  mit  Gott  eins  ist.  Wie  man  aber  auch  dieses  immanente  Verhdltniss 
con  Gott  und  Welt  betrachten  mag,  als  Selbstoffenbarung  Gotten  oder  als  Weltent* 
wicklung,  es  ist  an  sich  ein  rein  geistiger,  im  Wesen  des  Geistes  begrwndeter 
Process.  Der  Geist  stellt  in  den  Aeonen,  die  er  aus  sich  hervorgehen  Idsst,  sein 
eigenes  Wesen  a>is  sich  heraus  und  sich  gegenilber  ;  da  aber  das  Wesen  des  Geistel 
an  sich  das  Denken  und  Wissen  ist,  so  kann  der  Process  seiner  Selbstoffenbarung 
nur  darin  bestehent  doss  er  sich  dessen  bewusst  ist,  was  er  an  sich  ist.  Die  Aeonen 
des  Pleroma  sind  die  hochsten  -Begriffe  des  geistigen  Sewis  und  Lebens,  diA 
allgemeinen  Dcnkfonnen,  in  u'dchen  der  Geist  das,  was  er  an  sich  ist,  in  bestimmter 
concret-jr  Weixe  fur  das  Bewusstsein  ist.  3fit  dem  Wissen  des  Geistes  von  sich) 
iffim  Sclbatbcwitssteein  des  sich  wn  sich  untcrscheidenden  Geistes,  ist  aber  auch  schon 
nichi  bios  ein  Princip  der  Differenzirung,  sondern,  da  Gott  und  Welt  an  sich  Ei<n& 
tiiid*  auch  ein  Princip  der  Matenalisirung  des  Geistes  gesetzt.  Je  grosser  der 
Abfifcnd  der  das  Scwusstsein  des  Geistes  vermittelnden  Begriffe  von  dem  absolut&n, 
Princip  ist,  urn  so  mehr  verdunkelt  sich  das  geistige  Bewusstsein,  der  Geist 
entau&ert  sich  seiner  selbst,  er  ist  sich  sdbst  nicht  mehr  Mar  und  durchsiehtig,  das 
Pacumafische  sijikt  znm  Psychischen  herab,  das  Psychische  verdichtet  sich  zum 
JLiteriellcn,  und  mit  dem  Materidlen  verbindet  sich  in  seinem  Extrem  auch  der 
Seffffff  des  Ddnwnischen  und  Diabolischen.  Da  aber  auch  das  Psyshische  an  sich 
pncur.miischer  Satur  isft  und  Keime  des  geistigen  Lebens  uberall  zuruvkgeblieben 
sind,  so  muss  das  Pntumatische  die  materielle  VerdunHung  des  geistigen  Be- 
vrusatseins  aufder  Stufe  des  psychischen  Lebens  wieder  durchbrechen  und  die  Decke 
abwerfen,  die  in  der  Welt  des  Demiurg  auf  dem  jB&ousstsein  des  Geistes  liegt.  Die 
gauze  Welterttwicklung  ist  die  Continuitat  desseiben  geistigen  Processes,  es  muss 
daker  auch  einen  Wendepunkt  geben,  in  welchem  der  Geist  aus  seiner  Selbstentaus- 
eruny  zu  sick  selbst  suruckkehrt  und  wieder  sum  klaren  JBewusstsein  dessen,  was  er 
an  sich  isf,  kommt.  Diess  ist  der  gnostische  Begriff  der  christlichen  O/enbarung. 
Die  Wfcsenden  im  Sinne  der  Gnostiker,  die  Pneumatischen,  die  als  solche  auch  das 
wahrhaft  christliche  Bewusstsein  in  sich  haben,  Bind  ein  neues  Moment  des  attge- 
m^irtrn  geistigen  Lebens,  die  hochste  Stufe  der  Selbstoffenbarung  Gottes  und  der 
WelfetitiDtcklung.  Dicse  Periode  des  Weltverla-u/s  beginnt  mit  der  JSrscheinung 
Christi  und  endet  znletzt  damit,  doss  durch  Christus  und  die  Sophia  alles  Geistige 
\n  das  Plfroma  irieder  aufgenommen  wird.  Da  Christus,  wie  auf  jeder  Stvfe  der 
Weltentwicklung,  so  auch  schon  in  den  hochsten  Eegionen  der  Aeonenwelt,  in  welcher 
zlks  seinen  Ausgangspunkt  hat,  und  von  Anfang  an  auf  dieses  Eesultat  des  Gansen 
anr?el?gt  ist,  als  das  wiederhrrxteltende,  in  der  Einheit  mit  dem  Absoluten  erhaltende 
Princip  thatig  ist,  so  hat  er  in  der  Weltanschauung  der  Gnostiker  durchaus  die  Be- 
deutunq  eines  absoluten  Weltprincips" 


J126.  THE  SCHOOL  OF  VALE3TIXU&  479 

§  126.  The  School  of  Valentinus.     Hemdeon,  Ptolemy,  Marcos, 
Eardesanes,  Harmonius. 

Of  all  the  forms  of  Gnosticism,  that  of  Valentinus  was  the 
most  popular  and  influential,  more  particularly  in  Rome.  He 
had  a  large  number  of  followers,  who  variously  modified  his 
system.  Tertullian  says,  his  heresy  "  fashioned  itself  into  as 
many  shapes  as  a  courtesan  who  usually  changes  and  adjusts  her 
dress  every  day." 

The  school  of  Valentinus  divided  chiefly  into  two  branches, 
an  Oriental,1  and  an  Italian.  The  first,  in  which  Hippolytus 
reckons  one  AXIONICOS,  not  otherwise  known,  and  ARDESIAXES 
('Apdyecdvys,  probably  the  same  with  Bardesanes),  held  the 
body  of  Jesus  to  be  pneumatic  and  heavenly,  because  the  Holy 
Spirit,  i.  e.  Sophia  and  the  demiurgic  power  of  the  Highest, 
came  upon  Mary.  The  Italian  school  —  embracing  HEBACLEOX 
and  PTOLEMY  —  taught  that  the  body  of  Jesus  was  psychical, 
and  that  for  this  reason  the  Spirit  descended  upon  him  in  the 
baptism.  Some  Valentinians  came  nearer  the  orthodox  view, 
than  their  master. 

HERACLEON  was  personally  instructed  by  Valentine,  and 
probably  flourished  between  170  and  180  somewhere  in  Italy. 
He  has  a  special  interest  as  the  earliest  known  commentator  of 
the  Gospel  of  John.  Origen,  in  commenting  on  the  same  book, 
has  preserved  us  about  fifty  fragments,  usually  contradicting 
them.  They  are  chiefly  taken  from  the  first  two,  the  fourth, 
and  the  eighth  chapters.2  Heracleon  fully  acknowledges  the 
canonical  authority  of  the  fourth  Gospel,  but  reads  his  own  sys- 
tem into  it.  He  used  the  same  allegorical  method  as  Origen, 
who  even  charges  him  with  adhering  too  much  to  the  letter, 
and  not  going  deep  enough  into  the  spiritual  sense.  He  finds 
in  John  the  favorite  Valentinian  ideas  of  logos,  life,  light,  love, 
conflict  with  darkness,  and  mysteries  in  all  the  numbers,  but 


avaTohuuj.    Hippol.  VI.  35  (p.  286). 
a  They  are  collected  by  Grabe,  Spicil.  II.  83-1  17,  and  by  Stieren,  in  his  ed, 
of  Iren.  Tom.  I.  938-971      Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom.  IV.  9)  quotes  alsr 
from  a  Commentary  ""of  Heracleon  on  Luke  12  :  8. 


480  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

deprives  the  facts  of  historical  realness.  The  woman  of  Sama- 
ria, in  the  fourth  chapter,  represents  the  redemption  of  the 
Sophia;  the  water  of  Jacob's  well  is  Judaism;  her  husband  is 
her  spiritual  bridegroom  from  the  Pleroma;  her  former  hus- 
bands are  the  Hyle  or  kingdom  of  the  devil.  The  nobleman  in 
Capernaum  (4:  47)  is  the  Demiurge,  who  is  not  hostile,  but 
short-sighted  and  ignorant,  yet  ready  to  implore  the  Saviour's 
help  for  his  subjects;  the  nobleman's  son  represents  the  psy- 
chics, who  will  be  healed  and  redeemed  when  their  ignorance  is 
removed.  The  fact  that  John's  Gospel  was  held  in  equal  reve- 
rence by  the  Yalentinians  and  the  orthodox,  strongly  favors  its 
early  existence  before  their  separation,  and  its  apostolic  ori- 
gin.1 

PTOLEMY  is  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  Flora,  a  wealthy 
Christian  lady,  whom  he  tried  to  convert  to  the  Valentinian 
system.2  He  deals  chiefly  with  the  objection  that  the  creation 
of  the  world  and  the  Old  Testament  could  not  proceed  from  the 
highest  God.  He  appeals  to  an  apostolic  tradition  and  to  the 
words  of  Christ,  who  alone  knows  the  Father  of  all  and  first 
revealed  him  (John  1  :  18).  God  is  the  only  good  (Matt.  19  : 
17),  and  hence  he  cannot  be  the  author  of  a  world  in  which 
there  is  so  much  evil.  Irenseus  derived  much  of  his  informa- 
tion from  the  contemporary  followers  of  Ptolemy. 

Another  disciple  of  Valentine,  MAECOS,  who  taught  likewise 
in  the  second  half  of  the  second  century,  probably  in  Asia  Mi- 
nor, perhaps  also  in  Gaul,  blended  a  Pythagorean  and  Cabba- 
listic numerical  symbolism  with  the  ideas  of  his  master,  intro- 
duced a  ritual  abounding  in  ceremonies,  and  sought  to  attract 
beautiful  and  wealthy  women  by  magical  arts.  His  followers 
were  called 


1  Baur  (T.  203)  significantly  ignores  Heracleon's  Commentary,  which  is  fatal 
to  his  hypothesis  of  the  late  origin  of  the  fourth  Gospel. 

*  The  Epistola  ad  Floram  is  preserved  by  Epiphanius  (Seer-  XXIII.  §  3). 
Stieren,  in  a  Latin  inaugural  address  (1843),  denied  its  genuineness,  but  Eossel 
in  an  Appendix  to  Meander's  Church  History  (Germ.  ed.  II.  1249-1254^  in 
Torrey's  translation  I.  725-728),  and  Heinrici  (1.  c.  p.  75  sqq.)  defend'  it. 

9  Marcos  and  the  Marcosians  are  known  to  us  from  Clement  of  Alex,  and 


?  126.  THE  SCHOOL  OF  VALENTINUS.       481 

The  name  of  COLARBASUS,  which  is  often  connected  with 
Marcos,  must  be  stricken  from  the  list  of  the  Gnostics;  for  it 
originated  in  confounding  the  Hebrew  Kol-Arba9  "  the  Yoice 
of  Four,"  i.  e.  the  divine  Tetrad  at  the  head  of  the  Pleroma, 
with  a  person.1 

Finally,  in  the  Valentinian  school  is  counted  also  BARDE- 
SANES  or  BARDAJSAN  (son  of  Daisan,  £ap3r/ffd^<:).2  He  was  a 
distinguished  Syrian  scholar  and  poet,  and  lived  at  the  court  of 
the  prince  of  Edessa  at  the  close  of  the  second  and  in  the  early 
part  of  the  third  century.3  But  he  can  scarcely  be  numbered 
among  the  Gnostics,  except  in  a  very  wide  sense.  He  was  at 
first  orthodox,  according  to  Epiphanius,  but  became  corrupted 
by  contact  with  Valentinians.  Eusebius,  on  the  contrary, 
makes  him  begin  a  heretic  and  end  in  orthodoxy.  "  He  also 
reports,  that  Bardesanes  wrote  against  the  heresy  of  Marcion  in 
the  Syriac  language.  Probably  he  accepted  the  common  Chris- 
tian faith  with  some  modifications,  and  exercised  freedom  on 
speculative  doctrines,  which  were  not  yet  clearly  developed  in 
the  Syrian  church  of  that  period.4  His  numerous  works  are 

Iren.  (I.  13-21).    Hippolytus  (VI.  39  sqq.,  p.  296  sqq.)  and  Epiphanius  de- 
pend here  almost  entirely  on  Irenseus,  who  speak  of  Marcos  as  still  living. 

1  It  is  to  be  derived  from  Vlp,  voice  (not  from  ^3,  o#),  and  J731«,  four. 
The  confusion  was  first  discovered  by  Heumann  (1743),  and  more  fiilly  ex- 
plained by  Volkmar,  Die  Colarbasus-Gnosis,  in  Niedner's  "  Zettschrifi  fur  hist. 
Theol."  1855,  p.  603-616.    Comp.  Baur,  I.  204>  note,  and  Hort  in  Smith  and 
Wace,  I.  594  sq. 

2  Comp.  AUG.  HAHN:   Bardesanes^  Gnosticus  Syrorum  primus  hymnologus. 
Lips.  1819.     A.  MERX:    B >rdes.  v.  Edessa.    Halle,  1863.    Lirsius:  In  the 
" Zeitschrift  fur  wissenschaftl.  Theol"   1863,  p.  435  sqq.     A.  HIIXJENFELD : 
Bardesanes,  der  letzte  Gnostiker.    Leipz.  1864.     K.  MACKE:   Syrische  Lieder 
gnorihchen  Ursprungs,  in  the  "  Tub.  Theol.  Qwrtalsckrifi"  for  1874.    Dr.HoBT: 
Bardaisan,  in  Smith  and  Wace,  1. 256-260  (very  thorough). 

3  Eusebiu*  (IV.  30)  and  Jerome  (De  Vir.  <iUiistr.  33),  misled  by  the  common 
confusion  of  the  earlier  and  later  Antonines,  assign  him  to  the  reign  of  Marcus 
Aurelius  (161-180),   but  according  to  the  Chronicle  of  Edessa  (Assemani, 
Bibl  Or.  I.  389)  he  was  born  July  11,  155,  and  according. to  Barhebrseufl 
(Cliron.  Ecd.  ed.  Abbeloos  and  Lamy,  1872,  p.  79)  he  died  in  223,  aged  68 
years.    Hilgenfeld,  Jacobi  and  Hort  adopt  the  later  date. 

4  Dr.  Hort  (p;252)  thinks  that  "there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that Bardaisan 
rejected  the  ordinary  faith  of  Christians,  as  founded  on  the  Gospels  and  the 

Vol.  II.-31 


482  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

lost,  with  the  exception  of  a  fi  Dialogue  on  Fate,"  which  has  re- 
cently been  published  in  full.1  It  is,  however,  of  uncertain 
date,  and  shows  no  trace  of  the  Gnostic  mythology  and  dualism, 
ascribed  to  him.  He  or  his  son  Harmonius  (the  accounts  vary) 
is  the  father  of  Syrian  hymnology,  and  composed  a  book  of  one 
hundred  and  fifty  hymns  (after  the  Psalter),  which  were  used 
on  festivals,  till  they  were  superseded  by  the  orthodox  hymns 
of  St.  Ephnern  the  Syrian,  who  retained  the  same  metres  and 
tunes.1  He  enjoyed  great  reputation,  and  his  sect  is  said  to 
have  spread  to  the  Southern  Euphrates,  and  even  to  China. 

His  son  HARMONIUS,  of  Edessa,  followed  in  his  steps.-  He 
is  said  to  have  studied  philosophy  at  Athens.  He  shares  with 
Bardesanes  (as  already  remarked)  the  honor  of  being  the  father 
of  Syrian  hymnology. 

§  127.  Mareion  and  his  School, 

L  JUSTIN  M. :  Apol.  I.  c.  26  and  58.  He  wrote  also  a  special  work 
against  Mareion,  which  is  lost.  IRBN.ETJS  :  I.  28.  IV.  33  sqq.  and 
several  other  passages.  He  likewise  contemplated  a  special  treatise 
against  Mareion  (III.  12).  TEBTULLIAN:  Adv.  Marcionem  Libri  V. 

writings  of  the  Apostles,  except  on  isolated  points.''  The  varying  modern 
constructions  of  his  system  on  a  Gnostic  basis  are  all  arbitrary. 

1  Ilfpt  sluapusvTjc.  It  was  formerly  known  only  from  a  Greek  extract  in 
EuseUu^sProspca-atioEmng.  (VI.  9, 10).  The  Syriac  original  was  discovered 
among  the  Nitrian  MSS.  of  the  British  Museum,  and  published  by  Cureton, 
in  SpicUegium  Syriucum,  London  1855,  with  an  English  translation  and  notes. 
Men  gives  a  German  translation  with  notes  (p.  25-55).  The  treatise  is  either 
identical  with  the  Book  of  the  Laws  of  Countries,  or  an  extract  from  it.  Dr. 
Hort  doubts  its  genuineness. 

1  Ephrsem  the  Syrian  speaks  of  a  book  of  150  hymns,  by  which  Bardesanes 
had  beguiled  the  people,  and  makes  no  mention  of  Harmonius  j  but  Sozomen 
and  Theodoret  report  that  Harmonius  was  the  first  to  adapt  the  Syrian  lan- 
guage to  metrical  *brni5  and  music,  and  that  his  hymns  and  tunes  were  used 
till  the  time  of  Ephraem.  Dr.  Hort  explains  this  contradiction,  which  has 
not  received  sufficient  attention,  by  supposing  that  the  book  of  hymns  was 
really  written  by  Harmonius,  perhaps  in  his  father's  lifetime,  and  at  his  sug- 
gestion. But  it  is  equally  possible  that  Bardesanes  was  the  author  and  Har- 
inonins  the  editor,  or  that  both  were  hymnists.  The  testimony  of  Ephrsem 
cannot  easily  be  set  aside  as  a  pure  error.  Fragments  of  hymns  of  Bardesanes 
have  been  traced  in  the  Ada  Thorns  by  K.  Macke  in  the  article  quoted  above. 
The  Syriac  hymns  of  Ephnera  are  translated  into  German  by  Zingerle  (1838), 
and  into  English  by  fr  Burgess  (1$53), 


{  127.  MARCION  AND  HIS  SCHOOL.  483 

HIPPOL.  :  Philos.  VII.  29  (ed.  Duncker  and  Schneidewin,  pp.  382- 
394).  EPIPHANIUS:  Ear.  XLIL  PHILASTER:  Hcer.  XLY.  The 
Armenian  account  of  ESNIG  in  Ms  "Destruction  of  Heretics" 
(5th.  century),  translated  by  Neumann,  in  the  "Zeitschrift  fur 
histor.  Theologie,"  Leipzig,  vol.  IV*.  1834  Esniggives  Marcionism 
more  of  a  mystic  and  speculative  character  than  the  earlier  fathers, 
but  presents  nothing  which  may  not  be  harmonized  with  them. 

0,  NEANDBB  (whose  account  is  too  charitable),  BAUE  (I.  213-217), 
MdLLEE,  (Gesch.  der  Kosmologie,  374-407),  FESSLEE  (in  Wetzer  and 
Welte,  VI.  816-821.),  JACOBI  (in  Eerzog,  V,  231-236),  SALMON  (in 
Smith  and  Wace,  III.  816-824).  AD.  HILGENPELD:  Cerdon  und 
Mareion,  in  Ms  "  Zeitschriffe  fur  wissenschaftl.  TheoL"  Leipz. 
1881,  pp.  1-37. 

III.  On  the  critical  question  of  Marcion's  canon  and  the  relation  of  his 
mutilated  Gospel  of  Luke  to  the  genuine  Gospel  of  Luke,  see  the 
works  on  the  Canon,  the  critical  Introductions,  and  especially 
VOLKMAB:  Das  Evangelium  Marcions,  Text  und  Kritik  (Leipz. 
1852),  and  SANDAY:  The  Gospels  in  the  Second  Century  (London, 
1876).  The  last  two  have  conclusively  proved  (against  the  earlier 
view  of  Baur,  Ritschl,  and  the  author  of  "Supernat.  Eel.")  the 
priority  of  the  canonical  Luke.  Comp.  vol.  I.  668. 

MABCION  was  the  most  earnest,  the  most  practical,  and  the 
most  dangerous  among  the  Gnostics,  full  of  energy  and  zeal  for 
reforming,  but  restless,  rough  and  eccentric.  He  has  a  remote 
connection  with  modern  questions  of  biblical  criticism  and  the 
canon.  He  anticipated  the  rationalistic  opposition  to  the  Old 
Testament  and  to  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  but  in  a  very  arbitrary 
and  unscrupulous  way.  He  could  see  only  superficial  differ- 
ences in  the  Bible,  not  iihe  deeper  harmony.  He  rejected  the 
heathen  mythology  of  the  other  Gnostics,  and  adhered  to  Chris- 
tianity as  the  only  true  religion ;  he  was  less  speculative,  and 
gave  a  higher  place  to  faith.  But  he  was  utterly  destitute  of 
historical  sense,  and  put  Christianity  into  a  radical  conflict  with 
all  previous  revelations  of  God;  as  if  God  had  neglected  the 
world  for  thousands  of  years  until  he  suddenly  appeared  in 
Christ.  He  represents  an  extreme  anti-Jewish  and  pseudo- 
Pauline  tendency,  and  a  magical  supranaturalism,  which,  in 
fanatical  zeal  for  a  pure  primitive  Christianity,  nullifies  all  his 
tory,  and  turns  the  gospel  into  an  abrupt,  unnatural,  phantom- 
like  appearance. 


484  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Maroion  was  the  son  of  a  bishop  of  Sinope  in  Pontus,  and 
gave  in  his  first  fervor  his  property  to  the  church,  but  was  ex- 
communicated by  his  own  father,  probably  on  account  of  his 
heretical  opinions  and  contempt  of  authority.1  He  betook  him- 
self, about  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  to  Eome  (140- 
loo :,  which  originated  none  of  the  Gnostic  systems,  but  attracted 
them  all.  There  he  joined  the  Syrian  Gnostic,  CERDO,  who 
gave  him  some  speculative  foundation  for  his  practical  dualism. 
He  disseminated  his  doctrine  by  travels,  and  made  many  disci- 
ples from  different  nations.  He  is  said  to  have  intended  to  apply 
at  last  for  restoration  to  the  communion  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
when  his  death  intervened.2  The  time  and  place  of  his  death 
are  unknown.  He  wrote  a  recension  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke 
and  the  Pauline  Epistles,  and  a  work  on  the  contradictions  be- 
tween the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Justin  Martyr  regarded 
htm  as  the  most  formidable  heretic  of  his  day.  The  abhorrence 
of  the  Catholics  for  him  is  expressed  in  the  report  of  Irenseus, 
that  Polycarp  of  Smyrna,  meeting  with  Marcion  in  Eome,  and 
being  asked  by  him:  "Dost  thou  know  me?"  answered:  "I 
know  the  first-born  of  Satan."3 

Marcion  supposed  two  or  three  primal  forces  (dpxaf):  the 
good  or  gracious  God  (#soc  d^a&6^)9  whom  Christ  first  made 
known ;  the  evil  matter  (&ty),  ruled  by  the  devil,  to  which  hea- 
thenism belongs;  and  the  righteous  world-maker  (dq/Moupfbc 
dtxatoz),  who  is  the  finite,  imperfect,  angry  Jehovah  of  the  Jews. 
Some  writers  reduce  his  principles  to  two;  but  he  did  not  iden- 
tify the  demiurge  with  the  hyle.  He  did  not  go  into  any  fur- 
ther speculative  analysis  of  these  principles;  he  rejected  the 
pagan  emanation  theory,  the  secret  tradition,  and  the  allegorical 
interpretation  of  the  Gnostics;  in  his  system  he  has  no  Pleroma, 

1  Epiphanius  and  others  mention,  as  a  reason,  his  seduction  of  a  consecrated 
virgin ;  but  this  does  not  agree  well  with  his  asceticism,  and  Irenseus  and  Ter- 
tullian  bring  no  charge  of  youthful  incontinence  against  him. 

2  So  Tertullian ;  but  Irenasus  tells  a  similar  story  of  Cerdo.    Tertullian  also 
reports  that  Marcion  was  repeatedly  (send  et  iterum)  excommunicated. 

3  Adt\  Seer.  iii.  c.  3,  J  4:  'EmytvfaKu  rbv  irpvrfcoKOv  rov  Sarava, 


1 127.  MARCIOtf  AND  HIS  SCHOOL  485 

no  jEons,  no  Dynameis,  no  Syzygies,  no  suffering  Sophia ;  hf- 
excludes  gradual  development  and  growth;  everything  is  un- 
prepared, sudden  and  abrupt. 

His  system  was  more  critical  and  rationalistic  than  mystic 
and  philosophical.1  He  was  chiefly  zealous  for  the  consistent 
practical  enforcement  of  the  irreconcilable  dualism  which  he 
established  between  the  gospel  and  the  law,  Christianity  and 
Judaism,  goodness  and  righteousness.2  He  drew  out  this  con- 
trast at  large  in  a  special  work,  entitled  "Antitheses"  The 
God  of  the  Old  Testament  is  harsh,  severe  and  unmerciful  as 
his  law;  he  commands,  "Love  thy  neighbor,  but  hate  thine  ene- 
my," and  returns  "an  eye  for  an  eye,  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth;" 
but  the  God  of  the  New  Testament  commands,  "Love  thine 
enemy."  The  one  is  only  just,  the  other  is  good.  Marcion  re- 
jected all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  wrested  Christ's 
word  in  Matt.  5 :  17  into  the  very  opposite  declaration :  "  I  am 
come  not  to  fulfil  the  law  and  the  prophets,  but  to  destroy 
them."  In  his  view,  Christianity  has  no  connection  whatever 
with  the  past,  whether  of  the  Jewish  or  the  heathen  world,  but 
has  fallen  abruptly  and  magically,  as  it  were,  from  heaven.3 
Christ,  too,  was  not  born  at  all,  but  suddenly  descended  into  the 
city  of  Capernaum  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Tiberius, 
and  appeared  as  the  revealer  of  the  good  God,  who  sent  him. 

1  The  Armenian  bishop,  Esnig,  however,  brings  it  nearer  to  the  other  forms 
of  Gnosticism.  According  to  M™  Marcion  assumed  three  heavens;  in  the 
highest  dwelt  the  good  God,  far  away  from  the  world,  in  the  second  the  God  of 
the  Law,  in  the  lowest  his  angels ;  beneath,  on  the  earth,  lay  Hyle,  or  Matter, 
which  he  calls  also  the  power  (tfwa^c)  or  essence  (ovcria)  of  the  earth.  The 
Hyle  is  a  female  principle,  and  by  her  aid,  as  his  spouse,  the  Jewish  God  of 
the  Law  made  this  world,  after  which  he  retired  to  his  heaven,  and  each  ruled 
in  his  own  domain,  he  with  his  angels  in  heaven,  and  Hyle  with  her  sons  on 
earth.  Holier  (p.  378)  is  disposed  to  accept  this  account  as  trustworthy. 
Salmon  thinks  it  such  a  system  as  Marcion  may  have  learned  from  Cerdo,  bnt 
he  must  have  made  little  account  of  the  mystic  element,  else  it  would  be  men- 
tioned by  the  earlier  writers. 

1  '-Separatio  legis  et  euangelii  proprium  et  principale  opus  est  Marcionis" 
Tertullian,  Adv.  Marc-  1 19. 

8  *'  Subito  dkristus,  subifo  Joannes.  Sic  sunt  omnia  apud  Mardonemj  qws  suum 
it  plenum  habent  ordw&n  apud  creatorem"  Tert.  IV.  11. 


486  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

He  has  no  connection  with  the  Messiah,  announced  by  the 
Demiurge  in  the  Old  Testament;  though  he  called  himself  the 
Messiah  by  way  of  accommodation.  His  body  was  a  mere  ap- 
pearance, and  his  death  an  illusion,  though  they  had  a  real 
meaning.1  He  cast  the  Demiurge  into  Hades,  secured  the  re- 
demption of  the  soul  (not  of  the  body),  and  called  the  apostle 
Paul  to  preach  it.  The  other  apostles  are  Judaizing  corrupters 
of  pure  Christianity,  and  their  writings  are  to  be  rejected,  to- 
gether with  the  catholic  tradition.  In  over-straining  the  differ- 
ence between  Paul  and  the  other  apostles,  he  was  a  crude  fore- 
runner of  the  Tubingen  school  of  critics. 

ifarcion  formed  a  canon  of  his  own,  which  consisted  of  only 
eleven  books,  an  abridged  and  mutilated  Gospel  of  Luke,  and 
ten  of  Paul's  epistles.  He  put  Galatians  first  in  order,  and 
called  Ephesians  the  Epistle  to  the  Laodicseans.  He  rejected  the 
pastoral  epistles,  in  which  the  forerunners  of  Gnosticism  are 
condemned,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  Matthew,  Mark,  John, 
the  Acts,  the  Catholic  Epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse. 

Notwithstanding  his  violent  antinomianism,  Marcion  taught 
And  practiced  the  strictest  ascetic  self-discipline,  which  revolted 
not  only  from  all  pagan  festivities,  but  even  from  marriage, 
flesh,  and  wine.  (He  allowed  fish).  He  could  find  the  true  God 
in  nature  no  more  than  in  history.  He  admitted  married  per- 
sons to  baptism  only  on  a  vow  of  abstinence  from  all  sexual 
intercourse.2  He  had  a  very  gloomy,  pessimistic  view  of  the 
world  and  the  church,  and  addressed  a  disciple  as  "  his  partner 
in  tribulation,  and  fellow-sufferer  from  hatred." 

In  worship  he  excluded  wine  from  the  eucharist,  but  retained 
the  sacramental  bread,  water-baptism,  anointing  with  oil,  and 
the  mixture  of  milk  and  honey  given  to  the  newly  baptized.3 

i  Remn  (L'fylise  chrfc,  p.  358)  says  of  the  shadowy  narrative  of  Christ's  life 
which  Marcion  elaborated  on  the  basis  of  his  mutilated  Luke:  "Si  Jews  ne 
nous  avail  ete  connu  qne  par  des  textes  de  ce  genre,  on  auratt  pu  douter  s'il  avait 
rraiment  existf,  ou  s'tt  n>  &ait  pas  une  fiction  A  PBIOBI,  dtgagee  de  tout  lien  avec 
fa  realit^.  Dans  un  pareft  syst&me,  k  Christ  ne  naissait  pas  (la  wissance,  pow 
Mardon,  &i&it  une  souilbire},  ne  souffraiipaSj  ne  mourait  pas." 

*  Tertnllian,  I.  29;  IV.  Id  •  Tert.  L  14. 


1 128.  OPHITES,  SETHITES,  PERATJE,  AND  CAINITES.-  487 

Epiphanius  reports  that  he  permitted  females  to  baptize.  The 
Marciouites  practiced  sometimes  vicarious  baptism  for  the  dead.1 
Their  baptism  was  not  recognized  by  the  church. 

The  Marcionite  sect  spread  in  Italy,  Egypt,  North  Africa, 
Cyprus,  and  Syria;  but  it  split  into  many  branches.  Its  wide 
diffusion  is  proved  by  the  number  of  antagonists  in  the  different 
countries. 

The  most  noteworthy  Marcionites  are  PKEPO,  TJUCASTUS  (an 
Ajssyrian),  and  APELLES.  They  supplied  the  defects  of  the  mas- 
ter's system  by  other  Gnostic  speculations,  and  in  some  instances 
softened  down  its  antipathy  to  heathenism  and  Judaism.  Apel-* 
les  acknowledged  only  one  first  principle.  Arabrosius,  a  friend 
of  Origen,  was  a  Marcionite  before  his  conversion.  These  here- 
tics were  dangerous  to  the  church  because  of  their  severe  mo- 
rality and  the  number  of  their  martyrs.  They  abstained  from 
marriage,  flesh,  and  wine,  and  did  not  escape  from  persecution, 
like  some  other  Gnostics. 

Constantine  forbade  the  Marcionites  freedom  of  worship  pub* 
lie  and  private,  and  ordered  their  meeting-houses  to  be  handed 
over  to  the  Catholic  Church.2  The  Theodosian  code  mentions 
them  only  once.  But  they  existed -in  the  fifth  century  when 
Theodoret  boasted  to  have  converted  more  than  a  thousand  of 
these  heretics,  and  the  Trullan  Council  of  692  thought  it  worth 
while  to  make  provision  for  the  reconciliation  of  Marcionites. 
Remains  of  them  are  found  as  late  as  the  tenth  century.3  Some 
of  their  principles  revived  among  the  Paulicians,  who  took 
refuge  in  Bulgaria,  and  the  Cathari  in  the  West. 

§  128.  The  Ophites.     The  Sethites.     The  Peratce.     The  Cainites. 

L  HIPPOLYTUS  :  PhilosopL  Bk.  V.  1-23.  He  begins  his  account  of 
the  Heresies  with  the  Naasseni,  or  Ophites,  and  Peratse  (the  first 
four  hooks  heing  devoted  to  the  systems  of  heathen  philosophy). 

1  So  they  understood,  1  Cor.  15 :  29.  »  Euseh.  ViL  Const.  HI.  64. 

3  Fingers  Mani,  p.  160,  167  (quoted  hy  Salmon).  Prof.  Jacobi  (in  Herzog, 
V.  236)  quotes  a  letter  of  Hasenkamp  to  Lavater  of  the  year  1774,  and  later 
authorities,  to  prove  the  lingering  existence  of  similar  opinions  in  Bosnia  and 
Herzegowina. 


488  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

IBEXJETS:'  Ato.  Seer.  I.  30  (ed.  Stieren,  I.  266  sqq.).    EPIPHAIT, 

Hcer.  37  (in  Oehlers  ed.  I.  495  sqq.). 

IL  MOSHEIM  :  Geschichte  der  Schlangenbruder.    Helmstadt,  1746,  '48. 
E.    \V.    MOLLEB:     Geschichte    der   £osmologie.     Halle,   1860.     Dit 

opkitische  Gnosis,  p.  190  sqq. 
BAXMASN:   Die  Pkilosopkumena  und  die  Peraten,  in  Niedner's  "Zeit- 

schrift  fur  die  hist  Theol."  for  1860. 
LIPSIUS  :  Utber  das  ophitische  System.    In  "  Zeitschriffc  fur  wissenschaftL 

Theologie"  for  1863  and  '64. 
JACOBI  in  Herzog,  new  ed.,  vol.  V.  240  sq. 
GEOEGE  SALMON:   "Cainites,"  in  Smith  and  "Wace,  voL  I.  380-82. 

Articles  "  Ophites  and  "Peratae"  will  probably  appear  in  vol.  IV., 

not  vet  published. 

The  origin  of  the  OPHITES/  or,  in  Hebrew,  NAASENES/  i.  e. 
Serpent-Brethren,  or  Serpent~"Worshippers,  is  unknown,  and  is 
placed  by  Mosheim  and  others  before  the  time  of  Christ.  In 
any  case,  their  system  is  of  purely  heathen  stamp.-  Lipsius  has 
shown  their  connection  with  the  Syro-Chaldaic  mythology. 
The  sect  still  existed  as  late  as  the  sixth  century;  for  in  530 
Justinian  passed  laws  against  it. 

The  accounts  of  their  worship  of  the  serpent  rest,  indeed,  on 
uncertain  data;  but  their  name  itself  comes  from  their  ascribing 
special  import  to  the  serpent  as  the  type  of  gnosis,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  history  of  the  fall  (Gen.  3 : 1),  the  magic  rod  of  Mo- 
ses (Ex.  4 :  2,  3),  and  the  healing  power  of  the  brazen  serpent 
in  the  wilderness  (Xum.  21 :  9;  comp.  John  3:  14).  They  made 
use  of  the  serpent  on  amulets. 

That  mysterious,  awe-inspiring  reptile,  which  looks  like  the 
embodiment  of  a  thunderbolt,  or  like  a  fallen  angel  tortuously 
creeping  in  the  dust,  represents  in  the  Bible  the  evil  spirit,  and 
its  motto,  Eritis  sicut  Deus,  is  the  first  lie  of  the  father  of  lies, 
which  caused  the  ruin  of  man;  but  in  the  false  religions  it  is 
the  symbol  of  divine  wisdom  and  an  object  of  adoration ;  and 
the  Eritis  sieus  dii  appears  as  a  great  truth,  which  opened  the 
path  of  progress.  The  serpent,  far  from  being  the  seducer  of 
the  race,  was  its  fiist  schoolmaster  and  civilizer  by  teaching  if 

.  «erpent,  Serpentmi.  *  Prom  tf HJ. 


2 128.  OPHITES,  SETHITES,  PEEAT^  AND  CAINITES.    489 

the  difference  between  good  and  evil.  So  the  Ophites  regarded 
the  fall  of  Adam  as  the  transition  from  the  state  of  unconscious 
bondage  to  the  state  of  conscious  judgment  and  freedom ;  there- 
fore the  necessary  entrance  to  the  good.,  and  a  noble  advance  of 
the  human  spirit.  They  identified  the  serpent  with  the  Logos, 
or  the  mediator  between  the  Father  and  the  Matter,  bringing 
down  the  powers  of  the  upper  world  to  the  lower  world,  and 
leading  the  return  from  the  lower  to  the  higher.  The  serpent 
represents  the  whole  winding  process  of  development  and  sal- 
vation.1 The  Manichseans  also  regarded  the  serpent  as  the  direct 
image  of  Christ.2 

With  this  view  is  connected  their  violent  opposition  to  the 
Old  Testament.  Jaldabaoth,3  as  they  termed  the  God  of  the 
Jews  and  the  Creator  of  the  world,  they  represented  as  a  mali- 
cious, misanthropic  being.  In  other  respects,  their  doctrine 
strongly  resembles  the  Valentinian  system, '  except  that  it  is 
much  more  pantheistic,  unchristian,  and  immoral,  and  far  less 
developed. 

The  Ophites  again  branch  out  in  several  sects,  especially 
three. 

The  SETHITES  considered  the  third  son  of  Adam  the  first 
pneumatic  man  and  the  forerunner  of  Christ.  They  maintained 
three  principles,  darkness  below,  light  above,  and  spirit  between. 

The  PEEAT^I  or  PERATics4  (Transcendentalists)  are  described 
by  Hippolytus  as  allegorizing  astrologers  and  as  mystic  trithe- 
ists,  who  taught  three  Gods,  three  Logoi,  three  Minds,  three 
Men.  Christ  had  a  three-fold  nature,  a  three-fold  body,  and 

1  As  Baur  (K.  Gesch.  I.  195)  expresses  it :  "  Die  Schlange  ist  mil  Emern  Wort 
d&r  diirch  die  Gegensatze  dialectisch  sich  hindurchwind&nde  WdteTUwicklungspro- 
cess  rdbsk" 

3  Augustin,  De  H&r.  c.  17  and  46. 

3  JurD  *nV^  product  of  chaos. 

*  From  irepau,  to  pass  across,  to  go  beyond  (the  boundary  of  the  material 
world).  We  know  their  system  from  the  confused  account  of  Hippolytus, 
Philos.  1.  v.  7  sqq.  He  say?,  that  their  blasphemy  against  Christ  has  for  many 
years  escaped  notice.  Irenseus,  Tertullian,  and  Epiphanius  are  silent  about 
the  Peratffl.  Clement  of  Alex,  mentions  them. 


490  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

a  three-fold  power.  He  descended  from  above,  that  all  fellings 
triply  divided  might  be  saved.1 

The  CAIXITKS  boasted  of  the  descent  from  Cain  the  fracricide, 
and  made  him  their  leader2.  They  regarded  the  God  of  the 
Jews  and  Creator  of  the  world  as  a  positively  evil  being,  whom 
to  resist  is  virtue.  Hence  they  turned  the  history  of  salvation 
upside  down,  and  honored  all  the  infamous  characters  of  the 
Old  and  Xew  Testaments  from  Cain  to  Judas  as  spiritual  men 
and  martyrs  to  truth.  Judas  Iscariot  alone  among  the  apostles 
had  the  secret  of  true  knowledge,  and  betrayed  the  psychic 
Messiah  with  good  intent  to  destroy  the  empire  of  the  evil  God 
of  the  Jews.  Origen  speaks  of  a  branch  of  the  Ophites,  who 
were  as  great  enemies  of  Jesus  as  the  heathen  Celsus,  and  who 
admitted  none  into  their  society  who  had  not  first  cursed  his 
name.  Eut  the  majority  seem  to  have  acknowledged  the  good- 
ness of  Jesus  and  the  benefit  of  his  crucifixion  brought  about  by 
the  far-sighted  wisdom  of  Judas.  A*  book  entitled  "the  Gospel 
of  Judas"  was  circulated  among  them. 

Xo  wonder  that  such  blasphemous  travesty  of  the  Bible  his- 
tory, and  such  predilection  for  the  serpent  and  his  seed  was  con- 
nected with  the  most  unbridled  antinomianism,  which  changed 

1  The  following  specimen  of  Peratic  transcendental  nonsense  is  reported  by 
Hippolytus  (v.  12):  "According  to  them,  the  universe  is  the  Father,  Son, 
[and]  Matter ;  [but]  each  of  these  three  has  endless  capacities  in  itself.  In- 
termediate, then,  between  the  Matter  and  the  Father  sits  the  Son,  the  Word, 
the  Serpent,  always  being  in  motion  towards  the  unmoved  Father,  and  [to- 
ward?] matter  itself  in  motion.  And  at  one  time  he  is  turned  towards  the 
Father,  and  receives  the  powers  into  his  own  person ;  but  at  another  time  takes 
vp  these  powers,  and  is  turned  towards  Matter.  And  Matter,  [though]  devoid 
?t  attribute,  and  being  unfashioned,  moulds  [into  itself]  forms  from  the  Son 
which  ihe  Son  moulded  from  the  Father.  But  the  Son  derives  shape  from  the 
Fath::  after  a  mode  ineffable,  and  unspeakable,  and  unchangeable.  ...  No 
one  can  be  saved  or  return  [into  heaven]  without  the  Son,  and  the  Son  is  the 
Serpent.  For  as  he  brought  down  from  above  the  paternal  marks,  so  again  he 
carries  up  from  thence  those  marks,  roused  from  'a  dormant  condition,  and  ren- 
dered paternal  characteristics,  substantial  ones  from  the  unsubstantial  Being, 
transferring  them  hither  from  thence." 

»K*Z«w  CHippol.  Vni.  20),  KaiavLural  (Clem.  Alex.  Strom.  VH.   17X 
Ka«r,o/  /Epiph.  Hxr.  3Sj, 


2  129.  SATUBNiNUS  (SATOBNILOSJ.  491 

vice  into  virtue.  They  thought  it  a  necessary  part  of  "perfect 
knowledge"  to  have  a  complete  experience  of  all  sins,  including 
even  unuainable  vices. 

Some  have  identified  the  Ophites  with  the  false  teachers  de- 
nounced in  the  Epistle  of  Jude  as  filthy  dreamers,  who  "  defile 
the  flesh,  and  set  at  naught  dominion,  and  rail  at  dignities/' 
who  "went  in  the  way  of  Cain,  and  ran  riotously  in  the  error  of 
Balaam  for  hire,  and  "perished  in  the  gainsaying  of  Korah,"  as 
"  wandering  stars,  for  whom  the  blackness  of  darkness  has  been 
reserved  forever."  The  resemblance  is  certainly  very  striking, 
and  those  heretics  may  have  been  the  forerunners  of  the  Ophites 
of  the  second  century. 

§  129.  Saturninus  (Satormlos).  •» 

T.  I.  24,  3  1,  2;  ch.  28.  Hippol.  VII.  3,  28  (depending  on  Ireu.). 
TERT.  Prcesc.  Har.  46.  HEGESiPPcrs  in  Euseb.  TV.  22,  29.  EPIPH. 
Hoer.  XXIII.  THEOD.  Fab.  Ear.  I.  3.  Comp.  MOLLER,  I  c.,  p. 
367-373. 


Contemporary  with  Basilides  under  Hadrian, 
or  SATOENILOS,1  in  Antioch.  He  was,  like  him,  a  pupil  of 
Menander.  His  system  is  distinguished  for  its  bold  dualism 
between  God  and  Satan,  the  two  antipodes  of  the  universe,  and 
for  its  ascetic  severity.2  God  is  the  unfathomable  abyss,  abso- 
lutely unknown  (#soc  dpvoxrroc).  From  him  emanates  by  de- 
grees the  spirit-world  of  light,  with  angels,  archangels,  powers, 
and  dominions.  On  the  lowest  degree  are  the  seven  planetary 
spirits  (#775^0*  xofffjLoxpdTOpez)  with  the  Demiurge  or  God  of 
the  Jews  at  the  head.  Satan,  as  the  ruler  of  the  hyle,  is  eter- 
nally opposed  to  the  realm  of  light.  The  seven  planetary 
spirits  invade  the  realm  of  Satan,  and  form  out  of  a  part  of  the 
hyle  the  material  world  with  man,  who  is  filled  by  the  highest 

1  This  second  form,  says  Kenan  (Utgl  chret  ,  p.  177),  is  common  in  inscrip- 
tions. 

*  So  Mosheim,  Neander,  Baur,  Gieseler,  Eenan.  But  Moller  (p.  371)  dis- 
putes the  dualism  of  Saturninns,  and  maintains  that  Satan  and  the  God  of  the 
Jews  are  alike  subordinate,  though  antagonistic  beings.  But  so  is  Ahriman  in 
the  Paisee  dualism,  and  the  Demiurge  in  all  the  Gnostic  systems. 


492  SECOKD  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 


God  with  a  spark  of  light  (<nwftf/>).  Satan  creates  in  opposi- 
tion a  hylic  race  of  men,  and  incessantly  pursues  the  spiritual 
race  with  his  demons  and  false  prophets.  The  Jewish  God, 
with  his  prophets,  is  unable  to  overcome  him.  Finally  the 
good  God  'sends  the  aon  Tow-s  in  an  unreal  body,  as  Soter  on 
eaith,  who  teaches  the  spiritual  men  by  gnosis  and  strict  ab- 
stinence from  marriage  and  carnal  food  to  emancipate  them- 
selves from  the  vexations  of  Satan,  and  also  from  the  dominion 
of  the  Jewish  God  and  his  star-spirits,  and  to  rise  to  the  realm 
of  light. 

§  130.  Carpocrates. 

IKES.  I.  25  (24).    HIPPOL.  YII.  32  (D.  &  Schn.  p.  398  sqq.).    CLEM, 
ALEX.    Strom.  HI.  oil.    EPIPHA^TTTS,  H<zr.  XXV. 

CABPOCRATES  also  lived  under  Hadrian,  probably  at  Alex- 
andria, and  founded  a  Gnostic  sect,  (Sailed  by  his  own  name, 
which  put  Christ  on  a  level  with  heathen  philosophers,  prided 
itself  on  its  elevation  above  all  the  popular  religions,  and  sank 
into  unbridled  immorality.  The  world  is  created  by  angels 
greatly  inferior  to  the  unbegotten  Father.  Jesus  was  the  son  of 
Joseph,  and  just  like  other  men,  except  that  his  soul  was  stead- 
fast and  pure,  and  that  he  perfectly  remembered  those  things 
which  he  had  witnessed  within  the  sphere  of  the  uubegotten 
God.  For  this  reason  a  power  descended  upon  him  from  the 
Father,  that  by  means  of  it  he  might  escape  from  the  creators 
of  the  world.  After  passing  through  them  all,  and  remaining 
in  all  points  free,  he  ascended  again  to  the  Father.  We  may 
rise  to  an  equality  with  Jesus  by  despising  in  like  manner  the 
creators  of  the  world. 

The  Carpocratians,  say  Trenseus  and  Hippolytus,  practiced 
also  magical  arts,  incantations,  and  love-potions,  and  had  re- 
course to  familiar  spirits,  dream-sending  demons,  and  other 
abominations,  declaring  that  they  possess  power  to  rule  over  the 
princes  and  framers  of  this  world.  But  they  led  a  licentious 
life,  and  abused  the  name  of  Christ  as  a  means  of  hiding  their 
wickedness,  They  were  the  first  known  sect  that  used  pictures 


2  131.  TATIAN  AND  THE  ENCEATITES.  493 

of  Christ,  and  they  derived  them  from  a  pretended  original  of 
Pontius  Pilate.1 

EPIPHAITES,  a  son  of  Carpocrates,  who  died  at  the  age  of 
seventeen,  was  the  founder  of  "  monadic  "  Gnosticism,  which 
in  opposition  to  dualism  seems  to  have  denied  the  independent 
existence  of  evil,  and  resolved  it  into  a  fiction  of  human  laws. 
He  wrote  a  book  on  "  Justice,"  and  defined  it  to  be  equality.  He 
taught  that  God  gave  his  benefits  to  all  men  alike  and  in  com- 
mon, and  thence  derived  the  community  of  goods,  and  even  of 
women.  He  was  worshipped  by  his  adherents  after  his  death 
as  a  god,  at  Same  in  Cephalonia,  by  sacrifices,  libations,  ban- 
quets, and  singing  of  hymns.  Here  we  have  the  worship  of 
genius  in  league  with  the  emancipation  of  the  flesh,  which  has 
been  revived  in  modern  times.  But  it  is  not  impossible  that 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  relates  this  fact,  may  have  made  a 
similar  mistake  as  Justin  Martyr  in  the  case  of  Simon  Magus, 
and  confounded  a  local  heathen  festival  of  the  moon  known 
as  ra  'Rnepdveta  or  6  'Enrrpav^c  with  a  festival  in  honor  of 
Epiphanes.3 

§  131.  Tatian  and  the  Eneratites. 

L  TATIAN:  A<?J>O£  Trpbg  'W/^a^  (Oratio  adversus  Grcecos),  ed.  S.  Worth, 
Oxon.  1700  (an  excellent  ed.);  in  Otto's  Corpus  ApoL,  yol.  VI,  Jens& 
1851  j  and  in  Migne's  Patrologia  Graca,  Tom.  VI.  foL  803-888. 
Eng.  transl.  by  Pratten  &  JDods  in  the  "  Ante-Nicene  Library," 
vol.  III.  (Edinb.  1867).  A  Commentary  of  St.  Ephrsem  on  Ta- 
tian's  Diatessaron  (To  &a  Ttaadpuv),  was  found  in  an  Armenian 
translation  in  the  Armenian  Convent  at  Venice,  translated  into 
Latin  in  1841  by  Aucher,  and  edited  by  Mosinger  (Prof,  of  Biblical 
Learning  in  Salzburg)  under  the  title  "  Evangelii  Cbncordantis  Ex~ 
pozitio  facta  a  Sancto  Ephrcemo  Doctore  Syro."  Venet.  1876.  The 
Diatessaron  itself  was  found  in  an  Arabic  translation  in  1886,  and 
published  by  P.  AUG.  CIASCA  :  Tatiani  Evangeliorum  Harmonics 
Arabice,  Eom.  1888.  A  new  and  more  critical  edition  of  the  Oratio 
ad  Gr.,  by  ED.  SCHWARTZ,  Lips.,  1888  (105  pp). 

1  Hippol.  Philos.  VII.  32  :   eiK6va?  KaTaffKevdfrvm  rov  'Kpiarov 


2  This  was  the  conjecture  of  Mosheim,  which  has  been  worked  out  and 
modified  by  Volkmar  in  a  monthly  periodical  of  the  WissenscJtafll.  Verein  at 
Zurich,  1S56.  He  maintains  that  the  deity  worshipped  at  Same  was  the  new 
tppearing  moon,  6  'I 


494  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

ORTHODOX  Notices  of  Tatian  :  IKES.  I.  28,  1  ;  IIL  23,  8  sqq,  (in  Stieren, 
L23«J,£>1  sq.«.  HIPPOL.:  VIIL  16  (very  brief  ).  CLEM.  ALEX., 
Stfoiu.  1.  Hi.  EUfrEB.  :  #.  -£  IV.  16,  28,  29  ;  VI.  13.  EPIPHASTIUS, 
Hcer.  40  (Tatian;  and  47  lEncratites).  The  recently  discovered 
work  of  MACAUICS  MAGXES  -Paris  1876),  written  about  400,  con- 
tains s'mit:  information  about  the  Encratites  which  agrees  with 


II.  H.  A.  DANIEL:  Tatian  der  Apologet.    Halle  1837. 
jA3insD.f:;AL!»-«.rX:   A  Critical  Hidory  of  Christian  Lifer.,  etc.    Loud, 

vnl  II  I  '**.   ',l.Mit»;,  which  is  devoted  to  Tatian,  etc.,  p.  3-62. 
THEOK  XAIIX:  TaUnt*  Diatessaron.    Erlangen,  1881.    (The  first  part 

uf  I'tn-f'ntt.iyi'it  ;«>•  (raw/*.  cfes  neutestamentl.  Kanons}. 
AD.   ]lAit3Lu;c:     Lilian'*  Dintcssanm,  in  Brieger's    "  Zeitschrifib    fur 

Ki:vi.e:'.£Cai'h.";  1881,  p.  471-50.")  ;  Dit  Oratio  des  Tatian  nebst  einer 

E;u»'i*ttn*j  tiler  die  Zrit  dieses  Apologeten,  in  "  Texte  und  Untersuck- 

imflrnzur  Gwh.  for  altckristl  Litemtur"  vol.  L  No.  2,  p.  196-231. 

Leipz.,  18S3,  and  his  art,  uTatian,"  in  "EncycL  Brit."  xxiii.  (1888). 
FR.  XAV.  FrxK  (EL  C.):    2br  CJironokgie  Tatian'  s,  in  the  Tubing. 

'-TheoL  Qnartalschrift,"  1883,  p.  219-234 

TATIAS,  a  rhetorician  of  Syria;  was  converted  to  Catholic 

Christianity  by  Justin  Mariyr  in  Eome,  but  afterwards  strayed 

into  Gnosticism,  and  died  A.  D.  172.1    He  resembles  Marcion  in 

his  anti-Jewish  turn  and  dismal  austerity.    Falsely  interpreting 

1  Cor.  7  :  5,  he  declared  marriage  to  be  a  kind  of  licentiousness 

and  a  service  of  the  devil.    Irenaeus  says,  that  Tatian,  after  the 

martyrdom  of  Justin,  apostatised  from  the  church,  and  elated 

with  the  conceit  of  a  teacher,  and  vainly  puffed  up  as  if  he  sur- 

pa^ed  all  others,  invented  certain  invisible  aeons  similar  to 

Those  of  Valentine,  and  asserted  with  Marcion  and  Saturninos 

that  marriage  was  only  corruption  and  fornication.    But  his 

extant  apologetic  treatise  against  the  Gentiles,  and  his  Gospel- 

Harmony  (recently  recovered),  which  were  written  between  153 

and  1  70,  show  no  clear  traces  of  Gnosticism,  unless  it  be  the 

omission  of  the  genealogies  of  Jesus  in  the  "Diatessaron."    He 

was  nnt  so  much  anti-catholic  as  hyper-catholic,  and  hyper- 

ascetic.    We  shall  return  to  him  again  in  the  last  chapter. 

1  The  chronology  is  not  certain.  Zahn  and  BTarnack  put  his  birth  at  A.  D, 
110,  his  conversion  at  loQ,  his  death  at  172.  Funk  puts  the  birth  and  COD 
version  ahout  10  vears  later. 


?  132.  JUSTIN  THE  GNOSTIC.  495 

His  follow  £f  s,  who  kept  the  system  alive  till  the  fifth  cen- 
ury,  were  called,  from  their  ascetic  life,  E;N'ORATITES;  or  AB- 
STAINEKS,  and  from  their  use  of  water  for  wine  in  the  Lord's 
Supper,  HYDROPA.RASTAT.E  or  AQUARIANS.*  They  abstained 
from  flesh,  wine,  and  marriage,  not  temporarily  (as  the  ancient 
catholic  ascetics)  for  purposes  of  devotion,  nor  (as  many  modern 
total  abstainers  from  intoxicating  drink)  for  the  sake  of  ex- 
pediency or  setting  a  good  example,  but  permanently  and  from 
principle  on  account  of  the  supposed  intrinsic  impurity  of  the 
things  renounced.  The  title  "  Encratites,"  however,  was  ap- 
plied indiscriminately  to  all  ascetic  sects  of  the  Gnostics,  espe- 
cially the  followers  of  Saturninus,  Mansion,  and  Severus 
(Severians,  of  uncertain  origin).  The  Manichseans  also  sheltered 
themselves  under  this  name.  Clement  of  Alexandria  refers  to 
the  Indian  ascetics  as  the  forerunners  of  the  Encratites. 

The  practice  of  using  mere  water  for  wine  in  the  eucharist 
was  condemned  by  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Cyprian,  and 
Chrysostom,  and  forbidden  by  Theodosius  in  an  edict  of  382. 
A  certain  class  of  modern  abstinence  men  in  America,  in  their 
abhorrence  of  all  intoxicating  drinks,  have  resorted  to  the  same 
heretical  practice,  and  substituted  water  or  milk  for  the  express 
ordinance  of  our  Lord. 

§  132.  Justin  the  Gnostic 
HIPPOLYTUS:  PUlos.  V.  23-27  (p.  214r-233),  and  X.  15  (p.  516-519). 

Hippolytus  makes  us  acquainted  with  a  Gnostic  by  the  name 
of  JUSTIN,  of  uncertain  date  and  origin.2  He  propagated  his 
doctrine  secretly,  and  bound  his  disciples  to  silence  by  solemn 
oaths.  He  wrote  a  number  of  books,  one  called  Barucfa,  from 
which  Hippolytus  gives  an  abstract.  His  gnosis  is  mostly  based 
upon  a  mystical  interpretation  of  Genesis,  and  has  a  somewhat 


J  'JZyKparlTcu,  als>  'Ey/tpare^,  '"EyKparyrat,  C&ntinentes,  the  abstemious;  or, 
<ff6poTraoftardrat,  Aqwrii. 

*  lipsius  regards  him  as  one  of  the  earliest,  Salmon  (in  "  Smith  &  Wace," 
III.  587),  with  greater  probability,  as  one  of  the  latest  Gnostics.  The  silence 
of  Irenteus  favors  the  later  date. 


496  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Judaizing  oast.  Hippolvtus,  indeed,  classes  him  with  the  Naas- 
senes,  but  Justin  took  an  opposite  view  of  the  serpent  as  the  cause 
of  all  ml  in  history.  Me  made  use  also  of  the  Greek  mythology, 
especially  the  tradition  of  the  twelve  labors  of  Hercules.  He 
assumes  three  original  principles,  two  male  and  one  female. 
The  first  is  the  Good  Being;  the  second  Elohim,  the  Father  of 
the  creation;  the  third  is  called  Eden  and  Israel,  and  has  a 
double  form,  a  woman  above  the  middle  and  a  snake  below. 
Elohim  falls  in  love  with  Eden,  and  from  their  intercourse 
springs  the  spirit-world  of  twenty  angels,  ten  paternal  and 
ten  maternal,  and  these  people  the  world*  The  chief  of  the 
two  series  of  angels  are  Baruch,  who  is  the  author  of  all  good, 
and  is  represented  by  the  tree  of  life  in  Paradise,  and  Naas,  the 
serpent,  who  is  the  author  of  all  evil,  and  is  represented  by  the 
tres  of  knowledge.  The  four  rivers  are  symbols  of  the  four 
divisions  of  angels.  The  Naas  committed  adultery  with  Eve, 
and  a  worse  crime  with  Adam;  he  adulterated  the  laws  of 
if  oses  and  the  oracles  of  the  prophets ;  he  nailed  Jesus  to  the 
cross.  But  by  this  crucifixion  Jesus  was  emancipated  from  his 
material  body,  rose  to  the  good  God  to  whom  he 'committed  his 
spirit  in  death,  and  thus  he  came  to  be  the  deliverer. 

§  133.  Hermcgenea. 

TERTULLIAN  :  Adr,  Hermogenem.  Written  about  A.  D.  206.  One  of  Ma 
two  tracts  against  H.  is  lost.  HIPPOLTTTTS  :  Philos.  VIII.  17  (p.  432). 
Comp.  NEASTDER  :  Antignosticus,  p.  448 ;  KAYE  :  Wrfvlfian,  p.  532; 
HAUCK:  Tertullian^  p.  M) ;  SALMOBTD:  in  "Smith  &Wace,"  HI. 
1-8. 

HERMOGENES  was  a  painter  in  Carthage  at  the  end  of  the 
second  and  beginning  of  the  third  century.  Tertullian  de- 
scribes him  as  a  turbulent,  loquacious,  and  impudent  man,  who 
'e  married  more  women  than  he  painted."  *  He  is  but  remotely 
connected  with  Gnosticism  by  his  Platonic  dualism  and  denial 
of  the  creation  out  of  nothing.  He  derived  the  world,  includ- 
ing t!u»  soul  of  man,  from  the  formless,  eternal  matter,8  and 

1  This  was  enough  to  condemn  him  in  the  eyes  of  a  Montanist. 
*  HippoL  Le. :  tyy  r 


§  134.  OTHEB  GNOSTIC  SECTS.  497 

explained  the  ugly  in  the  natural  world,  as  well  as  the  evil  in 
the  spiritual,  by  the  resistance  of  matter  to  the  formative  in- 
fluence of  God.  In  this  way  only  he  thought  he  could  account 
for  the  origin  of  evil.  For  if  God  had  made  the  world  out  of 
nothing,  it  must  be  all  good.  He  taught  that  Christ  on  his 
ascension  left  his  body  in  the  sun,  and  then  ascended  to  the 
Father.1  But  otherwise  he  was  orthodox  and  did  not  wish  to 
separate  from  the  church. 

§  134.  Other  Gnostic  Sects. 

The  ancient  fathers,  especially  Hippolytus  and  Epiphanius, 
mention  several  other  Gnostic  sects  under  various  designations. 

1.  The  DOCET^I  or  DOCETJSTS  taught  that  the  body  of  Christ 
was  not  real  flesh  and  blood,  but  merely  a  deceptive,  transient 
phantom,  and  consequently  that  he  did  not  really  suffer  and  die 
and  rise  again.    Hippolytus  gives  an  account  of  the  system  of 
this  sect.     But  the  name  applied  as  well  to  most  Gnostics, 
especially  to  Basilides,  Saturninus,  Valentinus,  Marcion,  and 
the  Manichseans.    Docetism  was  a  characteristic  feature  of  the 
first  antichristian  errorists  whom  St.  John  had  in  view  (1  John 
4:  2;  2  John  7).a 

2.  The  name  ANTITACT^:  or  ANTITACTES,  denotes  the  licen- 
tious antinomian  Gnostics,  rather  than  the  followers  of  any 
single  master,  to  whom  the  term  can  be  traced.3 

3.  The  PRODIGIAM,  so  named  from  their  supposed  founder, 
PKODICUS,  considered  themselves  the  royal  family,4  and,  in 
crazy  self-conceit,  thought  themselves  above  the  law,  the  sabbath, 
and  every  form  of  worship,  even  above  prayer  itself,  which  was 
becoming  only  to  the  ignorant  mass.     They  resembled  the 
Nicolaitans    and  Antitactse,  and  were  also  called  Adamites, 

1  This  foolish  notion  he  proved  from  Ps.  19 :  "  He  hatb  placed  his  tabernacle 
In  the  sun.* 

*  For  a  fuller  account  see  two  good  articles  of  Dr.  Salmon  on  Doeete  and 
Docetism,  m  "Smith  &  Wace"  I  865-870. 

*  Bee  Clement  of  AlffiL,  8*wu  HL  526.    From  fonr&raadot,  to  defy,  rebel, 
against,  the  law. 

«  EvyewZc. 

Vol.  IT.— 32 


498  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  £.  100-311. 

Barbelite,  Borboriani,  Coddiani,  Phibionitee,  and  by  other  unin- 
telligible names.1 

Almost  every  form  of  immorality  and  lawlessness  seems  to 
have  been  practiced  under  the  sanction  of  religion  by  the  baser 
schools  of  Gnosticism,  and  the  worst  errors  and  organized  vices 
of  modern  times  were  anticipated  by  them.  Hence  we  need 
not  be  surprised  at  the  uncompromising  opposition  of  the  an- 
cient fathers  to  this  radical  corruption  and  perversion  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

§  135.  Hani  and  the  Mwichceans. 

SOTJECES. 

I.  Oriental  Sources :  The  most  important,  though  of  comparatively  late 
date,  (a)  Mohammedan  (Arabic) :  Kitab  al  fihrist.  A  history 
of  Arabic  literature  to  987,  by  an  Arab  of  Bagdad,  usually  called 
IBS  ABI  JAKUB  AX-!NAD£M;  brought  to  light  by  Flugel,  and 
published  after  his  death  by  Kodiger  and  Muller,  in  2  vols. 
Leipz.  1871-72.  Book  IX.  section  first,  treats  of  Manichajism. 
Flugel's  transl.  see  below.  Kessler  calls  Fihrist  a  "  Fundstatte 
allerersten  Ranges."  Next  to  it  comes  the  relation  of  the  Mohame- 
dan  philosopher  AL-SHAHRASTAsl  (d.  1153),  in  his  History  of  Re- 
ligious Parties  and  Philosophical  Sects,  ed.  Cureton,  Lond.  1842, 
2  vols.  (1. 188-192) ;  German  translation  by  Haarbrucker.  Halle, 
1851.  On  other  Mohammedan  sources  see  Kessler  in  Herzog2,  IX. 
225  sq.  (b)  Persian  sources,  relating  to  the  life  of  Mani ;  the 
Shdhnameh  (the  Kings'  Book)  of  FlBDATJSi,  ed.  by  Jul.  Mohl. 
Paris,  1866  (V.  472-475).  See  Kessler,  ibid.  225.  (c)  Christian 
Sources:  In  Arabic,  the  Alexandrian  Patriarch  ErjTYCHnis  (d.  916), 
Annales,  ed.  Pococke.  Oxon.  1628;  BABHEBRJBTJS  (d.  1286),  in  his 
Historic  Dynastiarum,  ed.  Pococke.  In  Syriac :  EPHB^SM  SYBUS  (d, 
893),  in  various  writings.  ESNKJ  or  ESOTK,  an  Armenian  bishop  of 
the  5th  century,  who  wrote  against  Marcion  and  Mani  (German 
translation  from  the  Armenian  by  0.  Fr.  Neumann  in  Hlgen's 
"Zeitschrift  fur  die  hist  Theol."  1834,  p.  77-78). 

1L  Greek  Sources:  EUSEBIUS  (H.  &  VIL  31,  a  brief  account).  EPI- 
PHAOTJS  (Seer.  66).  CYEIL  OF  JEEUSAL.  (Catech.  VL20  sqq.). 
Tirus  OF  BOSTBA  (ffpSc  Mav:^fftovc,  ed.  P.  de  Lagarde,  1859). 
PHOTIXTS:  Adv.  Manichceos  (Cod.  179  Biblwth.).  JOHN  OP  DAMAS- 
CUS :  De  H&res.  and  Dial 

1  See  Clem.  Alex.,  Strom.  I.  f.  304;  Eft.  f.  438;  VH.  f.  722:  and  Epiphsw- 
Beer.  26  (Oehler's  ed.  1. 169  sqq.). 


g  135.  MAtfl  AND  THE  MANICHLEANS.  499 

III.  Latin  Sources :  ARCHELAUS  (Bishop  of  Cascar  in  Mesopotamia,  d. 
about  278) :  Acta  Disputationis  cum  Manete  h&resiarcha  ;  first  writ- 
ten in  Syriac,  and  so  far  belonging  to  the  Oriental  Christian  sources 
(comp.  Jerome,  De  vir.  ill  72),  but  extant  only  in  a  Latin  transla* 
tion,  which  seems  to  have  been  made  from  the  Greek,  edited  by 
Zacagni  (Bom.  1698)  and  Routh  (in  Reliquice  Sacra,  vol.  V.  3-206), 
Engl.  transl.  in  Clark's  "  Ante-Nicene  Library  "  (vol.  XX.  272-419). 
These  Acts  purport  to  contain  the  report  of  a  disputation  between 
Archelaus  and  Mani  before  a  large  assembly,  which  was  in  full 
sympathy  with  the  orthodox  bishop,  but  (as  Beausobre  first  proved) 
they  are  in  form  a  fiction  from  the  first  quarter  of  the  fourth  century 
(about  B20)  by  a  Syrian  ecclesiastic  (probably  of  Edessa),  yet  based 
upon  Manichsean  documents,  and  containing  much  information 
about  Manichaean  doctrines.  They  consist  of  various  pieces,  and 
were  the  chief  source  of  information  to  the  West.  Mani  is  repre- 
sented (ch.  12)  as  appearing  in  a  many-colored  cloak  and  trousers, 
with  a  sturdy  staff  of  ebony,  a  Babylonian  book  under  Ms  left  arm, 
and  with  a  mien  of  an  old  Persian  master.  In  his  defense  he  quotes 
freely  from  the  N.  T.  At  the  end  he  makes  his  escape  to  Persia 
(ch.  55).  'Comp.  H.  y.  Zrrrwrrz :  Die  Acta  Archelai  et  Manetis 
untersucht,  in  KahnisJ  "  Zeitschrift  ffir  hist.  Theol."  1873,  No.  IV. 
OBLASlNSp: :  Acta  Disput.  Arch.,  etc.  Lips.  1874  (inaugural  dis- 
sert.). AD.  HARNACK  :  Die  Acta  Arekelai  und  das  Diatessaron 
Tatians,  in  "Texte  und  Untersuch.  zur  Gesch.  der  altchristl. 
Lit."  vol.  I.  Heft.  3  (1883),  p.  137-153.  Harnack  tries  to  prove  that 
the  Gospel  quotations  of  Archelaus  are  taken  from  Tatian's 
Diatessaron.  Comp.  also  his  Dogmenffesckichte^  L  (1886),  681-694 

ST.  AUGUSTIN  (d.  430,  the  chief  Latin  authority  next  to  the  translation 
of  Archelaus) :  Contra  Epistolam  Maniclicei;  Contra  Faustum 
Manwh. ,  and  other  anti-Manichaean  writings,  in  the  8th  voL  of  the 
Benedictine  edition  of  his  Opera.  English  translation  in  Schaffs 
"  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Library,"  YoL  IV.,  N.  York,  1887. 

Comp.  also  the  Acts  of  Councils  against  the  Manich.  from  the  fourth 
century  onward,  in  Mansi  and  Hefele. 

MODERN  WORKS: 

*!SAAC  BE  BEA.TTSOBRE  (b.  1659  in  France,  pastor  of  the  French  church 
in  Berlin,  d.  1738) :  JERstoire  crit.  de  ManicMe  et  du  Mamch&sme. 
Amst.  1734  and  '39.  2  vols.  4°.  Part  of  the  first  vol.  is  historical,  the 
second  doctrinal.  Very  fall  and  scholarly.  He  intended  to  write  a 
third  volume  on  the  later  Manichaeans. 

*F»  CHR.  BATTB:  Das  Manichaische  Religion&system,  nach  den  Quefien 
neu,  untersucht  und  entwtikelt.  Tub.  1831  (500  pages).  A  compre- 
hensive philosophical  and  critical  view.  He  calls  the  Manich,  sys- 
tem a  '' gltihend prachtiges  Natur-und  Wdtgedicht" 


500  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311- 

TBECHSEL:    Ueber  Kanon,  Zritik,  und  Exegese  d&r  Manichder.    Bern, 

1832. 

D.  CHWOLSON  :  J>ie  Ssabier  und  der  Ssabismus.     Petersb.  1856,  2  vols. 
*GusT.  FLtGEL  (d.  1870  j  :    Mani,  seine  Lehre  und  seine  Schriften.    Au* 

dem  Fihrist  des  AM  Jakub  an-Nadim  (987).     Leipz.  1862.    Text, 

translation,  and  Commentary,  440  pages. 

FB.  SPIEGEL  :  Eranmhe  AlterthumsJcunde,  vol.  IL  1873,  p.  185-232, 
ALEX.  GEYLEE:  Das  System  des  Manichaisimus  und  sein  Verh.  mm 

Buddhismus.    Jena,  1875. 
*K.  HESSLER:     Untersuchungen  zur  Genesis  des  manick.  Eel.  systems. 

Leipz.  1876.    By  the  same  :  Mdni  oder  BeitroLge  zur  Kenntniss  der  Re+ 

ligiommischung  im  Semitismus.    Leipz.  1882.    See  also  his  thorough 

art.     M'ini  und  die  Manichaer,  in  "Herzog,"  new  ed.,  vol.  IX. 

223-259  (abridged  in  Schaff's  "Bncycl."  IL  1396-1398). 
fi.  T.  STOKES  :  Manes,  and  Manichceans  in  "  Smith  and  Wace,"  III.  792- 

801. 
AD.  HABXACK:  Haniehceism,  in  the  9th  ed.  of  the  "Encycl.  Britannica,*1 

vol.  XV.  (1S83),  481-487. 
The  accounts  of  Mosheim,  Lardner,  Schrockh,  Walch,  Neahder,  Gieseler, 

"We  come  no^vr  to  the  latest,  the  best  organized,  the  most  con- 
sistent, tenacious  and  dangerous  form  of  Gnosticism,  with  which 
Christianity  had  to  wage  a  long  conflict.  Manichseism  was  not 
only  a  school,  like  the  older  forms  of  Gnosticism,  but  a  rival 
religion  and  a  rival  church.  In  this  respect  it  resembled  Islam 
which  at  a  later  period  became  a  still  more  formidable  rival  of 
Christianity;  both  claimed  to  be  divine  revelations,  both  en- 
grafted pseudo-Christian  elements  on  a  heathen  stock,  but  the 
starting  point  was  radically  different  :  Manichseism  being  anti- 
Jewish  and  dualistic,  Mohammedanism,  pseudo-Jewish  and 
severely  and  fanatically  monotheistic. 

First  the  external  history. 

The  origin  of  Manichseism  is  matter  of  obscure  and  confused 
tradition.  It  is  traced  to  MAJSTI  (MA^ES,  MANicn^ius),1  a 


f,  Mai-Tree,  ^Idvsvr^  Maw^aZof,  Manes  (gen.  Manetis),  Manichceans  (the 
last  form  always  used  by  St.  Augustin).  The  name  is  either  of  Persian  or 
Semitic  origin,  but  has  rot  yet  been  satisfactorily  explained.  Kessler  identi- 
fies it  with  Mdndj  Manda}  i.  e.  knowledge,  -yvfat?,  of  the  Mandseans.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Ada,  Archetai  he  was  originally  called  Qubncus,  which  Kessler  re- 
gards as  a  corruption  of  the  Arabic  Shuraik. 


$335.   MANI  A5D  THE  MA^ICILEAXS.  501 

Persian  philosopher,  astronomer,  and  painter,1  of  the  third  cen- 
tury (215-277),  who  came  over  to  Christianity,  or  rather 
introduced  some  Christian  elements  into  the  Zoroastrian  religion, 
and  thus  stirred  up  an  intellectual  and  moral  revolution  among 
his  countrymen.  According  to  Arabic  Mohammedan  sources, 
he  was  the  son  of  Fatak  (IlfaexiQs),  a  high-born  Persian  of 
Harnadan  (Ecbatana),  who  emigrated  to  Ctesiphon  in  Babylonia. 
Here  he  received  a  careful  education.  He  belonged  originally 
to  the  Judaizing  Gnostic  sect  of  the  Mandseans  or  Elkesaites 
(the  Mogtasilah,  i.  e.  Baptists) ;  but  in  his  nineteenth  and  again 
in  his  twenty-fourth  year  (238)  a  new  religion  was  divinely 
revealed  to  him.  In  his  thirtieth  year  he  began  to  preach  his 
syncretistic  creed,  undertook  long  journeys  and  sent  out  disciples. 
He  proclaimed  himself  to  be  the  last  and  highest  prophet  of  God 
and  the  Paraclete  promised  by  Christ  (as  Mohammed  did  six 
hundred  years  later).  He  began  his  " Epistola  Fuiidamenti"  in 
which  he  propounded  his  leading  doctrines,  with  the  words: 
(c  Mani,  the  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  by  the  providence  of  God 
the  Father.  These  are  the  words  of  salvation  from  the  eternal 
and  living  source."  He  composed  many  books  in  the  Persian 
and  Syriac  languages  and  in  an  alphabet  of  his  own  invention, 
but  they  are  all  lost.2 

At  first  M^ani  found  favor  at  the  court  of  the  Persian  king 
Shapur  L  (Sapor),  but  stirred  up  the  hatred  of  the  priestly  cast 
of  the  Magians.  He  fled  to  East  India  and  China  and  became 
acquainted  with  Buddhism.  Indeed,  the  name  of  Buddha  is 
interwoven  with  the  legendary  history  of  the  Manichsean  system* 
His  disputations  with  Archelaus  in  Mesopotamia  are  a  fiction, 
like  the  pseudo-Clementine  disputations  of  Simon  Magus  with 

1  At  least,  according  to  Persian  accounts;  but  the  Arabs,  who  hate  painting, 
and  the  church  fathers  are  silent  about  his  skill  as  a  painter. 

3  Among  these  are  mentioned  the  Book  of  Mysteries,  the  Book  of  Giants,  the 
Book  of  Precepts  for  -Hearers  (Chpitufa  or  Epistola  Jfandamenti,  from  which 
Augustiu  gives  large  extracts),  SkdhpArakdn  (i.  e.  belonging  to  King 
Shaiipur),  the  Book  of  Life,  the  Gospel  or  the  Lining  Gospel.  See  Kessler,  L  * 
p.2498qq, 


502  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Peter,  but  on  a  better  historic  foundation  and  with  an  orthodox 
aim  of  the  writer. £ 

In  the  year  270  Mani  returned  to  Persia,  and  won  many 
followers  by  his  symbolic  (pictorial)  illustrations  of  the  doc- 
trines, which  he  pretended  had  been  revealed  to  him  by  God. 
But  in  a  disputation  with  the  Magians,  he  was  convicted  of 
corrupting  the  old  religion,  and  thereupon  was  crucified,  or 
flayed  alive  by  order  of  king  Behram  I.  (Veranes)  about  277  •  his 
skin  was  stuffed  and  hung  up  for  a  terror  at  the  gate  of  the 
city  Djondishapur  (or  Gundeshapur),  since  called  "  the  gate  of 
Mani."  2  His  followers  were  cruelly  persecuted  by  the  king. 

Soon  after  Mani's  horrible  death  his  sect  spread  in  Turkistan, 
Mesopotamia,  North  Africa,  Sicily,  Italy  and  Spain.  As  it 
moved  westward  it  assumed -a  more  Christian  character,  espe- 
cially in  Xorth  Africa.  It  was  everywhere  persecuted  in  the 
Roman  empire,  first  by  Diocletian  (A.  D.  287),  and  afterwards 
by  the  Christian  emperors.  Nevertheless  it  flourished  till  the 
sixth  century  and  even  later.  Persecution  of  heresy  always 
helps  heresy  unless  the  heretics  are  exterminated. 

The  mysteriousness  of  its  doctrine,  its  compact  organization, 
the  apparent  solution  of  the  terrible  problem  of  evil,  and  the 
show  of  ascetic  holiness  sometimes  were  the  chief  points  oi 
attraction.  Even  such  a  profound  and  noble  spirit  as  St.  Au- 
gustin  was  nine  years  an  auditor  of  the  sect  before  he  was 
converted  to  the  Catholic  church.  He  sought  there  a  deeper 

1  Beausobre  (vol.  I.  Pref.  p.  viii) :  *  Les  Actes  de  cette  Dispute  sort  ewdemment 
une  fction  pareille  d  cette  de  cet  imposteur,  qui  a  pris  le  nom  de  Clement  J&main, 
et  qiLi a  introduit  S-  Pierre  disputant  conire  Simon  le  Magicien" 

1  The  cruel  death  of  Mani  and  the  maltreatment  of  his  corpse  are  well  at- 
tested, but  his  being  skinned  alive  is  perhaps  a  later  Christian  tradition.  The 
Disput.  Archelai  (c.  55)  towards  the  close  gives  this  account :  u  He  was  appre- 
hended and  brought  before  the  king,  who,  being  inflamed  with  the  strongest 
indignation  against  him,  and  fired  with  the  desire  of  avenging  two  deaths 
npon  him — namely,  the  death  of  his  own  son,  and  the  death  of  the  keeper  of 
the  prison— gave  orders  that  he  should  be  flayed  alive  and  hung  before  the 
gate  of  the  city,  and  that  his  skin  should-  be  dipped  in  certain  medicamentg 
and  inflated :  his  flesh,  too,  he  commanded  to  be  given  as  a  prey  to  the  birds** 
See  the  different  accounts  in  Beausobre,  L  205  sq. 


g  136.  THE  MANICH-EAX  SYSTEM.  503 

philosophy  of  religion  and  became  acquainted  with  the  gifted 
and  eloquent  Faustus  of  Numidia,  but  was  disappointed  and 
found  him  a  superficial  charlaban.  Another  Manichsean,  by  the 
name  of  Felix,  he  succeeded  in  converting  to  the  Catholic  faith 
in  a  public  disputation  of  two  days  at  Hippo.  His  connection 
with  Maniehseism  enabled  him  in  his  polemic  writings  to 
refute  it  and  to  develop  the  doctrines  of  the  rektion  of  know- 
ledge and  faith,  of  reason  and  revelation,  the  freedom  of -will, 
the  origin  of  evil  and  its  relation  to  the  divine  government 
Thus  here,  too,  error  was  overruled  for  the  promotion  of  truth. 
Pope  Leo  I.  searched  for  these  heretics  in  Rome,  and  with  the 
aid  of  the  magistrate  brought  many  to  punishment.  Valen- 
tinian  III.  punished  them  by  banishment,  Justinian  by  death. 
The  violent  and  persistent  persecutions  at  last  destroyed  their 
organization.  But  their  system  extended  its  influence  through- 
out the  middle  ages  down  to  the  thirteenth  century,  re-appearing, 
under  different  modifications,  with  a  larger  infusion  of  Christian 
elements,  in  the  Priscillianists,  Paulicians,  Bogomiles,  Albi- 
genses,  Catharists  and  other  sects,  which  were  therefore  called 
"  New  Manichseans."  Indeed  some  of  the  leading  features  of 
Manichaeism — the  dualistic  separation  of  soul  and  body,  the 
ascription  of  nature  to  the  devil,  the  pantheistic  confusion  of 
the  moral  and  physical,  the  hypocritical  symbolism,  concealing 
heathen  views  under  Christian  phrases,  the  haughty  air  of 
mystery,  .and  the  aristocratic  distinction  of  esoteric  and  ex- 
oteric— still  live  in  various  forms  even  in  modern  systems  ol 
philosophy  and  sects  of  religion.1 

§  136.  The  Manichosan  System. 

Manichseistn  is  a  compound  of  dualistic,  pantheistic,  Gnostic^ 
and  ascetic  elements,  combined  with  a  fantastic  philosophy  of 
nature,  which  gives  the  whole  system  a  materialistic  character, 
notwithstanding  its  ascetic  abhorrence  of  matter.  The  me- 

1  The  Mormons  or  Latter-Day  Saints  of  Utah  present  an  interesting  parallel, 
especially  in  their  hierarchical  organization;  while  in  their  polygamy  they  as 
strongly  contrast  with  the  ascetic  Manichseans,  and  resemble  the  Mohammedans. 


504  SECOND  PERIOD.    A'.D-  100-311. 

taphysical  foundation  is  a  radical  dualism  between  good 
and  evil,  light  and  darkness,  derived  from  the  Persian  Zoro- 
astrism  (as  restored  by  the  school  of  the  Magasaeans  under  the 
reign  of  the  second  Sassanides  towards  the  middle  of  the  second 
century).  The  prominent  ethical  feature  is  a  rigid  asceticism 
which  strongly  resembles  Buddhism.1  The  Christian  element  is 
only  a  superficial  varnish  (as  in  Mohammedanism).  The  Jewish 
religion  is  excluded  altogether  (while  in  Mohammedanism  it 
forms  a  very  important  feature),  and  the  Old  Testament  is 
rejected,  as  inspired  by  the  devil  and  his  false  prophets.  The 
chief  authorities  were  apocryphal  Gospels  and  the  writings  of 


1.  The  Manichsean  THEOLOGY  begins  with  an  irreconcilable 
antagonism  between  the  kingdom  of  light  and  the  kingdom  of 
darkness.  And  this  is  identified  with  the  ethical  dualism 
between  good  and  bad.  These  two  kingdoms  stood  opposed 
to  each  other  from  eternity,  remaining  unmingled.  Then  Satan 
who  with  his  demons  was  born  from  darkness,  began  to  rage 
and  made  an  assault  upon  the  kingdom  of  light.  From  this 
incursion  resulted  the  present  world,  which  exhibits  a  mixture 
of  the  two  elements,  detached  portions  of  light  imprisoned  in 
darkness.  Adam  was  created  in  the  image  of  Satan,  but  with  a 
strong  spark  of  light,  and  was  provided  by  Satan  with  Eve  as  his 
companion,  who  represents  seductive  sensuousness,  but  also  with 
a  spark  of  light,  though  smaller  than  that  in  Adam.  Cain  and 
Abel  are  sons  of  Satan  and  Eve,  but  Seth  is  the  offspring  of  Adam 
by  Eve,  and  Ml  of  light.  T^hus  mankind  came  into  existence 
with  difierent  shares  of  light,  the  men  with  more,  the  women 
with  less.  Every  individual  man  is  at  once  a  son  of  light  and 
of  darkness,  has  a  good  soul,  and  a  body  substantially  evil,  with 
an  evil  soul  corresponding  to  it.  "  The  redemption  of  the  ligh. 
from  the  bonds  of  the  darkness  is  effected  by  Christ,  who 

1  Kessler  (followed  by  Harnack)  derives  itanichseism  exclusively  from  Chal- 
daan  sources,  bat  must  admit  the  strong  affinity  with  Zoroastric  and  Buddhist 
ideas  and  customs.  The  Fihrist  says  that  Mani  derived  his  doctrine  from 
Paraism  and  Christianity.  Ou  the  Buddhistic  element,  sec  Baur,  p.  433-445. 


§  136.  THE  MANICH^EAN  SYSTEM.  505 

is  identical  with  the  sun  spirit,  and  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  who 
has  his  seat  in  the  ether.  These  two  beings  attract  the  light- 
forces  out  of  the  material  world,  while  the  prince  of  darkness, 
and  the  spirits  imprisoned  in  the  stars,  seek  to  keep  them  back* 
The  sun  and  moon  are  the  two  shining  ships  (lucidce,  mves)  for 
conducting  the  imprisoned  light  into  the  eternal  kingdom  of 
light.  The  full  moon  represents  the  ship  laden  with  light ;  the 
new  moon,  the  vessel  emptied  of  its  cargo ;  and  the  twelve  signs 
of  the  zodiac  also  serve  as  buckets  in  this  pumping  operation. 

The  Manichsean  christology,  like  the  Gnostic,  is  entirely 
docetic,  and,  by  its  perverted  view  of  body  and  matter,  wholly 
excludes  the  idea  of  an  incarnation  of  God.  The  teachings  of 
Christ  were  compiled  and  falsified  by  the  apostles  in  the  spirit 
of  Judaism.  Mani,  the  promised  Paraclete,  has  restored  them. 
The  goal  of  history  is  an  entire  separation  of  the  light  from  the 
darkness ;  a  tremendous  conflagration  consumes  the  world,  and 
the  kingdom  of  darkness  sinks  into  impotence. 

Thus  Christianity  is  here  resolved  into  a  fantastic  dualistic, 
and  yet  pantheistic  philosophy  of  nature;  moral  regeneration  is 
identified  with  a  process  of  physical  refinement ;  and  the  whole 
mystery  of  redemption  is  found  in  light,  which  was  always 
worshipped  in  the  East  as  the  symbol  of  deity.  Unquestionably 
there  pervades  the  Manichaean  system  a  kind  of  groaning  of  the 
creature  for  redemption,  and  a  deep  sympathy  with  nature,  that 
hieroglyphic  of  spirit ;  but  all  is  distorted  and  confused.  The 
suffering  Jesus  on  the  cross  (Jesus  patibilis)  is  here  a  mere  illu- 
sion, a  symbol  of  the  world-soul  still  enchained  in  matter,  and 
is  seen  in  every  plant  which  works  upwards  from  the  dark 
bosom  of  the  earth  towards  the  light,  towards  bloom  and  fruit, 
yearning  after  freedom.  Hence  the  class  of  the  "perfect "  would 
not  kill  nor  wound  a  beast,  pluck  a  flower,  nor  break  a  blade  of 
grass.  The  system,  instead  of  being,  as  it  pretends,  a  liberation 
of  light  from  darkness,  is  really  a  turning  of  light  into  darkness. 

2.  The  MORALITY  of  the  Manichseans  was  severely  ascetic, 
based  on  the  fundamental  error  of  the  intrinsic  evil  of  matter  and 


506  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  body ;  the  extreme  opposite  of  the  Pelagian  view  of  the  essen« 
tial  moral  purity  of  human  nature.1  The  great  moral  aim  is,  to 
become  entirely  unworldly  in  the  Buddhistic  sense ;  to  renounce 
and  destroy  corporeity ;  to  set  the  good  soul  free  from  the  fetters 
of  matter.  This  is  accomplished  by  the  most  rigid  and  gloomy 
abstinence  from  all  those  elements  which  have  their  source  in 
the  sphere  of  darkness.  It  was,  however,  only  required  of  the 
sleet,  not  of  catechumens.  A  distinction  was  made  between  a 
higher  and  lower  morality  similar  to  that  in  the  catholic  church. 
The  perfection  of  the  elect  consisted  in  a  threefold  seal  or  pre- 
servative (signaeulum}? 

(a)  The  signaculum  oris,  that  is,  purity  in  words  and  in  diet, 
abstinence  from  all  animal  food  and  strong  drink,  even  in  the 
holy  supper,  and  restriction  to  vegetable  diet,  which  was  fur- 
nished to  the  perfect  by  the  "hearers,"  particularly  olives,  as 
their  oil  is  the  food  of  light. 

(b)  The  sic/naculum  vnanuum:  renunciation  of  earthly  property, 
and  of  material  and  industrial  pursuits,  even  agriculture ;  with 
a  sacred  reverence  for  the  divine  light-life  difiused  through  all 
nature. 

(c)  The  signaoulum  sinus,  or  celibacy,  and  abstinence  from 
any  gratification  of  sensual  desire.    Marriage,  or  rather  pro- 
creation, is  a  contamination  with  corporeity,  which  is  essentially 
evil. 

.This  unnatural  holiness  of  the  elect  at  the  same  time  atoned 
for  the  unavoidable  daily  sins  of  the  catechumens  who  paid 
them  the  greatest  reverence.  It  was  accompanied,  however,  as 
in  the  Gnostics,  with  an  excessive  pride  of  knowledge,  and  if  we 
are  to  believe  the  catholic  opponents,  its  fair  show  not  rarely 
concealed  refined  forms  of  vice. 

1  Schleiermacher  correctly  represents  Manlchseism  and  Pelagianism  as  the 
too  fundamental  heresies  in  anthropology  and  soteriology-  the  one  makes 
man  essentially  evil  fin  body),  and  thus  denies  the  possibility  of  redemption ;  the 
other  makes  man  essentially  good,  and  thus  denies  the  necessity  of  redemption. 

*  The  meaning  of  signaculum  is  not  criterion  (as  Baur  explains,  I  c.  p.  248) 
but  secu  \  "*"  *  ~  ~  "  "'  *  *  "  ~ 


J 136.  THE  MANICH^AN  SYSTEM.  507 

3.  OBGAETZATION.    Manichseisni  differed  from  all  the  Gnostic 
schools  iu  having  a  fixed,  and  that  a  strictly  hierarchical,  organi- 
zation.   This  accounts  in  large  measure  for  its  tenacity  and  en- 
durance.   At  the  head  of  the  sect  stood  twelve  apostles,  or 
magistri,  among  whom  Mani  and  his  successors,  like  Peter  and 
the  pope,  held  the  chief  place.    Under  them  were  seventy-two 
bishops,  answering  to  the  seventy-two  (strictly  seventy)  disciples 
of  Jesus;   and    under   these   came  presbyters,    deacons    and 
itinerant  evangelists.1    In  the  congregation  there  were  two  dis- 
tinct classes,  designed  to  correspond  to  the  catechumens  and 
the  faithful  in  the  catholic  church:   the  "  hearers;"2  and 
the  "  perfect,"  the  esoteric,  the  priestly  caste,3  which  represents 
the  last  stage  in  the  process  of  liberation  of  the  spirit  and  its 
separation  from  the  world,  the  transition  from  the  kingdom  of 
matter  into  the  kingdom  of  light,  or  in  Buddhistic  terms,  from 
the  world  of  Sansara  into  Nirwana. 

4.  The  WOBSHIP  of  the  Manichseans  was,  on  the  whole,  very 
simple.    They  had  no  sacrifices,  but  four  daily, prayers,  pre- 
ceded   by   ablutions,  and    accompanied    by  prostrations,  the 
worshipper  turned  towards  the  sun  or  moon  as  the  seat  of  light. 
They  observed  Sunday,  in  honor  of  the  sun,  which  was  with 
them  the  same  with  the  redeemer ;  but,  contrary  to  the  custom 
of  the  catholic  .Christians,  they  made  it  a  day  of  fasting.    They 
had  weekly,  monthly,  and  yearly  fasts.     They  rejected  the 
church  festivals,  but  instead  celebrated  in  March  with  great 
pomp  the  day  of  the  martyrdom  of  their  divinely  appointed 
tether,  Mani.4    The  sacraments  were  mysteries  of  the  elect, 
ci  \viiicii  even  Augustin  could  learn  very'little.    Hence  it  has 
been  disputed  whether  they  used  baptism  or  not,  and  whether 

^  r.t 

1  The  organization  of  the  Mormons  is  similar. 

9  Audttores,  (Meehumem,  in  Arabic  sammafin. 

s  Electi,  perfect^  catharistcs,  ZI&SKTOI,  r&feux,  in  the  Fihrist  siddtk&n.  Faustus 
terms  them  the  sacerdotale  genus. 

*  The  feast  of  "the  chair,"  /%a,  cathedra.  The  Mormons  likewise  celebrate 
the  martyrdom  of  their  founder,  Joseph  Smithj  who  was  killed  by  the  mob  at 
Carthage,  Illinois  (June  27  1844). 


508  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

they  baptized  by  water,  or  by  oil.  Probably  they  practised  water 
baptism  and  anointing,  and  regarded  the  latter  as  a  higher 
spiritual  baptism,  or  distinguished  both  as  baptism  and  con- 
firmation in  the  catholic  church.1  They  also  celebrated  a  kind  of 
holy  supper,  sometimes  even  under  disguise  in  catholic  churches, 
but  without  wine  (because  Christ  had  no  blood),  and  regarding 
it  perhaps,  according  to  their  pantheistic  symbolism,  as  thn 
commemoration  of  the  light-soul  crucified  in  all  nature.  Their 
sign  of  recognition  was  the  extension  of  the  right  hand  as  a 
symbol  of  the  common  deliverance  from  the  kingdom  of  dark- 
ness by  the  redeeming  hand  of  the  spirit  of  the  sun. 

1  Gieseler  and  Neander  are  disposed  to  deny  the  use  of  water-baptism  by  the 
Manichseans,  Beausobre,  Thilo,  Baur,  and  Kessler  assert  it  The  passages  in 
Augustin  are  obscure  and  conflicting.  See  Baur,  1.  c.  p.  273-281.  The  older 
Gnostic  sects  (the  Marcionites  and  Valentinians),  and  the  New  Manichaeans 
practised  a  baptismal  rite  by  water.  Some  new  light  is  thrown  on  this  dis- 
puted question  by  the  complete  Greek  text  of  the  Gnostic  Acts  of  Thomas, 
recently  published  by  Max  Bonnet  of  Montpellier  (Acta  Thomce,  Lips.  1883). 
Here  both  baptism  and  anointing  are  repeatedly  mentioned,  p.  19  (in  a  thanks* 
giving  to  Christ :  yatiapiaas  avrovg  rf  ay  hovrpq*  not  afaityag  OVTOVC  T$  ay  t'/lefy 
airb  r^f  irepiexov&ts  airrofcf  irhavw }}  20,  3o,  68  (where,  however,  the  pouring  of 
oil  is  mentioned  before  water-baptism),  73,  32  (iifaitpa%  ...  /cat  efidirTtvev  avrovq 
.  .  .  aveWforruv  6s  avT&v  £K  r&v  ifidruv  Aaft&v  aprov  KOL  irorfpiov  svMyijasv  etrruv 
. .  .).  Comp.  the  discussion  of  Lipsius  in  Die  Apokryphen  Apostelgeschichten 
und  AposteUeffenden  (Braunschweig,  1883),  p  331,  where  he  asserts :  "Die  Was- 
sertaufe  stand  bei  den  Manichceern  ebenso  WIG  bei,  den  meisten  alteren  gnosticheR 
,  in  Uebung." 


CHAPTER  XIL 

1?HB    DEVELOPMENT    OF    CATHOLIC    THEOLOGY    I 
WITH  HEEESY. 

§  137.  Catholic  Orthodoxy. 

I.  Sources:  The  doctrinal  and  polemical  writings  of  the  ante-Nicene 
fathers,  especially  JUSTIST  MARTYR,  IREST-EITS,  HIPPOLYTUS,  TER- 
TULLIABT,  CYPRIAN,  CLEMENT  OF  ALEX.,  and  ORIGEN. 

H.  Literature :  The  relevant  sections  in  the  works  on  Doctrine  History 
by  PETAVTOS,  MUNSCHER,  NEANDER,  G-EESELER,  BATJR,  HAGEN- 
BACH,  SHEDD,  NITZSCH,  HARNACK  (first  vol.  1886  ;  2d  ed.  1888). 

Jos.  SCHWANE  (R.  C,):  Dogmengeschtehte  der  vornicanischen  Zeit. 
Munster,  1862. 

EDM.  DE  PRESSENSE  :  Heresy  and  Christian  Doctrine,  transl.  by  Annie 
Harwood.  Lond.  1873. 

The  special  literature  see  below.    Comp.  also  the  Lit.  in  Ch.  XIII. 

BY  the  wide-spread  errors  described  in  the  preceding  chapter, 
the  church  was  challenged  to  a  mighty  intellectual  combat,  from 
which  she  came  forth  victorious,  according  to  the  promise  of 
her  Lord,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  should  guide  her  into  the  whole 
truth.  To  the  subjective,  baseless,  and  ever-changing  specula- 
tions, dreams,  and  fictions  of  the  heretics,  she  opposed  the  sub- 
stantial, solid  realities  of  the  divine  revelation.  Christian 
theology  grew,  indeed,  as  by  inward  necessity,  from  the  demand 
of  faith  for  knowledge.  But  heresy,  Gnosticism  in  particular, 
gave  it  a  powerful  impulse  from  without,  and  caine  as  a  fer- 
tilizing thunder-storm  upon  the  field.  The  church  possessed 
the  truth  from  the  beginning,  in  the  experience  of  faith,  and  in 
the  holy  scriptures,  which  she  handed  down  with  scrupulous 
fidelity  from  generation  to  generation.  But  now  came  the  task 
of  developing  the  substance  of  the  Christian  truth  in  theoretical 
,1  fortifying  it  on  all  sides,  and  presenting  ii  in  clear  light 

*  toyut&repov,  as  Eusebius  has  it. 

609 


510  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

before  the  understanding.  Thus  the  Christian  polemic  and 
dogmatic  theology,  or  the  church's  logical  apprehension  of  the 
doctrines  of  salvation,  unfolded  itself  in  this  conflict  with 
heresy ;  as  the  apologetic  literature  and  martyrdom  had  arisen 
through  Jewish  and  heathen  persecution. 

From  this  time  forth  the  distinction  between  catholic  and 
heretical,  orthodoxy  and  heterodoxy,  the  faith  of  the  church 
and  dissenting  private  opinion,  became  steadily  more  prominent. 
Every  doctrine  which  agreed  with  the  holy  scriptures  and  the 
faith  of  the  church,  was  received  as  catholic ;  that  is,  universal, 
and  exclusive.1  Whatever  deviated  materially  from  this  stand- 
ard, every  arbitrary  notion,  framed  by  this  or  that  individual, 
every  distortion  or  corruption  of  the  revealed  doctrines  of 
Christianity,  every  departure  from  the  public  sentiment  of  the 
church,  was  considered  heresy.2 

Almost  all  the  church  fathers  came  out  against  the  contem- 
porary heresies,  with  arguments  from  scripture,  with  the  tradi- 
tion of  the  church,  and  with  rational  demonstration,  proving 
them  inwardly  inconsistent  and  absurd. 

But  in  doing  this,  while  they  are  one  in  spirit  and  purpose, 
they  pursue  two  very  different  courses,  determined  by  the 
differences  between  the  Greek  and  Roman  nationality,  and  by 
peculiarities  of  mental  organization  and  the  appointment  of 
Providence.  The  Greek  theology,  above  all  the  Alexandrian, 
represented  by  Clement  and  Origen,  is  predominantly  idealistic 
and  speculative,  dealing  with  the  objective  doctrines  of  God,  the 
incarnation,  the  trinity,  and  christology;  endeavoring  to  sup- 
plant the  false  gnosis  by  a  true  knowledge,  an  orthodox  philoso- 
phy, resting  on  the  Christian  pistis.  It  was  strongly  influenced  by 
Platonic  speculation  in  the  Logos  doctrine,  The  Latin  theology, 
particularly  the  North  African,  whose  most  distinguished  rep- 

*  The  term  catholic  is  first  used  in  its  ecclesiastical  sense  by  Ignatius,  the 
/ealous  advocate  of  episcopacy.  Ad  Smyrn.  c.  8 :  faov  av  $  X/>*cn%  }l^ffovf, 
fKei  j  KaVo7.LK7}  eKi^rjaia^  ubi  est  Christus  Jem,  tittc  Ontholica  Ecclesia.  So  also 
jn  the  Letter  of  the  Church  of  Smyrna  on  the  martyrdom  of  Polycarp  (155), 
In  Eusebius,  H.  E.  IV.  15, 

5  From  alpeffcc.    See  notes  below. 


\  137.  CATHOLIC  OBTHODOXY.  511 

resentatives  are  Tertullian  and  Cyprian,  is  more  realistic  and 
practical,  concerned  with  the  doctrines  of  human  nature  and  of 
salvation,  and  more  directly  hostile  to  Gnosticism  and  philoso- 
phy. With  this  is  connected  the  fact,  that  the  Greek  fathers 
were  first  philosophers;  the  Latin  were  mostly  lawyers  and 
statesmen ;  the  former  reached  the  Christian  faith  in  the  way  of 
speculation,  the  latter  in  the  spirit  of  practical  morality.  Cha- 
racteristically, too,  the  Greek  church  built  mainly  upon  the 
apostle  John,  pre-eminently  the  contemplative  " divine;"  the 
Latin  upon  Peter,  the  practical  leader  of  the  church.  "While 
Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Origen  often  wander  away  into 
cloudy,  almost  Gnostic  speculation,  and  threaten  to  resolve  the 
real  substance  of  the  Christian  ideas  into  thin  spiritualism,  Ter- 
tullian sets  himself  implacably  against  Gnosticism  and  the 
heathen  philosophy  upon  which  it  rests.  "What  fellowship," 
he  asks,  "  is  there  between  Athens  and  Jerusalem,  the  academy 
and  the  church,  heretics  and  Christians?"  But  this  difference 
was  only  relative.  With  all  their  spiritualism,  the  Alexan- 
drians still  committed  themselves  to  a  striking  literalism ;  while, 
in  spite  of  his  aversion  to  philosophy,  Tertullian  labored  with 
profound  speculative  ideas  which  came  to  their  full  birth  in 
Augustin. 

Irenseus,  who  sprang  from  the  Eastern  church,  and  used  the 
Greek  language,  but  labored  in  the  West,  holds  a  kind  of  medi- 
ating position  between  the  two  branches  of  the  church,  and 
may  be  taken  as,  on  the  whole,  the  most  moderate  and  sound 
representative  of  ecclesiastical  orthodoxy  in  the  ante-Nicune 
period.  He  is  as  decided  against  Gnosticism  as  Tertullian, 
without  overlooking  the  speculative  want  betrayed  in  that  sys- 
tem. His, refutation  of  the  Gnosis,1  written  between  177  and 
192,  is  the  leading  polemic  work  of  the  second  century.  In 
the  first  book  of  this  work  Irenaeus  gives  a  full  account  of  the 
Valentinian  system  of  Gnosis ;  in  the  second  book  he  begins 
bis  refutation  in  philosophical  and  logical  style ;  in  the  third, 

fovfovvpov  -yvtiasw* 


512  SECOND  PERIOD.    A,  D.  100-311. 

he  brings  against  the  system  the  catholic  tradition  and  the  Loly 
scriptures,  and  vindicates  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  unity  of 
God,  the  creation  of  the  world,  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos, 
against  the  docetic  denial  of  the  true  humanity  of  Christ  and 
the  Ebionitic  denial  of  his  true  divinity  ;  in  the  fourth  book 
he  further  fortifies  the  same  doctrines,  and,  against  the  antino- 
mianism  of  the  school  of  Marcion,  demonstrates  the  unity  of  the 
Old  and  Xew  Testaments;  in  the  fifth  and  last  book  he  presents 
his  views  on  eschatology,  particularly  on  the  resurrection  of  the 
body  —  so  offensive  to  the  Gnostic  spiritualism  —  and  at  the  close 
treats  of  Antichrist,  the  end  of  the  world,  the  intermediate 
state,  and  the  millennium. 

His  disciple  Hippolytus  gives  us,  in  the  "  Philosophumma" 
a  still  fuller  account,  in  many  respects,  of  the  early  heresies, 
and  traces  them  up  to  their  sources  in  the  heathen  systems  of  - 
philosophy,  but  does  not  go  so  deep  into  the  exposition  of  the 
catholic  doctrines  of  the  church. 

The  leading  effort  in  this  polemic  literature  was,  of  course,  to 
develop  and  establish  positively  the  Christian  truth  ;  which  is, 
at  the  same  time,  to  refute  most  effectually  the  opposite  error. 
The  object  was,  particularly,  to  settle  the  doctrines  of  the  rule 
of  faith,  the  incarnation  of  God,  and  the  true  divinity  and  true 
humanity  of  Christ.  In  this  effort  the  mind  of  the  church, 
under  the  constant  guidance  of  the  divine  word  and  the  apostolic 
tradition,  steered  with  unerring  instinct  between  the  threatening 
clifis.  Yet  no  little  indefiniteness  and  obscurity  still  prevailed 
in  the  scientific  apprehension  and  statement  of  these  points.  In 
this  stormy  time,  too,  there  were  as  yet  no  general  councils  to 
settle  doctrinal  controversy  by  the  voice  of  the  whole  church. 
The  dogmas  of  the  trinity  and  the  person  of  Chrfet,  did  not 
reach  maturity  and  final  symbolical  definition  until  the  following 
period,  or  the  Nicene  age. 

NOTES  ON  HERESY. 


The  term  heresy  is  derived  from  alpws,  which  means  originally  either 
capture  (from  alpfo),  or  election,  choice  (from  alpEopai),  and  assumed  the 


5 137.  CATHOLIC  ORTHODOXY.  513 

additional  idea  of  arbitrary  opposition  to  public  opinion  and  authority. 
In  the  N.  Test,  it  designates  a  chosen  way  of  life,  a  school  or  sect  or 
party,  not  necessarily  in  a  bad  sense,  and  is  applied  to  the  Pharisees,  the 
Sadducees,  and  even  the  Christians  as  a  Jewish  sect  (Acts  5 :  17;  15:  5 ; 
24:  5, 14;  26:  5;  28:  22)  j  then  it  signifies  discord,  arising  from  difler- 
ence  of  opinion  (Gal.  5 :  20 ;  1  Cor.  11 :  19) ;  and  lastly  error  (2  Pet. 
2:  1,  alpeffetc  airuteia?,  destructive  heresies,  or  sects  of  perdition).  This 
passage  comes  nearest  to  the  ecclesiastical  definition.  The  term  heretic 
(aiperiKfy  avSpwirog)  occurs  only  once,  Tit  3 :  10,  and  means  a  factious 
man,  a  sectary,  a  partisan,  rather  than  an  errorist. 

Constantine  the  Great  still  speaks  of  the  Christian  church  as  a  sect, 
%  alpECfe  TI  Kadofaitf,  T)  dyturdrq  alpeais  (in  a  letter  to  Chrestus,  bishop  of 
Syracuse,  in  Euseb,  H.  JS.  X.  c.  5,  {  21  and  22,  in  Heinichen's  ed.  1, 491). 
But  after  him  church  and  sect  became  opposites,  the  former  term  being 
confined  to  the  one  ruling  body,  the  latter  to  dissenting  minorities. 

The  fathers  commonly  use  heresy  of  false  teaching,  in  opposition  to 
Catholic  doctrine,  and  schism  of  a  breach  of  discipline,  in  opposition  to 
Catholic  government.  The  ancient  heresiologists — mostly  uncritical, 
credulous,  and  bigoted,  though  honest  and  pious,  zealots  for  a  narrow 
orthodoxy — unreasonably  multiplied  the  heresies  by  extending  them  be- 
yond the  limits  of  Christianity,  and  counting  all  modifications  and  varia- 
tions separately.  Philastrius  or  Philastrus,  bishop  of  Brescia  or  Brixia 
(d.  387),  in  his  Liber  de  JTceresibus,  numbered  28  -Jewish  and  128  Chris- 
tian heresies ;  Epiphanius  of  Cyprus  (d.  403),  in  his  UavdpLov.  80  heresies 
in  all,  20  before  and  60  after  Christ ;  Augustin  (d.  430),  88  Christian 
heresies,  including  Pelagianism;  Proedestinatus,  90,  including  Pela- 
gianism  and  Nestorianism.  (Pope  Pius  IX.  condemned  80  modern 
heresies,  in  his  Syllabus  of  Errors,  1864,)  Augustin  says  that  it  is 
"altogether  impossible,  or  at  any  rate  most  difficult'7  to  define  heresy, 
and  wisely  adds  that  the  spirit  in  which  error  is  held,  rather  than  error 
itself,  constitutes  heresy.  There  are  innocent  as  well  as  guilty  errors. 
Moreover,  a  great  many  people  are  better  than  their  creed  or  no-creed, 
and  a  great  many  are  worse  than  their  creed,  however  orthodox  it  may 
be.  The  severest  words  of  our  Lord  were  -directed  against  the  hypocriti- 
cal orthodoxy  of  the  Pharisees.  In  the  course  of  time  heresy  was  defined 
to  be  a'  religious  error  held  in  wilful  and  persistent  opposition  to  the 
truth  after  it  has  been  defined  and  declared  by  the  church  in  an  authori- 
tative manner,  or  "pertinax  defensio  dogmatis  ecclesioe  universalis  judido 
condemnati"  Speculations  on  open  questions  of  theology  are  no  heresies 
Origen  was  no  heretic  in  his  age,  but  was  condemned  long  after  hit 
death. 

In  the  present  divided  state  of  Christendom  there  are  different  kinds 
of  orthodoxy  and  heresy.  Orthodoxy  is  conformity  to  a  recognized 
creed  or  standard  of  public  doctrine ;  heresy  is  a  wilful  departure  from 
it.  The  Greek  church  rejects  the  Roman  dogmas  of  the  papacy,  of  the 
double  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  immaculate  conception  of  the 
Vol.  IL— 33. 


614  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  JD.  100-311. 

Virgin  Mary,  and  the  infallibility' of  the  Pope,  as  heretical,  because  con* 
trary  to  the  teaching  of  the  first  seven  oecumenical  councils.  The  Ro- 
man church  anathematized,  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  all  the  distinctive 
doctrines  of  the  Protestant  Reformation.  Evangelical  Protestants  on 
the  other  hand  regard  the  unscriptural  traditions  of  the  Greek  and 
Roman  churches  as  heretical.  Among  Protestant  churches  again  there 
are  minor  doctrinal  differences,  which  are  held  with  various  degrees  of 
exclusiveness  or  liberality  according  to  the  degree  of  departure  from  the 
Roman  Catholic  church.  Luther,  for  instance,  would  not  tolerate 
Zwingli's  view  on  the  Lord's  Supper,  while  Zwingli  was  willing  to 
fraternize  with  him  notwithstanding  this  difference.  The  Lutheran 
Formula  of  Concord,  and  the  Calvinistic  Synod  of  Dort  rejected  and 
condemned  doctrines  which  are  now  held  with  impunity  in  orthodox 
evangelical  churches.  The  danger  of  orthodoxy  lies  in  the  direction 
of  exclusive  and  uncharitable  bigotry,  which  contracts  the  truth;  the 
danger  of  liberalism  lies  in  the  direction  of  laxity  and  indifferentism, 
which  obliterates  the  eternal  distinction  between  truth  and  error. 

The  apostles,  guided  by  more  than  human  wisdom,  and  endowed  with 
more  than  ecclesiastical  authority,  judged  severely  of  every  essential  de- 
parture from  the  revealed  truth  of  salvation.  Paul  pronounced  the 
anathema  on  the  Judaizing  teachers,  who  made  circumcision  a  term  of 
true  church  membership  (Gal.  1:  8),  and  calls  them  sarcastically  "dogs" 
of  the  "  concision "  (Phil.  3  :  2,  fite*?™  rove  t&vas  t .  .  .  T^  Kararom). 
He  warned  the  elders  of  Ephesus  against  "grievous  wolves  "  (A.VKOL  papw) 
who  would  after  bis  departure  enter  among  them  (Acts  20 :  29) ;  and 
he  characterizes  the  speculations  of  the  rising  gnosis  falsely  so  called 
(wevd&wfjoc  -puo%)  as  "doctrines  of  demons'*  (Sida^a/uai  tiaipovtuv,  1 
Tim. 4:  1;  comp.  6:  3-20;  2  Tim.  3:  1  sqq.;  4:  3  sqq.).  John  warns 
with  equal  earnestness  and  severity  against  all  false  teachers  who  deny 
the  fact  of  the  incarnation,  and  calls  them  antichrists  (1  John  4:  3;  2 
John  7) ;  and  the  second  Epistle  of  Peter  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude  de- 
scribe the  heretics  in  the  darkest  colors. 

We  need  not  wonder,  then,  that  the  ante-Nicene  fathers  held  the 
gnostic  heretics  of  their  days  in  the  greatest  abhorrence,  and  called  them 
servants  of  Satan,  beasts  in  human  shape,  dealers  in  deadly  poison,  rob- 
bers, and  pirates.  Polycarp  (Ad  Phil.  c.  7),  Ignatius  (Ad  Smyrn.  c.  4), 
Justin  M.  (ApoL  I.  c.  26),  Irenaeus  (Adv.  H&r.  III.  3,  4),  Hippolytus, 
Tertullian,  even  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  Origen  occupy  essentially  the 
same  position  of  uncompromising  hostility  towards  heresy  as  the  fathers 
of  the  Nicene  and  post-Nicene  ages.  They  regard  it  as  the  tares  sown 
by  the  devil  in  the  Lord's  field  (Matt.  13 :  3-6  sqq).  Hence  Tertullian 
infers,  "  That  which  was  first  delivered  is  of  the  Lord  and  is  true ;  whilst 
that  is  strange  and  false  which  was  afterwards  introduced"  (Praescr.  c. 
31 :  "Ex  ipso  ordine  manifestatur,  idesse  dominicum  et  verum  quod  sit  prius 
traditum,  id  autem  extranewn  et  falsum  quod  sit  posterius  inmtssum "). 
There  is  indeed  a  necessity  for  heresies  and  sects  (1  Cor.  11:  19),  bufi 


\  137.  CATHOLIC  OETHODOXY.  515 

11  woe  to  that  man  through  whom  the  offence  cometh "  (Matt.  18 :  7). 
"  It  was  necessary,"  says  Tertullian  (ib.  30),  "  that  the  Lord  should  be 
betrayed ;  but  woe  to  the  traitor." 

Another  characteristic  feature  of  patristic  polemics  is  to  trace  heresy 
to  mean  motives,  such  as  pride,  disappointed  ambition,  sensual  lustr 
and  avarice.  No  allowance  is  made  for  different  mental  constitutions, 
educational  influences,  and  other  causes.  There  are,  however,  a  few 
noble  exceptions.  Origen  and  Augustin  admit  the  honesty  and  earnest- 
ness at  least  of  some  teachers  of  error. 

We  must  notice  two  important  points  of  difference  between  the  ante- 
Nicene  and  later  heresies,  and  the  mode  of  punishing  heresy. 

1.  The  chief  ante-Nicene  heresies  were  undoubtedly  radical  perver- 
sions of  Christian  truth  and  admitted  of  no  kind  of  compromise. 
Ebionism,  Gnosticism,  and  Manichseism  were  essentially  anti-Christian. 
The  church  could  not  tolerate  that  medley  of  pagan  sense  and  nonsense 
without  endangering  its  very  existence.    But  Montanists,  Novatians, 
Donatists,  Quartodecimanians,  and  other  sects  who  differed  on  minor 
points  of  doctrine  or  discipline,  were  judged  more  mildly,  and  their 
baptism  was  acknowledged. 

2.  The  punishment  of  heresy  in  the  ante-Nicene  church  was  purely 
ecclesiastical,  and  consisted  in  reproof,  deposition,  and  excommunication. 
It  had  no  effect  on  the  civil  status. 

But  as  soon  as  church,  and  state  began  to  be  united,  temporal  punish- 
ments, such  as  confiscation  of  property,  exile,  and  death,  were  added  by 
the  civil  magistrate  with  the  approval  of  the  church,  in  imitation  of  the 
Mosaic  code,  but  in  violation  of  the  spirit  and  example  of  Christ  and  the 
apostles.  Constantine  opened  the  way  in  some  edicts  against  the  Do- 
natists,  A.  D.  316.  Valentinian  I.  forbade  the  public  worship  of  Mani- 
chseans  (371).  After  the  defeat  of  the  Arians  by  the  second  (Ecumenical 
Council,  Theodosius  the  Great  enforced  uniformity  of  belief  by  legal 
penalties  in  fifteen  edicts  between  381  and  394.  Honorius  (408),  AT- 
cadius,  the  younger  Theodosius,  and  Justinian  (529)  followed  in  the 
same  path.  By  these  imperial  enactments  heretics,  i,  e.  open  dissenters 
from  the  imperial  state-religion,  were  deprived  of  all  public  offices,  of  the 
right  of  public  worship,  of  receiving  or  bequeathing  property,  of  making 
binding  contracts;  they  were  subjected  to  fines,  banishment,  corporeal 
punishment,  and  even  death.  See  the  Theos.  Code,  Book  XVI.  tit.  V. 
De  Hcereticis.  The  first  sentence  of  death  by  the  sword  for  heresy  was 
executed  on  Priscil'Jian  and  six  of  his  followers  who  held  Manichsean 
opinions  (385).  The  better  feeling  of  Ambrose  of  Milan  and  Martin  of 
Tours  protested  against  this  act,  but  in  vain.  Even  the  great  and  good 
St.  Augustin,  although  he  had  himself  been  a  heretic  for  nine  years, 
defended  the  principle  of  religious  persecution,  on  a  false  exegesis  of 
Cbgite  eos  intrarej  Luke  14:  23  (Ep.  98  a-  •  Vine.;  Ep.  185  adBonif. ,-  Re~ 
trad.  IT.  5.).  Had  he  foreseen  the  crusade,  , jurist  the  Albigrenses  and 
fche  horrors  of  the  Spanish  Inquisition,  he  would  have  retracted  his  dan* 


516  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

gerous  opinion.  A  theocratic  or  Erastian  state-church  theory — whether 
Greek  Catholic  or  Roman  Catholic  or  Protestant — makes  all  offences 
against  the  church  offences  against  the  state,  and  requires  their  punish- 
ment with  more  or  less  severity  according  to  the  prevailing  degree  of 
zeal  for  orthodoxy  and  hatred  of  heresy.  But  in  the  overruling  Provi- 
dence of  God  which  brings  good  out  of  every  evil,  the  bloody  persecu- 
tion of  heretics— one  of  the  darkest  chapters  in  church  history— has 
produced  the  sweet  fruit  of  religious  liberty.  See  voL  IE.  138-146. 

§  138.  The  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  Canon. 

The  works  on  the  Canon  by  RETJSS,  WESTCOTT,  (6th  ed.,  1889),  ZAHN, 
(1888).  HOLTZMAXN:  Kanon  u.  Tradition,  1859.  SCHAFF  :  Com- 
panion to  the  Greek  Testament  and  the  English,  Version.  N.  York 
and  London,  1883;  third  ed.  1888.  GREGORY:  Prolegomena  to  TLa- 
ehendorf 's  8th  ed.  of  the  Greek  Test  Lips.,  1884.  A.  EABJKACK  : 
Das  N.  Test,  urn  dasjahr  200.  Leipz.,  1889. 

The  question  of  the  source  and  rule  of  Christian  knowledge 
lies  at  the  foundation  of  all  theology.  We  therefore  notice  it 
here  before  passing  to  the  several  doctrines  of  faith. 

1.  This  source  and  this  rule  of  knowledge  are  the  holy  scriptures 
of  the  Old  and  New  Covenants.1  Here  at  once  arises  the  inquiry 
as  to  the  number  and  arrangement  of  the  sacred  writings,  or  the 
canon,  in  distinction  both  from  the  productions  of  enlightened 
but  not  inspired  church  teachers,  and  from  the  very  numerous 
and  in  some  eases  still  extant  apocryphal  works  (Gospels,  Acts, 
Epistles,  and  Apocalypses),  which  were  composed  in  the  first  four 
centuries,  in  the  interest  of  heresies  or  for  the  satisfaction  of  idle 
curiosity,  and  sent  forth  under  the  name  of  an  apostle  or  other 
eminent  person.  These  apocrypha,  however,  did  not  all  origi- 
nate with  Ebionites  and  Gnostics ;  some  were  merely  designed 
either  to  fill  chasms  in  the  history  of  Jesus  and  the  apostles  by 
fictitious  -stories,  or  to  glorify  Christianity  by  vatidnia  post 
centum,  in  the  way  of  pious  fraud  at  that  time  freely  allowed. 

The  canon  of  the  Old  Testament  descended  to  the  church 
from  the  Jews,  with  the  sanction  of  Christ  and  the  apostles. 
The  Jewish  Apocrypha  were  included  in  the  Septuagint  and 
passed  from  it  into  Christian  versions.  The  New  Testament 

1  Called  simply  «J  y/xz^,  d  ypafiat,  scrtptura,  seripturtB. 


2138.  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES  AND  THE  CANON.      511 

canon  was  gradually  formed,  on  the  model  of  the  Old,  in  the 
course  of  the  first  four  centuries  j  under  the  guidance  of  the 
same  Spirit,  through  whose  suggestion  the  several  apostolic 
books  had  been  prepared.  The  first  trace  of  it  appears  in  the 
second  Epistle  of  Peter  (3  :  15),  where  a  collection  of  Paul's  epis- 
tles1 is  presumed  to  exist,  and  is  placed  by  the  side  of  "the 
other  scriptures."2  The  apostolic  fathers  and  the  earlier  apolo- 
gists commonly  appeal,  indeed,  for  the  divinity  of  Christianity  to 
the  Old  Testament,  to  the  oral  preaching  of  the  apostles,  to  the 
living  faith  of  the  Christian  churches,  the  triumphant  death  of 
the  martyrs,  and  the  continued  miracles.  1  et  their  works  con- 
tain quotations,  generally  without  the  name  of  the  author,  from 
the  most  important  writings  of  the  apostles,  or  at  least  allusions 
to  those  writings,  enough  to  place  their  high  antiquity  and 
ecclesiastical  authority  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt.3  The 
heretical  canon  of  the  Gnostic  Marcion,  of  the  middle  of  the 
second  century,  consisting  of  a  mutilated  Gospel  of  JLuke  and 
ten  of  Paul's  epistles,  certainly  implies  the  existence  of  an 
orthodox  canon  at  that  time,  as  heresy  always  presupposes  truth, 
of  which  it  is  a  caricature. 

The  principal  books  of  the  New  Testament,  the  four  Gospels, 
the  Acts,  the  thirteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  the  first  Epistle  of 
Peter,  and  the  first  of  John,  which  are  designated  by  Eusebius 
as  "  Homologumena,"  were  in  general  use  in  the  church  after 
the  middle  of  the  second  century,  and  acknowledged  to  be 
apostolic,  inspired  by  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  and  therefore  authori- 
tative and  canonical.  This  is  established  by  the  testimonies 


1  fa  K&aaie  rdlq  kmaroXaiq.  a  rag  fanrac  (not  r<Jf 

3  Comp.  Clement  of  Rome,  Ad  Cor.  c.  47  ;  Polycarp,  Ad  Phil.  3  ;  Ignatius*, 
Ad  Eph*  12  ;  Ad  PhUad.  5  ;  Barnabas,  Ep.  c.  1  ;  Papias,  testimonies  on  Mat- 
thew and  Mark,  preserved  in  Euseb.  III.  39  ;  Justin  Martyr,  Apol  I.  61  ; 
Dial.  c.  Tryph.  63,  81,  103,  106,  and  his  frequent  quotations  from  the  so 
called  "  Memoirs  by  the  Apostles  ;  "  Tatian,  Diatessaron,  etc.  To  these  muat 
be  added  the  testimonies  of  the  early  heretics,  as  Basilides  (125),  Valentine 
(140),  Heradcon,  etc.  See  on  this  subject  the  works  on  the  Canon,  and  the 
critical  Introductions  to  the  N.  T.  The  Didache  quotes  often  from  Matthew, 
and  shows  acquaintance  with  other  books  ;  Chs.  1,  3,  7,  8,  9,  10,  11,  13,  14, 
16.  See  Schaff,  Did.,  p.  81  sqfl. 


518  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

of  Justin  Martyr,  Tatian,  Theophilus  of  Antioch,  Iren£eus,Tertul- 
lian,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  Origen,  of  the  Syriac  Peshito 
(which  omits  only  Jude,  2  Peter,  2  and  3  John,  and  the  Kevela- 
tion),  the  old  Latin  Versions  (which  include  all  books  but  2  Peter, 
Hebrews,  and  perhaps  James  and  the  Fragment  of  Muratori  f 
also  by  the  heretics,  and  the  heathen  opponent  Celsus — persons 
and  documents  which  represent  in  this  matter  the  churches  in  Asia 
Minor,  Italy,  Gaul,  North  Africa,  Egypt,  Palestine,  and  Syria 
We  may  therefore  call  these  books  the  original  canon. 

Concerning  the  other  seven  books,  the  "  Antilegomena "  of 
Eusebius,  viz.  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,2  the  Apocalypse/  the 
second  Epistle  of  Peter,  the  second  and  third  Epistles  of  John, 
the  Epistle  of  James,  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude, — the  tradition  of 
the  church  in  the  time  of  Eusebius,  the  beginning  of  the  fourth 
century,  still  wavered  between  acceptance  and  rejection.  But  of 
the  two  oldest  manuscripts  of  the  Greek  Testament  which  date 
from  the  age  of  Eusebius  and  Constantine,  one — the  Sinaitic — 
contains  all  the  twenty-seven  books,  and  the  other — the  Vati- 
can— was  probably  likewise  complete,  although  the  last  chapters 
of  Hebrews  (from  11 :  14),  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  Philemon,  and 
Revelation  are  lost.  There  was  a  second  class  of  Antilegomena, 
called  by  Eusebius  "spurious"  (v6$a),  consisting  of  several 
post-apostolic  writings,  viz.  the  catholic  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  the 
first  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Borne  to  the  Corinthians,  the  Epistle 

1  The  Muratorian  Canon  (so  called  from  its  discoverer  and  first  publisher, 
Muratori,  1740)  is  a  fragment  of  Eoman  origin,  though  translated  from  the 
Greek,  between  A,  D.  170  and  180,  begins  with  Mark,  passes  to  Luke  as  the 
third  Gospel,  then  to  John,  Acts,  thirteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  mentions  two  Epp. 
of  John,  one  of  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypses  of  John  and  Peter ;  thus  omitting 
James,  Hebrews,  third  John,  first  and  second  Peter,  and  mentioning  instead  an 
apocryphal  Apocalypse  of  Peter,  but  adding  that  "'some  of  our  body  will  not 
have  it  read  in  the  church."  The  interesting  fragment  has  been  much  dis- 
cussed by  Credner,  Kirchhofer,  Reuss,  Tregelles,  Hilgenfeld,  Westcott,  Hesse, 
Harnack,  Overbeck,  Salmon,  and  Zahn. 

1  Which  was  regarded  as  canonical  indeed,  bnt  not  as  genuine  or  Pauline  in 
the  West 

*  Which  has  the  strongest  external  testimony,  that  of  Jnptin,  Irenseus,  etc., 
in  its  favor,  and  came  into  question  only  in  the  third  century  through  some 
antL-chUiasts  on  dogmatical  grounds. 


3  138.  THE  HOLY  SCKIPTUKES  AND  THE  CANON.   519 

of  Polycarp  to  the  Philippians,  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas, 
the  lost  Apocalypse  of  Peter,  and  the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews ; 
which  were  read  at  least  in  some  churches,  but  were  afterwards 
generally  separated  from  the  canon.  Some  of  them  are  even 
incorporated  in  the  oldest  manuscripts  of  the  Bible,  as  the 
Epistle  of  Barnabas  and  a  part  of  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas 
(both  in  the  original  Greek)  in  the  Codex  Sinaiticus,  and  the 
first  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Rome  in  the  Codex  Alexandrinus. 

The  first  express  definition  of  the  New  Testament  canon,  in  the 
form  in  which  it  has  since  been  universally  retained,  comes  from 
two  African  synods,  held  in  393  at  Hippo,  and  397  at  Carthage, 
in  the  presence  of  Augustin,  who  exerted  a  commanding  in- 
fluence on  all  the  theological  questions  of  his  age.  By  that 
time,  at  least,  the  whole  church  must  have  already  become 
nearly  unanimous  as  to  the  number  of  the  canonical  books;  so 
that  there  seemed  to  be  no  need  even  of  the  sanction  of  a 
general  council.  The  Eastern  church,  at  all  events,  was  en- 
tirely independent  of  the  North  African  in  the  matter.  The 
Council  of  Laoclicea  (363)  gives  a  list  of  the  books  of  our  New 
Testament  with  the  exception  of  the  Apocalypse.  The  last 
canon  which  contains  fchis  list,  is  probably  a  later  addition,  yet  the 
long-established  ecclesiastical  use  of  all  the  books,  with  some 
doubts  as  to  the  Apocalypse,  is  confirmed  by  the  scattered  testi- 
monies of  all  the  great  Nicene  and  post-Nicene  fathers,  as 
Athanasius  (d.  373),  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (d.  386),  Gregory  of 
Nazianzum  (d.  389),  Epiphanius  of  Salainis  (d.  403),  Chrysos- 
tom  (d.  407),  etc.1  The  name  Novum  Testamentum,*  also  Novum 
In$fy*umentum  (a  juridical  term  conveying  the  idea  of  legal 
validity),  occurs  first  in  Tertullian,  and  came  into  general  use 
instead  of  the  more  correct  term  New  Covenant  The  books 
were  currently  divided  into  two  parts,  "the  Gospel2 "and  "the 

1  See  lists  of  patristic  canons  in  Charteris,  Canonicity,  p.  12  sqq. 

*  6ia&fiwj,  covenant,  comp.  Matt.  26 :  28,  where  the  Vulgate  translates,  '*  fefr 
tamentum"  instead  offcedus. 

*  ra  tvayysMKa  not  ra  airoaroXtK&<  or  rb  Evayy&tov  Kal  6  afnteroAo? ;  imtrumentWR 
'fangelicum,  aposfolicumj  or  evangdium,  apostohs.    Hence  the  Scripture  lessor' 
\TI  the  li'urcical  churches  are  divided  into  "Gospels"  an<*  "  Rnia 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

Apostle,"3  and  Hie  Epistles,  in  the  second  part,  into  Catholic  01 
General,  and  Pauline.  The  Catholic  canon  thus  settled  remained 
untouched  till  the  time  of  the  Reformation  when  the  question  of 
the  Apocrypha  and  of  the  Antilegomena  was  reopened  sud  the 
science  of -biblical  criticism  was  born.  But  the  most  thorough 
investigations  of  modern  times  have  not  been  able  to  unsettle  the 
faith  of  the  church  in  the  New  Testament,  nor  ever  will 

2.  As  to  the  origin  and  character  of  the  apostolic  writings,  the 
church  fathers  adopted  for  the  New  Testament  the  somewhat 
mechanical  and  magical  theory  of  inspiration  applied  by  the 
Jews  to  the  Old;  regarding  the  several  books  as  compose*! 
with  such  extraordinary  aid  from  the  Holy  Spirit  as  scoured 
their  freedom  from  errors  (according  to  Origen,  even  from  faults 
of  memory).     Yet  this  was'  not  regarded  as  excluding  the 
writer's  own  activity  and  individuality.    Irenaeus,  for  example, 
sees  in  Paul  a  peculiar  style,  which  he  attributes  to  the  mighty 
flow  of  thought  in  his  ardent  mind.    The  Alexandrians,  how- 
ever, enlarged  the  idea  of  inspiration  to  a  doubtful  breadth. 
Clement  of  Alexandria  calls  the  works  of  Plato  inspired,  be- 
cause they  contain  truth;  and  he  considers  all  that  is  beautiful 
and  good  in  history,  a  breath  of  the  infinite,  a  tone,  which  the 
divine  Logos  draws  forth  from  the  lyre  of  the  human  soul. 

As  a  production  of  the  inspired  organs,  of  divine  revelation> 
the  sacred  scriptures,  without  critical  distinction  between  the 
Old  .and  New  Covenants,  were  acknowledged  and  employed 
against  heretics  as  an  infallible  source  of  knowledge  and  an  un- 
erring rule  of  Christian  faith  and  practice.    Irensens  calls  the 
Gospel  a  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth.    Tertullian  demand? 
scripture  proof  for  every  doctrine,  and  declares,  that  heretic: 
cannot  stand  on  pure  scriptural  ground.     In  Origen's  view 
nothing  deserves  credit  which  cannot  be  confirmed  by  the  tcsti 
mony  of  scripture. 

3.  The  exposition  of  the  Bible  was  at  first  purely  practical,  and 
designed  for  direct  edification.    The  controversy  with  the  Gnos- 
tics called  for  a  more  scientific  method.    Both  the  orthodox  and 


|138.  THE  HOLY  SCBIPTUEES  AND  THE  CANON.      521 

heretics,  after  the  fashion  of  the  rabbinical  and  Alexandria! 
Judaism,  made  large  use  of  allegorical  and  mystical  interpreta- 
tion, and  not  rarely  lost  themselves  amid  the  merest  fancies  and 
\/ildest  vagaries.  The  fathers  generally,  with  a  few  exceptions, 
(Chrysostom  and  Jerome)  had  scarcely  an  idea  of  grammatical 
and  historical  exegesis. 

,  Origen  was  the  first  to  lay  down,  in  connection  with  the 
allegorical  method  of  the  Jewish  Platonist,  Philo,  a  formal 
theory  of  interpretation,  which  he  carried  out  in  a  long 
series  of  exegetical  works  remarkable  for  industry  and  in- 
genuity, but  meagre  in  solid  results.  He  considered  the  Bible 
a  living  organism,  consisting  of  three  elements  which  answer 
to  the  body,  soul,  and  spirit  of  man,  after  the  Platonic  psycho- 
logy. Accordingly,  he  attributed  to  the  scriptures  a  three- 
fold sense;  (1)  a  somatic,  literal,  or  historical  sense,  furnished 
immediately  by  the  meaning  of  the  words,  but  only  serving 
as  a  veil  for  a  higher  idea;  (2)  a  psychic  or  moral  sense, 
animating  the  first,  and  serving  for  general  edification;  (3) 
a  pneumatic  or  mystic  and  ideal  sense,  for  those  who  stand 
on  the  high  ground  of  philosophical  knowledge.  In  the  ap- 
plication of  this  theory  he  shows  the  same  tendency  as  Philo, 
to  spiritualize  away  the  letter  of  scripture,  especially  where  the 
plain  historical  sense  seems  unworthy,  as  in  the  history  of 
David's  crimes ;  and  instead  of  simply  bringing  out  the  sense  of 
the  Bible,  he  puts  into  it  all  sorts  of  foreign  ideas  and  irrelevant 
fancies.  But  this  allegorizing  suited  the  taste  of  the  age,  and, 
with  his  fertile  mind  and  imposing  learning,  Origen  was  the 
exegetical  oracle  of  the  early  church,  till  his  orthodoxy  fell  into 
disrepute.  He  is  the  pioneer,  also,  in  the  criticism  of  the  sacred 
text,  and  his  "  Hexapla  "  was  the  first  attempt  at  a  Polyglot  Bible. 
In  spite  of  the  numberless  exegetical  vagaries  and  differences 
in  detail,  which  confute  the  Tridentine  fiction  of  a  "  unanimis 
consensus  patrum"  there  is  still  a  certain  unanimity  among  the 
fathers  in  their  way  of  drawing  the  most  important  articles  of 
faith  from  the  Scriptures.  In  their  expositions  they  all  folios 


522  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

ono  dogmatical  principle,  a  kind  of  analogia  fidei.    This  brings 
us  to  tradition. 

NOTES  ON  THE  CANON. 

L  THE  STATEMENTS  OF  EUSEBIUS, 

The  accounts  of  Eusebius  (d.  3-iO)  on  the  apostolic  writings  in  several 
passages  of  his  Church  History  (especially  III.  25;  comp.  II.  22,  23; 
III.  3  24;  V.  8;  VI.  14,  25  j  are  somewhat  vague  and  inconsistent,  yet 
upon  'the 'whole  they  give  us  the  best  idea  of  the  state  of  the  canon  in 
the  first  quarter  of  the  fourth  century  just  before  the  Council  of  Nicsea 
(325). 

He  distinguishes  four  classes  of  sacred  books  of  the  Christians  ( ff.  K 
III.  25,  in  Heinichen's  ed.  vol.  1. 130  sqq.;  comp.  his  note  in  vol.  III. 
87  sqq.). 

1.  HoaiOLOGUMEiTA,  L  e.  such  as  were  universally  acknowledged 
(o^Myovfisva) :  22  Books  of  the  27  of  the  N.  T.,  viz. :  4  Gospels,  Acts, 
14  Pauline  Epistles  (including  Hebrews),  1  Peter,  1  John,  Revelation. 
He  says :  "  Having  arrived  at  this  point,  it  is  proper  that  we  should  give 
a  summary  catalogue  of  the  afore-mentioned  (HI.  24)  writings  of  the 
K  T.  (av<tKs<]>a%at6aaa&at  rag  (tyfo&eiaas  rij$  Katvft  diadfiwe  ypatydg).  First, 
then,  we  must  place  the  sacred  quaternion  (or  quartette,  rerpaicrbv)  of  the 
Gospels,  which  are  followed  by  the  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
(?t  TQV  Kpdfruv  r&v  drcoard^Qv  ypaQq).  After  this  we  must  reckon  the 
Epistles  of  Paul,  and  next  to  them  we  must  maintain  as  genuine 
(nvpurt'ov,  the  verb.  adj.  from  wp6u}  to  ratify],  the  Epistle  circulated  as 
the  former  of  John  (~#v  fapoptvrjv  'ludwov  irpoTtyav),  and  in  like  manner 
that  of  Peter  (*«<  d/ioiof  ryv  Uerpov  kirurrohJia).  In  addition  to  these  books, 
if  it  seem  proper  (rfye  0awr«/),  we  must  place  the  Revelation  of  John 
(TJ/V  dxoKdto^Lv  'Ivdwov),  concerning  which  we  shall  set  forth  the  differ- 
ent opinions  in  due  course.  And  these  are  reckoned  among  those  which 
are  generally  received  (h  dpofayovfitvoii;)." 

In  Bk.  IH.  ch.  3,  Eusebius  speaks  of  "  fourteen  Epp."  of  Paul  (TOV  61 
TiavZov  npoSifiMi  KOI  aa$Ei?  al  feKarfoaapec),  as  commonly  received,  but  adds 
that  "  some  have  rejected  the  Ep.  to  the  Hebrews,  saying  that  it  was  dis- 
puted as  not  being  one  of  Paul's  epistles. " 

On  the  Apocalypse,  Eusebius  vacillates  according  as  he  gives  the  pub* 
lie  belief  of  the  church  or  his  private  opinion.  He  first  counts  it  among 
the  Homologumena,  and  then,  in  the  same  passage  (III.  25),  among  the 
spurious  books,  but  iu  each  case  with  a  qualifying  statement  (si  faveiq}, 
leaving  the  matter  to  the  judgment  of  the  reader.  He  rarely  quotes  the 
book,  and  usually  as  the  "Apocalypse  of  John,"  but 'in  one  place  (III. 
39)  he  intimates  that  it  was  probably  written  by  "the  second  John," 
which  must  mean  the  "  Presbyter  John,"  so  called,  as  distinct  from  the 
Apostle— an  opinion  which  has  found  much  favor  in  the  Schleiermacher 
school  of  critics.  Owing  to  its  mysterious  character,  the  Apocalypse  is, 


§138.  THE  HOLY  SCEIPTUEES  AND.  THE  CANON.       523 

even  to  this  day,  the  most  popular  book  of  the  N.  T.  with  a  few,  and  the 
most  unpopular  with  the  many.  It  is  as  well  attested  as  any  other  book, 
and  the  most  radical  modern  critics  (Baur,  Renan)  admit  its  apostolic 
authorship  and  composition  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

2.  ANTILEGOMENA,  or  controverted  books,  yet  "familiar  to  most  people 
of  the  church"  (avr^ey^ueua,  yv&ptpa  d*  opus  roig  7ro/l/lo^,  III.  25). 
These  are  five  (or  seven),  viz.,  one  Epistle  of  James,  one  of  Jude,  2 
Peter,  2  and  3  John  ("  whether  they  really  belong  to  the  Evangelist  or 
to  another  John  "). 

To  these  we  m'ay  add  (although  Eusebius  does  not  do  it  expressly)  the 
Hebrews  and  the  Apocalypse,  the  former  as  not  being  generally  ac- 
knowledged as  Pauline,  the  latter  on  account  of  its  supposed  chiliasm, 
which  was  offensive  to,  Eusebius  and  the  Alexandrian  school. 

3.'  SPURIOUS  Books  (v6$a)}  such  as  the  Acts  of  Paul,  the  Revelation  of 
Peter,  the  Shepherd  (Hennas),  the  Ep.  of  Barnabas,  the  so-called  "  Doc- 
trines of  the  Apostles/'  and  the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  "  in 
which  those  Hebrews  who  have  accepted  Christ  take  special  delight." 

To  these  he  adds  inconsistently,  as  already  remarked,  the  Apocalypse 
of  John,  "  which  some,  as  I  said,  reject  (tfv  nvcf  a&e-ovaiv},  while  others 
reckon  it  among  the  books  generally  received  (role  fywtayouju&wf)."  He 
ought  to  have  numbered  it  with  the  Antilegomena. 

These  vdtfa,  we  may  say,  correspond  to  the  Apocrypha  of  the  0.  T., 
pious  and  useful,  but  not  canonical. 

4.  HERETICAL  Books.  These,  Eusebius  says,  are  worse  than  spurious 
books,  and  must  be  "set  aside  as  altogether  worthless  and  impious." 
Among  these  he  mentions  the  Gospels  of  Peter,  and  Thomas,  and  Mat- 
thias, the  Acts  of  Andrew,  and  John,  and  of  the  other  Apostles. 

II.  ECCLESIASTICAL  DEFECTIONS  OF  THE  CANON. 

Soon  after  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century,  when  the  church  became 
firmly  settled  in  the  Empire,  all  doubts  as  to  the  Apocrypha  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  Antilegomena  of  the  New  ceased,  and  the  acceptance 
of  the  Canon  in  its  Catholic  shape,  which  includes  both,  became  an 
article  of  faith.  The  first  OEcumenical  Council  of  Nicsea  did  not  settle 
the  canon,  as  one  might  expect,  but  the  scriptures  were  regarded  with- 
out controversy  as  the  sure  and  immovable  foundation  of  the  orthodox 
faith.  In  the  last  (20th  or  21st)  Canon  of  the  Synod  of  Gangra,  in  Asia 
Minor  (about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century),  it  is  said :  "  To  speak 
briefly,  we  desire  that  what  has  been  handed  down  to  us  by  the  divine 
scriptures  and  the  Apostolic  traditions  should  be  observed  in  the  church." 
Comp.  Hefele,  Conciliengesch.  I.  789. 

The  first  Council  which  expressly  legislated  on  the  number  of  canon- 
ical books  is  that  of  LAODICBA  in  Phrygia,  in  Asia  Minor  (held  between 
A.  r>.  343  and  381,  probably  about  363).  In  its  last  canon  (60  or  59),  it 
enumerates  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  then  all  ol 
the  New,  with  the  exception  of  the  Apocalypse,  in  the  following  order: 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

"And  these  are  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament:  Four  GospelSj 
according  to  Matthew,  according  to  Mark,  according  to  Luke,  according 
to  John ;  Acts  of  the  Apostles ;  Seven  Catholic  Epistles,  One  of  James, 
Two  of  Peter,  Three  of  John,  One  of  Jude;  Fourteen  Epistles  of  Paul, 
One  to  the  Boinans,  Two  to  the  Corinthians,  One  to  the  Galatians,  One 
to  the  Ephesians,  One  to  the  Philippians,  One  to  the  Colossians,  Two  to 
the  Thessalonians,  One  to  the  Hebrews,  Two  to  Timothy,  One  to  Titus, 
and  One  to  Philemon." 

This  catalogue  is  omitted  in  several  manuscripts  and  versions,  and 
probably  is  a  later  insertion  from  the  writings  of  Cyril  of  Jerusalem, 
Spittier,  Herbst,  and  Westcott  deny,  Schrockh  and  Hefele  defend,  the 
Laodicean  origin  of  this  catalogue.  It  resembles  that  of  the  85th  of 
the  Apostolical  Canons  which  likewise  omits  the  Apocalypse,  but  inserts 
two  Epistles  of  Clement  and  the  pseudo-Apostolical  Constitutions. 

On  the  Laodicean  Council  and  its  uncertain  date,  see  Hefele,  Con- 
eiliengeschichtej  revised  ed.  vol.  L  p.  746  sqq.,  and  Westcott,  on  the  Canon 
of  the  N.  T.,  second  ed.,  p.  382  sqq. 

In  the  Western  church,  the  third  provincial  Council  of  CARTHAGE 
(held  A.  D.  397)  gave  a  full  list  of  the  canonical  books  of  both  Testa- 
ments, which  should  be  read  as  divine  Scriptures  to  the  exclusion 
of  all  others  in  the  churches.  The  N.  T.  books  are  enumerated  in  the 
following  order :  "  Four  Books  of  the  Gospels,  One  Book  of  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  Thirteen  Epp.  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  One  Ep.  of  the  same 
[Apostle]  to  the  Hebrews,  Two  Epistles  of  the  Apostle  Peter,  Three  of 
John,  One  of  James,  One  of  Jude,  One  Book  of  the  Apocalypse  of  John." 
This  canon  nad  been  previously  adopted  by  the  African  Synodof  Hippo 
regius,  A.  D.  393,  at  which  Augustin,  then  presbyter,  delivered  his  dis- 
course De  Fide  et  8ymbolo.  The  acts  of  that  Council  are  lost,  but  they 
were  readopted  by  the  third  council  of  Carthage,  which  consisted  only 
of  forty-three  African  bishops,  and  can  claim  no  general  authority.  (See 
Westcott,  p.  391,  Charteris,  p.  20,  and  Hefele,  II.  53  and  68,  revised  ed.) 

Augustin,  (who  was  present  at  both  Councils),  and  Jerome  (who  trans- 
lated the  Latin  Bible  at  the  request  of  Pope  Damasus  of  Borne) 
exerted  a  decisive  influence  in  settling  the  Canon  for  the  Latin  church. 

The  Council  of  Trent  (1546)  confirmed  the  traditional  view  with 
an  anathema  on  those  who  dissent.  "  This  fatal  decree,  *'  says  Dr.  West- 
cott (p.  426  sq.),  "was  ratified  by  fifty-three  prelates,  among  whom  was 
not  one  German,  not  one  scholar  distinguished  for  historical  learning, 
not  one  who  was  fitted  by  special  study  for  the  examination  of  a  subject 
in  which  the  truth  could  only  be  determined  by  the  voice  of  antiquity." 

For  the  Greek  and  Eoman  churches  the  question  of  the  Canon  isv 
closed,  although  no  strictly  oecumenical  council  representing  the  entire 
church  has  pronounced  on  it.  But  Protestantism  claims  the  liberty  of 
the  ante-Nicene  age  and  the  right  of  renewed  investigation  into  the 
origin  and  history  of  every  book  of  the  Bible.  Without  this  liberty 
there  can  be  no  real  progress  in  exegetical  theology. 


g  139.  CATHOLIC  TBADITION.  625 

§  139.  Catholic  Tradition. 

Adv.  Hcer.  Lib,  I.  c.  9,  |  5;  1. 10,  1;  III.  3,  1,  2;  m.  4,  2; 

IV.  33,  7.    TJEBTULL.  :  De  PrcBseriptioni'bus  H&reticorum  ;  especially 

c.  13, 14, 17-19,  21,  35,  36,  40,  41;  De  Virgin,  veland.  c.  1;  Adv. 

Prax.  c.  2;   on  the  other  hand,  Adv.  Hermog.  c.  22;  De   Came 

Christij  c.  7 ;  De  Resurr.  Carnis,  c.  3.    No  v  ATI  AN :  De  Ti*initaie,  3 ; 

De  Regnla  Fidei.    CYPJUAHT:  De  Unitate  JEcel. ;  and  on  the  other 

hand,  Epist.  74.    ORIGEN:  Z>e  Princip.  lib.  L  Pnef.  £  4-6.    CYBIL 

of  Jerus. :  Kan^e^  (written  348). 
J*A.  DANIEL:    Theol.  Controversen  (the  doctrine  of  the  Scriptures  as 

the  scarce  of  knowledge).    Halle,  1843. 
J.  J.  JAOOBI  :   Die  kirchL  Lehre  von  d.  Tradition  u.  heiL  Schrift  in  ifirer 

Eiitwickelung  dargextdlt.    Berl.  I.  1847. 
Pn.  BCLIAFF:     Creeds   of   Christendom,  vol.   L  p.  12   sqq.;   II.  11-44. 

Comp.  Lit.  in  the  next  section. 

Besides  appealing  to  the  Scriptures,  the  fathers,  particularly 
Irenagufc?  and  Tertullian,  refer  with  equal  confidence  to  the  "  rule 
of  faith ;vl  that  is,  the  common  faith  of  the  church,  as  orally 
handed  down  in  the  unbroken  succession  of  bishops  from  Christ 
and  his  apostles  to  their  day,  and  Jbove  all  as  still  living  in  tire 
original  apostolic  churches,  like  those  of  Jerusalem,  Antiouh, 
Ephesus,  and  Rome.  Tradition  is  thus  intimately  connected 
with  th*e  primitive  episcopate.  The  latter  was  the  vehicle  of 
the  former,  and  both  were  looked  upon  as  bulwarks  against 
heresy. 

Irenseus  confronts  the  secret  tradition  of  the  Gnostics  with  the 
open  and  unadulterated  tradition  of  the  catholic  church,  and 
points  to  all  churches,  but  particularly  to  Home,  as  the  visible 
centre  of  the  unity  of  doctrine.  All  who  would  know  the  truth, 
says  he,  can  see  in  the  whole  church  the  tradition  of  the  apostles; 
and  we  can  count  the  bishops  ordained  by  the  apostles,  and 
f-heir  successors  down  to  our  time,  who  neither  taught  nor  knew 
any  such  heresies.  Then,  by  way  of  example,  he  cites  the  first 

i  Kav&v  Ti?g  7r«yr£6)£,  or  Tjyf  aty&eias,  iraptiftotric  r&v  airoaT6fan>,  or  trap. 
airoaTofaKTf,  tcavbv  eKKtyetaaTiKdi;,  TO  ap^alov  rfc  £KKfa]aia$,  Gvarqfia,  regida  fdei, 
*egula  veritatis,  traditio  apostolica,  lex  fidei,  fides  catholica.  Sometimes  these 
terms  are  used  in  a  wider  sense,  and  embrace  the  whole  course  of  catechetical 
instruction. 


526  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

twelve  bishops  of  the  Roman  church  from  Linus  to  Eleutherug, 
as  witnesses  of  the  pure  apostolic  doctrine.  He  might  conceive 
of  a  Christianity  without  scripture,  but  he  could  not  imagine  a 
Christianity  without  living  tradition ;  and  for  this  opinion  he 
refers  'to  barbarian  tribes,  who  have  the  gospel,  "  sine  charta  et 
xtwmento"  written  in  their  hearts. 

Tertullian  finds  a  universal  antidote  for  all  heresy  in  his 
celebrated  prescription  argument,  which  cuts  off  heretics,  at  the 
cutset,  from  every  right  of  appeal  to  the  holy  scriptures,  on  the 
srround,  that  the  holy  scriptures  arose  in  the  church  of  Christ, 
were  given  to  her,  and  only  in  her  and  by  her  can  be  rightly 
understood.  He  calls  attention  also  here  to  the  tangible  succes- 
sion, which  distinguishes  the  catholic  church  from  the  arbitrary 
and  ever-changing  sects  of  heretics,  and  which  in  all  the  prin- 
cipal congregations,  especially  in  the  original  sees  of  the  apostles, 
reaches  back  without  a  break  from  bishop  to  bishop,  to  the 
apostles  themselves,  from  the  apostles  to  Christ,  and  from  Christ 
to  God.  "  Come,  now,"  says  he,  in  his  tract  on  Prescription, "if 
you  would  practise  inquiry  to  more  advantage  in  the  matter  of 
your  salvation,  go  through  the  apostolic  churches,  in  which  the 
very  chairs  of  the  apostles  still  preside,  in  which  their  own  . 
authentic  letters  are  publicly  read,  uttering  the  voice  and  repre- 
senting the  face  of  every  one.  If  Achaia  is  nearest,  you  have 
Corinth.  If  you  are  not  far  from  Macedonia,  you  have  Philippi, 
you  have  Thessalonica.  If  you  can  go  to  Asia,  you  have  Ephesus. 
But  if  you  live  near  Italy,  you  have  Rome,  whence  also  we  [of 
the  African  church]  derive  our  origin.  How  happy  is  the  church, 
to  which  the  apostles  poured  out  their  whole  doctrine  with  theii 
blcod/'  etc. 

To  estimate  the  weight  of  this  argument,  we  must  remember 
that  these  fathers  still  stood  comparatively  very  near  the  apos- 
tolic age,  and  that  the  succession  of  bishops  in  the  oldest  churches 
could  be  demonstrated  by  the  living  memory  of  two  or  three 
generations.  Irenaeus,  in  fact,  had  been  acquainted  in  his  youth 
vrith  Polycarp,  a  disciple  of  St.  John.  But  for  this  very  reason 


#  139.  CATHOLIC  TRADITION.  627 

we  must  guard  against  overrating  this  testimony,  and  employing 
it  in  behalf  of  traditions  of  later  origin,  not  grounded  in  the 
scriptures. 

Nor  can  we  suppose  that  those  fathers  ever  thought  of  a  blind 
and  slavish  subjection  of  private  judgment  to  ecclesiastical  au- 
thority, and  to  the  decision  of  the  bishops  of  the  apostolic  mother 
churches.  The  same  Irenseus  frankly  opposed  the  Roman  bishop 
Victor.  Tertullian,  though  he  continued  essentially  orthodox, 
contested  various  points  with  the  catholic  church  from  his 
later  Montanistic  position,  and  laid  down,  though  at  first  only 
in  respect  to  a  conventional  custom — the  veiling  of  virgins — the 
genuine  Protestant  principle,  that  the  thing  to  be  regarded, 
especially  in  matters  of  religion,  is  not  custom  but  truth.1  His 
pupil,  Cyprian,  with  whom  biblical  and  catholic  were  almost 
interchangeable  terms,  protested  earnestly  against  the  Eoman 
theory  of  the  validity  of  heretical  baptism,  and  in  this  controversy 
declared,  in  exact  accordance  with  Tertullian,  that  custom  with- 
out truth  was  oi^ly  time-honored  error.2  The  Alexandrians 
freely  fostered  all  sorts  of  peculiar  views,  which  were  afterwards 
rejected  as -heretical;  and  though  the  xapddoats  dxoaTohxiy  plays 
a  prominent  part  with  them,  yet  this  and  similar  expressions 
have  in  their  language  a  different  sense,  sometimes  meaning 
simply  the  holy  scriptures.  So,  for  example,  in  the  well-known 
passage  of  Clement :  "As  if  one  should  be.  changed  from  a  man 
to  a  beast  after  the  manner  of  one  charmed  by  Circe ;  so  a  man 
ceases  to  be  God's  and  to  continue  faithful  to  the  Lord,  when  he 
sets  himself  up  against  the  church  tradition,  and  flies  off  to  posi- 
tions of  human  caprice/' 

In  the  substance  of  its  doctrine  this  apostolic  tradition  agrees 
with  the  holy  scriptures,  and  though  derived,  as  to  its  form, 
from  the  oral  preaching  of  the  apostles,  is  really,  as  to  its  con- 

1  *'  Christus  veritatem  se,  non  consuetudinem,  cognominavit. ....  Haereses  not: 
tarn  novitas  guam  veritas  reoineit.  Qttodcunque  adv&rsus  v&ritatem,  sapti  hoc  ertt 
iosresis,  etiam  vetits  consuetudo"  De  Virg.  vd.  c.  1. 

3  "  Cw^uetudo  siTie  v&rtiate  vetustaa  erroris  est."  Ep.  74  (contra  Stephanum), 
0.9. 


528  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

tents,  one  and  the  same  with  those  apostolic  writings.  In  this 
view  the  apparent  contradictions  of  the  earlier  fathers,  in  as- 
L-ribing  the  highest  authority  to  both  scripture  and  tradition  in 
matters  of  faith,  resolve  themselves.  It  is  one  and  the  same 
gospel  which  the  apostles  preached  with  their  lips,  and  then  laid 
down  in  their  writings,  and  which  the  church  faithfully  hands 
lown  by  word  and  writing  from  one  generation  to  another,1 

§  140.  The  Rule  of  Faith  and  the  Aposttes'  Creed. 

RUFINUS  (d.  410)  i   Expos,  in  Symbolum  Apostolorum.    In  the  Append. 

to  Fell's  ed.  of  Cyprian,  1682;   and  in  Rufini   Opera,  Migne's 

"Patrologia,"  Tom.  XXI.  fol.  335-386. 
JAMES  USSHER  (Prot.  archbishop  of  Armagh,  d.  1655) :   De  Romance 

Ecdesice  Symbolo  Apostolico  vetere,  aliisque  fidei.formulis.    London, 

1647.    In  his  Works,  Dublin  1847,  vol.  VII.  p.  297  sqq.    Ussher 

broke  the  path  for  a  critical  history  of  the  creed  on  the  basis  of  the 

oldest  MSS.  which  he  discovered. 
JOHN  PEARSOX  (Bp.  of  Chester,  d.  1686) :  Exposition  of  the  Creed,  1659, 

in  many  editions  (revised  ed.  by  Dr.  E.  Burton,  Oxf.  1847 ;  New 

York  1851).    A  standard  work  of  Anglican  theology. 
PETER  KDTG  (Lord  Chancellor  of  England,  d.  1733) :   History  of  the 

Apostles'  Creed.    Lend.  1702. 
HERM.  WITSITTS  (Calvinist,  d.  at  Leyden,  1708) :  Exercitafiones  sacrae  in 

Symbolum  quod  Apostolorum  didtur.    Amstel.  1700.    Basil.  1739.  4°. 

English  translation  by  Fraser.    Edinb.  1823,  in  2  vols. 
Kr>.  KOLLNER  (Luth.):    Symbolik  atter  christl  Confessionen.     Part  I. 

Hamb.  1837,  p.  6-28. 
*  AUG.  HAHX  :  Bibliothek  der  Symlole  und  Glaubensregeln  der  apostolisich- 

Jcatholischen  [in  the  new  ed.  der  alien]  Kirche.    Breslau,  1842  (pp. 

222).    Second  ed.  revised  and  enlarged  by  his  son,  G.  LUDWIG 

HAHN.    Breslau,  1877  (pp.  300). 
J.  W.  NEVE*:  The  Apostles1  Creed,  in  the  " Mercersburg  Review,"  1849. 

Purely  doctrinal. 

^o  Paul  uses  the  word  Tropd&xnf,  2Thess.  2:  15:  "hold  the  tradition* 
which  ye  were  taught,  whether  by  word  (Sia  Myov],  or  by  epistle  of  ours 
iirtoTolfe  f}n&v) ;  comp.  3 :  6  (KCLTCL  TTJV  irapaSoatv  %v  napeM/JETS  nap* 
\  Cor.  11 :  2.  In  all  otlier  passages,  however,  where  the  word  ira 
traditio,  occurs,  it  is  used  in  an  unfavorable  sense  of  extra-scriptural  teaching, 
especially  that  of  the  Pharisees.  Comp.  Matt.  15 :  2,  6 ;  Mark  7 :  3,  5,  9,  13 ; 
JtoJ.  1:  14;  Col.  2:  8.  The  Befonners  attached  the  samo  censure  to  the 
mediaeval  traditions  of  the  Roman  church,  which  obscured  and  virtually  se* 
aside  the  written  word  of  God. 


1 140.  THE  RULE  OI  FAITH  AND  APOSTLES'  CEEfiD.      529 

PET.  MEYERS  (R.  C.) :    De  Symboli  Apostolici  Titulo,   Origine  et  anti- 

guissimis  ecclesiae  temporibus  Auctoritate.    Treviris,  1849  (pp.  210i. 

A  learned  defense  of  the  Apostolic  origin  of  the  Creed. 
W.  W.  HARVEY:    The  History  and  Theology  of  the  three   Creeds  (the 

Apostles',  the  Nicene,  and  the  Athanasian}*    Lond.  1854.    2  vols. 
*CHAKLES  A.  HEURTLETZ  :  Harmonia  Symbolica.    Oxford,  1858. 
MICHEL  NICOLAS  :  Le  Symbole  des  apdtres.    Eszai  historic.    Paris,  1867. 

(Sceptical). 
*J.  EAWSON  LUMBY:     The  History  of  the  Creeds  (ante-Nicene,  Nlcem 

and,  Athanasian).    London,  1873,  2d  ed.  1880. 

*C.  A.  SWAINSON:  The  Nicene  and  the  Apostles'  Creed.    London,  1875. 
*C.  P.  CASPARI  (Prof,  in  Christiania) :    Quellen  zur  Gesch.  des  Tauf 

symbols   und  der   Qlnubensregel.    Christiania,   1866-1879.     4  vols. 

Contains  new  researches  and  discoveries  of  MSS. 
*F.  J.  A.  HORT :    Two  Dissertations  on  uoityevijs  tf  edc,  and  on  the  "  Oon- 

stantinopolitau  Cned  and  other  Eastern  Creeds  of  the  fourth  Century. 

Cambr.  and  Lond.  187C.    Of  great  critical  value. 
R  B.  WESTCOTT  :  The  Historic  Faith.    London,  1883. 
PH.  SCHAFF :  Creeds  of  Christendom,  vol.  I.  3-42,  and  EL  10-73.     (4th 

ed.  1884. 

IP  the  narrower  sense,  by  apostolic  tradition  or  the  rule  of 
faith  (xovo>v  rrfi  mcr-rswr,  regula  fidei)  was  understood  a  doc- 
trinal summary  of  Christianity,  or  a  compend  of  the  faith  of 
the  church.  Such  a  summary  grew  out  of  the  necessity  of 
catechetical  instruction  and  a  public  confession  of  candidates  for 
baptism.-  It  became  equivalent  to  a  symbolum,  that  is,  a  sign  of 
recognition  among  catholic  Christians  in  distinction  from  unbe- 
lievers and  heretics.  The  confession  of  Peter  (Matt.  16 :  16) 
gave  the  key-note,  and  the  baptismal  formula  (Matt.  28 :  19) 
furnished  the  trinitarian  frame-work  of  the  earliest  creeds  or 
baptismal  confessions  of  Christendom. . 

There  was  at  first  no  prescribed  formula  of  faith  binding 
upon  all  believers.  Each  of  the  leading  churches  framed  its 
creed  (in  a  sort  of  independent  congregational  way),  according 
to  its  wants,  though  on  the  same  basis  of  the  baptismal  formula, 
and  possibly  after  the  model  of  a  brief  archetype  which  may 
have  come  down  from  apostolic  days.  Hence  we  have  a  variety 
•yF  such  rules  of  faith,  or  rather  fragmentary  accounts  of  them, 
longer  or  shorter,  declarative  or  interrogative,  in  the  ante-Nicene 
writers,  as  Irenseus  of  Lyons  (180),  Tertullian  of  Carthage 


530  SECOND  PEBIOJ).    A.  D.  100-311. 

(200),  Cyprian  of  Carthage  (250),  Novation  of  Eome  (250), 
Origen  of  Alexandria  (250),  Gregory  Thaumaturgus  (270),  Lu- 
cian  of  Antioch  (300),  Eusebius  of  Caesarea  (325),  Marcelius  of 
Ancyra  (340),  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (350),  Epiphanius  of  Cyprus 
(374),  Rufinus  of  Aquileja  (390),  and  in  the  Apostolic  Constitu- 
tions).1 Yet  with  all  the  differences  in  form  and  extent  there  is 
a  substantial  agreement,  so  that  Tertullian  could  say  that  the 
reguta  fidei  was  "una  omnino,  sola  immobilis  et  irreformabilis." 
They  are  variations  of  the  same  theme.  We  may  refer  for 
illustration  of  the  variety  and  unity  to  the  numerous  orthodox 
and  congregational  creeds  of  the  Puritan  churches  in  New  Eng- 
land, which  are  based  upon  the  "Westminster  standards. 

The  Oriental  forms  are  generally  longer,  more  variable  and 
metaphysical,  than  the  Western,  and  include  a  number  of  dog- 
matic terms  against  heretical  doctrines  which  abounded  in  the 
East  They  were  all  replaced  at  last  by  the  Nicene  Creed 
(325,  381,  and  451),  which  was  clothed  with  the  authority  of 
oecumenical  councils  and  remains  to  this  day  the  fundamental 
Creed  of  the  Greek  Church.  Strictly  speaking  it  is  the  only 
oecumenical  Creed  of  Christendom,  having  been  adopted  also  in 
the  West,  though  with  a  clause  (Filiogue)  which  has  become  a 
wall  of  division.  We  shall  return  to  it  in  the  next  volume. 

The  Western  forms — North  African,  Gallican,  Italian — are 
shorter  and  simpler,  have  less  variety,  and  show  a  more  uniform 
type.  They  were  all  merged  into  the  Eoman  Symbol,  which 
became  and  remains  to  this  day  the  fundamental  creed  of  the 
Latin  Church  and  her  daughters. 

This  Roman  symbol  is  known  more  particularly  under  the 
honored  name  of  the  Apostles'  Creed.  For  a  long  time  it  was 
believed  (and  is  still  believed  by  many  in  the  Roman  church)  to 
be  the  product  of  the  Apostles  who  prepared  it  as  a  summary  of 
their  teaching  before  parting  from  Jerusalem  (each  contributing 
one  of  the  twelve  articles  by  higher  inspiration).3  This  tradition 

1  See  a  collection  of  these  ante-Nicene  rules  of  faith  in  Halm,  Denringer, 
Heurtley.  Caspari,  and  Schaff  (II 11-41). 
*  This  obsolete  opinion,  first  mentioned  by  Ambrose  and  Bufinus  is  still  de 


J140.  THE  RULE  OF  FAITH  ANJD  APOSTLES' CREED.    531 

which  took  its  rise  in  the  fourth  century,1  is  set  aside  by  the 
variations  of  the  ante-Nicene  creeds  and  of  the  Apostles'  Creed 
itself.  Had  the  Apostles  composed  such  a  document,  it  would 
have  been  scrupulously  handed  down  without  alteration.  The 
creed  which  bears  this  name  is  undoubtedly  a  gradual  growth. 
We  have  it  in  two  forms. 

The  earlier  form  as  found  in  old  manuscripts,2  is  much 
shorter  and  may  possibly  go  back  to  the  third  or  even  the 
second  century.  It  was  probably  imported  from  the  East,  or 
grew  in  Rome,  and  is  substantially  identical  with  the  Greek 
creed  of  Marcellus  of  Ancyra  (about  340),  inserted  in  his  letter 
to  Pope  Julius  I.  to  prove  his  orthodoxy,3  and  with  that  con- 
fended  by  Pet.  Meyers,  I  c.  and  by  Abbe*  Martigny  in  his  French  Dictionary 
of  Christ-  Antiquities  (sub  Symbole  des  ap6tres).  Longfellow,  in  his  Divine 
Tragedy  (1871)  makes  poetic  use  of  it,  and  arranges  the  Creed  in  twelve  ar- 
ticles, with  the  names  of  the  supposed  apostolic  authors.  The  apostolic  origin 
was  first  called  in  question  by  Laurentius  Valla,  Erasmus,  and  Calvin.  £ee 
particulars  in  SchafPs  Creeds,  I.  22-23. 

1  Rufinus  speaks  of  it  as  an  ancestral  tradition  (tradunt  majores  nostri)  and 
supports  it  by  a  false  explanation  of  symbolum,  as  ll  collatio,  hoc  est  quodplures 
in  unum  conferunt."  See  Miene,  XXT.  fol.  337. 

3  In  the  Grseco-Latin  Codex  Laudianus  (Cod.  E  of  the  Acts)  in  the  Bodleian 
Library  at  Oxford,  from  the  sixth  century,  and  known  to  the  Venerable  Bede 
(731).  The  Creed  is  attached  at  the  end,  is  written  in  uncial  letters,  and  was 
first  made  known  by  Archbishop  Ussher.  Heurtley  (p.  61  sq.)  gives  a  fac- 
simile. It  is  reprinted  in  Caspari,  Hahn  (second  ed.  p.  16),  and  Schaff  (II. 
47).  Another  copy  is  found  in  a  MS.  of  the  eighth  century  in  the  British 
Museum,  published  by  Swainson,  The  Nic.  and  Ap.  OreedSj  p.  161,  and  by 
Hahn  in  a  Nachtrag  to  the  Preface,  p.  xvi.  This  document,  however,  inserts 
catholicam  after  ecdesiam.  Comp.  also  the  form  in  the  Explanatio  Symboli  ad 
initiandos,  by  Ambrose  in  Caspari,  U.  48  and  128,  and  Schaff,  II.  50.  The 
Creed  of  Aquileja,  as  given  by  Rufinus,  has  a  few  additions,  but  marks  them 
as  such  so  that  we  can  infer  from  it  the  words  of  the  Roman  Creed.  With 
these  Latin  documents  agree  the  Greek  in  the  Psalterium  of  King  Aethelstan, 
and  of  Marcellus  (see  next  note). 

8  In  Epiphanius,  J2cer,  LXXIL  It  is  assigned  to  A..  D.  341,  by  others  to 
337.  It  is  printed  in  Schaff  (II.  47),  Hahn,  and  in  the  first  table  below.  It 
contains,  according  to  Caspari,  the  original  form  of  the  Roman  creed  as  cur- 
rent at  the  time  in  the  Greek  portion  of  the  Roman  congregation.  It  differs 
from  the  oldest  Latin  form  only  by  the  omission  of  iraT&pat  and  the  addition 
of  £ofy>  al&viov. 


532  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

tained  in  the  Psalter  of  King  Aeihelstan.1  Greek  was  the  ruling 
language  of  the  Roman  Church  and  literature  down  to  the  third 
century.3 

The  longer  form  of  the  Roman  symbol,  or  the  present  re- 
ceived text,  does  not  appear  before  the  sixth  or  seventh  century. 
It  has  several  important  clauses  which  were  wanting  in  the 
former,  as  "he  descended  into  hades/'3  the  predicate  "catholic'' 
after  ecclesiam/  "the  communion  of  saints/55  and  "the  life  ever- 

1  The  Psalterium  Aethelstani,  in  the  Cotton  Library  of  the  British  Museum, 
written  in  Anglo-Saxon  letters,  first  published  by  Ussher,  then  by  Heurtley, 
Caspari,  and  Hahn  (p.  15).  .  It  differs  from  the  text  of  Marcellus  by  the  in- 
sertion of  irartpa  and  the  omission  of  ^Jjv  aluvtov,  in  both  points  agreeing 
with  the  Latin  text. 

3  On  the  Greek  original  of  the  Roman  symbol  Caspari's  researches  (III, 
267-466)  are  conclusive.  Harnack  (in  Herzog  2,  vol.  I.  567)  agrees  :  *'  Der 
griechische  Text  ist  als  das  Original  zu  betrachten;  griechisch  wurde  das  Symbol  zu 
Rom  eine  lange  Zeit  hindurch  amscMiessltih  tradirt.  Dann  trot  der  lateinisch 
ubersetzte  Text  ok  Parattdform  hinzu,."  Both  are  disposed  to  trace  the  symbol 
to  Johannean  circles  in  Asia  Minor  on  account  of  the  term  '*  only  begotten" 
({Mvcryev7j$)t  which  is  used  of  Christ  only  by  John. 

8  Descendit  ad  inferno,  first  found  in  Arian  Creeds  (elg  tfdov  or  sic  TW  $fyv) 
about  A.  3>.  360;  then  in  the  Creed  of  Aquileja,  about  A.  D.  390;  then  in  the 
Creed  of  Venantiua  Fortunatus,  590,  in  the  Sacraaaentarium  Gallicanum,  650, 
and  in  the  ultimate  text  of  the  Apostles7  Creed  in  Pirminius,  750.  See  the 
table  in  SchaiPs  Greeds,  II.  54,  and  Critical  note  on  p.  46.  Bufinud  says  ex- 
pressly that  this  clause  was  not  contained  in  the  Eoman  creed,  and  explains  it 
wrongly  as  being  identical  with  ''buried."  Com.  c.  18  (in  Migne,  f.  356)*. 
^Sciendum.  sane  est,  gwod  in  Ecdesice  Romanuz  Symbolo  non  Tiabetwr  additum, 
'descendit  ad  infema:'  sed  neque  in  Orientis  EcMis  habetw  hie  sermo:  vw 
town  wrbi  eadem  videtur  esse  in  eo,  quod  '  sepultus  '  dicitur."  The  article  of  the 
descent  is  based  upon  Peter's  teaching,  Acts  2:  31  (''he  was  not  left  in 
Hades,"  «f  <f8ovt  consequently  he  was  there);  1  Pet.  3:  19;  4:  6;  and  the 
promise  of  Christ  to  the  dying  robber,  Luke  23  :  43  ("to  day  thou  shalt  be 
with  Me  in  paradise,"  ev  rf  irapadefav),  and  undoubtedly  means  a  self-exhibi- 
tion of  Christ  to  the  spirits  of  the  departed.  The  translation  "  descended  into 
hell"  is  unfortunate  and  misleading.  We'do  not  know  whether  Christ  was  in 
hell  ;  but  we  do  know  from  his  own  lips  that  he  was  in  paradise  between  his' 
death  and  resurrection.  The  term  Hades  is  much  more  comprehensive  than 
Hell  (Gehenna),  which  is  confined  to  the  state  and  place  of  the  lost. 

*  It  is  found  first  in  the  Sacramentarium  Gallicanum,  650.  The  older  creeds 
of  Cyprian,  Bufinus,  Augustin,  read  simply  sanctam  ecclesiam,  Marcellus  d-ylav 


5  Sanctorvm  communionem.    After  650. 


8  140.  THE  KULE  OF  FAITH  AND  APOSTLES'  CREED.    533 

"lasting." 1  These  additions  were  gathered  from  the  provincial 
versions  (Galilean  and  North  African)  and  incorporated  into  the 
older  form. 

The  Apostles'  Creed  then,  in  its  present  shape,  is  post-apos* 
tolic;  but,  in  its  contents  and  spirit,  truly  apostolic.  It  embodies 
the  faith  of  the  ante-Nicene  church,  and  is  the  product  of  a 
secondary  inspiration,  like  the  Gloria  in  Excelsis  and  the  Te- 
devm,  which  embody  the  devotions  of  the  same  age,  and  which 
likewise  cannot  be  traced  to  an  individual  author  or  authors.  It 
follows  the  historical  order  of  revelation  of  the  triune  God, 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  beginning  with  the  creation  and 
ending  with  the  resurrection  and  life  eternal.  It  clusters  around 
Christ  as  the  central  article  of  our  faith.  It  sets  forth  living 
facts,  not  abstract  dogmas,  and  speaks  in  the  language  of  the 
people,  not  of  the  theological  school.  It  confines  itself  to  the 
fundamental  truths,  is  simple,  brief,  and  yet  comprehensive,  and 
admirably  adapted  for  catechetical  and  liturgical  use.  It  still 
forms  a  living  bond  of  union  between  the  different  ages  and 
branches  of  orthodox  Christendom,  however  widely  they  differ 
from  each  other,  and  can  never  be  superseded  by  longer  and 
fuller  creeds,  however  necessary  these  are  in  their  place.  It  has 
the  authorityof  antiquity  and  the  dew  of  perennial  youth,  beyond 
any  other  document  of  post-apostolic  times.  It  is  the  only  strictly 
oecumenical  Creed  of  the  West,  as  the  Nicene  Creed  is  the  only 
oecumenical  Creed  of  the  East.2  It  is  the  Creed  of  creeds,  as 
the  Lord's  Prayer  is  the  Prayer  of  prayers. 

NOTE. 

The  legendary  formulas  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  which  appear  after  the 
sixth  century,  distribute  the  articles  to  the  several  apostles  arbitrarily 

1  Contained  in  Marcellus  and  Augustin,  but  wanting  in  Rufinus  and  in  the 
Psalter  of  Aethelstan.  See  on  all  these  additions  and  their  probable  date  the 
tables  in  my  Greeds  of  Christendom,  II.  54  and  55. 

3  We  usually  speak  of  three  oecumenical  creeds ;  but  the  Greek  church  has 
never  adopted  the  Apostles'  Creed  and  the  Athanasian  Creed,  although  she 
holds  the  doctrines  therein  contained.  The  Nicene  Creed  was  adopted  in  the 
West,  and  so  far  is  universal,  but  the  insertion  of  the  formula  Fiiiogue  created 
and  perpeiuates  the  split  between  the  Greek  and  Latin  churches. 


534  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

and  with  some  variations.    The  following  is  from  one  of  the  pseudo-- 
Augustinian  sermons  (see  Hahn,  p.47  sq-) : 

"  Decimo  die  post  ascensionem  discipulis  prae  timore  Judaeorum  con- 
gregatis  Dominua  promissum  Paracletuna  misit :  quo  veniente  ut  candens 
ferrum  inflammati  omniumque  linguarum    peritia   repleti  Symbolum 
composuerunt. 
PETBUS  dixit:    Credo  in  Deum  Patrem  omnipotentem — creatorem  cceli  et 

terrce. 
ANDREAS  dixit :    Et  in  Jesum  Christum,  Fillum  ejus — unicum  Dominum 

nostrum 
JACOBUS  dixit:    Qui  conceptus  est  de  Spiritu  Sancio — natus  ex  Maria, 


JOANSTES  dixit :  Passus  sub  Pontio  Pilato — crucifixus,  mortuus  et  sepultus. 
THOMAS  dixit:  Descendit  ad  inferna — tertia  die  resurrexit  a  mortuis. 
JACOBUS  dixit:   Adscendit  ad  ccslos — sedet  ad  dexter  am  Dei  Patris  om- 

nipotentis. 

PHILIPPUS  dixit:  Inde  venturus  estjudicare  vivos  et  mortuos. 
BARTHOLOH^US  dixit :  Credo  in  Spiritum  Sanctum. 

dixit:     Sanctam    Ecclesiam    catholicam — Sanctorum    com- 

munionem. 

"  dixit:  Remissionem peccatorum. 
THADDETJS  dixit :  Garnis  resurrectionem. 
MATTHIAS  dixit :   Vitam  aeternam" 

§  141.   Variations  of  the  Apostles9  Creed. 

We  present  two  tables  which  show  the  gradual  growth  of 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  and  its  relation  to  the  Ante-Nicene  rules  of 
faith  and  the  JSTicene  Creed  in  its  final  form.1 

1  The  second  table  is  transferred  from  the  author's  Creeds  of  Christendom, 
vol.  II.  40  and  41  (by  permission  of  the  publishers,  Messrs.  Harpers).  In  the 
frame  work  will  be  found  other  comparative  illustrative  and  chronological 
tables  of  the  oldest  symbols,  See  vol.  I.  21  and  28  sq. ;  and  vol.  H,  54,  55. 


THIS  R 


-13     |3     11 


- 


iiiiiH  i^i  HIM  ill 

- 


t* 


II 
J* 


=- 
! 


- 


,•**  S  a    p  ft 


3 


ill  i 


fel 


5*3 


i 


H    a 

§° 

<j    H 


AQ 


! 


FORMULA  MAR 
ANCYRANT. 


f  1* 


~? 


181  7 


9 


I 


M 

€« 

n 

$&5 


O^Jl 

SS|g 

Sl|| 
gfsfl 

CO' 


I 


j!t  p 


iji 


f 

I)  0 


sss 

<U  ftO 

K 

tl8 

gfc 

«9i 

ffl     .^rgf 
P    '. 
rJ 


llpfeii  - 


3 

!«" 

«i 

So 
-I 

I1 

* 


3acS 
. «-  *-S  • 


Ii 
i^iiiii^  31* 

5«3l^S|5      SS* 

•^oaSa^iKSoj        a   *o 

feisigiS3   »i* 
^I'-iiili  11= 


5 

!* 

^s 

?.c 


. 

111 


"g" 

^1- 


I  Hi 


r 


f3 


iiu 


H 


8 


HW  e 
sla*  as 

£  a s  •;! 

wo^    £§ 

r«  ^i 

(S  >:«  «*    ®i- 

iffl^l 

^-S^s^s 
o  -^56515 
^ :  <i 

r-I  eJ 


S-51 

!. 


«s«: 

g*»  a?  o  o>  a 

|%|gii 

titlsfil 


,a^!: 


si    ^§55;g'g 

3  «5  "^ 

4  *i  CD 


jj      ff 


111?   !t 


Sc 

Si 

<J 
00 


638  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

§  142.  God  and  the  Creation. 

E.  WlLH.  MOLLER  :  Geschiokte  der  Eosmologie  in  der  griechischen  JZircht 
~.Mwuf  Orig&nes.    Halle,  1860.    P.  112-188 ;  474-560.    The  greats 
part  of  this  learned  work  is  devoted  to  the  cosmological  theories  o* 
the  Gnostics. 

In  exhibiting  the  several  doctrines  of  the  church,  we  must 
ever  bear  in  mind  that  Christianity  entered  the  world,  not  as  a 
logical  system  but  as  a  divine-human  fact ;  and  that  the  New 
Testament  is  not  only  a  theological  text-book  for  scholars  but 
first  and  last  a  book  of  life  for  all  believers.  The  doctrines 
of  salvation,  of  course,  lie  in  these  facts  of  salvation,  but  in  a 
concrete,  living,  ever  fresh,  and  popular  form.  The  logical, 
scientific  development  of  those  doctrines  from  the  word  of 
God  and  Christian  experience  is  left  to  the  theologians.  Hence 
we  must  not  be  surprised  to  find  in  the  period  before  us, 
even  in  the  most  eminent  teachers,  a  very  indefinite  and  defec- 
tive knowledge,  as  yet,  of  important  articles  of  faith,  whose 
practical  force  those  teachers  felt  in  their  own  hearts  and  im- 
pressed on  others,  as  earnestly  as  their  most  orthodox  successors. 
The  centre  of  Christianity  is  the  divine-human  person  and  the 
divine-human  work  of  Christ.  From  that  centre  a  change 
passed  through  the  whole  circle  of  existing  religious  ideas,  in  its 
first  principles  and  its  last  results,  confirming  what  was  true  in 
the  earlier  religion,  and  rejecting  the  false. 

Almost  all  the  creeds  of  the  first  centuries,  especially  the 
Apostles'  and  the  Nicene,  begin  with  confession  of  faith  in  God, 
the  Eather  Almighty,  Maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  of  the  visible 
and  the  invisible.  With  the  defence  of  this  fundamental  doc- 
trine laid  down  in  the  very  first  chapter  of  the  Bible,  Irenseus 
opens  his  refutation  of  the  Gnostic  heresies.  He  would  not 
have  believed  the  Lord  himself,  if  he  had  announced  any  other 
God  than  the  Creator,  He  repudiates  everything  like  an  a 
priori  construction  of  the  idea  of  God,  and  bases  his  knowledge 
wholly  on  revelation  and  Christian  experience. 

We  begin  with  the  general  idea  of  God,  which  lie&  at  the 


§  142.  GOD  AND  THE  CREATION.  539 

bottom  of  all  religion.  This  is  refined,  spiritualized,  and  in- 
vigorated by  the  manifestation  in  Christ.  We  perceive  the 
advance  particularly  in  Tertullian's  view  of  the  irresistible 
leaning  of  the  human  soul  towards  God,  and  towards  the  only 
true  God.  "  God  will  never  be  hidden/'  says  he,  "  God  will 
never  fail  mankind ;  he  will  always  be  recognized,  always  per* 
ceived,  and  seen,  when  man  wishes.  God  has  made  all  that  we 
arc,  and  all  in  which  we  arc,  a  witness  of  himself.  Thus  he 
proves  himself  God,  and  the  one  God,  by  his  being  known  to 
all ;  since  another  must  first  be  proved.  The  sense  of  God  is 
the  original  dowry  of  the  soul;  the  same,  and  no  other,  in 
Egypt,  in  Syria,  and  in  Pontus ;  for  the  God  of  the  Jews  all 
souls  call  their  God."  But  nature  also  testifies  of  God.  It  is 
the  work  of  his  hand,  and  in  itself  good ;  not  as  the  Gnostics 
taught,  a  product  of  matter,  or  of  the  devil,  and  intrinsically 
bad.  Except  as  he  reveals  himself,  God  is,  according  to  Ire- 
nseus,  absolutely  hidden  and  incomprehensible.  But  in  creation 
and  redemption  he  has  communicated  himself,  and  can,  there- 
fore, not  remain  entirely  concealed  from  any  man. 

Of  the  various  arguments  for  the  existence  of  God,  we  find 
in  this  period  the  beginnings  of  the  cosmological  and  physico- 
theological  methods.  In  the  mode  of  conceiving  the  divine 
nature  we  observe  this  difference ;  while  the  Alexandrians  try 
to  avoid  all  anthropomorphic  and  anthropopathic  notions,  and 
insist  on  the  immateriality  and  spirituality  of  God  almost  to 
abstraction,  Tertullian  ascribes  to  him  even  corporeality ;  though 
probably,  as  he  considers  the  non-existent  alone  absolutely  incor- 
poreal, he  intends  by  corporeality  only  to  denote  the  substan- 
tiality and  concrete  personality  of  the  Supreme  Being.1 

The  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  God,  as  the  eternal,  almighty, 
omnipresent,  just,  and  holy  creator  and  upholder  of  all  things, 
the  Christian  church  inherited  from  Judaism,. and  vindicated 

1  "  Omne  guod  est  corpus  est  sui  generis.  NM  est  incorporate,  nisi  quad  non  est. 
Habente  igifar  anima  invisible  corpus,"  etc.  (De  Came  Christi,  c.  11).  "  Quis 
enim  negdbit,  Deum  corpus  esse,  etsi  Deus  spiritus  est  ?  Spiritus  enim  corpus  sui 
generis  in  &ua  effigie."  (Ado.  Prax.  c.  7). 


540  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

against  the  absurd  polytheism  of  the  pagans,  and  particularlj 
against  the  dualism  of  the  Gnostics,  which  supposed  matter  co- 
eternal  with  God,  and  attributed  the  creation  of  the  world  tc 
the  intermediate  Demiurge.  This  dualism  was  only  another 
form  of  polytheism,  which  excludes  absoluteness,  and  with  it  all 
proper  idea  of  God. 

As  to  creation :  Irenseus  and  Tertullian  most  firmly  rejected 
the  hylozoic  and  demiurgic  views  of  paganism  and  Gnosticism, 
and  taught,  according  to  the  book  of  Genesis,  that  God  made 
the  world,  including  matter,  not,  of  course,  out  of  any  material, 
but  out  of  nothing,  or,  to  express  it  positively,  out  of  his  free, 
^lroi^bfy-will,--by-hiS'-word.1  This  freewill  of  God,  a  will  of 
love,  is  the  supreme,  absolutely  unconditioned,  and  all- condi- 
tioning cause  and  final  reason  of  all  existence,  precluding  every 
idea  of  physical  force  or  of  emanation.  Every  creature,  since  it 
proceeds  from  the  good  and  holy  God,  is  in  itself,  as  to  its 
essence,  good.2  Evil,  therefore,  is  not  an  original  and  substantial 
entity,  but  a  corruption  of  nature,  and  hence  can  be  destroyed 
by  the  power  of  redemption.  Without  a  correct  doctrine  of 
creation  there  can  be  no  true  doctrine  of  redemption,  as  all  the 
Gnostic  systems  show. 

Origen's  view  of  an  eternal  creation  is  peculiar.  His  thought 
is  not  so  much  that  of  an  endless  succession  of  new  worlds,  as 
that  of  ever  new  metamorphoses  of  the  original  world,  revealing 
from  the  beginning  the  almighty  power,  wisdom  and  goodness 
of  God.  With  this  is  connected  his  Platonic  view  of  the  pre- 
existence  of  the  soul.  He  starts  from  the  idea  of  an  intimate 
relationship  between  God  and  the  world,  and  represents  the  latter 
as  a  necessary  revelation  of  the  former.  It  would  be  impious 
and  absurd  to  maintain  that  there  was  a  time  when  God  did  not 
show  forth  his  essential  attributes  which  make  up  his  very  being. 
He  was  never  idle  or  quiescent.  God's  being  is  identical  with 
his  goodness  and  love,  and  his  will  is  identical  with  his  nature. 

1Comp.  Gen.  c.  1  and  2;  Psalm  33:  9;  148:  5;  Johnl:  3;  Col.  1:  15; 
Heb.  1:  2;  11-.  3;  Bey.  4:  11. 
1  Gen.  1 :  31 ;  comp.  Ps.  104  :  24 ;  1  Tim.  4:  4. 


2  143.  MAN  AND  THE  FALL. 

He  must  create  according  to  his  nature,  and  he  will  create. 
Hence  what  is  a  necessity  is  at  the  same  time  a  free  act.  Each 
world  has  a  beginning  and  an  end  which  are  comprehended  in 
the  divine  Providence.  But  what  was  before  the  first  world  ? 
Origen  connects  the  idea  of  time  with  that  of  the  world,  but 
cannot  get  beyond  the  idea  of  an  endless  succession  of  time. 
God's  eternity  is  above  time,  and  yet  fills  all  time.  Origen 
mediates  the  transition  from  God  to  the  world  by  the  eternal 
generation  of  the  Logos  who  is  the  express  image  of  the  Fatter 
and  through  whom  God  creates  first  the  spiritual  and  then  the 
material  world.  And  this  generation  is  itself  a  continued  pro- 
cess ;  God  always  (de/)  begets  his  Son,  and  never  was  without 
his  Son  as  little  as  the  Son  is  without  the  Father.1 

§  143.  Man  and  the  Foil 

It  was  the  universal  faith  of  the  church  that  man  was  made 
in  the  image  of  God,  pure  and  holy,  and  fell  by  his  own  guilt 
and  the  temptation  of  Satan  who  himself  fell  from  his  original 
state.  But  the  extent  of  sin  and  the  consequences  of  the  fall 
were  not  fully  discussed  before  the  Pelagian  controversy  in  the 
fifth  century.  The  same  is  true  of  the  metaphysical  problem 
concerning  the  origin  of  the  human  soul.  Yet  three  theories 
appear  already  in  germ. 

Tertullian  is  the  author  of  tradutianism,2  which  derives  soul 
and  body  from  the  parents  through  the  process  of  generation.5 

1  For  a  full  exposition  of  Origen's  cosmology  see  Holler,  1.  c.  p.  536-560. 
He   justly  calls    it    a    "  kirchlich-wissenschafdiches   Gegenbud    der  gnostischen 
Weltanschauung"    Comp.  also  Huetius  (Origenwna),  Neander,  Dorner,  Ee- 
depenning. 

2  From  tradux,  a  branch  for  propagation,  frequently  used  by  Tertullian,  Adv. 
Valent*  c.  25,  etc. 

8  Tertullian,  De  Anima,  c.  27 :  "Ex  uno  homine  iota  hoc  animarum  redundan- 
tia"  Cap.  36 :  *'  Anima  in  utero  seminata  parit&r  cum  carne  parit&r  cum  i/psa 
sortitur  et  sexum,"  i.  e.  "  the  soul,  being  sown  in  the  woinb  at  the  same  time 
with  the  body,  receives  likewise  along  with  it  ils  sex ; "  and  this  takes  place  so 
simultaneously  "  that  neither  of  the  two  substances  can  be  alone  regarded  as 
the  cause  of  the  sex  (ita  pariter,  ut  in  causa  sexus  neufra  substantia  teneatur)" 
In  Tertullian  this  theory  was  connected  with  a  somewhat  materialistic  or 
strongly  realistic  tendency  of  thought. 


542  '          SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

It  assumes  that  God's  creation  de  niliilo  was  finished  on  the  sixth 
day,  and  that  Adam's  soul  was  endowed  with  the  power  of 
reproducing  itself  in  individual  souls,  just  as  the  first  created 
seed  in  the  vegetable  world  has  the  power  of  reproduction  in  its 
own  kind.  Most  Western  divines  followed  Tertullian  in  this 
theory  because  it  most  easily  explains  the  propagation  of  ori- 
ginal sin  by  generation/  but  it  materializes  sin  which  originates 
in  the  mind.  Adam  had  fallen  inwardly  by  doubt  and  disobe- 
dience before  he  ate  of  the  forbidden  fruit. 

The  Aristotelian  theory  of  creationism  traces  the  origin  of  each 
individual  soul  to  a  direct  agency  of  God  and  assumes  a  subse- 
quent corruption  of  the  soul  by  its  contact  with  the  body,  but 
destroys  the  organic  unity  of  soul  and  body,  and  derives  sin 
from  the  material  part.  It  was  advocated  by  Eastern  divines, 
and  by  Jerome  in  the  West.  Augustin  wavered  between  the 
two  theories,  and  the  church  has  never  decided  the  question. 

The  third  theory,  that  of  prc-existence}  was  taught  by  Origen 
as  before  by  Plato  and  Philo.  It  assumes  the  pro-historic  ex- 
istence and  fall  of  every  human  being,  and  thus  accounts  for 
original  sin  and  individual  guilt ;  but  as  it  has  no  support  in 
scripture  or  human  consciousness — except  in  an  ideal  sense — it 
was  condemned  under  Justinian,  as  one  of  the  Origenistic  here- 
sies. Nevertheless  it  has  been  revived  from  time  to  time  as  an 
isolated  speculative  opinion.2 

The  cause  of  the  Christian  faith  demanded  the  assertion  both  of 

1  "  Tradvx  animcB  tradux  pecccdi.*' 

*  Notably  in  our  century  by  "one  of  the  profoundest  and  soundest  evangelical 
divines,  Dr.  Julius  Miiller,  in  his  masterly  work  on  The  Christian  Doctrine  of 
Sin.  (Urwick's  translation,  Edinb.  1868,  vol.  II.  pp.  357  sqq.,  comp.  pp.  73, 
147,  397).  He  assum$;that  man  in  a  transcendental,  pre-temporal  or  extra- 
temporal  existence,  by  •'an  act  of  free  self-decision,  fixed  his  moral  character 
and  fate  for  his  present  life. .  Thi&conclusion,  he  thinks,  reconcile**  the  fact  of 
the  universalness  of  sin  with  that  of  individual  guilt,  and  accords  with  the 
unfathomable  depth  of  our  consciousness  of  guilt  and  the  mystery  of  that  in- 
extinguishable melancholy  and  sadness  which  is  most  profound  in  the  noblest 
natures.  But  Miiller  found  no  response,  and  was  opposed  by  Rothe,  Dorner, 
and  others.  In  America,  the  theory  of  pre-eiistence  was  independently  advo- 
cated by  Dr.  Edward  Beecher  in  his  book :  The  Conflict  of  Ages.  Boston,  185*» 


2  143.  MAN  AND  THE  FALL.  543 

rnau's  need  of  redemption,  against  Epicurean  levity  and  Stoical 
self-sufficiency,  and  man's  capacity  for  redemption,  against  the 
Gnostic  and  Manichsean  idea  of  the  intrinsic  evil  of  nature,  and 
against  every  form  of  fatalism. 

The  Greek  fathers,  especially  the  Alexandrian,  are  very  strenu- 
ous for  the  freedom  of  the  will,  as  the  ground  of  the  accounta- 
bility and  the  whole  moral  nature  of  man,  and  as  indispensable 
to  the  distinction  of  virtue  and  vice.  It  was  impaired  and 
weakened  by  the  fall,  but  not  destroyed.  In  the  case  of  Origen 
freedom  of  choice  is  the  main  pillar  of  his  theological  system. 
Irenseus  and  Hippolytus  cannot  conceive  of  man  without  the 
two  inseparable  predicates  of  intelligence  and  freedom.  And 
Tertullian  asserts  expressly,  against  Marcion  and  Hermogenes, 
free  will  as  one  of  the  innate  properties  of  the  soul,1  like  its  de- 
rivation from  God,  immortality,  instinct  of  dominion,  and  power 
of  divination.2  On  the  other  side,  however,  Irensous,  by  his 
Pauline  doctrine  of  the  casual  connection  of  the  original  sin  of 
Adam  with  the  sinfulnoHS  of  the  whole  race,  and  especially 
Tertullian,  by  his  view  of  hereditary  sin  and  its  propagation  by 
generation,  looked  towards  the  Augustinian  system  which  the 
greatest  of  the  Latin  fathers  developed  in  his  controversy  with 
the  Pelagian  heresy,  and  which  exerted  such  a  powerful  influ- 
ence upon  the.  Reformers,  but  had  no  effect  whatever  on  the 
Oriental  church  and  was  practically  disowned  in  part  by  the 
church  of  Rome.3 

1  "  Inesse  nobis  TO  avregobatov  naturcditer,  jarr  A  Marcioni  ostemdimus  et  Her- 
mogeni."     De  Anima,,  c.  21.     Comp.  Adv.  Marc.  II.  5  sqq. 

2  "  Definimus  amimcm  Dei  flalu  natam>  immortalem,  corporalem,  effigiatam,  sub- 
stantial simplicem,  de  swo  sapientcm,  varie  prccedentem,  liberam  arbitrii,  accid&ntiis 
obnoxiam,  per  ingenia  mutabilem,  rationalem,  dominatricem,  dimnatric&m,  fix  una 
redandantem"     De  Anima,  c.  22. 

1  Soe  vol.  III.  p.  783  sqq. 


544  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311, 

§  144.  Christ  and  the  Incarnation. 
Literature. 

*Diosnrs.  PETAYITTS  (or  Denis  Petau,  Prof,  of  Theol.  in  Paris,  d.  1652): 
Opus  de  theologicis  dogmatibus,  etc.  Par.  1644-50,  in  5  vols.  fol, 
Later  ed.  of.Antw.  1700;  by  Fr.  Ant.  Zacharia,  Venice,  1757  (in  7 
Yols.  fol.) ;  with  additions  by  0.  Passaglia,  and  C.  Schrader,  Eome, 
1857  (incomplete) ;  and  a  still  later  one  by  J.  B.  Thomas,  Bar  le 
Due,  1864,  in  8  vols.  Petau  was  a  thoroughly  learned  Jesuit  and 
the  father  of  Doctrine  History  (Dogmengeschichte).  In  the  section 
De  Trinitate  (vol.  II.),  he  has  collected  most  of  the  passages  of  the 
ante-Nicene  and  Mcene  fathers,  and  admits  a  progressive  develop- 
ment of  the  doctrine  of  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  of  the  trinity, 
for  which  the  Anglican,  G.  Bull,  severely  censures  him. 

*GEOBaE  BULL  (Bishop  of  St.  David's,  d.  1710) :  Defensio  Fidei  Niccenae 
de  ceterna  Divinitate  FiLii  Dei,  ex  scriptis  catholic,  doctorum  qui  intra 
tria  ecclesice  Christiana  secula  floruerunt.  Oxf.  1685.  (Lond.1703; 
again  1721;  also  in  Bp.  Bull's  complete  Works,  ed.  by  Edw. 
Burton,  Oxf.  1827,  and  again  in  1846  (vol.  V.,  Part  I.  and  II.) ; 
English  translation  in  the  "  Library  of  Anglo-Catholic  Theology," 
(Oxford  1851,  2  vols.).  Bishop  Bull  is  still  one  of  the  most  learned 
and  valuable  writers  on  the  early  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  but  he 
reads  the  ante-Nicene  fathers  too  much  through  the  glass  of  the 
Nicene  Creed,  and  has  to  explain  and  to  defend  the  language  of 
more  than  one  half  of  his  long  list  of  witnesses. 

MARTINI:  Gesch.  des  Dogmas  von  der  Gottheit  Christi  in  den  ersten  vier 
Jahrh.  Eost.  1809  (rationalistic). 

AD.  M5HLEB  (E.  0.) :  Athanasius  der  Gr.  Mainz.  1827,  second  ed. 
1844  (Bk  1.  Der  Glaube  der  Kirche  der  drei  ersten  Jahrh.  in  Betreff 
der  Fiinitat,  etc.,  p.  1-116). 

EDW.  BTTRTON  :  Testimonies  of  the  ante-Nicene  Fathers  to  the  Divinity  of 
Christ.  Seconded.  Oxf.  1829. 

*F.  C.  B^UE  (d.  1860) :  Die  christL  Lehre  von  der  DreieinigMt  u.  Mensch- 
werdung  G-ottes  in  ihrer  geschichtlichen  Entwicklung.  Tub,  1841-43. 
3  vols.  (I.  p.  129-341).  Thoroughly  independent,  learned,  critical, 
and  philosophical. 

G.  A.  MEIER  :  Die  Lehre  von  der  Trinitat  in  ihrer  hist.  EntwicMung. 
Hamb.  1844.  2  vols.  (I.  p.  45-134). 

*ISAAC  A.  DORITER  :  JUntwlcklungsgeschichte  der  Lehre  von  der  Person 
Christi  (1839),  2d  ed.  Stuttg,  u.  Berl.  1845-56.  2  vols.  (I.  pp. 
122-747).  A  masterpiece  of  exhaustive  and  conscientious  learning, 
and  penetrating  and  fair  criticism.  Engl.  translation  by  W.  I* 
Alexander  and  D.  "W.  Simon.  Edinb.  1864,  5  vols. 


2144.  CHEIST  AND  THE  INCAENATION.  545 

EOBT.  Is.  WILBERFOECE  (first  Anglican,  then,  since  1854,  E.  C.) :  The 
Doctrine  of  the  Incarnation  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  in  Us  relation 
to  Mankind  and  to  the  Church  (more  doctrinal  than  historical).  4th 
ed.  Lond.  1852.  (Ch.  V.  pp.  93-147.)  Republ.  from  an  earlier  ed., 
Philad.  1849. 

PH.  SCHAFF  :  The  Conflict  of  Trinitarianism  and  Unitarianism  in  the  ante- 
Nicene  age,  in  the  "  Bibl.  Sacra."  Andover,  1858,  Oct. 

M.  F.  SADLER  :  Emmanuel,  or,  The  Incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God  the 
Foundation  of  immutable  Truth.  London  1867  (Doctrinal). 

HENIIY  PABUY  LIDDON  (Anglican,  Canon  of  St.  Paul's  Cathedral) : 
The  Divinity  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ.  (The  Bampton 
Lectures  for  1866).  London  1867,  9th  ed.  1882.  Devout,  able,  and 
eloquent. 

Pn.  SCHAFF  :  Christ  and  Christianity.  N.  T.  1885,  p.  45-123.  A 
sketch  of  the  history  of  Christology  to  the  present  time. 

Com  p.  the  relevant  sections  in  the  doctrine — histories  of  HAGENBAOH, 
THOMASETJS,  HAENAOK,  etc. 

The  Mcssiahship  and  Divine  Sonship  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
first  confessed  by  Peter  in  the  name  of  all  the  apostles  and  the 
eye-witnesses  of  the  divine  glory  of  his  person  and  his  work,  as 
the  most  sacred  and  precious  fact  of  their  experience,  and  after 
the  resurrection  adoringly  acknowledged  by  the  sceptical  Thomas 
in  that  exclamation,  "My  Lord  and  my  God  !"— is  the  founda- 
tion stone  of  the  Christian  church;1  and  the  denial  of  the 
mystery  of  the  incarnation  is  the  mark  of  antichristian  heresy.2 

The  whole  theological  energy  of  the  ante-Nicene  period  con- 
centrated itself,  therefore,  upon  the  doctrine  of  Christ  as  the 
God-man  and  Redeemer  of  the  world.  This  doctrine  was.  the 
kernel  of  all  the  baptismal  creeds,  and  was  stamped  upon  the 
entire  life,  constitution  and  worship  of  the  early  church.  It  was 
not  only  expressly  asserted  by  the  fathers  against  heretics,  but 
also  professed  in  the  daily  and  weekly  worship,  in  the  celebra- 
tion of  baptism,  the  eucharist  and  the  annual  festivals,  especially 
Easter.  It  was  embodied  in  prayers,  doxologies  and  hymns  of 
praise.  From  the  earliest  record  Christ  was  the  object  not  of 
admiration  which  is  given  to  finite  persons  and  things,  and  pre- 
supposes equality,  but  of  prayer,  praise  and  adoration  which  is 
due  only  to  an  infinite,  uncreated,  divine  being.  This  is  evident 

1  Matt.  16 :  10-19  sqq.  »  1  John  4 :  1--S. 

Vol.  IL-Sfi 


546  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

from  several  passages  of  the  Xew  Testament,1  from  the  favorite 
symbol  of  the  early  Christians,  the  Ichthys*  from  the  Tersanctus, 
the  Gloria  in  Exed&s,  the  hymn  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  in 
praise  of  the  Logos,3  from  the  testimony  of  Origen,  who  says : 
w  We  sing  hymns  to  the  Most  High  alone,  and  His  Only  Be- 
gotten, who  is  the  TTord  and  God ;  and  we  praise  God  and  His 
Only  Begotten;"4  and  from  the  heathen  testimony  of  the 
younger  Pliny  who  reports  to  the  Emperor  Trajan  that  the 
Christians  in  Asia  were  in  the  habit  of  singing  "hymns  to  Christ 
as  their  God."5  Eusebius,  quoting  from  an  earlier  writer  (pro- 
bably Hippolytns)  against  the  heresy  of  Artemon,  refers  to  the 
testimonies  of  Justin,  Miltiades,  Tatian,  Clement,  and  "  many 
others"  for  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  asks:  "Who  knows  not 
the  works  of  Irenseus  and  Melito,  and  the  rest,  in  which  Christ 
is  announced  as  God  and  man?  Whatever  psalms  and  hymns 
of  the  brethren  were  written  by  the  faithful  from  the  beginning, 
celebrate  Christ  as  the  Word  of  God,  by  asserting  his  divinity." 6 
The  same  faith  was  sealed  by  the  sufferings  and  death  of  "  the 
noble  army"  of  confessors  and  martyrs,  who  confessed  Christ 
to  .be  God,  and  died  for  Christ  as  God.7 

1Comp,Matt2:  11;  9:  18;  17:  14,  15;  28:  9,  17;  Luke  17:  15,  16;  23: 
42;  John  20:  28;  Acts  7:  59,60;  9:  14,21;  1  Cor.  1 :  2;  Phil.  2:  10; 
Hebr.  1:  6;  1  John  5:  13-15;  Kev.  5:  6-13,  etc, 

*  See  p.  279.  3  See  p.  230.  *  Contra,  Cds.  1.  VIII.  c.  67. 

*  "  Carnem  Christo  quasi  Deo  dicere,"  Epp.  X.  97.    A  heathen  mock-crucifix 
which  was  discovered  in  185V  in  Eome,  represents  a  Christian  as  worshipping 
a  crucified  ass  as  u  his  God.''    See  above,  p.  272. 

*  -vv  1.6yov  rov  &sov  TQV  'X.piarbv  vpvwat  fteofo-yovvrss.    Hist.  Ecd.  V.  28. 

T  Comp.  Euinart,  Ada  Mart.;  Prudentius,  Peristeph.,  Liddon,  I.  c.,  pp.  400 
sqq.  "If  there  be  one  doctrine  of  our  faith"  (says  Canon  Liddon,  p.  406) 
"which  the  martyrs  especially  confessed  at  death,  it  is  the  doctrine  of  our 

Lord's  Divinity The  learned  and  the  illiterate,  the  young  and  the  old, 

the  noble  and  the  lowly,  the  slave  and  his  master  united  in  this  confession. 
Sometimes  it  is  wrung  from  the  martyr  reluctantly  by  cross-examination,  some- 
times it  is  proclaimed  as  a  truth  with  which  the  Christian  heart  is  full  to 
bursting,  and  which,  out  of  the  heart's  abundance,  the  Christian  mouth  cannot 
but  speak.  Sometimes  Christ's  Divinity  is  professed  as  belonging  to  the  great 
Christian  contradiction  of  the  polytheism  of  the  heathen  world  around.  Some- 
times it  is  explained  as  involving  Christ's  unity  with  the  Father,  against  the 
pagan  imputation  of  ditheism;  sometimes  it  is  proclaimed  as  justifying  the 


i  144.  CHRIST  AND  THE  DTCAENATIO^.  547 

Life  and  worship  anticipated  theology,  and  Christian  experi- 
ence contained  more  than  divines  could  in  clear  words  express. 
So  a  child  may  worship  the  Saviour  and  pray  to  Him  long 
before  he  can  give  a  rational  account  of  his  faith.  The  instinct 
of  the  Christian  people  was  always  in  the  right  direction,  and 
it  is  unfair  to  make  them  responsible  for  the  speculative  cru- 
dities, the  experimental  and  tentative  statements  of  some  of  the 
ante-Nicene  teachers.  The  divinity  of  Christ  then,  and  with 
this  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  were  from  the  first  im- 
movably fixed  in  the  mind  and  heart  of  the  Christian  Church 
as  a  central  article  of  faith. 

But  the  logical  definition  of  this  divinity,  and  of  its  relation 
to  the  Old  Testament  fundamental  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  the 
divine  essence — in  a  word,  the  church  dogma  of  the  trinity — 
was  the  work  of  three  centuries,  and  was  fairly  accomplished 
only  in  the  Nicene  age.  In  the  first  efforts  of  reason  to  grapple 
with  these  unfathomable  mysteries,  we  must  expect  mistakes, 
crudities,  and  inaccuracies  of  every  kind. 

In  the  Apostolic  Fathers  we  find  for  the  most  part  only  the 
simple  biblical  statements  of  the  deity  and  humanity  of  Christ, 
in  the  practical  form  needed  for  general  edification.  Of  those 
fathers  Ignatius  is  most  deeply  imbued  with  the  conviction,  that 
the  crucified  Jesus  is  God  incarnate,  and  indeed  frequently  calls 
him,  without  qualification,  God.1 

worship  which,  as  the  heathens  knew,  Christians  paid  to  Christ."    Many  illus- 
trations are  given. 

1  Ad.  Eph,  c.  18 :  <5  yap  Qsbg  faov  Iqaove  6  Xptarfy  kicuofopfftii  brrb  Mapia?  ' 
(Deus  nost&r  Jesus  Chrisfas  conceptus  est  ex  Maria) ;  c.  7 :  kv  oapid  yevdpevos  6edc. 
Ignatius  calls  the  blood  of  Jesus  the  "blood  of  God"  (h  atyart,  &eov),  AdEph. 
1.  He  desires  to  imitate  the  sufferings  of  "  his  God,*'  fufajrifc  elvat,  TOV  Trdtfovf 
TOV  Qeov  fiovj  Ad  .Bom.  6.  Polycarp  calls  Christ  the  eternal  Son  of  God,  to 
whom  all  things  in  heaven  and  earth  are  subject  (Ad  Phil  c.  2,  8,  and  his  last 
prayer  in  Martyr-  Potyc.  c.  14).  The  anonymous  author  of  the  Epistle  to 
Diognetus  (c.  7,  8)  teaches  that  the  Father  sent  to  men,  not  one  of  his  servants, 
whether  man  or  angel,  but  the  very  architect  and  author  of  all  things,  by 
whom  all  has  been  ordered,  and  on  whom  all  depends ;  he  sent  him  as  God,  and 
because  he  is  God,  his  advent  is  a  revelation  of  God.  On  the  Christology  of  the 
Apost  Fathers  comp.,  besides  Dorner,  Schwane's  Ante-Nicene  Doctrine  History, 
pp.  '60  £F.,  and  Liddon's  Lectures  on  the  Dimity  of  Christ,  pp.  379  and  411  sqq. 


548  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

The  scientific  development  of  Christology  begins  with  Just 
and  culminates  in  Origen.  From  Origen  then  proceed  tv 
opposite  modes  of  conception,  the  Athanasian  and  the  Arian ;  tl 
former  at  last  triumphs  in  the  council  of  Nicsea  A.  r>.  325,  ar 
confirms  its  victor}-  in  the  council  of  Constantinople,  381.  In  t] 
Arian  controversy  the  ante-Xicene  conflicts  on  this  vital  doctrii 
came  to  a  head  and  final  settlement. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation  involves  three  elements :  tl 
divine  nature  of  Christ;  his  human  nature;  and  the  relation  < 
the  two  to  his  undivided  personality. 

§  145.  The  Divinity  of  Chmt. 

The  dogma  of  the  DIVINITY  of  Christ  is  the  centre  1 
interest.  It  comes  into  the  foreground,  not  only  against  rj 
tionalistic  Monarchianism  and  Ebionism,  which  degrade  Chri 
to  a  second  iloses,  but  also  against  Gnosticism,  which,  though 
holds  him  to  be  superhuman,  still  puts  him  on  a  level  wit 
other  seons  of  the  ideal  world,  and  thus,  by  endlessly  multiplyin 
sons  of  God,  after  the  manner  of  the  heathem  mytholog; 
pantheistically  dilutes  and  destroys  all  idea  of  a  specific  soi 
ship.  The  development  of  this  dogma  started  from  the  Ol 
Testament  idea  of  the  word  and  the  wisdom  of  God ;  from  tl 
Jewish  Platonism  of  Alexandria ;  above  all,  from  the  Chri 
tology  of  Paul,  and  from  the  Logos-doctrine  of  John.  Th 
view  of  John  gave  a  mighty  impulse  to  Christian  speculatio] 
and  furnished  it  ever  fresh  material.  It  was  the  form  und( 
which  all  the  Greek  fathers  conceived  the  divine  nature  an 
divine  dignity  of  Christ  before  his  incarnation.  The  ten 
Logos  was  peculiarly  serviceable  here,  from  its  well-know 
double  meaning  of  "reason"  and  "word,"  ratio  and  oratio 
though  in  John  it  is  evidently  used  in  the  latter  sense  alone.1 

1  On  the  Logos  doctrine  of  Philo,  which  probably  was  known  to  Job 
much  has  been  written  by  Gfrorer  (1831),  Dahne  (1834),  Grossmann  (1829  at 
1841),  Dorner  (1845),  Langen,  (1S67),  Heinze  (1872),  Schiirer  (1874),  Siegfri* 
(1875),  Soolier,  Paimd,  Klasen,  and  others. 


2 145.  THE  DIVINITY  OF  CSRIST.  549 

JUSTIN  MARTYR  developed  the  first  Christology,  though  not 
as  a  novelty,  but  in  the  consciousness  of  its  being  generally  held 
by  Christians.1  Following  the  suggestion  of  the  double  meaning 
of  Logos  and  the  precedent  of  a  similar  distinction  by  Philo,  he 
distinguishes  in  the  Logos,  that  is,  the  divine  being  of  Christ 
two  elements :  the  immanent,  or  that  which  determines  the  reve- 
lation of  God  to  himself  within  himself;2  and  the  transitive,  in 
virtue  of  which  God  reveals  himself  outwardly.3  The  act  of 
the  procession  of  the  Logos  from  God4  he  illustrates  by  the 
figure  of  generation,5  without  division  or  diminution  of  the 
divine  substance ;  and  in  this  view  the  Logos  is  the  only  and 
absolute  Son  of  God,  the  only-begotten.  The  generation,  how- 
ever, is  not  with  him  an  eternal  act,  grounded  in  metaphysical 
necessity,  as  with  Athanasius  in  the  later  church  doctrine.  It 
took  place  before  the  creation  of  the  world,  and  proceeded  from 
the  free  will  of  God.6  This  begotten,  ante-mundane  (though  it 
would  seem  not  strictly  eternal)  Logos  he  conceives  as  a  hypostati- 
cal  being,  a  person  numerically  distinct  from  the  Father ;  and  to 
the  agency  of  this  person  before  his  incarnation7  Justin  attributes 
the  creation  and  support  of  the  universe,  all  the  theophanies 
(Christophanies)  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  all  that  is  true  and 
rational  in  the  world.  Christ  is  the  Reason  of  reasons,  the 
incarnation  of  the  absolute  and  eternal  reason.  He  is  a  true  object 
of  worship.  In  his  efforts  to  reconcile  this  view  with  mono- 
theism, he  at  one  time  asserts  the  moral  uniiy  of  the  two  divine 
persons,  and  at  another  decidedly  subordinates  the  Son  to  the 

1  For  thorough  discussions  of  Justin's  Logos  doctrine  see  Semi' sen,  Justin  der 
Martyrer,  II.  289  sqq. ;  Dorner,  EntmckLungsgesch.  etc.  1. 415-435 ;  Weizsacker. 
Die  Tkeologie  des  Mart.  Justinus,  in  Dorner's  "  Jahrbucher  fiir  deutsche  TheoL" 
Bd  XII.  1867,  p.  60  sqq. ;  and  M.  von  Engelhardt,  Das  Christmthwn  Justins 
des  Mart.  (1878),  p.  107-120,  and  Ms  art.  in  the  revised  ed.  of  Herzog,  voL 
VTL  (1880),  p.  326. 

2  Attyof  hSid&eroc.    *  A<5yof  7cpo$optK6e.    *  npofyxeo&at.    5  ?eww,  yewaa&at. 
6  He  calls  Christ  "the  first  begotten  of  God/'  flrpordrwof  TOV  &SQV  and  the 

VP&TOV  ytwijua  (but  not  Krfopa  or  Troiijpa  vov  &eov.  See  Apol.  I.  21,  23,  33, 
46,  63 ;  and  Engelhardt,  I  c.  p.  116-120 :  "  Der  Logos  tit  vvrwdtlich,  aber  nicM 
wig"  "» 


550  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Father.  Justin  thus  combines  hypostasianism,  or  the  theory 
the  independent,  personal  (hypostatical)  divinity  of  Christ,  wi 
subordinationism ;  he  is,  therefore,  neither  Ariau  nor  Athanasia; 
but  his  whole  theological  tendency,  in  opposition  to  the  heresie 
was  evidently  towards  the  orthodox  system,  and  had  he  live 
later,  he  would  have  subscribed  the  Nicene  creed.1  The  saji 
may  be  said  of  Tertullian  and  of  Origen. 

In  this  connection  we  must  also  mention  Justin's  remarkabl 
doctrine  of  the  "  Logos  spermatikos,"  or  the  Divine  Word  di* 
seminated  among  men.  He  recognized  in  every  rational  sot 
something  Christian,  a  germ  (ffTtepjua)  of  the  Logos,  or  a  spar] 
of  the  absolute  Reason.  He  therefore  traced  all  the  elements  o 
truth  and  beauty  which  are  scattered  like  seeds  not  only  amonj 
the  Jews  but  also  among  the  heathen  to  the  influence  of  Chris 
before  his  incarnation.  He  regarded  the  heathen  sages,  Socrates 
(whom  he  compares  to  Abraham),  Plato,  the  Stoics,  and  some  oj 
the  poets  and  historians  as  unconscious  disciples  of  the  Logos,  as 
Christians  before  Christ.3 

Justin  derived  this  idea  no  doubt  from  the  Gospel  of  John 
(1 :  4,  5,  9,  10),  though  he  only  quotes  one  passage  from  it 
(3 :  3-5).  His  pupil  Tatian  used  it  in  his  Diatessaron.3 

1  See  the  proof  in  the  monograph  of  Semisch. 

*  Comp.  Apol.  II.  8, 10,  13-  He  says  that  the  moral  teaching  of  the  Stoics 
and  some  of  the  Greek  poets  was  admirable  on  account  of  the  seed  of  the 
Logos  implanted  in  every  race  of  men  (&a  TO  fytyvrov  iravrt  -yhu  ay&ptiTruv 
o-epfia  TOV  /<tyov),and  mentions  as  examples  Heraclitus,  Musonius,  and  others, 
who  for  this  reason  were  hated  and  put  to  death. 

s  On  the  relation  of  Justin  to  John's  Gospel,  see  especially  the  very  careful 
examination  of  Ezra  Abbot,  The  Authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  (Boston,  1880), 
pp.  29-56.  He  says  (p.  41) :  "  While  Justin's  conceptions  in  regard  to  the 
Logos  were  undoubtedly  greatly  affected  by  Philo  and  the  Alexandrian  phi- 
losophy, the  doctrine  of  the  inwrnation  of  the  Logos  was  utterly  foreign  to  that 
philosophy,  and  could  only  have  been  derived,  it  would  seem,  from  the  Gospel 
of  John.  He  accordingly  speaks  very  often  in  language  similar  to  that  of 
John  (1 :  14)  of  the  Logos  as  'made  flesh/  or  as  'having  become  man/  That 
in  the  last  phrase  he  should  prefer  the  term  'man'  to  the  Hebraistic  'flesh' 
can  excite  no  surprise.  With  reference  to  the  deity  of  the.  Logos  and  his 
instrumental  agency  ic  creation,  compare  also  especially  Apol  IL  6,  'through 
him  God  created  all  things'  (&*  avrov  ndvra  &™re),  Dial  c,  56,  and  ApoL 


2145.  THE  DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST.  551 

The  further  development  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos  we  find 
In  the  other  apologists,  in  Tatian,  Athenagoras,  Theophilus  of 
Antioch,  and  especially  in  the  Alexandrian  school. 

CLEMEXT  of  Alexandria  speaks  in  the  very  highest  terms  of 
the  Logos,  but  leaves  his  independent  personality  obscure.  He 
makes  the  Logos  the  ultimate  principle  of  all  existence,  without 
beginning,  and  timeless ;  the  revealer  of  the  Father,  the  sum  of 
all  intelligence  and  wisdom,  the  personal  truth,  the  speaking  as 
well  as  the  spoken  word  of  creative  power,  the  proper  author  of 
the  world,  the  source  of  light  and  life,  the  great  educator  of  the 
human  race,  at  last  becoming  man,  to  draw  us  into  fellowship 
with  him  and  make  us  partakers  of  his  divine  nature. 

OHIGEN  felt  the  whole  weight  of  the  Christologicaland  trini- 
tarian  problem  and  manfully  grappled  with  it,  but  obscured  it 
by  foreign  speculations.  He  wavered  between  the  fiomo-ousian, 
or  orthodox,  and  the  homoi-ou&ian  or  subordinatian  theories, 
which  afterwards  came  into  sharp  conflict  with  each  other  in  the 
Arian  controversy.1  On  the  one  hand  he  brings  the  Son  as  near 
as  possible  to  the  essence  of  the  Father;  not  only  making  him  the 

I.  63,  with  John  1 :  1-3  Since  the  Fathers  who  Immediately  followed  Justin, 
as  Theophilus,  Irenseus,  Clement,  Tertullian,  unquestionably  founded  their 
doctrine  of  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos  on  the  Gospel  of  John,  the  presump- 
tion is  that  Justin  did  the  same.  He  professes  to  hold  his  view,  in  which  he 
owns  that  some  Christians  do  not  agree  with  him,  'because  we  have  been  com- 
manded by  Christ  himself  not  to  follow  the  doctrines  of  men,  but  those  which 
were  proclaimed  by  the  blessed  prophets  and  taught  by  Hue.*  (Dial.  c.  48). 
Now,  as  Canon  Westcott  observes,  '  the  Synoptists  do  not  anywhere  declare 
Christ's  pre-existence/  And  where  could  Justin  suppose  himself  to  have 
found  this  doctrine  taught  by  Christ  except  in  the  Fourth  Gospel?  Compare 
IpoL  I.  46:  'That  Christ  is  the  firstrbom  of  God,  being  the  Logos  [the 
divine  Reason]  of  which  every  race  of  men  have  been  partakers  [comp.  John 
1 i  4j  57  9],  we  Tiavt  been  taught  and  have  declared  before.  And  those  who 
have  lived  according  to  Reason  are  Christians,  even  though  they  were  deemed 
atheists ;  as  for  example,  Socrates  and  Heraclitus  and  those  like  them  among 
the  Greeks."1 

1  Comp.  here  "Neander,  Baur,  Dorner  (I.  635-695),  the  monographs  on 
Origen  by  Eedepenning  (II.  295-307),  and  Thomasiuf ,  H.  Schultz,  Die  Ckrfc 
tologie  des  Orig&nes,  in  the  "  Jahrb-  f.  Protest.  Theol."  1875,  No.  JL  and 
and  the  art.  of  Moller  in  Herzog'  XL  105  sqq. 


552  SECOND  PERIOD.    A,  D.  100-311. 

absolute  personal  wisdom,  truth,  righteousness,  reason,1  but 
expressly  predicating  eternity  of  him,  and  propounding 
church  dogma  of  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son.  This  g 
ration  he  usually  represents  as  proceeding  from  the  will  of 
Father;  but  he  also  conceives  it  as  proceeding  from  his  essei 
and  hence,  at  least  in  one  passage,  he  already  applies  the  t 
homo-ousios  to  the  Son,  thus  declaring  him  coequal  in  esseno 
nature  with  the  Father.2  This  idea  of  eternal  generation,  h 
ever,  has  a  peculiar  form  with  him,  from  its  close  connection  T 
his  doctrine  of  an  eternal  creation.  He  can  no  more  thin] 
the  Father  without  the  Son,  than  of  an  almighty  God  witf 
creation,  or  of  light  without  radiance.3  Hence  he  describes 
generation  not  as  a  single,  instantaneous  act,  but,  like  creat 
ever  going  on.4  But  on  the  other  hand  he  distinguishes  the  esse 
of  the  Son  from  that  of  the  Father  ;  speaks  of  a  different 
substance  ;5  and  makes  the  Son  decidedly  inferior  to  the  Fat] 
calling  him,  with  reference  to  John  i.  1,  merely  $s<5c  with 
the  article,  that  is,  God  in  a  relative  or  secondary  sense  (L 
de  Deo),  also  Ssfcepoz  #£dc,  but  the  Father  God  in  the  absol 
sense,  6  #s6c  (Dens  per  $e),  or  a5r6$soc,  also  the  fountain  t 
root  of  the  divinity.6  Hence,  he  also  taught,  that  the  £ 
should  not  be  directly  addressed  in  prayer,  but  the  Fat 
through  the  Son  in  the  Holy  Spirit.7  This  must  be  limited, 
doubt,  to  absolute  worship,  for  he  elsewhere  recognizes  pra? 


avroaMfoeia,  avTodLKaioaivq,  afoodbvctfuf,  aurdfoyoc,  etc.     On 
V.  39.     Origen  repeatedly  uses  the  term  "God  Jesus,"  i 
without  the  article,  ibid.  V.  51  ;  VI.  66. 
*  In  a  fragment  on  the  Ep.  to  the  Hebrews  (IV.  697,  de  la  Eue)  :  air6pt 


8  De  Prinrip.  IV.  28  :  "Sicut  lux  numqwm  sine  splendore  essepotuit,  ifa 
FtKus  guidem  sine  Poire  intelligi  potest" 

*  De  Princ.  L  2,  4:  "  Est  (sterna  et  sempiterna  generatio,  sicut  splendor  genera 
a  luce."  Horn,  in  Jer&n.  IX.  4  :  aei  yewa  6  TLaryp  rbv  Ti6v. 

5  frep6nis  rijr  ovcia$  or  TOV  vTroKSipsvov,  which  the  advocates  of  his  orthodo. 
probably  without  reason,  take  as  merely  opposing  the  Patripassian  concept] 
of  the  tpoovcia.    Eedepenning,  II.  300-306,  gives  the  principal  passages 
the  homo-ousia  and  the  hetero-ousia. 

6  'xm,  fcfc  "rife  6e6-njr^  t  £e  fo^  c.  15 


J146.  THE  DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST-  053 

to  the  Son  and  to  the  Holy  Spirit.1  Yet  this  subordination  of 
the  Son  formed  a  stepping-stone  to  Arianisni,  and  some  disciples 
of  Origen,  particularly  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  decidedly  ap- 
proached that  heresy.  Against  this,  however,  the  deeper  Chris- 
tian sentiment,  even  before  the  Arian  controversy,  put  forth  firm 
protest,  especially  in  the  person  of  the  Roman  Dionysius,  to  whom 
his  Alexandrian  namesake  and  colleague  magnanimously  yielded. 

In  a  simpler  way  the  western  fathers,  including  here  Irenseus 
and  Hippolytus,  who  labored  in  the  "West,  though  they  were  of 
Greek  training,  reached  the  position,  that  Christ  must  be  one 
with  the  Father,  yet  personally  distinct  from  him.  It  is  com- 
monly supposed  that  they  came  nearer  the  homo-omion  than  the 
Greeks.  This  can  be  said  of  Irenseus,  but  not  of  Tertullian* 
And  as  to  Cyprian,  whose  sphere  was  exclusively  that  of  church 
government  and  discipline,  he  had  nothing  peculiar  in  his  specu- 
lative doctrines. 

IBEKSJUS,  after  Polycarp,  the  most  faithful  representative  of 
the  Johannean  school,  keeps  more  within  the  limits  of  the  simple 
biblical  statements,  and  ventures  no  such  bold  speculations  as 
the  Alexandrians,  but  is  more  sound  and  much  nearer  the  Nicene 
standard.  He  likewise  uses  the  terms  "Logos"  and  "Son  of 
God "  interchangeably,  and  concedes  the  distinction,  made  also 
by  the  Valentinians,  between  the  inward  and  the  uttered  word,2 
in  reference  to  man,  but  contests  the  application  of  it  to  God, 
who  is  above  all  antitheses,  absolutely  simple  and  unchangeable, 
and  in  whom  before  and  after,  thinking  and  speaking,  coincide. 
He  repudiates  also  every  speculative  or  a  priori  attempt  to 
explain  the  derivation  of  the  Son  from  the  Father;  this  he 
holds  to  be  an  incomprehensible  mystery.3  He  is  content  to 

1  For  example,  Ad  Horn.  I.  p.  472 :  u  Adorare  cdium  quempiam  praeter  Patrem 
et  Fttium  et  Spiritum  sanctum,  impietatis  est  crimenJ'     Contra  Cels.  VIH.  67. 
He  closes  his  Homilies  with  a  doxology  to  Christ. 

2  The  Wyof  MC&-&STOC  and  Adyof  xpofopiKd?. 

8  Adv.  Hcsr.  II.  28,  6 .  "  Si  qufa  noils  dixerit :  quomodo  ergo  Filius  profatus  a 
Patre  est*  didmus  ei—nem  nwti  nisi  solus,  qui  generavit  Paler  et  qui  naius  est 
Filius." 


554  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

J'jfine  the  actual  distinction  between  Father  and  Son,  by  sayi 
that  the  former  is  God  revealing  himself,  the  latter,  God  reveak 
the  one  is  the  ground  of  revelation,  the  other  is  the  actu 
appearing  revelation  itself.  Hence  he  calls  the  Father  t 
invisible  of  the  Son,  and  the  Son  the  visible  of  the  Fath< 
He  discriminates  most  rigidly  the  conceptions  of  generation  ai 
of  creation.  The  Son,  though  begotten  of  the  Father,  is  st 
like  him,  distinguished  from  the  created  world,  as  iucreal 
without  beginning,  and  eternal.  All  this  plainly  shows  th 
Irenaius  is  much  nearer  the  Nicene  dogma  of  the  substanti 
identity  of  the  Son  with  the  Father,  than  Justin  and  the  Alexai 
drians.  If,  as  he  does  in  several  passages,  he  still  subordinat 
the  Son  to  the  Father,  he  is  certainly  inconsistent  ;  and  that  f< 
want  of  an  accurate  distinction  between  the  eternal  Logos  an 
the  actual  Christ.1  Expressions  like,  "My  Father  is  great* 
than  I,"  which  apply  only  to  the  Christ  of  history,  he  refei 
also,  like  Justin  and  Origen,  to  the  eternal  Word.  On  tt 
other  hand,  he  has  been  charged  with  leaning  in  the  opposii 
direction  towards  the  Sabellian  and  Patripassian  views,  bi 
unjustly.2  Apart  from  his  frequent  want  of  precision  in  es 
pression,  he  steers  in  general,  with  sure  biblical  and  churchl 
tact,  equally  clear  of  both  extremes,  and  asserts  alike  the  essen 
tial  unity  and  the  eternal  personal  distinction  of  the  Father  an< 
the  Son. 

The  incarnation  of  the  Logos  Irensras  represents  both  as  i 
restoration  and  redemption  from  sin  and  death,  and  as  the  com 
pletion  of  the  revelation  of  God  and  of  the  creation  of  man 
In  the  latter  view,  as  finisher,  Christ  is  the  perfect  Son  of  Man 
in  whom  the  likeness  of  man  to  God,  the  similitude  Dei,  regardec 
as  moral  duty,  in  distinction  from  the  imago  Dd,  as  an  essentia 
property,  becomes  for  the  first  time  fully  real.  According  ix 
this  the  incarnation  would  be  grounded  in  the  original  plan  o. 


1  The  ^oyog-  acaptcx^  and  the  /.d 
*  As  Duncker  in  his  monograph     Die  Christdogie  des  hett.  Irenwus,  p.  5( 
sqq.,  has  unanswerably  shown. 


2 145.    THE  DIVINITY  OF  CHKIST.  555 

God  for  the  education  of  mankind,  and  independent  of  the  fall ; 
it  would  have  taken  place  even  without  the  fall,  though  in  some 
other  form.  Yet  Irenseus  does  not  expressly  say  this ;  speculation 
on  abstract  possibilities  was  foreign  to  his  realistic  cast  of  mind. 

TEKTULLIAJT  cannot  escape  the  charge  of  subordinationism. 
He  bluntly  calls  the  Father  the  whole  divine  substance,  and  the 
Son  a  part  of  it  ;*  illustrating  their  relation  by  the  figures  of  the 
fountain  and  the  stream,  the  sun  and  the  beam.  He  would  not 
have  two  suns,  he  says,  but  he  might  call  Christ  God,  as  Paul 
does  in  Rom  9  :  5.  The  sunbeam,  too,  in  itself  considered,  may 
be  called  sun,  but  not  the  sun  a  beam.  Sun  and  beam  are  two 
distinct  things  (species)  in  one  essence  (substantia),  as  God  and 
the  Word,  as.  the  Father  and  the  Son.  But  we  should  not  take 
figurative  language  too  strictly,  and  must  remember  that  Tertul- 
lian  was  specially  interested  to  distinguish  the  Son  from  the 
Father  in  opposition  to  the  Patripassian  Praxeas.  In  other 
respects  he  did  the  church  Christology  material  service.  He 
propounds  a  threefold  hypostatical  existence  of  the  Son  (Jilwtid) : 
(1)  The  pre-existent,  eternal  immanence  of  the  Son  hi  the  Father; 
they  being  as  inseparable  as  reason  and  word  in  man,  who  was 
created  in  the  image  of  God,  and  hence  in  a  measure  reflects  his 
being  ;2  (2)  the  coming  forth  of  the  Son  with  the  Father  for  the 
purpose  of  the  creation ;  (3)  the  manifestation  of  the  Son  in  the 
world  by  the  incarnation.3 

With  equal  energy  HEPPOLYTUS  combated  Patripassianism, 
and  insisted  on  the  recognition  of  different  hypostases  with  equal 
claim  to  divine  worship.  Yet  he,  too,  is  somewhat  trammelled 
with  the  subordination  view.4 

1  Adv.  Proa.  c.  9 :  ''Pater  iota,  substantial  est,  Films  vero  derivatio  totius  et  portio, 
sicut  ipse profitetur :  Quia  'Pater  major  Me  est"  (John  14:  28). 

3  Hence  he  says  (Adv.  Prax.  c.  5),  byway  of  illustration :  <cQuodcunque 
cogitaveris,  sermo  est;  quodcimque  senseris  ratio  est.  Loqwris  fllud  in  animo 
necesse  estj  et  dum'loqueris,  conlocutorem  patens  sermonem,  in  quo  inest  haec  ipsa 
ratio  qua  cum  eo  cogitans  loquaris,  per  quern  loquens  cogitas.3' 

3  In  German  terminology  this  progress  in  the  filiation  (BypostoMrung)  may 
>e  expressed :  die  werdende  Persordichkeitj  die  gewordene  PersonlicJiJsett,  die  ersch- 
einendePersordichkeit.  *  See  the  exposition  of  Dollinger,  Hippd.  p.  195  sqq. 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

On  the  other  hand,  according  to  his  representation  in  t 
Philosophumena,  the  lloman  bishops  Zephyrinus  and  especial 
Callistus  favored  Patripassianism.  The  later  popes,  howevc 
were  firm  defenders  of  hypostasianisni.  One  of  them,  Dionysii 
A.D.  262,  as  we  shall  see  more  fully  when  speaking  of  the  trinit 
maintained  at  once  the  homo-ousion  and  eternal  generation  again 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  and  the  hypostatical  distinction  again 
Sabellianism,  and  sketched  in  bold  and  clear  outlines  the  Nice] 
standard  view. 

§  146.  The  Humanity  of  Christ. 

Passing  now  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Saviour's  HUMAOTTY,  v 
find  this  asserted  by  IGNATIUS  as  clearly  and  forcibly  as  h 
divinity.  Of  the  Gnostic  Docetists  of  his  day,  who  made  Chri 
a  spectre,  he  says,  they  are  bodiless  spectres  themselves,  who] 
we  should  fear  as  wild  beasts  in  human  shape,  because  they  te* 
away  the  foundation  of  our  hope.1  He  attaches  great  importanc 
to  the  flesh,  that  is,  the  full  reality  of  the  human  nature  of  Chris 
his  true  birth  from  the  virgin,  and  his  crucifixion  under  Pontii 
Pilate;  he  calls  him  God  incarnate;2  therefore  is  his  death  th 
fountain  of  life. 

IRENJEUS  refutes  Docetism  at  length.  Christ,  he  contend 
against  the  Gnostics,  must  be  a  man,  like  us,  if  he  would  redeer 
us  from  corruption  and  make  us  perfect.  As  sin  and  death  cam 
into  the  world  by  a  man,  so  they  could  be  blotted  out  legitimatel 
and  to  our  advantage  only  by  a  man ;  though  of  course  not  b 
one  who  should  be  a  mere  descendant  of  Adam,  and  thus  himsel 
in  need  of  redemption,  but  by  a  second  Adam,  supernaturall 
begotten,  a  new  progenitor  of  our  race,  as  divine  as  he  is  humar 
A  new  birth  unto  life  must  take  the  place  of  the  old  birth  unt 
death.  As  the  completer,  also,  Christ  must  enter  into  fellowshi 
with  us,  to  be  our  teacher  and  pattern.  He  made  himself  equa 

1  Ep.  ad  Smyrn.  c.  2-5. 

*  h  vapid  ?fv6nevoc  tfeefc  (ad  Ephes.  c.  7) ;  also  evuatc  aapicbe  nal 
Comp.  Rom.  1 :  3,  4-,  9 :  5;  1  Jolm  4;  1-3. 


2  146.  THE  HUMANITY  OF  CHBIST.  557 

with  man,  that  man,  by  his  likeness  to  the  Son,  might  become 
precious  in  the  Father's  sight.  Irenseus  conceived  the  humanity 
of  Christ  not  as  a  mere  corporeality,  though  he  often  contends 
for  this  alone  against  the  Gnostics,  but  as  true  humanity, 
embracing  body,  soul,  and  spirit.  He  places  Christ  in  the 
same  relation  to  the  regenerate  race,  which  Adam  bears  to  the 
natural,  and  regards  him  as  the  absolute,  universal  man,  the 
prototype  and  summing  up  x  of  the  whole  race.  Connected  with 
this  is  his  beautiful  thought,  found  also  in  Hippolytus  in  the 
tenth  book  of  the  Philosophumena,  that  Christ  made  the  cir- 
cuit of  all  the  stages  of  human  life,  to  redeem  and  sanctify  all. 
To  apply  this  to  advanced  age,  he  singularly  extended  the  life 
of  Jesus  to  fifty  years,  and  endeavored  to  prove  this  view  from 
the  Gospels,  against  the  Valentinians.2  The  full  communion  of 
Christ  with  men  involved  his  participation  in  all  their  evils  and 
sufferings,  his  death,  and  his  descent  into  the  abode  of  the  dead. 
TEETULLIAN  advocates  the  entire  yet  sinless  humanity  of 
Christ  against  both  the  Doeetistic  Gnostics3  and  the  Patripas- 
'  sians.4  He  accuses  the  former  of  making  Christ  who  is  all 
truth,  a  half  lie,  and  by  the  denial  of  his  flesh  resolving  all  his 
work  in  the  flesh,  his  sufferings  and  his  death,  into  an  empty 
show,  and  subverting  the  whole  scheme  of  redemption.  Against 
the  Patripassians  he  argues,  that  God  the  Father  is  incapable  of 
suffering,  and  is  beyond  the  sphere  of  finiteness  and  change. 
In  the  humanity,  he  expressly  includes  the  soul  ;  and  this,  in 
his  view,  comprises  the  reason  also  ;  for  he  adopts  not  the  tri- 
chotomic,  but  the  dychotomic  division.  The  body  of  Christ, 
before  the  exaltation,  he  conceived  to  have  been  even  homely,  on 
a  misapprehension  of  Isa.  53  :  2,  where  the  suffering  Messiah  is 


LG,  recapitulatio,  a  term,  frequently  used  by  Irenaeus.  Comp. 
Bom.  13:  9;  Eph.  1:  10. 

3  Adv.  Hcer.  II.  22,  \  4-6.  He  appeals  to  tradition  and  to  the  loose  conjec- 
ture of  the  Jews  that  Christ  was  near  fifty  years,  John  8  :  57.  The  Valen- 
tinian  Gnostics  allowed  only  thirty  years  to  Christ,  corresponding  to  the  num- 
ber of  their  aeons. 

*  Adv.  MarciwMm,  and  De  Came  Christi  4  Adv. 


558  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

figuratively  said  to  have  "no  form  nor  comeliness."  This 
unnatural  view  agreed  with  his  aversion  to  art  and  earthly 
splendor,  but  was  not  commonly  held  by  the  Christian  people 
if  we  are  to  judge  from  the  oldest  representations  of  Christ 
under  the  figure  of  a  beautiful  Shepherd  carrying  the  lamb  in 
his  arms  or  on  his  shoulders. 

CLEMENT  of  Alexandria  likewise  adopted  the  notion  of 
the  uncomely  personal  appearance  of  Jesus,  but  compensated  it 
with  the  thought  of  the  moral  beauty  of  his  soul.  In  his 
oifort,  however,  to  idealize  the  body  of  the  Lord,  and  raise  it 
above  all  sensual  desires  and  wants,  he  almost  reaches  Gnostic 
Doeetism. 

The  Christology  of  ORIGEN  is  more  fully  developed  in  this 
part,  as  well  as  in  the  article  of  the  divine  nature,  and  pecu- 
liarlv  modified  by  his  Platonizing  view  of  the  pre-existence 
and  pre-Adamie  fall  of  souls  and  their  confinement  in  the  prison 
of  corporeity ;  but  he  is  likewise  too  idealistic,  and  inclined  to 
substitute  the  superhuman  for  the  purely  human.  He  conceives 
the  incarnation  as  a  gradual  process,  and  distinguishes  two  stages 
in  it — the  assumption  of  the  soul,  and  the  assumption  of  the 
body.  The  Logos,  before  the  creation  of  the  world,  nay,  from 
the  beginning,  took  to  himself  a  human  soul,  which  had  no  part 
in  the  ante- mundane  apostasy,  but  clave  to  the  Logos  in  per- 
fect love,  and  was  warmed  through  by  him,  as  iron  by  fire. 
Then  this  fair  soul,  married  to  the  Logos,  took  from  the  Virgin 
Mary  a  true  body,  yet  without  sin ;  not  by  way  of  punishment, 
like  the  fallen  souls,  but  from  love  to  men,  to  effect  their 
redemption.  Again,  Origen  distinguishes  *various  forms  of  the 
manifestation  of  this  human  nature,  in  which  the  Lord  became 
all  things  to  all  men,  to  gain  all.  To  the  great  mass  he  ap- 
peared in  the  form  of  a  servant ;  to  his  confidential  disciples 
and  persons  of  culture,  in  a  radiance  of  the  highest  beauty  and 
glory,  such  as,  even  before  the  resurrection,  broke  forth  from 
his  miracles  and  in  the  transfiguration  on  the  Mount.  In 
connection  with  this  comes  Origen's  view  of  a  gradual  spiritual)- 


\  147.  THE  RELATION  OF  THE  TWO  STATUSES.        559 

zation  and  deification  of  the  body  of  Christ,  even  to  the  ubiquity 
which  he  ascribes  to  it  in  its  exalted  state.1 

On  this  insufficient  ground  his  opponents  charged  him  with 
teaching  a  double  Christ  (answering  to  the  lower  Jesus  and  the 
higher  Soter  of  the  Gnostics),  and  a  merely  temporary  validity 
in  the  corporeity  of  the  Redeemer. 

Origen  is  the  first  to  apply  to  Christ  the  term  God-man,2  which 
leads  to  the  true  view  of  the  relation  of  the  two  natures. 

§  147.  The  Relation  of  the  Divine  and  the  Human  in  Christ. 

The  doctrine  of  the  MUTUAL,  RELATION  of  the  divine  and  the 
human  in  Christ  did  not  come  into  special  discussion  nor  reach 
a  definite  settlement  until  the  Christological  (Nestorian  and  Eu- 
tychian)  controversies  of  the  fifth  century. 

Yet  IBENJEUS,  in  several  passages,  throws  out  important 
hints.  He  teaches  unequivocally  a  true  and  indissoluble  union 
of  divinity  and  humanity  in  Christ,  and  repels  the  Gnostic 
idea  of  a  mere  external  and  transient  connection  of  the  di- 
vine Soter  with  the  human  Jesus.  The  foundation  for  that 
union  he  perceives  in  the  creation  of  the  world  by  the  Logos, 
and  in  man's  original  likeness  to  God  and  destination  for  per- 
manent fellowship  with  Him.  In  the  act  of  union,  that  is, 
in  the  supernatural  generation  and  birth,  the  divine  is  the  active 
principle,  and  the  seat  of  personality ;  the  human,  the  passive  or, 
receptive  •  as,  in  general,  man  is  absolutely  dependent  on  God, 
and -is  the  vessel  to  receive  the  revelations  of  his  wisdom  and 
love.  The  medium  and  bond  of  the  union  is  the  Holy  Spirit, 
flfho  took  the  place  of  the  masculine  agent  in  the  generation,  and 
overshadowed  the  virgin  womb  of  Mary  with  the  power  of  the 
Highest  In  this  .connection  he  calls  Mary  the  counterpart  of 
Eve  the  "  mother  of  all  living  "  in  a  higher  sense ;  who,  by  her 

1  The  -view  of  the  ubiquity  of  Christ's  body  was  adopted  by  Gregory  of 
Nyssa,  revived  by  Scotus  Erigena,  but  in  a  pantheistic  sense,  and  by  Luther, 
who  made  it  a  support  to  his  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  See  Oreeds  of 
Christendom,  vol.  I.  p.  286  sqq. 


560  SEC<m>  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

believing  obedience,  became  the  cause  of  salvation  both  to  herself 
and  the  whole  human  race,1  as  Eve  by  her  disobedience  induced 
the  apostasy  and  death  of  mankind; — a  fruitful  but  questionable 
parallel,  suggested  but  not  warranted  by  Paul's  parallel  between 
Adam  and  Christ,  afterwards  frequently  pushed  too  far,  and 
turned,  no  doubt,  contrary  to  its  original  sense,  to  favor  the 
idolatrous  worship  of  the  blessed  Virgin.  Irenseus  seems2  to 
conceive  the  incarnation  as  progressive,  the  two  factors  reaching 
absolute  communion  (but  neither  absorbing  the  other)  in  the  as- 
cension ;  though  before  this,  at  every  stage  of  life,  Christ  was  a 
perfect  man,  presenting  the  model  of  every  age. 

ORIGEN,  the  author  of  the  term  "God-man,"  was  also  the  first 
to  employ  the  figure,  since  become  so  classical,  of  an  iron  warmed 
through  by  fire,  to  illustrate  the  pervasion  of  the  human  nature 
(primarily  the  soul)  by  the  divine  in  the  presence  of  Christ* 

§  148.  The  Holy  Spirit. 

ED.  BURTON:   Testimonies  of  the  Ante-Nlcene  Fathers  to  the  Divinity  oj 

the  Holy  Ghost    Oxf.  1831  ( Works,  vol.  II). 
£.  F.  A.  KAHXIS:  Die  Lehre  vom  hdl  Geiste,    Halle,  1847.    (Pt.  I.  p. 

149-356.    Incomplete). 

NEAXDEB:  Dogmengeschichte,  ed.  by  Jacobi,  L  181-186. 
The  doctrine  of  Justin  3Iart.  is  treated  with  exhaustive  thoroughness  by 

SEMISCH,  in  his  monograph  (Breslau,  1840),  II.  305-332.    Comp, 

also  31.  v.  EXGELELARDT  :   Das  Ohristenthum  Justins   (Erlangen, 

1878),  p.  143-147. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  far  less  developed,  and 
until  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  was  never  a  subject  of 
special  controversy.  So  in  the  Apostles'  Creed,  only  one  article3  is 
devoted  to  the  third  person  of  the  holy  Trinity,  while  the  confes- 
sion of  the  Son  of  God,  in  six  or  seven  articles,  forms  the  body  of 
the  symbol.  Even  the  original  Nicene  Creed  breaks  off  abruptly 
with  the  words :  "And  in  the  Holy  Spirit;"  the  other  clauses 
being  later  additions.  Logical  knowledge  appears  to  be  here 

1  "Et  sibi  et  universo  generi  humano  causa  facto,  est  salutis."    Adv.  Ear.  ITL 
22  ,J  4. 
*  At  least  according  to  Dorner,  I.  495.  s  O$&  fa  Spirifam  Sfawfam. 


§  148.  THE  HOLY  SPIBIT.  561 

still  further  removed  than  in  Christology  from  the  living  sub- 
stance of  faith.  This  period  was  still  in  immediate  contact  with 
the  fresh  spiritual  life  of  the  apostolic,  still  witnessed  the 
lingering  operations  of  the  extraordinary  gifts,  and  experienced 
in  full  measure  the  regenerating,  sanctifying,  and  comforting 
influences  of  the  divine  Spirit  in  life,  suffering,  and  death ;  but, 
as  to  the  theological  definition  of  the  nature  and  work  of  the 
Spirit,  it  remained  in  many  respects  confused  and  wavering  down 
to  the  Nicene  age. 

Yet  rationalistic  historians  go  quite  too  far  when,  among  other 
accusations,  they  charge  the  early  church  with  making  the  Holy 
Spirit  identical  with  the  Logos.  To  confound  the  functions,  as 
in  attributing  the  inspiration  of  the  prophets,  for  example,  now 
to  the  Holy  Spirit,  now  to  the  Logos,  is  by  no  means  to  confound 
the  persons.  On  the  contrary,  the  thorough  investigations  of 
recent  times  show  plainly  that  the  ante-Nicene  fathers,  with  the 
exception  of  the  Monarchians  and  perhaps  Lactantius,  agreed  in 
the  two  fundamental  points,  that  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  sole  agent 
in  the  application  of  redemption,  is  a  supernatural  divine  being, 
and  that  he  is  an  independent  person ;  thus  closely  allied  to  the 
Father  and  the  Son,  yet  hypostatically  different  from  them  both. 
This  was  the  practical  conception,  as  demanded  even  by  the 
formula  of  baptism.  But  instead  of  making  the  Holy  Spirit 
strictly  coordinate  with  the  other  divine  persons,  as  the  Nicene 
doctrine  does,  it  commonly  left  him  subordinate  to  the  Father 
and  the  Son. 

So  in  JUSTIN,  the  pioneer  of  scientific  discovery  in  Pneuma- 
tology  as  well  as  in  Christology.  He  refutes  the  heathen  charge 
of  atheism  with  the  explanation,  that  the  Christians  worship  the 
Creator  of  the  universe,  in  the  second  place  the  Son,1  in  the  third 
rank2  the  prophetic  Spirit;  placing  the  three  divine  hy postages 
in  a  descending  gradation  as  objects  of  worship.  In  another 
passage,  quite  similar,  he  interposes  the  host  of  good  angels 
between  the  Son  and  the  Spirit,  and  thus  favors  the  inference, 

*  h  Swrtpg  x&Pfr  f  &  rP'irV  T*fet>  Apol.  L  18. 

Vol.  11.— 36. 


562  SECOND  PERIOD.    A,  D,  100-311. 

that  lie  regarded  the  Holy  Ghost  himself  as  akin  to  the  angels 
and  therefore  a  created  being.1  But  aside  from  the  obscurity 
and  ambiguity  of  the  words  relating  to  the  angelic  host,  the  co- 
ordination of  the  Holy  Ghost  with  the  angels  is  utterly  precluded 
by  many  other  expressions  of  Justin,  in  which  he  exalts  the 
Spirit  far  above  the  sphere  of  all  created  being,  and  challenges 
for  the  members  of  the  divine  trinity  a  worship  forbidden  to 
angels.  The  leading  function  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  with  him,  as 
with  other  apologists,  is  the  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament 
prophets.2  In  general  the  Spirit  conducted  the  Jewish  theocracy, 
and  qualified  the  theocratic  officers.  All  his  gifts  concentrated 
themselves  finally  in  Christ;  and  thence  they  pass  to  the  faithful 
in  the  church.  It  is  a  striking  fact,  however,  that  Justin  in  only 
two  passages  refers  the  new  moral  life  of  the  Christian  to  the 
Spirit;  he  commonly  represents  the  Logos  as  its  fountain.  He 
lacks  all  insight  into  the  distinction  of  the  Old  Testament  Spirit 
and  theXew,and  urges  their  identity  in  opposition  to  the  Gnostics. 

1  Apd*  L  6:  'Emvdv  re  (i  e.  Qebv),  Kal  TOV  nap*  avrov  T&v  &&6vTa  KOI 
&6af-o,vTa  %/£Q£  Tavra  KO\  rav  TUV  aAAwv  liropevav  Kal  sgopotovpevav  aya&tiv 
ayy£%uv  trrpordv,  ILvsvpa  TS  TO  TrpwjHjnKbv  ff£/36/JLe&a  Kal  irpoaKwovfisv.  This  pas- 
sage Las  been  variously  explained.  The  questions  arise,  whether  ayye tor  here 
is  not  to  be  taken  in  the  wider  sense,  in  which  Justin  often  uses  it,  and  even 
applies  it  to  Christ;  whether  orpardv  depends  on  rc/Sd/zftfa,  and  not  rather  on 
8i66%avra,  so  as  to  be  co-ordinate  with  ^uac,  or  with  Tavra,  and  not  with  Tl6v 
and  Uvsvfta.  Still  others  suspect  that  arpardv  is  a  false  reading  for  cTpa.TTjy6v, 
which  would  characterize  Christ  as  the  leader  of  the  angelic  host.  It  is  im- 
possible to  co-ordinate  the  host  of  angels  with  the  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit,  as 
objects  of  worship,  without  involving  Justin  in  gross  self-contradiction  (ApdL 
I.  17 :  6edv  pwov  Tcpowcwovpev,  etc.).  We  must  either  join  OTparfo  with  sfriar, 
in  the  sense  that  Christ  is  the  teacher,  not  of  men  only,  but  also  of  the  host  of 
angels ;  or  with  ravra  in  the  sense  that  the  Son  of  God  taught  us  (6v8a%avra 
^«ac)  about  these  things  (ravra,  i.  e.  evil  spirits,  compare  the  preceding  chapter 
I.  5),  but  also  concerning  the  good  angels— rto  ayy&uv  arparfo  being  in  thi* 
case  elliptically  put  for  ra  mpl  rdv  , . ,  ayy&uv  errparov.  The  former  is  more 
natural,  although  a  more  careful  writer  than  Justin  would  in  this  case  have 
said  ravra  jj/ifif  instead  of  j}^5c  ravra.  For  a  summary  of  the  different  inter* 
pretations  see  Otto's  notes  in  the  third  ed.  of  Justin's  Opera,  I.  20-23. 

*  Hence  the  frequent  designation,  TO  TLvevpa  irpo$TjTiK.6v>  together  with  the 
other,  TLvevpa  aytov;  and  hence  also  even  in  the  Symb.  NIC.  Constantin.  the 
definition:  Hvev/oi . . .  rd Tta^aav  die  rw  Trpo^TTdh',  "who  spoke  throvgh  tfc* 
DrophetB." 


§148.  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT.  563 

In  CLEMENT  of  Alexandria  we  find  very  little  progress  be- 
yond this  point.  Yet  he  calls  the  Holy  Spirit  the  third  member 
of  the  sacred  triad,  and  requires  thanksgiving  to  be  addressed 
to  him  as  to  the  Son  and  the  Father.1 

OEIGEN  vacillates  in  his  Pneumatology  still  more  than  in 
his  Christology  between  orthodox  and  heterodox  views.  He 
ascribes  to  the  Holy  Spirit  eternal  existence,  exalts  him,  as  he 
does  the  Son,  far  above  all  creatures,  and  considers  him  the 
source  of  all  charisms,2  especially  as  the  principle  of  all  the  illu- 
mination and  holiness  of  believers  under  the  Old  Covenant  and 
the  New.  But  he  places  the  Spirit  in  essence,  dignity,  and 
efficiency  below  the  Son,  as  far  as  he  places  the  Son  below  the 
Father;  and  though  he  grants  in  one  passage3  that  the  Bible 
nowhere  calls  the  Holy  Spirit  a  creaturfc,  yet,  according  to 
another  somewhat  obscure  sentence,  he  himself  inclines  towards 
the  view,  which,  however,  he  does  not  avow,"  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  had  a  beginning  (though,  according  'to  his  system,  not  in 
time  but  from  eternity),  and  is  the  first  and  most  excellent  of  all 
the  beings  produced  by  the  Logos.4  In  the  same  connection  he 
adduces  three  opinions  concerning  the  Holy  Spirit;  one  re- 
garding him  as  not  having  an  origin  ;  another,  ascribing  to  him 
no  separate  personality;  and  a  third,  making  him  a  being 
originated  by  the  Logos.  The  first  of  these  opinions  he  rejects 
because  the  Father  alone  is  without  origin  (dj-sw^roc)  ;  the 
second  he  rejects  because  in  Matt.  12  :  32  the  Spirit  is  plainly 
distinguished  from  the  Father  and  the  Son  ;  the  third  he  takes 
for  the  true  and  scriptural  view,  because  everything  was  made 


Paed.  HI.  p.  311  :   'Et^apomwvroc  <&>&*  *$  f*fo<i>  Harpi  xat  T2£—  <rtrv  /cai 


1  Not  as  fa?  TUW  xapiaparuv,  as  Neander  and  others  represent  it,  but  as  TTJV 
faijv  T&V  xaptff**  na-ptyw,  as  offering  the  substance  and  fulness  of  the  spiritual 
gifts  ;  therefore  as  the  apxq  and  mrrft  of  them.  In  Joh.  IL  \  6. 

1  Le  Princip.  I.  3,  3. 

4  In  Joh.  torn.  II.  \  6  :  rtfufaepov—  this  comparative,  by  the  tray,  should  be 
noticed  as  possibly  Baying  more  than  the  superlative,  and  perhaps  designed  to 
distinguish  the  Spirit  from  all  creatures—  vdvrunf  T&V  into  TOV  Uarpdf  <fca 


564  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

by  the  Logos.1  Indeed,  according  to  Matt.  12 :  32,  the  Holy 
Spirit  would  seem  to  stand  above  the  Son ;  but  the  sin  against 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  more  heinous  than  that  against  the  Son  of 
Man,  only  because  he  who  has  received  the  Holy  Spirit  stands 
higher  than  he  who  has  merely  the  reason  from  the  Logos. 

Here  again  IBEXJETTS  comes  nearer  than  the  Alexandrians  to 
the  dogma  of  the  perfect  substantial  identity  of  the  Spirit  with 
the  Father  and  the  Son ;  though  his  repeated  figurative  (but  for 
this  reason  not  so  definite)  designation  of  the  Son  and  Spirit  as 
the  "hands"  of  the  Father,  by  which  he  made  all  things,  implies 
a  certain  subordination.  He  differs  from  most  of  the  Fathers  in 
referring  the  "Wisdom  of  the  book  of  Proverbs  not  to  the  Logos 
but  to  the  Spirit;  and  hence  must  regard  him  as  eternal.  Yet  he 
was  far  from  concerning  the  Spirit  a  mere  power  or  attribute ; 
he  considered  him  an  independent  personality,  like  the  Logos. 
"With  God,"  says  he,3  "are  ever  the  Word  and  the  Wisdom,  the 
Son  and  the  Spirit,  through  whom  and  in  whom  he  freely  made 
all  things,  to  whom  he  said, c  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image, 
after  our  likeness/  "  But  he  speaks  more  of  the  operations  than 
of  the  nature  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Spirit  predicted  in  the 
prophets  the  coming  of  Christ ;  has  been  near  to  man  in  all 
divine  ordinances ;  communicates  the  knowledge  of  the  Father 
and  the  Son ;  gives  believers  the  consciousness  of  sonship ;  is 
fellowship  with  Christ,  the  pledge  of  imperishable  life,  and  the 
kdder  on  which  wa  ascend  to  God. 

In  the  Montanistic  system  the  Paraclete  occupies  a  peculiarly 
important  place.  He  appears  there  as  the  principle  of  the 
highest  stage  of  revelation,  or  of  the  church  of  the  consumma- 
tion. TEETULLIAN  made  the  Holy  Spirit  the  proper  essence  of 
the  church,  but  subordinated  him  to  the  Son,  as  he  did  the  Sou 
to  the  Father,  though  elsewhere  he  asserts  the  "unitas  sub- 
stantice."  In  his  view  the  Spirit  proceeds  "a  Patre  per  Filium" 
as  the  fruit  from  the  root  through  the  stem.  The  view  of  the 
Trinity  presented  by  Sabellius  contributed  to  the  suppression  of 
these  subordination  ideas. 

2  According  to  John  1:3.  a  Adv.  Hcer.  IV.  20,  g  L 


{149.  THE  HOLY  TEEXTFY.  565 

§  149.  The  Holy  Trinity. 
Comp.  the  works  quoted  in  g  144,  especially  PETAVHTS,  BULL,  BA.UE,  aad 


Here  now  we  have  the  elements  of  the  dogma  of  the  Trinity, 
that  is,  the  doctrine  of  the  living,  only  true  God,  Father,  Son, 
and  Spirit,  of  whom,  through  whom,  and  to  whom  are  all 
things.  This  dogma  has  a  peculiar,  comprehensive,  and  defini- 
tive import  in  the  Christian  system,  as  a  brief  summary  of  all 
the  truths  and  blessings  of  revealed  religion.  Hence  the  bap- 
tismal formula  (Matt.  28 :  19),  which  forms  the  basis  of  all  the 
ancient  creeds,  is  trinitarian;  as  is  the  apostolic  benediction 
also  (2  Cor.  13 :  14).  This  doctrine  meets  us  in  the  Scriptures, 
however,  not  so  much  in  direct  statements  and  single  expres- 
sions, of  which  the  two  just  mentioned  are  the  clearest,  as  in 
great  living  facts;  in  the  history  of  a  threefold  revelation  of 
the  living  God  in  the  creation  and  government,  the  reconcilia- 
tion and  redemption,  and  the  sanctification  and  consummation 
of  the  world — a  history  continued  in  the  experience  of  Christen- 
dom. In  the  article  of  the  Trinity  the  Christian  conception  of 
God  completely  defines  itself,  in  distinction  alike  from  the  ab- 
stract monotheism  of  the  Jewish  religion,  and  from  the  poly- 
theism and  dualism  of  the  heathen.  It  has  accordingly  been 
looked  upon  in  all  ages  as  the  sacred  symbol  and  the  funda- 
mental doctrine  of  the  Christian  church,  with  the  denial  of 
which  the  divinity  of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  divine 
character  of  the  work  of  redemption  and  sanctification,  fall  to 
the  ground. 

On  this  scriptural  basis  and  the  Christian  consciousness  of  a 
Jireefold  relation  we  sustain  to  God  as  our  Maker,  Redeemer, 
and  Sanctifier,  the  church  dogma  of  the  Trinity  arose ;  and  it 
directly  or  indirectly  ruled  even  the  ante-Nicene  theology, 
though  it  did  not  attain  its  fixed  definition  till  in  the  Nicene 
age.  It  is  primarily  of  a  practical  religious  nature,  and  specu- 


566  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

lative  onlr  in  a  secondary  sense.  It  arose  not  from  ihe  field  of 
metaphysics,  but  from  that  of  experience  and  worship ;  and  not 
as  an  abstract,  isolated  dogma,  but  in  inseparable  connection 
with  the  study  of  Christ  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  especially  in 
connection  with  Christology,  since  all  theology  proceeds  from 
"God  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  unto  himself."  Under 
the  condition  of  monotheism,  this  doctrine  followed  of  necessity 
from  the  •doctrine  of  the  divinity  of  Christ  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  The  unity  of  God  was  already  immovably  fixed  by  the 
Old  Testament  as  a  fundamental  article  of  revealed  religion  in 
opposition  to  all  forms  of  idolatry.  But  the  New  Testament 
and  the  Christian  consciousness  as  firmly  demanded  faith  in  the 
divinity  of  the  Son,  who  effected  redemption,  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  who  founded  the  church  and  dwells  in  believers ;  and 
these  apparently  contradictory  interests  could  be  reconciled  only 
in  the  form  of  the  Trinity ; l  that  is,  by  distinguishing  in  the 
one  and  indivisible  essence  of  God 2  three  hypostases  or  per- 
sons ; 3  at  the  same  time  allowing  for  the  insufficiency  of  all 
human  conceptions  and  words  to  describe  such  an  unfathomable 
mystery. 

The  Socinian  and  rationalistic  opinion,  that  the  church 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity  sprang  from  Platonism4  and  Neo- 
Platonism5  is  therefore  radically  false.  The  Indian  Trimurti, 
altogether  pantheistic  in  spirit,  is  still  further  from  the  Christian 
Trinity.  Only  thus  much  is  true,  that  the  Hellenic  philosophy 
operated  from  without,  as  a  stimulating  force,  upon  the  form  of 
the  whole  patristic  theology,  the  doctrines  of  the  -Logos  and  the 
Trinity  among  the  rest;  and  that  the  deeper  minds  of  heathen 


if,  first  in  Theophilus ;  irimtas,  first  in  Tertullian ;  from  the  fourth  cen- 
tury more  distinctly  pavorpidf,  ^ovof  h  rptdtit,  triumitas* 

*  owr/o,  0wwf,  substantia;  sometimes  also,  inaccurately,  inrdarafftf. 

*  Tpclc  {rzooTdaeic,  rpta  wp6auica,  personce. 

*  Comp.  Plato,  Ep.  2  and  6,  which,  however,  are  spurious  or  doubtful.  Legg< 
IV.  p.  185:  *0  i?eof  apxfr>  re  Kai  Teievr^v  xdi  peck  ruv  &VTW  dirdvrw  tym. 

5  Plotinus  (in  Em.  V.  1)  and  Porphyry  (in  Cyril.  Alex.  c.  Jul.)  who,  however, 
*ere  already  unconsciously  affected  by  Christian  ideas,  speak  of  rpe'c  hroordaen 
but  in  a  sense  altogether  different  from  that  of  the  church. 


J 149.  THE  HOLY  TRINITY.  567 

antiquity  showed  a  presentiment  of  a  threefold  distinction  in 
the  divine  essence :  but  only  a  remote  and  vague  presentiment 
which,  like  all  the  deeper  instincts  of  the  heathen  mind,  serves 
to  strengthen  the  Christian  truth.  Far  clearer  and  more  fruitful 
suggestions  presented  themselves  in  the  Old  Testament,  par- 
ticularly in  the  doctrines  of  the  Messiah,  of  the  Spirit,  of  the 
Word,  and  of  the  Wisdom  of  God,  and  even  in  the  system  of 
symbolical  numbers,  which  rests  on  the  sacredness  of  the  num- 
bers three  (God),  four  (the  world),  seven  and  twelve  (the  union 
of  God  and  the  world,  hence  the  covenant  numbers.  But  the 
mystery  of  the  Trinity  could  be  fully  revealed  only  in  the  New 
Testament  after  the  completion  of  the  work  of  redemption  and 
the  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  historical  manifesta- 
tion of  the  Trinity  is  the  condition  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
Trinity. 

Again,  it  was  primarily  the  oeconomie  or  transitive  trinity, 
which  the  church  had  in  mind ;  that  is,  the  trinity  of  the  reve- 
lation of  God  in  the  threefold  work  of  creation,  redemption, 
and  sanctification ;  the  trinity  presented  in  the  apostolic  writings 
as  a  living  fact.  But  from  this,  in  agreement  with  both  reason 
and  Scripture,  the  immanent  or  ontologic  trinity  was  inferred ; 
that  is,  an  eternal  distinction  in  the  essence  of  God  itself,  which 
reflects  itself  in  his  revelation,  and  can  be  understood  only  so 
far  as  it  manifests  itself  in  his  works  and  words.  The  divine 
nature  thus  came  to  be  conceived,  not  as  an  abstract,  blank 
unity,  but  as  an  infinite  fulness  of  life ;  and  the  Christian  idea 
of  God  (as  John  of  Damascus  has  remarked)  in  this  respect 
combined  Jewish  monotheism  with  the  truth  which  lay  at  the 
bottom  of  even  the  heathen  polytheism,  though  distorted  and 
defaced  there  beyond  recognition. 

Then  for  the  more  definite  illustration  of  this  trinity  of 
essence,  speculative  church  teachers  of  subsequent  times  ap- 
pealed to  all  sorts  of  analogies  in  nature,  particularly  in  the 
sphere  of  the  finite  mind,  which  was  made  after  the  image  of 
the  divine,  and  thus  to  a  certain  extent  authorizes  such  a 


568  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

parallel.  They  found  a  sort  of  triad  in  the  universal  law  oi 
thesis,  antithesis,  and  synthesis;  in  the  elements  of  the  syl- 
logism ;  in  the  three  persons  of  grammar ;  in  the  combination 
of  body,  soul,  and  spirit  in  man ;  in  the  three  leading  faculties 
of  the  soul;  in  the  nature  of  intelligence  and  knowledge  as 
involving  a  union  of  the  thinking  subject  and  the  thought 
object ;  and  in  the  nature  of  love,  as  likewise  a  union  between 
the  Irviug  and  the  loved.1  These  speculations  began  with  Ori- 
gen  and  Tertuliian;  they  were  pursued  by  Atnanasius  and 
Angustin;  by  the  scholastics  and  mystics  of  the  Middle  Ages; 
by  Melanehthon,  and  the  speculative  Protestant  divines  down 
to  tichleierrnacher,  Rothe  and  Corner,  as  well  as  by  philosophers 
from  Bohnie  to  Hegel;  and  they  are  not  yet  exhausted,  nor  will 
bo  till  we  reach  the  beatific  vision.  For  the  holy  Trinity,  though 
iln-  most  evident,  is  yet  the  deepest  of  mysteries,  and  can  be  ade- 
q '.lately  explained  by  no  analogies  from  finite  and  earthly  things. 
As  the  doctrines  of  the  divinity  of  Christ  and  of  the  Holy 
S,'!rit  were  but  imperfectly  developed  in  logical  precision  in  the 
:I»:C-?MI^:I«  period,  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  founded  on 
tiit'i.i,  ^wrt!>£  bo  expected  to  be  more  clear.  We  find  it  first  in 
1:1"  :  n-jt  <im-;>!e  bibHrsl  and  practical  shape  in  till  the  creeds  of 
tli.1  lir&(  tlisve  centuries:  which,  like  the  ApostW  and  the 
Xkv'jH'.  are  based  on  the  baptismal  fonnul-i,  and  hence  arranged 
in  ti'initarian  order.  Then  it  appears  in  the  trinitarian  cloxolo- 
gies  used  in  the  chuivh  from  the  first;  such  as  occur  even  in  the 
epistle  of  the  church  at  Smyrna  on  the  martyrdom  of  Polycarp.2 
Clement  of  Rome  calls  "God,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
Holy  Spirit "  the  object  of  "  the  feitli  and  hope  of  the  elect" 3 

1  "  Ubi  amor,  ibi  irmitfis"  says  St.  Augustin. 

*  C.  14,  where  Polycarp  eonoiuilfs  his  prayer  at  the  stake  with  the  words, 
&'  ov  li.  e.  Ghrfri)  ffof  f  i.  e.  the  Father)  sw  wry  (Ch'ist)  ml  Tlvevfiart 
*ci  vvv  Kal  «c  ™v;  aa/ojTrtj  tuwai;.  Coinp.  at  the  end  of  C.  22 :  6 
XpiGrdt; ...  y  $  Anga  uiv  Rirftt  ical  dy/cj  HvebuaTtj  «f  TOVS  ai&va?  r&v 
tl  Dominus  Jesux  Ch>-i*ftis,  c>ii  s/f  gloria  cum  Patre  et  Spiritu  Sancto  in  scecula 
wscriorum  Amen."  I  q-jotf  ih  •  text  from  Funk,  Pair.  Apart.  I.  298  and  308. 

s  In  tho  Const.  MS.  Ad  (\>r.  58:  &  6  &tbs  ml  £y  6  tiptoe  'I^ao&f  X^taToc 
/.,?*  rd  KVFiua  aywv,  jj  re  nicng  xal  $  &rlc  r&v  e/Oaerav.  "As  surely  as  Gtxi 
liveth  ...  so  surely,"  eta 


{  149.  THE  HOLY  TKIJSiTV.  569 

The  sentiment,  that  we  rise  through  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  Son, 
through  the  Sou  to  the  Father,  belongs  likewise  to  the  age  ot 
fche  immediate  disciples  of  the  apostles.1 

JUSTIN  MARTYR  repeatedly  places  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit 
together  as  objects  of  divine  worship  among  the  Christians 
(though  not  as  being  altogether  equal  in  dignity),  and  imputes 
to  Plato  a  presentiment  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  Athe- 
lagoras  confesses  his  faith  in  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit,  who  are 
one  as  to  power  (xara  Swapw),  but  whom  he  dL<tinyuisLe<  as  to 
order  or  dignity  (rd&c),  in  subordination  style.  Theof Jiilus 
of  Antioch  (180)  is  the  first  to  denote  the  relation  of  the  throe 
divine  persons2  by  the  term  Triad. 

ORIGEN  conceives  the  Trinity  as  three  concentric  circles,  of 
which  each  succeeding  one  circumscribes  a  smaller  area.  God 
the  Father  acts  upon  all  created  being ;  the  Logos  only  upon 
the  rational  creation;  the  Holy  Ghost  only  upon  the  saints  in 
the  church.  But  the  sanctifying  work  of  the  Spirit  leads  baels 
to  the  Son,  and  the  Son  to  the  Father,  who  is  consequently  the 
ground  and  end  of  all  being,  and  stands  highest  in  dignity  as 
the  compass  of  his  operation  is  the  largest. 

IREKEUS  goes  no  further  than  the  baptismal  formula  and  the 
trinity  of  revelation ;  proceeding  on  the  hypothesis  of  three  suc- 
cessive stages  in  the  development  of  the  kingdom  of  God  on 
earth,  and  of  a  progressive  communication  of  God  to  the  world. 
He  also  represents  the  relation  of  the  persons  according  to  Eph. 
4 :  6 ;  the  Father  as  above  all.  and  the  head  of  Christ ;  the  Son 
as  through  all,  and  the  head  of  the  church ;  the  Spirit  as  in  all, 
and  the  fountain  of  the  water  of  life.3  Of  a  suprainundane 
trinity  of  essence  he  betrays  but  faint  indications. 

TERTHLLIAN  advances  a  step.  He  supposes  a  distinction  it 
God  himself;  and  on  the  principle  that  the  created  image  affords 
a  key  to  the  uncreated  original,  he  illustrates  the  distinction  in 
the  divine  nature  by  the  analogy  of  human  thought ;  the  neces- ' 

1  In  Irenseus:  Adv.  Hosr.  V.  36,  2. 

*  Bedf,  Arfyof,  and  So^/a.    By  2'>0fa,  like  Irenaeus,  he  means  the  Holy  Spirit 

»  Ado.  Hcer.  V.  18,  2. 


570  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-  311. 

aity  of  a  self-projection,  or  of  making  one's  self  objective  in 
word,  for  which  he  borrows  from  the  Valentinians  the  term 
xpofto/y,  or  prolatio  rei  altenus  ex  altera,1  but  without  con- 
necting with  it  the  sensuous  emanation  theory  of  the  Gnostics. 
Otherwise  he  stands,  as  already  observed,  on  subordiuatian 
ground,  if  his  comparisons  of  the  trinitarian  relation  to  that  of 
root,  stem,  and  fruit;  or  fountain,  flow,  and  brook;  or  sun,  ray, 
and  ravpoint,  be  dogmatically  pressed.2  Yet  he  directly  asserts 
also  the  essential  unity  of  the  three  persons.3 

Tertullian  was  followed  by  the  schismatic  but  orthodox 
XOVATIAN,  the  author  of  a  special  treatise  De  IHnitate,  drawn 
from  the  Creed,  and  fortified  with  Scripture  proofs  against  the 
two  classes  of  Monarchians. 

The  Roman  bishop  DIOSTYSIUS  (A.  D.  262),  a  Greek  by  birth,4 
stood  nearest  the  Xicene  doctrine.  He  maintained  distinctly,  in 
the  controversy  with  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  at  once  the 
unity  of  essence  and  the  real  personal  distinction  of  the  three 
members  of  the  divine  triad,  and  avoided  tritheism,  Sabellian- 
ism,  and  subordinatianism  with  the  instinct  of  orthodoxy,  and 
also  with  the  art  of  anathematizing  already  familiar  to  the 
popes.  -His  view  has  come  down  to  us  in  a  fragment  in  Atha- 
nasius,  where  it  is  said :  "  Then  I  must  declare  against  those 
who  annihilate  the  most  sacred  doctrine  of  the  church  by 

1  Adv.  Praxetot,  c.  8. 

*  a  Tertius"— says  he,  Adv.  Pros.  c.  8— "est  Spirtiw  <*  ]fa*  et  Mio,  aicui  for- 
tins  a  radice  fructus  ex  frutiee,  et  t&rtius  afonte  rivus  eg  famine,  et  tertiua  a  sole 
apex  ex  radio.   Nihil  famen  a  matrice  alienatur,  a  qua,  proprietors  was  ducit.    Ifa 
trinitas  [here  this  word  appears  for  the  first  time,  comp.  c.  2 :   otKovopia  qua* 
vnttatem  in  trintiatem  disponti]  per  consertos  [al  consortes]  et  connexos  gradus  a 
Poire  decurrens  et  monarchies  nihil  obstrepU  et  otKovovfaf  stofam  protegti." 

8  C.  2:  "Tres  avtem  non  stain,  Bed  gradu,  nee  substantia,  sed  forma,  nee 
potestate,  sed  specie,  unius  autem  substantia,  et  unius  status,  et  unius  potestatis,  quiet 
unus  Deus,  &  qw  et  gradus  isti  et  forma  et  species,  in  nomine  PoHs  et  Filii  et 
Spiritus  Sancti  depwtantur."  -  * 

*  Nothing  is  known  of  him  except  his  effective  effort  against  the  Sabellian 
heresy.    He  was  consecrated  after  the  death  of  Xystus,  July  22,  259,  during 
the  persecution  of  Valerian.    He  acted  with  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  in  con- 
demning and  degrading  Paul  of  Samosata,  in  264.    He  died  Dec.  26,  269. 


1  150.  ANTITRINITABIANS.  571 

dividing  and  dissolving  the  unity  of  God.  into  three  powers, 
separate  hypostases,  and  three  deities.  This  notion  [some  tri- 
theistic  view,  not  further  known  to  us]  is  "just  the  opposite  of  the 
opinion  of  Sabellius.  For  while  the  latter  would  introduce  the 
impious  doctrine,  that  the  Son  is  the  same  as  the  Father,  and  the 
converse,  the  former  teach  in  some  sense  three  Gods,  by  dividing 
the  sacred  unity  into  three  fully  separate  hypostases.  But  the 
divine  Logos  must  be  inseparably  united  with  the  God  of  all, 
and  in  God  also  the  Holy  Ghost  must  dwell  so  that  the  divine 
triad  must  be  comprehended  in  one,  viz.  the  all-ruling  God,  as 
in  a  head."  l  Then  Dionysius  condemns  the  doctrine,  that  the 
Son  is'  a  creature,  as  "the  height  of  blasphemy,"  and  concludes: 
"The  divine  adorable  unity  must  not  be  thus  cut  up  into  three 
deities  ;  no  more  may  the  transcendant  dignity  and  greatness  of 
the  Lord  be  lowered  by  saying,  the  Son  is  created;  but  we  must 
believe  in  God  the  almighty  Father,  and  in  Jesus  Christ  his 
Son,  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  must  consider  the  Logos 
inseparably  united  with  the  God  of  all  ;  for  he  says,  *I  and  my 
Father  are  one5;  and  fl  am  in  the  Father  and  the  Father  in 
me/  In  this  way  are  both  the  divine  triad  and  the  sacred  doc- 
trine of  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  preserved  inviolate." 

§  150.  Antitrinitarians.    First  doss:    The  Alogi,  Theodofas, 
Artemon,  Paul  of  Samosata. 

The  works  cited  at  g  144,  p.  543. 

SOHLEIEKM  A  CHEB  :  Ueber  den  Gegensafe  der  sdbelUanischen  u.  athanati* 

anischen  Vorstellung  von  der  Trinilat  (  Werke  zur  TheoL  Vol.  IL). 

A  rare  specimen  of  constructive  criticism  (in  tihe  interest  of  Sabel- 

lianism). 
LOBEG.  LANGE:  Geschichte  u.  Lekrbegriff  der  Vhitarier  vor  der  nican- 

ischen  Synode.    Leipz.  1831. 
Jos.  SCHWANE  (E.  0.)  :  Dogmengesch.  der  vornicdn.  Zeti  (MtiBster,  1862), 

pp.  142-156;  199-203.    Oomp.  his  art.  Antitrintiarier  in  "Wetzer 

und  Welte,"  new  ed.  L  971-976. 


el?  ha  Sxrirep  #£  xQpuQrfp  rcva  (rto  &tdv  rfa>  6Auv,  TOT 
vyKefi&aiOva&al  re  Kal  cwayea&cu  iraaa  avdyw.  Athan- 
asius,  De  Sent.  Dionym,  c.  4  sqq.  (Opera,  I.  252);  De  Deer.  Syn.  NIC.  26 
(Eouth,  Ediqu,.  Saves,  iii.  p.  384,  ed.  alt). 


572  SECOND  P-dJRIOIX    A.  B.  100-311. 

FRIEDE.  ff  ITZSCH  :  Dogmengeschichte,  Part  1.    (Berlin,  1870),  194-210. 
AD.  HAU^ACK:  Monarchianismus.    In  Herzog2,  vol.  X.  (1882),  178-213 
A  very  elaborate  article.   Abridged  in  Schaff's  Herzog,  II.  1548  sqq, 
AD,  HILGEXFELD  :  Kctzergeschwhte  des  Urchmtcnthums  (1SS4)  p.  60S-G28, 

That  this  goal  was  at  last  happily  reached,  was  in  great  pan 
due  again  to  those  controversies  with  the  opponents  of  th< 
church  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  which  filled  the  whole  third 
eentuiy.  These  Antitrinitarians  are  commonly  called  Monar- 
chians from  (/jioyapxfa)  *  or  Unitarians,  on  account  of  the  stress 
they  laid  upon  the  numerical,  personal  unity  of  the  Godhead. 

But  we  must  carefully  distinguish  among  them  two  opposite 
classes :  the  rationalistic  or  dynamic  Monarchians,  who  denied 
the  divinity  of  Christ,  or  explained  it  as  a  mere  "  power " 
(&5va/#c);  and  the  patripassian  or  modalistic  Monarchians,  who 
identified  the  Son  with  the  Father,  and  admitted  at  most  only 
a  modal  trinity,  that  is  a  threefold  mode  of  revelation,  but  not  a 
tripersonality. 

The  first  form  of  this  heresy,  involved  in  the  abstract  Jewish 
monotheism,  deistically  sundered  the  divine  and  the  human,  and 
rose  little  above  Ebionism.  After  being  defeated  in  the  church 
this  heresy  arose  outside  of  it  on  a  grander  scale,  as  a  pretended 
revelation,  and  with  marvellous  success,  in  Mohammedanism 
which  may  be  called  the  pseudo-Jewish  and  pseudo-Christian 
Unitarianism  of  the  East. 

The  second  form  proceeded  from  the  highest  conception  of 
the  deiiy  of  Christ,  but  in  part  also  from  pantheistic  notions 
which  approached  the  ground  of  Gnostic  docetism. 

The  one  prejudiced  the  dignity  of  the  Son,  the  other  the 

1  The  designation  Monarchiani  as  a  sectarian  name  is  first  used  by  Tertullian, 
Adv.  Pmax.  c.  10  ("vanissimi  isti  Monarchiani") ;  but  the  Monarchians  them- 
selves used  ftavapxia  in  the  good  sense  (Adv.  Prax,  3.  "  Mowrchiam,  inquiunt, 
fcnonua"),  in  which  it  was  employed  by  the  orthodox  fathers  in  opposition  to 
dualism  and  polytheism.  Irenaeus  wrote  (according  to  Jerome)  a  book  uDe 
-Mbnorefcid,  size  quod  Dem  non  sit  auctor  mal&rwn."  In  a  somewhat  different 
sense,  the  Greek  fathers  in  opposition  to  the  Latin  Fttioque  insist  on  the 
povapxfa  of  the  Father,  £.  e.  the  sovereign  dignity  of  the  first  Person  of  the 
trinity,  as  the  root  and  fountain  of  the  Deity. 


5150.   ANTITEIXITAETAKS.  573 

dignity  of  the  Father  ;  yet  the  latter  was  by  far  the  more  pro- 
found and  Christian,  and  accordingly  met  with  the  greater 
acceptance. 

The  Monarchians  of  the  first  class  saw  in  Christ  a  mere  man, 
filled  with  divine  power  ;  but  conceived  this  divine  power  as 
operative  in  him,  not  from  the  baptism  only,  according  to  the 
Ebionite  view,  but  from  the  beginning;  and  admitted  his  su- 
pernatural generation  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  To  this  class  belong: 

1.  The  AIXXHANS  or  ALOGI/  a  heretical  sect  in  Asia  Minor 
about  A.B.  170;  of  which  very  little  is  known.  Epiphanius 
gave  them  this  name  because  they  rejected  the  Logos  doctrine 
and  the  Logos  Gospel,  together  with  the  Apocalypse.  "  "What 
good,"  they  said,  "  is  the  Apocalypse  to  me,  with  its  seven  an- 
gels and  seven  seals  ?  What  have  I  to  do  with  the  four  angels 
at  Euphrates,  whom  another  angel  must  loose,  and  the  host  of 
horsemen  with  breastplates  of  fire  and  brimstone  ?"  They 
seem  to  have  been  jejune  rationalists  opposed  to  chiliasm  and 
all  mysterious  doctrines.  They  absurdly  attributed  the  writings 
of  John  to  the  Gnostic,  Cerinthus,  whom  the  aged  apostle  op- 
posed.2 This  is  the  first  specimen  of  negative  biblical  criticism, 
next  to  Marcion's  mutilation  of  the  canon.3 


1  From  a  privative  and  Arfyof,  which  may  mean  both  irrational,  and  op- 
ponents of  the  Logos  doctrine.  The  designation  occurs  first  in  Epiphanius, 
who  invented  the  term  (Hcer.  51,  a,  3)  to  characterize  sarcastically  their  un- 
reasonable rejection  of  the  Divine  Reason  preached  by  John. 

J  Hence  Epiphanios  asks  (Hcer.  51,  3)  :  vrcfc  earat  Kqpiv&ov  TO.  Kara  TSjipivtiov 
teyovra  ? 

8  Comp.  on  the  Alogi,  Iren.  Adv.  Bar.  IIL  11.  9  (dii  .  .  .  wmid  emngdium 
[Jbcmras]  et  propheticum  repettuntspiritum;"  but  the  application  of  this  passage 
is  doubtful)  ;  Epiphanius,  JETcer.  51  and  54.  M.  Merkel,  Historisch-kritische 
Aufklarung  der  StreitigJseiten  der  Aloger  uber  die  ApoJsalypsis,  Frankf.  and  Leipz. 
1782;  by  the  same:  Umstandlieher  JBeweis  doss  die  Apok.  ein  unt&rgeschobenes 
Bwh  set,  Leipz.  1785;  F.  A.  Heinichen,  De  Alogis,  Theodotianis  atque  Ar- 
temonites,  Leipzig,  1829  ;  Neander,  EHrchengescKJ..  II.  906,  1003  ;  Dorner,  I  c. 
Belli-  500-503;  Schaff,  Alogians  in  "Smith  and  Wace,*  I.  87;  Lipsius, 
Quellen,  der  altesten  Ketzergeschichte,  93  and  214;  Schwane,  I  c.  145-148;  Dol- 
linger,  Hippolytus  and  Cattistus,  273-288  (in  Plummer's  transl.)  ;  Zahn,  in  the 
"Zeitschrift  fiir  hist.  Theol."  1875,  p.  72  sq.  ;  Harnack,  in  Herzog2,  183-186. 
Harnack  infers  from  Irenaus  that  the  Alogi  were  churcJily  or  catholic  opponents 


5  74  SECOX  D  PERIOD.    A.  D.,  100-311. 

2.  The  THEODOTIANS;  so  called  from  their  founder,  the 
tanner  THBODOTTJS.      He   sprang  from   Byzantium;   denied 
Christ  in  a  persecution,  with  the  apology  that  he  denied  only  a 
man;   but  still  held  him  to  be  the  supernaturally    begotten 
Messiah.    He  gained  followers  in  Borne,  but  was  excommuni- 
cated by  the  bishop  Victor  (192-202).    After  his  death  his  sect 
2hose  the  confessor  Xatalis  bishop,  who  is  said  to  have  after- 
wards penitently  returned  into  the  bosom   of  the   Catholic 
church.     A  younger  Theodotus,  the  "  money-changer,"  put 
Melchizedek  as  mediator  between  God  and  the  angels,  above 
Christ,  the  mediator  between  God  and  men ;  and  his  followers 
were  called  Melchizedekians.1 

3.  The  ARTEMONTTES,  or  adherents  of  ARTEMON  or  AR- 
TEMOS;  who  carae  out  somewhat  later  at  Rome  with  a  similar 
opinion,  declared  the  doctrine  of  the  divinity  of  Christ  an 
innovation  and  a  relapse  to  heathen  polytheism ;  and  was  ex- 
communicated by  Zephyrinus  (202-217)  or  afterwards.     The 

Vrtemonites  were  charged  with  placing  Euclid  and  Aristotle 
above  Christ,  and  esteeming  mathematics  and  dialectics  higher 
than  the  gospel.  This  indicates  a  critical  intellectual  turn, 
averse  to  mystery,  and  shows  that  Aristotle  was  employed  by 
some  against  the  divinity  of  Christ,  as  Plato  was  engaged  for  it. 
Their  assertion,  that  the  true  doctrine  was  obscured  in  the 
Roman  church  only  from  the  time  of  Zephyrinus,2  is  explained 

of  the  Montanistic  prophecy  as  well  as  the  millennarian  Gnosticism  of  Cerinth 
at  a  time  before  the  canon  was  fixed ;  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  Irenaeus  refers 
to  them  at  all,  and  in  the  year  170  the  fourth  Gospel  was  undoubtedly  recog- 
nized throughout  the  Catholic  church. 

1  On  the  older  Theodotus  see  Hippoi.  Philos.,  VH.  35  ;  X.  23  (in  B.  and 
Schu.  p.  406  and  526)  ;  Epiph.,  Ifor-  54;  Philastr.,  Hcer.  50;  JPseudo  Tert., 
Hrer.  28 ;  EuaeK,  K  E.  Y.  23,    On  the  younger  Theodotus,  see  Hippoi.,  VII. 
36;    Euseb.,  Y.  28;   Pseudo-Tert,,  29;  Epiph.,  HOST.   55    (Contra  Mdchi- 
sederianos} 

2  Euseb.  Y.  28.    Eusebius  derived  his  information  from  an  anonymous  book 
which  Nicephorus  (IV.  21}  calls  ptKpw  %a8vpw$ov,  "the  little  labyrinth," 
and  which  Photins  f  Bibl  c.  48)  ascribes  to  Caius,  but  which  was  probably 
written  by  Hippolytus  of  Home.    See  the  note  of  Heinichen  in  Tom.  IIL  24£ 
sq.,  and  Dollinger,  Hippolytus,  p.  3  (Engl.  transL). 


g  350.  AOTITBINITARIANS.  575 

by  the  fact  brought  to  light  recently  through  the  Pkttoso- 
phumena  of  Hippolytus,  that  Zephyrinus  (and  perhaps  his 
predecessor  Victor),  against  the  vehement  opposition  of  a  por- 
tion of  the  Eoman  church,  favored  Patripassianism,  and  probably 
in  behalf  of  this  doctrine  condemned  the  Artemonites.1 

4.  PAUL  OF  SAMOSATA,  from  260  bishop  of  Antioch,  and  at 
the  same  time  a  high  civil  officer,2  is  the  most  famous  of  these 
rationalistic  Unitarians,  and  contaminated  one  of  the  first  apos- 
tolic churches  with  his  heresy.  He  denied  the  personality  of  the 
Logos  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  considered  them*  merely 
powers  of  God,  like  reason  and  mind  in  man ;  but  granted  that 
the  Logos  dwelt  in  Christ  in  larger  measure  than  in  any  former 
messenger  of  God,  and  taught,  like  the  Socinians  in  kter  times, 
a  gradual  elevation  of  Christ,  determined  by  his  own  moral 
development,  to  divine  dignity.3  He  admitted  that  Christ  re- 
mained free  from  sin,  conquered  the  sin  of  our  forefathers,  and 
then  became  the  Saviour  of  the  race.  To  introduce  his  Christo- 
logy  into  the  mind  of  the  people,  he  undertook  to  alter  the 
church  hymns,  but  was  shrewd  enough  to  accommodate  himself 
to  the  orthodox  formulas,  calling  Christ,  for  example,  "God 
from  the  Virgin,"4  and  ascribing  to  him  even  homo-(wsia  with 
the  Father,  but  of  course  in  his  own  sense.5 

1  The  sources  of  our  fragmentary  information  about  Artemon  are  Epiphanius, 
&<zr.  65,  c.  1-4;  Euseb.,  S.  E.  V.  28;  VIL  30;  Theodoret,  JEfor.  Fab.  II.  8. 
Comp.  Kapp,  Historia  Artemonis,  1737,  Schleiermacher,  Dorner,  and  Harnack. 

2  "  Ducenarius  procurator."    He  was  viceroy  of  the  queen  of  Palmyra,  to 
which  Antioch  belonged  at  that  time, 

3  A  &eo7roi7}Gt(;  EK  irpoKOffqc,  or  a  yeyovsvai  &ebv  eg  avtipunov.    He  anticipated 
the  doctrine  of  the  Socinians  who  were  at  first  frequently  called  Samuxateniana 
(a.  g.  in  the  Second  Helvetic  Confession).     They  teach  that  Christ  he- 
gan  as  a  man  and  ended  as  a  God,  being  elevated  after  the  resurrection  to  a 
quawi-divinity,  so  as  to  become  an  object  of  adoration  and  worship.    But  the 
logical  tendency  of  Socinianism  is  towards  mere  humanitariamsm.    The  idea  of 
divinity  necessarily  includes  aseity  and  eternity,    A  divinity  communicated 
in  time  is  only  a  finite  being. 

*  Qeb$  IK  rijg  irapfthov. 

5  Probably  lie  meant  tne  impersonal,  pre-existent  Logos.    But  the  Synod  of 
Antioch  declined  the  term  fyoovoioe  in  this  impersonal  (Sabellian)  sense. 


576  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

The  bishops  under  him  in  Syria  accused  him  not  only  of 
heresy  but  also  of  extreme  vanity,  arrogance,  pompousness, 
avarice,  and  undue  concern  with  secular  business;  and  at  a 
third  synod  held  in  Antioch  A.  D.  269  or  268,  they  pronounced 
his  deposition.  The  number  of  bishops  present  is  variously 
reported  (70,  80, 180).  Dornnus  was  appointed  successor.  The 
result  was  communicated  to  the  bishops  of  Rome,  Alexandria, 
and  to  all  the  churches.  But  as  Paul  was  favored  by  the  queen 
Zenobia  of  Palmyra,  the  deposition  could  not  be  executed  till 
after  her  subjection  by  the  emperor  Aurelian  in  272,  and  after 
consultation  with  the  Italian  bishops.1 

His  overthrow  decided  the  fall  of  the  Monarchians;  though 
they  still  appear  at  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  as  condemned 
heretics,  under  the  name  of  Samosatians,  Paulianists,  and  Sa- 
bellians. 

§  151.  Second  Class  of  Antitrinitarians :  Praxeas,  Noetus,  Gal- 
listus,  Beryllus. 

The  second  class  of  Monarchians,  called  by  Tertullian  "  Patri- 
passions "  ('as  afterwards  a  branch  of  the  Monophysites  was 
called  "  Theopaschites  "),2  together  with  their  Unitarian  zeal 
felt  the  deeper  Christian  impulse  to  hold  fast  the  divinity  of 
Christ;  but  they  sacrificed  to  it  his  independent  personality, 
which  they  merged  in  the  essence  of  the  Father.  *  They  taught 
that  the  one  supreme  God  by  his  own  free  will,  and  by  an  act 
of  self-limitation  became  man,  so  that  the  Son  is  the  Father 
veiled  in  the  flesh.  They  knew  no  other  God  but  the  one  mani- 
fested in  Christ,  and  charged  their  opponents  with  ditheism. 

1  Sources :  The  fragmentary  acts  of  the  Synod  of  Antioch  in  Eusebius,  VII. 
27-30;  Jerome,  De  Viris  iU.  71 ;  Epiphanius,  Hcer.  65  (or  45  Kara  rov  Tiafaw 
rov  Sauocareuc,  in  Getter's  ed.  II.  2,  p.  380-397) ;  five  fragments  of  sermons 
of  Paul  of  doubtful  genuineness,  in  Ang.  Mai's  Vet.  Script.  Nova  Cott.  "VTL  68 
sq. ;  scattered  notices  in  Athanasius,  Hilary,  and  other  Nicene  fathers ;  Theo* 
doret  Fab.  Hcer.  II.  8.  Comp.  Dorner  and  Harnack. 

8  The  Orientals  usually  call  them  "Sabellians"  from  their  most  prominent 
reuresentative. 


{151.  SECOND  CLASS  OF  AXTITRIXITAEIANS.         577 

They  were  more  dangerous  than  the  rationalistic  Unitarians,  and 
for  a  number  of  years  had  even  the  sympathy  and  support  of 
the  papal  chair.  They  had  a  succession  of  teachers  in  Rome, 
and  were  numerous  there  even  at  the  time  of  Epiphanius  to- 
wards the  close  of  the  fourth  century. 

1.  The  first  prominent  advocate  of  the  Patripassian  heresy 
was  PRAXEAS  of  Asia  Minor.  He  came  to  Rome  under  Marcus 
Aurelius  with  the  renown  of  a  confessor;  procured  there  the 
condemnation  of  Montanism;  and  propounded  his  Patripas- 
siamsm,  to  which  he  gained  even  the  bishop  Victor.1  But 
Tertullian  met  him  in  vindication  at  once  of  Montanism  and 
of  hypostasianism  with  crushing  logic,  and  sarcastically  charged 
him  with  having  executed  at  Rome  two  commissions  of  the 
devil :  having  driven  away  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  having  cruci- 
fied the  Father.  Praxeas,  constantly  appealing  to  Is.  45 :  5 ; 
Jno.  10:  30  ("I  and  my  Father  are  one")>  and  14:  9  ("He 
that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father  "),  as  if  the  whole  Bible 
consisted  of  these  three  passages,  taught  that  the  Father  himself 
became  man,  hungered,  thirsted,  suffered,  and  died  in  Christ. 
True,  he  would  not  be  understood  as  speaking  directly  of  a 
suffering  (pati)  of  the  Father,  but  only  of  a  sympathy  (copati) 
of  the  Father  with  the  Son ;  but  in  any  case  he  lost  the  inde- 
pendent personality  of  the  Son.  He  conceived  the  relation  of 
the  Father  to  the  Son  as  like  that  of  the  spirit  to  the  flesh. 
The  same  subject,  as  spirit,  is  the  Father ;  as  flesh,  the  Son.  He 
thought  the  Catholic  doctrine  tritheistic.2 

1  Pseudo-Tert. :    "Praxeas  hceresim  introduxit  quam  VZctorinw  [probably= 
Victor]  corroborare  curavit."    It  is  certain  from  Hippolytua,  that  Victor's  suc- 
cessors, Zephyrinus  and  Calliatus  sympathized  with  Patripassianism. 

2  The  chief  source:  Tertuliian,  Adv.  Praxean  (39  chs.,  written  about  210). 
Comp.  Pseudo-Tertull.  20.    Hippolytus  strangely  never  mentions  Praxeas. 
Hence  some  have  conjectured  that  he  was  identical  with  Noetus,  who  came 
likewise  from  Asia  Minor ;  others  identify  him  with  Epigonus,  or  with.  CaUis- 
tus,  and  regard  Praxeas  as  a  nickname.    The  proper  view  is  that  Praxeas  ap- 
peared in  Borne  before  Epigonus,  probably  under  Eleutherus,  and  remained 
but  a  short  time.    On  the  other  hand  Tertullian  nowhere  mentions  the  names 
of  Noetus,  Epigonus,  Cleomenes,  and  Callistus. 

Vol.  H— 37 


678  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

2.  Xoferus  of  Smyrna  published  the  same  view  about  A.  B. 
200,  appealing  also  to  Rom.  9 :  5,  where  Christ  is  called  "  the 
one  God  over  all."    AVhen  censured  by  a  council  he  argued  in 
vindication  of  himself,  that  his  doctrine  enhanced  the  glory  of 
Christ.1    The  author  of  the  Philosophuinena  places  him  in  con- 
nection with  the  pantheistic  philosophy  of  Heraclitus,  who,  as 
we  here  for  the  first  time  learn,  viewed  nature  as  the  harmony 
of  all  antitheses,  and  called  the  universe  at  once  dissoluble  and 
indissoluble,  originated  and  unoriginated,  mortal  and  immortal ; 
and  thus  Xoetus  supposed  that  the  same  divine  subject  must  be 
able  to  combine  opposite  attributes  in  itself.2 

Two  of  his  disciples,  Epigonus  and  Cleomenes,3  propagated 
this  doctrine  in  Borne  under  favor  of  Pope  Zephyrinus. 

3.  CALUSTUS  (pope  Calixtus  I.)  adopted  and  advocated  the 
doctrine  of  Xoetus.    He  declared  the  Son  merely  the  mani- 
festation of  the  Father  in  human  form ;  the  Father  animating 
the  Son,  as  the  spirit  animates  the  body,4  and  suffering  with 
him  on  the  cross.    "The  Father,"  said  he,  "who  was  in  the 
Son,  took  flesh  and  made  it  God,  uniting  it  with  himself  and 
made  it  one.    Father  and  Son  were  therefore  the  name  of 
the  one  God,  and  this  one  person 5  cannot  be  two ;  thus  the 
Father  suffered  with  the  Son."    He  considered  his  opponents 
"ditheists,"6  and  they  in  return  called  his  followers   "Gal- 
listians." 

These  and  other  disclosures  respecting  the  church  at  Rome 
during  the  first  quarter  of  the  third  century,  we  owe,  as  already 
observed,  to  the  ninth  book  of  the  Philosophumena  of  Hip- 

1  TI  ofa  KCIKOV  TTOWJ,  he  asked,  6o^uv  rbv  "Kpiar6v. 

*  On  Noetus  see  HippoL,  Philos.  IX.  7-9  (p.  440-442),  and  his  tract  against 
Noetus  (tQfuMa  rif  r^v  cupeaiv  JSmrrov  rtvoq,  perhaps  the  last  chapter  of  his  lost 
work  against  the  32  heresies).    Epiphanius,  Beer.  57,  used  both  these  books, 
but  falsely  put  foetus  back  from  the  close  of  the  second  century  to  about  130. 

1  Not  his  teachers,  as  was  supposed  by  former  historians,  including  Neander. 
See  Hippolytug,  IX.  7. 

*  John  14:  11. 

*  irpfoonov.    Callistus,  however,  rectified  t}ris  statement,  which  seems  to  be 
merely  an  inference  of  Hippolytus.  «  6i$eot. 


\  151.  SECOND  CLASS  OF  ANT1TBINITARIANS.         579 

polytus,  who  was,  however,  it  must  be  remembered,  the  leading 
opponent  and  rival  of  Callistus,  and  in  his  own  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  inclined  to  the  opposite  subordination  extreme.  He 
calls  Callistus,  evidently  with  passion,  an  "unreasonable  and 
treacherous  man,  who  brought  together  blasphemies  from  above 
and  below,  only  to  speak  against  the  truth,  and  was  not 
ashamed  to  fall  now  into  the  error  of  Sabellius,  now  into  that 
of  Theodotus "  (of  which  latter,  however,  he  shows  no  trace, 
but  the  very  opposite).1  Callistus  differed  from  the  ditheistic 
separation  of  the  Logos  from  God,  but  also  from  the  Sabelliaa 
confusion  of  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and  insisted  on  the  mutual 
indwelling  (jre/^/oi/^c)  of  the  divine  Persons ;  in  other  words, 
he  sought  the  way  from  modalistic  unitarianism  to  the  Nicene 
trinitarianism ;  but  he  was  not  explicit  and  consistent  in  his 
statements.  He  excommunicated  both  Sabellius  and  Hippo- 
lytus ;  the  Roman  church  sided  with  him,  and  made  his  name 
one  of  the  most  prominent  among  the  ancient  popes.3 

After  the  death  of  Callistus,  who  occupied  the  papal  chair 
between  218  and  223  or  224,  Patripassianism  disappeared  from 
the  Eoman  church. 

4.  BEKYLLUS  of  Bostra  (now  Bosra  and  Bosseret),  in  Arabia 

1  Dollinger  here  dissents  from,  Harnack  agrees  with,  the  charge  of  Hip- 
polytus. 

*  On  Callistus  see  Hippol.  IX.  11, 12  (p.  45<M62)  and  c.  27  (p.  528-530). 
Comp.  Dollinger,  Hippol  und  Cdttistus,  ch.  IV.  (Engl.  transl.  p.  183  sqq., 
especially  p.  215),  and  other  works  on  Hippolytus;  also  Langen,  Gesch.der 
rom.  JSircAe,  p.  192-216.  Dollinger  charges  Hippolytus  with  misrepresenting 
the  views  of  Callistus;  while  Bishop  Wordsworth  (St.  Hippolytus  and  the 
Church  of  Rome,  ch.  XIV.  p.  214  sqq.\  charges  Callistns  with  the  Sabellian 
heresy,  and  defends  the  orthodoxy  of  Hippolytus  by  such  easy  reasoning  as 
this  (p.  254) :  ''  Callistus  is  asserted  by  Hippolytus  to  have  been  a  heretic. 
No  church  historian  affirms  Callistus  to  have  been  orthodox.  All  church  his- 
tory that  has  spoken  of  Hippolytus,— and  his  name  is  'one  of  the  most  cele- 
brated in  its  annals, — has  concurred  in  bearing  witness  to  the  soundness  of  his 
faith."  Harnack  (in  Herzog  X.  202)  considers  the  formula  of  Callistus  as  the 
bridge  from  the  original  monarchianism  of  the  Eoman  church  to  the  hypos- 
tasis-christology  ("die  Brucke,  auf  lodcker  die  ursprunglich  monarchianisch 
gesimten  romischen  Christen,  dem  Zuge  der  ZeU  und  der  Mrchlichen  Wissenschqft 
folgend,  wr  Anwkennung  der  Hypostasen-Christologit  ubergegangen  sintf"). 


580  SECOND  PERIOD.    A,  D.  100-311. 

Petrsea.  From  him  we  have  only  a  somewhat  obscure  and  very 
variously  interpreted  passage  preserved  in  Eusebius.1  He  de- 
nied the  personal  pre-existence  *  and  in  general  the  independent 
divinity3  of  Christ,  but  at  the  same  time  asserted  the  indwelling 
of  the  divinity  of  the  Father4  in  him  during  his  earthly  life. 
He  forms,  in  some  sense,  the  stepping-stone  from  simple  Patri- 
passianism  to  Sabellian  modalism.  At  an  Arabian  synod  in 
244,  where  the  presbyter  Origen,  then  himself  accused  of 
heresy,  was  called  into  consultation,  Beiyllus  was  convinced  of 
his  error  by  that  great  teacher,  and  was  persuaded  particularly 
of  the  existence  of  a  human  soul  in  Christ,  in  place  of  which 
he  had  probably  put  his  xarpexyj  ftsoryZ)  as  Apollinaris  in  a 
later  period  put  the  /fy-oc.  He  is  said  to  have  thanked  Origen 
afterwards  for  his  instruction.  Here  we  have  one  of  the  very 
few  theological  disputations  which  have  resulted  in  unity  in- 
stead of  greater  division.5 

§  152.  SabeUianim. 

SOURCES  :  EIPPOLYTFS:  Philos.  IX.  11  (D.  and  Schn.  p.  450, 456,458). 
Bather  meagre,  but  important.  EPIPHAN.  :  ffcer.  62.  The  frag- 
ments of  letters  of  DIONYSIUS  OP  ALEX,  in  Athanasius,  De  Sentent. 
Dion.,  and  later  writers,  collected  in  Eonth,  Ediqu.  sacr.  NOVA- 
TIAN  :  De  Trinit.  ETTSEB.  :  Contra  Marcettum.  The  references  in 
the  writings  of  ATHA^ASIUS  (De  Syn. ;  De  Deer.  Nic.  Syn.;  Contra 
Arian.).  BASIL  M. :  Ep.  207,  210,  214,  235.  GBEGOBY  NAZ.  :  /Ityor 

Kara  'Apcww  tS<z,&£yUov. 
Oomp.  SCHLEIEBMACHEB,  ^EAOTER,  BATTR,  DOB^EB,  HABNACK,  L  C., 

and  ZAHJT,  Marcettus  von  Ancyra  (Gotha,  1867)  ,•  NITZSCH,  Dogmenr 
gesch.  L  206-209,  223-225. 

i  H.  E.  VI.  33. 

»  Mia  civlac  vepcypatf,  i  c.  a  drcumscribed,  limited,  separate  existence. 

*  Mia  $s6TiK.  *  %  Ka.Tpud)  $£6rr)$. 

1  The  Acts  of  the  Synod  of  Bostraj  known  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  are  lost 
Our  scanty  information  on  Beryllus  is  derived  from  Eusehius,  already  quoted, 
from  Jerome,  De  Fir.  iU.  c.  60,  and  from  a  fragment  of  Origen  in  the  Apology 
of  Pamphilus,  Orig.  Opera,  IV.  22  (ed.  Bened.)  Comp.  Ullmann,  De  Berytto 
Postr.,  Hamb.  1835.  Fock,  Dissert,  de  Christologia  Ben/Hi,  1843;  Kober, 
Benfl  v.  E.  in  the  Tub.  "Theol.  Quartalschrift,"  for  1848.  Also  Baur,  Dor- 
ner  (1.  545  sqq.),  Harnack,  and  Hefble  (Owe.  Qesch.  L  109). 


J152.  SABELLIANISM.    . 

5.  SABELLIUS  is  by  far  the  most  original,  profound,  and 
ingenious  of  the  ante-Nicene  Unitarians,  and  his  system  the 
most  plausible  rival  of  orthodox  trinitarianism.  It  revives 
from  time  to  time  in  various  modifications.1  We  know  very 
little  of  his  life*  He  was  probably  a  Lybian  from  the  Pen- 
tapolis.  He  spent  some  time  in  Rome  in  the  beginning  of  the 
third  century,  and  was  first  gained  by  Callistus  to  Patripas- 
sianism,  but  when  the  latter  became  bishop  he  was  excommu- 
nicated,2 The  former  fact  is  doubtful.  His  doctrine  spread 
in  Rome,  and  especially  also  in  the  Pentapolis  in  Egypt. 
Dionysius,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  excommunicated  him  in  260 
or  261 3  at  a  council  in  that  city,  and,  in  vehement  opposition  to 
him,  declared  in  almost  Arian  terms  for  the  hypostatical  inde- 
pendence and  subordination  of  the  Son  in  relation  to  the  Father. 
This  led  the  Sabellians  to  complain  of  that  bishop  to  Dionysius 
of  Rome,  who  held  a  council  in  262,  and  in  a  special  treatise 
controverted  Sabellianism,  as  well  as  subordinatianism  and 
tritheism,  with  nice  orthodox  tact.4  The  bishop  of  Alexandria 
very  cheerfully  yielded,  and  retracted  his  assertion  of  the 
creaturely  inferiority  of  the  Son  in  favor  of  the  orthodox 
homo-ousios.  Thus  the  strife  was  for  a  while  allayed,  to  be 
renewed  with  still  greater  violence  by  Arius  half  a  century 
later.  . 

The  system  of  Sabellius  is  known  to  us  only  from  a  few 
fragments,  and  some  of  these  not  altogether  consistent,  in 
Athanasius  and  other  fathers. 

While  the  other  Monarchians  confine  their  inquiry  to  the 
relation  of  Father  and  Son,  Sabellius  embraces  the  Holy  Spirit 

1  We  will  only  mention  Marcellns  of  Ancyra,  Schleiermacher,  and  Bushnell. 
Schleiermacher's  doctrine  of  the  trinity  is  a  very  ingenious  improvement  of 
Sabellianism. 

3  This  we  learn  from  Hippolytns,  who  introduces  him  rather  incidentally 
(in  his  account  of  Callistus)  as  a  man  well  known  at  his  time  in  the  Roma? 
church. 

3  Sabellius  must  have  been  an  old  man  at  that  time. 

*  Comp.  the  close  of  J  149,  p.  570. 


582  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

in  his  speculation,  and  reaches  a  trinity,  not  a  simultaneous 
trinity  of  essence,  however,  but  only  a  successive  trinity  of 
revelation.  He  starts  from  a  distinction  of  the  monad  and  the 
triad  in  the  divine  nature.  His  fundamental  thought  is,  that 
the  unity  of  God,  without  distinction  in  itself,  unfolds  or  ex- 
tends itself1  in  the  course  of  the  world's  development  in  three 
different  forms  and  periods  of  revelation,2  -and,  after  the  com- 
pletion of  redemption,  returns  into  unity.  The  Father  reveals 
himself  in  the  giving  of  the  law  or  the  Old  Testament  economy 
(not  in  the  creation  also,  which  in  his  view  precedes  the  trini- 
tarian  revelation)  ;  the  Son,  in  the  incarnation  ;  the  Holy  Ghost, 
in  inspiration.  The  revelation  of  the  Son  ends  with  the  ascen- 
sion ;  the  revelation  of  the  Spirit  goes  on  in  regeneration  and 
sanctification.  He  illustrates  the  trinitarian  relation  by  com- 
paring the  Father  to  the  disc  of  the  sun,  the  Son  to  its  enlight- 
ening power,  the  Spirit  to  its  warming  influence.  He  is  said 
also  to  have  likened  the  Father  to  the  body,  the  Son  to  the 
soul,  the  Holy  Ghost  to  the  spirit  of  man;  but  this  is  unworthy 
of  his  evident  speculative  discrimination.  His  view  of  the 
Logos,3  too,  is  peculiar.  The  Logos  is  not  identical  with  the 
Son,  but  is  the  monad  itself  in  its  transition  to  triad  ;  that  is, 
God  conceived  as  vital  motion  and  creating  principle,  the 
speaking  God/  in  distinction  from  the  silent  God.6  Each 
xpoffojxou  is  another  dtaXifSffdcu,  and  the  three  npdaama 
together  are  only  successive  evolutions  of  the  Logos  or  the 
worldward  aspect  of  the  divine  nature.  As  the  Logos  pro- 
ceeded from  God,  so  he  returns  at  last  into  him,  and  the 
process  of  trinitarian  development  6  closes. 

Athanasius  traced  the  doctrine  of  Sabellius  to  the  Stoic 
philosophy.    The  common  element  is  the  pantheistic  leading 


eiffa  ytywe  rpt&$* 

iryxfcrcjmr,—  not  in  the  orthodox  sense  of  hypostasis,  however,  but 
In  the  primary  sense  of  mask,  or  part  (in  a  play)—,  also  ftopfai, 
*  Which  was  for  the  first  time  duly  brought  out  by  Dr.  Baur. 


2153.  REDEMPTION.  583 

view  of  an  expansion  and  contraction  *  of  the  divine  nature 
immanent  in  the  world.  In  the  Pythagorean  system  also,  in 
the  Gospel  of  the  Egyptians,  and  in  the  pseudo-Clementine 
Homilies,  there  are  kindred  ideas.  But  the  originality  of 
Sabellius  cannot  be  brought  into  question  by  these.  His  theory 
broke  the  way  for  the  Nicene  church  doctrine,  by  its  full  co- 
ordination of  the  three  persons.  He  differs  from  the  orthodox 
standard  mainly  in  denying  the  trinity  of  essence  and  the  per- 
manence of  the  trinity  of  manifestation ;  making  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost  only  temporary  phenomena,  which  fulfil  their 
mission  and  return  into  the  abstract  monad. 

§  153.  Redemption. 

COTTA:  Histor.  doctrines  de  redemptione  sanguine  J.  Chr.f octet,  in  Ger 
hard:  Lod  theol.,  vol.  IV.  p.  105-134 

ZIEGLEB  :  Hist,  dogmatis  de  redemptione.    Gott.  1791.    nationalistic. 

K.  BAEHU:  Die  Lehre  der  Kirche  vom  TodeJesu  in  den  drei  ersten  Jahrh*, 
Sulzb.  1832.  Against  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  satisfaciio 
vicaria. 

F.  0.  BAUR  :  Die  christt.  Lehre  von  der  Versohnung  in  ihrer  geschichtL 
Entw.  von  der  dltesten  Zeit  bis  auf  die  neueste.  Tub.  1838.  764  pages, 
(See  pp*  23-67).  Very  learned,  critical,  and  philosophical,  but 
resulting  in  Hegelian  pantheism. 

L.  DUNCKER:  Des  heiL  Irenceux  Christologie.  GStt.  184S  (p.  217  sqq.; 
purely  objective). 

BAUMGABTEN  CEUSITTS:  Compendium  der  christt.  Dogmengeschichte. 
Leipz.  2d  Part  1846,  {  95  sqq.  (p.  257  sqq.) 

ALBRECHT  EITSCHL  (Prof,  in  Gottingen):  Die  ckrvdl.  Lehre  von  der 
Rechtfertigung  und  Versohnung,  Bonn,  1870,  second  revised  ed.  1882, 
sqq.,  3  vols.  The  first  vol.  (pages  656)  contains  the  history  of  the 
doctrine,  but  devotes  only  a  few  introductory  pages  to  our  period 
(p.  4),  being  occupied  chiefly  with  the  Anselmic,  the  orthodox 
Lutheran  and  Calvinistic,  and  the  modern  German  theories  of  re- 
demption. Eitschl  belonged  originally  to  the  Tubingen  school, 
but  pursues  now  an  independent  path,  and  lays  greater  stress  on  the 
ethical  forces  in  History. 

The  work  of  the  triune  God,  in  his  self-revelation,  is  the 
salvation,  or  redemption  and  reconciliation  of  the  world :  nega- 


584  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

tively,  the  emancipation  of  humanity  from  the  guilt  and  powei 
of  sin  and  death;  positively,  the  communication  of  the  right- 
eousness and  life  of  fellowship  with  God.  First,  the  discord 
between  the  Creator  and  the  creature  must  be  adjusted ;  and 
then  man  can  be  carried  onward  to  his  destined  perfection. 
Reconciliation  with  God  is  the  ultimate  aim  of  every  religion 
In  heathenism  it  was  only  darkly  guessed  and  felt  after,  or 
anticipated  in  perverted,  fleshly  forms.  In  Judaism  it  was 
divinely  promised,  typically  foreshadowed,  and  historically  pre- 
pared. In  Christianity  it  is  revealed  in  objective  reality, 
according  to  the  eternal  counsel  of  the  love  and  wisdom  of 
God,  through  the  life,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Christ,  and  is 
being  continually  applied  subjectively  to  individuals  in  the 
church  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  through  the  means  of  grace,  on 
condition  of  repentance  and  faith.  Christ  is,  exclusively  and 
absolutely,  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  and  the  Mediator  between 
God  and  man. 

The  apostolic  scriptures,  in  the  fulness  of  their  inspiration, 
everywhere  bear  witness  of  this  salvation  wrought  through 
Christ,  as  a  living  fact  of  experience.  But  it  required  time  for 
the  profound  ideas  of  a  Paul  and  a  John  to  come  up  clearly  to 
the  view  of  the  church;,  indeed,  to  this  day  they  remain  un- 
fathomed.  Here  again  experience  anticipated  theology.  The 
church  lived  from  the  first  on  the  atoning  sacrifice  of  Christ. 
The  cross  ruled  all  Christian  thought  and  conduct,  and  fed  the 
spirit  of  martyrdom.  But  the  primitive  church  teachers  lived 
more  in  the  thankful  enjoyment  of  redemption  than  in  logical 
reflection  upon  it.  We  perceive  in  their  exhibitions  of  this 
blessed  mystery  the  language  rather  of  enthusiastic  feeling  than 
of  careful  definition  and  acute  analysis.  Moreover,  this  doc- 
trine was  never,  like  Christology  and  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  a  subject  of  special  controversy  within  the  ancient 
church.  The  oecumenical  symbols  touch  it  only  in  general 
terms.  The  Apostles'  Creed  presents  it  in  the  article  on  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  on  the  ground  of  the  divine-human  life. 


8153.  KEDEMPTION.  585 

death,  and  resurrection  of  Christ.  The  Xicene  Creed  says,  a 
little  more  definitely,  that  Christ  became  man  for  our  salvation,1 
and  died  for  us,  and  rose  again. 

Nevertheless,  all  the  essential  elements  of  the  later  church 
doctrine  of  redemption  may  be  found,  either  expressed  or  im- 
plied, befor^  the  close  of  the  second  century.  The  negative 
part  of  the  doctrine,  the  subjection  of  the  devil;  the  prince  of 
the  kingdom  of  sin  and  death,  was  naturally  most  dwelt  on  m 
the  patristic  period,  on  account  of  the  existing  conflict  of  Chris- 
tianity with  heathenism,  which  was  regarded  as  wholly  ru^erl 
by  Satan  and  demons.  Even  in  the  Xew  Testament,  particu- 
larly in  Col.  2 :  15,  Heb.  2 :  14,  and  1  John  3 :  8,  the  victory 
over  the  devil  is  made  an  integral  part  of  the  work  of  Christ. 
But  this  view  was  carried  out  in  the  early  church  in  a  very 
peculiar  and,  to  some  extent,  mythical  way ;  and  in  this  form 
continued  current,  until  the  satisfaction  theory  of  Anselm  gave 
a  new  turn  to  the  development  of  the  dogma.  Satan  is  sup- 
posed to  have  acquired,  by  the  disobedience  of  our  first  parents,  a 
legal  claim  (whether  just  or  unjust)  upon  mankind,  and  held 
them  bound  in  the  chains  of  sin  and  death  (comp.  Hebr.  2 :  14, 
15).  Christ  came  to  our  release.  The  victory  over  Satan  was 
conceived  now  as  a  legal  ransom  by  the  payment  of  a  stipulated 
price,  to  wit,  the  death  of  Christ ;  now  as  a  cheat  upon  him,2 
either  intentional  and  deserved,  or  due  to  his  own  infatuation.3 

The  theological  development  of  the  doctrine  of  the  work  of 
Christ  began  with  the  struggle  against  Jewish  and  heathen  in- 
fluences, and  at  the  same  time  with  the  development  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  person  of  Christ,  which  is  inseparable  from  that 
of  his  work,  and  indeed  fundamental  to  it.  Ebionism,  with 
its  deistic  and  legal  spirit,  could  not  raise  its  view  above  the 
prophetic  office  of  Christ  to  the  priestly  and  the  kingly,  but  saw 
in  him  only  a  new  teacher  and  legislator.  Gnosticism,  from 

1  tita  T%V  ftpsTtpav  cwrrjpiav.  *  1  Cor.  2 :  8,  misapprehended. 

3  This  strange  theory  is  variously  held  by  Irenasus,  Origen,  Gregory  oJ 
Nyssa,  Gregory  Nazaanzen,  Ambrose,  Augustin,  Leo  the  Great  and  Gregory 
the  Great  See  Baur,  eh.  I.  and  U.  p.  30-118. 


586  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  naturalistic  and  pantheistic  position  of  heathendom,  looked 
upon  redemption  as  a  physical  and  intellectual  process,  liberat- 
ing the  spirit  from  the  bonds  of  matter,  the  supposed  principle 
of  evil ;  reduced  the  human  life  and  passion  of  Christ  to  a  vain 
show ,•  and  could  ascribe  at  best  only  a  symbolical  virtue  to  his 
death.  For  this  reason  even  Ignatius,  Irenseus,  and  Tertullian, 
in  their  opposition  to  docetism,  insist  most  earnestly  on  the  reality 
of  the  humanity  and  death  of  Jesus,  as  the  source  of  our  recon- 
ciliation with  God.1 

In  JUSTIN  MARTYR  appear  traces  of  the  doctrine  of  satisfac- 
tion, though  in  very  indefinite  terms.  He  often  refers  to  the 
Messianic  fifty-third  chapter  of  Isaiah.2 

The  anonymous  author  of  the  Epistle  to  an  unknown  heathen, 
Diognetus,'  which  has  sometimes  been  ascribed  to  Justin,  but  is 
probably  of  much  earlier  date,  has  a  beautiful  and  forcible  pas- 
sage on  the  mystery  of  redemption,  which  shows  that  the  root 
of  the  matter  was  apprehended  by  faith  long  before  a  logical 
analysis  was  attempted.  "TThen  our  wickedness,"  he  says,3 
"  had  reached  its  height,  and  it  had  been  clearly  shown  that  its 
reward — punishment  and  death — was  impending  over  us  .... 
God  himself  took  on  Him  the  burden  of  our  iniquities.  He 
gave  His  own  Son  as  a  ransom  for  us,  the  holy  One  for  trans- 
gressors, the  blameless  One  for  the  wicked,  the  righteous  One 
for  the  unrighteous,  the  incorruptible  One  for  the  corruptible, 
the  immortal  One  for  them  that  are  mortal.  For  what  other 
thing  was  capable  of  covering  our  sins  than  His  righteousness  ? 
By  what  other  one  was  it  possible  that  we,  the  wicked  and  un- 
godly, could  be  justified,  than  by  the  only  Son  of  God  ?  O 
sweet  exchange !  0  unsearchable  operation !  O  benefits  sur- 
passing all  expectation !  that  the  wickedness  of  many  should  be 
hid  in  a  single  righteous  One,  and  that  the  righteousness  of  One 
should  justify  many  transgressors ! " 

1  Comp.  J  146. 

*  Apol.  L  50,  etc.    See  von  Engeliardt,  p.  182. 

8  Ep.  ad  Dioffnetumj  c.  9. 


2153.  REDEMPTION.  587 

IRENJSUS  is  the  first  of  all  the  church  teachers  to  give  a 
careful  analysis  of  the  work  of  redemption,  and  his  view  is  by 
far  the  deepest  and  soundest  we  find  in  the  first  three  centuries. 
Christ,  he  teaches,  as  the  second  Adam,  repeated  in  himself  the 
entire  life  of  man,  from  childhood  to  manhood,  from  birth  to 
death  and  hades,  and  as  it  were  summed  up  that  life  and 
brought  it  under  one  head,1  with  the  double  purpose  of  restoring 
humanity  from  its  fall  and  carrying  it  to  perfection.  Redemp- 
tion comprises  the  taking  away  of  sin  by  the  perfect  obedience 
of  Christ;  the  destruction  of  death  by  victory  over  the  devil; 
and  the  communication  of  a  new  divine  life  to  man.  To  accom- 
plish this  work,  the  Redeemer  must  unite  in  himself  the  divine 
and  human  natures;  for  only  as  God  could  he  do  what  man 
could  not,  and  only  as  man  could  he  do  in  a  legitimate  way, 
what  man  should.  By  the  voluntary  disobedience  of  Adam 
the  devil  gained  a  power  over  man,  but  in  an  unfair  way,  by 
fraud.2  By  the  voluntary  obedience  of  Christ  that  power  was 
wrested  from  him  by  lawful  means.3  This  took  place  first  in 
the  temptation,  in  which  Christ  renewed  or  recapitulated  the 
struggle  of  Adam  with  Satan,  but  defeated  the  seducer,  and 
thereby  liberated  man  from  his  thraldom.  But  then  the  whole 
life  of  Christ  was  a  continuous  victorious  conflict  with  Satan, 
and  a  constant  obedience  to  God.  This  obedience  completed 
itself  in  the  suffering  and  death  on  "the  tree  of  the  cross,  and 
thus  blotted  out  the  disobedience  which  the  first  Adam  had 
committed  on  the  tree  of  knowledge.  This,  however,  is  only 
the  negative  side.  To  this  is  added,  as  already  remarked,  the 
communication  of  a  new  divine  principle  of  life,  and  the  per- 
fecting of  the  idea  of  humanity  first  effected  by  Christ. 

ORIGEST  differs  from  Irenseus  in  considering  man,  in  conse- 
quence of  sin,  the  lawful  property  of  Satan,  and  in  representing 

1  This,  as  already  intimated  in  a  former  connection,  is  the  sense  of  his  fre- 
quent expression :  avaKsfyaTuctivbv,  avaK£<f>afaiuai£,  recapitulate,  rewpMatio. 

1  Dissuasio. 

3  By  suadela,  persuasion,  announcement  of  truth,  not  overreaching  01 
deception. 


588  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  victory  over  Satan  as  an  outwitting  of  the  enemy,  who  had 
no  claim  to  the  sinless  soul  of  Jesus,  and  therefore  could  not 
keep  it  in  death.  The  ransom  was  paid,  not  to  God,  but  to 
Satan,  who  thereby  lost  his  right  to  man.  Here  Origen  touches 
on  mythical  Gnosticism.  He  contemplates  the  death  of  Christ, 
however,  from  other  points  of  view  also,  as  an  atoning  sacrifice 
of  love  offered  to  God  for  the  sins  of  the  world;  as  the  highest 
proof  of  perfect  obedience  to  God;  and  as  an  example  of  pa- 
tience. He  singularly  extends  the  virtue  of  this  redemption  to 
the  whole  spirit  world,  to  fallen  angels  as  well  as  men,  in  con- 
nection with  his  hypothesis  of  a  final  restoration.  The  only 
one  of  the  fathers  who  accompanies  him  in  this  is  Gregory  of 
Xyssa. 

Athanasius,  in  his  early  youth,  at  the  beginning  of  the  next 
period,  wrote  the  first  systematic  treatise  on  redemption  and 
answer  to  the  question  "  Cur  Dens  homo  ?  "  l  But  it  was  left 
for  the  Latin  church,  after  the  epoch-making  treatise  of  Anselm, 
to  develop  this  important  doctrine  in  its  various  aspects. 

§  154.  Other  Doctrines. 

The  doctrine  of  the  subjective  appropriation  of  salvation, 
including  faith,  justification,  and  sanctification,  was  as  yet  far 
less  perfectly  formed  than  the  objective  dogmas;  and  in  the 
nature  of  the  case,  must  follow  the  latter.  If  any  one  expects 
to  find  in  this  period,  or  in  any  of  the  church  fathers,  Augustin 
himself  not  excepted,  the  Protestant  doctrine  of  justification  by 
faith  alone,  as  the  "  artieulus  stantis  aut  cadentis  ecdesice"  he 
will  be  greatly  disappointed.  The  incarnation  of  the  Logos, 
his  true  divinity  and  true  humanity,  stand  almost  unmistakably 
in  the  foreground,  as  the  fundamental  truths.  Paul's  doctrine 


It  was  written  before  the  outbreak 
of  the  Arian  controversy.  The  Athanasian  authorship  has  been  contested 
without  good  reason;  but  another  work  with  the  similar  title:  TIspl  ^ 
oapK&suK  rov  da*  Uym,  is  pseudo-Athanasian,  and  belongs  to  the  younger 
IpoUinaris  of  Laodicea.  See  Hitachi,  I.  8  gq. 


8  155.  ESCHATOLOGY.  589 

of  justification,  except  perhaps  in  Clement  of  Borne,  who  joins 
it  with  the  doctrine  of  James,  is  left  very  much  out  of  view, 
and  awaits  the  age  of  the  Reformation  to  be  more  thoroughly 
established  and  understood.  The  fathers  lay  chief  stress  on 
sanctification  and  good  works,  and  show  the  already  existing 
germs  of  the  Roman  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  meritoriousness 
and  even  the  supererogatory  meritoriousness  of  Christian  virtue. 
It  was  left  to  modern  evangelical  theology  to  develop  more  fully 
the  doctrines  of  soteriology  and  subjective  Christianity. 

The  doctrine  of  the  church,  as  the  communion  of  grace,  we 
have  already  considered  in  the  chapter  on  the  constitution  of 
the  church,1  and  the  doctrine  of  the  sacraments,  as  the  objective 
means  of  appropriating  grace,  in  the  chapter  on  worship.3 

§  155.  Eschatology.    Immortality  ami  Resurrection. 

I.  GEITERAL  Eschatology: 

CHR.  W.  FLUGGE  :  Geschichte  des  Glaubens  an  Unsterblich&eit,  Aufersteh- 
ung,  Gericht  und  Vergeltung.  3  Theile,  Leipz,  1794-1800.  Part  in. 
in  2  vols.  gives  a  history  of  the  Christian  doctrine.  Not  completed. 

WILLIAM  EOUNSEVILLE  ALGEE  (Unitarian):  A  Critical  History  of  the 
Doctrine  of  a  Future  Life.  With  a  Complete  Literature  on  the  Subject. 
Philad.  1864,  tenth  ed.  with  six  new  chs.  Boston,  1878.  He  treats 
of  the  patristic  doctrine  in  Part  Fourth,  ch.  I.  p.  394r407.  The 
Bibliographical  Index  by  Prof.  EZRA  ABBOT,  of  Cambridge,  con- 
tains a  classified  list  of  over  5000  books  on  the  subject,  and  is  un- 
equalled in  bibliographical  literature  for  completeness  and  accuracy* 

EDM.  SPIESS  :  Enticicklungsgeschichte  der  Vorstellungen  vom  Zustand  nach 
dem  Tode.  Jena,  1877.  This  book  of  616  pages  omits  the  Christian 
eschatology. 

II.  GBEEK  and  ROMAN  Eschatology: 

C.  FR.  NlGELSBACH :   Die  homerische  Theologie  in  ikrem  Zusammenhang 

dargestellL    Nurnberg,  1840. 
The  same :   Die  nachhomerische  Theologie  des  griechischen  Volksglaubens 

bis  auf  Alexander.    Nurnberg,  1857. 
ATTG.  AUNDT  :   Die  Ansichten  der  Alien  uber  Lebfent  Tod  und  Unsterblich- 

keit.    Frankfurt  a.  M.  1874. 
LEHRS:  Vorstellungen  der  Griechen  uber  das  Fortleben  naeh  dem  Tode. 

Second  ed.  1875. 

1  See  especially  {  53,  p.  168  sqq.  »  See  ]{  66  to  74,  p.  235  sqq. 


590  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

LUDWIG  FBIEDLAENDER  :  Sittengeschichte  Rows,  fifth  ed.    Leipz.  1881 
vol.  III.  p.  681-717  (Der  Unsterblichkeitsglaube). 

III.  JEWISH  Eschatology : 

A.  KAHLE:  Biblische  Eschatologie  des  Alien  Testaments.    Gotha,  1870, 
A.   WAHL:    Unsterblichkeits-und   Vergeltungslehre  des   alttestamentlichen 

Hebraismus.    Jena,  1871. 
Dr.  FERDINAND  WEBER  t,d.  1879) :   System  der  Altsynagogalen  PaZas- 

tinischen   Theologie  aus   Targum,  Midrasch  und   Talmud.     Ed.  by 

Franz  Delitzseii  and  Georg  Schnedermann.     Leipzig,  1880.    See 

chs.  XXI.  3r>i>-33:>;  XXIV.  371-386. 
AUG.  Wo'cCHE:    Die  VorsteUunyen  wm  Zustande  nach  dem  Tode  nach 

Apokryphtn,  Talmud,  und  Kirchenmtern.     In  the  "Jahrbucher  fur 

Protest.  Theol."    Leipz.  1880. 
BI&ELL:  The  Eschatology  of  the  Apocrypha.  In  the  "Bibliotheca  Sacra," 

1S79. 

IV.  CHRISTIAN  Eschatology : 

S,-e  the  relevant  chapters  in  FLUGGE,  and  ALGER,  as  above. 

Dr.  EDWARD  BEECHER  :  History  of  Opinions  on  the  Scriptural  Doctrine 

of  Retribution,    Xew  York,  1878  (334  pages). 
The  relevant  sections  in  the  Doctrine  Histories  of  MUSTSCHER,  NEANDER, 

GIESELER,  BAUR,  HAGEXBACH  (H.  B.  Smith's  ed.  vol.  I.  213  sqq. 

and  368  sqq.),  SKEDD,  FRIEDRICH  NITZSOH  (I.  397  sqq.) 
A  large  number  of  monographs  on  Death,  Hades,  Purgatory,  Eesurrec- 

tion,  Future  Punishment.    See  the  next  sections. 

Christianity — and  human  life  itself,  with  its  countless  prob- 
lems and  mysteries — has  no  meaning  without  the  certainty  of  a 
future  world  of  rewards  and  punishments,  for  which  the  present 
life  serves  as  a  preparatory  school.  Christ  represents  himself  as 
"'*  the  Resurrection  and  the  Life,"  and  promises  "  eternal  life  "  to 
all  who  believe  in  Him.  On  his  resurrection  the  church  is  built, 
and  without  it  the  church  could  never  have  come  into  existence. 
The  resurrection  of  the  body  and  the  life  everlasting  are  among 
the  fundamental  articles  of  the  early  baptismal  creeds.  The 
doctrine  of  the  future  life,  though  last  in  the  logical  order  of 
systematic  theology,  was  among  the  first  in  the  consciousness  of 
the  Christians,  and  an  unfailing  source  of  comfort  and  strength 
in  times  of  trial  and  persecution.  It  stood  in  close  connection 
with  the  expectation  of  the  Lord's  glorious  reappearance.  It 
is  the  subject  of  Paul's  first  Epistles,  those  to  the  Thessalonians, 
and  is  prominently  discussed  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  First 


J155.  ESCHATOLOGY..  591 

Corinthians.  He  declares  the  Christians  "the  most  pitiable/' 
because  the  most  deluded  and  uselessly  self-sacrificing,  "  of  all 
men/'  if  their  hope  in  Christ  were  confined  to  this  life. 

The  ante-Nicene  church  was  a  stranger  in  the  midst  of  a 
hostile  world,  and  longed  for  the  unfading  crown  which  awaited 
the  faithful  confessor  and  martyr  beyond  the  grave.  Such  a 
mighty  revolution  as  the  conversion  of  the  heathen  emperor 
was  not  dreamed  of  even  as  a  remote  possibility,  except  perhaps 
by  the  far-sighted  Origen.  Among  the  five  causes  to  which 
Gibbon  traces  the  rapid  progress  of  the  Christian  religion,  he 
assigns  the  second  place  to  the  doctrine  of  the  immortality  of 
the  soul.  We  know  nothing  whatever  of  a  future  world  which 
lies  beyond  the  boundaries  of  our  observation  and  experience, 
except  what  God  has  chosen  to  reveal  to  us.  Left  to  the  instincts 
and  aspirations  of  nature,  which  strongly  crave  after  immortality 
and  glory,  we  can  reach  at  best  only  probabilities  j  while  the 
gospel  gives  us  absolute  certainty,  sealed  by  the  resurrection  of 
Christ. 

1.  The  HEATHEN  notions  of  the  future  life  were  vague  and 
confused.  The  Hindoos,  Babylonians,  and  Egyptians  had  a 
lively  sense  of  immortality,  but  mixed  with  the  idea  of  endless 
migrations  and  transformations.  The  Buddhists,  starting  from 
the  idea  that  existence  is  want,  and  want  is  suffering,  make 
it  the  chief  end  of  man  to  escape  such  migrations,  and  by 
various  mortifications  to  prepare  for  final  absorption  in 
Nirwana.  The  popular  belief  among  the  ancient  Greeks  and 
Romans  was  that  man  passes  after  death  into  the  Underworld, 
the  Greek  Hades,  the  Roman  Orous.  According  to  Homer, 
Hades  is  a  dark .  abode  in  the  interior  of  the  earth,  with  an 
entrance  at  the  Western  extremity  of  the  Ocean,  where  the  rays 
of  the  sun  do  not  penetrate.  Charon  carries  the  dead  over  the 
stream  Acheron,  and  the  three-headed  dog  Cerberus  watches 
the  entrance  and  allows  none  to  pass  out.  There  the  spirits 
exist  in  a  disembodied  state  and  lead  a  shadowy  dream-life.  A 
vague  distinction  was  made  between  two  regions  in  Hades,  an 


592  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Elysium  (also  "  the  Islands  of  the  Blessed  ")  for  the  good,  and 
Tartarus  for  the  bad.  "Poets  and  painters/3  says  Gibbon, 
"peopled  the  infernal  regions  with  so  many  phantoms  and 
monsters,  who  dispensed  their  rewards  and  punishments  with  so 
little  equity.,  that  a  solemn  truth,  the  most  congenial  to  the 
human  heart,  was  oppressed  and  disgraced  by  the  absurd  mix- 
ture of  the  wildest  fictions.  The  eleventh  book  of  the  Odyssey 
gives  a  very  dreary  and  incoherent  account  of  the  infernal 
shades.  Pindar  and  Virgil  have  embellished  the  picture ;  but 
even  those  poets,  though  more  correct  than  their  great  model, 
are  guilty  of  very  strange  inconsistencies." l 

Socrates,  Plato,  Cicero,  Seneca,  and  Plutarch  rose  highest 
amono-  the  ancient  philosophers  in  their  views  of  the  future 
life,  but  they  reached  only  to  belief  in  its  probability — not  in 
its  certainty.    Socrates,  after  he  was  condemned  to  death,  said  to 
his  judges :   "  Death  is  either  an  eternal  sleep,  or  the  transition 
to  a  new  life ;  but  in  neither  case  is  it  an  evil ;  " 2  and  he  drank 
with  playful  irony  the  fatal  hemlock.     Plato,  viewing  the 
human  soul  as  a  portion  of  the  eternal,  infinite,  all-pervading 
deity,  believed  in  its  pre-existence  before  this  present  life,  and 
thus  had  a  strong  ground  of  hope  for  its  continuance  after 
csath.    All  the  souls  (according  to  his  Phcedon  and  Gorgias) 
pass  into  the  spirit-world,  the  righteous  into  the  abodes  of  bliss, 
where  they  live  forever  in  a  disembodied  state,  the  wicked  into 
Tartarus  for  punishment  and  purification  (which  notion  pre- 
pared the  way  for  purgatory).    Plutarch,  the  purest  and  noblest 
among  the  Platonists,  thought  that  immortality  was  inseparably 
connected  with  belief  in  an  all-ruling  Providence,  and  looked 
with  Plato  to  the  life  beyond  as  promising  a  higher  knowledge 
of,  and  closer  conformity  to  God,  but  only  for  those  few  who 
are  here  purified  by  virtue  and  piety.     In  such  rare  cases, 
departure  might  be  called  an  ascent  to  the'  stars,  to  heaven, 
to  the  gods,  rather  than  a  descent  to  Hades.     He  also,  at  the 
death  of  his  daughter,  expresses  his  faith  in  the  blissful  state  of 

•  Decline  and  FaU  of  the  R.  Emp.  ch.  XV  *  Plato,  Apol  40, 


8156.  ESCHATOLOGY.  593 

infants  who  die  in  infancy.  Cicero,  in  his  Fusculan  Questions 
and  treatise  De  Senectute,  reflects  in  classical  language  "the 
ignorance,  the  errors,  and  the  uncertainty  of  the  ancient 
philosophers  with  regard  to  the  immortality  of  the  soul/' 
Though  strongly  leaning  to  a  positive  view,  he  yet  found  it  no 
superfluous  task  to  quiet  the  fear  of  death  in  case  the  soul 
should  perish  with  the  body.  The  Stoics  believed  only  in  a 
limited  immortality,  or  denied  it  altogether,  and  justified  suicide 
when  life  became  unendurable.  The  great  men  of  Greece  and 
Borne  were  not  influenced  by  the  idea  of  a  future  world  as  a 
motive  of  action.  During  the  debate  on  the  punishment  of 
Catiline  and  his  fellow-conspirators,  Julius  Caesar  openly  de- 
clared in  the  Roman  Senate  that  death  dissolves  all  the  ilia  of 
mortality,  and  is  the  boundary  of  existence  beyond  which  there 
is  no  more  care  nor  joy,  no  more  punishment  for  sin,  nor  any 
reward  for  virtue.  The  younger  Cato,  the  model  Stoic,  agreed 
with  Csesar ;  yet  before  he  made  an  end  to  his  life  at  TJtica,  he 
read  Plato's  Phcedon.  Seneca  once  dreamed  of  immortality, 
and  almost  approached  the  Christian  hope  of  the  birth-day  of 
eternity,  if  we  are  to  trust  his  rhetoric,  but  afterwards  he  awoke 
from  the  beautiful  dream  and  committed  suicide.  The  elder 
Pliny,  who  found  a  tragic  death  under  the  lava  of  Vesuvius, 
speaks  of  the  future  life  as  an  invention  of  man's  vanity  and 
selfishness,  and  thinks  that  body  and  soul  have  no  more  sensa- 
tion after  death  than  before  birth ;  death  becomes  doubly  painful 
if  it  is  only  the  beginning  of  another  indefinite  existence. 
Tacitus  speaks  but  once  of  \nunortality,  and  then  conditionally; 
and  he  believed  only  in  the  immortality  of  fame.  Marcus 
Aurelius,  in  sad  resignation,  bids  nature,  "Give  what  thou  wilt, 
and  take  back  again  what  and  when  thou  wilt." 

These  were  noble  and  earnest  Romans.  What  can  be  ex- 
pected from  the  crowd  of  frivolous  men  of  the  world  who 
moved  within  the  limits  of  matter  and  sense,  and  made  present 
pleasure  and  enjoyment  the  crtef  end  of  life?  The  surviving 
wife  of  an  Epicurean  philosopher  erected  a  monument  to  him. 
Vol.  II.— 38 


594  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D-  100-311. 

with  the  inscription,  "to  the  eternal  sleep/'1  Not  a 
heathen  epitaphs  openly  profess  the  doctrine  that  death  ends  all ; 
while,  in  striking  contrast  with  them,  the  humble  Christian  in- 
scriptions in  the  catacombs  express  the  confident  hope  of  future 
bliss  and  glory  in  the  uninterrupted  communion  of  the  believer 
with  Christ  and  God. 

Yet  the  scepticism  of  the  educated  and  half-educated  could 
not  extinguish  the  popular  belief  in  the  imperial  age.  The 
number  of  cheerless  and  hopeless  materialistic  epitaphs  is,  after 
all,  very  small  as  compared  with  the  many  thousands  which 
reveal  no  such  doubt,  or  espress  a  belief  in  some  kind  of  exist- 
ence beyond  the  grave.2 

Of  a  resurrection  of  the  body  the  Greeks  and  Komans  had 
no  conception,  except  in  the  form  of  shades  and  spectral  out- 
lines, which  were  supposed  to  surround  the  disembodied  spirits, 
and  to  make  them  to  some  degree  recognizable.  Heathen 
philosophers,  like  Celsus,  ridiculed  the  resurrection  of  the  body 
as  useless,  absurd,  and  impossible. 

2.  The  JEWISH  doctrine  is  far  in  advance  of  heathen  notions 
and  conjectures,  but  presents  different  phases  of  development. 

(a)  The  Mosaic  writings  are  remarkably  silent  about  the 
future  life,  and  emphasize  the  present  rather  than  future  con- 
sequences of  the  observance  or  non-observance  of  the  law 
(because  it  had  a  civil  or  political  as  well  as  spiritual  import) ; 
and  hence  the  Sadducees  accepted  them,  although  they  denied 
the  resurrection  (perhaps  also  the  immortality  of  the  soul). 
The  Pentateuch  contains,  however,  some  remote  and  significant 
hints  of  immortality,  as  in  the  tree  of  life  with  its  symbolic 
import ; 3  in  the  mysterious  translation  of  Enoch  as  a  reward 
for  his  piety;4  in  the  prohibition  of  necromancy;5  in  the 

1  See  Friedlaender,  I  c.  682  sq. 

*  See  Friedlaender,  p.  685.    So  in  our  age,  too,  the  number  of  sceptics, 
materialists,  and  atheists,  though  by  no  means  inconsiderable,  is  a  very  small 
minority  compared  with  the  mass  of  believers  in  a  future  life. 

3  Gen.  2:  9j  3:22,24.  *Gea  5:31 

*  Beat  18:  11 ;  comp.  1  Sam.  28:  7. 


J155.  ESCHATOLOGY.  595 

patriarchal  phrase  for  dying :  "  to  be  gathered  to  his  fathers/' 
or  "  to  his  people ; " 1  and  last,  though  not  least,  in  the  self- 
designation  of  Jehovah  as  "  the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
Jacob,"  which  implies  their  immortality,  since  "  God  is  not  the 
God  of  the  dead,  but  of  the  living." 2  What  has  an  eternal 
meaning  for  God  must  itself  be  eternal. 

(6)  In  the  later  writings  of  the  Old  Testament,  especially 
during  and  after  the  exile,  the  doctrine  of  immortality  and 
resurrection  comes  out  plainly.3  Daniel's  vision  reaches  out 
even  to  the  final  resurrection  of  "  many  of  them  that  sleep  in 
the  dust  of  the  earth  to  everlasting  life,"  and  of  "some  to 
shame  and  everlasting  contempt,"  and  prophesies  that  "they 
that  are  wise  shall  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the  firmament, 
and  they  that  turn  many  to  righteousness  as  the  stars  forever 
and  ever." 4 

But  before  Christ,  who  first  revealed  true  life,  the  Hebrew 
Sheol,  the  general  receptacle  of  departing  souls,  remained,  like 
the  Greek  Hades,  a  dark  and  dreary  abode,  and  is  so  described 
in  the  Old  Testament.5  Cases  like  Enoch's  translation  and 
Elijah's  ascent  are  altogether  unique  and  exceptional,  and  imply 
the  moaning  that  death  is  contrary  to  man's  original  destination, 
and  may  be  overcome  by  the  power  of  holiness. 

(c)  The  Jewish  Apocrypha  (the  Book  of  Wisdom,  and  tine 
Second  Book  qf  Maccabees),  and  later  Jewish  writings  (the 
Book  of  Enoch,  the  Apocalypse  of  Ezra)  show  some  progress : 

1  Gen.  25:  8 ;  35:  29:  49:  29,  33.     *  Ex.  3:  6,  16;  comp.  Matt.  22:  32. 

s  Comp.  the  famous  Goel-pasaage,  Job  19 :  25-27,  which  strongly  teaches 
the  immortality  of  the  soul  and  the  future  rectification  of  the  wrongs  of  this 
life;  Eccles.  12:  7  ("the  spirit  shall  return  to  God  who  gave  it'1),  and  ver. 
14  ("  God  shall  bring  every  work  into  judgment,  with  every  secret  thing, 
whether  it  be  good  or  whether  it  be  evil "} . 

4  Dan.  12 :  2,  3;  comp.  Isa.  65:  17 ;  66:  22-24 

5  See  the  passages  sub  Sheol  in  the  Hebrew  Concordance.    The  very  name 
Sheol  P'Wtf)  expresses  either  the  inexorable  demand  and  insatiability  of 
death  (if  derived  from  '?$   to  ask  pres&ingly,  to  urge),  or  the  subterranean 
character  of  the  region,  an  abyss  (if  derived  from  'SJJ,  to  b&  hollow,  comp. 
Ml,  hollow,  Hotte),  and  is  essentially  the  same  as  the  Greek  Hades  and  the 


596  SECOXJ)  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

they  distinguish  between  two  regions  in  Sheol — Paradise  01 
Abraham's  Bosom  for  the  righteous,  and  Gehinnom  or  Gehenna 
for  the  wicked ;  they  emphasize  the  resurrection  of  the  body, 
and  the  future  rewards  and  punishments, 

(d)  The  Talmud  adds  various  fanciful  embellishments.  It 
puts  Paradise  and  Gehenna  in  close  proximity,  measures  their 
extent,  and  distinguishes  different  departments  in  both  cor- 
responding to  the  degrees  of  merit  and  guilt.  Paradise  is  sixty 
times  as  large  as  the  world,  and  Hell  sixty  times  as  large  as 
Paradise,  for  the  bad  preponderate  here  and  hereafter.  Accord- 
ing to  other  rabbinical  testimonies,  both  are  well  nigh  bound- 
less. The  Talmudic  descriptions  of  Paradise  (as  those  of  the 
Koran)  mix  sensual  and  spiritual  delights.  The  righteous 
enjoy  the  vision  of  the  Shechina  and  feast  with  the  patriarchs, 
and  with  Moses  and  David  of  the  flesh  of  leviathan,  and  drink 
wine  from  the  cup  of  salvation.  Each  inhabitant  has  a  house 
according  to  his  merit.  Among  the  punishments  of  hell  the 
chief  place  is  assigned  to  fire,  which  is  renewed  every  week 
after  the  Sabbath.  The  wicked  are  boiled  like  the  flesh  in  the 
Dot,  bui  the  bad  Israelites  are  not  touched  by  fire,  and  are 
otherwise  tormented.  The  severest  punishment  is  reserved  for 
idolaters,  hypocrites,  traitors,  and  apostates.  As  to  the  duration 
of  future  punishment  the  school  of  Shammai  held  that  it  was 
everlasting ;  while  the  school  of  Hillel  inclined  to  the  milder 
view  of  a  possible  redemption  after  repentance  and  purification. 

Eoman  Orcus.  The  distinction  of  two  regions  in  the  spirit-world  (Abraham's 
Bosom  or  Paradise,  and  Gehenna,  comp.  Luke  16 :  22,  23)  does  not  appear 
elearlv  in  the  canonical  hooks,  and  is  of  later  origin.  Oehler  (Theol.  des  A. 
Zfejtf.,  I.  264)  says :  "  Von  tinm  Unterschied  des  Looses  der  im  TodtenrM 
Benndliehen  ist  im  Alien  Test  nirgends  deutlich  geredet,  Wie  vielmekr  dort  Attes 
gldch  tcerrfe,  scMdert  Hiob.  3:  17-19.  Nur  in  Jes.  14:  15;  Ez.  32:  23,  wo  dm 
gesturstenEroberern  die  ausserste  Tiefe  pfirnaT)  angetciesen  wird,  kann  man  die 
Andeutung  rerscJivdener  Abstufungen  des  Todtenreichs  jmden,  etwa  in  dem,  Sinn, 
vie  Josfphns  (Bell  Jvd,  HI.  8,  5)  den  Selbstmorde^n  ein&i,  cc%  aKori&repot 
in  Aussicht  stellt.  Sonst  ist  nur  Ton  finer  Sonderung  mch  Volfarn  und  G& 
sddechtem  dit  Red*,  nicM  von  einer  Sonderung  der  Gerechten,  und  Unqe 
" 


8155.  ESCHATOLOGY.  597 

Some  Rabbis  taught  that  hell  will  cease,  and  that  the  sun  will 
burn  up  and  annihilate  the  wicked.1 

3.  The  CHRISTIAN  doctrine  of  the  future  life  differs  from  the 
heathen,  and  to  a  less  extent  also  from  the  Jewish,  in  the  follow- 
ing important  points : 

(a)  It  gives  to  the  belief  in  a  future  state  the  absolute  cer- 
tainty of  divine  revelation,  sealed  by  the  fact  of  Christ's  resur- 
rection, and  thereby  imparts  to  the  present  life  an  immeasurable 
importance,  involving  endless  issues. 

(6)  It  connects  the  resurrection  of  the  body  with  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul,  and  thus  gives  concrete  completion  to  the  latter, 
and  saves  the  whole  individuality  of  man  from  destruction. 

(c)  It  views  death  as  the  punishment  of  sin,  and  therefore  as 
something  terrible,  from  which  nature  shrinks.     But  its  terror 
has  been  broken,  and  its  sting  extracted  by  Christ 

(d)  It  qualifies  the  idea  of  a  future  state  by  the  doctrine  of 
sin  and  redemption,  and  thus  makes  it  to  the  believer  a  state  of 
absolute  holiness  and  happiness,  to  the  impenitent  sinner  a  state 
of  absolute  misery.    Death  and  immortality  are  a  blessing  to  the 
one;  but  a  terror  to  the  other ;  the  former  can  hail  them  with 
joy ;  the  latter  has  reason  to  tremble. 

(e)  It  gives  great  prominence  to  the  general  judgment,  after 
the  resurrection,  which  determines  the  ultimate  fate  of  all  men 
according  to  their  works  done  in  this  earthly  life. 

But  we  must  distinguish,  in  this  mysterious  article,  what  is 
of  faith,  and  what  is  private  opinion  and  speculation. 

The  return  of  Christ  to  judgment  with  its  eternal  rewards 
and  punishment  is  the  centre  of  the  eschatological  faith  of  the 
church.  The  judgment  is  preceded  by  the  general  resurrection, 
and  followed  by  life  everlasting. 

1  See  these  and  other  curious  particulars  with  references  in  "Wunbche,  L  c.  p. 
361  sqq.,  and  494  sqq.  He  confesses,  however,  that  it  is  exceedingly  difficult 
to  present  a  coherent  system  from  the  various  sayings  of  the  Rabbis.  The 
views  of  the  Essenes  differed  from  the  common  Jewish  notions ;  they  believed 
only  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  and  greeted  death  as  a  deliverance  from 
the  prison  of  the  body. 


598  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

This  faith  is  expressed  in  the  oecumenical  creeds. 
The  Apostles'  Creed : 

"He  shall  come  to  judge  tlie  quick  and  the  dead,"  and  "I  believa 
in  the  resurrection  of  the  body  and  life  everlasting." 

The  Xicene  Creed : 

"He  shall  come  again,  with  glory,  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead* 
whose  kingdom  shall  have  no  end. "  "And  we  look  for  the  resurrection 
of  the  dead,  and  the  life  of  the  world  to  come." 

The  Athanasian  Creed,  so  called,  adds  to  these  simple  state- 
ments a  damnatory  clause  at  the  beginning,  middle,  and  end, 
and  makes  salvation  depend  on  belief  in  the  orthodox  catholic- 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity  and  the  Incarnation,  as  therein  stated, 
But  that  document  is  of  much  later  origin,  and  cannot  be  traced 
beyond  the  sixth  century. 

The  liturgies  which  claim  apostolic  or  post-apostolic  origin, 
give  devotional  expression  to  the  same  essential  points  in  the 
eucharistic  sacrifice. 

The  Clementine  liturgy : 

**  Being  mindful,  therefore,  of  His  passion  and  death,  and  resurrec- 
tion from  the  dead,  and  return  into  the  heavens,  and  His  future  second 
appearing,  wherein  He  is  to  come  with  glory  and  power  to  judge  the 
quick  and  the  dead,  and  to  recompense  to  every  one  according  to  his 
works." 

The  liturgy  of  James : 

"His  second  glorious  and  awful  appearing,  when  He  shall  come 
with  glory  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,  and  render  to  every  one  ac- 
cording to  his  works." 

The  liturgy  of  Mark: 

"His  second  terrible  and  dreadful  coming,  in  which  He  will  come 
to  judge  righteously  the  quick  and  the  dead,  and  to  render  to  each  man 
according  to  his  works." 

All  that  is  beyond  these  revealed  and  generally  received 
articles  must  be  left  free.  The  time  of  the  Second  Advent,  the 
preceding  revelation  of  Antichrist,  the  millennium  before  or 


J156.  BETWEEN  DEATH  AND  BESUERECTION.         599 

after  the  general  judgment,  the  nature  of  the  disembodied  state 
between  death  and  resurrection,  the  mode  and  degree  of  future 
punishment,  the  proportion  of  the  saved  and  lost,  the  fete  of 
the  heathen  and  all  who  die  ignorant  of  Christianity,  the  locality 
of  heaven  and  hell,  are  open  questions  in  eschatology  about 
which  wise  and  good  men  in  the  church  have  always  differed, 
and  will  differ  to  the  end.  The  Bible  speaks  indeed  of  ascend* 
iny  to  heaven  and  descending  to  hell,  but  this  is  simply  the 
unavoidable  popular  language,  as  when  it  speaks  of  the  rising 
and  setting  sun.  We  do  the  same,  although  we  know  that  in 
the  universe  of  God  there  is  neither  above  nor  below,  and  that 
the  sun  does  not  move  around  the  earth.  The  supernatural 
world  may  be  very  far  from  us,  beyond  the  stars  and  beyond 
the  boundaries  of  the  visible  created  world  (if  it  has  any  bound- 
aries), or  very  near  and  round  about  us.  At  all  events  there  is 
an  abundance  of  room  for  all  God's  children.  "  In  my  Father's 
house  are  many  mansions.  I  go  to  prepare  a  place  for  you'5 
(John  14 :  2).  This  suffices  for  faith. 

§  156.  Between  Death  and  Resurrection. 

DAV.  BLONDEL  :  Traitb  de  la  creance  des  Ptres  touchant  Vetat  des  ames 
aprls  cette  vie.  Charenton,  1651. 

J.  A.  BATJMGABTEN  :  Historia  doctrines  de  Statu  Animarum  separatarum. 
Hal.  1754. 

H6PFNER :  De  Origine  dogm.  de  Purgatorio.    Hal.  1792. 

J.  A.  EBKESTI  :  De  veterum  Patrum  opinione  de  Statu  Animarum  a  corpore 
sejunctar.  Lips.  1794. 

HEBBEBT  MOBTIMEB  LUCKOCK  (Canon  of  Ely,  liigli- Anglican) :  After 
Death.  An  Examination  of  the  Testimony  of  Primitive  Times  respect' 
ing  the  State  of  the  Faithful  Dead,  and  their  Relationship  to  the  Living 
London,  third  ed.  1881.  Defends  prayers  for  the  dead. 

Among  the  darkest  points  in  eschatology  is  the  middle  state, 
or  the  condition  of  the  soul  between  death  and  resurrection.  It 
is  difficult  to  conceive  of  a  disembodied  state  of  happiness  or 
woe  without  physical  organs  for  enjoyment  and  suffering. 
Justin  Martyr  held  that  the  souls  retain  their  sensibility  after 
death,  otherwise  the  bad  would  have  the  advantage  over  the 


600  SECOND  PEJRIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

good.  Origen  seems  to  have  assumed  some  refined,  spiritual 
corporeity  which  accompanies  the  soul  on  its  lonely  journey, 
and  is  the  germ  of  the  resurrection  body ;  but  the  speculative 
opinions  of  that  profound  thinker  were  looked  upon  with  sus- 
picion, and  some  of  them  were  ultimately  condemned.  The 
idea  of  the  sleep  of  the  soul  (psychopannychia)  had  some  advo- 
cates, but  was  expressly  rejected  by  Tertullian.1  Others  held 
that  the  soul  died  with  the  body,  and  was  created  anew  at  the 
resurrection.2  The  prevailing  view  was  that  the  soul  continued 
in  a  conscious,  though  disembodied  state,  by  virtue  either  of 
inherent  or  of  communicated  immortality.  The  nature  of  that 
state  depends  upon  the  moral  character  formed  in  this  life  either 
for  weal  or  woe,  without  the  possibility  of  a  change  except  in 
the  same  direction. 

The  catholic  doctrine  of  the  status  intermedium  was  chiefly 
derived  from  the  Jewish  tradition  of  the  Sheol,  from  the  para- 
ble of  Dives  and  Lazarus  (Luke  16 :  19  sqq.),  and  from  the 
passages  of  Chrisf  s  descent  into  Hades.3  The  utterances  of  the 
ante-Oficene  fathers  are  somewhat  vague  and  confused,  but  re- 
ceive light  from  the  more  mature  statements  of  the  Nicene  and 
post-Nicene  fathers,  and  may  be  reduced  to  the  following  points : 4 

1.  The  pious  who  died  before  Christ  from  Abel  or  Adam 
down  to  John  the  Baptist  (with  rare  exceptions,  as  Enoch, 
Moses,  and  Elijah)  were  detained  in  a  part  of  Sheol,5  waiting 

1  De  Anixna,  c.  58.  The  doctrine  of  the  psychopannychia  was  renewed  by 
the  Anabaptists,  and  refuted  by  Calvin  in  one  of  his  earliest  books.  (Paris, 
1534) 

*  Eusebius,  ,VL  37,  mentions  this  view  as  held  by  some  in  Arabia. 

1  Lake 23:  43;  Acts  2:  81;  1  Pet.  3:  19;  4:  6. 

4  Comp.  among  other  passages,  Justin  M.,  Dial  c.  5,  72,  80,  99, 105  (Engel- 
hardt,  I  c.  p.  308) ;  Irenaus,  IY.  27,  2;  V.  31;  Tertullian,  De  Anima,  c.  7,  31, 
50,55,  58;  Adv.  Marc.  IV-  34;  Cyprian,  Bp.  52;  Clemens  Alex.,  Str<m.  VI. 
762  sq.;  Origen,  Contra  Qds.  V.  15;  Horn,  in  IMC.  XIV.  (Tom.  Id.  948); 
Horn,  in  Ez.  L  (HI.  360) ;  Ambrose,  De  Bono  Mortis,  and  Ep.  20. 

5  The  mediaeval  scholastics  called  that  part  of  Sheol  the  Limbus  Pairvm, 
and  assumed  that  it  was  emptied  by  Christ  at  his  descent,  and  replaced  by 
Purgatory,  which  in  turn  will  be  emptied  at  the  second  Advent,  so  that  after 
the  judgment  there  will  be  only  heaven  and  hell.    The  evangelical  confessions 


{  156.  BETWEEN  DEATH  AND  EESUR SECTION.        601 

for  the  first  Advent,  and  were  released  by  Christ  after  tho 
crucifixion  and  transferred  to  Paradise.  This  was  the  chief 
aim  and  result  of  the  descensus  ad  inferos,  as  understood  in  the 
church  long  before  it  became  an  article  of  the  Apostles'  Creed, 
first  in  Aquileja  (where,  however,  Rufinus  explained  it  wrongly, 
as  being  equivalent  to  burial),  and  then  in  Rome.  Hernias  of 
Rome  and  Clement  of  Alexandria  supposed  that  the  patriarchs 
and  Old  Testament  saints,  before  their  translation,  were  baptized 
by  Christ  and  the  apostles.  Irenseus  repeatedly  refers  to  the 
descent  of  Christ  to  the  spirit-world  as  the  only  means  by 
which  the  benefits  of  the  redemption  could  be  made  known  and 
applied  to  the  pious  dead  of  former  ages.1 

2.  Christian  martyrs  and  confessors,  to  whom  were  afterwards 
added  other  eminent  saints,  pass  immediately  after  death  into 
heaven  to  the  blessed  vision  of  God.2 

3.  The  majority  of  Christian  believers'  being  imperfect,  enter 
for  an  indefinite  period  into  a  preparatory  state  of  rest  and  hap- 
piness, usually  called  Paradise  (comp.  Luke  23 :  41)  or  Abra- 
ham's Bosom  (Luke  16  :  23).    There  they  are  gradually  purged 
of  remaining  infirmities  until  they  are  ripe  for  heaven,  into 
which  nothing  is  admitted  but  absolute  purity.    Origen  assumed 
a  constant  progression  to  higher  and  higher  regions  of  knowledge 
and  bliss.     (After  the  fifth  or  sixth  century,  certainly  since 
Pope  Gregory  I.,  Purgatory  was  substituted  for  Paradise). 

4.  The  locality  of  Paradise  is  uncertain :  stone  imagined  it 

agree  with  the  Roman  Catholic  in  the  twofold  state  after  the  judgment,  hut 
deny  the  preceding  state  of  purgatory  between  heaven  and  hell.  They  allow, 
however,  different  degrees  of  holiness  and  happiness  as  well  as  guilt  and 
punishment  hefore  and  after  the  judgment. 

1  Adv.  Hcer.  IV.  27,?  2:    "It  was  for  this  reason  that  the  Lord  descended 
into  the  regions  beneath  the  earth,  preaching  His  advent  to  them  also,  and 
[declaring]  the  remission  of  sins  to  those  who  believe  in  Him.    Now  all 
those  believed  in  Him  who  had  hope  towards  him,  that  is,  those  who  pro. 
claimed  His  advent,  and  submitted  to  His  dispensations,  the  righteous  men, 
the  prophets,  and  the  patriarchs,  to  whom  He  remitted  sins  in  the  same  way, 
as  He  did  to  us,  which  sins  we  should  not  lay  to  their  charge,  if  we  would  not 
despise  the  grace  of  God."    This  passage  exists  only  in  the  Latin  version. 

2  The  Gnostics  taught- that  all  souls  return  immediately  to  God,  but  this  was 
rejected  as  heretical.    Justin,  Dial  SO. 


602  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

to  be  a  higher  region  of  Hades  beneath  the  earth,  yet  "  afar 
off'7  from  Gehenna,  and  separated  from  it  by  "a  great  gulf" 
(comp.  Luke  16 :  23,  26) ; ]  others  transferred  it  to  the  lower 
regions  of  heaven  above  the  earth,  yet  clearly  distinct  from  the 
final  home  of  the  blessed.2 

5.  Impenitent  Christians  and   unbelievers  go  down  to  the 
lower  regions  of  Hades  (Gehenna,  Tartarus,  Hell)  into  a  pre- 
paratory state  of  misery  and  dreadful  expectation  of  the  final 
judgment.     From  the  fourth  century  Hades  came  to  be  identi- 
fied with  Hell,  and  this  confusion  passed  into  many  versions  of 
rhe  Bible,  including  that  of  King  James. 

6.  The  future  fate  of  the  heathen  and  of  unbaptized  children 
was  left  in  hopeless  darkness,  except  by  Justin  and  the  Alex- 
andrian fathers,  who  extended  the  operations  of  divine  gr#ce 
beyond  the  limits  of  the  visible  church.    Justin  Martyr  must 
have  believed,  from  his  premises,  in  the  salvation  of  all  those 
heathen  who  had  in  this  life  followed  the  light  of  the  Divine 
Logos  and  died  in  a  state  of  unconscious  Christianity,  or  pre- 
paredness for  Christianity.     For,  he  says,  "  those  who  lived 
with  the  Logos  were  Christians,  although  they  were  esteemed 
atheists,  as  Socrates  and  Heraclitus,2  and  others  like  them."  3 

1  So  apparently  Tcrtullian,  who  calls  Gehenna  ft  a  reservoir  of  secret  fire 
under  the  earth/'  and  Paradise  "  the  place  of  divine  bliss  appointed  to  receive 
the  spirits  of  the  saints,  separated  from  the  knowledge  of  this  world  by  that 
fiery  zone  [i.  e.  the  niver  Pyriphlegeton  as  by  a  sort  of  enclosure."]  ApoL  c.  47. 

3  So  Irenseus,  Adv.  H&r.  V.  5,  §  1 :  "  Wherefore  also  the  elders  who  were 
disciples  of  the  apostles  tell  us  that  those  who  -were  translated  were  transferred 
to  that  place  (for  paradise  has  been  prepared  for  righteous  men,  such  as  have 
the  Spirit :  in  which  place  also  Paul  the  apostle,  when  he  was  caught  up? 
heard  words  which  are  unspeakable  as  regards  us  in  our  present  condition), 
and  that  there  shall  they  who  have  been  translated  remain  until  the  consum- 
mation [of  all  things],  as  a  prelude  to  immortality." 

3  Apd,  I.  46 :  ol  psTa  Adyov  fituaavrec  Xptariavot  eiat,  KCLV  a&eot  evopfodqcrav, 
olov  h  'EZtyai  SuKfxSrqc  Kal  £Hpd/d«rof  ^al  ol  bpoLot.  avroig.  Comp.  ApoL  I.  20, 
44;  Apol.  II.  8,  13.  He  does  not  say  anywhere  expressly  that  the  nobler 
heathen  are  saved ;  but  it  follows  from  his  view  of  the  Logos  spermaticos  (see 
p.  550).  It  was  renewed  in  the  sixteenth  century  by  Zwingli,  and  may  be 
consistently  held  by  all  who  make  eslvan'on  depend  on  eternal  election  rather 
than  on  water-baptism.  God  :c  no*  bound  by  his  own  ordinances,  and  may 
tave  whom  and  when  and  how  ^e  pleases. 


§  156.  BETWEEN  DEATH  AND  RESURRECTION.        60S 

7.  There  are;  in  the  other  world,  different  degrees  of  happi- 
ness and  misery  according  to  the  degrees  of  merit  and  guilt. 
This  is  reasonable  in  itself,  and  supported  by  scripture. 

8.  With  the  idea  of  the  imperfection  of  the  middle  state  and 
the  possibility  of  progressive  amelioration,  is  connected  the 
commemoration  of  the  departed,  and  prayer  in  their  behalf. 
~So  trace  of  the  custom  is  found  in  the  Xew  Testament  nor  in 
the  canonical  books  of  the  Old,  but  an  isolated  example,  which, 
seems  to  imply  habit,  occurs  in  the  age  of  the  Maccabees,  when 
Judas  Maccabseus  and  his  company  offered  prayer  and  sacrifice 
for  those  slain  in  battle,  "  that  they  might  be  delivered  from 
sin."1    In  old  Jewish  service-books  there  are  prayers  for  the 
blessedness  of  the  dead.2    The  strong  sense  of  the  communion 
of  saints  unbroken  by  death  easily  accounts  for  the  rise  of  a 
similar  custom  among  the  early  Christians.    Tertullian  bears 
clear  testimony  to  its  existence  at  his  time.    "  We  offer,"  he 
says,  "  oblations  for  the  dead  on  the  anniversary  of  their  birth," 
i.  e.  their  celestial  birth-day.3    He  gives  it  as  a  mark  of  a 
Christian  widow,  that  she  prays  for  the  soul  of  her  husband, 
and  requests  for  him  refreshment  and  fellowship  in  the  first 
resurrection;  and  that  she  offers  sacrifice  on  the  anniversaries 
of  his  falling  asleep.4    Eusebius  narrates  that  at  the  tomb  of 
Constantine  a  vast  crowd  of  people,  in  company  with  the  priests 
of  God,  with  tears  and  great,  lamentation  offered  their  prayers 
to  God  for  the  emperor's  soul.5    Augustin  calls  prayer  for  the 
pious  dead  in  the  eucharistic  sacrifice  an  observance  of  the  uni- 

1  2  Mace.  12 :  39  sqq.  Roman  Catholic  divines  use  this  passage  (besides 
Matt.  5 :  26 ;  12:  82  and  I  Cor.  3:  13-15)  as  an  argument  for  the  doctrine  oi 
purgatory.  But  it  would  prove  too  much  for  them ;  for  the  sin  here  spoken 
of  was  not  venial,  but  the  deadly  sin  of  idolatry,  which  is  excluded  from  pur- 
gatory and  from  the  reach  of  efficacious  intercession. 

3  See  specimens  in  Luckock,  I  c.  p.  58  sqq. 

3  De  Cor.  Mil.  c.  3 :  "  Oblationes  pro  defunctis,  pro  natalitiis  annua  diefacimus" 
Comp.  the  notes  in  Dealer's  ed.  Tom.  I.  422. 

*  De  Monog.  c.  10 :  "  Pro  anima  qus  orat  et  refrigeriwrn  interim  adposhdat  ei 
et  in  prima  resurrectione  consortium.91 

5  Vita  Const  IV.  71 :  cvv  /cAatntyp  icfelovi  rdf  svx&C  imsp 


604  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

versal  church,  handed  down  from  the  fathers.1  He  hin-iself 
remembered  in  prayer  his  godly  mother  at  her  dying  request 

This  is  confirmed  by  the  ancient  liturgies,  which  express  in" 
substance  the  devotions  of  the  ante-Xicene  age,  although  they 
were  not  committed  to  writing  before  the  fourth  century.  The 
commemoration  of  the  pious  dead  is  an  important  part  in  the 
eucharistic  prayers.  Take  the  following  from  the  Liturgy  of 
St.  James :  "  Remember,  0  Lord  God,  the  spirits  of  whom 
we  have  made  mention,  and  of  whom  we  have  not  made 
mention,  who  are  of  the  true  faith,2  from  righteous  Abel  unto 
this  day ;  do  Thou  Thyself  give  them  rest  there  in  the  land 
of  the  living,  in  Thy  kingdom,  in  the  delight  of  Paradise,3  in 
the  Bosom  of  Abraham  and  of  Isaac  and  of  Jacob,  our  holy 
fathers;  whence  pain  and  grief  and  lamentation  have  fled  away : 
there  the  light  of  Thy  countenance  looks  upon  them,  and  gives 
them  light  for  evermore."  The  Clementine  Liturgy  in  the 
eighth  book  of  the  "  Apostolical  Constitutions  "  has  likewise  a 
prayer  "  for  those  who  rest  in  faith,"  in  these  words :  "  "We 
make  an  ofiering  to  Thee  for  all  Thy  saints  who  have  pleased 
Thee  from  the  beginning  of  the  world,  patriarchs,  prophets,  just 
men,  apostles,  martyrs,  confessors,  bishops,  elders,  deacons,  sub- 
deacons,  singers,  virgins,  widows,  laymen,  and  all  whose  names 
Thou  Thyself  knowest." 

9.  These  views  of  the  middle  state  in  connection  with  prayers 
for  the  dead  show  a  strong  tendency  to  the  Eoman  Catholic 
doctrine  of  Purgatory,  which  afterwards  came  to  prevail  in  the 

1  Sermo  172.  He  also  inferred  from  the  passage  on  the  unpardonable  sin 
(Matt  12:  32)  that  other  sins  may  be  forgiven  in  the  future  world.  De  Qivit. 
Dei,  XXI.  24.  In  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  (452),  Dioscurus  was  charged 
with  a  breach  of  trust  for  not  having  executed  the  will  of  a  saintly  woman 
who  had  left  large  sums  of  money  to  monasteries,  hospitals,  and  alms-houses, 
in  the  hope  of  being  benefited  by  the  prayers  of  the  faithful  recipients. 

*  rtjv  xvevparuv 6pdod6*M.  The  Greek  church  lays  great  stress  05 

orthodoxy ;  but  it  has  here  evidently  a  very  wide  meaning,  as  it  includes  the 
%ith  of  Abel  and  all  Old  Testament  saints. 

$  Not  Purgatory.  This  shows  the  difference  between  the  ante-Nicene  and 
{>ost-2ftcene  faith.  See  below. 


2  156.  BETWEEN  DEATH  AND  RESURRECTION.        605 

West  through  the  great  weight  of  St.  Augustin  and  Pope 
Gregory  I.  But  there  is,  after  all,  a  considerable  difference. 
The  ante-Nicene  idea  of  the  middle  state  of  the  pious  excludes, 
or  at  all  events  ignores,  the  idea  of  penal  suffering,  which  is  an 
essential  part  of  the  Catholic  conception  of  purgatory.  It 
represents  the  condition  of  the  pious  as  one  of  comparative 
happiness,  inferior  only  to  the  perfect  happiness  after  the  resur- 
rection. Whatever  and  wherever  Paradise  may  be,  it  belongs 
to  the  heavenly  world;  while  purgatory  is  supposed  to  be  a 
middle  region  between  heaven  and  hell,  and  to  border  rather  on 
the  latter.  The  sepulchral  inscriptions  in  the  catacombs  have,  a 
prevailingly  cheerful  tone,  and  represent  the  departed  souls  as 
being  "  in  peace  "  and  ' '  living  in  Christ/'  or  "  in  God." l  The 
same  view  is  substantially  preserved  in  the  Oriental  church, 
which  holds  that  the  souls  of  the  departed  believers  may  be 
aided  by  the  prayers  of  the  living,  but  are  nevertheless  "  in 
light  and  rest,  with  a  foretaste  of  eternal  happiness.2 

Yet  alongside  with  this  prevailing  belief,  there  are  traces  of 
the  purgatorial  idea  of  suffering  the  temporal  consequences  of 
sin,  and  a  painful  struggle  after  holiness.  Origen,  following  in 
the  path  of  Plato,  used  the  term  "  purgatorial  fire," 3  by  which 
the  remaining  stains  of  the  soul  shall  be  burned  away ;  but  he 
understood  it  figuratively,  and  connected  it  with  the  consuming 
fire  at  the  final  judgment,  while  Augustin  and  Gregory  I.  trans- 
ferred it  to  the  middle  state.  The  common  people  and  most  of 
the  fathers  understood  it  of  a  material  fire ;  but  this  is  not  a 
matter  of  faith,  and  there  are  Roman  divines*  who  confine 

1  Sometimes,  however,  this  is  expressed  in  the  form  of  a  wish  or  prayer : 
"Mayest  thou  live  in  God"  (Vivas  in  Deo,  or  in  Christo] ;  "May  God  refresh 
thy  spirit"  (Deus  refrigeret  spiritum  tmm) ;  "Mayest  thou  have  eternal  light  in 
Christ,"  etc.    Comp.  ?  86,  p.  301-303. 

2  Longer  Eussian  Catechism,  in  Schaff's  Creeds,  vol.  IT.  p.  503. 

8  ffvp  Kati&patQv.    It  is  mentioned  also  before  Origen  in  the  Clementine 
Homilies,  IX,  13.    The  Scripture  passage  on  which  the  term  ignis  purgatoriut 
was  based,  is  1  Cor.  3 :  13,  15 »   "  the  fire  shall  prove  each  man's  work  . . . 
he  himself  shall  he  saved ;  yet  so  as  through  fre  (<&c  &3  xupfa ). 

*  As  Mohler,  Klee,  and  others, 


606  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  purgatorial  sufferings  to  the  mind  and  the  conscience.  A 
material  fire  would  be  very  harmless  without  a  material  body. 
A  still  nearer  approach  to  the  Roman  purgatory  was  made  by 
Tertullian  and  Cyprian,  who  taught  that  a  special  satisfaction 
and  penance  was  required  for  sins  committed  after  baptism,  and 
that  the  last  farthing  must  be  paid  (Matt.  5 :  20)  before  the 
soul  can  be  released  from  prison  and  enter  into  heaven. 

§  157.  After  Judgment.    Future  Punishment. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Fathers  on  future  punishment  is  discussed  by  Dr. 
EDWARD  BEECHEE,  I  c.,  and  in  the  controversial  works  called  forth 
by  Canon  FAERAE'S  Eternal  Hope  (Five  Sermons  preached  in  West- 
minster Abbey,  Xov.  1877.  Lond.,  1879.)  See  especially 

Dr-  PUSEY  :  "  What  is  of  Faith  as  to  Everlasting  Punishment  ?  '*  A  Reply 
to  Dr.  Farrar's  Challenge.  Oxf.  and  Lond.,  second  ed.  1880  (284 
pages). 

Canon  F.  W.  FAPJSUB:  Mercy  and  Judgment:  A  few  last  words  on  Chris- 
tian Esckatology  icith  reference  to  Dr.  Pusey's  "  What  is  of  Faith?39 
London  and  X.  York,  1881  iv4S5  pages).  See  chs.  II.,  III.,  IX.-XII. 
Farrar  opposes  with  much  fervor  "  the  current  opinions  about  Hell," 
and  reduces  it  to  the  smallest  possible  dimensions  of  time  and  space, 
but  expressly  rejects  Universalism.  He  accepts  with  Pusey  the 
Romanizing  view  of  "future  purification  "  (instead  of  "probation"), 
and  thus  increases  the  number  of  the  saved  by  withdrawing  vast 
multitudes  of  imperfect  Christians  from  the  awful  doom. 

After  the  general  judgment  we  have  nothing  revealed  but 
the  boundless  prospect  of  seonian  life  and  seonian  death.  This 
is  the  ultimate  boundary  of  our  knowledge. 

There  never  was  in  the  Christian  church  any  difference  of 
opinion  concerning  the  righteous,  who  shall  inherit  eternal  life 
and  enjoy  the  blessed  communion  of  God  forever  and  ever. 
But  the  final  fate  of  the  impenitent  who  reject  the  offer  of  sal- 
vation admits  of  three  answers  to  the  reasoning  mind :  everlast- 
ing punishment,  annihilation,  restoration  (after  remedial  punish- 
ment and  repentance). 

1.  EVERLASTING  PrarsHMEXT  of  the  wicked  always  was, 
and  always  will  be  the  orthodox  theory.  It  was  held  by  the 
Jews  at  the  time  of  Christ,  with  the  exception  of  the  Sadducees 


J157.  AFTER  JUDGMENT.    FUTURE  PUNISHMENT.    607 

who  denied  the  resurrection.1  It  is  endorsed  by  the  highest 
authority  of  the  most  merciful  Being,  who  sacrificed  his  own 
life  for  the  salvation  of  sinners,2 

1  The  point  is  disputed,  but  the  4th  Maccabees,  the  4th  Esdras,  the  Book  of 
Enoch,  the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch,  and  the  Psalms  of  Solomon,  contain  very 
strong  passages,  which  Dr.  Pusey  has  collected,  /,  c.  48-100,  and  are  not  in- 
validated by  the  reply  of  Farrar,  ch.  VIII.  180-221.    Josephus  (whose  testi- 
mony Farrar  arbitrarily  sets  aside  as  worthless)  attests  the  belief  of  the  Phari- 
sees and  Essenes  in  eternal  punishment,  Ant  XVIII.  1,3;  Bell.  Jud.  II.  8, 
31,    Rabbi  Akiba  (about  120)  limited  the  punishment;  of  Gehenna  to  twelve 
months ;  but  only  for  the  Jews.    The  Talmud  assigns  certain  classes  to  ever- 
lading  punishment,  especially  apostates  and  those  who  despise  the  wisdom  of 
the  Kabbis.    The  chief  passage  is  Eosk  Hoshanah,  f.  16  and  17:  "There  will 
be  three  divisions  on  the  day  of  judgment,  the  perfectly  righteous,  the  perfectly 
wicked,  and  the  intermediate  class.    The  first  will  be  at  once  inscribed  and 
sealed  to  life  eternal ;  the  second  at  once  to  Gehenna  (Dan.  12 :  2) ;  the  third 
will  descend  into  Gehenna  and  keep  rising  and  sinking"  (Zech.  12:  10).    This 
opinion  was  endorsed  by  the  two  great  schools  of  Shammai  and  Hillel,  but 
Hillel  inclined  to  a  liberal  and  charitable  construction  (see  p.  596).    Farrar 
maintains  that  Gehenna  does  not  necessarily  and  usually  mean  hell  in  our 
sent-e,  but  1)  for  Jews,  or  the  majority  of  Jews,  a  short  punishment,  followed 
by  forgiveness  and  escape  ;  2)  for  worse  offenders  a  long  but  still  terminable 
punishment ;  3)  for  the  worst  offenders,  especially  Gentiles — punishment  fol- 
lowed by  annihilation.    He  quotes  several  modern  Jewish  authorities  of  the 
rationalistic  type,  e  g.    Dr.  Deutsch,  who  says :   "  There  is  not  a  word  in  the 
Talmud  that  lends  any  support  to  the  damnable  dogma  of  endless  torment." 
But  Dr.  Ferd.  Weber  who  is  as  good  authority,  says,  that  some  passages  in  the 
Talmud  teach  total  annihilation  of  the  wicked,  others  teach  everlasting  punish- 
ment, e.  g.  Pesachim  54a:  "  The  fire  of  Gehenna  is  never  extinguished."    Syst. 
tier  altsynag.  Pal'dst.  Theologie,  p.  375.    The  Mohammedans  share  the  Jewish 
belief,  but  change  the  inhabitants :  the  Koran  assigns  Paradise  to  the  orthodox 
Moslems,  and  Hell  to  all  unbelievers  (Jews,  Gentiles,  and  Christians),  and  to 
apostates  from  Islam. 

2  Matt.  12:  32  (the  unpardonable  sin) ;  26:  24  (Judas  had  better  never  been 
born);  25  :  46  ("eternal  punishment"  contrasted  with  "eternal  life");  Mark 
9 :  48  ("Gehenna,  where  their  worm  dieth  not,  #nd  the  fire  is  not  quenched"). 
In  the  light  of  these  solemn  declarations  we  must  interpret  the  passages  of 
Paul  (Bom.  5 :  12  sqq. ;  14:  9;  1  Cor.  15:  22,  28),  which  look  towards  uni- 
versal restoration.    The  exegetical  discussion  lies  outside  of  our  scope,  but  a* 
the  meaning  of  al&woq  has  been  drawn  into  the  patristic  discussion,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  remark  that  the  argumentative  force  lies  not  in  the  etymological  and 
independent  meaning  of  the  word,  which  is  limited  to  an  ceon,  but  in  its  con- 
nection with  future  punishment  as  contrasted  with  future  reward,  which  no 
man  doubts  to  be  everlasting  (Matt.  25 :  46).    On  the  exegetical  question  see 
M.  Stuart,  L  c.,  and  especially  the  excursus  of  Taylor  Lewis  on  Olamic  and 
JEonmn  words  in  Scripture,  in  Lange's  Com.  on  Ecclesiastes  (Am.  ed.  p.  44-51). 


608  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311.      . 

Consequently  the  majority  of  the  fathers  who  speak  plainly 
on  this  terrible  subject,  favor  this  view. 

Ignatius  speaks  of  "  the  unquenchable  fire  ;  "  l  Hennas,  of 
some  "  who  will  not  be  saved/'  but  "shall  utterly  perish/'  be- 
cause they  will  not  repent.2 

Justin  Martyr  teaches  that  the  wicked  or  hopelessly  impeni- 
tent will  be  raised  at  the  judgment  to  receive  eternal  punish- 
ment. He  speaks  of  it  in  twelve  passages.  "Briefly,"  he 
says,  "  what  we  look  for,  and  have  learned  from  Christ,  and 
what  we  teach,  is  as  follows.  Plato  said  to  the  same  effect,  that 
Rhadamanthus  and  Minos  would  punish  the  wicked  when  they 
came  to  them  ;  we  say  that  the  same  thing  will  take  place  ;  but 
that  the  judge  will  be  Christ,  and  that  their  souls  will  be  united 
to  the  same  bodies,  and  will  undergo  an  eternal  punishment 
(aswua)'  xulacro)',  and  not,  as  Plato  said,  a  period  of  only  a 
thousand  years  f/^oi/r«erif  xeptoSov)"3  In  another  place: 
"  "We  believe  that  all  who  live  wickedly  and  do  not  repent,  "will 
be  punished  in  eternal  fire  "  (ey  atwvfy  Try/?/).4  Such  language 
is  inconsistent  with  the  annihilation  theory  for  which  Justin 
M.  has  been  claimed.5  He  does,  indeed,  reject  with  several 
other  ante-Xicene  writers,  the  Platonic  idea  that  the  soul  is  in 
itself  and  independently  immortal,6  and  hints  at  the  possibility 
of  the  final  destruction  of  the  wicked,7  but  he  puts  that  possi- 

1  Ep.  ad  Eph.  c.  16  :   &  roiovro^  pvnapb$  -ysvdpsvos,  elg  TO  irvp  rb  ao/Searov 


3  Vis.  HI  2,  7  ;  Simil.  VHT.  9  (ed.  Funk,  L  p.  256,  488  sq.).  Dr.  Pusey 
claims  also  Polyearp  (?),  Barnabas,  and  the  spurions  second  Ep.  of  Clement, 
and  many  martyrs  (from  their  Acts)  on  his  side,  p.  151-166. 

8  Apol  I.  8.  (Comp.  Plato,  Phcedr.  p.  249  A;  De  Eepull  p.  615  A,) 

*ApoL  I.  21:  comp.  c.  28,  45,  52;  II.  2,  7,  8,  9;  Dial.  45,  130.  Also  v. 
Engelhardt,  p.  206,  and  Donaldson,  H  321. 

6  By  Petavius,  Beecher  (p.  206),  Farrar  (p.  236),  and  others. 
>  6  Dial  c.  Tr.  4.  5;  comp.  Apol.  L  21.  Tatian,  his  disciple,  says  against  the 
Platonists  (Adv.  Grcec.  c.  13)  :  "  The  soul  is  not  immortal  in  itself,  O  Greeks, 
but  mortal  (C&K  tarty  aMvaros  %  ^xti  Ka&'  savrfo,  tivTirri  de).  Yet  it  is  pos- 
sible for  it  not  to  die  "  Irenasus,  Theophilas  of  Antioch,  Arnobius,  and  Lactan- 
tius  held  the  same  view.  See  Nitzsch,  L  351-353. 

T  In  Di'aZ.  c.  5,  he  pats  into  the  mouth  of  the  aged  man  by  whom  he  was 
Converted,  the  sentence:  ."Such  **  ar*  worthy  to  see  God  die  no  more,  but 


|157  AFTER  JUDGMENT.  FUTURE  PUNISHMENT.  609 

bility  countless  ages  beyond  the  final  judgment,  certainly  beyond 
the  Platonic  millennium  of  punishment,  so  that  it  loses  all 
practical  significance  and  ceases  to  give  relief. 

Irenseus  has  been  represented  as  holding  inconsistently  aU 
three  theories,  or  at  least  as  hesitating  between  the  orthodox 
view  and  the  annihilation  scheme.  He  denies,  like  Justin  Mar- 
tyr, the  necessary  and  intrinsic  immortality  of  the  soul,  and 
makes  it  dependent  on  God  for  the  continuance  in  life  as  well 
as  for  life  itself.1  But  in  paraphrasing  the  apostolic  rule  of 
faith  he  mentions  eternal  punishment,  and  in  another  place  he 
accepts  as  certain  truth  that  "eternal  fire  is  prepared  for 
sinners,"  because  "the  Lord  openly  affirms,  and  the  other 

others  shall  undergo  punishment  as  long  as  it  shall  please  Sim  that  they  shaft 
exist  and  be  punished  "  But  just  before  he  had  said :  *'  I  do  not  say  that  all 
souls  die:  for  that  would  he  a  godsend  to  the  wicked.  "What  then?  the  souls 
of  the  pious  remain  in  a  better  place,  while  those  of  the  unjust  and  wicked  are 
in  a  worse,  waiting  for  the  time  of  judgment."  Comp.  the  note  of  Otto  on  the 
passage,  Op.  II.  26. 

Adv,  Hcsr.  II.  34,  \  3 :  "  omnia  qua  facia  sunt .  .  .  persec&rant  quoadusque  ea 
Deus  etesse  et  perseverare  wluerit"  Irenseus  reasons  that  whatever  is  created 
had  a  beginning,  and  therefore  may  have  an  end.  "Whether  it  will  continue 
or  not,  depends  upon  man's  gratitude  or  ingratitude.  He  who  preserves  the 
gift  of  life  and  is  grateful  to  the  Giver,  shall  receive  length  of  days  forever 
and  ever  (accipiet  et  insceculum  sceculi  longitudinem  dierum)\  but  he  who  casts  it 
away  and  becomes  ungrateful  to  his  Maker,  "  deprives  himself  of  perseverance 
foreoer"  (ipse  se  privat  in  soeculum  sceculi  perseverantia}.  From  this  passage, 
which  exists  only  in  the  imperfect  Latin  version,  Dodwell,  Beecher  (p.  26*0), 
and  Farrar  (241)  iu^r  that  Trenaeus  tanght  annihilation,  and  interpret  per- 
severantia to  mean  continued  existence ;  while  Massuet  (see  his  note  in  Stieren 
1.  415),  and  Pusey  (p.  183)  explain  perseverantia  of  continuance  in  real  life  in 
God,  or  eternal  happiness.  The  passage,  it  must  be  admitted,  is  not  clear,  for 
longitude  dierum  and  perseverantia  are  not  identical,  nor  is  perseveraTtfia  equiva- 
lent to' existentia  orw'ta.  In  Bk.IV.  20,  7t  Irenseus  says  that  Christ  "became 
the  dispenser  of  the  paternal  grace  for  the  benefit  of  man  . . .  lest  man,  falling 
away  from  God  altogether,  should  cease  to  exist "  (cessaret  esse) ;  but  he  adds, 
"  the  life  of  man  consists  in  beholding  God "  (vita,  autem  hominis  visio  Dei). 
In  the  fourth  Pfaffian  Fragment  ascribed  to  him  (Stieren  L  889),  he  says  that 
Christ  "will  come  at  the  end  of  time  to  destroy  all  evil  («c  TO  narapyijaat,  lav 
rb  KaKbv)  and  to  reconcile  all  things  (elf  rb  cnroKara^d^aL  ra  ir&vra,  from  Col. 
1 :  20)  that  there  may  be  an  end  of  all  impurity."  This  passage,  like  1  Cor. 
15 :  28  and  Col.  1 :  20,  looks  towards  universal  restoration  rather  than  anni- 
hilation, but  admits,  like  the  Pauline  passag  .ls,  of  an  interpretation  consistent 
with  eternal  punishment*  See  the  long  note  in  Stieren. 
Vol.  11.— 39. 


810  SECOND  PERIOD    A.  D.  100-311. 

Scriptures  prove "  it.1  Hippolytns  approves  the  escha 
tology  of  the  Pharisees  as  regards  the  resurrection,  the  im- 
mortality of  the  soul,  the  judgment  and  conflagration,  ever- 
lasting life  and  "everlasting  punishment;"  and  in  another  place 
he  speaks  of  "  the  rayless  scenery  of  gloomy  Tartarus,  where 
never  shines  a  beam  from  the  radiating  voice  of  the  Word.5'2 
According  to  Tertullian  the  future  punishment  "  will  continue, 
not  for  a  long  time,  but  forever."3  It  does  credit  to  his  feelings 
when  he  says  that  no  innocent  man  can  rejoice  in  the  punish- 
ment of  the  guilty,  however  just,  but  will  grieve  rather.  Cyprian 
thinks  that  the  fear  of  hell  is  the  only  ground  of  the  fear  of 
death  to  any  one,  and  that  we  should  have  before  our  eyes  the 
fear  of  God  and  eternal  punishment  much  more  than  the  fear 
of  men  and  brief  suffering.4 

The  generality  of  this  belief  among  Christians  is  testified  by 
Celsus,  who  tells  them  that  the  heathen  priests  threaten  the 
same  "  eternal  punishment "  as  they,  and  that  the  only  question 
was  which  was  right,  since  both  claimed  the  truth  with  equal 
confidence.5 

II.  The  final  A^IHILATIO^  of  the  wicked  removes  all  dis- 
cord from  the  universe  of  God  at  the  expense  of  the  natural  im- 
mortality of  the  soul,  and  on  the  ground  that  sin  will  ultimately 
destroy  the  sinner,  and  thus  destroy  itself. 

This  theory  is  attributed  to  Justin  Martyr,  Irenseus,  and 
others,  who  believed  only  in  a  conditional  immortality  which  may 
be  forfeited ;  butj  as  we  have  just  seen,  their  utterances  in  favor 
of  eternal  punishment  are  too  clear  and  strong  to  justify  the  in- 
ference which  they  might  have  drawn  from  their  psychology. 

1  Adv.  Hcsr.  III.  4>  1 ;  IL  28,  7.  See  Pusey,  p.  177-181.  2aegler  (Ir&nav*, 
p.  312)  says  that  Irenseus  teaches  the  eternity  of  punishment  in  several  pas- 
sages, or  presupposes  it,  and  quotes  III.  23,  3;  IV.  27,  4;  28, 1  j  IV.  33, 11; 
39,  4 ;  40, 1  and  2.  2  Phfos.  IX.  23,  30. 

»  Apd.  c.  45.    Comp.  De  Test.  An.  4 ;  De  Sped.  1 9,  30.    Pusey,  184  sq. 
^  «  De  Mortal.  10;  Ep.  VIII.  2.    Pusey,  190.    He  quotes  also  the  Eocogni- 
tions  of  Clement,  and  the  Clementine  Homilies  (XL  11)  on  this  side. 

6  Orig.  #  Cds.  VIII.  48.  Origen  in  his  answer  does  not  deny  the  fact;  but 
aims  to  prove  that  the  truth  is  with  the  Christians. 


J 157.  AFTER  JUDGMENT,  FUTURE  PUNISHMENT.  611 

Arnobius,  however,  seems  to  have  believed  in  actual  annihila- 
tion ;  for  he  speaks  of  certain  souls  that  "  are  engulfed  and 
burned  up,"  or  "  hurled  •  down  and  having  been  reduced  to 
nothing,  vanish  in  the  frustration  of  a  perpetual  destruction." l 

III.  The  APOKATASTASIS  or  final  restoration  of  all  rational 
beings  to  holiness  and  happiness.  This  seems  to  be  the  ^ost 
satisfactory  speculative  solution  of  the  problem  of  sin,  and 
secures  perfect  harmony  in  the  creation,  but  does  violence  to 
freedom  with  its  power  to  perpetuate  resistance,  and  ignores  the 
hardening  nature  of  sin  and  the  ever  increasing  difficulty  of 
repentance.  If  conversion  and  salvation  are  an  ultimate  neces- 
sity, they  lose  their  moral  character,  and  moral  aim. 

Origen  was  the  first  Christian  Universalist.  He  taught  a 
final  restoration,  but  with  modesty  as  a  speculation  rather  than  a 
dogma,  in  his  youthful  work  De  Privicipiis  (written  before  231), 
which  was  made  known  in  the  "West  by  the  loose  version  of 
Eufinus  (398).2  In  his  later  writings  there  are  only  faint  traces 
of  it ;  he  seems  at  kast  to  have  modified  it,  and  exempted  Satan 
from  final  repentance  and  salvation,  but  this  defeats  the  end  of 
the  theory.3  He  also  obscured  it  by  his  other  theory  of  the 
necessary  mutability  of  free  will,  and  the  constant  succession  of 
fall  and  redemption.4 

Universal  salvation  (including  Satan)  was  clearly  taught 
by  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  a  profound  thinker  of  the  school  of 

1  Adv.  Gent.  II.  14.    The  theory  of  conditional  immortality  and  the  anni- 
hilation of  the  wicked  has  been  recently  renewed  by  a  devout  English  author, 
Bev.  Edward  White,  Life  in  Christ.    Dr.  E.  Rcthe  also  advocates  annihila- 
tion, but  not  till  after  the  conversion  of  the  wicked  has  become  a  moral  im- 
possibility.   See  his  posthumous  Dogmatik,  ed.  by  Schenkel,  II.  335. 

2  fie  Princ.  L  6,  3.    Comp.  In  Jer.  Horn.  19;  0.  Cels.  VI.  26. 

8  It  is  usually  asserted  from  Augustin  down  to  Nitzsch  (L  402),  that  Origen 
included  Satan  in  the  cncoKaTdaTiunc  T&V  iravruv,  but  In  Ep.  ad  Rom.  1.  VTEI. 
9  (Opera  IV.  634)  he  says  that  Satan  will  not  be  converted,  not  even  at  the 
end  of  the  world,  and  in  a  letter  Ad  qwsdatii  arnicas  Alex.  ( Opera  L  5,  quoted 
by  Pusey,  p.  125) :  "  Although  they  say  that  the  father  of  malice  and  of  the 
perdition  of  those  who  shall  be  cast  out  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  can  be  saved ; 
which  no  one  can  say,  even  if  bereft  of  reason." 

4  After  the  apokatastasis  has  been  completed  in  certain  seons,  he  speaks  of 
See  the  judicious  remarks  of  Neander,  I.  656  (Am.  ed.) 


612  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Origen  (d.  395),  and,  from  an  exegetical  standpoint,  by  the 
eminent  Antiocliian  divines  Diodorus  of  Tarsus  (d*  394)  and 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  ( d.  429),  and  many  Nestorian  bishops.1 
In  the  West  also  at  the  time  of  Augustin  (d.  430)  there  were,  as 
he  says,  "  multitudes  who  did  not  believe  in  eternal  punishment." 
But  the  view  of  Origen  was  rejected  by  Epiphanius,  Jerome, 
and  Augustin,  and  at  last  condemned  as  one  of  the  Origenistie 
errors  under  the  Emperor  Justinian  (543),2 

Since  that  time  universalism  was  regarded  as  a  heresy,  but  is 
tolerated  in  Protestant  churches  as  a  private  speculative  opinion 
or  charitable  hope.3 

i  5itz?ch  (I.  403  sq.)  includes  also  Gregory  Nazianzen,  and  possibly 
Chrysostom  among  universalists.  So  does  Farrar  more  confidently  (249  sqq.; 
271  sqq,  \  But  the  passages  on  the  other  side  are  stronger,  see  Pusey,  209  sqq., 
244  sqq.,  and  cannot  be  explained  from  mere  "  accommodation  to  the  popular 
view."  It  is  true,  however,  that  Chrysostom  honored  the  memory  of  Origen, 
and  eulogized  his  teacher  Diodorus,  of  Tarsus,  and  his  comments  on  1  Cor. 
15:  25  look  towards  an  apokatastasis.  Pusey  speaks  too  disparagingly  of 
Pirtdor  and  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  as  the  fathers  of  Nestorianism,  and  un- 
ju>tly  asserts  that  they  denied  the  incarnation  (223-226).  They  and  Chrysos- 
tom were  the  fathers  of  a  sound  grammatical  exegesis  against  the  allegorizing 
extravagances  of  the  Origenistic  school. 

2  Pusey  contends  (125-137),  that  Origen  was  condemned  by  the  fifth  (Ecu- 
menical Council,  553,  but  Hefele  conclusively  proves  that  the  fifteen  ana- 
thematisms  against  Origen  were  passed  by  a  local  Synod  of  Constantinople  in 
543  under  Mennas.  See  his  ConriliengescJi.,  second  ed.,  II.  859  sqq.  The  same 
view  was  before  advocated  by  Dupin,  Walch,  and  Dollinger. 

8  At  least  in  the  Lutheran  church  of  Germany  and  in  the  church  of  England 
Btttgel  very  cautiously  intimates  the  apokatastasis,  and  the  Pietists  in  Wurt- 
tmberg  generally  hold  it.  Among  recent  divines  Schleiermacher,  the  Origen 
of  Germany,  is  the  most  distinguished  Universalist.  He  started  not,  like 
Origen,  from  freedom,  but  from  the  opposite  Calvinistic  theory  of  a  particular 
election  of  individuals  and  nations,  which  necessarily  involves  a  particular 
reprobation  or  pretermission  rather,  but  only  for  a  time,  until  the  election  shall 
reach  at  last  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  and  the  whole  of  Israel.  Satan  was 
no  obstacle  with  him,  as  he  denied  his  personal  existence.  A  denomination 
of  recent  American  origin,  the  Universalists,  have  a  creed  of  three  articles 
called  the  Winchester  Confession  (1803),  and  one  article  teaches  the  ultimate 
restoration  of  "the  whole  family  of  mankind  to  holiness  and  happiness*" 


§158.  CHILIASM.  613 


§  158.  CWiami. 

COEBODI:    Zritische    Geschichte    des    Chiliasmus.    1781.    Second   ed. 

Zurich,  1794.    4  vols.    Very  unsatisfactory. 
MusrscHEB :  Lehre  vom  tausendjahrigen  Reich  in  den  3  ersten  Jahrh.  (in 

Eenke's  "Magazin,"  VI.  2,  p.  233  sqq.) 
D.  T.  TAYLOK  :  The  Voice  of  the  Church  on  the  Coming  and  Kingdom  of 

the  Redeemer;  a  History  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Reign  of  Christ  on 

Earth,    Revised  by  Hastings,    Second  ed.    Peace  Dale,  E.  1. 1855. 

Pre-millennial. 

W.  VOLCK:  Der  Chiliasmus.  Mine  historisch-exeget.  Sludie.  Dorpat, 
1869  Millennarian. 

A.  KOCH  :  Das  tausendjahrige  Reich.  Basel,  1872.  Millennarian  against 
Hengstenberg, 

C.  A.  BRIOGS:  Origin  and  History  of  Premillennarianism.  In  the 
"  Lutheran  Quarterly  Review,"  Gettysburg,  Pa.,  for  April,  1879.  38 
pages.  Anti-millennial,  occasioned  by  the  "Prophetic  Conference" 
of  Pre-millennarians,  held  hi  New  York,  Nov.  1878.  Discusses  the 
ante-Nicene  doctrine. 

GEO.  N.  H.  PETERS  :  The  Theocratic  Kingdom  of  our  Lord  Jesus,  the 
Christ.  N.  York,  announced  for  pubL  in  3  Vols.  1884.  Pre-mil- 
lennarian. 

A  complete  critical  history  is  wanting,  but  the  controversial  and 
devotional  literature  on  the  subject  is  very  large,  especially  in  the 
English  language.  We  mention— 1)  on  the  millennial  side  (em- 
bracing widely  different  shades  of  opinion),  (a)  English  and  Ameri- 
can divines :  Jos.  Mede  (1627),  Twisse,  Abbadie,  Beverly  T.  Burnet, 
Bishop  Newton,  Edward  Irving,  Birks,  Bickersteth,  Horatio  and  An- 
drew Bonar  (two  brothers),  E.  B.  Elliott  (Hor&  Apoc.)>  John  Gum- 
ming, Dean  Alford,  Nathan  Lord,  John  Lillie,  James  H.  Brooks, 
E.  R.  Craven,  Nath.  West,  J.  A.  Seiss,  S.  H.  Kellogg,  Peters,  and  the 
writings  of  the  Second  Adventists,  the  Irvin|dtes,  and  the  Plymouth 
Bretliren.  (6)  German  divines:  Spener  (Hoffnung  lesserer  Zeiteri), 
Peterson,  Bengel  (ErJdarte  Offeribarung  Johannis,  1740),  Oetinger, 
Stilling,  Lavater,Auberlen  (on  Dan.  and  IteveL),  Martensen,  Eothe, 
von  Hofmann,  Lohe,  Delit2sch,  Volck,  Luthardt.  2)  On  the 
anti-millennial  side — (a)  English  and  American :  Bishop  Hall,  R. 
Baxter,  David  Brown  ( Christ's  Second  Advent) t  Fairbairn,  Urwickt 
G.  Bush,  Mos.  Stuart  (on  EeveL),  Cowles  (on  Dan.  and  Revel], 
Briggs,  etc.  (b)  German :  Gerhard,  Maresius,  Hengstenberg,  Keil, 
Kliefoth,  Philippi,  and  many  others.  See  the  articles  "  Millennari^ 
anism"  by  Semlsch,  and  "  Pre-Millennarianism "  by  Kellog,  in 
Schaff-Herzog,  vols.  II.  a-nd  IIL,  and  the  literature  there  given. 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

The  most  striking  point  in  the  eschatology  of  the  ante- 
Nicene  age  is  the  prominent  chiliasm,  or  millennarianism,  that 
is  the  belief  of  a  visible  reign  of  Christ  in  glory  on  earth  with 
the  risen  saints  for  a  thousand  years,  before  the  general  resur- 
rection and  judgment.1  It  was  indeed  not  the  doctrine  of  the 
church  embodied  in  any  creed  or  form  of  devotion,  but  a  widely 
current  opinion  of  distinguished  teachers,  such  as  Barnabas, 
Papias,  Justin  Martyr,  Irenseus,  Tertullian,  Methodius,  and 
Lactantitis  ;  while  Cains,  Origen,  Dionysius  the  Great,  Eusebius 
(as  afterwards  Jerome  and  Augustin)  opposed  it. 

The  Jewish  chiliasm  rested  on  a  carnal  misapprehension  of 
the  Messianic  kingdom,  a  literal  interpretation  of  prophetic 
figures,  and  an  overestimate  of  the  importance  of  the  Jewish 
people  and  the  holy  city  as  the  centre  of  that  kingdom.  It  was 
developed  shortly  before  and  after  Christ  in  the  apocalyptic 
literature,  as  the  Book  of  Enoch,  the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch, 
4th  Esdras,  the  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  and  the 
Sibylline  Books.  It  was  adopted  by  the  heretical  sect  of  the 
Ebionites,  and  the  Gnostic  Cerinthus.2 

The  Christian  chiliasm  is  the  Jewish  chiliasm  spiritualized 
and  fixed  upon  the  second,  instead  of  the  first,  coming  of  Christ. 
It  distinguishes,  moreover,  two  resurrections,  one  before  and 
another  after  the  millennium,  and  makes  the  millennial  reign  of 
Christ  only  a  prelude  to  his  eternal  reign  in  heaven,  from  which 
it  is  separated  by  a  short  interregnum  of  Satan.  The  millennium 
is  expected  to  come  not  as  the  legitimate  result  of  a  historical 
process  but  as  a  sudden  supernatural  revelation. 

The  advocates  of  this  theory  appeal  to  the  certain  promises 


1  Chiliasm  (from  ££U<z  by,  a  thousand  years,  Bev.  20s  2,  3)  is  the  Greek, 
mtilennarianism  or  millennidism  (from  mitte  anni)t  the  Latin  term  for  the  same 
theory.  The  adherents  are  called  Chiliasts,  or  MiUennarians,  also  Prfrmitten- 
narians,  or  Pre-mittennialists  (to  indicate  the  belief  that  Christ  will  appear  again 
before  the  millennium),  but  among  them  many  are  counted  who  simply  believe 
in  a  golden  age  of  Christianity  which  is  yet  to  come.  Post-millennanans  or 
Anti-milleniwrians  are  those  who  put  the  Second  Advent  after  the  willenniqni 

JSee  Euseb.  H.  E.  Ill  27  and  28. 


J158.  CHILIASM.  615 

of  the  Lord/  but  particularly  to  the  hieoroglyphic  passage  of 
the  Apocalypse,  which  teaches  a  millennial  leign  of  Christ  upon 
this  earth  after  the  first  resurrection  and  before  the  creation  of 
the  new  heavens  and  the  new  earth.2 

In  connection  with  this  the  general  expectation  prevailed  that 
the  return  of  the  Lord  was  near,  though  uncertain  and  unascer- 
tainable  as  to  its  day  and  hour,  so  that  believers  may  be  always 
ready  for  it.3  This  hope,  through  the  whole  age  of  persecution, 
was  a  copious  fountain  of  encouragement  and  comfort  under  "the 
pains  of  that  martyrdom  which  sowed  in  blood  the  seed  of  a 
bountiful  harvest  for  the  church. 

Among  the  Apostolic  Fathers  BARNABAS  is  the  first  and  the 
only  one  who  expressly  teaches  a  pre-millennial  reign  of  Christ 
on  earth.  He  considers  the  Mosaic  history  of  the  creation  a 
type  of  six  ages  of  labor  for  the  world,  each  lasting  a  thousand 
years,  and  of  a  millennium  of  rest ;  since  with  God  "  one  day  is 
as  a  thousand  years."  The  millennial  sabbath  on  earth  will  be 
followed  by  an  eighth  and  eternal  day  in  a  new  world,  of 
which  the  Lord's  Day  (called  by  Barnabas  "the  eighth  day")  is 
the  type.4 

PAPIAS  of  Hierapolis,  a  pious  but  credulous  cotemporary  of 
Polycarp,  entertained  quaint  and  extravagant  notions  of  the 

*  Matt.  5 :  4 ;  19 :  28 ;  Luke  14 :  12  sqq. 

3  Rev.  20 :  1-6.  This  is  the  only  strictly  millennarian  passage  in  the  whole 
Bible.  Commentators  are  still  divided  as  to  the  literal  or  symbolical  meaning 
of  the  millennium,  and  as  to  its  beginning  in  the  past  or  in  the  future.  Bat  a 
number  of  other  passages  are  drawn  into  the  service  of  the  millennarian 
theory,  as  affording  indirect  support,  especially  Isa.  11:  4^9;  Acts  3:  21 1 
Rom.  11:  15.  Modern  Pre-millennarians  also  appeal  to  what  they  call  the 
unfulfilled  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament  regarding  the  restoration  of  the 
Jews  in  the  holy  land.  But  the  ancient  Chiliasts  applied  those  prophecies  to 
the  Christian  church  as  the  true  Israel. 

8  Comp.  Matt.  24:  33,  36;  Mark  13:  32;  Acts  1:  7;  1  Thess,  5:  1,  2;  2 
Pet  3:  10;  Eev.l:  3;  3:  3. 

*  Barn.  J&pist,  ch.  15.    He  seems  to  have  drawn  his  views  from  Ps.  90 : 4, 
2  Pet.  3:  8,  but  chiefly  from  Jewish  tradition.     He  does  not  quote  the 
Apocalypse.     See  Otto    in   Hilgenfeld's  "Zeitschrift  fur  wissenschafiliche 
Theologie,"  1877,  p.  525-529,  and  Funk's  note  in  Pair.  Apott.  L  46. 


616  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

happiness  of  the  millennial  reign,  for  which  he  appealed  to 
apostolic  tradition.  He  put  into  the  mouth  of  Christ  himself  a 
highly  figurative  description  of  the  more  than  tropical  fertility 
of  that  period,  which  is  preserved  and  approved  by  Irenseus, 
but  sounds  very  apocryphal.1 

JUSTIX  ]\IARTYR  represents  the  transition  from  the  Jewish 
Christian  to  the  Gentile  Christian  chiliasm.  He  speaks  re- 
peatedly of  the  second  parousia  of  Christ  in  the  clouds  of 
heaven,  surrounded  by  the  holy  angels.  It  will  be  preceded  by 
the  near  manifestation  of  the  man  of  sin  (foftpamot;  rr^  d.vo/j.taz) 
who  speaks  blasphemies  against  the  most  high  God,  and  will 
rule  three  and  a  half  years.  He  is  preceded  by  heresies  and 
false  prophets.2  Christ  will  then  raise  the  patriarchs,  prophets, 

1  Adv.  HOST.  V.  33,  2  3  (ed.  Stieren  I.  809),  quoted  from  the  fourth  book  of 
"The  Orades  of  the  Lord:1'  4fThe  days  will  come  when  vines  shall  grow, 
each  having  ten  thousand  branches,  and  in  each  branch  ten  thousand  twig?, 
and  in  each  true  twig  ten  thousand  shoots,  and  in  every  one  of  the  shoots  ten 
thousand  clusters,  and  on  every  one  of  the  clusters  ten  thousand  grapes,  and 
every  grape  when  pressed  will  give  five-and-twenty  measures  of  wine.  And 
when  any  one  of  the  saints  shall  lay  hold  of  a  cluster,  another  shall  cry  out, 
'  I  am  a  better  cluster,  take  me ;  bless  the  Lord  through  me.'  In  like  manner 
[He  said],  *  that  a  grain  of  wheat  shall  produce  ten  thousand  ears,  and  that 
every  ear  shall  have  ten  thousand  grains,  and  every  grain  shall  yield  ten 
pounds  of  pure,  fine  flour ;  and  that  apples,  and  seeds,  and  grass  shall  pro- 
duce in  similar  proportions;  and  that  all  animals,  feeding  on  the  produc- 
tions of  the  earth,  shall  then  live  in  peace  and  harmony,  and  be  in 
perfect  subjection  to  man,7 )?  These  words  were  communicated  to  Papias  by 
"the  presbyters,  who  saw  John  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,"  and  who  remem- 
bered having  heard  them  from  John  as  coming  from  the  Lord.  There  is  a 
similar  description  of  the  Messianic  times  in  the  twenty-ninth  chapter  of  the 
Apocalypse  of  Baruch,  from  the  close  of  the  first  or  beginning  of  the  second 
century,  as  follows:  "The  earth  shall  yield  its  fruits,  one  producing  ten 
thousand,  and  in  one  vine  shall  be  a  thousand  bunches,  and  one  bunch  shall 
produce  one  thousand  grapes,  and  one  grape  shall  produce  one  thousand  ber- 
ries, and  one  berry  shall  yield  a  measure  of  wine.  And  those  who  have  been 
hungry  shall  rejoice,  and  they  shall  again  see  prodigies  every  day.  For  spirits 
shall  go  forth  from  my  sight  to  bring  every  morning  the  fragrance  of  spices, 
and  at  the  end  of  the  day  clouds  dropping  the  dew  of  health.  And  it  shall 
come  to  pass,  at  that  time,  that  the  treasure  of  manna  shall  again  descend 
from  above,  and  they  shall  eat  of  it  in  these  years."  See  the  Latin  in 
Fritzsche's  ed.  of  the  Libri  Apoc.  V.  T.,  p.  666. 

*  Dial  c.  Tryph.  c.  32,  51,  HO.    Comp.  Dan.  7 :  25  and  2  Thess.  2 :  8. 


8158.  CHILIASM.  617 

and  pions  Jews,  establish  the  millennium,  restore  Jerusalem, 
and  reign  there  in  the  midst  of  his  saints;  after  which  the 
second  and  general  resurrection  and  judgment  of  the  world  will 
take  place.  He  regarded  this  expectation  of  the  earthly  per- 
fection of  Christ's  kingdom  as  the  key-stone  of  pure  doctrine, 
but  adds  that  many  pure  and  devout  Christians  of  his  day  did 
not  share  this  opinion.1  After  the  millennium  the  world  will 
be  annihilated,  or  transformed.2  In  his  two  Apologies,  Justin 
teaches  the  usual  view  of  the  general  resurrection  and  judgment, 
and  makes  no  mention  of  the  millennium,  but  does  not  exclude 
it.3  The  other  Greek  Apologists  are  silent  on  the  subject,  and 
cannot  be  quoted  either  for  or  against  chiliasm. 

IREKZEUS,  on  the  strength  of  tradition  from  St.  John  and  his 
disciples,  taught  that  after  the  destruction  of  the  Eoman  em- 
pire, and  the  brief  raging  of  antichrist  (lasting  three  and  a 
half  years  or  1260  days),  Christ  will  visibly  appear,  will 
bind  Satan,  will  reign  at  the  rebuilt  -  city  of  Jerusalem 

with  the  little  band   of  faithful  confessors  and  the  host  of 

n 

risen  martyrs  over  the  nations  of  the  earth,  and  will  celebrate 
the  millennial  sabbath  of  preparation  for  the  eternal  glory  of 

1  Dial.  c.  80  and  81.    He  appeals  to  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  (65:  17  sqq.), 
Ezekiel,  Ps.  90 :  4f  and  the  Apocalypse  of  "  a  man  named  John,  one  of  the 
apostles  of  Christ."    In  another  passage,  Died.  c.  113,  Justin  says  that  as 
Joshua  led  Israel  into  the  holy  land  and  distributed  it  among  the  tribeg,  so 
Christ  will  convert  the  diaspora  and  distribute  the  goodly  land,  yet  not  as  an 
earthly  possession,  but  give  us  ((rjfiiv)  an  eternal  inheritance.    He  will  shine 
in  Jerusalem  as  the  eternal  light,  for  he  is  the  King  of  Salem  after  the  order 
of  Melchisedek,  and  the  eternal  priest  of  the  Most  High,    But  he  makes  no 
mention  of  the  loosing  of  Satan  after  the  millennium.    Comp.  the  discussion  of 
Justin's  eschatology  by  M.  von  Engelhardt,  Das  Ckristenthum  Jitstins  des  Mart. 
(1878),  p.  302-307,  and  by  Donaldson,  Grit.  Hist,  of  Christ.  Lit.  II.  316-322. 

2  This  point  is  disputed.    Semisch  contends  for  annihilation,  Weizsacker  for 
transformation,  von  Engelhardt  (p.  309)  leaves  the  matter  undecided.    In  the 
Did.  c.  113  Justin  says  that  God  through  Christ  will  renew  (Kawovp-yelv)  the 
heaven  and  the  earth ;  in  the  Apologies,  that  the  world  will  be  burnt  up. 

3  Apol.  I.  50,  51,  52.    For  this  reason  Donaldson  (II.  263),  and  Dr.  Briggs 
(I  c.  p.  21)  suspect  that  the  chiliastic  passages  in  the  Dialogue  (at  least  ch.  Si) 
are  an  interpolation,  or  corrupted,  but  without  any  warrant.    The  omission  of 
Justin  in  Jerome's  lists  of  Chiliasts  can  prove  nothing  against  the  testimony 
of  all  the  manuscripts. 


618  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-31L 

heaven;  then,  after  a  temporary  liberation  of  Satan,  follows 
the  final  victory,  the  general  resurrection,  the  judgment  of  the 
world,  and  the  consummation  in  the  new  heavens  and  the  new 
earth.1 

TEBTULLIAN  was  an  enthusiastic  Chiliast,  and  pointed  not 
only  to  the  Apocalypse,  but  also  to  the  predictions  of  the  Mon- 
tanist  prophets.2  But  the  Montanists  substituted  Pepuza  in 
Phiygia  for  Jerusalem,  as  the  centre  of  Christ's  reign,  and  ran 
into  fanatical  excesses,  which  brought  chiliasm  into  discredit, 
and  resulted  in  its  condemnation  by  several  synods  in  Asia 
Minor.3 

After  Tertullian,  and  independently  of  Montanism,  chiliasm 
was  taught  by  COM^TODIAN  towards  the  close  of  the  third 
century,4  LACTAXirus,5  and  VicroRimrs  of  Petau,6  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  fourth.  Its  last  distinguished  advocates  in  the 
East  were  METHODIUS  (d.,  a  martyr,  311),  the  opponent  of 
Origen,7  and  APOLLINAEIS  of  Laodicea  in  Syria. 

We  now  turn  to  the  a$ti-Chiliasts.  The  opposition  began 
during  the  Montanist  movement  in  Asia  Minor.  Caius  of 
Rome  attacked  both  Chiliasm  and  Montanism,  and  traced  the 
former  to  the  hated  heretic  Cerinthus.8  The  Roman  church 
seems  never  to  have  sympathized  with  either,  and  prepared 
itself  for  a  comfortable  settlement  and  normal  development  in 
this  world.  In  Alexandria,  Origen  opposed  chiliasm  as  a 

i  Adr.  Ear.  V.  23-36.  On  the  eschatology  of  Irenams  see  Ziegler,  Iren.  der 
B.  ».  Lyon  (Berl.  1871),  293-320;  and  Kirehner,  Die  Escftatol.  d  Iren.  in  the 
"Studien  und  Kritiken"  for  1863,  p.  315-358, 

*  De  Ees.  Cam.  25  ,•  Adv.  Mars.  III.  24;  IV.  29,  etc.  He  discussed  the  sub- 
ject in  a  special  work,  De  Spe  Fidelium>  which  is  lost 


*  Instruct,  adv.  Gentium  Dm,  43,  44,  with  the  Jewish  notion  of  fruitful  mil- 
lennial marriages. 

*  Instit.  V1L  24;  JBpti.  71,  72.    He  quotes  from  the  Sibylline  books,  and  ex 
pects  the  speedy  end  of  -the  world,  bnt  not  while  the  city  of  Borne  remains. 

6  In  his  Commentary  on  Eevelation,  and  the  fragment  De  Fabrica  Mwdi 
(part  of  a  Com.  on  Genesis).    Jerome  classes  him  among  the  Chiliasts. 

*  In  his  Banquet  of  the  Ten  Virgins,  IX.  5,  and  Discourse  on  Revurrertion. 

*  Euseb.  JET.  E.  II.  25  (against  the  Montanist  Pioclus),  and  HI.  28  (against 
chili  asm)% 


$158.  CHIl^IASM.  619 

Jewish  dream,  and  spiritualized  the  symbolical  language  of  the 
prophets.1  His  distinguished  pupil,  Dionysius  the  Great  (d. 
about  264),  checked  the  chiliastic  movement  when  it  was  re- 
vived by  Nepos  in  Egypt,  and  wrote  an  elaborate  work  against 
it,  which  is  lost.  He  denied  the  Apocalypse  to  the  apostle 
John,  and  ascribed  it  to  a  presbyter  of  that  name.2  Eusebios 
inclined  to  the  same  view. 

But  the  crushing  blow  came  from  the  great  change  in  the 
social  condition  and  prospects  of  the  church  in  the  Xicene  age. 
After  Christianity,  contrary  to  all  expectation,  triumphed  in  the 
Roman  empire,  and  was  embraced  by  the  Caesars  themselves, 
the  millennial  reign,  instead  of  being  anxiously  waited  and 
prayed  for,  began  to  be  dated  either  from  the  first  appearance 
of  Christ,  or  from  the  conversion  of  Constantine  and  the  down- 
fall of  paganism,  and  to  be  regarded  as  realized  in  the  glory  of 
the  dominant  imperial  state-church.  Augustin,  who  himself 
had  formerly  entertained  chiliastic  hopes,  framed  the  new  theory 
which  reflected  the  social  change,  and  was  generally  accepted. 
The  apocalyptic  millennium  he  understood  to  be  the  present 
reign  of  Christ  in  the  Catholic  church,  and  the  first  resurrection, 
the  translation  of  the  martyrs  and  saints  to  heaven,  where  they 
participate  in  Christ's  reign.3  It  was  consistent  with  this  theory 
that  towards  the  close  of  the  first  millennium  of  the  Christian 
era  there  was  a  wide-spread  expectation  in  Western  Europe  that 
the  final  judgment  was  at  hand. 

From,  the  time  of  Constantine  and  Augustin  chiliasm  took  its 
place  among  the  heresies,  and  was  rejected  subsequently  even  by 
the  Protestant  reformers  as  a  Jewish  dream.4  But  it  was  re- 

1  De  jFHnc.  II.  11.  He  had,  however,  in  view  a  very  sensuous  idea  of  the 
millennium  with  marriages  and  luxuriant  feasts. 

*  Euseb.  Vn.  2^  25.  8  De  CLV&  Lei,  XX.  6-10. 

4  The  Augsburg  Confession,  Art.  XYH.,  condemns  the  Anabaptists  and 
others  "  who  now  scatter  Jewish  opinions  that,  before  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  the  godly  shall  occupy  the  kingdom  of  the  world,  the  wicked  being 
everywhere  suppressed."  The  41st  of  the  Anglican  Articles,  drawn  up  by 
Cranmer  (1553),  but  omitted  afterwards  in  the  revision  under  Elizabeth  (1563)» 
describes  the  millennium  as  "  a  fable  of  Jewish  dotage," 


620  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

vived  from  time  to  time  as  an  article  of  faith  and  hope  by  pious 
individuals  and  whole  sects,  often  in  connection  with  historic 
pessimism,  with  distrust  in  mission  work,  as  carried  on  by 
human  agencies,  with  literal  interpretations  of  prophecy,  and 
with  peculiar  notions  about  Antichrist,  the  conversion  and 
restoration  of  the  Jews,  their  return  to  the  Holy  Land,  and  also 
«ith  abortive  attempts  to  calculate  "  the  times  and  seasons  "  of 
the  Second  Advent,  which  "  th"e  Father  hath  put  in  his  own 
power "  (Acts  1 :  7),  and  did  not  choose  to  reveal  to  his  own 
Son  in  the  days  of  his  flesh.  In  a  free  spiritual  sense,  however, 
millennarianism  will  always  survive  as"  the  hope  of  a  golden 
age  of  the  church  on  earth,  and  of  a  great  sabbath  of  history 
after  its  many  centuries  of  labor  and  strife.  The  church  mili- 
tant ever  longs  after  the  church  triumphant,  and  looks  "for 
new  heavens  and  a  new  earth,  wherein  dwelleth  righteousness  " 
(2  Pet.  3 :  13).  "  There  remaineth  a  sabbath  rest  for  the  people 
-fGod."  (Heb.  4:  9). 


CHAPTER 

ECCLESIASTICAL  LITEEATURE  OF  THE  ANTE-KICENE  AGE, 
BIOGRAPHICAL  SKETCHES  OF  THE  CHURCH-FATHERS. 

§  159.  Literature. 

I,  General  Patristic  Collections. 

The  Benedictine  editions,  repeatedly  published  in  Paris,  Venice,  etc.,  are 
the  best  as  far  as  they  go,  but  do  not  satisfy  the  present  state  of 
criticism.  Jesuits  (Petavius,  Sirmond,  Harduin),  and  Dominicans 
(Combefis,  Le  Quieu)  have  also  published  several  fathers.  These 
and  more  recent  editions  are  mentioned  in  the  respective  sections. 
Of  patristic  collections  the  principal  ones  are : 

MAXIMA  BIBLIOTHECA  veterum  Patrum,  etc.  Lugd.  1677,  27  torn.  fol. 
Contains  the  less  voluminous  writers,  and  only  in  the  Latin  trans- 
lation. 

A.  GALLANDI  (Andreas  Gallandius,  Oratorian,  d.  1779):  Bibliotheca 
QrcEco-Latina  veterum  Patrum,  etc.  Yen.  1765-88,  14  torn.  fol. 
Contains  in  all  380  ecclesiastical  writers  (180  more  than  the  Bibl 
Max.]  in  Greek  and  Latin,  with  valuable  dissertations  and  notes. 

ABB£  MIGNE  (Jacques  Paul,  b.  1800,  founder  of  the  Ultramontane 
U  Univers  religeux  and  the  Cath.  printing  establishment  at  Mont- 
rouge,  consumed  by  fire  1868) :  Patrologiae  cursus  completus  sive 
Bibliotheca  universalis,  Integra,  uniformis,  commoda,  oeconomica, 
omnium  SS.  Patrum,  Doctorum,  Scriptorumque  ecclesiasticorum. 
Petit  Montrouge  (near  Paris),  1844-1866  (Garnier  FreTes).  The 
cheapest  and  most  complete  patristic  library,  but  carelessly 
edited,  and  often  inaccurate,  reaching  down  to  the  thirteenth 
century,  the  Latin  in  222,  the  Greet  in  167  vols.,  reprinted  from  the 
Bened.  and  other  good  editions,  with  Prolegomena,  Vitae,  Disser- 
tations, Supplements,  etc.  Some  of  the  plates  were  consumed  by  fire 
in  1868,  but  have  been  replaced.  To  be  used  with  great  caution. 

Abbe  HOROY  :  Bibliotheca  Patristica  ab  anno  MCCXVI.  usque  ad  Con- 
cilii  Ti-identini  Tempora.  Paris,  1879  sqq.  A  continuation  of  Migne. 
Belongs  to  mediaeval  history. 

A  new  and  critical  edition  of  the  Latin  Fathers  has  been  under- 
taken by  the  Imperial  Academy  of  Vienna  in  1866,  under  the  title: 
Corpus  scriptorum  ecclesiasticorum  Latinorum.  The  first  volume 
contains  the  works  of  Sulpicius  Severus,  ed.  by  C.  HALM,  1866;  the 
second  Minucius  Felix  and  Jul.  Firmicus  Maternus,  by  the  same, 

621 


622  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

1S6T;  Cyprian  by  HARTEL,  1876;  Arnobius  by  REIFFERSCHEXD  ; 
Coinmodianus  by  DOUBART  ;  Salvianus  by  PATJLY  ;  Oassianus  by 
PETiSCHENiG  ;  Priscilliau  by  SCHEPSS,  etc.  So  far  18  vols.  from  1866 
io  1SS9. 

A  new  and  critical  edition  of  the  Greek  fathers  is  still  more 
needed. 

Handy  editions  of  the  older  fathers  by  OBBETHUE,  EICHTEB, 

vjEIWDUllF,  etc. 

Special  collections  of  patristic  fragments  by  GRABE  (Spicilegium 
Pafram  .  EoiTH  \Rdiquiae  Sacrae),  ANGELO  MAI  (Svriptorum  vet. 
now  Ojlle^tu.,  Rom.  ISlft-'SS,  10  t;  SpidUgium  roman.  1839-44, 1A 
t. ;  X'tra  Pat  mm  BiMMeca,  1852  sqq.  7  t.) ;  Card.  PlTRA  (Spid- 
kyliuii  S'dfsntt'Hiie,  LSo2  sqq.  5  t.j,  LlVERANi  (Spieikg.  Jjiberianum, 
!.<*>"  ,  and  others. 

1  i.  *<j'  trait  Collections  of  the  ante-Nicene  Fathers. 
PATRES  APOSTOLICT,  best  critical  editions,  one  Protestant  by  OSCAR  VON 
GEBHARDT,  HARNACK,  and  ZAHN  (ed.  IL  Lips.  1876-'78,  in  3 
parts) ;  another  by  HILGENFELD  (ed.  IL  Lips.  1876  sqq.  in  several 
parts) ;  one  by  Bp.  LIGHTPOOT  (Lond.  1869  sqq.) ;  and  one,  R  Catho- 
lic, by  Bp.  HEFELE,  fifth  ed.  by  Prof.  FUNK,  Tiibingen  (1878  and  '81, 
2  rob.).  See?  161. 

CORPCS  APOLOGETAROI  OHRISTIANORTJM:  SECULI  n. ,  ED.  Giro.  Jenae, 
1847-'oO ;  Ed  III.  1876  sqq.  A  new  critical  ed.  by  0.  v.  GEB- 
HARDT  and  E.  SCHWARTZ.  Lips.  1888  sqq. 

ROBERTS  and  DOXALDSOX  :  Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library.    Edinburgh 
1857-1872.    54  vols.    Authorized  reprint,  N.  York,  1885-'S6,  8  vok 
III.  Biographical,  critical ',  doctrinal.    Patristics  and  Patrology 

ST.  JEROME  •  d.  419 ) :  De  Viris  ittustribus.  Comprises,  in  135  numbers, 
brief  notices  of  the  biblical  and  ecclesiastical  authors,  down  to  A.  D. 
3f$.  Continuations  by  GEKXADIUS  (490),  ISIDOR  (636),  ILPEFOKS 
(067 ',  and  others. 

PHOTirs  •'  d.  800) :  llvptopi/faw,  n  pLfaofyw,  ed.  J.  £echr,  Berol,  1824,  2 
t.  fo!.,  and  in  Migne,  PnoL  Opera,  t.  III.  and  IV.  Extracts  of  280 
Greek  author^  heathen  and  Christian,  whose  works  are  partly  lost. 
See  a  full  account  in  Hergenro'ther's  Photius,  III.  13-31. 

BELLARMIX  (R.  C.) :  Liber  de  scriptoribus  ecclesiastics  (from  the  0.  T, 
ro  A.  D.  1500).  Rom.  1613  and  often. 

TILLEMONT  (R.  C.) :  Memoirs  pour  servir  h  I'histoire  eccles.  Par.  1693 
sqq.  1*)  vols.  The  first  six  centuries. 

L  E.  Drrix  (R.  C.  d.  1719) :  NouvcUe  BibliotJieque  des  auteurs  ecclesias- 
tiqites,  contenant  TJiistoire  de  leur  vie,  etc.  Par.  1688-1715,  47  vols. 
8°,  with  continuations  by  Coujet,  Petit-Didier  to  the  18th  century, 
and  Critiques  of  R.  Simon,  61  vols.,  9th  ed.  Par.  1698  sqq. ;  another 
edition,  but  incomplete,  AmsteL  1690-1713,  20  vols.  4°. 


1 159.  LITERATURE.  623 

REMI  ^EILLIER  (R.  0.  d.  1761) :  Eistoire  generate  'des  auteurs  sacres  et 
ecclesiastiques.  Par.  1729-'63,  23  vols.  4° ;  new  ed.  with  addifons, 
Par.  1858-1865  in  14  vols.  More  complete  and  exact,  but  less  liberal 
than  Dnpin ;  extends  to  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century. 

WILL.  CAVE  (Anglican,  d.  1713) :  Scriptorium,  ecclesiasticorum  Historia 
literaria,  a  Chriito  nato  usque  ad  saecul.  XIV.  Lond.  1688-98,  2 
vols. ;  Geneva,  1720 ;  Colon.  1722 ;  best  edition  superintend  '-d  by 
WATERLA^D,  Oxf.  1740-43,  reprinted  at  Basle  1741-'45.  This  work 
is  arranged  in  the  centuriat  style  (saeculum  Apostolicum,  s.  Gnos- 
ticum,  s.  Novatianum,  s.  Arianum,  s.  Xestorianum,  s.  Eutychianum, 
s..  Monotbeleticum,  etc.)  W.  CAVE:  Lives  of  the  most  "minent 
fathers  of  the  church  that  flourished  in  the  first  four  centuries.  Best 
ed.  revised  by  HENRY  CABY.  Oxf,  1840,  3  vols. 

CHAS.  OTJDIN  (first  a  monk,  then  a  Protestant,  librarian  to  the  Uni- 
versity at  Ley  den,  died  1717) :  Commentarius  de  scrip  foribus  ecdesiae 
antiquis  illorumque  scriptis,  a  Bellarmino,  Pessevino,  Caveo,  Dupin  et 
aliis  omissfe,  ad  ann.  1460.  Lips.  1722.  3  vols.  fol. 

JOHN  ALB.  FABRICIUS  ("the  most  learned,  the  most  voluminous  and  the 
most  useful  of  bibliographers/*  born  at  Leipsic  1668.  Prof,  of  Elo- 
quence at  Hamburg,  died  1736):  Bibliotheca  Graeca,  sive  notitia 
scriptorum  veterum  Graecorum  ;  ed.  III.  Hamb.  1718-'2S,  14  vols. ; 
ed.  IV.  by  G.  CHK.  HASLESS,  with  additions.  Hamb.  1790-1811, 
in  12  vols.  (incomplete).  This  great  work  of  forty  years'  labor  em- 
Draces  all  the  Greek  writers  to  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  but  is  inconveniently  arranged.  (A  valuable  supplement 
to  it  is  S.  F.  G.  HOFFMANN  :  BiUiograpMsches  Lexicon  der  gesamm- 
ten  Literatur  der  Chechen.  Leipz.  3  vols.),  2nd  ed.  1844-?45.  J.  A. 
FABRICIUS  published  also  a  Bibliotheca  Latino,  mediae  et  infimae 
aetatis,  Hamb.  1734-'46,  in  6  vols.  (enlarged  by  MOMI,  Padua,  1754, 
3  torn.),  and  a  Bibliotheca  ecolesiastica,  Hamb.  1718,  in  1  vol.  fol., 
which  contains  the  catalogues  of  ecclesiastical  authors  by  Jerome, 
Gennadius,  Isidore,  Ildefondus,  Trithemius  (d.  1515)  and  others. 

0.  T.  G.  ScEOiraaiAOT :  Bibliotheca  historico-literaria  patrum  Latinorum 
a  TertuUiano  usque  ad  Gregorium  J/.  et  Isidorum  ffispalensem.  Lips. 
1792,  2  vols.  A  continuation  of  Fabricius'  Biblioth.  Lat 

G.  LUMPER  (R.  C.) :  Efistoria  theologico-critica  de  vita,scriptis  et  doctrina 
S&.  Patrum  trium  primarum  saeculorum.  Aug.  Vind.  1783-J99, 
13  t.  8°. 

A.  M6HLEB  (R.  C.  d.  1838) :  Patrologie,  oder  christliche  Literdrgeschichte. 
Edited  by  REITHMAYER.  Regensb.  1840,  vol.  I.  Covers  only  the 
first  three  centuries. 

J.  FESSLEB  (R.  C.) :  Institutiones  patrologicae.    Oenip.  1850-~'52,2vol6. 

J.  0.  P.  BAHB  :  Geschickte  der  rmischen  Literatur.  Karlsruhe,  1336, 
4th  ed.  1868. 


624  SECOXD  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

FR.  BSHRIOTER  (d.  1879)  :    Die  Kirche  Christi  u.  ihre  Zeugen,  oder  die 

K  G.  in  Biographien.    Ziir.  1842  (2d  ed.  1861  sqq.  and  1873  sqq.), 

2  vols.  in  7  parts  (to  the  sixteenth  century). 
JOH.  ALZOG  (E.  C.,  Pro£  in  Freiburg,  d.  1878)  :  Grundriss  der  Patrologie 

oder  der  dlteren  chmtl    Literargeschichte.    Frieburg,  1866;  second 

ed.  1869;  third  ed.  187G;  fourth  ed.  1888. 
JAMES  DO^ALDSO^T  :  A  Critical  History  of  Christian  Literature  and  "Doc- 

trine from  the  death  of  the  jostles  to  the  Nicene  CoundL    London, 

18(3*t-'G6.    3  vols.    Very  valuable,  but  unfinished. 
Jos.  SCHWAKE  (R.  0.)  :  Dogmengeschichte  der  patristischen  Zeit.    Miin- 

ster,  1866. 
ADOLF  EBEET  :  Geschichte  der  christlich-lateinischen  Literatur  von  ihren 

Anfangen  bis  zum  Zeitalter  Karls  des  Grossen.    Leipzig,  1872  (624 

pages).    The  first  vol.  of  a  larger  work  on  the  general  history  of 

mediaeval  literature.    The  second  vol.  (1880)  contains  the  literature 

from  Charlemagne  to  Charles  the  Bald. 
Jos.  XIRSCHL  (R.  C.)  :  Lehrluch  der  Patrologie  und  Patristik.    Mainz. 

Vol.  1.  1S81  (VI.  and  384). 
<*EORGB  A.  JACKSOX:  Early  Christian  Literature  Primers,     N.  York, 

Ife79-1883,  in  4  little  vok,  containing  ex  tracts  *ro:u  the  iatherd. 
FR.  TV.  FARRAR  :  Lives  of  the  Fathers.     Sketches  of  Church  History  in 
Lond.  and  N.  York,  1889,  2  vols. 


RT.  On  the  Authority  and  Use  of  the  Fathers. 

DALIAECS  'Daille,  Calvinist):  De  usuPatrum  in  decidendts  controi/xsvis. 

Gent'v.  1656  fand  often).    Against  the  superstitious  and  slavish  E. 

Catholic  overvaluation  of  the  fathers. 
J.  TV.  EBEEL  (R.  C.)  :  Leitfaden  zum  Studium  der  Patrologie.    Augsb. 

1854. 
J.  J.  BLOT  (Anglican)  :    The  Eight  Use  of  the  Early  Fathers.    Lond, 

1857,  3rd  ed.  1859.    Confined  to  the  first  three  centuries,  and  largely 

polemical  against  the  depreciation  of  the  fathers,  by  DaillS,  Bar- 

bevrat,  and  Gibbon. 


v 


On  the  Philosophy  of  the  Fathers. 


H.  BITTER:    Geschichte  der  christl.  Phibsophie.     Hamb.  1841  sqq. 

2  vols. 
JOH.  HUBER  (d.  1879  as  an  Old  Catholic) :  Die  Philosophic  der  Eirchen- 

tater.    Mfinchen,  1859. 
A.  STOCKL  (R.  C.) :   Geschichte  der  Philosophic  der  patristischen  Zett. 

TVurzb.  1858,  2  vols. ;  and  Geschichte  der  Philosophic  des  Mittelatters. 

Mainz,  1864-1866.    3  vols. 

.  UEBERWEG.  History  of  Philosophy  (EngL  transl.  by  Morris  & 

Porter).    N.  Y.  1876  (first  vol.). 


\  160.  A  GENERAL  ESTIMATE  OF  THE  FATHERS.       625 

71,  Patristic  Dictionaries. 

J.  C.  SUICER  (i  in  Zurich,  1660) :  Thesaurus  ecdesiasticm  e  Patribus 
Graecis.  Amstel.,  1682,  second  ed.,  much  improved,  1728.  2  vols. 
fol.  (with  a  new  title  page.  Utr.  1746). 

Du  CANGE  (Car.  Dufresne  a  Benedictine,  d.  1C88) :  Gloxsarium  ad  scrip- 
tores  mediae  et  nifimae  Graecitatis.  Lugd.  16SS.  2  vols.  By  the 
same :  Glossariwn  ad  scriptores  mediae  et  infimae  Latinitatis.  Par. 
1681,  again  1733,  6  vols.  fol.,  re-edited  by  Carpenter  1766,  4  vols., 
and  by  Henschel,  Par.  1840-' 50,  7  vok  A  revised  English  edition 
of  DuCange  by  E.  A.  Dayman  was  announced  for  publication  by 
John  Murray  (London),  but  has  not  yet  appeared,  in  1889. 

E.  A.  SOPHOCLES  :  A  glossary  of  Latin  and  Byzantine  Greek.  Boston, 
1860,  enlarged  ed.  1870.  A  new  ed.  by  Jos.  H.  Thayer,  1888. 

G.  KOFFMANE  :  Geschichte  des  Kircheiilateins.    Breslau,  ]S79sqq. 

WM.  SMITH  and  HENRY  WACE  (Anglicans)  :  A  Dictionary  of  Christian 
Biography^  Literature,  Sects  and  Doctrines.  London,  vol.  I.  1877- 
1887,  4  vols.  By  far  the  best  patristic  biographical  Dictionary  in  the 
English  or  any  other  language.  A  noble  monument  of  the  learning 
of  the  Church  of  England. 

E.  0.  RICHARDSON  (Hartford,  Conn.):  Bibliographical  Synopsis  of  th* 
Ante-Nicene  Fathers.  An  appendix  to  the  Am  Ed.  of  the  Ante-Nicene 
Fathers,  N.  York,  1887.  Very  complete. 

§  160.  A  General  Estimate  «f  the  Fathers. 

As  Christianity  is  primarily  a  religion  of  diyine  facts,  and  a 
new  moral  creation,  the  literary  and  scientific  element  in  its  his- 
tory held,  at  first,  a  secondary  and  subordinate  place.  Of  the 
apostles,  Paiul  alone  received  a  learned  education,  and  even  he 
made  his  rabbinical  culture  and  great  natural  talents  subservient 
to  the  higher  spiritual  knowledge  imparted  to  him  by  revelation. 
But  for  the  very  reason  that  it  is  a  new  life,  Christianity  must 
produce  also  a  new  science  and  literature ;  partly  from  the  in- 
herent impulse  of  faith  towards  deeper  and  clearer  knowledge 
of  its  object  for  its  own  satisfaction ;  partly  from  the  demands 
of  self-preservation  against  assaults  from  without ;  partly  from 
the  practical  want  of  instruction  and  direction  for  the  people. 
The  church  also  gradually  appropriated  the  classical  culture, 
and  made  it  tributary  to  her  theology.  Throughout  the  middle 
ages  she  was  almost  the  sole  vehicle  and  guardian  of  literature 

and  art,  and  she  is  the  mother  of  the  best  elements  of  ih.9 
Vol.  IT.— 40 


626  SECOOT  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

modern  European  and  American  civilization.  TVe  have  already 
treated  of  the  mighty  intellectual  labor  of  our  period  on  the 
field  of  apologetic,  polemic,  and  dogmatic  theology.  In  this 
section  we  have  to  do  with  patrology,  or  the  biographical  and 
bibliographical  matter  of  the  ancient  theology  and  literature. 

The  ecclesiastical  learning  of  the  first  sis  centuries  was  cast 
almost  entirely  in  the  mould  of  the  Graeco-Roman  culture. 
The  earliest  church  fathers,  even  Clement  of  Rome,  Hermas, 
and  Hippolytus,  who  lived  and  labored  in  and  about  Rome, 
used  the  Greek  language,  after  the  example  of  the  apostles, 
with  such  modifications  as  the  Christian  ideas  required.  Not 
till  the  end  of  the  second  century,  and  then  not  in  Italy,  but  in 
North  Africa,  did  the  Latin  language  also  become,  through 
Tertullian,  a  medium  of  Christian  science  and  literature.  The 
Latin  church,  however,  continued  for  a  long  time  dependent  on 
the  learning  of  the  Greek.  The  Greek  church  was  more  ex- 
citable, speculative,  and  dialectic ;  the  Latin  more  steady,  prac- 
tical, and  devoted  to  outward  organization;  though  we  have 
on  both  sides  striking  exceptions  to  this  rule,  in  the  Greek 
Chrysostom,  who  was  the  greatest  pulpit  orator,  and  the  Latin 
Augustin,  who  was  the  profoundest  speculative  theologian  among 
the  fathers. 

The  patristic  literature  in  general  falls  considerably  below  the 
classical  in  elegance  of  form,  but  far  surpasses  it  in  the  sterling 
quality  of  its  matter.  It  wears  the  servant  form  of  its  master, 
during  the  days  of  his  flesh,  not  the  splendid,  princely  garb  of 
this  world.  Confidence  in  the  power  of  the  Christian  truth 
made  men  less  careful  of  the  form  in  which  they  presented  it. 
Besides,  many  of  the  oldest  Christian  writers  lacked  early  edu- 
cation, and  had  a  certain  aversion  to  art,  from  its  manifold 
perversion  in  those  days  to  the  service  of  idolatry  and  immo- 
rality. But  some  of  them,  even  in  the  second  and  third  centu- 
ries, particularly  Clement  and  Origen,  stood  at  the  head  of  their 
age  in  learning  and  philosophical  culture;  and  in  the  fourth 
and  fifth  centuries,  the  literary  productions  of  an  Athanaaius,  a 


8160.  A  GENEKAL  ESTIMATE  OF  THE  FATHERS.       627 

Gregory,  a  Chrysostom,  an  Augustin,  and  a  Jerome,  excelled 
the  contemporaneous  heathen  literature  in  every  respect.  Many 
fathers,  like  the  two  Clements,  Justin  Martyr,  Athenagoras, 
Theophilus,  Tertullian,  Cyprian,  and  among  the  later  ones,  even 
Jerome  and  Augustin,  embraced  Christianity  after*  attaining 
adult  years;  and  it  is  interesting  to  notice  with  what  en- 
thusiasm, energy,  and  thankfulness  they  laid  hold  upon  it. 

The  term  "  church-father  "  originated  in  the  primitive  custom 
of  transferring  the  idea  of  father  to  spiritual  relationships,  espe- 
cially to  those  of  teacher,  priest,  and  bishop.  In  the  case 
before  us  the  idea  necessarily  includes  that  of  antiquity,  involv- 
ing a  certain  degree  of  general  authority  for  all  subsequent 
periods  and  single  branches  of  the  church.  Hence  this  title  of 
honor  is  justly  limited  to  the  more  distinguished  teachers  of  the 
first  five  or  six  centuries,  excepting,  of  course,  the  apostles,  who 
stand  far  above  them  all  as  the  inspired  organs  of  Christ.  It 
applies,  therefore,  to  the  period  of  the  oecumenical  formation 
of  doctrines,  before  the  separation  of  Eastern  and  "Western 
Christendom.  The  line  of  the  Latin  fathers  is  generally  closed 
with  Pope  Gregory  I.  (d.  604),  the  line  of  the  Greek  with  John 
of  Damascus  (d.  about  754). 

Besides  antiquity,  or  direct  connection  with  the  formative  age 
of  the  whole  church,  learning,  holiness,  orthodoxy,  and  the 
approbation  of  the  church,  or  general  recognition,  are  the  quali- 
fications for  a  church  father.  These  qualifications,  however,  are 
only  relative.  At  least  we  cannot  apply  the  scale  of  fully 
developed  orthodoxy,  whether  Greek,  Eoman,  or  Evangelical, 
to  the  ante-Nicene  fathers.  Their  dogmatic  conceptions  were 
often  very  indefinite  and  uncertain.  In  fact  the  Roman  church 
excludes  a  Tertullian  for  his  Montanism,  an  Origen  for  his 
Platonic  and  idealistic  views,  an  Eusebius  for  his  semi-Arianism, 
also  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Lactantius,  Theodoret,  and  other 
distinguished  divines,  from  the  list  of  "  fathers  "  (Pcrfres),  and 
designates  them  merely  "ecclesiastical  writers"  (Soriptore* 


028  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

In  strictness,  not  a  single  one  of  the  aute-Nicene  fathers 
fairly  agrees  with  the  Roman  standard  of  doctrine  in  all  points. 
Even  Irenseus  and  Cyprian  differed  from  the  Roman  bishop, 
the  former  in  reference  to  Chiliasm  and  Montanisin,  the  latter 
on  the  validity  of  heretical  baptism.  Jerome  is  a  strong  wit* 
ness  against  the  canonical  value  of  the  Apocrypha.  Ail- 
gustin,  the  greatest  authority  of  Catholic  theology  among  the 
fathers,  is  yet  decidedly  evangelical  in  his  views  on  sin  and 
grace,  which  were  enthusiastically  revived  by  Luther  and 
Calvin,  and  virtually  condemned  by  the  Council  of  Trent. 
Pope  Gregory  the  Great  repudiated  the  title  *'  ecumenical 
bishop  "  as  an  antichristian  assumption,  and  yet  it  is  compara- 
tively harmless  as  compared  with  the  official  titles  of  his  suc- 
cessors, who  claim  to  be  the  Vicars  of  Christ,  the  vicegerents 
of  God  Almighty  on  earth,  and  the  infallible  organs  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  all  matters  of  faith  and  discipline.  None  of 
the  ancient  fathers  and  doctors  knew  anything  of  the  modern 
Roman  dogmas  of  the  immaculate  conception  (1854)  and  papal 
infallibility  (1870).  The  " unanimous  consent  of  the  fathers" 
is  a  mere  illusion,  except  on  the  most  fundamental  articles  of 
general  Christianity.  We  must  resort  here  to  a  liberal  con- 
ception of  orthodoxy,  and  duly  consider  the  necessary  stages 
of  progress  in  the  development  of  Christian  doctrine  in  th^ 
church. 

On  the  other  hand  the  theology  of  the  fathers  still  less  accordt 
with  the  Protestant  standard  of  orthodoxy.  We  seek  in  vain 
among  them  for  the  evangelical  doctrines  of  the  exclusive 
authority  of  the  Scriptures,  justification  by  faith  alone,  the 
universal  priesthood  of  the  laity ;  and  we  find  instead  as  early 
as  the  second  century  a  high  estimate  of  ecclesiastical  traditions, 
meritorious  and  even  ovenneritorious  works,  and  strong  sacer- 
dotal, sacramentarian,  ritualistic,  and  ascetic  tendencies,  which 
gradually  matured  in  the  Greek  and  Roman  types  of  catholicity. 
The  Church  of  England  always  had  more  sympathy  with  the 
fathers  than  the  Lutheran  and  Calvinistic  Churches,  and  pro- 


2  160.  A  GENERAL  ESTIMATE  OF  THE  FATHERS.   629 

fesses  to  be  in  full  harmony  with  the  creed,  the  episcopal  polity, 
and  liturgical  worship  of  antiquity  before  the  separation  of  the 
east  and  the  west ;  but  the  difference  is  only  one  of  degree ;  the 
Thirty-Nine  Articles  are  as  thoroughly  evangelical  as  the 
Augsburg  Confession  or  the  Westminster  standards;  and  even 
the  modern  Anglo-Catholic  school,  the  most  churchly  and 
churchy  of  all,  ignores  many  tenets  and  usages  which  were 
considered  of  vital  importance  in  the  first  centuries,  and  holds 
others  which  were  unknown  before  the  sixteenth  century.  The 
reformers  were  as  great  and  good  men  as  the  fathers,  but  both 
must  bow  before  the  apostles.  There  is  a  steady  progress  of 
Christianity,  an  ever-deepening  understanding  and  an  ever- 
widening  application  of  its  principles  and  powers,  and  there  are 
yet  many  hidden  treasures  in  the  Bible  which  will  be  brought 
to  light  in  future  ages. 

In  general  the  excellences  of  the  church  fathers  are  very 
various.  Polycarp  is  distinguished,  not  for  genius  or  learning, 
but  for  patriarchal  simplicity  and  dignity ;  Clement  of  Rome, 
for  the  gift  of  administration ;  Ignatius,  for  impetuous  devo- 
tion to  episcopacy,  church  unity,  and  Christian  martyrdom ; 
Justin,  for  apologetic  zeal  and  extensive  reading ;  Irenseus,  for 
sound  doctrine  and  moderation;  Clement  of  Alexandria?  for 
stimulating  fertility  of  thought ;  Origen,  for  brilliant  learning 
and  bold  speculation ;  TertuUias,  for  freshness  and  vigor  of 
intellect,  and  sturdiness  of  character;  Cyprian,  for  energetic 
churchliness ;  Eugfihiufi,  for  literary  industry  in  compilation; 
Lactoitms,  for  elegance  of  style.  Each  had  also  his  weakness. 
Not  one  compares  for  a  moment  in  depth  and  spiritual  fulness 
with  a  St  Paul  or  St.  John ;  and  the  whole  patristic  literature, 
with  all  its  incalculable  value,  must  ever  remain  very  far  below 
the  New  Testament.  The  single  epistle  to  the  Romans  or  the 
Gospel  of  John  is  wortB  more  than  all  commentaries,  doctrinal, 
polemic,  and  ascetic  treatises  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  fathers, 
schoolmen,  and  reformers. 

The  ante-Nicene  fathers  may  be  divided  into  five  or  six  classes : 


630  SECOND  PEBIOB.    A.  D.  100-311. 

(I.)  The  apostolic  fathers,  or  personal  disciples  of  the  apos- 
tles. Of  these,  Polycarp,  Clement,  and  Ignatius  are  the  most 
eminent. 

(2.)  The  apologists  for  Christianity  against  Judaism  and  hea- 
thenism: Justin  Martyr  and  his  successors  to  the  end  of  the 
second  century. 

(3.)  The  controversialists  against  heresies  within  the  church  r 
Irenteus,  and  Hippolytns,  at  the  close  of  the  second  century  and 
beginning  of  the  third. 

(4).  The  Alexandrian  school  of  philosophical  theology: 
Clement  and  Origen,  in  the  first  half  of  the  third  century. 

(5)  The  contemporary  but  more  practical  North  African 
school  of  Tertullian  and  Cyprian. 

(6).  Then  there  were  also  the  germs  of  the  Antioohian  school, 
and  some  less  prominent  writers,  who  can  be  assigned  to  no  par- 
ticular class. 

Together  with  the  genuine  writings  of  the  church  fefchers 
there  appeared  in  the  first  centuries,  in  behalf  both  of  heresy 
and  of  orthodoxy,  a  multitude  of  apocryphal  Gospels,  Acts,  and 
Apocalypses,  under  the  names  of  apostles  and  of  later  celebrities; 
also  Jewish  and  heathen  prophecies  of  Christianity,  such  as  the 
Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  the  Books  of  Hydaspes, 
of  Hernias  Trismegistos,  and  of  the  Sibyls.  The  frequent  use 
made  of  such  fabrications  of  an  idle  imagination  even  by  emi- 
nent church  teachers,  particularly  by  the  apologists,  evinces  not 
only  great  credulity  and  total  want  of  literary  criticism,  but  also 
a  very  imperfect  development  of  the  sense  of  truth,  which  had 
not  yet  learned  utterly  to  discard  the  pia  fraus  as  immoral 
falsehood* 

NOTES. 

The  Roman  church  extends  the  line  of  the  Pqfres,  among  whom  she  farther 
distinguishes  a  small  numher  of  Doctor es  ecdesiae,  emphatically  so-called,  down 
late  into  the  middle  ages,  and  reckons  in  it  Anselm,  Bernard  of  Clairvaux, 
Thomas  Aquinas,  Bonaventura,  and  the  divines  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  rest- 
ing on  her  claim  to  exclusive  catholicity,  which  is  recognized  neither  by  the 
Greek  nor  the  Evangelical  church.  The  marks  of  a  Doctor  Ecdesda  are: 


1 161.  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS.  t)31 

1)  eminens  eruditio;  2)  rloctrina  orthodom;  3)  sanciitas  vitae?  4)  depresses 
ecciesiae  de'Jaratio.  The  Eoman  Church  recognizes  as  Doctores  Ecdesiae  the 
following  Greek  fathers  :  Athanasius,  Basil  the  Great,  Gregory  of  .Nazianzen, 
Chrysostom,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  and  John  of  Damascus,  and  the  following 
Latin  fathers :  Ambrose,  Jerome,  Augustin,  Hilarius  of  Poitiers,  Leo  I.  and 
Gregory  I.,  together  with  the  mediaeval  divines  Ajiselm,  Thomas  Aquinas, 
Bonaventura  and  Bernard  of  Clairvaux.  The  distinction  between  doctors* 
ecdesiae  and  patres  ecclesiae  was  formally  recognized  by  Pope  Boniface  VIII. 
in  a  decree  of  1298,  in  which  Ambrose,  Augustin,  Jerome,,  and  Gregory  the 
Great  are  designated  as  magni  doctores  etdesiae,  who  deserve  a  highei  degree 
of  veneration.  Thomas  Aquinas,  Bonaventura,  and  St.  Bernard  were  added 
to  the  list  by  papal  decree  in  1830,  Hilary  in  1852,  Alfonso  Maria  da  Liguori 
in  1871.  Anselm  of  Canterbury  and  a  few  others  are  called  doctores  in  the 
liturgical  service,  without  special  decree.  The  long  line  of  popes  has  only  fur- 
nished two  fathers,  Leo  I.  and  Gregory  I.  The  Council  of  Trent  first  speaks 
of  the  " unanimis  consejisus patrum"  which  is  used  in  the  same  sense  as  "  do& 


§  161.  The  Apostolic  Fathers. 
SOURCES: 

PATRTJM  APOSTOLICORUM  OPERA.  Best  editions  by  0.  VON  GEBHARDT, 
A.  HARNICK,  TH.  ZAETC,  Lips.  1S76-'S,  3  vols.  (being  the  third  ed. 
of  Dres.sel  much  improved) ;  by  FR.  XAV.  FUNK  (E  C.),  Tub.  1878 
and  1831,  2  vols.  (being  the  5th  and  enlarged  edition  of  Hefele) ; 
by  A.  HiLGEtfPELD  (Tubingen  school) :  Norum  Testamentvm  extra 
canonem  rec&ptum,  Lips.  1866,  superseded  by  the  revised  ed.  appear- 
ing in  parts  (Clemens  E.,  1876 ;  Barnabas,  1877 ;  Hennas,  1881) ; 
and  by  Bishop  LIGHTFOOT,  Lond.  and  Camhr.  1869,  1877,  and  1SS5 
(including  Clement  of  Eome,  Ignatius  and  Polycarp,  -with  a  full 
critical  apparatus,  English  translations  and  valuable  notes;  upon 
the  whole  the  best  edition  as  far  as  it  goes.) 

Older  editions  by  B.  COTELERIUS  (COTELIEB,  E.  C.),  Par.  1672, 
2  vols.  foL,  including  the  spurious  works;  republ.  and  ed.  by 
J.  CLERICUS  (LE  CLERC),  Antw.  1698,  2nd  ed.  Amst.  1724. 
2  vols. ;  TH.  ITTIG,  1699 ;  FREY,  Basel  1742 ;  E.  ErssEL,  Lond 
1746,  2  vols.  (the  genuine  works) ;  HOR^EMA^,  Havnise,  1828 ; 
GTTIL.  JACOBSON,  Oxon.  1838,  ed,  IV.  1866,  2  vols.  (very  elegant 
and  accurate,  with  valuable  notes,  but  containing  only  Clemens, 
Ignatius,  Polycarp,  and  the  Martyria  of  Ign.  and  Polyc.) ;  C.  J* 
HEPELE  (E.  C.),  Tub.  1839,  ed.  IV.  1855, 1  vol.  (very  handy,  with 
learned  and  judicious  prolegomena  and  notes) ;  A.  K  M.  DRESSEL. 
Lips.  1857,  second  ed.  1863  (more  complete,  and  based  on  new  MSS. 
Hefele's  and  Dressel's  edd.  are  superseded  by  the  first  two  above 
mentioned. 


632  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

English  translations  of  the  Apost.  Fathers  by  Archbishop  W. 

(d.  1737),  Lond.  169%  4th  ed.  1737,  and  often  republished  (in  ad- 
mirable style,  though  with  many  inaccuracies) ;  by  ALEX.  EGBERTS 
and  JAMES  DOSALDSOX,  in  the  first  vol.  of  Clark;s  "  Ante-Nicene 
Christian  Library,"  Edinb.  1867  (superior  to  Wake  in  accuracy, 
but  inferior  in  old  English  flavor) ;  by  CHS.  H.  HOOLE,  Lond.  1870 
and  1872;  best  by  Lighttbot  (Clement  It.  in  Appendix,  1877).  An 
excellent  German  translation  by  H.  SCHOLZ,  Gutersloh,  1865  (in 
the  style  of  Luther  s  Bible  version), 

WOEKS: 

The  Prolegomena  to  the  editions  just  named,  particularly  those  of  the 
first  four. 

A.  SCHWEGLEB:  Das  nachapostolische  Zeitalter.  Tub.  1846.  2  vola. 
A  very  able  but  hypercritical  reconstruction  from  the  Tubingen 
school,  full  of  untenable  hypotheses,  assigning  the  Gospels,  Acte, 
the  Catholic  and  later  Pauline  Epistles  to  the  post-apostolic  age, 
and  measuring  every  writer  by  his  supposed  Petrine  or  Pauline 
tendency,  and  his  relation  to  Ebionism  and  Gnosticism. 

A-  HILGEXFELD  :  Die  apoxtolischen  Vater.    Halle,  1853. 

J*  H.  B.  LlJBKERT :  Die  Tlieologie  der  apostolischen  Voter,  in  the  "  Zeit- 
schrift  fur  hist.  Theol."  Leipz.  1854. 

Abbe"  FBEPPEL  (Prof,  at  the  Sorbonne) :  Les  Fires  Apostoliques  et  leur 
4poque>  second  ed.  Paris,  1859.  Strongly  Eomaa  Catholic. 

LEOHLER:  Das.  apost  u.nachapost.  Zeitalter,  Stuttgart,  1857,  p.  476- 
495;  3ded,  thoroughly  revised  (Leipz. ,  1885),  p.  526-608. 

JAMES  DONALDSON  (LL.  D.) :  A  Critical  History  of  Christian  Literature, 
etc.  Vol.  I.  The  Apost.  Fathers.  Edinburgh,  1864.  The  same, 
separately  publ.  under  the  title:  The  Apostolic  Fathers :  A  critical 
account  of  their  genuine  writings  and  of  their  doctrines.  London, 
1874  (412  pages).  Ignatius  is  omitted.  A  work  of  honest  and  sober 
Protestant  learning. 

GEORGE  A.  JACKSOK:  The  Apostolic  Fathers  and  the  Apologists  of  the 
Second  Century.  New  York  1879.  Popular,  with  extracts  (pages 
203). 

J.  M.  COTTEKILL:  P&regrinus  Proteus.  Edinburgh,  1879.  A  curious 
book,  by  a  Scotch  Episcopalian,  who  tries  to  prove  that  the  two 
Epistles  of  Clement,  the  Epistle  to  Diognetus,  and  other  ancien. 
writings,  were  literary  frauds  perpetrated  by  Henry  Stephens  and 
others  in  the  time  of  the  revival  of  letters  in  the  sixteenth  century. 

JOSEF  SranfZL  (E.  C.) :  Die  Theologie  der  apost.  Voter.  Wien,  1880. 
Tries  to  prove  the  entire  agreement  of  the  Ap.  Fathers  with  the 
modern  Vatican  theology. 


2 161.  THE  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS.  633 

The  "  apostolic/'  or  rather  post-apostolic  "  fathers " l  were  the 
first  church  teachers  after  the  apostles,  who  had  enjoyed  in  part 
personal  intercourse  with  them,  and  thus  form  the  connecting 
link  between  them  and  the  apologists  of  the  second  century. 
This  class  consists  of  Barnabas,  Clement  of  Rome,  Ignatius, 
Polycarp,  and,  in  a  broader  sense,  Hennas,  Papias,  and  the  un- 
known authors  of  the  Epistle  to  Diognetus,  and  of  the  Didaehe. 
Of  the  outward  life  of  these  men,  their  extraction,  education, 
and  occupation  before  conversion,  hardly  anything  is  known. 
The  distressed  condition  of  that  age  was  very  unfavorable  to 
authorship;  and  more  than  this,  the  spirit  of  the  primitive 
church  regarded  the  new  life  in  Christ  as  the  only  true  life,  the  - 
only  one  worthy  of  being  recorded.    Even  of  the  lives  of  the 
apostles  themselves  before  their  call  we  have  only  a  few  hints.  - 
But  the  pious  story  of  the  martyrdom  of  several  of  these 
fathers,  as  their  entrance  into  perfect  life,  has  been  copiously 
written.    They  were  good  men  rather  than  great  men,  and  ex- 
celled more  in  zeal  and  devotion  to  Christ  than  in  literary, 
attainments.      They   were    faithful    practical    workers,    and 
hence  of  more  use  to  the  church  in  those  days  than  profound 
thinkers  or  great  scholars  could  have  been.    "  \VTiile  the  works 
of  Tacitus,  Sueton,  Juvenal,  Martial,  and  other  contemporary 
heathen  authors  are  filled  with  the  sickening  details  of  human 
folly,  vice,  and  crime,  these  humble  Christian  pastors  are  ever 
burning  with  the  love  of  God  and  men,  exhort  to  a  life  of 
purity  and  holiness  in  imitation  of  the  example  of  Christ,  and 
find  abundant  strength  and  comfort  amid   trial  and  persecu- 
tion in  their  faith,  and  the  hope  of  a  glorious  immortality  in 
heaven." 2 

1  The  usual  name  is  probably  derived  from  Tertullian,  who  calls  the  fol 
lowers  of  the  apostles,  Apostold,  (De  Came,  2;  Prvscr.  Hcer.  30).    Westcott 
calls  them  su&-ap6sfo/ic,  Donaldson,  ep-apostolic. 

2  "The  most  striking  feature  of  these  writings,"  says  Donaldson  (p.!05):"is 
the  deep  living  piety  which  pervades  them.    It  consists  in  the  warmest  love  to 
God,  the'  deepest  interest  in  man,  and  it  exhibits  itself  in  a  healthy,  vigorous, 
manly  morality.1* 


03 i  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

The  extant  works  of  the  apostolic  fathers  are  of  small  com- 
pass, a  handful  of  letters  on  holy  living  and  dying,  making  in 
all  a  volume  of  about  twice  the  size  of  the  New  Testament 
Half  of  these  (several  Epistles  of  Ignatius,  the  Epistle  of  Bar- 
nabas, and  the  Pastor  of  Hernias)  are  of  doubtful  genuineness; 
but  they  belong  at  all  events  to  that  obscure  and  mysterious 
transition  period  between  the  end  of  the  first  century  and  the 
middle  of  the  second.  They  all  originated,  not  in  scientific 
study,  hut  in  practical  religious  feeling,  and  contain  not  analyses 
of  doctrine  so  much  as  simple  direct  assertions  of  faith  and 
exhortations  to  holy  life;  all,  excepting  Hennas  and  the 
Lidaehe,  in  the  form  of  epistles  after  the  model  of  Paul's*1 
Yet  they  show,  the  germs  of  the  apologetic,  polemic,  dogmatic, 
and  ethic  theology,  as  well  as  the  outlines  of  the  organization 
and  the  cultus  of  the  ancient  Catholic  church.  Critical  research 
lias  to  assign  to  them  their  due  place  in  the  external  and  in- 
ternal development  of  the  church ;  in  doing  this  it  needs  very 
great  caution  to  avoid  arbitrary  construction. 

If  we  compare  these  documents  with  the  canonical  Scriptures 
of  the  Xew  Testament,  it  is  evident  at  once  that  they  fall  far 
below  in  original  force,  depth,  and  fulness  of  spirit,  and  afford 

1  Like  the  K  T.  Epistles,  the  writings  of  the  Apostolic  fathers  generally 
open  with  an  inscription  and  Christian  salutation,  and  conclude  with  a  benedic- 
tion and  doxology.  The  Ep.  of  Clement  to  the  Corinthians  beginning  thus 
{eh.  I.) :  "The  chuich  of  God,  which  sojournes  in  Borne  to  the  church  of  God 
which  sojournes  in  Corinth,  to  them  that  are  called  and  sanctified  by  the 
will  of  God,  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ:  Grace  and  peace  from  Almighty 
God,  through  Jesus  Christ,  be  multiplied  unto  you."  (comp.  1  Cor.  1 :  2,  3; 
2  Pet.  1:  2.)  It  concludes  (ch.  65,  formerly  ch.  59):  "The  grace  of  our" 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  with  you, -and  with  all  men  everywhere  who  are  called 
of  God  through  Him,  through  whom  be  glory,  honor,  power,  majesty,  and  eter- 
nal dominion  unto  Him  from  the  ages  past  to  the  ages  of  ages.  Amen." — The 
Ep.  of  Polycarp  begins:  ;' Polycarp,  and  the  presbyters  that  are  with  him,  to 
the  church  of  God  sojourning  in  Philippi :  Mercy  unto  you.  and  peace  from 
God  Almighty  and  from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour,  be  multiplied ; >? 
and  it  concludes:  ''Grace  be  with  you  all.  Amen."  The  Ep.  of  Barnabas 
opens  and  closes  in  a  very  general  way,  omitting  the  names  of  the  writer  and 
readers.  The  inscriptions  and  salutations  of  the  Ignatian  Epistles  are  longer 
and  overloaded,  even  in  the  Syriac  recension* 


S  161.  THE  APOSTOLIC  PATHEES.  635 

in  this  a  strong  indirect  proof  of  the  inspiration  of  the  apostles. 
Yet  they  still  shine  with  the  evening  red  of  the  apostolic  day, 
and  breathe  an  enthusiasm  of  simple  faith  and  fervent  love  and 
fidelity  to  the  Lord,  which  proved  its  power  in  suffering  and 
martyrdom.  They  move  in  the  element  of  living  tradition,  and 
make  reference  oftener  to  the  oral  preaching  of  the  apostles  than 
to  their  writings ;  for  these  were  not  yet  so  generally  circulated  \ 
but  they  bear  a  testimony  none  the  less  valuable  to  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  apostolic  writings,  by  occasional  citations  or  allusions, 
and  by  the  coincidence  of  their  reminiscences  with  the  facts  of 
the  gospel  history  and  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Xcw 
Testament.  The  epistles  of  Barnabas,  Clement,  and  Polycarp, 
and  the  Shepherd  of  Hernias,  were  in  many  churches  read  in 
public  worship.1  Some  were  even  incorporated  in  important 
manuscripts  of  the  Bible.2  This  shows  that  the  sense  of  the 
church,  as  to  the  extent  of  the  canon,  had  not  yet  become  every- 
where clear.  Their  authority,  however,  was  always  but  sec- 
tional and  subordinate  to  that  of  the  Gospels  and  the  apostolic 
Epistles.  It  was  a  sound  instinct  of  the  church,  that  the 
writings  of  the  disciples  of  the  apostles,  excepting  those  of 
Mark  and  Luke,  who  were  peculiarly  associated  with  Peter  and 
Paul,  were  kept  out  of  the  canon  of  the  Xew  Testament.  For 
by  the  wise  ordering  of  the  Ruler  of  history,  there  is  an  im- 
passable gulf  between  the  inspiration  of  the  apostles  and  the 
illumination  of  the  succeeding  age,  between  the  standard  au- 
thority of  holy  Scripture  and  the  derived  validity  of  the  teach- 
ing of  the  church.  "The  Bible" — to  adopt  an  illustration  of  a 

1  Comp.  Euseb.  H.  E.  III.  16 ;  IV.  23,  as  regards  the  epistle  of  Clement, 
which  continued  to  be  read  in  the  church  of  Corinth  down  to  the  time  of 
Dionysius,  A  D.  160,  and  even  to  the  time  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  in  the 
fourth   o.vicury.     The   Pastor    Hermce    is    quoted    by   Irenseus   IV.  3,  as 
"scriptwa"  and  is  treated  by  Clement  of  Alex,  and  Origen  (Ad  Horn.  Com- 
ment. X.  c.  31)  as  "  scriptura  valde  utilis  et  divinUus  inspirata.'* 

2  The  Codex  Alexandrinus  (A)  of  the  fifth  century  contains,  after  the 
Apocalypse,  the  Epistle  of  Clemens  Bomanus  to  the  Corinthians,  with  a  frag- 
ment  of  a  homily;  and  the  Codex  Sinaiticusof  the  fourth  century  gives,  at 
the  close,  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  complete  in  Greek,  and  also  a  part  of  the 
Greek  Pastor  Henna. 


636  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.,  100-311. 

distinguished  writer1— "is  not  like  a  city  of  modern 
which  subsides  through  suburban  gardens  and  groves  and  man- 
sions into  the  open  country  around,  but  like  an  Eastern  oitfy  in 
the  desert,  from  which  the  traveler  passes  by  a  single  step  /into 
a  barren  waste."  The  very  poverty  of  these  post-apostolic  jvrit- 
ings  renders  homage  to  the  inexhaustible  richness  of  the  ajpos- 
tolic  books  which,  like  the  person  of  Christ,  are  divine  as  (well 
as  human  in  their  origin,  character,  and  effect. 2 

§  162.  Clement  of  Rome. 

(I.)  The  Epistle  of  CLEMENS  ROM.  to  the  Corinthians.  Only  the  first  is 
genuine,  the  second  so-called  Ep.  of  Cl.  is  a  homily  of  later  date. 
Best  editions  by  PHILOTHEOS  BRYEXIJIOS  (Toy  h  dyhtf  irarpbg  yu&v 
K/.jyufiTOf  ercoKOTou  'PAiiyc  al  6io  rrpcc  Kaptv&iovc  sKiaro'kai,  etc,  'Ef 
Kwrrawvo^si,  1875.  With  prolegomena,  commentary  and  fac- 
similes at  the  end,  188  pp.  text,  and  pf&'  or  169  prolegomena) ; 
HILGEXTELD  (second  ed.  Leipz.  1S76,  with  prolegomena,  textual 
notes  and  conjectures);  voy  GEBHARDT  &  HABNACK  (sec.  ed. 
1876,  with  proleg.,  notes,  and  Latin  version);  FUNK  (1878,  with 
Latin  version  and  notes) ;  and  LIGHTFOOT  (with  notes,  Lond.  1869, 
and  Appendix  containing  the  newly-discovered  portions,  and  an 
English  Version,  1877). 

All  the  older  editions  from  the  Alexandrian  MS.  first  published  by 
Junius,  1633,  are  partly  superseded  by  the  discovery  of  the  new  and 
complete  MS,  in  Constantinople,  which  marks  an  epoch  in  this 
chapter  of  church  history. 

(IT.)  R.  A.  LIPSITS  :  De  dementis  Pom.  Epistola  ad  Corinth,  priore  dis- 
quiaith-  Lips.  1856  (188  pages).  Comp.  his  review  of  recent  edi- 
tions in  the  "  Jenaer  Literaturzeitung,"  Jan.  13, 1877. 

B.  H.  CowPEB :  What  the  First  bishop  of  Home  taught.  The  Ep.  of 
Clement  of  JR.  to  the  Cor.,  with  an  Introduction  and  Notes.  London, 
1867. 

Jos.  MrLLOOLY :  Si.  Clement  Pope  and  Martyr,  and  his  Basilica  in  Some. 
Rome,  second  ed.  1873.  The  same  in  Italian.  Discusses  the  sup 
posed  house  and  basilica  of  Clement,  but  not  his  works. 

1  Ascribed  to  Archbishop  Whately. 

*  Baur,  Schwegiec,  and  the  other  Tubingen  critics  show  great  want  of  spirit- 
ual discernment  in  assigning  so  many  N.  T.  writings,  even  the  Gospel  of  John 
to  the  borrowed  moonlight  of  the  post-apostolic  age.  They  form  the  opposite 
extreme  to  the  Komaa  overestimate  of  patristic  teaching  as  beifcg  oi  equa? 
inthority  with  toe  Bible, 


{  162.  CLEMENT  OF  EOME.  637 

JACOBI:  Diebeiden  Briefs  des  Clemens  v.  Rom.,  in  the  <eStudien  und 
Kritiken  "  for  1876,  p.  707  sqq. 

FUNK:  Ei)i  theo'ogischer  Fund,  in  the  Tub.  "Theol.  Quartalschrifb," 
1876,  p.  286  aqq. 

DONALDSON:  The  New  MS.  of  Clement  of  Rome.  In  the  "Theolog. 
Review,"  1877,  p.  35  sqq. 

WIESELBE  :  Der  Brief  des  rom.  Clemens  an  die  Kor.,  in  the  "  Jahrbiicher 
fur  deufache  Theol.''  1877.  No.  III. 

RENAN  :  Les  evangiles.    Paris  1877.    Ch.  XT.  311-338. 

C.  J.  H.  ROPES  :  The  New  MS.  of  Clement  of  Home,  in  the  "Presb.  Quar- 
terly and  Princeton  Review/1  N.  York  1877,  p.  325-343.  Contains 
a  scholarly  examination  ^f  the  new  readings,  and  a  comparison  of 
the  concluding  prayer  with  the  ancient  liturgies. 

The  relevant  sections  in  HILGENFELD  (Apost.  Voter,  85-92),  DONALD- 
SON (Ap.  Fath.,  113-190),  SPBINZL  (Theol  d.  apost.  Vdter,  21  sqq., 
57  sqq.),  SALMON  in  {Smith  and  Wace,  I.  554  sqq.,  and  UHLHOBX  in 
Herzog2,  sub  Clemens  Rom.  IJI.  248-257. 

Comp.  full  lists  of  editions,  translations,  and  discussions  on  Clement, 
before  and  after  1875,  in  the  Prolegomena  of  von  Gebhardt  &  Har- 
nack,  XVIIL-XXIV.;  Funk,  XXXH.-XXXYI.;  Lightfoot,  p.  28 
sqq.,  223  sqq.,  and  393  sqq.,  and  Richardson,  Synopsis^  1  sqq. 

The  first  rank  among  the  works  of  the  post-Apostolic  age 
belongs  to  the  "  Teaching  of  the  Apostles,"  discovered  in  1883.1 
Next  follow  the  letters  of  Clement,  Ignatius,  and  Polycarp. 

I.  CLEMENT,  a  name  of  great  celebrity  in  antiquity,  was  a  dis- 
ciple of  Paul  and  Peter,  to  whom  he  refers  as  the  chief  examples 
for  imitation.  He  may  have  been  the  same  person  who  is  men- 
tioned by  Paul  as  one  of  his  faithful  fellow-workers  in  Philippi 
(Phil.  4 :  3) ;  or  probably  a  Roman  who^was  in  some  way  con- 
nected with  the  distinguished  Flavian  family,  and  through  it 
with  the  imperial  household,  where  Christianity  found  an  early 
lodgment.2  His  Epistle  betrays  a  man  of  classical  culture,  exe- 

1  See  above  p.  184  sq.,  and  my  monograph,  third  revised  edition,  1889. 

2  There  are  six  different  conjectures.     1)   Clement  was  the  Philippial 
Clement  mentioned  by  Paul.    So  Origen,  Eusebius,  Jerome.    He  may  have 
been  a  Greek  or  a  Roman  laboring  for  a  time  in  Philippi  and  afterwards  in 
Rome.     2)  A  distant  relative  of  the  emperor  Tiberius.     So  the  pseudo- 
Clementine  romances  which  are  historically  confused  and  worthless.    3)  The 
Consul  Flavius  Clemens,  Domitian's  cousin,  who  was  put  to  death  by  him  for 
''atheism,"  i.  e.  the  Christian  faith,  A.  D.  95,  while  his  wife  Domitilla  (wto 
Branded  the  oldest  Christian  cemetery  in  Borne)  was  banished  to  an  island* 


638  SECOND  PERIOD.    A. D.  100-311. 

putive  wisdom,  and  thorough  familiarity  with  the  Septuagint 
Bible.  The  last  seems  to  indicate  that  he  was  of  Jewish  parentage.1 
What  we  know  with  certainty  is  only  this,  that  he  stood  at  the 
head  of  the  Roman  congregation  at  the  close  of  the  first  century. 
Yet  tradition  is  divided  against  itself  as  to  the  time  of  his 
administration ;  now  making  him  the  first  successor  of  Peter,, 
now,  with  more  probability,  the  third.  According  to  Eusebius 
he  was  bishop  from  the  twelfth  year  of  Domitian  to  the  third 
of  Trajan  (A.  D.  92  to  101).  Considering  that  the  official  dis- 
tinction between  bishops  and  presbyters  was  not  yet  clearly 
defined  in  his  time,  he  may  have  be°n  co-presbyter  with  Linus 
and  Anaclotus,  who  are  represented  by  some  as  his  predecessors, 
by  others  as  his  successors.2 

Later  legends  have  decked  out  his  life  in  romance,  both  in 
the  interest  of  the  Catholic  church  and  in  that  of  heresy.  They 
picture  him  as  a  noble  and  highly  educated  Roman  who,  dis- 
satisfied with  the  wisdom  and  art  of  heathenism,  journeyed  to 
Palestine,  became  acquainted  there  with  the  apostle  Peter,  and 
tva?  converted  by  him;  accompanied  him  on  his  missionary 
tours;  composed  many  books  in  his  name;  was  appointed  by 

So  Hilgenfeld,  *nd,  less  confidently,  Harnack.  But  our  Clement  died  a  natural 
deaih,  and  if  lie  had  been  so  closely  related  to  the  emperor,  the  fact  would 
have  l>een  widely  spread  in  the  church.  4)  A  nephew  of  Flavius  Clemens. 
So  the  nsariyr  acts  of  Kerens  and  Achilles,  and  Cav.  de  Kossi.  5)  A  son  of 
Flavius  Clemens.  So  Ewald.  But  the  SODS  of  the  Consul,  whom  Domitian 
appointed  his  successors  on  the  throne,  were  mere  boys  when  Clement  was 
bit-hop  of  Home.  6j  A  Jewish  freedman  or  son  of  a  freedman  belonging  to 
the  household  of  Flavius  Clemens.  Plausibly  advocated  by  Lightfoot  (p,  265). 
The  imperial  honsehold  seems  to  have  been  the  centre'of  the  Eoman  church 
from  tne  time  of  Phil's  imprisonment  (Phil,  4:  22).  Slaves  and  freedmen 
were  often  very  intelligent  and  cultivated.  Hermas  (Vis.  I.  1)  and  Pope 
?a]ii*tns  iPkilos.  IX.  12j  were  formerly  slaves.  Funk  concludes:  res  Tion 
'iqurt.  $o  ako  Uhlhorn  in  Herzog. 

1  Etnan   p.  313 )  thinks  that  he  was  a  Eoman  Jew.    So  also  Lightfoot.    But 
Justin  Martyr  had  the  *.arne  familiarity  with  the  Old  Testament,  though  he 
was  a  Gentile  by  birth  and  education* 

2  See  }  o2,  p.  166.     Bryennios  discusses  this  question  at  length  in  his 
Prolegomena,  and  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  Clement  was  the  ihird  bishop 
of  Borne,  and  the  author  of  both  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians.    He  identifies 
him  with  the  Clement  in  PhiL  4:  3. 


2162-  CLEMENT  OF  EOME. 

him  his  successor  as  bishop  of  Rome,  with  a  sort  of  supervision 
over  the  whole  church;  and  at  last,  being  banished  una<* 
Trajan  to  the  Taurian  Chersonesus,  died  the  glorious  death  of  a 
martyr  in  the  waves  of  the  sea.  But  the  oldest  witnesses,  down 
to  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  know  nothing  of  his  martyrdom. 
The  Ada  Martyrii  dementis  (by  Simon  Metaphrastes)  make 
their  appearance  first  in  the  ninth  century.  They  are  purely 
fictitious,  and  ascribe  incredible  miracles  to  their  hero. 

It  is  very  remarkable  that  a  person  of  such  vast  influence  in 
truth  and  fiction,  whose  words  were  law,  who  preached  the  duty 
of  obedience  and  submission  to  an  independent  and  distracted 
church,  whose  vision  reached  even  to  unknown  lands  beyond 
the  Western  sea,  should  inaugurate,  at  the  threshold  of  the 
second  century,  that  long  line  of  pontifis  who  have  outlasted 
every  dynasty  in  Europe,  and  now  claim  an  infallible  authority 
over  the  consciences  of  two  hundred  millions  of  Christians.1 

II.  From  this  Clement  we  have  a  Greek  epistle  to  the 
Corinthians.  It  is  often  cited  by  the  church  fathers,  then 
disappeared,  but  was  found  again,  together  with  the  fragments 
of  the  second  epistle,  in  the  Alexandrian  codex  of  the  Bible 
(now  in  the  British  Museum),  and  published  by  Patricius 
Junius  (Patrick  Young)  at  Oxford  in  1633.2  A  second,  less 
ancient,  but  more  perfect  manuscript  from  the  eleventh  century, 

1  "  Clement  Eomain,"  says  the  sceptical  Renan,  once  a  student  of  Roman 
Catholic  theology  in  St.  Sulpice,  "ne  fat  pas  settlement  unpersonnage  reel,  ce  Jut 
un  personnage  de  premier  ordre,  un  vrai  chef  dfiglwe,  un  eveque,  avant  que 
P  episcopal  fut  nettement  constitu$j  £  oserais  presque  dire  un  pnpe,  si  ce  mot  nefaisait 
id  un  tropfort  anachronime.  Son  autorite  passa  pour  la  plus  grande  de  fairies  en 
Italie,  en  GrZce,  en,  Mace'donie,  durant  les  disc  derni&res  annces  du  Ier  sMe.  A  la 
Unite  de  ?  dgeapostolique,  ilfut  comme  un  apotre,  un  epigone  de  la  grande  generation 
des  disciples  de  Jesus,  une  des  colonnes  de  cette  Ealise  de  Rome,  qui,  depuis  la  der 
rtruction  de  Jerusalem,  devenait  deplus  en  plus  le  centre  du,  ckristianisme." 

*  The  Alexandrian  Bible  codex  dates  from  the  fifth  century,  and  was  pre« 
sented  by  Cyril  Lucar,  of  Constantinople,  to  King  Charles  I  in  1628.  Since 
1633  the  Ep.  of  Cl.  has  been  edited  about  thirty  timt-s  from  this  single  MS. 
It  lacks  the  concluding  chapters  (57-66)  in  whole  or  in  part,  and  is  greatly 
blurred  and  defaced.  It  was  careiuUy  re-examined  and  best  edited  by 
Tischendorf  (1867  and  1873),  Lightfoot  (18C9  and  1877),  Laurent  (1870),  and 
fjebhardt  fin  his  first  ed.  1875).  Their  conjectures  have  been  sustained  in  great 


640  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.100--311. 

containing  the  missing  chapters  of  the  first  (-with  the  oldesi 
written  prayer)  and  the  whole  of  the  second  Epistle  (together 
with  other  valuable  documents),  was  discovered  by  Philotheos 
Bryennios/  in  the  convent  library  of  the  patriarch  of  Jerusalem 
in  Constantinople,  and  published  in  1875.2  Soon  afterwards  a 
complete  Syriac  translation  was  found  in  the  library  of  Jules 
Mohl,  of  Paris  (d.  1876).3  "We  have  thus  three  independent 

part  by  the  discovery  of  the  Constantinopolitan  MS.  See  the  critical  Addenda 
in  the  Append,  of  Lightfoot,  p.  396  sqq. 

1  At  that  time  metropolitan  of  Seme  (farposro^T^  Seppw)— an  ancient  see 
(Heraclea  '•,  in  Macedonia— afterwards  of  ^icomedia.   This  Eastern  prelate  was 
most  cordially  welcomed  by  the  scholars  of  the  West,  Catholic  and  Protestant, 
to  an  honored  place  in  the  republic  of  Christian  learning.     His  discovery 
is  of  inestimable  value.    In  his  prolegomena  and  notes— all  in  Greek — he 
shows  considerable  knowledge  of  tha  previous  editions  of  Clement  (except  that 
of  Li^htt'oot,  1SC9 }  and  of  modern  German  literature.     It  is  amusing  to  find 
fuiuiihir  names  turned  into  Greek,   a?   Neander   (b   Neavdpotfj   Gieseler   (6 
r.'fr;/:'/i'oj't  Hereie  (o  °Eos/.Q£),  Die&el  (b  &pE<w&uoc;\  Hilgenfeld  (6  lAye/^&fof), 
JacoUon  to  'lcK^3c6vto^\  Tischendorf  (Kuva-avrtvoe  6  Tiasvddpfioc),  Thiersch 
(it  6&i~<eins\  Schroeckh  (6  Zpo/'/e^/or),  Schwegler  (b  Sovfyfopof),  Schliemann 
(o  S/^m-of),  Keith m ay r  (6  PfZtf/mtof),  Uhlhorn  (6  Ov^Pvt°C  *»  TV  Real 
EotykL  ZX>TI  Eei-zog  h  ?J$.    Clemens  von  R<m  rofi.  /3'.  a&  721 ;  p.  ££')»  etc.    He 
complains  however,  of  "the  higher1'  or  "lofty  criticism"  (vtyrptfi  KPLTLK^)  and 
the  **episcophobia"  [s-ioKofopia)  of  certain  Germany  and  his  own  criticism  is 
checked  by  his  reverence  for  tradition,  which  leads  him  to  accept  the  Second 
Epistle  of  Clement  as  genuine,  contrary  to  the  judgment  of  the  best  scholars. 

2  The  Constantinopolitan  codex  belongs  to  the  library  of  the  Convent  of 
the  Holy  Sepulchre  (rov  Havayiav  laoov)  in  the  Fanar  or  Phanar,  the  Greek 
district  of  Constantinople,  whose  inhabitants,  the  Fanariotes,  were  originally 
employed  as  secretaries  and  transcribers  of  documents.    It  is  a  small  8vo 
parchment  of  120  leaves,  dates  from  A.  D.  1056,  is  clearly  and  carefully  written 
in  cursive  characters,  with  accents,  spiritus,  punctuation  (but  without  jota  sub- 
Bcriptum),  and  contains  in  addition  the  second  Epistle  of  Clement  in  full,  the 
Greek  Ep.  of  Barnabas,  the  larger  Greek  recension  of  the  12  Ignatian  Epistles, 
the  '*  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles  "  (di$a%%  T&V  fadeica  aicoff-6huv),  and  a 
work  of  ChrysoPtom  (a  Synopsis  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments).    The  value 
of  this  text  consists  chiefly  in  the  new  matter  of  the  first  fcp.  (about  one- 
tenth  of  the  whole,  from  the  close  of  ch.  57  to  the  end),  and  the  remainder  of 
the  second.    It  presents  nearly  four  hundred  variations.    The  Constantinopoli- 
tan codex  Is  preferred  by  Hilgenfeld,  the  Alexandrian  by  Lightfoot,  Geb- 
hardt  and  Harnack.    The  Didache  is  far  more  important,  but  was  not  published 
till  18*3. 

3  This  MS.,  which  escaped  the  attention  of  French  scholars,  is  now  in  Cam 
bridge.     It  u:^  \v:i:t«'n  in  the  year  1170,  hi  the  convent  of  Mar  Saliba,  at 


2 162.  CLEMENT  OF  ROME.  641 

texts  (A,  C,  S),  derived,  it  would  seem,  from  a  common  parent 
of  the  second  century.  The  newly  discovered  portions  shed 
new  light  on  the  history  of  papal  authority  and  liturgical  wor- 
ship, as  we  have  pointed  out  in  previous  chapters.1 

This  first  (and  in  fact  the  only)  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians 
was  sent  by  the  Church  of  God  in  Rome,  at  its  own  impulse,  and 
unasked,  to  the  Church  of  God  in  Corinth,  through  three  aged 
and  faithful  Christians  :  Claudius  Ephebus,  Valerius  Biton,  and 
Fortunatus.2  It  does  not  bear  the  name  of  Clement,  and  is 
written  in  the  name  of  the  Eoman  congregation,  but  was  uni- 
versally regarded  as  his  production.3  It  stood  in  the  highest 
esteem  in  ancient  timos,  and  continued  in  public  use  in  the 
Corinthian  church  and  in  several  other  churches  down  to  the 
beginning  of  the  fourth  century.4  This  accounts  for  its  incor- 

Edessa.  It  contains,  with  the  exception  of  the  Apocalypse,  the  entire  New- 
Testament  in  the  Harclean  recension  (616)  of  the  Philoxenian  version  (508) » 
and  the  two  Epistles  of  Clement  between  the  Catholic  and  Pauline  Epistles 
(instead  of  at  the  close,  as  in  the  Alexandrian  Cod.),  as  if  they  were  equal  in 
authority  to  the  canonical  books.  Bishop  Lightfoot  (Appendix  to  &  Qlement, 
p.  238)  says,  that  this  Syriac  version  is  conscientious  and  faithful,  but  with  a 
tendency  to  run  into  paraphrase,  and  that  it  follows  the  Alex,  rather  than  the 
Constantino poJitan  text,  but  presents  also  some  independent  readings. 
L  See  \  50,  p.  157,  and  g  66,  p.  226,  228. 

2  Mentioned  at  the  close  in  ch.  65  (which  in  the  Alex,  text  is  ch.  59).    Clau- 
dius and  Valerius  may  have  been  connected  with  the  imperial  household  as 
freedmen  (comp.  Phil.  4:  22).     Fortunatus  has  been  identified  by  some  with, 
the  one  mentioned  1  Cor.  16 :  17,  as  a  younger  member  of  the  household  o 
Stephanas  in  Corinth. 

3  By  the  author  of  the  Catalogue  of  contents  prefixed  to  the  Alexandrian 
codex,  generally  called  Cod.  A ;  by  Dionysins  of  Corinth,  in  his  letter  to  Soter 
of  Rome  (Euseb.  IV,  23) ;  Irenaeus  (Adv.  Hcer.  ILL  3,  \  3);  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, who  often  quotes  from  it ;  Origen  (Comm.  in  Joan.  VI.  §  36  and  other 
places) ;  Eusebius  (H.  E.  III.  16 ;  IV.  23 ;  V.  6) ;  Jerome  ( De  Viris  ittvstr.  c.  15). 
Polycarp  already  used  it,  as  appears  from  the  similarity  of  several  passages. 
All  modern  critics  (with  the  exception  of  Baur,  Schwegler,  Volkmar,  and 
Cotterill)  admit  the  Clementine  origin,  which   is  supported  by  the  internal 
evidence  of  style  and  doctrine.    CotterilPs  Peregrinus  Proteus  (1879),  which 
puts  the  Clementine  Epistles  in  their  present  shape  among  the  Stephanie  fab- 
rications, is  an  ingenious  literary  curiosity,  but  no  serious  argument*    Kenan 
says  (p.  319) :  "Pew  cT  ecn'fe  sont  aussi  authentiques" 

*  Bionysius  of  Corinth  (A.  D.  170)  first  mentions  the  liturgical  use  of  the 
Epistle  in  his  church.    Eusebius  (III.  16)  testifies  from  his  own  knowledge 
Vol.  II.    41. 


642  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A,  D.  100-311, 

poration  in  the  Alexandrian  Bible  Codex,  but  it  is  properly  pui 
after  the  Apocalypse  and  separated  from  the  apostolic  epistles, 

And  this  indicates  its  value.  It  is  not  apostolical,  not  in- 
spired—far from  it—  but  the  oldest  and  best  among  the  sub- 
apostolic  writings  both  in  form  and  contents.  It  was  occasioned 
by  party  differences  and  quarrels  in  the  church  of  Corinth, 
where  the  sectarian  spirit,  so  earnestly  rebuked  by  Paul  in  his 
first  Epistle,  had  broken  out  afresh  and  succeeded  in  deposing 
the  regular  officers  (the  presbyter-bishops).  The  writer  exhorts 
the  readers  to  harmony  and  love,  humility,  and  holiness,  after 
the  pattern  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  especially  Peter  and  Paul, 
who  had  but  recently  sealed  their  testimony  with  their  blood. 
He  speaks  in  the  highest  terms  of  Paul  who,  "  after  instructing 
the  whole  [Roman]  world  in  righteousness,  and  after  having 
reached  the  end  of  the  Vest,  and  borne  witness  before  the  rulers, 
departed  into  the  holy  place,  leaving  the  greatest  example  of 
patient  endurance."  l  He  evinces  the  calm  dignity  and  execu- 
tive wisdom  of  the  Roman  church  in  her  original  simplicity, 
without  hierarchical  arrogance  ;  and  it  is  remarkable  how  soon 
that  church  recovered  after  the  terrible  ordeal  of  the  Neronian 
persecution,  which  must  have  been  almost  an  annihilation.  He 
appeals  to  the  word  of  God  as  the  final  authority,  but  quotes  as 
freely  from  the  Apocrypha  as  from  the  canonical  Scriptures  (the 
Septuagint).  He  abounds  in  free  reminiscences  of  the  teaching 
of  Christ  and  the  Apostles.3  He  refers  to  Paul's  (First)  Epistle 


that  it  was  read  in  very  many  churches  (h  Kteiarai?  sKKhqciate)  both  in  former 
times  and  in  his  own  day.  Comp.  Jerome,  D&  Vtr.  ML  c.  15. 

1  Ch.  5.  The  rippa  r?f  6vcs(^  must  be  Spain,  whither  Paul  intended  to  go, 
Eom.  15  :  24,  28.  To  a  Koman  writing  in  Rome,  Spain  or  Britain  was  the 
Western  terminus  of  the  earth.  Comp.  Strabo  H  c.  1,  4;  III.  2.  The 
fcrifisvot  are  the  Roman  magistrates;  others  refer  the  word  specifically  to 
Tigellinus  and  Nymphidius,  the  prefects  of  the  praetorium  in  67,  or  to  HeliuR 
and  Polycletus,  who  ruled  in  Borne  during  the  absence  of  Nero  in  Greece  in  67« 

*  Funk  gives  a  Ii«t  of  quotations  and  parallel  passages,  Patr.  Apost.  L  566- 
570.  From  this  it  appears  that  157  are  from  the  0.  T.,  including  the  Apoc- 
rypha and  (apparently)  the  Assumption  of  Moses,  158  from  the  N.  T.,  but 
only  three  of  the  latter  are  strict  quotations  (ch.  46  from  Matt.  26  :  24,  and 
17:  2;  ch.  2  and  61  front  Tit.  3:  1).  Clemest  mentions  by  name  only 


\  162.  CLEMENT  OF  BOME.  643 

Co  the  Corinthians,  and  shows  great  familiarity  with  his  letters, 
with  James,  First  Peter,  and  especially  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  from  which  he  borrows  several  expressions.  Hence 
he  is  mentioned — with  Paul,  Barnabas,  and  Luke— as  one  of 
the  supposed  authors  of  that  anonymous  epistle.  Origen  con* 
jectured  that  Clement  or  Luke  composed  the  Hebrews  unde* 
the  inspiration  or  dictation  of  Paul. 

Clement  bears  clear  testimony  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity 
("  God,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  are  the 
faith  and  the  hope  of  the  elect"),  of  the  .Divine  dignity  and 
glory  of  Christ,  salvation  only  by  his  blood,  the  necessity  of 
repentance  and  living  faith,  justification  by  grace,  sanctification 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  unity  of  the  church,  and  the  Christian 
graces  of  humility,  charity,  forbearance,  patience,  and  per- 
severance. In  striking  contrast  with  the  bloody  cruelties 
practiced  by  Domitian,  he  exhorts  to  prayer  for  the  civil  rulers, 
that  God  "  may  give  them  health,  peace,  concord,  and  stability 
for  the  administration  of  the  government  he  has  given  them." * 
We  have  here  the  echo  of  Paul's  exhortation  to  the  Eomans 
(ch.  13)  under  the  tyrant  Nero.  Altogether  the  Epistle  of 
Clement  is  worthy  of  a  disciple  of  the  apostles,  although 
falling  far  short  of  their  writings  in  original  simplicity,  terse- 
ness, and  force. 

III.  In  regard  to  its  theology,  this  epistle  belongs  plainly  to 
the  school  of  Paul,  and  strongly  resembles  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  while  at  the  same  time  it  betrays  the  influence  of 
Peter  also ;  both  these  apostles  having,  in  fact,  personally 

one  book  of  the  N.  T.,  the  tmaroTty  rdv  fMKaplov  TLafaw,  with  evident  reference 
to  1  Cor,  1 ;  10  sqq.  Comp.  also  the  lists  of  Scripture  quotations  in  the  ed. 
of  Bryennios  (p.  159-165),  and  G.  and  H.  p.  144r-155. 

1 "  When  we  remember."  says  Lightfoot,  p.  268  sq.,  ft  that  this  prayer  issued 
from  the  fiery  furnace  of  persecution  after  experience  of  a  cruel  and  capricious 
tyrant  like  Domitian,  it  will  appear  truly  sublime— sublime  in  its  utterances, 
and  still  more  sublime  in  its  silence.  Who  would  have  grudged  the  Church 
of  Rome  her  primacy,  if  she  had  always  spoken  thus?"  Eopes  (I  c.  p,  34$) : 
"The  sublimity  of  this  prayer  gains  a  peculiar  significance  when  we  remembei 
that  it  ivas  Domitian  in  whose  behalf  it  was  offered." 


644  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

labored  in  the  church  of  Eome,  in  whose  name  the  letter  is 
written,  and  having  left  the  stamp  of  their  mind  upon  it 
There  is  no  trace  in  it  of  an  antagonism  between  Paulinism 
and  Petrinism.1  Clement  is  the  only  one  of  the  apostolic 
fathers,  except  perhaps  Polycarp,  who  shows  some  conception 
of  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith.  "All  (the 
saints  of  the  Old  Testament),"  says  he,2  "became  great  and 
glorious,  not  through  themselves,  nor  by  their  works,  nor  by 
their  righteousness,  but  by  the  will  of  God.  Thus  we  also, 
who  are  called  by  the  will  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus,  are  righteous 
not  of  ourselves,  neither  through  our  wisdom,  nor  through  our 
understanding,  nor  through  our  piety,  nor  through  our  works, 
which  we  have  wrought  in  purity  of  heart,  but  by  faith,  by 
which  the  almighty  God  justified  all  these  from  the  beginning  ; 
to  whom  be  glory  to  all  eternity."  And  then  Clement,  pre- 
cisely like  Paul  in  the  sizth  chapter  of  Romans,  derives  sanrti- 
fication  from  justification,  and  continues :  "  What,  then,  shovild 
we  do,  beloved  brethren?  Should  we  be  slothful  in  gjod 
works  and  neglect  love?  By  no  means!  But  with  zeal  and 
courage  we  will  hasten  to  fulfil  every  good  work.  For  the 
Creator  and  Lord  of  all  things  himself  rejoices  in  his  works." 
Among  the  good  works  he  especially  extols  love,  and  describes 
it  in  a  strain  which  reminds  one  of  Paul's  13th  chapter  of  1 
Corinthians :  "  He  who  has  love  in  Christ  obeys  the  commands 
of  Christ,  "Who  can  declare  the  bond  of  the  love  of  God,  and 
tell  the  greatness  of  its  beauty?  The  height  to  which  it  leads 
is  unspeakable.  Love  unites  us  with  God ;  covers  a  multitude 
of  sins;  beareth  all  things,  endureth  all  things.  There  is 

1  Renan  (p.  314)  calls  his  epistle  lCun  beau  morceau  neutre,  dont  les  disciple* 
sfe  Pierre  et  ceux  de  Paid  durent  se  contenter  egakment.  I  lest  probate  qu  'ilfut  un 
cfcs  agents  les  ptw>  *nergetiques  de  la  grande  ceuvre  qu&  eta-it  en  train  de  s?  accomplir, 
je  tciix  dire,  de  la  reconciliation  posthume  de  Pierre  et  de  Paul  de  lafusior  des  deux 
parti*,  sans  Funion  desquels  Fceuvre  du  Christ  ne  pouvait  qu&  p&rir" 

*  Ch.  32.  An  echo  of  Paul's  teaching  is  found  in  Polycarp,  Ad  Phil.  c.  1, 
where  he  refers  to  "the  firm  root  of  their  faith,  preached  to  them  from  olden 
times,  which  remains  to  this  day,  and  beais  fruit  in  our.  Lord  Jesus  Christ," 


J 162.  CLEMENT  OF  ROME.  645 

g  mean  in  love,  nothing  haughty.  It  knows  no  division;, 
5i  is  sot  refractory ;  it  does  everything  in  harmony.  In  love 
have  a/I  the  elect  of  God  become  perfect.  Without  love  nothing 
is  pleasing  to  God.  In  love  has  the  Lord  received  us;  for  the 
love  wti&h  he  cherished  towards  us,  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  gave 
his  blood  for  us  according  to  the  will  of  God,  and  his  flesh  for 
our  flosh,  and  his  soul  for  our  soul." l  Hence  all  his  zeal  for 
the  unit}'  of  file  church.  "  Wherefore  are  dispute,  anger,  dis- 
cord, div'^ion,  and  war  among  you  ?  Or  have  we  not  one  God 
and  one  Christ  and  one  Spirit,  who  is  poured  out  upon  us,  and 
one  callug-  in  Christ?  Wherefore  do  we  tear  and  sunder  the 
members  of  Christ,  and  bring  the  body  into  tumult  against 
itself,  anc  go  so  far  in  delusion,  that  we  forget  that  we  are 
members  o  le  of  another  ?  " 2 

Vevy  h'  Dutifully  also  he  draws  from  the  harmony  of  the 
universe  a  i  incitement  to  concord,  and  incidentally  expresses 
here  tha  r-markable  sentiment,  perhaps  suggested  by  the  old 
legends  of  the  Atlantis,  the  orbis  alter,  the  ultima  Thule,  etc., 
that  there  are  other  worlds  beyond  the  impenetrable  ocean, 
which  art  juled  by  the  same  laws  of  the  Lord.3 

But  notwithstanding  its  prevailing  Pauline  character,  this 
epistle  lowers  somewhat  the  free  evangelical  tone  of  the  Gentile 
apostle's  theology,  softens  its  anti-Judaistic  sternness,  and  blends 
it  with  the  Jewish-Christian  counterpart  of  St.  James,  showing 
that  the  conflict  between  the  Pauline  and  Petrine  views  was 

i  Ch.  49.  J  Ch.  46.    Comp.  Eph.  4:  3  sqq. 

3  Ch.  20 :  'Qft&zvof  av&p6Trot<;  atripavrog  Kai  ol  per1  avrbv  ic6fffioi  rozf  ovrdZj- 
royals  TOV  faGir6rov  dievdbvovTat.  Lightfoot  (p.  84)  remarks  on  this  passage: 
"  Clement  may  possibly  be  referring  to  some  known,  but  hardly  accessible 
iand,  lying  without  tLj  pillars  of  Hercules.  But  more  probably  he  contem- 
plated some  unknown  land  in  the  far  west  beyond  the  ocean,  like  the  fabled 
Atlantis  of  Plato,  or  the  real  America  of  modern  discovery .'*  Lightfoot  goes 
on  to  say  that  this  passage  was  thus  understood  by  Irenseus  (II.  28,  2),  Clement 
of  Alexandria  (Strom.  V.  12),  and  Origen  (Da  Print.  II.  6;  In  Ezech.  VIIL 
3),  but  that,  at  a  later  date,  this  opinion  was  condemned  by  Tertullian  (Da 
Pall.  2  Hermog.  25),  Lactantius  (InsL  II.  24),  and  Augustin  (De  Oimt.  Dd 
XVI.  9).  For  centuries  the  idea  of  Cosraas  Indicopleustes  that  the  earth  w* 
%  plain  surface  and  a  parallelogram,  prevailed  in  Christian  literature. 


646  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  £.  100-311. 

substantially  settled  at  the  end  of  the  first  century  in  the  Roman 
church,  and  also  in  that  of  Corinth. 

Clement  knows  nothing  of  an  episcopate  above  the  presby- 
terate ;  and  his  epistle  itself  is  written,  not  in  his  own  name, 
but  in  that  of  the  church  at  Rome.  But  he  represents  the 
Levitical  priesthood  as  a  type  of  the  Christian  teaching  office, 
and  insists  with  the  greatest  decision  on  outward  unity,  fixed 
order?  and  obedience  to  church  rulers.  He  speai&  in  a  tone  of 
authority  to  a  sister  church  of  apostolic  foundation,  and  thus 
reveals  the  easy  and  as  yet  innocent  beginning  of  the  papacy.1 
A  hundred  years  after  his  death  his  successors  ventured,  in  their 
own  name,  not  only  to  exhort,  but  to  excommunicate  whole 
churches  for  trifling  differences. 

The  interval  between  Clement  and  Paul,  and  the  transition 
from  the  apostolic  to  the  apocryphal,  from  faith  to  superstition, 
appears  in  the  indiscriminate  use  of  the  Jewish  Apocrypha,  and 
in  the  difference  between  Paul's  treatment  of  scepticism  in  re- 
gard to  the  resurrection,  and  his  disciple's  treatment  of  the  same 
subject.3  Clement  points  not  only  to  the  types  in  nature,  the 
i  hanges  of  the  seasons  and  of  day  and  night,  but  also  in  full 
earnest  to  the  heathen  myth  of  the  miraculous  bird,  the  phoenix 
in  Arabia,  which  regenerates  itself  every  five  hundred  years. 
When  the  phcenix — so  runs  the  fable — approaches  death,  it 
makes  itself  a  nest  of  frankincense,  myrrh,'  and  other  spices ; 
from  its  decaying  flesh  a  winged  worm  arises,  which,  when  it 
becomes  strong,  carries  the  reproductive  nest  from  Arabia  to 
Heliopolis  in  Egypt,  and  there  flying  down  by  day,  in  the  sight 
of  all,  it  lays  it,  with  the  bones  of  its  predecessors,  upon  the 
alter  of  the  sun.  And  this  takes  place,  according  to  the  reckon- 
ing of  the  priests,  every  five  hundred  years.  After  Clement  other 
fathc:  iAso  used  the  phoenix  as  a  symbol  of  the  resurrection.3 

1  See  especially  chs.  56,  58, 59,  63,  of  the  Constantinopolitan  and  Syrian  text 
*  Clement,  Ad  Cor.  c.  25.    Contrast  with  this  account  the  fifteenth  chaptei 

of  Paul's  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 
1  Tertullian  (De  Resurrect.  13),  Origen  (0.  Cfefe.  IT.  72),  Ambrose  (Hexaem. 

V.  23, 79),  Epiphanius,  Rufinus,  and  other  patristic  writers.   The  Phoenix  Wta 


?162.  CLEMENT  OF  ROME.  647 

IV.  As  to  the  time  of  its  composition,  this  epistle  falls  certainly 
after  the  death  of  Peter  and  Paul,  for  it  celebrates  their  mar- 
tyrdom; and  probably  after  the  death  of  John  (about  98);  for 
one  would  suppose,  that  if  he  had  been  living,  Clement  would 
have  alluded  to  him,  in  deference  to  superior  authority,  and  that 
the  Corinthian  Christians  would  have  applied  to  an  apostle  for 
iounsel,  rather  than  to  a  disciple  of  the  apostles  in  distant 
Borne.  The  persecution  alluded  to  in  the  beginning  of  the 
epistle  refers  to  the  Domitian  as  well  as  the  jXeronian;  for  he 
speaks  of  "  sudden  and  repeated  calamities  and  reverses  which 
have  befallen  us." l  He  prudently  abstains  from  naming  the 
imperial  persecutors,  and  intercedes  at  the  close  for  the  civil 
rulers.  Moreover,  he  calls  the  church  at  Corinth  at  that  time 
"  firmly  established  and  ancient,"  2  With  this  date  the  report 

a  favorite  symbol  of  renovation  and  resurrection,  and  even  of  Christ  himself 
among  the  early  Christians,  and  appears  frequently  on  coins,  medals,  rings, 
cups,  and  tombstones.  But  in  this  point  they  were  no  more  superstitions  than 
the  most  intelligent  heathen  contemporaries.  Herodotus  heard  the  marvelous 
story  of  the  burial  of  the  parent  bird  by  the  offspring  from  Egyptian  priests, 
II.  73.  Ovid  and  other  Latin  poets  refer  to  it,  and  Claudian  devotes  a  poem 
to  it.  Tacitus  (Ann.  VI.  28),  Pliny  (H.  Nat.  X.  2),  and  Dion  Cassius  LVIII. 
27)  record  that  the  Phoenix  actually  reappeared  in  Egypt,  A.  D.  34,  after  an 
interval  of  250  years.  According  to  Pliny  the  bird  was  also  brought  to  Rome 
by  a  decree  of  Claudius,  and  exhibited  in  the  comitium,  in  the  year  of  the  city 
800  (A.  D.  47).  This,  of  course,  was  a  fraud,  but  many,  and  among  them 
probably  Clement,  who  may  have  seen  the  wonderful  bird  from  Egypt  at  the 
time,  took  it  for  genuine.  But  an  inspired  writer  like  Paul  would  never  have 
made  use  of  such  a  heathen  fable  as  an  argument  for  a  Christian  truth.  "  It 
is  now  known/'  says  Lightfoot,  *  that  the  story  owes  its  origin  to  the  symbolic 
and  pictorial  representations  of  astronomy.  The  appearance  of  the  phoenix  is 
the  recurrence  of  a  period  marked  by  the  heliacal  rising  of  some  prominent 
Ptar  or  constellation."  See  on  the  whole  subject  Henrichsen,  De  Phsnids 
Fabuln  (Havn.  1825),  Cowper,  Gephardt  and  Harnack,  Funk,  and  Lightfoot 
jn  ch.  25  of  the  Clementine  Ep.,  Piper,  Mythokgie  und  Symbolik  der  chrM. 
Kunst  (1847)  L  446  sqq.,  and  Lepsius,  Chronologie  der  Aegypter  (1849)  ISO  aq. 

1  Ch.  1.  The  usual  reading  is:  yevo/i&of,  which  refers  to  past  ralamities. 
So  Cod.  C.  The  Alex.  MS.  is  here  defective,  probably  frewy«]  *«if.  Light- 
foot  reads  with  the  Syrian  version  ytvoptva?,  "which  are  befalling  us "  (267 
and  399),  and  refers  the  passage  to  the  continued  perils  of  th«  church  undei 
Domitiofli. 

*  BeBaioT&TTiv  KOI  apxalav,  c.  47. 


648  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

of  Eusebins  agrees,  that  Clement  did  not  take  the  bishop's  chair 
in  Rome  till  92  or  93.1 

§  163.  The  Pseudo-Clementine  Works. 

The  most  complete  collection  of  the  genuine  and  spurious  works  of 
Clement  in  Migne's  Patrol.  Grceca,  Tom.  I.  and  II. 

The  name  of  Clement  has  been  forged  upon  several  later 
•writings,  both  orthodox  and  heretical,  to  give  them  the  more 
currency  by  the  weight  of  his  name  and  position.  These 
pseudo-Clementine  works  supplanted  in  the  church  of  Eome 
the  one  genuine  work  of  Clement,  which  passed  into  oblivion 
with  the  knowledge  of  the  Greek  language.  They  are  as 
follows : 

1.  A  SECOND  EPISTLE  TO  THE  COEINTHIAKS,  falsely  so 
called,  formerly  known  only  in  part  (12  chapters),  since  1875 
in  full  (20  chapters).3  It  is  greatly  inferior  to  the  First  Epistle 

*  The  later  date  (93-97)  is  assigned  to  the  Epistle  by  Cotelier,  Tillemont, 
L&rdner,  Mohler,  Schliemann,  Bunsen,  Bitschl,  Lipsius,  Hilgenfeld,  Donald- 
son, Bryennios,  Harnack,  Uhlhorn,  Lightfoot  (who  puts  the  letter  soon  after 
the  martyrdom  of  Flavins  Clement,  A.  D.  95),  Funk  (who  puts  it  after  the 
death  of  Domitian,  96).  Bat  other  writers,. including  Hugo  Grotius,  Grabe, 
Hefele,  Wieseler,  B.  H.  Cowper,  assign  the  Epistle  to  an  earlier  date,  and  in- 
fer from  ch.  41  that  it  must  have  been  written  before  70,  when  the  temple 
service  in  Jerusalem  was  still  celebrated.  "Not  everywhere,  brethren/'  says 
Clement,  "are  the  daily  sacrifices  offered  (Trpoaqfyovrai  fivc'icu),  or  the  vows,  or 
the  sin-offerings,  or  the  trespass-offerings,  but  in  Jerusalem,  ovdy;  and  even 
there  they  are  not  offered  (xpocfepsrcu)  in  every  place,  but  only  at  the  altar 
before  the  sanctuary,  after  the  victim  to  be  offered  has  been  examined  by  the 
high-priest  and  the  ministers  already  mentioned,"  This  argument  is  very 
plausible,  but  not  conclusive,  since  Josephus  wrote  A.  D.  93  in  a  similar 
way  of  the  sacrifices  of  the  temple,  using  the  proesens  Mstoriam,  as  if  it  still 
existed,  Aid.  III.  10.  In  ch.  6  Clement  seems  to  refer  to  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  when  he  says  that  "jealousy  and  strife  have  overthrown  great  cities 
and  uprooted  great  nations"  Cowper  (L  c.  p.  16)  mentions  the  absence  of  any 
allusion  to  the  Gospel  of  John  as  another  argument.  But  the  Synoptic  Gos- 
pels are  not  named  either,  although  the  influence  of  all  the  Gospels  and  nearly 
all  the  Epistles  can  be  clearly  traced  in  Clement. 

1  Ed.  in  full  by  Bryennios,  Const.  1875,  p.  11S-142  with  Greek  notes;  by 
Funk,  with  a  Latin  version  (1. 144-171),  and  by  Lightfoot  with  an  Engliafc 
version  (380-390) 


J163.  THE  PSEUDO-CLEMENTIKE  WOEKS.  649 

In  contents  and  style,  and  of  a  later  date,  between  120  and  140, 
probably  written  in  Corinth ;  hence  its  connection  with  it  in 
MSS.1  It  is  no  epistle  at  all,  but  a  homily  addressed  fa 
"  brothers  and  sisters."  It  is  the  oldest  known  specimen  of  a 
post-apostolic  sermon,  and  herein  alone  lies  its  importance  and 
value.2  It  is  an  earnest,  though  somewhat  feeble  exhortation  to 
active  Christianity  and  to  fidelity  in  persecution,  meantime  con- 
tending with  the  Gnostic  denial  of  the  resurrection.  It  is 
orthodox  in  sentiment,  calls  Christ  "  God  and  the  Judge  of  the 
living  and  the  dead,"  and  speaks  of  the  great  moral  revolution 
wrought  by  him  in  these  words  (ch.  1) :  "  We  were  deficient  in 
understanding,  worshipping  stocks  and  stones,  gold  and  silver 
and  brass,  the  works  of  men ;  and  our  whole  life  was  nothing 
else  but  death.  .  .  .  Through  Jesus  Christ  we  have  received 
sight,  putting  off  by  his  will  the  cloud  wherein  we  were 
wrapped.  He  mercifully  saved  us.  ...  He  called  us  when  we 
\tere  not,  and  willed  that  out  of  nothing  we  should  attain  a  real 
existence." 

2.  Two  ENCYCLICAL  LETTERS  os  VIRGESTITY.  They  were 
first  discovered  by  J.  J.  Wetstein  in  the  library  of  the  Remon- 
strants at  Amsterdam,  in  a  Syriac  Version  written  A.  D.  1470, 
and  published  as  an  appendix  to  his  famous  Greek  Testament, 

1  It  is  first  mentioned  by  Eusebius,  but  with  the  remark  that  it  was  not  used 
by  ancient  writers  (H.  E.  III.  38).     Irenseus,  Clement  of  Alex.,  and  Origen 
know  only  one  Ep.  of  Clement.    Dionysius  of  Corinth,  in  a  letter  to  Bishop 
Soter  of  Borne,  calls  it,  indeed,  "the  former *f  (rpor^pa),  but  with  reference  to 
a  later  epistle  of  Soter  to  the  Corinthians  (Euseb.  J31  K  IV.  23).    Bryennios, 
the  discoverer  of  the  complete  copy,  still  vindicates  the  Clementine  author- 
ship of  the  homily,  and  so  does  Sprinzl  (p.  28),  but  all  other  modern  scholars 
give  it  up.    Wocher  (1S30)  assigned  it  to  Dionysius  of  Corinth,  Hilgenfeld 
first  to  Soter  of  Borne,  afterwards  (Clem.  Ep.  ed  II.  1876,  p.  XLIX)  to  Clement 
of  Alex,  in  his  youth  during  his  sojourn  in  Corinth,  Harnack  (1877)  to  a  third 
Clement  who  lived  in  Borne  between  the  Boman   and  the  Alexandrian 
Clement,  Lightfoot  (App.  p.  307)  and  Funk  (ProZ.  yxyrs:)  to  an  unknown 
Corinthian  before  A.  D.  140,  on  account  of  the  allusion  to  the  Isthmian  games 
(c.  7)  and  the  connection  with  the  Ep.  of  Clement.    Comp.  above  p.  225. 

2  Lightfoot  (p.  317)  calls  it  a  testimony  "of  the  lofty  moral  earnestness  and 
triumphant  faith  which  subdued  a  reluctant  world,  and  laid  it  prostrate  at  it 
feet  of  the  cross,"  but  "almost  worthless  as  a  literary  work." 


G50  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

1752.1  They  commend  the  unmarried  life,  and  contain 
exhortations  and  rules  to  ascetics  of  both  sexes.  They  show 
the  early  development  of  an  asceticism  which  is  foreign  to 
the  apostolic  teaching  and  practice.  While  some  Roman 
Catholic  divines  still  defend  the  Clementine  origin/  others 
with  stronger  arguments  assign  it  to  the  middle  or  close  of  the 
second  century.3 

3.  The  APOSTOLICAL  CONSTITUTIONS  and  CANONS.*     The 
so-called  LiTUnaiA  S.  CLEMEXTIS  is  a  part  of  the  eighth  book 
of  the  Constitutions. 

4.  The  PsErDO-CLE^iEXTiNA^  or  twenty  Ebionitic  homilies 
and  their  Catholic  reproduction,  the  RECOGNITIONS.5 

5.  FIVE  DECRETAL  LETTERS,  which   pseudo-Isidore   has 
placed   at   the   head  of   his   collection.     Two  of  them  are 
addressed  to  James,  the   Lord's  Brother,  are  older  than  the 
pseudo-Isidore,  and  date  from  the  second  or  third  century; 
the  three  others  were  fabricated  by  him.    They  form  the  basis 
for  the  most  gigantic  and  audacious  literary  forgery  of  the 
middle  ages — the  Isidorian  Decretals — which   subserved   the 
purposes  of  the  papal  hierarchy.6    The  first  Epistle  to  James 
gives  an  account  of  the  appointment  of  Clement  by  Peter  as 
his  successor  in  the  see  of  Rome,  with  directions  concerning  the 
functions  of  the  church-officers  and  the  general  administration 
of  the  church.    The  second  Epistle  to  James  refers  to  the 
administration  of  the  eucharist,  church  furniture,  and  other 
ritualistic  matters.    They  are  attached  to  the  pseudo-Clementine 
Homilies  and  Recognitions.    But  it  is  remarkable  that  in  the 

1  Best  edition  with  Latin  version  by  Beelen :  S.  Clementis  IL  Epistolce  Unas 
de  Virginitate.     Louvain,  1856.    German  translation   by  Zingerle  (1827), 
French  by  Villecourt  (1853),  English  in  the  "  Ante-Nieene  Library." 

2  Villeeoart,  Beelen,  Mohler,  Chanapagny,  Briick. 

*  Mansi,  Hefele,  Alzog,  Funk  (ProL  XLII.  sq.).  Also  all  the  Protestant 
critics  except  Wetstein,  the  discoverer.  Lightfoot  (I.  e.  p.  15  sq.)  assigns  the 
document  to  the  beginning  of  the  third  centory.  Eusebius  nowhere  men- 
tions h. 

4  See  \  56,  p.  183  sqq.  s  See  §  114,  p.  435  sqq. 

«  They  originated  in  the  east  of  France  between  A.  D.  829  and  847. 


j  164.  IGNATIUS  OF  AJSTTIOCH.  651 

Homilies  James  of  Jerusalem  appears  as  the  superior  of  Peter 
of  Rome,  who  must  give  an  account  of  his  doings,  and  entrust 
to  him  his  sermons  for  safe  keeping. 

§  164.  IgnatiiLs  of  Antioeh. 
Comp.  ??  17  and  45  (p.  47  sqq.  and  149  sqq.). 

SOURCES: 

I.  The  Epistles. 

W.  CURKTON  :  The  Ancient  Syriac  Version  of  the  Epistles  of  8.  Ignatius 
to  S.  Potycarp,  the  Ephesians,  and  the  Romans.  With  transl.  and  notes. 
Lond.  and  Berl.,  1845.  Also  in  LIGHTFOOT  II.  Go9-676. 

C.  C.  J.  BUXSE^":  Die  3  achten  u.  die  4  unachten  Brief e  des  Ignatius  von 
Ant.  Hergestellter  u.  vergleichender  Text  mit  Anmerkk.  Hamb.,  1847. 

W.  CURETON:  Corpus  Ignatianum:  a  complete  collection  of  the  Ignaiian 
Epistles,  genuine,  interpolated,  and  spurious;  together  with  numerous 
extracts  from  them  as  quoted  by  eccles.  writers  down  to  the  tenth  century; 
in  Syriac,  Greek,  and  Latin,  an  EngL  transl  of  the  Syriac  text,  copious 
notes,  and  introd.  Lond.  and  Berl.,  1849. 

J,  H.  PETERMAOT :  S.  Ignatii  quce  feruntur  Epistolcs,  una,  cumf  ejusdem 
martyrio,  collatis  edd.  Gr&cis,  versionibusque  Syriaca,  Armeniaca,  La- 
tinis.  Lips.,  1849. 

THEOD.  ZA.HTST;  Ignatii  et  Poly  carpi  Epistula.  Marty  ria,  Fragmenta.  Lips. 
1876  (the  second  part  of  Patmm  Apostolorum  Opera,  ed.  Gebhardt, 
Harnack  and  Zahn).  This  is  the  best  critical  ed.  of  the  shorter  Greek 
text.  Funk  admits  its  superiority  ("non  hesitant  dico,  textuin  quern 
exhibuit  Zahn,  prioribus  longe  pr&stare"  Prol.,  p.  IXXT.). 

PR,  XAV.  FTINTK:  :  Opera  Patmm  Apost,  vol.  I.    Tub.,  1878. 

J.  B.  LIGHTFOOT  :  The  Apost  Fathers.    P.  II.  vol.  I.  and  II.  Lond.  1885. 

English  translations  of  all  the  Epistles  of  Ignatius  (Syriac,  arid  Greek 
in  both  recensions)  by  EGBERTS,  DONALDSON,  and  CROMBIE,  In 
Clark's  "  Ante-Nicene  Library,  (1867),  and  by  LIGHTFOOT  (1885). 

Earlier  Engl.  translations  by  WHISTOX  (1711)  and  CLEMENTSON  (1827). 

German  translations  by  M.  I.  WOCHEH  (1839)  and  Jos.  2toscHL  (Die 
Briefe  des  heiL  Ign.  und  sein  Martyrium,  1870). 

II.  TheMartyria. 

AdTA  MARTYBH  S.  IGNATII  (Mapr%>ioy  roi>  dyiov  lepofidprvpoc  'lyvariov  TOV 
QwQopov),  ed.  by  Ussher  (from  two  Latin  copies,  1647),  Cotelier 
(Greek,  1672),  Ruiuart  (1689),  Grabe,  Ittig,  Smith,  Gallandi,  Jacob- 
son,  Hefele,  Dressel,  Cureton,  Mosinger,  Petermann,  Zahn  (pp.  301 
sqq.),  (tfunk  (1. 254r26o ;  II.  218-275),  and  Li^htfoot  (II.  473-536).  A 
Syriac  version  was  edited  by  Cureton  ( Corpus  Ignat.  222-22-5,  252- 
255),  and  more  fully  by  Mosinger  (Supplementum  Corporis  Ignat. , 
1872).  An  Armenian  Martyr,  was  edited  by  Petermann,  1849.  The 
Martyrium  Colbertinum  (from  the  codex  Colbertinus  in  Paris)  has 


052  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

seven  chapters.  There  are  several  later  and  discordant  recensions, 
with  muny  interpolations.  The  Acts  of  Ignatius  profess  to  be  writ- 
ten by  two  of  his  deacons  and  travelling  companions ;  but  they  were 
unknown  to  Euscbius,  they  contradict  the  Epistles,  they  abound  in 
uhhistorical  statements,  and  the  various  versions  conflict  with  each 
other.  Hence  recent  Protestant  critics  reject  them;  and  even  the 
latest  Roman  Catholic  editor  admits  that  they  must  have  been  writ- 
ten after  the  second  century.  Probably  not  before  the  fifth.  Comp. 
the  investigation  of  Zahn,  Ign.  v.  Ant,  p.  1-74;  Funk,  Prokg.  p.  kxk. 
sqq.,  and  Lightfoot,  EL  363-536. 

The  patristic  statements  concerning  Ignatius  are  collected  by  Cure- 
ton,  Bunsen,  Petermann,  Zahn,  p.  326-381,  and  Lightfoot,  1. 127-221. 

CRITICAL  DISCUSSIONS. 

JOB,  DALLJEUS  (Dailie):  De  scriptis  qu&  sub  Dionysii  Areopagitce  et 

lynatii  nouwdbiis  circumferuntur,  libri  duo.    Genev.,  1666.    Against 

the  genuineness. 
*J.  PEARSON:  Vlndicics  Ignatiance.  Cambr.,  1672.    Also  in  Cleric,  ed.  of 

the  Patres  Apost.  II.  250-440,  and  in  Migne's  Patrol.  Or.,  Tom.  V. 

Eepublished  with  annotations  by  K  Churton^  in  the  Anglo-Cath. 

Library,  Oxf.,  1852,  2  vols. 
*R.  EOTHE:  Anfange  der  christl.  Kirche.    Wittenb.,  1837.  I.,  p.  715  sqq. 

For  the  shorter  Greek  recension. 
Baron  vox  BUNSEN  (at  that  time  Prussian  ambassador  in  England) : 

Ignatim  wn  Ant.  u.  seine  ZeiL  7  fiendschreiben  an  Dr.  Neander. 

Hamb.,  1847.    For  the  Syriac  version. 
BArn:  Die  Ignatianisrhen  Brief e  u.  ihr  neuster  Kritiker.     Tiib,7  1848. 

Against  Bunsen  and  against  the  genuineness  of  all  recensions. 
DENZIXGER  (R.  C.):   Ueber  die  jEchtheit  des  bisherigen  Textes  der  Igna- 

tian.  Briefe.    Wurzb.,  1849. 
*G.  UHLHOBN  :  Das  Verhdltniss  der  syrischen  Recension  der  Ignatian.  Br. 

zu  der  kurzeren  griechischen.  Leipz.,  1851  (in  the  "Zeitschr,  fur  hist. 

Theol.");  and  his  article  "Ignatius"  in  Eerzog's  Theol.  EncykL, 

vol.  vi.  (1856),  p.  628  sqq.,  and  in  the  second  ed.,  vol.  vi.  688-694. 

For  the  shorter  Greek  recension. 

THIEKSCH  :  Kirche  im  apost.  Zeitalter.    Frankf,  u.  Erl.,  1852,  p.  320  sqq. 
LlPSirs:  reber  die  JEchtheit  der  syr.  Recens.  der  Ignat.  Br.    Leipz.,  1856 

(in  Niedner's  "  Zeitschr.  fur  hist.  Theol.").    For  the  Syriac  version. 

But  he  afterwards  changed  his  view  in  Hilgenfeld's  "Zeitschrifb  f. 

wiss.  Theol."  1874,  p.  211. 
VATJCHER:    JRecherches   critiques   sur   les   lettres   cFIgnace   d?Antioche. 

Geneve,  1856. 

MERX  :  Meletemata  Ignatiana.    Hal.  1861. 
*THEOD.  ZAHX:  Ignatius  wn  Antiochlen.    Gotha,  1873.    (631  pages.) 

For  the  short  Greek  recension.    The  best  vindication.    Comp.  the 

Proleg.  to  his  ed.,  1876. 


J161  IGNATIUS  OF  ANTIOCE.  653 

BEXA.NT:  Les  Emngiles  (1877  j,  ch.  xxu.  485-498,  and  the  introduction, 
p.  x  sqq.  Comp.  also  his  notice  of  Zahn  in  the  "Journal  dea 
Savants"  for  1874.  Against  the  genuineness  of  all  Ep.  except 
Romans.  See  in  reply  Zahn,  Proleg,  p.  x. 

F.  X.  FUNK  :  Die  Echthrit  der  Ignatiani*chen  Briefe.    Tubingen  1883. 

LIGHTFOOT  :  St.  Paul's  Ep.  to  the  Phttippians  (Lond.  1873),  Excurs.  on 
the  Chr.  Ministry,  p.  208-211,  and  232-236.  "  The  short  Greek  of 
the  Ignatian  letters  is  probably  corrupt  or  spurious  :  but  from  inter- 
nal evidence  this  recension  can  hardly  have  been  made  later  than 
the  middle  of  the  second  century  "  (p.  210).  On  p.  232,  note,  he 
expressed  his  preference  with  Lipsius  for  the  short  Syriac  text 
But  since  then  he  has  changed  his  mind  in  favor  of  the  short 
Greek  recension.  See  his  S.  Ignatius  and  S.  Polycarp,  London,  1885, 
Vol.  L,  315-414.  He  repeats  and  reinforces  Zahn's  arguments. 

CANON  R.  TEAVEKS  SMITH  :  St.  Ignatius  in  Smith  and  Wace  III.  (1882) 
20D-223.  For  the  short  Greek  recension. 

On  the  chronology  : 

Jos.  NIESCHL:  Das  Todesjahr  des  Ignatius  v.  J.  und  die  drei  oriental. 
Feldziige  des  Kaisers  Trajan  (1869)  ;  ADOLF  HAENACK  :  Die  Zett  des 
Ignatius  und  die  Chronologie  der  Antiockenischen  Bisckofe  bis  Tyran- 
nu-s  (Leipzig,  1878)  ;  and  WEESELER  :  Die  Ckristenverfolgungen  der 
Ccesaren  (Giitersloh,  1878),  p.  125  sqq. 

On  the  theology  of  Ignatius,  comp.  the  relevant  sections  in  MOHLEB, 
HILGESTFELD,  ZAHN  (422-494),  XiESCHL,  and  SPEINZL. 

I.  Life  of  Ignatius. 

iG^ATTCTSj  surnamed  Theophorus,1  stood  at  the  head  of  the 
Church  of  Antioch  at  the  close  of  the  first  century  and  the  be- 
ginning of  the  second,  and  was  thus  contemporaneous  with  Cle- 
ment of  Rome  and  Simeon  of  Jerusalem.  The  church  of  Antioch 
was  the  mother-church  of  Gentile  Christianity;  and  the  city  was 
the  second  city  of  the  Roman  empire.  Great  numbers  of  Chris- 


c,  "bearer  of  God."  The  titles  of  the  Epistles  call  him  'lywznoc  6 
KOI  Geo$6poc}  adding  simply  the  Greek  to  the  Latin  name.  The  MartyriwA 
Ignatii,  c.  2,  makes  him  explain  the  term,  in  answer  to  a  question  of  Trajan,  as 
meaning  "one  who  has  Christ  in  his  breast."  The  still  later  legend  (in  Sy- 
meon  Metaphrastes  and  the  Mencsa  Grceea)j  by  changing  the  accent  (Bflfoopof, 
Theoph6rus),  gives  the  name  the  passive  meaning,  "one  carried  by  God"  be- 
cause Ignatius  was  the  child  whom  Christ  took  up  in  his  arms  and  set  before 
bis  disciples  as  a  pattern  of  humility  (Matt.  IS  :  2).  So  the  Acta  Sanctorum, 
1  Febr.  I.  28.  The  Syrians  called  him  Nuror^  t.he  Fiery,  in  allusion  to  lus 
Latin  name  from  ignis. 


SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-811. 

tians  and  a  host  of  heretical  tendencies  were  collected  there,  and 
pushed  the  development  of  doctrine  and  organization  with  greai 
rapidity. 

As  in  the  case  of  Rome,  tradition  differs  concerning  the  first 
episcopal  succession  of  Antioch,  making  Ignatius  either  the  sec- 
ond or  the  first  bishop  of  this  church  after  Peter,  and  calling 
him  now  a  disciple  of  Peter,  now  of  Paul,  now  of  John.  The 
Apostolic  Constitutions  intimate  that  Evodius  and  Ignatius 
presided  contemporaneously  over  that  church,  the  first  being 
nnlained  by  Peter,  the  second  by  Paul.1  Baronius  and  others 
•suppose  the  one  to  have  been  the  bishop  of  the  Jewish,  the  other 
»f  the  Gentile  converts.  Thiersch  endeavors  to  reconcile  the 
fMnflictin^  statements  by  the  hypothesis,  that  Peter  appointed 
Ev«idius  presbyter,  Paul  Ignatius,  and  John  subsequently  or- 
dained Ignatius  bishop.  But  Ignatius  himself  and  Eusebius 
say  nothing  of  his  apostolic  discipleship ;  while  the  testimony  of 
Jerome  and  the  Martyrium  Colbertinum  that  he  and  Polyearp 
were  fellow-disciples  of  St.  John,  is  contradicted  by  the  Epistle 
of  Ignatius  to  Polyearp,  according  to  which  he  did  not  know 
Polyearp  till  he  came  to  Smyrna  on  his  way  to  Rome.2  Ac- 
cording to  later  story,  Ignatius  was  the  first  patron  of  sacred 
music,  and  introduced  the  antiphony  in  Antioch. 

But  his  peculiar  glory,  in  the  eyes  of  the  ancient  church,  wat 
his  martyrdom.  The  minute  account  of  it,  in  the  various  ver- 
sions of  the  Martyrinm  8.  Ignatii,  contains  many  embellishments 
of  pious  fraud  and  fancy;  but  the  fact  itself  is  confirmed  by 
general  tradition,  Ignatius  himself  says,  in  his  Epistle  to  the 

1  Ap.  Const.  VJl.  46:  'Avrutxeiaf  Eud&of  UEV  in9  Efjw  IKrpov,  'lyvfotoc  fe  M 
HaiXov  KEtftparonrtu.  According  to  Eusebius  (Chron.,  ed.  Schcene  IL,  p.  158) 
and  Jerome,  Ignatius  was  *  Antiochto  secundiis  episcopits."  Comp.  Zahn,  Ign. 
».  A.,  p.  56  sqq.,  and  Harnack,  Die  Zeit  des  Ign.,  p.  11  sq. 

*Grmp.  Zahn,  p.  402,  who  rejects  this  tradition  as  altogether  groundless: 
"Esfchlt  bfi  lynatfux  (inch  jcde  leiseste  Spur  doxon,  doss  er  noch  aus  apostolischem 
Mind  die  Predict  gehort  habe."  He  calk  himself  five  times  the  least  among 
the  Antiochian  Christians,  and  not  worthy  to  be  one  of  their  number.  From 
*hw,  Zahn  infers  that  he  was  converted  late  in  life  from  determined  hostility  to 
enthusiastic  devotion,  like  Paul  (comp.  1  Cor.  15:  8-10). 


J164.  IGNATIUS  OF  ANTIOCH.  655 

Romans,  according  to  the  Syriac  version :  "From  Syria  to  Rome 
I  fight  with  wild  beasts,  on  water  and  on  land,  by  day  and  by 
night,  chained  to  ten  leopards  [soldiers]/  made  worse  by  signs  of 
kindness.  Yet  their  wickednesses  do  me  good  as  a  disciple;  but 
not  on  this  account  am  I  justified.  "\Yould  that  I  might  be  glad 
of  the  beasts  made  ready  for  me.  And  I  pray  that  they  may  be 
xrand  ready  for  me.  Nay,  I  will  fawn  upon  them,  that  they 
nay  devour  me  quickly,  and  not,  as  they  have  done  with  some, 
refuse  to  touch  me  from  fear.  Yea,  and  if  they  will  not  volun- 
tarily do  it,  I  will  bring  them  to  it  by  force." 

The  Acts  of  his  martyrdom  relate  more  minutely,  that  Igna- 
tius was  brought  before  the  Emperor  Trajan  at  Antioch  in  the 
ninth  year  of  his  reign  (107-108),  was  condemned  to  death  as  a 
Christian,  was  transported  in  chains  to  Rome,  was  there  thrown 
to  lions  in  the  Coliseum  for  the  amusement  of  the  people,  and 
that  his  remains  were  carried  back  to  Antioch  as  an  invaluable 
treasure.2  The  transportation  may  be  accounted  for  as  designed 
to  cool  the  zeal  of  the  bishop,  to  terrify  other  Christians  on  the 
way,  and  to  prevent  an  outbreak  of  fanaticism  in  the  church  of 
Antioch.8  But  the  chronological  part  of  the  statement  makes 
difficulty.  So  far  as  we  know,  from  coins  and  other  ancient 
documents,  Trajan  did  not  come  to  Antioch  on  Ms  Parthian  ex- 
pedition till  the  year  114  or  115.  We  must  therefore  either 
place  the  martyrdom  later,*  or  suppose,  what  is  much  more  pro- 

i  "0  Ion  trrpaTivrav  rayfia,  is  added  here  for  explanation  by  the  two  Greek 
versions,  and  by  Eusebius  also,  JET.  E,  IIL  36. 

*  fyffav'pbg  dri.wof,  Mart.  c.  6. 

8  Lucian,  in  his  satire  on  the  Death  of  Peregrini***  represents  this  Cynic  philo- 
Bopher  as  a  hypocritical  bishop  and  confessor,  who  while  in  prison  received 
and  sent  messages,  and  was  the  centre  of  attention  and  correspondence  among 
the  credulous  and  good-natured  Christians  in  Syria  and  Asia  Minor.  The 
Doincidence  is  so  striking  that  Zahn  and  Kenan  agree  in  the  inference  that 
Lucian  knew  the  story  of  Ignatius,  and  intended  to  mimic  him  in  the  person 
of  Peregrinus  Proteus,  as  he  mimicked  the  martyrdom  of  Polycarp.  See 
Les  Gvangttes,  p.  430  sq* 

*  Grabe  proposes  to  read,  in  the  Martyr,  c.  2,  <foedrp  evvdru  ETEL,  for 
which  would  give  the  year  116.    Tillemont  and  others  escape  the  difficulty  by 
supposing,  without  good  reason,  a  double  Parthian  expedition  of  Trajan,  one 


656  SEOOSD  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

bable,  that  Ignatius  did  not  appear  before  the  emperor  himself 
at  all,  but  before  his  governor.1  Eusebius,  Chrysostom,  and 
other  ancient  witnesses  say  nothing  of  an  imperial  judgment, 
and  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  rather  implies  that  Ignatius  was 
not  condemned  by  the  emperor  at  all ;  for  otherwise  it  would 
have  been  useless  for  him  to  forbid  them  to  intercede  in  his  be- 
half. An  appeal  vas  possible  from  a  lower  tribunal,  but  not 
from  the  emperor's. 

II.  His  Letters. 

On  his  journey  to  Rome,  Bishop  Ignatius,  as  a  prisoner  of 
Jesus  Christ,  wrote  seven  epistles  to  various  churches,  mostly  in 
Asia  Minor.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  put  them  in  the  following 
order:  (1)  To  the  Ephesians;  (2)  to  the  Magnesians;  (3)  to  the 
Trallians;  (4)  to  the  Romans;  (5)  to  the  Philadelphia^ ;  (6)  to 
the  Smyrneans ;  (7)  to  Polycarp,  bishop  of  Smyrna*  The  first 
four  were  composed  in  Smyrna;  the  other  three  later  in  Troas, 
These  seven  epistles,  in  connection  with  a  number  of  other  de- 
cidedly spurious  epistles  of  Ignatius,  have  come  down  to  us  in 
two  Greek  versions,  a  longer  and  a  shorter.  The  shorter  is 
unquestionably  to  be  preferred  to  the  longer,  which  abounds 
with  later  interpolations.  Besides  these,  to  increase1  the  confu- 
sion of  controversy,  a  Syriac  translation  has  been  made  known 
in  184o,  which  contains  only  three  of  the  former  epistles — those 
to  Polyr'arp,  to  the  Ephesians,  and  to  the  Romans — and  these 
in  a  much  shorter  form.  This  version  is  regarded  by  some  as 
an  exact  transfer  of  the  original ;  by  others,  with  greater  proba- 
bility, as  a  mere  extract  from  it  for  practical  and  ascetic  pur- 
poses* 

;n  107  and  another  In  115  or  116.  Comp.  Francke:  Zur  Geschtefa  Trajart* 
1837,  p.  233  sqq.,  and  Budinger,  Untersuchungen  zur  rom.  Eimergesch.  1. 153 
p<jq.  Mrschl  assumes  even  three  oriental  expeditions  of  Trajan.  Wieselei 
nnd  Frank  defend  the  traditional  date  (107);  Harnack  puts  the  martyrdom 
down  to  the  reign  of  Hadrian  or  Antoninus  Pius,  but  without  solid  reason* 
Zahn  i  p.  5-S,i  leaves  it  indefinite  between  107  and  116,  Lightf.  between  llOand  118, 
*£>  IThlhom,  Zahn  (243  sq.),  Funk  (XLYIL).  Comp.  Lightfoot  (II.  390)! 


2  164.  IGNATIUS  OF  ANTIOCE.  657 

The  question  therefore  lies  between  the  shorter  Greek  copy 
and  the  Syriae  version.  The  preponderance  of  testimony  is  for 
the  former,  in  which  the  letters  are  no  loose  patch-work,  but 
were  produced  each  under  its  own  impulse,  were  known  to 
Eusebius  (probably  even  to  Polycarp)/  and  agree  also  with  the 
Armenian  version  of  the  fifth  century,  as  compared  by  Peter- 
maim.  The  three  Syriac  epistles,  however,  though  they  lack 
some  of  the  strongest  passages  on  episcopacy  and  on  the  divinity 
of  Christ,  contain  the  outlines  of  the  same  life-picture,  and  espe- 
cially the  same  fervid  enthusiasm  for  martyrdom,  as  the  seven 
Greek  epistles. 

III.  His  Character  and  Position  in  history. 

Ignatius  stands  out  in  history  as  the  ideal  of  a  catholic  mar- 
tyr, and  as  the  earliest  advocate  of  the  hierarchical  principle  in 
both  its  good  and  its  evil  points.  As  a  writer,  he  is  remarkable 
for  originality,  freshness  and  force  of  ideas,  and  for  terse,  spark- 
ling and  sententious  style ;  but  in  apostolic  simplicity  and  sound- 
ness, he  is  inferior  to  Clement  and  Polycarp,  and  presents  a 
stronger  contrast  to  the  epistles  of  the  j^ew  Testament.  Clement 
shows  the  calmness,  dignity  and  governmental  wisdom  of  the 
Roman  character.  Ignatius  glows  with  the  fire  and  impetuosity 
of  the  Greek  and  Syrian  temper  which  carries  him  beyond  the 
bounds  of  sobriety.  He  was  a  very  uncommon  man,  and  made 
a  powerful  impression  upon  his  age.  He  is  the  incarnation,  as  it 
were,  of  the  three  closely  connected  ideas :  the  glory  of  martyr- 
dom, the  omnipotence  of  episcopacy,  and  the  hatred  of  heresy 
and  schism.  Hierarchical  pride  and  humility,  Christian  charity 
and  churchly  exclusiveness  are  typically  represented  in  Ignatius. 

1  Polycarp  writes  to  the  PhHippians  (di.  13),  that  he  had  sent  them  tk« 
Epistles  of  Ignatius  (Tag  eTTiaro^a^  'lyvar'Lov,  rag  ^SJJL^ELGOL^  yftiv  in3  arrow  xat 
M&ag  .  .  fa-tyTJHipev  fyuv).  Zahn  and  Funk  maintain  that  this  syUoge  Po/ycarp- 
iana,  consisted  of  six  epistles,  and  excluded  that  to  the  Romans.  (Ussher  ex- 
cluded the  Ep.  to  Polycarp).  Irenaeus  quotes  a  passage  from  the  Epistle  to  the 
Bomans,  Adv.  Hcer.  V-  28,  ?  4.  Origen  speaks  of  several  letters  of  Ignatius, 
and  quotes  a  passage  from  Bomans  and  another  from  Ephesians,  PrdL  in  Gmt. 
Cantic.  and  Horn.'  VI.  in  Luc.  (III.  30  and  938,  Delarue).  Zahn  (p.  513)  finds 
also  traces  of  Ignatius  in  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Lucian's  book  De  Jtforfe 
rinL  which  was  written  soon  after  the  martyrdom  of  Polycarp. 
Yol.  II.  42  '  * 


658  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

As  he  appears  personally  in  his  epistles,  his  most  beautiful 
and  venerable  trait  is  his  glowing  love  for  Christ  as  God  incar- 
nate, and  his  enthusiasm  for  martyrdom.  If  great  patriots 
thought  it  sweet  to  die  for  their  country,  he  thought  it  sweeter 
and  more  honorable  to  die  for  Christ,  and  by  his  blood  to  ferti- 
lize the  soil  for  the  growth  of  His  Church.  "  I  would  rather 
die  for  Christ,"  says  he,  "than  rule  the  whole  earth."  "It  is 
glorious  to  go  down  in  the  world,  in  order  to  go  up  into  God." 
He  beseeches  the  Romans:  "Leave  me  to  the  beasts,  that  I  may 
by  them  be  made  partaker  of  God.  I  am  a  grain  of  the  wheat 
of  God,  and  I  would  be  ground  by  the  teeth  of  wild  beasts,  that 
I  may  be  found  pure  bread  of  God.  Rather. fawn  upon  the 
beasts,  that  they  may  be  to  me  a  grave,  and  leave  nothing  of 
my  body,  that,  when  I  sleep,  I  may  not  be  burdensome  to  any 
one.  Then  will  I  truly  be  a  disciple  of  Christ,  when  the  world 
can  no  longer  even  see  my  body.  Pray  the  Lord  for  me,  that 
through  these  instruments  I  may  be  found  a  sacrifice  to  God." l 
And  further  on :  "  Fire,  and  cross,  and  exposure  to  beasts,  scat- 
tering of  the  bones,  hewing  of  the  limbs,  crushing  of  the  whole 
body,  wicked  torments  of  the  devil,  may  come  upon  me,  if  they 
only  make  me  partaker  of  Jesus  Christ.  .  .  .  My  Jove  is  cruci- 
fied, and  there  is  no  fire  in  me,  which  loves  earthly  stuff.  .  .  . 
I  rejoice  not  in  the  food  of  perishableness,  nor  in  the  pleasures 
of  this  life.  The  bread  of  God  would  I  have,  which  is  the  flesh 
of  Christ ;  and  for  drink  I  wish  his  blood,  which  is  imperisha- 
ble love."3 

From  these  and  similar  passages,  however,  we  perceive  also 
that  his  martyr-spirit  exceeds  the  limits  of  the  genuine  apostolic 
soberness  and  resignation,  which  is  equally  willing  to  depart  or 
to  remain  according  to  the  Lord's  good  pleasure.3  It  degene- 
rates into  boisterous  impatience  and  morbid  fanaticism.  It  re- 
sembles the  lurid  torch  rather  than  the  clear  calm  light.  There 
mingles  also  in  all  his  extravagant  professions  of  humility  and 

*  Ad  Bom.  c.  2,  according  to  the  Syriac  tert;  c.  4^  in  the  Greek. 
»Ch.4(Syr.),or5-7(Gr.). 

*  Comp.  Phil.  1 :  23,  24,  aod  Matt  26:  89u 


8  164.  IGNATIUS  OF  ANTIOCH.  659 

entire  un worthiness  a  refined  spiritual  pride  and  self-commend- 
ation. And,  finally,  there  is  something  offensive  in  the  tone  of 
his  epistle  to  Polycarp,  in  which  he  addresses  that  venerable 
bishop  and  apostolic  disciple,  who  at  that  time  must  have 
already  entered  upon  the  years  of  ripe  manhood,  not  as  a  colleague 
and  brother,  but  rather  as  a  pupil,  with  exhortations  and  warn- 
ings, such  as :  "  Strive  after  more  knowledge  than  thou  hast." 
"  Be  wise  as  the  serpents."  "  Be  more  zealous  than  thou  art." 
"Flee  the  arts  of  the  devil."1  This  last  injunction  goes  even 
beyond  that  of  Paul  to  Timothy:  "Flee  youthful  lusts,"2  and 
can  hardly  be  justified  by  it.  Thus,  not  only  in  force  and  depth 
of  teaching,  but  also  in  life  and  suffering,  there  is  a  significant 
difference  between  an  apostolic  and  a  post-apostolic  martyr. 

The  doctrinal  and  churchly  views  of  the  Ignatian  epistles  are 
framed  on  a  peculiar  combination  and  somewhat  materialistic 
apprehension  of  John's  doctrine  of  the  incarnation,  and  Paul's 
idea  of  the  church  as  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ  In  the  "  catholic 
church  " — an  expression  introduced  by  him — that  is,  the  episco- 
pal orthodox  organization  of  his  day,  the  author  sees,  as  it  were, 
the  continuation  of  the  mystery  of  the  incarnation,  on  the  reality 
of  which  he  laid  great  emphasis  against  the  Docetists;  and  in 
every  bishop,  a  visible  representative  of  Christ,  and  a  personal 
centre  of  ecclesiastical  unity,  which  he  presses  home  upon  his 
readers  with  the  greatest  solicitude  and  almost  passionate 
zeal.  He  thus  applies  those  ideas  of  the  apostles  directly  to  the 
outward  organization,  and  makes  them  subservient  to  the  princi- 
ple and  institution  of  the  growing  hierarchy.  Here  lies  the 
chief  importance  of  these  epistles;  and  the  cause  of  their  high 
repute  with  catholics  and  prelatists,3  and  their  unpopularity  with 

1  Tdf  KaKorexvia?  Qevys,  according  to  all  the  MSS.,  even  the  Syriac.  Bunsen 
proposes  to  read  KaKor^ov^  in  the  sense  of  seductive  women,  coquettes,  instead 
of  KOKorexvhf.  But  this,  besides  being  a  mere  conjecture,  would  not  materially 
soften  tlie  warning. 

»  2  Tim*  ii.  22. 

*  Such  Roman  Catholic  writers  as  Nirschl  and  Sprinzl  find  the  whole  theo- 
logy and  church  polity  of  Rome  in  Ignatius.  Episcopalians  admire  him  for 
his  advocacy  of  episcopacy ;  but  he  proves  too  little  and  too  much  for  them; 


660  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

anti-episcopalians,  and  modern  critics  of  the  more  radical 
school.1 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  idea  of  the  episcopal  hierarchy  which 
we  have  developed  in  another  chapter,  should  be  first  clearly 
and  boldly  brought  out,  not  by  the  contemporary  Roman  bishop 
Clement,2  but  by  a  bishop  of  the  Eastern  church;  though  it 
was  transplanted  by  him  to  the  soil  of  Rome,  and  there  sealed 
with  his  martyr  blood.  Equally  noticeable  is  the  circumstance, 
that  these  oldest  documents  of  the  hierarchy  soon  became  so  in- 
terpolated, curtailed,  and  mutilated  by  pious  fraud,  that  it  is  to- 
day almost  impossible  to  discover  with  certainty  the  genuine 
Ignatius  of  histoiy  under  the  hyper-  and  pseudo-Ignatius  of 
tradition. 

§  165.     The  Ignatian  Controversy. 

Of  all  the  writings  of  the  apostolic  fathers  none  have  been  so  much 
discussed,  especially  in  modern  times,  as  the  Ignatian  Epistles.  This 
arises  partly  from  the  importance  of  their  contents  to  the  episcopal  ques- 
tion, partly  from  the  existence  of  so  many  different  versions.  The  lat- 
ter fact  seems  to  argue  as  strongly  for  the  hypothesis  of  a  genuine  basis 
for  all,  as  against  the  supposition  of  the  full  integrity  of  any  one  of  the 

too  little  because  Ignatius  knows  nothing  of  a  diocesan,  hut  only  of  a  congre- 
gational episcopacy ;  too  much  because  he  requires  absolute  obedience  lo  ihe 
bishop  as  tbe  representative  of  Christ;  himself,  while  the  Presbyters  represent 
the  apostles.  Moreover  the  Ignatian  episcopacy  is  free  from  the  sacerdotal 
idea  which  came  in  later  with  Cyprian,  but  is  intimated  in  Clement  of  Borne. 

1  Calvin,  who,  however,  knew  only  the  spurious  and  worthless  longer  recen- 
sion, calls  the  Ignatian  Epistles  abominable  trash  (Inst.  1. 1,  c.  13,  2  29) ;  Dr.  W. 
D.  Killen,  who  ought  to  know  better,  from  strong  aDti-prelatic  feeling,  speaks 
of  Ignatius,  even  according  to  the  shorter  Syriac  recension,  as  an  lt  anti-evan- 
gelical formalist,  a  puerile  boaster,  a  mystic  dreamer  and  crazy  fanatic.'1 
(Ancunt  Church,  1859,  p.  414).  Neander  is  far  more  moderate,  yet  cannot 
conceive  that  a  martyr  so  near  the  apostolic  age  should  have  nothing  more 
important  to  say  than  "such  things  about  obedience  to  the  bishops  "  (Ch.  H.  I. 
192,  note,  Bost.  ed.).  Baur  and  the  Tubingen  critics  reject  the  entire  Ignatian 
literature  as  a  forgery.  Eothe  on  the  other  hand  is  favorably  impressed  with 
the  martyr-enthusiasm  of  the  Epistles,  and  Zahn  (an  orthodox  Lutheran) 
thinks  tbe  Ignatian  epistles  in  the  shorter  Greek  recension  worthy  of  a  com- 
parison with  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul  (p.  400). 

*  Still  less  by  the  apostle  Peter,  the  alleged  first  Pope  of  Rome ;  on  the  con- 
trary,  he  enters  a  solemn  protest  against  hierarchical  tendencies  for  all  time  to 
come,  1  Pet.  5 : 1-i 


§165.  THE  IGCTATIAN  CONTROVERSY.  661 

extant  texts.  Renan  describes  the  Ignatian  problem  as  tlie  most  difficult 
in  early  Christian  literature,  next  to  that  of  the  Gospel  of  John  (Let 
£mng.  p.  x). 

The  Ignatian  controversy  has  passed  through  three  periods,  the  first 
from  the  publication  of  the  spurious  Ignatius  to  the  publication  of  the 
shorter  Greek  recension  (A.  D.  1495  to  1644) ;  the  second  from  the  dis- 
covery and  publication  of  the  shorter  Greek  recension  to  the  discovery 
and  publication  of  the  Syrian  version  (A.  D.  1644:  to  1845),  which  re- 
sulted in  the  rejection  of  the  larger  Greek  recension  ;  the  third  from  the 
discovery  of  the  Syrian  extract  to  the  present  time  ( 1845-1883  j,  which  is 
favorable  to  the  shorter  Greek  recension. 

1.  The  LAEGEE  GREEK  RECESSION  OF  SEVEN  EPISTLES  with  eight 
additional  ones.    Four  of  them  were  published  in  Latin  at  Paris,  1495, 
as  an  appendix  to  another  book ;  eleven  more  by  Faber  Stapulensis,  also  in 
Latin,  at  Paris,  1498 ;  then  all  fifteen  in  Greek  by  Valentine  Hartung 
(called  Paceus  or  Irenseus)  at  Dillingen,  1557 ;  and  twelve  by  Andreas 
Gesner  at  Zurich,  1560.     The  Catholics  at  first  accepted  them  all  as 
genuine  works  of  Ignatius ;  and  Hartung,  Baronius,  Bellarmin  defended 
at  least  twelve;   out  Calvin  and  the  Magdeburg  Centuriators  rejected 
them  all,  and  later  Catholics  surrendered  at  least  eight  as  utterly  unten- 
able.   These  are  two  Latin  letters  of  Ignatius  to  St.  John  and  one  to  the 
Virgin  Mary  with  an  answer  of  the  Virgin  5  and  five  Greek  letters  of  Ig- 
natius to  Maria  Castabolita,  with  an  answer,  to  the  Tarsenses,  to  the  An- 
tiochians,  to  Hero,  a  deacon  of  Antioch,  and  to  the  Philippians.    These 
letters  swarm  with  offences  against  history  and  chronology.    They  were 
entirely  unknown  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome.    They  are  worthless  forgeries, 
clothed  with  the  name  and  authority  of  Ignatius.    It  is  a  humiliating 
fact  that  the  spurious  Ignatius  and  his  letters  to  St.  John  and  the  Virgin 
Mary  should  in  a  wretched  Latin  version  have  so  long  transplanted 
and  obscured  the  historical  Ignatius  down  to  the  sixteenth  century.    No 
wonder  that  Calvin  spoke  of  this  fabrication  with  such  contempt.    But 
in  like  manner  the  Mary  of  history  gave  way  to  a  Mary  of  fiction,  the 
real  Peter  to  a  pseudo-Peter,  and  the  real  Clement  to  a  pseudo-Clement 
Here,  if  anywhere,  we  see  the  necessity  and  use  of  historical  criticism 
for  the  defense  of  truth  and  honesty. 

2.  The  SHOETEE  GEEEK  RECENSION  of  the  seven  Epistles  known  to 
Eusebius  was  discovered  in  a  Latin  version  and  edited  by  Archbishop 
Ussher  at  Oxford,  1644  (Polycarpi  et  IgnatiiEpistola),  and  in  Greek  by 
Isaac  Vossius,  from  a  Medicean  Codex  in  1646,  again  by  Th.  Ruinart 
from  the  Codex  Colbertinus  (together  with  the  Hartyrium)  in  1689.    We 
have  also  fragments  of  a  Syrian  version  (in  Cureton),  and  of  an  Armenian 
version  apparently  from  the  Syrian  (printed  in  Constantinople  in  1783, 
and  compared  by  Peter Tryinn).    Henceforth  the  longer  Greek  recension 
found  very  few  defenders  (the  eccentric  Whiston,  1711,  and  more  re- 
cently Fr.C.  Meier,  1836),  and  their  arguments  were  conclusively  refuted 
by  R  Rothe  in  his  Anfdnge,  1837,  and  by  K.  Fr.  L.  Arndt  in  the  "  Sfcu- 


662  SECOND  PERIOD.    A. D.  100-311. 

dien  und  Kritiken,"  1S39).  It  is  generally  given  up  even  b>  Roman 
Catholic  scholars  -as  Petavius,  Cotelier,  Dupin,  Hefele,  Funk).  But  as 
regards  the  genuineness  or*  the  s-horter  Greek  text  there  are  three  views 
among  which  scholars  are  divided. 

(a)  Ito  genuineness  and  integrity  are  advocated  by  Pearson  (  Vindicice 
lynatiance,  107:2,  against  the  doubts  of  the  acute  Dallasus),  latterly  by 
Gieseler,  Mohler  <,R.  C.j,  Rothe  (1837),  Huther  (1841),  Diisterdieck 
(1843),  Dorner  (1845),  and  (since  the  publication  of  the  shorter  Syriac 
version}  by  Jacobson,  Hefele  \E.  C.,  1847  and  1855),  Denzinger  (R.  C., 
1849),  Petermann  (1849),  Wordsworth,  Churton  (1852),  and  most  tho- 
rr.ughly  by  ITlhhorn,  (1851  and  '56),  and  Zahn  (1873,  Ign.  v.  Ant  495- 
541V    The  same  view  is  adopted  by  Wieseler  (1878),  Funk  (in  Patr. 
Ajnid.  1878,  Prol  LX.  sqq.,  and  his  monograph,  1883),  Canon  Travers 
Sinith,  (in  Smith  and  Wace,  1882),  and  Lightfoot  (1885). 

(b)  The  friends  of  the  three  Syriae  epistles  (see  below  under  No.  3) 
let  only  so  many  of  the  seven  epistles  stand  as  agree  with  those.    Als»o 
Lardner  (1743),"  Mosheim  (1755),  Neander  (1826),  TMersch  (1852  j,  Lech- 
ler  (1857  j,  Robertson  and  Donaldson  (1867),  are  inclined  to  suppose  at 
least  interpolation. 

(c)  The  shorter  recension,  though  older  than  the  longer,-is  likewise 
spurious.    The  letters  were  forged  in  the  later  half  of  the  second  century 
for  the  purpose  of  promoting  episcopacy  and  the  worship  of  martyrs. 
This  view  is  ably  advocated  by  two  very  different  classes  of  divines :  first 
by  Calvinists  in  the  interest  of  Presbyterianisin  or  anti-prelacy,  Claudius 
Salmasius  (1645j,  David  Blondel  (1646),  Dallceus  (1666),  Samuel  Bas- 
nage,  and  by  Dr.  Killen  of  Belfast  (1859  and  18*8) ;  next  by  the  Tubingen 
school  of  critics  in  a  purely  historical  interest,  Dr.  Baur  (1835,  then 
against  Rothe,  1S38,  and  against  Bunsen,  1848  and  1853),  Schwegler 
1,1846),  and  more  thoroughly  by  Hilgenfeld  (1853).     The  Tubingen 
critics  reject  the  whole  Ignatian  literature  as  unhistorical  tendency  wri- 
tings, partly  because  the  entire  historical  situation  implied  in  it  and  the 
circuitous  journey  to  Eome  are  in  themselves  improbable,  partly  because 
it  advocates  a  form  of  church  government  and  combats  Gnostic  heresies, 
which  could  not  have  existed  in  the  age  of  Ignatius.     This  extreme 
scepticism  is  closely  connected  with  the  whole  view  of  the  Tubingen 
school  in  regard  to  the  history  of  primitive  Christianity,  and  offers  no 
explanation  of  the  stubborn  fact  that  Ignatius  was  a  historical  character 
of  a  strongly  marked  individuality  and  wrote  a  number  of  letters  widely 
known  and  appreciated  in  the  early  church.    Eenan  admits  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  Ep.  to  the  Romans,  but  rejects  the  six  others  as  fabrications 
of  a  zealous  partizan  of  orthodoxy  and  episcopacy  about  A.  D.  170.    He 
misses  in  them  le  g6nie,  k  caracftre  indlviduel,  but  speaks  highly  of  the 
Ep.  to  the  Romans,  in  which  the  enthusiasm  of  the  martyr  has  found 
"#>»  expression  la  plus  exaltte"  (p.  489). 

(d)  We  grant  that  the  integrity  of  these  epistles,  even  in  the  shorter 
copy,  is  not  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt.  As  the  manuscripts  of  them  con 


J165.  THE  IGNATIAN  CONTROVERSY.  663 

tain,  at  the  same  time,  decidedly  spurious  epistles  (even  the  Armenian 
translation  has  thirteen  epistles),  the  suspicion  arises,  that  the  seven  genu- 
ine also  have  not  wholly  escaped  the  hand  of  the  forger.  Yet  there  are,  in 
any  case,  very  strong  arguments  for  their  genuineness  and  substantial  in- 
tegrity; viz.  (1)  The  testimony  of  the  fathers,  especially  of  Eusebius. 
Even  Polycarp  alludes  to  epistles  of  Ignatius.  (2)  The  raciness  and 
freshness  of  their  contents,  which  a  forger  could  not  well  Imitate.  (3) 
The  small  number  of  citations  from  the  Xew  Testament,  indicating  the 
period  of  the  immediate  disciples  of  the  apostles.  (4)  Their  way  of 
combating  the  Judaists  and  Docetists  (probably  Judaizing  Gnostics  of 
the  school  of  Cerinthus),  showing  us  Gnosticism  as  yet  in  the  first  stage 
of  its  development.  (5)  Their  dogmatical  indefiniteness,  particularly  in 
regard  to  the  Trinity  and  Christology,  notwithstanding  very  strong  ex- 
pressions in  favor  of  the  divinity  of  Christ.  (6)  Their  urgent  recommen- 
dation of  episcopacy  as  an  institution  still  new  and  fresh,  and  as  a  centre 
of  congregational  unity  in  distinction  from  the  diocesan  episcopacy  of 
Irenaeus  and  Tertullian.  (7)  Their  entire  silence  respecting  a  Roman 
primacy,  even  in  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  where  we  should  most  expect 
it.  The  Roman  church  is  highly  recommended  indeed,  but  the  Roman 
bishop  is  not  even  mentioned.  In  any  case  these  epistles  must  have  been 
written  before  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  and  reflect  the  spirit  of 
their  age  in  its  strong  current  towards  a  hierarchical  organization  and 
churchly  orthodoxy  on  the  basis  of  the  glory  of  martyrdom. 

3.  The  SYJRIAC  VERSION  contains  only  three  epistles  (to  Polycarp,  to 
the  Ephesians,  and  to  the  Romans),  and  even  these  in  a  much  reduced 
form,  less  than  half  of  the  corresponding  Greek  Epistles.  It  has  the 
subscription :  "  Here  end  the  three  epistles  of  the  bishop  and  martyr  Ig- 
natius," on  which,  however,  Bunsen  lays  too  great  stress ;  for.  even  if  it 
comes  from  the  translator  himself,  and  not  from  a  mere  transcriber,  it 
does  not  necessarily  exclude  the  existence  of  other  epistles  (comp.  Pe- 
termann,  1.  c.  p.  xxi.).  It  was  discovered  in  1839  and  '43  by  the  Rev. 
Henry  Tattam  in  a  monastery  of  the  Libyan  desert,  together  with  365 
other  Syriac  manuscripts,  now  in  the  British  Museum ;  published  first 
by  Oureton  in  1845,  and  again  in  1849,  with  the  help  of  a  third  MS.  dis- 
covered in  1847 ;  and  advocated  as  genuine  by  him,  as  also  by  Lee  (1846), 
Bunsen  (1847),  Ritschl  (1851  and  1857),  Weiss  (1852),  and  most  fully  by 
Lipsius  (1856),  also  by  E.  de  Pressense  (1882),  B6hringer  (1873),  and  at 
first  by  Lightfoot. 

Now,  it  is  true,  that  all  the  considerations  we  have  adduced  in  favor  of 
the  shorter  Greek  text,  except  the  first,  are  equally  good,  and  some  of 
them  even  better,  for  the  genuineness  of  the  Syrian  Ignatius,  which  lias 
the  additional  advantage  of  lacking  many  of  the  most  offensive  passages 
(though  not  in  the  epistle  to  Polycarp). 

But  against  the  Syriac  text  is,  in  the  first  place,  the  external  testimony 
of  antiquity,  especially  that  of  Eusebius,  who  confessedly  knew  of  and 
used  seven  epistles,  whereas  the  oldest  of  the  three  manuscripts  of  this 


664  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

version,  according  to  Cureton,  belongs  at  the  earliest  to  the  sixth  century 
a  period,  when  the  longer  copy  also  had  become  circulated  through  all  the 
East,  and  that  too  in  a  Syriac  translation,  as  the  fragments  given  by 
Cureton  show.  Secondly,  the  internal  testimony  of  the  fact,  that  the 
Syriac  text,  on  close  examination,  by  the  want  of  a  proper  sequence  of 
thoughts  and  sentences  betrays  the  character  of  a  fragmentary  extract 
from  the  Greek;  as  Baur  (1848),  Hilgenfeld  (1853),  and  especially  Uhl- 
horn  (1851),  and  Zahn  (1873,  p.  167-241),  by  an  accurate  comparison  of 
the  two,  have  proved  in  a  manner  hitherto  unrefuted  and  irrefutable. 
The  short  Svriac  Ignatius  has  vanished  like  a  dream.  Even  Lipsius  and 
Ligbtfoot  have  given  up  or  modified  their  former  view.  The  great 
work  of  Lightfoot  on  Ignatius  and  Polycarp  (1885)  which  goes  into 
all  the  details  and  gives  all  the  documents,  may  be  regarded  as  a  full 
and  final  settlement  of  the  Ignatian  problem  in  favor  of  the  shorter 
Greek  recension. 

The  only  genuine  Ignatius,  as  the  question  now  stands,  is  the  Igna- 
tius of  the  shorter  seven  Greek  epistles. 

§  166.  Polycarp  of  Smyrna. 
Comp.  2 19  and  the  lit  there  quoted, 

S.  POLYCABPI,  SmyrncBorum  episcopi  et  hieromartyris,  ad  Philippenses 
jEpisfola,  first  published  in  Latin  by  laber  Stapulensis  (Paris  1498), 
then  with  the  Greek  original  by  Petrus  Hallouius  (Halloix),  Dual, 
1633;  and  Jew.  JJsserius  (Ussher),  Lond.  1647:  also  in  all  the  edi- 
tions of  the  Apost  Fath.,  especially  those  of  Jacobean  (who  compared 
several  manuscripts),  Zahn  (1876),  Funk  (1878),  and  Lightfoot  (1885). 

MARTYBITJM  S.  POLYCABPI  (Epistola  circularis  ecclesi&Smyrnensis),  first 
completed  ed.  in  Gr.  &  Lat.  by  Archbp.  Ussher,  Lond.  1647,  then  in 
all  the  ed.  of  the  Pair.  Apost.,  especially  that  of  Jacobson  (who  here 
also  made  use  of  three  new  codices),  of  Zdhn,  and  Funk. 

L.  DUCHESNE:  Vita  Sancti  Polycarpi  Smyrnseorum  episcopi  auctore 
Pionio  Primum  grace  edita.  Paris  1881.  The  same  also  in  the 
second  vol.  of  Funk's  Pair.  Apost.  (1881)  pp.  LIY.-LVIII.  315-347. 
It  is,  according  to  Funk,  from  the  fourth  or  fifth  "century,  and  shows 
not  what  Polycarp  really  was,  but  how  he  appeared  to  the  Christians 
of  a  later  age. 

ZAH^:  Ign.  v.  Ant.  p.  495-511 ;  and  Proleg.  to  his  ed.  of  Ign.  and  PoL 
(1876),  p.  XLH-LV. 

DONALDSON:  Ap.  Path.  191-247. 

ItoAtf  L'fylke  chr'etienne  (1879),  ch.  ix.  and  X.  p.  437-466. 

LIGHTFOOT  :  S.  Ign.  and  S.  Polycarp,  (1SS5),  vol.  I.  417-704. 

POLYCARP,  born  about  A.  D.  69  or  earlier,  a  disciple  of  the 
apostle  John,  a  younger  friend  of  Ignatius,  and  the  teacher  of 


j  166.  POLYCAKP  OF  SMYRNA.  665 

Irenseus  (between  130  and  140),  presided  as  presbyter-bishop  over 
the  church  of  Smyrna  in  Asia  Minor  in  the  first  half  of  the 
second  century;  made  a  journey  to  Rome  about  the  year  154,  to 
adjust  the  Easter  dispute ;  and  died  at  the  stake  in  the  persecution 
under  Antoninus  Pius  A.  D.  155,  at  a  great  age,  having  served 
the  Lord  six  and  eight}7  years.1  He  was  not  so  original  and  intel- 
lectually active  as  Clement  or  Ignatius,  but  a  man  of  truly  vene- 
rable character,  and  simple,  patriarchal  piety.  His  disciple  Ire- 
naeus  of  Lyons  (who  wrote  under  Eleutherus,  177-190),  in  a 
letter  to  his  fellow-pupil  Florinus,  who  had  fallen  into  the  error 
of  Gnosticism,  has  given  ua  most  valuable  reminiscences  of 
this  "  blessed  and  apostolic  presbyter,"  which  show  how  faith- 
fully he  held  fast  the  apostolic  tradition,  and  how  he  deprecated 
all  departure  from  it.  He  remembered  vividly  his  mode  of 
life  and  personal  appearance,  his  discourses  to  the  people,  and 
his  communications  respecting  the  teaching  and  miracles  of  the 
Lord,  as  he  had  received  them  from  the  mouth  of  John  and 
other  eye-witnesses,  in  agreement  with  the  Holy  Scriptures.2  In 
another  place,  Irenaeus  says  of  Polycarp,  that  he  had  all  the 
time  taught  what  he  had  learned  from  the  apostles,  and  what 
the  church  handed  down ;  and  relates,  that  he  once  called  the 
Gnostic  Marcion  in  Rome,  "  the  first-born  of  Satan."3  This  is 
by  no  means  incredible  in  a  disciple  of  John,  who,  with  all  his 
mildness,  forbids  his  people  to  salute  the  deniers  of  the  true 
divinity  and  humanity  of  the  Lord  ;4  and  it  is  confirmed  by  a 
passage  in  the  epistle  of  Polycarp  to  the  Philippians,5  where  he 
says :  "  Whoever  doth  not  confess,  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in 
the  flesh,  is  antichrist,6  and  whoever  doth  not  confess  the  mys- 
tery of  the  cross,  is  of  the  devil ;  and  he,  who  wrests  the 
words  of  the  Lord  according  to  his  own  pleasure,  and  saith, 
there  is  no  resurrection  and  judgment,  is  the  first-born  of  Satan. 
Therefore  would  we  forsake  the  empty  babbling  of  this  crowd 

1  On  the  change  of  date  from  166  or  167  to  155  or  156,  in  consequence  of 
Waddington's  researches,  see  p.  50. 

2  Eusebius,  J3.  E.  V«  20-         8  Adv.  .Hcer.  iii.  3,  |  4  *  2  John  ID. 
*  Ch  7.                                                                 «  Comp.  1  John4:  3. 


666  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  10Q-S11. 

and  their  false  teachings,  anrl  turn  to  the  word  which  hath  beer 
given  us  from  the  beginning,  watching  in  prayer/  continuing  ia 
fasting,  and  most  humbly  praying  God;  that  he  lead  us  not  into 
temptation,2  as  the  Lord  hath  said  :  '  The  spirit  is  willing,  but 
the  flesh  is  weak.'  "3 

This  epistle  to  the  Philippians  consists  of  fourteen  short  chap* 
ters,  and  has  been  published  in  full  since  1633.  It  is  the  onlj 
document  that  remains  to  us  from  this  last  witness  of  the  Johaa- 
nean  age,  who  wrote  several  letters  to  neighboring  congrega- 
tions. It  is  mentioned  first  by  his  pupil  Irenseus  ;4  it  was  still 
in  public  use  in  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor  in  the  time  of  Je- 
rome as  he  reports;  and  its  contents  corrrespond  with  the  known 
life  and  character  of  Polycarp ;  its  genuineness  there  is  no  just 
reason  to  doubt.5  It  has  little  merit  as  a  literary  production 
but  is  simple  and  earnest,  and  breathes  a  noble  Christian  spirit 
It  was  written  after  the  death  of  Ignatius  (whose  epistles  are 
mentioned,  c.  13)  in  the  name  of  Polycarp  and  his  presbyters; 
commends  the  Philippians  for  the  love  they  showed  Ignatius  io 
bonds  and  his  companions,  and  for  their  adherence  to  the  ancient 
faith ;  and  proceeds  with  simple,  earnest  exhortation  to  love, 
harmony,  contentment,  patience,  and  perseverance,  to  prayer 
even  for  enemies  and  persecutors ;  also  giving  special  directions 
for  deacons,  presbyters,  youths,  wives,  widows,  and  virgins; 
with  strokes  against  Gnostic  Docetic  errors.  Of  Christ  it 
speaks  in  high  terms,  as  the  Lord,  who  sits  at  the  right  hand  of 
God  to  whom  everything  in  heaven  and  earth  is  subject;  whom 

i  Comp.  1  Pet.  4 : 17.  *  Matt.  6:13.  *  Matt.  26 :  41. 

*Adv.  Hcer.  III.  3,  g  4.  Comp.  Euseb.  H  E.  III.  36,  and  Jerome  De  Vir.  m 
j.17. 

*  Nor  has  its  integrity  been  called  in  question  with  sufficient  reason  by  Dal- 
JBBOS,  and  more  recently  by  Bunsen,  Kitschl  (in  tbe  second  ed  of  Ms  Entet&hr 
*ng  der  atiktfh.  JSSrcfo,  p.  584-600),  Eenan  (Journal  des  savanis,  1874,  and 
less  confidently  in  L'fylise  chret.,  1879,  p.  442  aqq.),  and  the  author  of  Super 
natural  Religion,  (I.  274^73).  But  tbe  genuineness  and  integrity  of  the  Ep 
are  ably  vindicated  by  Zahn  (1873)  and  by  Lightfoot  ("Gontemp.  Rev.," 
Feb.  1S75,  p.  838-852).  The  testimony  of  Lrenajus,  who  knew  it  (Adv.  Har. 
HI.  3,?  4),  is  conclusive.  Eenan  urges  chiefly  the  want  of  originality  aoa 
forte  against  it 


POLYCARP  OF  SMYKNA.  667 

every  living  being  serves ;  who  is  coming  to  judge  the  quick  and 
the  dead ;  who.se  blood  God  will  require  of  all,  who  believe  not 
on  him.1  Polycarp  guards  with  sound  feeling  against  being  con- 
sidered equal  with  the  apostles :  "  I  write  these  things,  brethren, 
not  in  arrogance,  but  because  ye  have  requested  me.  For 
neither  I,  nor  any  other  like  me,  can  attain  the  wisdom  of  the 
blessed  and  glorious  Paul,  who  was  among  you,  and  in  the 
presence  of  the  then  living  accurately  and  firmly  taught  the 
word  of  truth,  who  also  in  his  absence  wrote  you  an  epistle,2 
from  which  ye  may  edify  yourselves  in  the  faith  given  to  you, 
which  is  the  mother  of  us  all,3  hope  following  after,  and  love  to 
God  and  to  Christ,  and  to  neighbors  leading  further.4  For 
when  any  one  is  full  of  these  virtues,  he  fulfills  the  command  of 
righteousness  ;  for  he,  who  has  love,  is  far  from  all  sin." 5  This 
does  not  agrse  altogether  with  the  system  of  St.  Paul.  But  it 
should  be  remembered  that  Polycarp,  in  the  very  first  chapter, 
represents  faith  and  the  whole  salvation  as  the  gift  of  free  grace.6 

The  epistle  is  interwoven  with  many  reminiscences  of  the 
Synoptical  Gospels  and  the  epistles  of  Paul,  John  and  First 
Peter,  which  give  to  it  considerable  importance  in  the  history 
of  the  oanon.7 

The  Ifartyrium  S.  Polyoarpi^Z  chs.),  in  the  form  of  a  circu- 
lar letter  of  the  church  of  Smyrna  to  the  church  of  Philonielium 
in  Phrygia,  and  all  "parishes  of  the  Catholic  church/'  appears, 
from  ch.  18,  to  have  been  composed  before  the  first  annual  celebra- 
tion of  his  martyrdom.  Eusebius  has  incorporated  in  his  church 
history  the  greater  part  of  this  beautiful  memorial,  and  Ussher 
first  published  it  complete  in  the  Greek  original,  1647.  It 
contains  an  edifying  description  of  the  trial  and  martyrdom  of 

1  Ch.  2.  *  'EwroMf  must  here  probably  be  understood,  like  the  Latin 
£feroe,  of  one  epistle.  8  Gal.  4 :  26.  *  xpoayavcTK-  5  Ch.  3. 

4  Xdptn  tare  wawjplvQt  owe  «f  epytw,  aMid  tfe&Tjuart  tf  aw,  <fcd  *3fl0w  Xpiorofr, 
comp.  Eph.  2:  8,  9. 

1  Funk  (1. 573  sq.),  counts  only  6  quotations  from  the  0.  T.t  but  68  remi- 
niscences of  passages  in  Matthew  (8),  Mark  (1),  Luke  (1),  Acts  (4),  Bomans, 
Cor,  Gal.,  Eph.,  Phil.,  Col..  Thess.,  1  and  2  Tim..  James  (1),  1  Pet.  (10),  3 
Pet  (1?)  1  and  2  John.  Corop.  the  works  on  the  canon,  of  tne  N.  T. 


668  SECOND  PEBIOD,    A.  D.  100-311 

E  olycarp,  though  embellished  \vith  some  marvellous  additions  01 
legendary  poesy.  When,  for  example,  the  pile  was  kindled;  the 
flames  surrounded  the  body  of  Polycarp,  like  the  full  sail  of  a 
ship,  without  touching  it;  on  the  contrary  it  shone,  unhurt, 
with  a  gorgeous  color,  like  white  baken  bread,  or  like  gold  and 
silver  in  a  crucible,  and  gave  forth  a  lovely  fragrance  a?  of  pre- 
cious spices.  Then  one  of  the  executioners  pierced  the  body  ^1 
the  saint  with  a  spear,  and  forthwith  there  flowed  such  a  stream 
of  blood  that  the  fire  was  extinguished  by  it.  The  narrative 
mentions  also  a  dove  which  flew  up  from  the  burning  pile;  but 
the  reading  is  corrupt,  and  Eusebias,  Eufinus,  and  >!icephorus 
make  no  reference  to  it.1  The  sign  of  a  dove  (which  is  fre- 
quently found  on  ancient  monuments)  was  probably  first  marked 
on  the  margin,  as  a  symbol  of  the  pure  soul1  of  the  martyr,  or  of 
the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  which  pervaded  him ;  but  the 
insertion  of  the  word  dove  in  the  text  suggests  an  intended  con- 
trast to  the  eagle,  which  flew  up  from  the  ashes  of  the  Eoman 
emperors,  and  proclaimed  their  apotheosis,  and  may  thus  be 
connected  with  the  rising  worship  of  martyrs  and  saints. 

Throughout  its  later  chapters  this  narrative  considerably 
exceeds  the  sober  limits  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  in  the 
description  of  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen  and  the  elder  James, 
and  serves  to  illustrate,  in  this  respect  also,  the  undeniable  dif- 
ference, notwithstanding  all  the  affinity,  between  the  apostolic 
and  the  old  catholic  literature.2 

1  All  sorts  of  corrections,  accordingly,  have  been  proposed  for  irepfarepd  in 
ch.  16 ;  e.  g-  CTT'  aptarepQ,  a  sinistra,  or  Kept  ortyva,  or  rapiJrrepa  aZ/mrof  (scintilla* 
nan  vnstar  sanguinis),  or  ?rspi  arLpaKa,  (circa  hostile,  around  the  spike).  Comp. 
Hefele:  Patr.Ap.  p.  288  (4th  &)  note  4;  and  Funk  (5th  ed.)  299.  Funk 
feads  TOP*  OTV/XHCO,  which  gives  good  sense.  So  also  the  ed.  of  Gebh.  and  Ham. 

*  Keim  (1873),  and  Lipsins  (1876)  reject  the  whole  Martyrium.  Steitz  (1861), 
Zahn  (1876),  and  Funk  (Prd-  XCVIL)  the  last  two  chapters  as  later  additions, 
Donaldson  (p.  198  pqq.)  assumes  several  interpolations,  which  make  it  unre- 
liable as  a  historical  document,  but  admits  that  it  is  superior  to  the  later  mar* 
tyria  by  its  greater  simplicity  and  the  probability  of  the  most  part  of  the  nap 
tativ^  opecialiy  the  circumstance  of  the  flight  and  capture  of  Polycarp. 


156.  fOLYCARP  OF  SJtLYJiJNA. 


NOTES. 

I.  Of  all  the  writings  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  the  Epistle  of  Polycarp 
is  the  least  original,  but  nearest  in  tone  to*  the  Pastoral  Epistles  of  Paul, 
and  fullest  of  reminiscences  from  the  New  Testament.  We  give  the  first 
four  chapters  as  specimens. 

I.  "  POLYCARP  AND  THE  PRESBYTERS  WITH  HUT  TO  THE  CONGREGATION 
OP  GOD  WHICH  SOJOURNS  AT  PHIUPPI.  MERCY  AND  PEACE  BE  ZtfULTTPLIEB 
UPON  YOU,  FROM  GOD  ALMIGHTY,  AND  PROM  JESUS  CHRIST  OUR  SAVIOUP- 

1.  "I  have  greatly  rejoiced  with  you,  in  the  joy  you  have  had  in  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  in  receiving  those  examples  of  true  charity,  and  hav- 
ing accompanied,  as  it  well  became  you,  those  who  were  bound  with  holy 
chains  [Ignatius  and  his  fellow-prisoners,  Zosimus  and  Bufus;  comp.  ch. 
9]  ;  who  are  the  diadems  of  the  truly  elect  of  God  and  our  Lord;  and 
that  the  strong  root  of  your  faith,  spoken  of  in  the  earliest  times,  endureth 
until  now,  and  bringeth  forth  fruit  unto  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  suf- 
fered for  our  sins,  but  whom  God  raised  from  the  dead,  having  loosed  the 
pains  f*f  Hades  [Acts  2:  24];  in  whom  though  ye  see  Him  not,  ye  believe, 
and  believing  rejoice  with  joy  unspeakable  and  full  of  glory  [1  Pet.  1:  8]  ; 
into  which  joy  many  desire  to  enter  ;  knowing  that  by  grace  ye  are  saved, 
not  by  icorks  [Eph.  2:  8,  9],  but  by  the  will  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ. 

2.  "  Wherefore,  girding  up  your  loins,  serve  the  Lord  in  fear  [1  Pet.  1  :  13] 
and  truth,  as  those  who  have  forsaken  the  vain,  empty  talk  and  error  of 
the  multitude,  and  believed  in  Him  -who  raised  up  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
from  the  deadj  and  gave  him  glory  [1  Pet.  1:  21],  and  a  throne  at  His 
right  hand  [comp.  Heb.  1  :  3  ;  8  :  1  ;  12  :  2]  ;  to  whom  all  things  in 
heaven  and  on  earth  are  subject.    Him  every  spirit  serves.    His  blood 
will  God  require  of  those  who  do  not  believe  in  Him.    But  He  who 
raised  Him  up  from  th'e  dead  will  raise  up  us  also,  if  we  do  His  will,  and 
walk  in  His  commandments,  and  love  what  He  loved,  keepipg  ourselves 
from  all  unrighteousness,  covetousness,  love  of  money,  evil-speaking, 
false-  witness  ;  not  rendering  evil  for  evil,  or  reviling  for  reviling  [1  Pet.  3  : 
9]  ;  or  blow  for  blow,  or  cursing  for  cursing,  remembering  the  words  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  [comp.  Acts  20  :  35]  in  His  teaching  :  Judge  not,  that  ye  be  not 
judged  ;  forgive,  and  it  shall  be  forgiven  unto  you;  be  merciful,  that,  ye 
may  obtain  mercy  ;  with  what  measure  ye  mete,  it  shall  be  measured  to  you  1 
again  [Matt.  7:  1,  2;  Luke  6:  36-38],  and  once  more,  Blessed  are  the 
poor,  and  those  that  are  persecuted  for  riyhtfoasness'  sake,  for  theirs  is  the 
kingdom  of  God  [Luke  6:  21;  Matt.  5:  3,  10]  . 

3.  "  These  things,  brethren,  I  write  to  you  concerning  righteousness,  not 
because  I  take  anything  on  myself,  but  because  ye  have  invited  me  there- 
to.   For  neither  I,  nor  any  such  as  I,  can  come  up  to  the  wisdom  of  the 
blessed  and  glorified  Paul.    He,  when  among  you,  accurately  and  stead- 
fastly taught  the  word  of  truth  in  the  presence  of  those  who  were  then 
jdive  ;  and  when  absent  from  you,  he  wrote  you  a  letter,  which,  if  yo* 


670  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

carefully  study,  you  will  find  to  be  the  means  of  building  you  up  in  that 
faith  which  has  been  given  you,  and  which,  being  followed  by  hope  and 
preceded  by  love  towards  God,  and  Christ,  and  our  neighbor,  is  the 
mother  of  u*  all  ^Gal.  4:  26 ].  For  if  any  one  be  inwardly  possessed  of 
these  graces,  he  luv-  fulfilled  the  command  of  righteousness,  since  he  that 
has  love  is  far  from  all  sin. 

4.  "But  the  love  of  money  is  a  beginning  [apxt,  instead  of  root,  li£ij\  of 
all  kinds  oftvil,  [I  Tiiii.  6:  lOj.  Knowing,  therefore,  that  as  we  brought 
nothing  into  the  irorht,  so  ire  can  carry  nothing  out,  [1  Tim.  6:  7],  let  us 
arm  ourselves  with  the  armor  of  righteousness ;  and  let  us  teach,  first  of 
all,  ourselves  to  walk  in  the  commandments  of  the  Lord.  Next  teach  your 
wives  to  walk  in  the  faith  given  to  them,  and  in  love  and  purity  tenderly 
loving  their  own  husbands  in  all  truth,  and  loving  all  equally  in  all 
chastity;  and  to  train  up  their  children  in  the  knowledge  and  fear  of 
God  tcomj>.  Eph.  6:  11, 13,  14],  Let  us  teach  the  widows  to  be  discreet 
a;?  respects  the  faith  of  the  Lord,  praying  continually  for  all,  being  far 
from  all  slandering,  evil -speaking,  false-witnessing,  love  of  money,  and 
every  kind  of  evil ;  knowing  that  they  are  the  altar  of  God,  that  He 
clearly  perceives  all  things,  and  that  nothing  is  hid  from  Him,  neither 
reasonings,  nor  reflections,  nor  any  one  of  the  secret  things  of  the  heart." 

II.  From  the  Mtirtyriuni  Potycarpi.  When  the  Proconsul  demanded 
that  Polycarp  should  swear  by  the  genius  of  Caesar  and  renounce  Christ, 
Le  gave  the  memorable  answer : 

"  Eighty  and  six  years  have  I  served  Christ,  nor  has  He  ever  done  me 
any  harm.  How,  then,  could  I  blaspheme  my  King  who  saved  me  " 
(Tit?  3actsia  pov  rw  cucavrd  //e)  ?  Cll  9. 

Standing  at  the  stake  with  his  hands  tied  to  the  back,  as  the  fagots 
were  kindled,  Poly  carp  lifted  up  his  voice  and  uttered  this  sublime 
prayer  as  reported  by  disciples  who  heard  it  (ch.  14) : 

"  Lord  God  Almighty,  Father  of  Thy  beloved  and  blessed  Son,  Jesus 
Christ,  through  whom  we  have  received  the  grace  of  knowing  Thee  ; 
Goil  of  angels  and  powers,  and  the  whole  creation,  and  of  the  whole  race 
cf  the  righteous  who  live  in  Thy  presence ;  I  bless  Thee  for  deigning  me 
worthy  of  this  day  and  this  hour  that  I  may  be  among  Thy  martyrs  and 
drink  of  the  cup  of  my  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  unto  the  resurrection  of  eter- 
nal life  of  soul  and  body  in  the  incorruption  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Receive 
me  this  day  into  Thy  presence  together  with  them,  as  a  fair  and  accept- 
able sacrifice  prepared  for  Thyself  in  fulfillment  of  Thy  promise,  0  true 
and  faithful  God.  Wherefore  I  praise  Thee  for  all  Thy  mercies ;  I  bless 
Thee,  I  glorify  Thee,  through  the  eternal  High-Priest,  Jesus  Christ,  Thy 
beloved  Son,  with  whom  to  Thyself  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  be  glory  both 
now  and  forever.  Amen." 

For  a  good  popular  description  of  Polycarp,  including  his  letter  and 
martyrdom,  see  J7te  Pupils  of  St.  John  the  Divine,  by  the  Author  of  thf 
Heir  <J  JRtdcliffe,  in  Maemillan's  "Sunday  Library,"  London  1863. 


J167.  BARNABAS.  671 

§  167.  Barnabas. 
EDITIONS. 

First  editions  in  Greek  and  Latin,  except  the  first  four  chapters  and 
part  of  the  fifth,  which  were  known  only  in  the  Latin  version,  by 
Archbishop  USSHEE  (Oxf.  1643,  destroyed  by  fire  l&ti),  Luc. 
D'ACHERY  (Par.  1645),  and  ISAAC  Voss  (Amstel.  1646). 

First  complete  edition  of  the  Greek  original  from  the  Codex 
iSinaiticus,  to  which  it  is  appended,  by  TISCHENDORF  in  the  fac- 
simile ed.  of  that  Codex,  Petropoli,  1863,  Tom.  IV.  135-141,  and  in 
the  Novum  Testam.  Sinait.  1863.  •  The  text  dates  from  the  fourth 
century.  It  was  discovered  by  Tischendorf  in  the  Convent  of  St. 
Catharine  at  Mt.  Sinai,  1859,  and  is  now  in  the  library  of  St. 
Petersburg. 

A  new  MS.  of  the  Greek  B.  from  the  eleventh  century  (1056)  was 
discovered  in  Constantinople  by  BRYENNIOS,  1875,  together  with  the 
Ep.  of  Clement,  and  has  been  utilized  by  the  latest  editors,  espe- 
cially by  Hilgenfeld. 

0.  v.  GEBHARDT,  HARNACK,  and  ZAHN:  Pair.  Ap.  1876.  Gebhardt  ed. 
the  text  from  Cod.  Sin.  Harnack  prepared  the  critical  commentary. 
In  the  small  ed.  of  1877  the  Const.  Cod.  is  also  compared. 

HEPELE— FUNK  :  Pair.  Ap.  1878,  p.  2-59. 

AD.  HILGENFELD  :  Barnabas  Epishda.  Integrant  Gr&te  iterum  ediditj 
veterem  interpretationem  Latinam,  commentarium  criticitm  et  adnota- 
tiones  addidit  A.  H.  Ed.  altera  et  valde  auda.  Lips.  1877.  Dedi- 
cated to  Bryennios,  lt  Orientalis  Eedesice  splendido  lumini,'*  who 
being  prevented  by  the  Oriental  troubles  from  editing  the  new  MS., 
sent  a  collation  to  H.  in  Oct.  1876  (Prol.  p.  xm).  The  best  critical 
edition.  Comp.  Harnack's  review  in  Sehurer's  "  Theol.  Lit.  Ztg, " 
1877,  f.  473-'77. 

J".  Q.  MULLER  (of  Basle)  -.  ErHarung  des  Barnabasbriefes.  Leipz.  1869. 
An  Appendix  to  Be  Wette's  Com.  on  the  N.  T. 

English  translations  by  WAKE  (1693),  ROBERTS  and  DONALDSON 
(in  Ante-Nic.  Lib.  1867),  HOOLE  (1872  ,  KENDALL  (1877),  SHABPE 
(1880,  from  the  Sinait.  MS  ).  German  translations  by  HEFELE 
(1840),  SCHOLZ  (1865),  MAYER  (1869),  EioeEXBACH  (187"s). 

CRITICAL  DISCUSSIONS. 
J.  Jos.  HEFELE  (E.  C.) :  Das  Sendsekreiben  des  Apostels  Barnabas 9  aufs 

Neue  untersucht  und  er&lart.    Tub.  1840. 

JOH.  KAYSER:  Ueber  densogen.  Barndbasbritf.    Paderborn,  1866. 
DONALDSON:  Ap.  Fathers  (1874),  p.  248-317. 
K.  WIESELER:    On  the  Origin  and  Authorship  of  the  Ep.  of  B.,  in  the 

"  Jahrbucher  for  Deutsche  Theol.,J?  1870,  p.  603  sqq. 
0.  BEAUNSBERGER  (K  C.) :  Der  Aposte!  Barnabas.    Sein  Leben  und  der 

ihm  beigelegte  Brief  wmenschaftlich  qewurdigt.    Mainz,  1876. 


672  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

W.  CUNNINGHAM  :  Tkt  Ep.  of  St.  Barnabas.    London,  1876. 

SAMUEL  SHARPS  :  The  Ep.  ofB.  from  the  Sinaitic  MS.    London,  1880. 

J,  WEISS  :  Der  Barnabasbriefkritisch  untersucht.    Berlin,  1888. 

MILLIGAN  in  Smith  and  Wace,  I.  260-265;  Earnack  in  Herzog1  H 
101-105. 

Other  essays  by  HENKE  (1S27),  EOEDAM  (1828),  ULLMANN 
(1828  ,  SCHENKEL  (1837),  FEAXKE  (1840),  WEIZS!CKEB  (1864), 
HEYDECKE  (1374  1.  On  the  relation  of  Barnabas  to  Justin  Martyr 
see  31.  von  Engelhardt  :  -Das  Christenthum  Justins  d.  M.  (1878),  p. 
375-314. 
The  doctrines  of  B,  are  fully  treated  by  HEFELE,  KAYSEB, 

DONALDSON^  HlLGESTELD,  BBAUNSBEEGEK,  and  SPRINZL. 

Comp.  the  list  of  books  from  1  822-1  875  in  HARNACK'S  Prol.  to  the 
Leipz.  ed.  of  Barn.  Ep.  p.  xx  sqq.  ;  and  in  RICHARDSON,  Synopsis, 
16-19  (down  to  1887). 

The  CATHOLIC  EPISTLE  OP  BAKXABAS,  so  called,  is  anony- 
mous, and  omits  all  allusion  to  the  name  or  residence  of  the 
readers.  He  addresses  them  not  as  their  teacher,  but  as  one 
ami  >ng  them.1  He  commences  in  a  very  general  way  :  "  All 
hail,  ye  sons  and  daughters,  in  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  who  loved  us,  in  peace  ;  "  and  concludes  :  "  Farewell,  ye 
children  of  love  and  peace,  The  Lord  of  glory  and  all  grace  be 
with  your  spirit.  Amen."  2  For  this  reason,  probably,  Origen 
called  it  a  "Catholic"  Epistle,  which  must  be  understood, 
however,  with  limitation.  Though  not  addressed  to  any  par- 
ticular congregation,  it  is  intended  for  a  particular  class  of 
Christians  who  were  in  danger  of  relapsing  into  Judaizing 
errors. 

1.  COXTENIS.  The  epistle  is  chiefly  doctrinal  (ch.  1-17), 
and  winds  up  with  some  practical  exhortations  to  walk  "  in  the 
way  of  light/1  and  to  avoid  "the  way  of  darkness"  (ch.  18-21).1 

we  6i6&CKatoe,  oH'  &s  elc  !£  v/ifiv,  ch.  1  ;  comp.  4: 


5  The  Cod.  Sinaiticus  onpis  "Amen,"  and"  adds  at  the  dose: 
Bopitzofa* 

s  The  last  chapters  are  derived  either  from  the  Didache,  or  from  a  still  older 
work,  Duse  Yi&  vel  Judidum  Petris  which  may  have  "been  the  common  source 
of  both.  See  my  work  on  the  Didache.  p.  227  sqq.,  305,  309,  312  sq.,  317. 


8107.  BARNABAS.  673 

It  has  essentially  the  same  object  as  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
though  far  below  it  in  depth,  originality  and  unction.  Tt  shows 
that  Christianity  is  the  all-sufficient,  divine  institution  for  sal- 
vation, and  an  abrogation  of  Judaism,  with  all  its  laws  and 
ceremonies.  Old  things  have  passed  away ;  all  things  are  made 
new.  Christ  has  indeed  given  us  a  law;  but  it  is  a  new  law, 
without  the  yoke  of  constraint.1  The  tables  of  Moses  are  broken 
that  the  love  of  Christ  may  be  sealed  in  our  hearts.2  It  is 
therefore  sin  and  folly  to  assert  that  the  old  covenant  is  still 
binding.  Christians  should  strive  after  higher  knowledge  and 
understand  the  difference. 

By  Judaism,  however,  the  author  understands  not  the  Mosaic 
and  prophetic  writings  in  their  true  spiritual  sense,  but  the  car- 
nal misapprehension  of  them.  The  Old  Testament  is,  with  him, 
rather  a  veiled  Christianity,  which  he  puts  into  it  by  a  mystical 
allegorical  interpretation,  as  Philo,  by  the  same  method,  smug- 
gled into  it  the  Platonic  philosophy.  In  this  allegorical  con- 
ception he  goes  so  far,  that  he  actually  seems  to  deny  the  literal 
historical  sense.  He  asserts,  for  example,  that  God  never  willed 
the  sacrifice  and  fasting,  the  Sabbath  observance  and  temple- 
worship  of  the  Jews,  but  a  purely  spiritual  worship;  and  that 
(he  laws  of  food  did  not  relate  at  all  to  the  eating  of  clean  and 
unclean  animals,  but  only  to  intercourse  with  different  classes  of 
men,  and  to  certain  virtues  and  vices.  His  chiliasm  likewise 
rests  on  an  allegorical  exegesis,  and  is  no  proof  of  a  Judaizing 
tendency  any  more  than  in  Justin,  Irensens,  and  Tertullian.  He 
sees  in  the  six  days  of  creation  a  type  of  six  historical  millennia 
of  work  to  be  followed  first  by  the  seventh  millennium  of  rest, 
and  then  by  the  eighth  millennium  of  eternity,  the  latter  being 
foreshadowed  by  the  weekly  Lord's  Day.  The  carnal  Jewish 
interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament  is  a  diabolical  perversion. 
The  Christians,  and  not  the  Jews,  are  the  true  Israel  of  God 
and  the  righteous  owners  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures. 

1  Ch.  2?  £  Kacvbg  v6ftof  TOV  Kvpiov  $pZ>v  *I.  X.,  avsv  (arep]  fyyov 
*Ch.4:  ffW£Tpt/?77  avTvv  $  &a#^W7,  Iva  $  T 
flif  rftv  mpfliav  fy&v  kv  &irfth  r^g  wiarsog  adroi. 
Vol.  II.    43 


674  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Barnabas  proclaims  thus  an  absolute  separation  of  Christianity 
from  Judaism.  In  this  respect  he  goes  further  than  any  post- 
apostolic  writer.  He  has  been  on  that  ground  charged  with 
unsound  ultra-Paulinism  bordering  on  antinomianisin  and  here- 
tical Gnosticism.  But  this  is  unjust.  He  breathes  the  spirit  of 
Paul,  and  only  lacks  his  depth,  wisdom,  and  discrimination. 
Paul,  in  Galatians  and  Colossians,  likewise  takes  an  uncom 
promising  attitude  against  Jewish  circumcision,  Sabbatarianism, 
and  ceremonialism,  if  made  a  ground  of  justification  and  a  bind- 
ing yoke  of  conscience;  but  nevertheless  he  vindicated  tho  Mosaic 
law  as  a  preparatory  school  for  Christianity.  Barnabas  ignores 
this,  and  looks  only  at  the  negative  side.  Yet  he,  too,  acknow- 
ledges the  new  law  of  Christ.  He  has  some  profound  glances 
and  inklings  of  a  Christian  philosophy.  He  may  be  called  an 
orthodox  Gnostic.  He  stands  midway  between  St.  Paul  and 
Justin  Martyr,  as  Justin  Martyr  stands  between  Barnabas  and 
the  Alexandrian  school.  Clement  and  Origen,  while  averse  to 
his  chiliasm,  liked  his  zeal  for  higher  Christian  knowledge  and 
his  -allegorizing  exegesis  which  obscures  every  proper  historical 
understanding  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  Epistle  of  Barnabas  has  considerable  historical,  doctrinal, 
and  apologetic  value.  He  confirms  the  principal  facts  and  doc- 
trines of  the  gospel.  He  testifies  to  the  general  observance  of 
Sunday  on  "  the  eighth  day,"  as  the  joyful  commemoration  of 
Christ's  resurrection,  in  strict  distinction  from  the  Jewish  Sab- 
bath on  the  seventh.  He  furnishes  the  first  clear  argument  for 
the  canonical  authority  of  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  (without 
naming  it)  by  quoting  the  passage:  "Many  are  called,  but  few 
are  chosen/'  with  the  solemn  formula  of  Scripture  quotation: 
*as  it  is  written."1  He  introduces  also  (ch.  5)  the  words  of 


l  Gap.  4  at  the  close:  vpoa^wiev  /afn-ore,  <5f  yfypairrat, 
&  c&eKTol  eipe&auev.  From  Matt.  22:  14.  As  long  as  the  fourth  chapter  of 
this  epistle  existed  only  in  Latin,  the  words:  "stcirf  wriphm  est"  were  suspected 
by  Dr.  Gredner  and  other  critics  as  an  interpolation.  Hilgenfeld  (3853)  srg- 
?«ted  that  the  original  had  simply  Katify  fjpiv,  and  Dressel,  in  his  first  edition 
«f  the  Apoetolw  Fathers  (1857),  remarked  inloc;  'T<?*»  **ictd«cr«rfw»  erf»  gfet 


§167.  BAKtfABAS.  675 

Christ,  that  he  did  not  come  "to  call  just  men,  but  sinners/' 
which  are  recorded  by  Matthew  (9 : 13).  He  furnishes  parallels 
to  &  number  of  passages  in  the  Gospels,  Pauline  Epistles,  First 
Peter,  and  the  Apocalypse.  His  direct  quotations  from  the  Old 
Testament,  especially  the  Pentateuch,  the  Psalms,  and  Isaiah, 
are  numerous ;  but  he  quotes  also  IV.  Esdras  and  the  Book  of 
Enoch.1 

2.  AUTHOESHIP.  The  Epistle  was  first  cited  by  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  and  Origen,  as  a  work  of  the  apostolic  Barnabas, 
who  plays  so  prominent  a  part  in  the  early  history  of  the 
church.2  Origen  seems  to  rank  it  almost-  with  the  inspired 
Scriptures.  In  the  Sinaitic  Bible,  of  the  fourth  century,  it  fol- 
lows as  the  "Epistle  of  Barnabas,"  immediately  after  the  Apoc- 
alypse (even  on  the  same  page  135,  second  column),  as  if  it 
were  a  regular  part  of  the  New  Testament.  From  this  we  may 
infer  that  it  was  read  in  some  churches  as  a  secondary  ecclesias- 
tical book,  like  the  Epistle  of  Clement,  the  Epistle  of  Polycarp, 
and  the  Pastor  of  Hermas.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  likewise 
ascribe  it  to  Barnabas^  but  number  it  among  the  "spurious,"  or 

sam  olent."  But  the  discovery  of  the  Greek  original  in  the  Sinaitic  MS.  of  the 
Bible  has  settled  this  point,  and  the  Constantinopolitan  MS.  confirms  it.  The 
attempt  of  Strauss  and  other  sceptics  to  refer  the  quotation  to  the  apocryphal 
fourth  Book  of  Esdras,  which  was  probably  written  by  a  Jewish  Christian  after 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  contains  the  passage :  ( Many  are  born,  but 
few  will  be  saved,"  is  only  worth  mentioning  as  an  instance  of  the  stubbornness 
of  preconceived  prejudice. 

1  Funk  (1. 364r-366)  gives  nine  quotations  from  Genesis,  thirteen  from  Exo- 
dus, six  from  Deuteronomy,  fourteen  from  the  Psalms,  twenty-six  from  Isaiah, 
etc.,  also  one  from  IV.  Esdras,  four  from  Enoch.  Comp.  the  list  in  Anger's 
Synopsis  Eoang.  (1852),  Gebh.  and  Ham.,  217-230. 

'SeeActsl:  23;  4:  37;  9:^26  sq.;  II :  22,30;14:  4,  14;15:2,etc.  Cle- 
ment of  Alex,  quotes  the  Epistle  seven  rimes  (four  times  under  the  name  oi 
Barnabas),  in  his  Stromata,  Origen,  his  pupil,  three  or  four  times  (Contra  Cfeta 
I.  63;  De  Print.  III.  2;  Ad  Eim.  I.  24).  Tertullian  does  not  mention 
the  epistle,  but  seems  to  have  known  it  (comp.  Adv.  Marc.  IEL  7 ;  Adv.  Jud. 
14);  he,  however,  ascribes  the  Ep.  to  the  Hebrews  to  Barnabas  (De  Pudic.  c. 
20).  Hefele  and  Funk  find  probable  allusions  to  it  in  Irenaeus,  Justin  Martyr, 
Ignatius,  and  Hermas ;  but  these  are  uncertain.  On  the  life  and  labors  of 
Barnabas  see  especially  Hefele  and  Braunsberger  (p.  1-135). 


<57t5  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

"apocryphal"  writings.1    They  seem  to  have  doubted  the  au 
thuriry,  but  not  the  authenticity  of  the  epistle.     The  historical 
testimony  therefore  is  strong  and  unanimous  in  favor  of  B^r- 
oal*a&.  and  is  accepted  by  all  the  older  editors  and  several  of  the. 
later  critic^.2 

But  the  internal  evidence  points  with  greater  force  to  a  post- 
apostolic  writer.3  The  Epistle  does  not  come  up  to  the  position 
and  reputation  of  Barnabas,  the  senior  companion  of  Paul, 
unices  we  a?>ume  that  he  was  a  man  of  inferior  ability  and 
gradually  vanished  before  the  rising  star  of  his  friend  from 
Tarsus.  It  takes  extreme  ground  against  the  Mosaic  law,  such 
as  we  can  hardly  expect  from  one  who  stood  as  a  mediator 
between  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  and  the  Jewish  Apostles, 
and  who  iu  the  collision  at  Antioch  sided  with  Peter  and  Mark 
against  the  bold  champion  of  freedom ;  yet  we  should  re- 
member that  this  was  only  a  temporary  inconsistency,  and  that 
no  doubt  a  reaction  afterwards  took  place  in  his  mind.  The 
author  in  order  to  glorify  the  grace  of  the  Saviour,  speaks  of 
the  apostles  of  Christ  before  their  conversion  as  over-sinful,4  and 

1  In  H.  E.  EEL  25,  Eusebius  counts  it  among  the  "spurious1'  books  (ev  To2g 
rot?o*rC- . .  ^  fapoftsiy  Eapi-dSa  ETTIGTO/J),  but  immediately  afterwards  and  in 
VI.  H  among  the  "doubtful"  (avrifo-ydpeva),  and  Jerome  (De  Vir.  ill  c.  6), 
a  inter  apocrypkas  scripturas" 

»  Vos$,  Diipin,  Qallandi,  Cave,  Pearson,  Lardner,  Henke,  Bordam,  Schneck- 
enbarger,  Franke,  Gieseler,  Credner,  Bleek  (formerly),  De  Wette,  Mohler, 
Alzog,  Sprinzl  ("genuine,  but  not  inspired"),  Sharpe.  The  interpolation  hy- 
pothesis of  Schenkel  (1837)  and  Heydeke  (1874)  is  untenable;  the  book  must 
*tand  or  fall  as  a  whole, 

s  So  Usfiher,  Daill£,  Cotelier,  Tillemont,  Mosheim,  Neander,  Ullmaun,  Baor, 
HHgenfeld,  Hefele,  Do'llinger,  Kayser,  Donaldson,  Westcott,  Miiller,  Wiese* 
ler,  Weizsilcker,  Braunsberger,  Harnack,  Funk.  Hefele  urges  eight  arguments 
'gainst  the  genuineness;  but  five  of  them  are  entirely  inconclusive.  See  Mil- 
liffan,  /.  c.,,  who  examines  them  carefully  and  concludes  that  the  authenticity 
:.f  the  Epistle  is  more  probable  than  is  now  commonly  supposed. 

4  Or  ''sinners  above  all  sin,"  b~sp  -acav  duapriav  avofturspovs,  homines  omni 
pcecato  iniquwrcs,  c.  5.  Paul  might  call  himself  in  genuine  humility  "the 
chief  of  sinners"  (1  Tim.  1:  15),  with  reference  to  his  former  conduct  as  a 
persecutor ;  but  he  certainly  would  not  have  used  such  a  term  <tf  all  the  apes* 
iles,  nor  would  it  be  true  of  any  of  them  but  Judas. 


8167.  BABffABAS. 

indulges  in  artificial  and  absurd  allegorical  fancies.1  He  iilso 
wrote  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  when  Barnabas  in  all 
probability  was  no  more  among  the  living,  though  the  date  of 
his  death  is  unknown,  and  the  inference  from  Col.  4:10  and 
1  Pet.  5:  13  is  uncertain. 

These  arguments  are  not  conclusive,  it  is  true,  but  it  is  quite 
certain  that  if  Barnabas  wrote  this  epistle,  he  cannot  be  the 
author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  vice  versa.  The 
difference  between  the  two  is  too  great  for  the  unity  of  the 
authorship.  The  ancient  church  showed  sound  tact  in  excluding 
that  book  from  the  canon-  while  a  genuine  product  of  the 
apostolic  Barnabas2  had  a  claim  to  be  admitted  into  it  as  well  as 
the  anonymous  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  or  the  writings  of  ilark 
and  Luke. 

The  author  was  probably  a  converted  Jew  from  Alexandria 
(perhaps  by  the  name  Barnabas,  which  would  easily  explain  the 
confusion),  to  judge  from  his  familiarity  with  Jewish  literature, 
and,  apparently,  with  Philo  and  his  allegorical  method  in  hand- 
ling the  Old  Testament.  In  Egypt  his  Epistle  was  first  known 
and  most  esteemed;  and  the  Sinaitic  Bible  which  contains  it  was 
probably  written  in  Alexandria  or  Csesarea  in  Palestine.  The 
readers  were  chiefly  Jewish  Christians  in  Egypt  and  the  East, 
who  overestimated  the  Mosaic  traditions  and  ceremonies.3. 

1  He  is  also  charged  with  several  blunders  concerning  Jewish  history  and 
worship  which  can  hardly  be  expected  from  Barnabas  the  Levite.    Comp.  chs. 
7,  8,  9,  10,  15.    But  this  is  disproved  by  Braunsberger  (p.  253  sqq.),  who 
shows  that  the  epistle  gives  us  interesting  archaeological  information  in  those 
chapters,  although  he  denies  the  genuineness. 

2  He  is  twice  called  an  apostle*  Acts  14  :  4^  14,  being  included  with  Paul  in 


8  So  Neander,  Mohler,  Eefele  (1840),  Funk,  Giidemann.  On  the  other  hand, 
Lardner,  Donaldson,  Hilgenfeld,  Kayser,  Eiggenbach,  Hefele  (1868),  BrannsK 
berger,  Harnack  contend  that  Barnabas  and  his  readers  were  Gentile  Chris- 
tians, because  he  distinguishes  himself  and  his  readers  (#"«f)  from  the  Jew^ 
chs.  2,  3,  4,  8,  10,  H  16.  But  the  same  distinction  is  uniformly  made  ry  John 
in  the  Gospel,  and  was  quite  natural  after  the  final  separation  between  ihc 
Church  and  the  synagogue.  The  mistakes  in  Jewish  history  are  doubtful  and 
less  numerous  than  the  proofs  of  the  writer's  familiar!  iy  with  it.  The  strongesl 
passage  is  ch.  16  :  "  Before  we  became  believers  in  God,  the  house  of  our  heart 


678  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311- 

3.  TIME  of  composition.  The  work  was  written  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  temple,  which  is  alluded  to  as 
an  accomplished  tact;1  yet  probably  before  the  close  of  the  first 

centurv,  certainly  before  the  reconstruction  of  Jerusalem  under 

» /  f 

Hadrian  ^120).3 

§  168.  Hernias. 
EDITIONS. 

The  older  editions  give  only  the  imperfect  Latin  Version,  first  pub- 
lished by  FABEE  STAPCLEXSIS  (Par.  1513).  Oth^r  Latin  MSS. 
were  discovered  since.  The  Greek  text  (brought  from  Mt.  Athos 
by  Omstantine  Simonides,  and  called  Cod.  Lipsiensis^  was  first  pub- 
lished by  R.  AXGEE,  with  a  preface  by  G.  DINDOEF  (Lips.  1856) ; 
then  by  TISCHESTDOBF,  in  Dressel's  Patres  Apost.,  Lips  1857  (p.  572- 
637; ;  again  in  the  second  ed.  1863,  where  Tischendcrf,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  intervening  discovery  of  the  Cod.  Sinaiticfs  retracted 
his  former  objections  to  the  originality  of  the  Greek  Hermas  from 

was  . . .  foil  of  idolatry  and  the  house  of  demons,  because  we  did  what  was  con- 
trary to  God's  will/*  Bat  even  this,  though  more  applicable  to  heathen,  is 
not  inapplicable  to  Jews;  nor  need  we  suppose  that  there  were  no  Gentiles 
anoong  the  readers.  Towards  the  close  of  the  second  century  there  were  pro- 
bably very  few  unmixed  congregations.  Lipsius  and  Volkmar  seek  the  readers 
in  Rome,  Muller  in  Asia  Minor,  Sehenkel,  Hilgenfeld,  Harnack,  and  Funk  in 
Alexandria  or  Egypt.  There  is  a  similar  difference  of  opinion  concerning  the 
readers  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 

1  Ch.  16  compared  with  the  explanation  of  Daniel's  prophecy  of  the  little 
horn  in  eh.  4. 

9  Hefele,  Hayser,  Baur,  Muller,  Lipsius,  put  the  composition  between  107 
and  120  (before  the  building  of  JSIia  Capitolina  under  Hadrian),  and  Brauns- 
berger  between  110  and  137;  but  EDlgenfeld,  Beuss  (Gesch.  d.  N.  T.,  4th  edv 
1364,  p.  233\  Ewald  (Gesch.  d.  Volkes  Israel,  VH.  136),  Weizsacker  ("in  Jahrb. 
fur  Deutsch.  Theol.,"  1865,  p.  391,  and  1871,  p.  569),  Wieseler  (Ibid.  1870,  p. 
603-614).  and  Pank  (Prol.  p.  TL),  at  the  close  of  the  first  century,  or  even 
before  79.  Wieseler  argues  from  the  author's  interpretation  of  Daniel's  pro- 
phecy concerning  the  ten  kingdoms  and  the  little  horn  (ch.  4  and  16),  that  the 
Ep.  w^  written  under  Domitian,  the  eleventh  Bom.  emperor,  and  "the  little 
horn77  of  Daniel.  Weiszacker  and  Cunningham  refer  the  little  horn  to  Vespa- 
tdan  (79-79  ,  Hilgenfeld  to  ]STerva;  but  even  in  the  last  case  the  Ep.  would 
have  been  written  before  A.B.  98,  when  ETerva  died.  Milligan  concludes  that 
it  was  written  very  soon  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  But  «i  fresh  view 
of  that  terrible  judgment,  we  can  scarcely  account  for  the  danger  rtf  apostesv  to 
Judaism.  The  author's  aim  seems  to  pre-suppos©  a  revival  of  Judaism  and  o» 
Jewish  tendencies  within  the  Christian  Church. 


2  168.  HERMAS.  679 

Mt.  Athos,  which  he  had  pronounced  a  mediaeval  retranslation  from 
the  Latin  (see  the  Proleg.,  Appendix  a?id  Preface  to  the  second  ed.). 
The  Hotfi^if  bpacx  is  also  printed  in  the  fourth  vol.  of  the  large  edi- 
tion of  the  Codex  Sinaiticus,  at  the  close  (pp.  142-148),  Petersb. 
1862.  The  texts  from  Mt.  Athos  and  Mt.  Sinai  substantially  agree. 
A,n  Ethiopic  translation  appeared  in  Leipz.  1860,  ed.  with  a  Latin 
version  by  ANT.  D'  ABBADIE.  Comp,  DILLJIANX  in  the  "  Zeitschrift 
d.  D.  Morgenland.  Gesellschaft  "  for  1861 ;  SCHODDE  :  H&rma  Nabi, 
the  Ethiop.  K  of  P.  H.  examined.  Leipz.  1876  (criticised  by  Har- 
nack  in  the  "Theol.  Lit.  Ztg.,"  1877,  fol.  58),  and  G.  and  His  Proleg. 
xxxiv.  sqq, 

0,  v.  GEBHARDT,  and  HAHNACK  :  Patrum  Apo&t*  Opera,  Fascic.  HI. 
Lips.  1877.  Greek  and  Latin.  A  very  careful  recension  of  the  text 
(from  the  Sinaitic  MS.)  by  v.  Gebhardt,  with  ample  Prolegomena 
(84  pages),  and  a  critical  and  historical  commentary  by  Harnack. 

FUNK'S  fifth  ed.  of  Hefele's  Patres  Apost.  I.  334r-563.  Gr.  and  Lat 
Follows  mostly  the  text  of  Yon  Gebhardt. 

AD.  HILGENFELD  :  Hermce  Pastor.  Greece  e  codicibus  Sinaitico  et  Lipsiensi 
. . .  restituit,  etc.  Ed.  altera  emendata  et  valde  aucta.  Lips.  1881. 
With  Prolegomena  and  critical  annotations  (257  pp.).  By  the  same : 
Hermce  Pastor  Greece  integrum  ambitu.  Lips.,  1887  (pp.  130).  From 
the  Athos  and  Sinaitic  MSS. 

S.  P.  LAMBROS  (Prof,  in  Athens) :  A  Collation  of  the  Athos  Codex  of  the 
Shepherd  of  Hermas,  together  with  an  Introduction.  Translated  and 
edited  by  J.  A.  ROBINSON,  Cambridge,  1888. 

English  translations  by  WAKE  (1693,  from  the  Latin  version) ;  F. 
CROMBDB  (vol.  L  of  the  "  Ante-Nicene  Christian  Library,"  1867,  from 
the  Greek  of  the  Sinait  MS.),  by  CHARLES  H.  HOLE  (1870,  from 
Hilgenfeld's  first  ed.  of  1866,)  and  by  ROBINSON  (1888). 

ESSAYS. 

0.  REINH.«JACHMANN:  Der  ERrte  des  Hermas.    Konigsberg,  1835. 
ERNST  GAAB  :  Der  Hirte  des  Hermas.    Basel,  1866  (pp.  203). 
THEOD.  ZAHN:   Der  JBirt  des  Hermas.    Gotha  1868.    (Comp,  also  Ma 

review  of  Ga&b  in  the  Studien  und  Kritiken  for  1868,  pp.  319-349). 
CHABLES  EL  HOOLE  (of  Christ  Church,  Oxf.) :  The  Shepherd  of  Herma* 

translated  into  English,  with  an  Introduction  and  Notes.    Lond.,  Oxf. 

and  Cambr.  1870  (184  pages). 
GTTST.  HEYNE:    Quo  tempore  Hermes  Pastor  scriptus  sit.    Regimonti, 

1872. 

J.  DONALDSON:  The  Apostolical  Fathers  (1874)  p.  818-392. 
H.  M.  BEHM:  Der  Verfasser  der  Schrift.,  welche  d.  Titd  " Hirt"  fuhrt. 

Rostock,  1876  (71  pp.). 
BBGTLL:  Der  Hirt  des  Hermas.    Nach  Ursprung  und  Inhalt  untersucht. 

Freiburg  i.  B.  1882.    The  same:    Ueber  den  Ursprung  des  ersten 

Clemensbriefs  und  des  Hxrten  des  Hernias.    1882. 


880  SECOND  PERIOD.    A,  D.  100-S11. 

Ar>.  LrNfc  :  Christi  Person  und  Werk  im  Hirteti  des  Hernias.    Marburg, 

1S86.     Die  Einheit  fes  Pastor  Eermcp.    Marb.  1888.    Defends  the 

unity  of  Hennas  against  Hilgenfeld 
P.  BAUMGXRTXER  :  Z>7«  Eiuheft  d<*  JBermas-Buches.    Freiburg,  1889. 

He  mediates  tetweeri  HihreufelJ  and  Link,  and  holds  that  the  book 

was  written  by  one  author,  but  at  different  times. 

I,  The  SHEPHERD  OF  HERMAS1  has  its  title  from  the  circum- 
stance that  the  author  calls  himself  Hernias  arid  is  instructed 
by  the  angel  of  repentance  in  the  costume  of  a  shepherd.     It  is 
distinguished  from  all  the  productions  of  the  apostolic  fathers 
bv  its  literary  form.     It  is  the  oldest  Christian  allegory,  an 
apocalyptic  book,  a  sort  of  didactic  religious  romance.     This 
accounts  in  part  for  its  great  popularity  in  the  ancient  church. 
It  has  often  been  compared  with  Bunyan's  Pilgrim's  Progress 
and  Dante's  Divina  Comrnedia,  though  far  inferior  in  literary 
merit  and  widely  different  in  theology  from  either.     For  a  long 
time  it  was  only  known  in  an  old,  inaccurate  Latin  translation, 
which  was  first  published  by  Faber  Stapulensis  in  1513;  but 
since  1856  and  1862,  we  have  it  also  in  the  original  Greek,  in 
two  texts,  one  hailing  from  Mount  Athos,  re-discovered  and  com- 
pared by  Latnbros,  and  another  (incomplete)  from  Mount  Sinai. 

II.  CHARACTER  ASB  CONTEXTS.    The  PASTOR  HEBMJB  is  a 
sort  of  system  of  Christian  morality  in  an  allegorical  dress,  aud 
a  call  to  repentance  and  to  renovation  of  the  already  somewhat 
slumbering  and  secularized  church   in   view  of  the  speedily 
approaching  day  of  judgment.    It  falls  into  three  boolss:2 

(1)  Visions;  four  visions  and  revelations,  which  were  given 
to  the  author,  and  in  which  the  church  appears  to  him  first  in 
the  form  of  a  venerable  matron  in  shining  garments  with  a 
book,  then  as  a  tower,  and  lastly  as  a  virgin.  All  the  visions 
have  for  their  object  to  call  Hennas  and  through  him  the 
church  to  repentance,  which  is  now  possible,  but  will  close  when 
the  church  tower  is  completed. 

It  is  difficult  to  decide  whether  the  writer  actually  had  or 
imagined  himself  to  have  had  those  visions,  or  invented  them  as 

1  Pastor  Bermce,  fo  Ilewuyv.    Comp.  Vis.  L  1,  2,  4 ;  II.  2. 
*  This  division,  however,  is  made  by  later  editors. 


J168.   HEKMAS.       '  681 

a  pleasing  and  effective  mode  of  instruction,  like  Dante's  vision 
and  Bunyan's  dream. 

(2)  Mandate,  or  twelve  commandments,  prescribed  by  a  guar- 
dian angel  in  the  garb  of  a  shepherd. 

(3)  Similitudes,  or  ten  parables,  in  which  the  church  again 
appears,  but  now  in  the  form  of  a  building,  and  the  different 
virtues  are  represented  under  the  figures  of  stones  and  trees. 
The  similitudes  were  no  doubt  suggested  by  the  parables  of  the 
gospel,  but  bear  no  comparison  with  them  for  beauty  and  sig- 
nificance. 

The  scene  is  laid  in  Rome  and  the  neighborhood.  The  Tiber 
is  named,  but  no  allusion  is  made  to  the  palaces,  the  court,  the 
people  and  society  of  Rome,  or  to  any  classical  work.  An  old 
lady,  virgins,  and  angels  appear,  but  the  only  persons  mentioned 
by  name  are  Hermas,  Maxinius,  Clement  and  Grapte. 

The  literary  merit  of  the  Shepherd  is  insignificant.  It  differs 
widely  from  apostolic  simplicity  and  has  now  only  an  antiqua- 
rian interest,  like  the  pictures  and  sculptures  of  the  catacombs. 
It  is  prosy,  frigid,  monotonous,  repetitious,  overloaded  with 
uninteresting  details,  but  animated  by  a  pure  love  of  nature  and 
an  ardent  zeal  for  doing  good.  The  author  was  a  self-made 
man  of  the  people,  ignorant  of  the  classics  and  ignored  by  them, 
but  endowed  with  the  imaginative  faculty  and  a  talent  for  pop- 
ular religious  instruction.  He  derives  lessons  of  wisdom  and 
piety  from  shepherd  and  sheep,  vineyards  and  pastures,  towers 
and  villas,  and  the  language  and  events  of  every-day  life. 

The  first  Vision  is  a  fair  specimen  of  the  book,  which  opens 
like  a  love  story,  but  soon  takes  a  serious  turn.  The  following 
is  a  faithful  translation: 

1.  "He  who  had  brought  me  up,  sold  me  to  a  certain  Ehoda  at 
Some.1  Many  years  after,  I  met  her  again  and  began  to  love  her  as  a 
sister.  Some  time  after  this,  I  saw  her  bathing  in  the  river  Tiber,  and 

1  So  v.  Gebh.  and  Hilgenf.  ed.  II.,  with  Cod.  Sin.  But  the  MSS.  vary  con- 
siderably. The  Vatican  MS.  reads :  v&ndidit  quandam  puellam  Romce.  The 
words  «f  fP<fy«?i>  would  indicate  that  the  writer  was  not  from  Borne;  but  he 
often  confounds  ?k  and  sv. 


GS2  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

I  gave  her  my  hand  and  led  her  out  of  the  river.  And  when  I  beheld 
her  beauty,  I  thought  in  my  heart,  saying:  'Happy  should  I  be,  if  I 
hu<:  a  wife  of  such  beauty  and  goodness.'  This  was  my  only  thought, 
and  nothing  more. 

"After  some  time,  a*  I  went  into  the  villages  and  glorified  the  crea- 
tures of  Go*l,  f><r  their  greatness,  and  beauty,  and  power,  I  fell  asleep 
while  walking.  And  the  Spirit  seized  me  and  carried  me  through  a  cer- 
tain wilderness  through  which  no  man  could  travel,  for  the  ground  was 
rocky  and  :ir,pa^uble,  on  account  of  the  water. 

"And  when  I  had  crossed  the  river,  I  came  to  a  plain;  and  falling 
upon  my  knees,  1  began  to  pray  unto  the  Lord  and  to  confess  my  sins. 
And  while  I  was  praying,  the  heaven  opened,  and  I  beheld  the  woman 
that  I  loved  tainting  me  from  heaven,  and  saying:  'Hail,  Hennas!' 
And  when  I  beheld  her,  I  said  unto  her:  'Lady,  what  doest  thou  here?' 
Bat  she  an* were* I  and  said :  '  I  was  taken  up,  in  order  that  I  might  bring 
to  light  thy  sins  before  the  Lord.'  And  I  said  unto  her:  'Hast  thou 
become  my  accuser?'  *]So/  said  she;  'but  hear  the  words  that  I  shall 
say  unto  thee.  God  who  dwells  in  heaven,  and  who  made  the  things 
that  are  out  of  that  which  is  not,  and  multiplied  and  increased  them  on 
account  of  his  holy  church,  is  angry  with  thee  because  thou  hast  sinned 
against  me.'  I  answered  and  said  unto  her:  'Have  I  sinned  against 
thee?  In  what  way?  Did  I  ever  say  unto  thee  an  unseemly  word? 
Did  I  not  always  consider  thee  as  a  lady?  Did  I  not  always  respect  thee 
as  a  sister?  "Why  doest  thou  utter  against  me,  0  Lady,  these  wicked 
and  foul  lies?'  But  she  smiled  and  said  unto  me:  ' The  desire  of  wick- 
t-dneifs  has  entered  into  thy  heart.  Does  it  not  seem  to  thee  an  evil  thing 
for  a  just  man,  if  an  evil  desire  enters  into  his  heart?  Yea,  it  is  a  sin, 
and  a  great  one  (said  she).  For  the  just  man  devises  just  things,  and  by 
devising  just  things  is  his  glory  established  in  the  heavens,  and  he  finds 
the  Lord  merciful  unto  him  in  all  his  ways;  but  those  who  desire  evil 
things  in  their  hearts,  bring  upon  themselves  death  and  captivity,  espe- 
cially they  who  set  their  affection  upon  this  world,  and  who  glory  in  their 
wealth,  and  lay  not  hold  of  the  good  things  to  come.  The  souls  of  those 
that  have  no  hope,  but  have  cast  themselves  and  their  lives  away,  shall 
greatly  regret  it.  But  do  thou  pray  unto  God,  and  thy  sins  shall  be 
healed,  cud  those  of  thy  whole  house  and  of  all  the  saints.1 

2.  "After  she  had  spoken  these  words,  the  heavens  were  closed,  and  I 
remained  trembling  all  over  and  was  sorely  troubled.  And  I  said  within 
myself:  '  L  rhis  sin  be  set  down  against  me,  how  can  I  be  saved?  or  how 
can  I  propitiate  God  for  the  multitude  of  my  sins?  or  with  what  words 
shall  I  ask  the  Lord  to  have  mercy  upon  me? " 

**  While  I  was  meditating  on  these  things,  and  was  musing  on  them  in 
my  heart,  I  beheld  in  front  of  me  a  great  white  chair  made  out  of  fleeces 
of  wool ;  and  there  came  an  aged  woman,  clad  in  very  suining  raiment, 
and  having  a  book  in  her  hand,  and  she  sat  down  by  herself  on  the  chair 
and  saluted  me,  saying:  'Hail,  Hennas  1"  And  I,  sorrowing  and  weep 


|168.  HEKMAS.  683 

ing,  said  unto  her:  *Hail,  Lady!'  And  she  said  unto  me:  'Why  art 
thou  sorrowful,  0  Hermas,  for  thou  wert  wont  to  be  patient,  and  good- 
tempered,  and  always  smiling?  Why  is  thy  countenance  cast  down? 
and  why  art  thou  not  cheerful? '  And  I  said  unto  her :  i  0  Lady,  I  have 
been  reproached  by  a  most  excellent  woman,  who  said  unto  me  that  I 
sinned  against  her.'  And  she  said  unto  me:  'Far  be  it  from  the  servant 
of  God  to  do  this  thing.  But  of  a  surety  a  desire  after  her  must  have 
come  into  thy  heart.  Such  an  intent  as  this  brings  a  charge  of  sin  against 
the  servant  of  God ;  for  it  is  an  evil  and  horrible  intent  that  a  devout 
and  tried  spirit  should  lust  after  an  evil  deed  5  and  especially  that  the 
chaste  Hermas  should  do  so — he  who  abstained  from  every  evil  desire, 
and  was  full  of  all  simplicity,  and  of  great  innocence 1* 

3.  " '  But  [she  continued]  God  is  not  angry  with  thee  on  account  of 
this,  but  in  order  that  thou  mayest  convert  thy  house,  which  has  done 
iniquity  against  the  Lord,  and  against  you  who  art  their  parent.  But 
thou,  in  thy  love  for  your  children  (<*>d6reKvoc  &v)  didst  not  rebuke  thy 
house,  but  didst  allow  it  to  become  dreadfully  wicked.  On  this  account 
is  the  Lord  angry  with  thee;  but  He  will  heal  all  the  evils  that  happened 
aforetime  in  thy  house;  for  through  the  sins  and  iniquities  of  thy  house- 
hold thou  hast  been  corrupted  by  the  affairs  of  this  life.  But  the  mercy 
of  the  Lord  had  compassion  upon  thee,  and  upon  thy  house,  and  will 
make  thee  strong  and  establish  thee  in  His  glory.  Only  be  not  slothful, 
but  be  of  good  courage  and  strengthen  thy  house.  For  even  as  the  smith, 
by  smiting  his  work  with  the  hammer,  accomplishes  the  thing  that  he 
wishes,  so  shall  the  daily  word  of  righteousness  overcome  all  iniquity. 
Fail  not,  therefore,  to  rebuke  thy  children,  for  I  know  that  if  they  will 
repent  with  all  their  heart,  they  will  be  written  in  the  book  of  life,  toge- 
ther with  the  saints.' 

"After  these  words  of  hers  were  ended,  she  said  unto  me :  i  Dost  thou 
wish  to  hear  me  read?'  I  said  unto  her:  '  Yea,  Lady,  I  do  wish  it.*  She 
said  unto  me:  'Be  thou  a  hearer,  and  listen  to  the  glories  of  God.' 
Then  I  heard,  after  a  great  and  wonderful  fashion,  that  which  my  memory 
was  unable  to  retain ;  for  all  the  words  were  terrible,  and  beyond  man's 
power  to  bear.  The  last  words,  however,  I  remembered ;  for  they  were 
profitable  for  us,  and  gentle :  '  Behold  the  God  of  power,  who  by  his  in- 
visible strength,  and  His  great  wisdom,  has  created  the  world,  and  by 
His  magnificent  counsel  hath  crowned  His  creation  with  glory,  and  by 
His  mighty  word  has  fixed  the  heaven,  and  founded  the  earth  upon  the 
waters,  and  by  His  own  wisdom  and  foresight  has  formed  His  holy 
church,  which  He  has  also  blessed !  Behold,  He  removes  the  heavens 
from  their  places,  and  the  mountains,  and  the  hills,  and  the  stars,  and 
everything  becomes  smooth  before  His  elect,  that  He  may  give  unto 
them  the  blessing  which  He  promised  them  with  great  glory  and  joy,  if 
only  they  shall  keep  with  firm  faith  the  laws  of  God  which  they  have 
received.' 
4,  "  When,  therefore,  she  had  ended  her  reading,  and  had  risen  up 


684  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

from  the  chair,  there  came  four  young  men,  and  took  up  the  chair,  and 
departed  towards  the  east.  Then  she  called  me,  and  toadied  my  breast, 
and  said  unto  uic:  'Host  thou  been  pleased  with  my  reading?'  And  I 
said  unto  her:  *Lady,  the.-e  last  things  pleased  me;  but  the  former  were 
hard  and  har>h '  Bur  she  spake  unto  me,  saying:  i These  last  are  foi 
the  righteous ;  but  the  former  are  for  the  heathen  and  the  apostates.'' 
While  the  was  yet  speaking  with  me,  there  appeared  two  men,  and  they 
took  her  up  in  their  arms  and  departed  unto  the  east,  whither  also  the 
chair  had  gone.  And  she  departed  joyfully;  and  as  she  departed,  she 
said :  *  Be  of  good  courage,  0  Hernias ! ' 

III.  The  THEOLOGY  of  Hennas  is  ethical  and  practical.     He 
is  free  from  speculative  opinions  and  ignorant  of  theological 
technicalities.      He  views  Christianity  as  a  new  law  and  lays 
chief  stress  on  practice.    Herein  he  resembles  James,  but  he 
ignores  the  "liberty"  by  which  James  distinguishes  the  "per- 
fect'"' Christian  law  from  the  imperfect  old  law  of  bondage.    He 
teaches  not  only  the  merit,  but  the  supererogatory  merit  of  good 
works  and  the  sin-atoning  virtue  of  martyrdom.     He  knows 
little  or  nothing  of  the  gospel,  never  mentions  the  word,  and 
has  no  idea  of  justifying  faith,  although  he  makes  faith  the 
chief  virtue  and  the  mother  of  virtues.     He  dwells  on  man's 
duty  and  performance  more  than  on  God's  gracious  promises  and 
saving  deeds.     In  a  word,  his  Christianity  is  thoroughly  legal- 
istic and  ascetic,  and  further  off  from  the  evangelical  spirit  than 
any  uther  book  of  the  apostolic  fathers.     Christ  is   nowhere 
named,  nor  his  example  held  up  for  imitation  (which  is  the  true 
conception  of  Christian  life);  yet  he  appears  as  "the  Son  of 
God/7  and  is  represented  as  pre-^xistent  and  strictly  divine.1 
The  word  Christian  never  occurs. 

But  this  meagre  view  of  Christianity,  far  from  being  heretical 
or  schismatic,  is  closely  connected  with  catholic  orthodoxy  as 

T  In  the  FUIOTU*  and  Mandates  the  person  of  the  Redeemer  is  mentioned  only 
three  times ;  in  the  Similitudes  Hennas  speaks  repeatedly  of  the  "Son  of  God/' 
and  seems  to  identify  his  pre-existent  divine  nature  with  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Sim.  IX.  1  TC>  msvpa  TO  a}iov  ...  6  vsbg  rov  dsov  scriv.  But  a  passage  in  a 
parable  must  not  be  pressed  and  it  is  differently  explained.  Comp.  Hilgen- 
feld,  Aj>.  rater.  166  sq.,  Harnoek's  notes  ou  Sim.  V.  5  and  IX.  1  ;  the  differ- 
ent view  of  Zahn,  139sqq.  and  24o  sqq.  atid  especially  Link's  monograph 
qnoted  above  /p.  660;. 


8168.  HERMAS.  685 

far  as  we  can  judge  from  hints  and  figures.  Hennas  stood  in 
close  normal  relation  to  the  Roman  congregation  (either  under 
Clement  or  Pius),  and  has  an  exalted  view  of  the  "  holy  church," 
as  he  calls  the  church  universal.  He  represents  her  as  the  first 
creature  of  God  for  which  the  world  was  made,  as  old  and  ever 
growing  younger;  yet  he  distinguishes  this  ideal  church  from 
the  real  and  represents  the  latter  as  corrupt.  He  may  have  in* 
ferred  this  conception  in  part  from  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians, 
the  only  one  of  Paul's  writings  with  which  he  shows  himself 
familiar.  He  requires  water-baptism  as  indispensable  to  salva- 
tion, even  for  the  pious  Jews  of  the  old  dispensation,  who 
received  it  from  the  apostles  in  Hades.1  He  does  not  mention 
the  eucharist,  but  this  is  merely  accidental.  The  whole  book 
rests  on  the  idea  of  an  exclusive  church  out  of  which  there  is  no 
salvation.  It  closes  with  the  characteristic  exhortation  of  the 
ingel :  "Do  good  works,  ye  who  have  received  earthly  blessings 
from  the  Lord,  that  the  building  of  the  tower  (the  church)  may 
not  be  finished  while  ye  loiter ;  for  the  labor  of  the  building  has 
been  interrupted  for  your  sakes.  Unless,  therefore,  ye  hasten 
to  do  right,  the  tower  will  be  finished,  and  ye  will  be  shut  out." 
Much  of  the  theology  of  Hermas  is  drawn  from  the  Jewish 
apocalyptic  writings  of  pseudo-Enoch,  pseudo-Esdras,  and  the 
lost  Book  of  Eldad  and  Medad.2  So  his  doctrine  of  angels.  He 
teaches  that  six  angels  were  first  created  and  .  directed  the 

1  This  is  the  natural  interpretation  of  the  curious  passage  Simil.  IX.  16 : 
"  These  apostles  and  teachers  who  preached  the  name  of  the  Son  of  God,  after 
having  fallen  asleep  in  the  power  and  faith  of  the  Son  of  God,  preached  to 
those  also  who  were  asleep  and  gave  to  them  the  seal  of  preaching.  They  de- 
scended therefore  into  the  water  with  them  and  again  ascended  (KaTsfaoav  abv 
psT*  av~5)v  eif  rb  vtiup  KOL  KO)ILV  avifyaca>) .  But  these  descended  alive  and 
again  ascended  alive;  but  those  who  had  fallen  asleep  before  descended  dead 
(vsKpoi)  and  ascended  alive  (f&yref)."  This  imaginary  post-mortem  baptism  is 
derived  from  the  preaching  of  Christ  in  Hadea,  1  Pet.  3:  19 ;  4:  6.  Clement 
of  Alex,  quotes  this  passage  with  approbation,  but  supposed  that  Christ  as  well 
as  the  apostles  baptized  in  Hades.  Strom.  IT.  9.  44;  VL  6,  45,  46.  Coteliei 
and  Donaldson  (p.  380)  are  wrong  in  interpreting  Hermas  as  meaning  merely 
a  metaphorical  and  mystical  baptism,  or  the  divine  blessings  symbolized  by  it 

*  The  last  is  expressly  quoted  in  the  Second  Vision. 


056  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 


Ing  of  the  church.  Michael,  their  chief,  writes  the  law  in 
the  hearts  of  the  faithful  ;  tlie  angel  of  repentance  guards  the 
penitent  against  relapse  and  seeks  to  bring  back  the  fallen. 
Twelve  good  spirits  which  bear  the  names  of  Christian  virtues, 
and  are  seen  by  Henna?  in  the  form  of  Tirgins,  conduct  the 
believer  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  twelve  unclean  spirits 
named  from  the  same  number  of  sins;  hinder  him.  Every 
man  ha>  a  srnod  and  an  evil  genius.  Even  reptiles  and  other 
alma's  have  a  presiding  angel.  The  last  idea  Jerome  justly 
n.nd^mn-  a<  i'»«>lish. 

It  is  oMufiMiig  and  misleading  to  judge  Hermas  from  the 
ip«i-t«»!5c  t'Ottflii't  between  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christianity.1 
That  conflict  was  over.  John  shows  no  traces  of  it  in  his 
f  impel  and  Epistles.  Clement  of  Rome  mentions  Peter  and 
Panl  as  inseparable.  The  two  types  had  melted  into  the  one 
(  'atholie  family,  and  continued  there  as  co-operative  elements  in 
the  same  organization,  but  were  as  yet  very  imperfectly  under- 
>toiM.L  especially  the  free  Gospel  of  Paul.  Jewish  and  pagan 
features  reappeared,  or  rather  they  never  disappeared,  and 
exerted  their  influence  for  good  and  evil.  Hence  there  runs 
through  the  whole  history  of  Catholicism  a  legalistic  or  Juda- 
izing,  and  an  evangelical  or  Pauline  tendency  ;  the  latter  pre- 
vailed in  the  Reformation  and  produced  Protestant  Christianity. 
Hermas  stood  nearest  to  James  and  furthest  from  Paul  ;  his 
friend  Clement  of  Rome  stood  nearer  to  Paul  and  further  off 
from  James  ;  but  neither  one  nor  the  other  had  any  idea  of  a 
hotile  conflict  between  the  apostles. 

IT.  RELATION  TO  THE  SCRIPTURES    Hermas  is  the  only  one 

:  As  is  done  by  the  Tubingen  School,  but  without  unanimity.  Schwegler, 
aad,  with  qualifications,  Hilgenfeld  and  Lipsins  represent  Hennas  as  an 
Ebionite,  while  Ritschl  on  the  contrary  assigns  him  to  ihe  school  of  Paul. 
There  is  no  trace  whatever  in  Hernias  of  the  essential  features  of  Ebionism  — 
circumcision,  the  sabbath,  the  antipathy  to  Paul  ;—  nor  on  the  oiher  hand  of 
an  undemanding  of  the  specific  doctrines  of  Paul.  Ohlhoiq,  hits  the  point 
(I.  c.  p.  13  1  *'  Herrnas  i3t  em  Qliedder  damaligen  ortMoTen  Kirrlie.  und  *&ne 
Auf'ixsung  der  christlwhen  Lehre  die  «me>  einfoehen  QemdndegKtfes  one  be 
tiimmte  Awtpr&guny  irgend  eines  Partricharakten." 


\  168.  HERMAS.  687 

of*  the  apostolic  fathers  who  abstains  from  quoting  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures  and  the  words  of  our  Lord.  This  absence 
is  due  in  part  to  the  prophetic  character  of  the  Shepherd,  for 
prophecy  is  its  own  warrant,  and  speaks  with  divine  authority. 
There  are,  however,  indications  that  he  knew  several  books  of 
the  New  Testament,  especially  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  the  Epistle 
of  James,  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  The  name  of  Paul 
is  nowhere  mentioned,  but  neither  are  the  other  apostles.  It  is 
wrong,  therefore,  to  infer  from  this  silence  an  anti-Pauline 
tendency.  Justin  Martyr  likewise  omits  the  name,  but  shows 
acquaintance  with  the  writings  of  Paul.1 

Y.  RELATION  TO  MONTANISM.  The  assertion  of  the  pro- 
phetic gift  and  the  disciplinarian  rigorism  Hermas  shares 
with  the  Montanists;  but  they  arose  half  a  century  later,  and 
there  is  no  historic  connection.  Moreover  his  zeal  for  discipline 
does  not  run  into  schismatic  excess.  He  makes  remission  and 
absolution  after  baptism  difficult,  but  not  impossible;  he 
ascribes  extra  merit  to  celibacy  and  seems  to  have  regretted  his 
own  unhappy  marriage,  but  he  allows  second  marriage  as  well 
as  second  repentance,  at  least  till  the  return  of  the  Lord  which, 
with  Barnabas,  he  supposes  to  be  near  at  hand.  Hence 
Tertullian  as  a  Montanist  denounced  Hermas. 

VI.  AUTHORSHIP  AND  TIME  OF  COMPOSITION.  Five  opinions 
are  possible,  (a)  The  author  was  the  friend  of  Paul  to  whom 
he  sends  greetings  in  Rom.  16 :  14,  in  the  year  58.  This  is  th«r 
oldest  opinion  and  accounts  best  for  its  high  authority.2  (b)  A 
contemporary  of  Clement,  presbyter-bishop  of  Rome,  A.  D.  92- 

i  See  the  list  of  Scripture  allusions  of  Hermas  in  Gebhardtfs  ed.  p.  272-274 ; 
in  Funk's  ed.  I.  575-578 ;  Hilgenfeld,  Die  Ap.  Voter,  182-184;  Zahn,  Herma 
Postore  N.  T.  ittustratus,  Gott.  1867 ;  and  D.  Hirt  d.  JET.  391-482.  '  Zahn  dis- 
covers considerable  familiarity  of  H.  with  the  N.  T.  writings.  On  the  relation 
of  Hermas  to  John  see  Holtzmann,  in  Hilgenfeld's  "Zeitschrift  fur  wissensch. 
TheoL,"  1875,  p.  40sqq. 

*  So  Origen  (his  opinion,  puto  enim,  etc,),  Eusebius,  Jerome,  probably  also 
Irenjeus  and  Clement  of  Alexandria ;  among  recent  writers  Cotelier, 
r,  Gallandi,  Lumper,  Lachmann,  Spriozl* 


6SS  SECOXD  I'ERluD.    A.  L>.  lu.-Sil. 

101.  Based  upon  the  testimony  of  the  book  itself.1  (c)  A 
brother  of  Bishop  Pius  of  Rome  ^140).  So  asserts  an  unknown 
author  of  170  in  the  Muratorian  fragment  of  the  canon.2  But 
he  may  have  confounded  the  older  and  younger  Hernias  with 
the  Latin  translator,  (d)  The  book  is  the  work  of  two  or 
three  author?,  was  begun  under  Trajan  before  112  and  com- 
pleted l»y  the  brother  of  Pius  in  140.3  (e)  Hernias  is  a 
fictitious  name  to  lend  apostolic  authority  to  the  Shepherd,  (f  ) 
Bardv  worth  mentioning  is  the  isolated  assertion  of  the  Ethio- 
pian vereiun  that  the  apostle  Paul  wrote  the  Shepherd  under  the 
name  of  Hennas  which  was  given  to  him  by  the  inhabitants  of 
Lystra.  • 

We  adopt  the  second  view,  which  may  be  combined  with  the 
firct.  The  author  calls  himself  Hernias  and  professes  to  be  a 
eontera|»orary  of  the  Eoman  Clement,  who  was  to  send  his  book 
to  foreign  churches.4  This  testimony  is  clear  and  must  outweigh 

1  Gaab,  Zahn,  Caspar!,  Alzog,  Salmon  (in  "Diet,  of  Chr.  Biog."  II.  912  sqq.). 

2  "jRw'0/e1/!  t'€.v  r-'tp.rrhne  tern  'Oribua  nnstris  in  urbe  Homo,  ffefma  (ffermas) 
tnwiwt-  detente  [/n]  cithelm,  c.rhi^  Rouiae  eccleaiae  Plo  episcopo,  fratre  ejiis. 
Et  /J<w  !t'-ji  e  raiqwlem  nppor'et,  ^e[d]  pnblicnre  i*ero  in  ecdesia  populo  neque  inter 
jw.'iiArfrv  *o  ip'ctwn  [read:  complefoi\  nurnero^  nr<we  inter  apostolos,  infinem  tern- 
pnf>:M  potej  M    The  same  view  is  set  forth  in  a  poem  of  pseudo-Tertullian 
against  Maroion  : 


<k  P:-st  hvne  {Hypi/i'is]  deinde  Pius,  Hermas,  cui  germinefrater, 
Angd'c;s  P.M'OT,  qni  tradita  i-erba  Incutus  n 

It  id  ako  eontainei  in  the  Liberian  Catalogue  of  Roman  bifihopa  (A.  D.  354), 
2^d  adroc.itetl  hy  Mosheim,  Schrockh,-  Credner,  Hefele,  Lipsius,  Ritschl, 
Hevne,  v.  Gebhardt,  Harnack,  Briill,  Funk,  Uhlhorn,  Baumgartner.  Others 
assume  that  the  brother  of  Pius  was  the  author,  but  simulated  an  elder 
Hennas. 

3  Hil^renteld  designates  these  authors  H.  a=  Efrrrnas  apocaljpticus  ;  H.  p. 
=  Hernias  jjo?torali^  ;  H.  s.=  Hermas  secnnrloriu^;  See  Prol.  p.  XXI.  sq, 
Thiersob,  Count  de  Charapa^ny  t  Lfs  Antonins,  e<i.  III.  IS75,  T.  I,"  p.  144)  and 
(Tn^ranpcr  likewise  ass:im^  more  than  one  author*  But  the  book  is  a  unit, 
Comp.  Harnai-k  versus  Hil^enfeld  in  the  "Theol.  Literatur-Zeitung  "  for 
l6^,  f.  *J49sqq.,  Link,  Bimmgiirtner,  Lambros,  quoted  above. 

*  In  n.  n.  4  Hermas  receives  the  command  to  write  "two  books  and  to 
send  one  to  Clement  and  one  to  Grapte  ;  "  an  I  Clement  was  to  send  the  books 
io  foreign  cities  («fe-  rar  ^w  wdAwc).  This  seems  to  imply  that  he  was  the 
well  known  bishop  of  Borne.  Giapte  was  a  deaconess,  having  charge  q/ 


3168.  HERMAS.  689 

every  other.  If  the  Hennas  mentioned  by  Paul  was  a  young 
disciple  in  58S  he  may  well  have  lived  to  the  age  of  Trajan,  and 
he  expressly  represents  himself  as  an  aged  man  at  the  time 
when  he  wrote. 

We  further  learn  from  the  author  that  he  was  a  rather  unfor- 
tunate husband  and  the  father  of  bad  children,  who  had  lost  his 
wealth  in  trade  through  his  own  sins  and  those  of  his  neglected 
sons,  but  who  awoke  to  repentance  and  now  came  forward  him- 
self as  a  plain  preacher  of  righteousness,  though  without  any 
official  position,  and  apparently  a  mere  layman.1  He  had  been 
formerly  a  slave  and  sold  by  his  master  to  a  certain  Christian 
lady  in  Rome  by  the  name  of  Rhoda.  It  has  been  inferred  from 
his  Greek  style  that  he  was  born  in  Egypt  and  brought  up  in  a 
Jewish  family.2  But  the  fact  that  he  first  mistook  the  aged 
woman  who  represents  the  church,  for  the  heathen  Sibyl,  rather 
suggests  that  he  was  of  Gentile  origin.  We  may  iufer  the  same 
from  his  complete  silence  about  the  prophetic  Scriptures  of  the 
Old  Testament.  He  says  nothing  of  his  conversion. 

widows  and  orphans.  The  opinion  of  Origen  that  CJement  and  Grapte  repre- 
sent the  spiritual  and  literal  methods  of  interpretation  is  merely  an  allegorical 
fancy.  Donaldson  and  Harnack  assume  that  Clement  is  an  unknown  person, 
but  this  is  inconsistent  with  the  assumed  authority  of  that  person. 

1  He  is  told  in  the  Second  Vision,  ch.  2 :  "  Your  seed,  O  Hennas,  has  sinned 
against  God,  and  they  have  blasphemed  against  the  Lord,  and  in  their  great 
wickedness  they  have  betrayed  their  parents  . .  .  and  their  iniquities  have  been 
filled  up.    But  make  known  these  words  to  all  your  children,  and  to  your  wife 
who  is  to  be  your  sister.    For  she  does  not  restrain  her  tongue,  with  whi ch  she 
commits  iniquity;  but  on  hearing  these  words  she  will  control  herself,  and 
will  obtain  mercy."    The  words  '*  who  is  to  be  your  sister >f  probably  refer  to 
future  continence  or  separation.    Tillemont  and  Hefele  regard  Hennas  as  a 
presbyter,  but  Fleury,  Hilgenfeld,  Thiersch,  Zahn,  Uhlhorn  and  Salmon  as  a 
iayman.    He  always  speaks  of  presbyters  as  if  he  were  not  one  of  them,  and 
severely  censures  the  Roman  clergy.    Justin  Martyr  was  also  a  lay-preacher, 
but  with  more  culture. 

2  Zahn  infers  from  the  Jewish  Greek  idiom  of  Hermas  that  he  grew  up  in 
Jewish  circles,  and  was  perhaps  acquainted  with  the  Hebrew  language.  On  the 
other  hand  Harnack  supposes  (Notes  on  Vis.  1. 1)  that  Hermas  was  descended 
from  Christian  parents,  else  he  would  not  have  omitted  to  inform  us  of  his 
conversion  in  the  house  of  Rhoda.    Hilgenfeld  (p.  138)  makes  Hermas  a  Jewi 
but  his  master,  who  sold  him,  a  Gentile.    Robinson  conjectures  that  he  \7as 
a  Greek  slave  (Sim.  IX.)  and  wrote  reminiscences  of  his  youth. 

Yol.  IT.    44 


690  SECOND  PERIOD.    A. D.  100-311. 

The  book  was  probably  written  at  the  close  of  the  first  or  early 
in  the  second  century.  It  shows  no  trace  of  a  hierarchical  or- 
ganization, and  assumes  the  identity  of  presbyters  and  bishops; 
even  Clement  of  Eome  is  not  called  a  bishop.1  The  state  of  the 
church  is  indeed  described  as  corrupt,  but  corruption  began 
already  in  the  apostolic  age,  as  we  see  from  the  Epistles  and  the 
Apocalypse.  At  the  time  of  Irenseus  the  book  was  held  in  the 
highest  esteem,  which  implies  its  early  origin. 

VII.  AUTHORITY  and  VALUE.  No  product  of  post-apostolic 
literature  has  undergone  a  greater  change  in  public  esteem.  The 
Shepherd  was  a  book  for  the  times,  but  not  for  all  times.  To 
the  Christians  of  the  second  and  third  century  it  had  all  the 
charm  of  a  novel  from  the  spirit- world,  or  as  Bunyan's  Pil- 
grims' Progress  has  at  the  present  day.  It  was  even  read  in 
public  worship  down  to  the  time  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  and 
added  to  copies  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  (as  the  Codex  Sinaiticus, 
where  it  follows  after  the  Ep.  of  Barnabas).  Irenseus  quotes  it 
as  "  divine  Scripture. wl  The  Alexandrian  fathers,  who  with  all 

1  The  church  officers  appear  as  a  plnrality  of  irpecfivrspot,  or  seniors,  or 
presides,  of  equal  rank,  but  Clement  of  Borne  is  supposed  to  have  a  certain 
supervision  in  relation  to  foreign  churches.  Vis.  II.,  2,  4 ;  III,,  9 ;  8imil.  IX., 
31.  In  one  passage  ( Vis.  HF.,  5)  Hennas  mentions  four  officers,  '*  apoptles. 
bishops,  teachers,  and  deacons."  The  "  bishops"  here  include  presbyters,  and 
the  u  teachers"  are  either  all  preachers  of  the  gospel  or  the  presbyter-bishops  in 
their  teaching  (as  distinct  from  their  ruling)  capacity  and  function.  In  other 
passages  he  names  only  the  axdarofoi  and  dtdaaKc&ot,  Sim,  IX.,  15, 16,  25; 
camp.  Paul's  mptves  not  didcuriu&Qi,  Eph.  4:  11.  The  statements  of  Hermas 
on  church  organization  are  rather  loose  and  indefinite.  They  have  been  dis- 
cussed by  Hilgenfeld  and  Harnack  in  favor  of  presbyterianism,  by  Hefele  and" 
Bothe  in  favor  of  episcopacy.  Lightfoot,  who  identifies  Hermas  with  the 
brother  of  bishop  Pins  (140),  says :  «  Were  it  not  known  that  the  writer's  own 
brother  was  bishop  of  Eome  (?),  we  should  be  at  a  loss  what  to  say  about  the 
constitution  of  the  Eoman  church  in  his  day."  (Com.  on  Phfiipp.,  p.  218.) 

1  Adv.  Hear.  IY.  20,  \  2 :  el™  $  ypatf  $  Uyovoa.  Then  follows  a  quotation 
from  Hand.  1. 1 :  "First  of  all  believe  that  there  is  one  God  who  created  and 
prepared  and  made  all  things  out  of  nothing."  Possibly  the  wrong  reference 
was  a  slip  of  memory  in  view  of  familiar  passages,  2  Mace,  7 :  28  (^dvra  . .  If 
WK  avrow  kmbaev) }  Heb.  11:3;  Mark  12 :  29  (6  &£%  it?  forf) ;  James  2 :  18 
Hilgenfeld  thinks  that  the  Hermas  was  known  also  to  the  author  of  the  laiwyW' 
nfr(*n»  and  pseudo-Clement. 


§  163.  HEBMAS.  69i 

their  learning  were  wanting  in  sound  critical  discrimination,  re- 
garded it  as  "  divinely  inspired,"  though  Origen  intimates  that 
others  judged  less  favorably.1  Eusebius  classes  it  with  the 
"spurious,"  though  orthodox  books,  like  the  Epistle  of  Earnabas, 
the  Acts  of  Paul,  etc. ;  and  Athanasius  puts  it  on  a  par  with 
the  Apocrypha  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  are  useful  for  cate- 
chetical instruction. 

In  the  Latin  church  where  it  originated,  it  never  rose  to  such 
high  authority.  The  Muratorian  canon  regards  it  as  apocryphal, 
and  remarks  that  "  it  should  be  read,2  but  not  publicly  used  in 
the  church  or  numbered  among  the  prophets  or  the  apostles." 
Tertullian,  who  took  offence  at  its  doctrine  of  the  possibility  of  a 
second  repentance,  and  the  lawfulness  of  second  marriage,  speaks 
even  contemptuously  of  it.3  So  does  Jerome  in  one  passage, 
though  he  speaks  respectfully  of  it  in  another.*  Ambrose 
and  Augustin  ignore  it.  The  decree  of  Pope  Gelasius  I.  (about 
500)  condemns  the  book  as  apocryphal.  Since  that  time  it 
shared  the  fate  of  all  Apocrypha,  and  fell  into  entire  neglect. 
The  Greek  original  even  disappeared  for  centuries,  until  it 
turned  up  unexpectedly  in  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century 
to  awaken  a  new  interest,  and  to  try  the  ingenuity  of  scholars  as 
one  of  the  links  in  the  development  of  catholic  Christianity. 

NOTE. 

The  Pastor  Hermse  has  long  ceased  to  be  read  for  devotion  or  enter- 
tainment. We  add  some  modern  opinions.  Mosheim  (who  must  have 

1  See  the  quotations  from  Clement  of  Alex,  and  Origen  in  G-.  and  H.  Prol.* 
p.  un.-LVi.  Zahn  says  that  "  the  history  of  the  ecclesiastical  authority  of 
Hennas  in  the  East  begins  with  an  unbounded  recognition  of  the  same  as  a 
book  resting  on  divine  revelation." 

*  In  private  only,  or  in  the  church  ?    The  passage  is  obscure  and  disputed. 

5  On  account  of  this  comparative  mildness  (fifand.  IV.,  1),  Tertullian  calls 
Hermas  sarcastically  "Me  apocryphus  Pastor  inwhorum."  De  Pud.  c.  20; 
comp.  c.  10. 

*  Jerome  calls  the  Shepherd  "  revera  Mis  liber,"  which  was  publicly  read  in 
certain  churches  of  Greece,  and  quoted  by  many  ancient  writers  as  an  author- 
ity, but  "  almost  unknown  among  the  Latins'7  (apud  Latinos'  pcsne  ignotus). 
Op-  II.  846.    In  another  passage,  Op.  VI.  604,  he  condemns  the  view  of  the 
angelic  supervision  of  animala  ( Vis.  IV.  2). 


692  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

read  it  very  superficially)  pronounced  the  talk  of  the  heavenly  spirits  in 
Hennas  to  be  more  stupid  and  insipid  than  that  of  the  barbers  of  his 
day,  and  concluded  that  he  was  either  a  fool  or  an  impostor.  The  great 
historian  Mebuhr,  as  reported  by  Bunsen,  used  to  say  that  he  pitied  the 
Athenian  [why  not  the  Roman  ?]  Christians  who  were  obliged  to  listen 
to  the  reader  oV  such  a  book  in  the  church.  Bunsen  himself  pronounces 
it "  a  well-meant  but  silly  romance." 

On  the  other  hand,  some  Irvingite  scholars,  Dr.  Thiersch  and  Mr.  Ga&b, 
kave  revived  the  old  belief  in  a  supernatural  foundation  for  the  visions,  as 
having  been  really  seen  and  recorded  in  the  church  of  Rome  during  the 
apostolic  age,  but  afterwards  modified  and  mingled  with  errors  by  the 
compiler  under  Pius.  Ga£ib  thinks  that  Hennas  was  gifted  with  the  power 
of  vision,  and  inspired  in  the  same  sense  as  Swedenborg. 

Westcott  ascribes  "  the  highest  value  v  to  the  Shepherd, "  as  showing  in 
what  way  Christianity  was  endangered  by  the  influence  of  Jewish  prin- 
ciples as  distinguished  from  Jewish  forms."  Hist,  of  the  Canon  of  the  N. 
21  p.  173  'second  ed.) 

Donaldson  (a  liberal  Scotch  Presbyterian)  thinks  that  the  Shepherd 
*  ought  to  derive  a  peculiar  interest  from  its  being  the  first  work  extant, 
the  main  effort  of  which  is  to  direct  the  soul  to  God.  The  other  religious 
books  relate  to  internal  workings  in  the  church — this  alone  specially 
deals  with  the  great  change  requisite  to  living  to  God.  ...  Its  creed  is  a 
very  short  and  simple  one.  Its  great  object  is  to  exhibit  the  morality 
implied  in  conversion,  ....  and  it  is  well  calculated  to  awaken  a  true 
sense  of  the  spiritual  foes  that  are  ever  ready  to  assail  him."  (Ap. 
Ftxth.,  p.  339).  But  he  also  remarks  (p.  336)  that  "nothing  would  more 
completely  show  the  immense  difference  between  ancient  Christian  feel- 
ing and  modern,  than  the  respect  in  which  ancient,  and  a  large  number 
of  modern  Christians  hold  this  work." 

George  A.  Jackson  (an  American  Congregationalist)  judges  even  more 
fcvorably  (Ap.  Path.,  1879,  p.  15) :  "Reading  the  ' Shepherd,'  and  re- 
membering that  it  appeared  in  the  midst  of  a  society  differing  little  from 
that  satirized  by  Juvenal,  we  no  longer  wonder  at  the  esteem  in  which  it 
was  held  by  the  early  Christians,  but  we  almost  join  with  them  in  calling 
it  an  inspired  book.'* 

3Ir.  Hoole,  of  Oxford,  agrees  with  the  judgment  of  Athanasius,  and 
puts  its  literary  character  on  the  same  footing  as  the  pious  but  rude  art 
of  the  Roman  catacombs. 

Dr.  Salmon,  of  Dublin,  compares  Hennas  with  Savonarola,  who  sin- 
cerely believed :  (a)  that  the  church  of  his  time  was  corrupt  and  worldly; 
(5)  that  a  time  of  great  tribulation  was  at  hand,  in  which  tie  dross  should 
be  purged  away ;  (c)  that  there  was  still  an  intervening  time  for  repent- 
tnce  j  (d)  that  he  himself  was  divinely  commissioned  to  be  a  preacher  oli 
thai  repentance. 


J169.  PAPIAS,  693 


§  169.  Papias. 

(I )  The  fragments  of  PAPIAS  collected  in  EOUTH  :  Reliquiae  Sacrae,  ed. 
II.,  Oxl'.,  1846,  vol.  L,  3-16.  VON  GEBHARDT  and  HARSACK  : 
Patres  Apost.,  Appendix :  Papice  Fragment^  I.,  180-196.  English 
translation  in  Roberts  and  Donaldson,  "  Ante-Nicene  Library,"  I., 
441-448. 

Passages  on  Papias  in  IKEKZETTS  :  Adv.  H&r.,  v.  33,  \  3,  4.  EUSEB.  Hi  K 
HI.  36,  39;  Chron.  ad  Olymp.  220,  ed.  Schone  II.  162.  Also  a  few 
later  notices;  see  Routh  and  the  Leipz.  ed.  of  P.  A.  The  Vita 
&  Papice,  by  the  Jesuit  Halloix,  Dusei,  1633,  is  filled  with  a  fanciful 
account  of  the  birth,  education,  ordination,  episcopal  and  literary 
labors  of  the  saint,  of  whom  very  little  is  really  known. 

(II.)  Separate  articles  on  Papias,  mostly  connected  with  the  Gospel  ques- 
tion, by  SCHLEIEBMACHER  (on  his  testimonies  concerning  Matthew 
and  Mark  in  the  "Studien  und  Kritiken"  for!832,  p.  735) ;  TH.  ZA-RRC 
(ibid.  1866,  No.  IV.  p.  649  sqq.) ;  GK  E.  STEITZ  (in  the  "Sfcudien  und 
Kritiken"  for  1868,  No.  I.  63-95,  and  art.  Papias  in  Herzog's 
"  Encyc."  ed.  L  vol.  XI.,  78-86 ;  revised  by  LEIMBACH  in  ed.  IL 
vol.  XL  19rt-206);  JAMES  DO^ALDSO^  (The  Apost.  Fathers 

1874,  p.  393-i02) ;  Bishop  LIGHTFOOT  (in  the  "  Contemporary  Ke- 
view "  for  Aug.,  1875,  pp.  377-403 ;  a  careful  examination  of  the 
testimonies  of  Papias  concerning  the  Gospels  of  Mark  and  Matthew 
against  the  misstatements  in  ''  Supernatural  Beligion") ;  LEIMBACH 
(Das  Papiasfragment,  1875) ;  "WEIPFESTBACH  (Das  Papiasfragment, 
1874  and  1878) ;  HILGENFELD  ("  Zeitschrift  fur  wissensch.  Theol.," 

1875,  239  sqq.) ;  LtJDEMASTff  (Zur  ErMarung  des  Papiasfragments, 
in  the  "Jahrbucher  fur  protest  Theol.,"  1879,  p.  365  sqq.);  H. 
HOLTZMANST  (Papias  und  Johannes,  in  Hilgenfeld's   "  Zeitschriffc 
fur  wissensch.    Theologie,"  1880,  pp.  64-77).  Comp.  also  WESTCOTT 
on  the  Canon  of  the  N.  T.,  p.  59-68. 

PAPIAS,  a  disciple  of  John l  and  friend  of  Polycarp,  was  bishop 
of  Hierapolis,  in  Phrygia,  till  towards  the  middle  of  the  second 
century.  According  to  a  later  tradition  in  the  "  Paschal  Chron- 
icle/5 he  suffered  martyrdom  at  Pergamon  about  the  same  time 
with  Polycarp  at  Smyrna.  As  the  death  of  the  latter  ha? 
recently  been  put  back  from  166  to  155,  the  date  of  Papias 
must  undergo  a  similar  change;  and  as  his  contemporary  friend 
was  at  least  86  years  old,  Papias  was  probably  born  about  A.  D. 
70,  so  that  he  may  have  known  St.  John,  St.  Philip  the  Evan- 
1  See  note  at  the  end  of  the  section. 


694  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

^elist,  and  other  primitive  disciples  who  survived  the  destruo 
tion  of  Jerusalem. 

Papias  \vas  a  pious,  devout  and  learned  student  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  a  faithful  traditionist,  though  somewhat  credulous 
and  of  limited  comprehension.1  He  carried  the  heavenly  treas- 
ure in  an  earthen  vessel.  His  associations  give  him  considerable 
weight.  He  went  to  the  primitive  sources  of  the  Christian 
faith.  "I  shall  not  regret/3  he  says,  "to  subjoin  to  my  inter- 
pretations [of  the  Lord's  Oracles],  whatsoever  I  have  at  any 
time  accurately  ascertained  and  treasured  up  in  my  memory,  as 
I  have  received  it  from  the  elders  (xapa  r&v  KpeffftoTepwv)  and 
have  recorded  it  to  give  additional  confirmation  to  the  truth,  by 
my  testimony.  For  I  did  not,  like  most  men,  delight  in  those 
who  speak  much,  but  in  those  who  teach  the  truth  ;  nor  in  those 
who  record  the  commands  of  others  [or  new  and  strange  com- 
mands], but  in  those  who  record  the  commands  given  by  the 
Lord  to  our  faith,  and  proceeding  from  truth  itself.  If  then 
any  one  who  had  attended  on  the  elders  came,  I  made  it  a  point 
to  inquire  what  were  the  words  of  the  elders  ;  what  Andrew,  or 
what  Peter  said,  or  Philip,  or  Thomas,  or  James,  or  John,  or 
Matthew,  or  any  other  of  the  disciples  of  our  Lord;  and  what 
things  Aristion  and  the  elder  John,  the  disciples  of  the  Lord, 
say.  For  I  was  of  opinion  that  I  could  not  derive  so  much 
benefit  from  books  as  from  the  living  and  abiding  voice."  2  He 
collected  with  great  zeal  the  oral  traditions  of  the  apostles  and 
their  disciples  respecting  the  discourses  and  works  of  Jesus,  and 


1  Eosebins,  H.  K  ITL  39,  says  that  he  was  e$6$pa  GJJUK^  rfo  vow,  "very 
•mall-minded,"  and  that  this  appear,  from  his  writings  ;  but  he  was  no  doubt 
unfavorably  influenced  in  his  judgment  by  the  strong  millennarianism  of 
Papias,  which  he  mentions  josfc  before;  and  even  if  well  founded,  it  would  not 
invalidate  his  testimony  as  to  mere  feds.  In  another  place  (in.  36),  Eusebius 
calls  him  a  man  of  comprehensive  learning  and  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures 
(atfp  TO.  srcvrfl  brt  ftfiurra  foyaSrarof  xat  rfc  ypwfic  evfypw,  omni  doctrine* 
gmere  wwfrtccfetmtw  ct  in  usriptura  sacra  versaius).  Learning,  piety,  and  good 
sense  are  not  always  combined.  The  passage,  however,  is  wanting  in  som« 
MSS.  of  Eusebins.  See  the  note  of  Heinichen,  vol.  1.  141  sqq. 


r*pd  J&HJT  ^mfc  «rf  pemfaK.    Eus.  IK  39  (Heinichen,  L  148). 


\  169.  PAPIA&  695 

published  them  in  five  books  under  the  title:  "  Explanation  of 
the  Lord's  Discourses"1 

Unfortunately  this  book,  which  still  existed  in  the  thirteenth 
century,  is  lost  with  the  exception  of  valuable  and  interesting 
fragments  preserved  chiefly  by  Irenseus  and  Eusebius.  Among 
these  are  his  testimonies  concerning  the  Hebrew  Gospel  of 
Matthew  and  the  Petrine  Gospel  of  Mark,  which  figure  so 
prominently  in  all  the  critical  discussions  oil  the  origin  of  the 
Gospels.2  The  episode  on  the  woman  taken  in  adultery  which  is 
found  in  some  MSS.  of  John  7:  53-8:  11,  or  after  Luke 
21  :  38,  has  been  traced  to  the  same  source  and  was  perhaps  to 
illustrate  the  word  of  Christ,  John  8:  15  ("I  judge  no  man"); 
for  Eusebius  reports  that  Papias  "set  forth  another  narrative 
concerning  a  woman  who  was  maliciously  accused  before  the 
Lord  of  many  sins,  which  is  contained  in  the  Gospel  according  to 
the  Hebrews."3  If  so,  we  are  indebted  to  him  for  the  preser- 
vation of  a  precious  fact  which  at  once  illustrates  in  a  most 
striking  manner  our  Saviour's  absolute  purity  in  dealing  with 
sin,  and  his  tender  compassion  toward  the  sinner.  Papias  was 
an  enthusiastic  chiliast,  and  the  famous  parable  of  the  fertility 
of  the  millennium  which  he  puts  in  the  Lord's  mouth  and 
which  Irenseus  accepted  in  good  faith,  may  have  been  intended 
as  an  explanation  of  the  Lord's  word  concerning  the  fruit  of  the 


1  Aoyfov  KvpiaK&v  egqyiiatG,  Hxplanatio  sermonum  Domini.  The  word 
here  no  doubt  means  interpretation  of  some  already  existing  gospel  record, 
since  Anastasius  of  Sinai  (d.  599)  classes  Papias  among  Biblical  exegetes  or 
interpreters.  He  probably  took  as  his  text  the  canonical  Gospels,  and  gave 
his  own  comments  on  the  Lord's  Discourses  therein  contained,  together  with 
additional  sayings  which  he  had  derived,  directly  or  indirectly,  from  personal 
disciples  of  Christ.  Although  this  work  has  disappeared  for  several  centuries, 
it  may  possibly  yet  be  recovered  either  in  the  original,  or  in  a  Syriac  or 
Armenian  version.  The  work  was  still  extant  in  1218  in  the  MSS.  collection 
of  the  church  at  Nismes,  according  to  Gallandi  and  Pitra.  It  is  also  men- 
tioned thrice  in  the  Catalogue  of  the  Library  of  the  Benedictine  MoaoBtery 
of  Christ  Church,  Canterbury,  contained  in  the  Cottonian  MS.  of  the  thirteenth 
or  fourteenth  century.  Donaldson,  p.  402.  On  the  meaning  of  Myia  see  V\.l. 
I.  622  sq. 

*  See  vol  I.  p.  622,  633  sq. 

s  The  plural  («rt  notedis  dfiaprlaq,  H.  K  III.  39)  is  no  argumenf  against 
the  conjecture.    Cod.  D  reads  d/zaprip  instead  of  fioi^ia  in  John  8  :  3. 


696  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

vine  which  he  shall  drink  new  in  his  Father's  kingdom,  Matt 
26:  29,1  His  chiliasra  is  no  proof  of  a  Judaizing  tendency,  for 
it  was  the  prevailing  view  in  the  second  century.  He  also 
related  two  miracles,  the  resurrection  of  a  dead  man  which  took 
place  at  the  time  of  Philip  (the  Evangelist),  as  he  learned  from 
his  daughters,  and  the  drinking  of  poison  without  harm  by 
Justus  Barsabas. 

Papias  proves  the  great  value  which  was  attached  to  the  oral 
traditions  of  the  apostles  and  their  disciples  in  the  second  cen- 
tury. He  stood  on  the  threshold  of  a  new  period  when  the  last 
witnesses  of  the  apostolic  age  were  fast  disappearing,  and  when 
it  seemed  to  be  of  the  utmost  importance  to  gather  the  remain- 
ing fragments  of  inspired  wisdom  which  might  throw  light  on 
the  Lord's  teaching,  and  guard  the  church  against  error. 

But  he  is  also  an  important  witness  to  the  state  of  the  canon 
before  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  He  knew  the  first  two 
Gospels,  and  in  all  probability  also  the  Gospel  of  John,  for  he 
quoted,  as  Eusebius  expressly  says,  from  the  first  Epistle  of 
John,  which  is  so  much  like  the  fourth  Gospel  in  thought  and 
style  that  they  stand  or 'fall  as  the  works  of  one  and  the  same 
author.2  He  is  one  of  the  oldest  witnesses  to  the  inspiration  and 

1  See  above,  \  158,  p.  616*  Card.  Pitra,  in  the  first  vol.  of  his  Spicileg.  Solesm., 
communicates  a  similar  fragment,  but  this  is,  as  the  title  and  opening  words 
intimate,  a  translation  of  Irenseus,  not  of  Papias.  The  authoress  of  '*  The 
Pttp&  of  St.  John]'  p.  203,  remarks  on  that  description  of  Papias :  "  Under- 
stood literally,  this  is  of  course  utterly  unlike  anything  we  know  of  our  blessed 
Lord's  unearthly  teaching;  yet  it  does  sound  like  what  a  literal  and  narrow 
mind,  listening  to  mere  word-of  mouth  narrative,  might  make  of  the  parable 
of  the  Vine,  and  of  the  Sower,  or  of  the  Grain  of  Mustard-seed ;  and  we  also 
•ee  how  providential  and  how  merciful  it  was  that  the  real  words  of  our  Lord 
were  so  early  recorded  by  two  eye-witnesses,  and  by  two  scholarly  men,  under 
the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  instead  of  being  left  to  the  versions  that  good 
te  dull-minded  believers  might  make  of  them." 

1 A  mediaeval  tradition  assigns  to  Papias  an  account  of  the  origin,  and  even 
a  part  in  the  composition,  of  the  Gospel  of  John  as  his  amanuensis.  So  a  note 
prefixed  to  John's  Gospel  in  a  MS.  of  the  ninth  century,  rediscovered  by  Pitra 
and  Tischendorf  in  1866  in  the  Vatican  library.  The  note  is,  in  Tischendorf  's 
opinion,  older  than  Jerome,  and  is  as  follows :  "Evangelium,  johannis  manifesta- 
tum  <rf  datum  est  ecdesiis  abjohanne  adhue  in  corpore  constitute,  sicut  papias  Twnin* 
hitrapolitanua  dteciputus  johannis  carus  in  exoteriris  [exegeticui],  id  est  in  extremis, 


§169.  PAPIAS.  697 

credibility  of  the  Apocalypse  of  John,  and  commented  on  a  part 
of  it.1  He  made  use  of  the  first  Epistle  of  Peter,  but  is  silent 
as  far  as  we  know  concerning  Paul  and  Luke.  This  has  been 
variously  explained  from  accident  or  ignorance  or  dislike,  but 
best  from  the  nature  of  his  design  to  collect  only  words  of  the 
Lord,  Hernias  and  Justin  Martyr  likewise  ignore  Paul,  and 
yet  knew  his  writings.  That  Papias  -was  not  hostile  to  the 
great  apostle  may  be  inferred  from  his  intimacy  with  Polycarp, 
who  lauds  Paul  in  his  Epistle. 

NOTES. 

The  relation  of  Papias  to  the  Apostle  John  is  still  a  disputed  point. 
Irenseus,  the  oldest  witness  and  himself  a  pupil  of  Polycarp,  calls  Papias 
'luawov  jj,&  d/coix77Tfr,  IIoAu/cdpflm'  6£  ET(upoc  (Adv.  HCBT.  V.  33j  4).  He  must 
evidently  mean  here  the  Apostle  John.  Following  him,  Jerome  and 
later  writers  (Mazimus  Confessor,  Andrew  of  Crete  and  Anastasius  Si- 
naita)  call  him  a  disciple  of  the  Apostle  John,  and  this  view  has  "been 
defended  with  much  learning  and  acumen  by  Dr.  Zahn  (1866),  and,  in- 
dependently of  him,  by  Dr.  Milligan  (on  John  the  Presbyter,  in  Cowper's 
"Journal  of  Sacred  Literature"  for  Oct.,  1867,  p.  106  sqq.),  on  the  as- 
sumption of  the  identity  of  the  Apostle  John  with  "Presbyter  John;" 
comp.  2  and  3  John,  where  the  writer  calls  himself  6  Tpsafivrepoe.  Eig- 
genbach  (on  John  the  Ap.  and  John  the  Presbyter,  in  the  "  Jahrbiicher 
fur  Deutsche  Theologie,"  1868,  pp.  319-33-1),  Hengstenberg,  Leimbach, 
take  the  same  view  (also  Schaff  in  History  of  the  Apost  Ch.,  1853,  p.  421). 

On  the  other  hand,  Eusebius  (H.  E.  III.  39)  infers  that  Papias  distin- 
guishes between  John  the  Apostle  and  "  the  Presbyter  John ''  (b  vrpsfffib- 
repoc  'Iwdvwrc)  so  called,  and  that  he  was  a  pupil  of  the  Presbyter  only. 
He  bases  the  distinction  on  a  fragment  he  quotes  from  the  introduction 
to  the  "Explanation  of  the  Lord's  Discourses"  where  Papias  says  that  he 
ascertained  the  primitive  traditions:  ri  'Avdpeag  %  ri  Tisrpo^  el  new  [in  the 
past  tense],  #  ri S&MTTTOC  #  rl  Gu/jfic  #  'IdituBoe  %  ri*luavvri$  [the  Apostle] 
#  MarPatof,  y  n$  erepof  T&V  rov  Kvpiov  /na-dijr&v,  a  re  'Apiariuv  Kal  & 

quinque  libris  rettdit.  jJiseripsit  vero  evangelium  dictante  johanne  recte"  etc.  The 
last  sentence  is  probably  a  mistaken  translation  of  the  Greek.  See  Lightfoot 
in  the  "Contemp.  Bev.,"  Oct.  1875,  p.  85-1;  Charteris,  Canonieity,  p.  168. 
Another  testimony  is  found  in  a  frasrment  of  a  Greek  commentator  in  the 
Procemium  of  the  Catena  Patrum  Grcecorum  in  S  Jofianntm,  ed.  by  Corderins, 
Antwerp,  1630,  according  to  which  John  dictated  his  Gospel  to  Papias  of 
Hierapolis.  See  Papise  Frag,  in  Gebh.  and  Harn.'s  ed.  p.  194.  This  tradition 
is  discredited  by  the  silence  of  Eusebius,  but  it  shows  that  in  the  opinion  of 
the  medjseval  church  Papias  was  closely  connected  with  the  Gospel  of  John. 
1  Andreas  of  Csesarea,  In  Apoc.  c.  34,  Serm.  12.  See  v.  G.  and  H.  p.  189 


098  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 


0*   rov  Kvpiov  [not  T&V  ajroerrdJlfiw] 

[present  tense^.  Here  two  Johns  seem  to  be  clearly  distin- 
guished ;  but  the  Presbyter  John,  together  with  an  unknown  Aristion,  is 
likewise  called  a  disciple  of  the  Lord  (not  of  the  Apostles).  The  distinc- 
tion id  maintained  by  Steitz,  Tischendorf,  Keim,  Weiffenbach,  Liide- 
mann,  Donaldson,  Westeott,  and  Lightfoot.  In  confirmation  of  this  view, 
Eusebius  states  that  two  graves  were  shown  at  Ephesus  bearing  the 
name  of  John  ;  in,  39  :  rfi*o  w  'Eoico  yevea&at  fofyfiara,  Koi  Mnptar  'ludwov 
in  vvv  «jci?i?ai;.  But  Jerome,  De  Vir.  ill  c.  9,  suggests,  that  both  graves 
were  only  memories  of  the  Apostle.  Beyond  this,  nothing  whatever  is 
known  of  this  mysterious  Presbyter  John,  and  it  was  a  purely  critical  con- 
jecture of  the  anti-millennarian  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  that  he  was  the 
author  of  the  Apocalypse  (Euseb.  VII.  25).  The  substance  of  the  me- 
dieval legend  of  "Prester  John"  was  undoubtedly  derived  from  another 
source. 

In  any  case,  it  is  certainly  possible  that  Papias,  like  his  friend 
Polycarp,  may  have  seen  and  heard  the  aged  apostle  who  lived  to  the 
close  of  the  first  or  the  beginning  of  the  second  century.  It  is  therefore 
unnecessary  to  charge  Irenaus  with  an  error  either  of  name  or  memory. 
It  is  more  likely  that  Eusebius  misunderstood  Papias,  and  is  responsible 
for  a  fictitious  John,  who  has  introduced  so  much  confusion  into  the 
question  of  the  authorship  of  the  Johanneau  Apocalypse. 

§170.  The  Epistle  to  Diognetus.      - 
Editions. 

EPISTOLA  AD  DIOGNETUM,  ed.  Otto  (with  Lat.  transl.,  introduction  aad 

critical  notes),  ed.  II.    Lips.  1852. 
In  the  Leipz.  edition  of  the  Apost.  Fathers,  by  0.  0.  Gebhardt  and  Ad    ' 

Harnack,  I.  216-226  ;  in  the  Tubingen  ed.  of  Hefde-Fwnk,  L  pp 

310-333. 

W.  A.  HOLLEXBERG  :  Der  Brief  an  Diognet.    Berl.  1853. 
E.  if.  KBENKEL:  Epistola  ad  Diogn.    Lips.  1860. 
English  translation:  in  Kitto's  "Journal  of  S.  Lit."  1852,  and  in  vol.  I 

of  the  "Ante-Xicene  Library."    Edinb.  1867. 
French  versions  by  P.  k  Gras,  Paris  1725;  M.  d$  Genoude,  1838,-  A 

Kay&er,  1856. 

Discussions. 

OTTO  :  De  Up.  ad  Diognetum.    1852, 

A.  KAYSEB  :  La  Lettre  a  Diogn&e.    1856  (in  "  B^vue  de  Th^ologie  ")• 
G.  J.  SNOECK  :  Specimen  iheofogicum  exhibens  introductioTiem  in  Eptetolan 

ad  Diogn.    Lugd.    Bat.  1861. 
DONALDSON:  A  Critical  Ifist.  of  Christian  Liter.,  etc.    Lond.,  1866,  H 

126  sqq.    He  was  inclined  to  assume  that  Henry  Stephens,  the  firsi 

editor,  manufactured  the  Ep.,  but  gave  up  the  strange  hypothesis 


THE  EPISTLE  OF  DIOGKETUS.  699 

which  was  afterwards  reasserted  by  COTTEEILL  in  Ms  Peregrine 
Proteus,  1879. 

FRANZ  OVERBECK  :  Ueber  den  pseudo-justinischen  Brief  an  Diognet. 
Basel  1872.  And  again  with  additions  in  his  Studien  zur  Geschichte 
der  alien  Kirche  (Schloss-Chemnitz,  1875),  p.  1-92.  He  represents  the 
Ep.  (like  Donaldson)  as  a  post-Constantinian  fiction,  but  has  been 
refuted  by  Hilgenfeld,  Keim,  Lipsius,  and  Draseke. 

JOH.  DRASEKE  :  Der  Brief  an  Diognetos.  Leipz.  1881  (207  pp.).  Against 
Overbeck  and  Donaldson.  The  Ep.  was  known  and  used  by  Tertul- 
lian,  and  probably  composed  in  Rome  by  a  Christian  Gnostic  (per- 
haps  Appelles).  Unlikely. 

HEINE.  KIHN  (R.  C.) :  Der  Ursprung  des  Briefes  an  Diognet  Freiburg  i. 
B.  1882  (XV.  and  168  pages). 

SEMISCH:  art.  Diognet.in  Herzog2  III.  611-615  (and  in  his  Justin  der 
Mart.,  1840,  vol.  1. 172  sqq.) ;  SCHAPF,  in  McClintock  and  Strong, 
III.  807  sq.,  and  BIBKS,  in  Smith  and  Wace,  II.  162-167. 

The  Ep.  to  D.  has  also  been  discussed  by  Neander,  Hefele,  Credner, 
Mohler,  Bunsen,  Ewald,  Dorner,  Hilgenfeld,  Lechler,  Baur,  Har- 
nack,  Zahn,  Funk,  Lipsius,  Keim  (especially  in  Rom  nnd  das  Chris- 
thum,  460-468). 

1.  The  short  but  precious  document  called  the  EPISTLE  TO 
DIOGNETUS  was  unknown  in  Christian  literature1  until  Henry 
Stephens,  the  learned  publisher  of  Paris,  issued  it  in  Greek  and 
Latin  in  1592,  under  the  name  of  Justin  Martyr.2  He  gives 
no  account  of  his  sources.  The  only  Codex  definitely  known 
is  the  Strassburg  Codex  of  the  thirteenth  century,  and  even 
this  (after  having  been  thoroughly  compared  by  Professor 
Cunitz  for  Otto's  edition),  was  destroyed  in  the  accidental 

1  Not  even  Eusebius  or  Jerome  or  Photius  make  any  mention  of  it. 
Mohler  (Patrol  p.  170)  refers  to  Photius,  but  Photius  speaks  of  Justin  Martyr, 
with  whose  writings  he  was  well  acquainted.  See  Hergenrother,  Photius,  IIL 
19  sq. 

«  IOT2TINOT  TOT  <j>d#a6(f)ov  KOI  ^apropos  'Envcrro^  Trpog  Aioyvj/rov,  KOL  h.6yo$ 
lustini  Philosophi  et  Martyris  Ep.  ad  Diognetum,  &  Oratio  ad 
j  nunc  primum  luce  et  latinifate  donates  ab  Henrico  Stephana.  Eiusdem, 
Henr.  Stephana  annototionibus  additum  est  lo.  lacobi  Beureri  de  quorundam 
locorum  partim  iTiterpretatwne  partim  emendatione  iudirium.  Tatiani,  discipuli 
lustmi,  qucedam.  £hxudebat  Henricus  Stephanus.  Anno  MD£CU.  The  copy 
of  Stephens  is  still  preserved  in  the  University  library  at  Leiden.  The  copy 
of  Benrer  is  lost,  but  was  probably  made  from  the  Strassburg  Codex,  with 
which  it  agrees  in  the  readings  published  by  Stephens  in  his  appendix,  and  by 
Bylburg  in  his  notes. 


700  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

fire  at  Strassburg  during  the  siege  of  1870.1  So  great  is  the 
mystery  hanging  over  the  origin  of  this  document,  that  some 
modem  scholars  have  soberly  turned  it  into  a  post-Coustaiitinian 
fiction  in  imitation  of  early  Christianity,  but  without  being  able 
to  agree  upon  an  author,  or  his  age.  or  his  nationality. 

Yet  this  most  obscure  writer  of  the  second  century  is  at  the 
same  time  the  most  brilliant ;  and  while  his  name  remains  un- 
known to  this  day,  he  shed  lustre  on  the  Christian  name  in 
times  when  it  was  assailed  and  blasphemed  from  Jew  and  Gen- 
tile, and  could  only  be  professed  at  the  risk  of  life.  He  must  be 
ranked  with  the  "  great  unknown "  authors  of  Job  and  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  who  are  known  only  to  God. 

2.  DIOGXETUS  was  an  inquiring  heathen  of  high  social  posi- 
tion and  culture,  who  desired  information  concerning  the  origin 
and  nature  of  the  religion  of  the  Christians,  and  the  secret  of 
their  contempt  of  the  world,  their  courage  in  death,  their  bro- 
therly love,  and  the  reason  of  the  late  origin  of  this  new  fashion, 
so  different  from  the  gods  of  the  Greeks  and  the  superstition  of 
the  Jews.  A  Stoic  philosopher  of  this  name  instructed  Marcus 
Aurelius  in  his  youth  (about  133)  in  painting  and  composition, 
and  trained  him  in  Attic  simplicity  of  life,  and  "  whatever  else 
of  the  kind  belongs  to  Grecian  discipline."  Perhaps  he  taught 
him  also  to  despise  the  Christian  martyrs,  and  to  trace  their 
heroic  courage  to  sheer  obstinacy.  It  is  quite  probable  that  our 
Diognetus  was  identical  with  the  imperial  tutor  ;  for  he  wished 
especially  to  know  what  enabled  these  Christians  "  to  despise  the 
world  and  to  make  light  of  death."2 

1  "  Epistyles  ad  Diognetum  unum  tantummodo  exemplar  antiquius  ad  nostram 
vuqwe  peruenti  memoriam:  codicem  dico  loannis  Heuchlini  quondam,  posted- 
Argentoratensem.,  qui  misero  illo  iwxJio  die  nono  ante  Calmdas  Septembres  annl 
MDCCCLXX  cum  tot  aliis  libra  pretiosis  in  cineies  dilapsus  est"  Von  Geb- 
hardt  and  Harnack,  p.  205.  They  assert,  p.  208,  that  the  copies  of  Stephens 
and  Beurer  were  taken  from  the  Cod.  of  Strassburg.  Otto  (Prol.  p.  3)  speaks 
of  "ires  codices,  ArgentoratensiSj  apographon  Stephani,  apographon  Bewreri" 

8  Comp.  Ep.  adDiog.,  c.  1>  with  Marcus  Aur.  Medit,  IX.  3  (his  only  allusion 
to  Christianity,  quoted  p.  329).  Marcus  Aurelius  gratefully  remembers  his 
teacher  Diognetus,  Medit.,  I.  6.  Diognetus  was  not  a  rare  name ;  but  the 
•ne  of  our  Epistle  was  a  person  of  social  prominence,  as  the  term 


g  170.  THE  EPISTLE  TO  DIOGNETUS.  701 

3.  The  EPISTLE  before  us  is  an  answer  to  the  questions  of 
this  noble  heathen.    It  is  a  brief  but  masterly  vindication  of 
Christian  life  and  doctrine  from  actual  experience.     It  is  evi- 
dently the  product  of  a  man  of  genius,  fine  taste  and  classical 
culture.     It  excels  in  fresh  enthusiasm  of  faith,  richness  of 
thought,  and  elegance  of  style,  and  is  altogether  one  of  the  most 
beautiful  memorials  of  Christian  antiquity,  unsurpassed  and 
hardly  equalled  by  any  genuine  work  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers.1 

4.  CONTENTS.    The  document  consists  of  twelve  chapters. 
It  opens  with  an  address  to  Diognetus  who  is  described  as 
exceedingly  desirous  to  learn  the  Christian  doctrine  and  mode 
of  worship  in  distinction  from  that  of  the  Greeks  and  the  Jews. 
The  writer,  rejoicing  in  this  opportunity  to  lead  a  Gentile  friend 
to  the  path  of  truth,  exposes  first  the   vanity  of  idols  (ch.  2), 
then  the  superstitions  of  the  Jews  (ch.^3,  4) ;  after  this  he  gives 
by  contrasts  a  striking  and  truthful  picture  of  Christian  life 
which  moves  in  this  world  like  the  invisible,  immortal  soul  in 
the  visible,  perishing  body  (ch.  5  and  6),2  and  sets  forth  the 
benefits  of  Christ's  coining  (ch.  7).    He  next  describes  the  mis- 
erable condition  of  the  world  before  Christ  (ch.  8),  and  answers 
the  question  why  He  appeared  so  late  (ch.  9).    In  this  connec- 

honordbk,  implies.  Otto  and  Ewald  identify  the  two.  Keim  and  Draseke 
(p.  141)  admit  that  our  Diognetus  belonged  to  the  imperial  court,  but  put  him 
later. 

1  Ewald  (Geschichte  des  Volkes  Isroe/,  BdVIL  p.  150)  places  it  first  among 
all  the  early  Christian  epistles  which  were  not  received  into  the  N.  T.,  and 
says  that  it  combines  perfectly  u  the  fulness  and  art  of  Greek  eloquence  with 
the  purest  love  of  truth,  and  the  ease  and  grace  of  words  with  the  elevating 
seriousness  of  the  Christian."    Bunsen :    "  Indisputably,  after  Scripture,  the 
finest  monument  of  sound  Christian  feeling,  noble  courage,  and  manly  elo- 
quence." "Semisch  (in  Herzog)  calls  it  "ein  Kleinod  des  christi.  Alterthums, 
wekheni  in  Geist  und  Fassnng  kaum  ein  sweites  Schriftwerk  der  Tiachapostolmhen 
Zeit  gleichsteht."    Keim  (Rom  und  das  Chr-istenthum,  p.  463  sq.)  calls  it  "das 
liebtichste,  ja  ein  fast  sauberhaftes  Wort  des  sweiten  Jahrhunderts"  and  eloquently 
praises  t{die  reine,  klassisehe  Sprache,  den  schonen,  korrekten  Satzbau,  die,  rhe- 
torische  Frische,  die  schlagenden  Antithesen,  den  geistreichen  Ausdruck,  die  logische 
Abrundung  . . .  die  unmittelbare,  liebesrwarme,  begeisterte,  w&nn  whon  mit  BUdung 
durchsattigte  Frommigkdt^ 

2  Quoted  above,  §  2,  p.  9. 


702  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

tion  occurs  a  beautiful  passage  on  redemption,  fuller  and  clearer 
than  any  that  can  be  found  before  Irenffius.1  He  concludes  with 
an  account  of  the  blessings  and  moral  effects  which  flow  from 
the  Christian  faith  (ch.  10).  The  last  two  chapters  which  were 
probably  added  by  a  younger  contemporary,  and  marked  as 
such  in  the  MS.,  treat  of  knowledge,  faith  and  spiritual  life 
with  reference  to  the  tree  of  knowledge  and  the  tree  of  life  in 
paradise.  Faith  opens  the  paradise  of  a  higher  knowledge  of 
the  mysteries  of  the  supernatural  world. 

The  Epistle  to  Diognetus  forms  the  transition  from  the 
purely  practical  literature  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  to  the  reflec- 
tive theology  of  the  Apologists.  It  still  glows  with  the  ardor 
of  the  first  love.  It  is  strongly  Pauline.2  It  breathes  the  spirit 
of  freedom  and  higher  knowledge  grounded  in  faith.  The  Old 
Testament  is  ignored,  but  without  any  sign  of  Gnostic  contempt. 

5.  AUTHORSHIP  and  TIME  of  composition.  The  author  calls 
himself  "a  disciple  of  the  Apostles,"3  but  this  term  occurs  in 
the  appendix,  and  may  be  taken  in  a  wider  sense.  In  the  MS. 
the  letter  is  ascribed  to  Justin  Martyr,  but  its  style  is  more  ele- 
gant, vigorous  and  terse  than  that  of  Justin,  and  the  thoughts  are 
more  original  and  vigorous.*  It  belongs,  however,  in  all  prob- 
ability, to  the  same  age,  that  is,  to  the  middle  of  the  second 
century,  rather  earlier  than  later.  Christianity  appears  in  it  as 
something  still  new  and  unknown  to  the  aristocratic  society,  as 
a  stranger  in  the  world,  everywhere  exposed  to  calumny  and 
persecution  of  Jews  and  Gentiles.  All  this  suits  the  reign  of 
Antoninus  Pius  and  of  Marcus  Aurelius.  If  Diognetus  was 
the  teacher  of  the  latter  as  already  suggested,  we  would  have  an 
indication  of  Rome,  as  the  probable  place  of  composition. 

Some  assign  the  Epistle  to  an  earlier  date  under  Trajan  or 

1  See  above,  {  153,  p.  587. 

*  "  As  if  no  less  a  person  than  Paul  himself  had  returned  to  life  for  that  age.91 
Ewald,  vu.  149. 

1  '\ttQGT6fan>  -ytvdftevof  ^a%nfo  ch.  11. 

4  The  Justinian  authorship  is  defended  by  Gave,  Fabridus,  and  Otto,  but  re- 
futed by  Semisch,  Hefele,  Keim,  and  others. 


i  171.  SIXTHS  OF  ROME.  703 

Hadrian/  others  to  the  reign  of  Marcus  Amelias,2  others  to  the 
close  of  the  second  century  or  still  later.3  The  speculations 
about  the  author  begin  with  Apollos  in  the  first,  and  end  with 
Stephens  in  the  sixteenth,  century.  He  will  probably  remain 
unknown.* 

§  171.  Sixtus  of  Rome. 

Enchiridion  SIXTI  pkilotophi  Pytkagorici,  first  ed.  by  Symphor.  Cham- 
perius,  Lugd.  1507  (under  the  title:  Sixtii  Xysti  Anulus) ;  again  at 
Wittenberg  with  the  Carmina  aurea  of  Pythagoras,  151-1 ;  by  Beatus 
Ehenanus,  Bas.  1516 ;  in  the  "  Maxima  Bibliotheca  Yet.  Patrum/ ' 
Lugd.  1677,  Tom.  III.  335-339  (under  the  title  Xysti  vel  Sexti  Pytha- 
gorid  philosophi  ethnici  Sententice,  interprete  Eufino  Presbytero  Aqui- 
lejemi) ;  by  U.  G.  Siber,  Lips.  1725  (under  the  name  of  Sixtus  II. 
instead  of  Sixtus  I.) ;  and  by  GILDEMEISTER  (Gr.,  Lat.  and  Syr.), 
Bonn  1873. 

A  Syriac  Version  in  P.  LAGABDII  Analecta  Syriaca,  Lips,  and  Lond. 
1858  (p.  1-31,  only  the  Syriac  text,  derived  from  seven  MSS.  of  the 
Brit.  Museum,  the  oldest  before  A.  D.  553,  but  mutilated). 

The  book  is  discussed  in  the  "Max.BibL1'  I  c.;  by  FoOTAOTSUS:  His- 
toria  liter.  Aquilejensis  (Eom.  1742) ;  by  FABRICTUS,  in  the  Bibli- 
otheca  Groeca,  Tom.  I.  870  sqq.  (ed.  Harks,  1790) ;  by  E^ALB : 
Gesehichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  vol.  VII.  (Gottingen,  1859),  p.  321-326; 
and  by  TOBLEE  in  Annulus  Eufini,  Sent.  Sext.  (Tubingen  1878). 

XYSTUS,  or  as  the  Romans  spelled  the  name,  SEZTUS  or 
SIXTHS  I.;  was  the  sixth  bishop  of  Rome,  and  occupied  this 
position  about  ten  years  under  the  reign  of  Hadrian  (119-128).5 

1  Tillemont  and  Mohler  to  the  first  century,  Hefele  and  Ewald  to  the  reign 
of  Hadrian  (120-130).  Westcott  (Can.  N.  T.  p.  76) :  Not  before  Trajan,  and 
not  much  later ;  everything  betokens  an  early  age. 

*  So  Keim,  who  suggests  the  bloody  year  177. 

3  So  Hilgenfeld,  Lipsius,  Gass,  Zahn,  Draseke  (under  Septimus  Severus,  be- 
tween  193"— 211).      Overbeck's  hypothesis  of  a  post-Constantinian  date  is 
exploded. 

4  Justin  M.  (the  MS.  tradition);   Marcion  before  his  secession  from  the 
church  (Bunsen) ;  Quadratus  (Dorner) ;  Apelles,  the  Gnostic  in  his  old  age 
(Draseke,  p.  141).    The  writer  of  the  art.  in  Smith  and  Wace,  II.  162,  identi- 
fies the  author  with  one  Ambrosius,  "a  chief  man  of  Greece  who  became  a 
Christian,  and  all  his  fellow  councillors  raised  a  clamor  against  him,"  and 
refers  to  Cureton's  SpicU.  Syriacum,  p.  61-69.     The  Stephanie  hypothesis  of 
and  Cotterill  is  a  literary  and  moral  impossibility. 

*  Irenaeus  (Adv.  HOST,  1.  III.  c.  3,  3  3)  mentions  him  as  the  Eoman  bishop 
after  Clement,  EyaristuSj  and  Alexander.    Eusebius  (R.  E*  iv.  5)  relates  that 


704  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Little  or  nothing  is  known  about  him  except  that  he  was  sup- 
posed to  be  the  author  of  a  remarkable  collection  of  moral  and 
religious  maxims,  written  in  Greek,  translated  into  Latin  by 
Rufinus  and  extensively  read  in  the  ancient  church.  The  sen- 
tences are  brief  and  weighty  after  the  manner  of  the  Hebrew 
Proverbs  and  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  They  do  not  mention 
the  prophets  or  apostles;  or  even  the  name  of  Christ,  but  are  full 
of  God  and  sublime  moral  sentiments,  only  bordering  somewhat 
on  pantheism.1  If  it  is  the  production  of  a  heathen  philosopher, 
he  came  nearer  the  genius  of  Christian  ethics  than  even  Seneca, 
or  Epictetus,  or  Plutarch,  or  Marcus  Aurelius ;  but  the  product 
has  no  doubt  undergone  a  transformation  in  Christian  hands, 
and  this  accounts  for  its  ancient  popularity,  and  entitles  it  to  a 
place  in  the  history  of  ecclesiastical  literature.  Eufinus  took 
great  liberties  as  translator ;  besides,  the  MSS.  vary  very  much. 

Origen  first  cites  in  two  places  the  Gnomes  or  Sententice  of 
SEXTUS  (p^wfia:  -Fecroy),  as  a  work  well  known  and  widely 
read  among  the  Christians  of  his  times,  i.  e.}  in  the  first  half  of 
the  second  century,  but  he  does  not  mention  that  the  writer  was 
a  bishop,  or  even  a  Christian.  Rufinus  translated  them  with 
additions,  and  ascribes  them  to  Sixtus,  bishop  of  Rome  and 
martyr.  But  Jerome,  who  was  well  versed  in  classical  literature, 
charges  him  with  prefixing  the  name  of  a  Christian  bishop  to 
the  product  of  a  christless  and  most  heathenish  Pythagorean 
philosopher,  Xystus,  who  is  admired  most  by  those  who  teach 
Stoic  apathy  and  Pelagian  sinlessness.  Augustin  first  regarded 
the  author  as  one  of  the  two  Roman  bishops  Sixti,  but  after- 
wards retracted  his  opinion,  probably  in  consequence  of  Jerome's 
statement.  Maximus  the  Confessor  and  John  of  Damascus  ascribe 
it  to  Xystus  of  Rome.  Gennadius  merely  calls  the  work  Xysti 
Sententict.  Pope  Gelasius  declares  it  spurious  and  written  by 

he  ruled  the  Boman  church  for  ten  years.    Jaffe*  (Regatta  Ponlificum  Rom. 
p.  3}  puts  his  pontificate  between  119  and  128.    The  second  Pope  of  that  name 
died  a  martyr  A.  D.  257  or  258-    The  two  have  been  sometimes  confounded  as 
authors  of  the  Enchiridion.    Siber  published  it  under  the  name  of  Sixtus  IL 
1  See  specimens  in  the  Xofeg. 


J171.  SIXTHS  OF  EOME.  705 

heretics.1  More  recent  writers  (as  Fontanini,  Bnicker,  Fabri- 
cius,  Mosheirn)  agree  in  assigning  it  to  the  elder  QUIETUS 
SEXTUS  or  SEXTITJS  (Q.  8.  PATER),  a  Stoic  philosopher  who  de- 
clined the  dignity  of  Eoman  Senator  offered  to  him  fay  Julius 
Caesar  and  who  is  highly  lauded  by  Seneca.  He  abstained  from 
animal  food,  and  subjected  himself  to  a  scrupulous  self-examina- 
tion at  the  close  of  every  day.  Hence  this  book  was  entirely 
ignored  by  modern  church  historians.3  But  Paul  de  Lagarde, 
who  published  a  Syriac  Version,  and  Ewald  have  again  directed 
attention  to  it  and  treat  it  as  a  genuine  work  of  the  first  Pope 
Xystus.  Ewald  puts  the  highest  estimate  on  it.  "  The  Chris- 
tian conscience;"  he  says,  "  appears  here  for  the  first  time  before 
all  the  world  to  teach  all  the  world  its  duty,  and  to  embody  the 
Christian  wisdom  of  life  in  brief  pointed  sentences/'  3  But  it 
seems  impossible  that  a  Christian  sage  and  bishop  should  write 
a  system  of  Christian  Ethics  or  a  collection  of  Christian  pro- 
verbs without  even  mentioning  the  name  of  Christ. 

NOTES. 

The  following  is  a  selection  of  the  most  important  of  the  430  Sentences 
of  Xystus  from  the  Bibliotheca  Maxima  Veterum  Patrum,  Tom.  HI.  335- 
339.  We  add  some  Scripture  parallels  : 

"1.  Fidelfe  homo,  electus  homo  est.  2.  Eleetus  homo,  7iomo  Dei  est. 
3.  Homo  Dei  est,  qui  Deo  dignus  est.  4.  Deo  dignus  esi,  qui  nihil  indigne 
agit.  5.  Dubius  in  fide,  infidelis  est.  6.  Infidelis  homo,  mortuus  est  corpore 
vivente.  7.  Verefidelis  est,  qui  non  peccat,  atgue  etiam,  in  vninimis  cavte 
agit.  8.  Non  est  minimum  in  humana  vita,  negligere  minima.  9.  Omne 
peccatum  impietatem  puta.  Non  enim  manus,  vet  ocuJus  peccat,  vel  aliquod 
Tmiusmodi  membrum,  sed  male  uti  manu  vel  oculo,  peccatum  est.  10.  OmM 
membrum  corporis,  quod  invitat  te  contra  pudidtiam  agere,  abjiciendum  etL 


the  references  in  the  Bibliath.  Mas,.  JTJ.  525;  and  in  Fontanlni  aad 
Jabricius,  I  c. 

2  Meander,  Gie^eler,  Baur,  Donaldson,  and  others  do  not  even  mention  the 
lx>ok. 

3  Gesehichte  Israels,  vol.  VII.  p.  322.    Compare  his  review  of  Lagardii 
Andecta  Syriaca  in  the  "Gottingen  Gel.  Anzeigen/'  1859,  p.  261-269.    Both 
Ewald  and  P.  de  Lagarde,  his  successor,  characteristically  ignore  aM 
editions  and  discussions, 

Vol.  H.-45. 


706  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Melius  est  uno  mcmbro  vivere,  quam  cum  duobus  puniri  [Cornp.  Matt  5i 
29] 

" 15.  Sapiens  vir,  et  pecunice  contemptor,  similis  est  Deo.  16.  Rebut 
mundanis  in  causis  tantum  necessarite  utere.  17.  Qua  mundi  sunt,  mundo  : 
et  qua  Dei  sunt,  reddantur  Deo  [Comp.  Matt.  22:  21].  18.  Certus  esto. 
quod  animam  tuamfidde  depositum  acceperis  CL  Deo.  19.  Cum  loquwis  Deo, 
9ciio  quod  judiceris  ft  Deo.  20.  Optimam  purificationem  putato,  nocere 
nemini.  21.  Anima  purificatur  Dei  verbo  per  sapientiam.  .  .  . 

**  2S.  Qu&cw/iquc  fecit  Dens,  pro  hominibus  ea  fecit.  29.  Angelus  minister 
est  Dei  ad  hominem.  30.  Tarn  pretiosus  est  homo  apud  Deum,  quam  ange 
lus.  31.  Primus  beneficus  est  Deus:  secundus  est  is,  qui  beneficii  eius  fit 
particeps  homo,  riveigitur  ita,  tanquam  qui  sis  secundus  post  Deum,  et 
dectus  ab  eo.  32.  Habet,  inquam,  in  te  aliquid  simile  Dei,  et  idea  utere 
teipso  telut  templo  Dei,propter  ittud  quod  in  te  simile  est  Lei  [I  Cor.  3 : 
16,  17] 

lk  40.  Ttmplum  sanctum  est  Deo  mens  pii,  et  aftare  est  optimum  d  cor  mun- 
dum  et  sine  peccato.  41.  Hostia  soli  Deo  acceptabilis,  benefacere  hominibus 
pro  Deo.  42.  Deo  gratiam  prcestat  homo,  qui  quantum  possibile  est  vimt 
secundum  Deum.  .  .  . 

*447.  Omnetempus,quoDeononcogitas,hocputateperdidisse.  48.  Corpus 
quidem  fuum  incedat  in  terra,  anhna  autem  semper  s-it  apud  Deum.  49.  In- 
tettige  quce  sint  bona,  ut  bene  agas.  50.  Bona  cogitoMo  hominis  Deum  non 
Met  et  ideo  cogitatio  tua  pura  sit  ab  omni  malo.  51.  Dignus  esto  eo,  qui  te 
dignafus  est  jtlium  dicere,  et  age  omnia  ut  filius  Dei.  52.  Quod  Deum patrem 
vocas,  huius  in  actionibus  tuis  7nemor  esto.  53.  Vir  castus  et  sine  peccato, 
potestatem  acctpit  a  Deo  esse  filius  Dei  [Comp.  John  I  13].  54.  Bona 
mens  chorus  est  Dei.  55.  Kola  mens  chorus  est  dcsmonum  malorum.  .  .  , 

78.  fltndamentum  pietatis  est  continentia :  culmen  autem  pietatis  amor 
Dei,  79.  Hum  hominem  habeto  tanquam  teipsum.  80.  Opta  tibi  evenire 
non  quod  t2>?  sea  quod  expedit.  81.  Qualem  vis  esse  proximum  tuum  tibi^ 
tali*  esto  ettutuis  proximis  [Luke  6:  31].  .  .  . 

"  86.  Si  quid  non  vis  sdre  Deum3  istud  nee  agas,  nee  cogiteSj  87-  Pnus- 
quamaga8quodcunqueagistcogitaDeum,  ut  lux  eius  pozcedat  actus  tuos.  .  .  . 

A*  96.  Deus  in  bonis  actibus  hominibus  dux  est.  97.  Neminem  inimicum 
deputes.  98,  Dilige  omne  quod  eiusdem  tecum  natures  eat,  Deum  vero  plus 
quam  animam  dilige.  99.  Pessimum  est  peccatoribus,  m  unum  oonvenire 
cum  peccant,  100.  Multi  cibi  impediunt  castitatem3  et  incontinentia  ciborum 
immundum  facit  hominem.  101.  Animantium  omnium  usus  quidem  in 
cibis  indifferens,  abstinere  vero  rationabilius  est.  102.  Non  cibi  per  os  in- 
feruntur  polluunt  hominem,  sed  ea  quce  ex  malis  actibus  proferuntur  fMarlr 
7:  18-21] 

"  106*  Mali  nuHitts  autor  est  Deus.  107.  Non  amplius possideas  quam  usus 
corporis  posnt.  ... 

"  115.  Ratio  quw  m  te  est,  ritce  iude  lux  est  [Matt.  6:  22].  116.  Ea  pete 
a  Deo,  quce  accipere  ab  homine  non  potes,  .  .  . 


§171.  SIXTHS  OF  KOME.  707 

"  122.  Nilpretiosumducas,  quodauferre  a  te  possithomo  malus.  123.  HOG 
solum  bonum  putato,  quod  Deo  dignum  est.  124  Quod  Deo  dignum  est,  hoc 
et  viro  bono.  125.  Quicquid  non  convenit  adbeatudinem  Dei,  non  conveniai 
nomini  Dei.  126.  Ea  debes  vette,  quce  et  Deus  vutt.  127.  Filius  Dei  est, 
qui  haec  sola  pretiosa  ducit  qucs  et  Dens.  139.  Semper  apud  Deum  mens 
est  sapientis.  137.  Sapientis  mentem  Deus  inhabitat.  .  .  . 

"  181.  Sapiens  vir  etiamsi  nudus  sit,sapiens  apud  te  kabeatur.  182.  Ne- 
minem  propterea  magni  cestimes,  quod  pecunia  dwitiisque  abundet.  183, 
Difficile  est  divitem  salvari  [Matt.  19 :  23]-  .  .  . 

"187.  Age  magna,non  magna  potticens.  188.  JVon  eris  sapiens,  si  te 
reputaveris  sapientem.  189.  Non  potest  bene  vivere  qui  non  integre  credit. 
190.  In  tribulationibus  quis  sit  fidelis,  agnoscitur.  191.  Finem  vitae  exis- 
tima  vivere  secundum  Deum.  192.  Nihil  putes  rnalum,  quod  non  sit 
turpe. 

"  198.  Malitia  est  csgritudo  animce.  199.  Animce  autem  mors  iniustitia  et 
impietas.  200.  Tune  te  putato  Jidelem,  cum  passionibus  animce  carueris, 
201.  Omnibus  liominibus  ita  utere,  quasi  communis  omnium  post  Deum 
curator.  202.  Qui  hominibus  male  utitur,  seipso  male  utitur.  203.  Qui 
nikil  mali  vultj  fidelis  est.  .  .  . 

"  214.  Verba  tua  pietate  semper  plena  sint.  215.  In  actibus  tuls  ante  oculos 
pone  Deum.  216.  Nefas  est  Deum  patrem  invocare,  et  aliquid  inhonestum 
agere.  ... 

<C261.  Ebrietatem  quasi  insaniamfuge.  262.  Homo  qui  a  ventremnci- 
tur,  bettuce  similis  est. .  263.  Ez  carne  nihil  oritur  bonum.  .  .  . 

"302.  Omne  quod  malum  est,  Deo  inimicum  est.  303.  Qui  sapit  in  tet 
Jiunc  dicito  esse  hominem.  304  Particeps  Dei  est  vir  sapiens.  305.  Z75t 
est  quod  sapit  in  te,  ibi  est  et  bonum  tuum:  306.  Bonum  in  carne  non 
quceras.  307.  Quod  animce  non  nocet,  nee  homini.  308.  Sapientem 
hominem  tanquam  Dei  ministrum  honora  post  Deum.  .  .  . 

"  390.  Qucecunque  dat  mundus,  nemo  firmiter  tenet.  391.  Qusecumque 
dot  Deus  nemo  au/erre  potest.  392.  Divina  sapientia  vera  est  sdentia.  .  .  . 

"403.  Animae  ascensus  ad  Deum  per  Dei  verbum  est.  404.  Sapiens 
sequitur  Deum,  et  Deus  animam  sapientis.  405.  Gaudet  rex  super  his  quos 
regitj  gaudet  ergo  Deus  super  sapiente.  Insepardbilis  est  et  ab  his  quos 
regit  ille,  qui  regitj  ita  ergo  et  Deus  ab  anima  sapientis  quam  tuetur  et  regit. 
406.  Reqitwr  a  Deo  vir  sapiens,  et  iddrco  beatus  est.  .  .  . 

"  424.  Si  non  diligis  Deum,  non  ibis  ad  Deum.  425.  Oonsuesce  teipsum 
semper  respicere  ad  Deum.  426.  Intuendo  Deum  videbis  Deum.  427-  71- 
dens  Deum  fades  mentem  tuam  qualis  est  Deus.  428.  Excole  quod  infra  te 
est,  nee  ei  ex  libidine  corporis  contumeliam  facias.  429.  Incontaminatum 
custodi  corpus  tuum,  tanquam  si  indumentum  acceperis  a  Deo}  et  sieut  vesti- 
menfam  corporis  immacuZatum  servare  stude.  430.  JSapiens  mens 


708  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

§  172.  The  Apologists.     Quadratus  and  Aristides. 
On  the  Apologetic  Lit.  in  general,  see  \  28,  p.  85  sq.,  and  \  37,  p.  104, 

TTe  now  proceed  to  that  series  of  ecclesiastical  authors  who, 
from  the  character  and  name  of  their  .chief  writings  are  called 
APOHXHSTS.  They  flourished  during  the  reigns  of  Hadrian^ 
Antoninus,  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  when  Christianity  was  ex- 
posed to  the  literary  as  well  as  bloody  persecution  of  the  heathen 
world.  They  refuted  the  charges  and  slanders  of  Jews  and 
Gentiles,  vindicated  the  truths  of  the  Gospel,  and  attacked  the 
errors  and  vices  of  idolatry.  They  were  men  of  more  learning 
and  culture  than  the  Apostolic  Fathers.  They  were  mostly 
philosophers  and  rhetoricians,  who  embraced  Christianity  in 
mature  age  after  earnest  investigation,  and  found  peace  in  it  for 
mind  and  heart.  Their  writings  breathe  the  same  heroism,  the 
same  enthusiasm  for  the  faith,  which  animated  the  martyrs  in 
their  sufferings  and  death. 

The  earliest  of  these  Apologists  are  QUADBATUS  and  AEIS 
TIDES,  who  wrote  against  the  heathen,  and  ARISTO  of  Pella, 
who  wrote  against  the  Jews,  all  in  the  reign  of  Hadrian  (117- 
137). 

QUADRATUS  (Kodpdvrjz)  was  a  disciple  of  the  apostles,  and 
bishop  (presbyter)  of  Athens.  His  Apology  is  lost.  All  we 
know  of  him  is  a  quotation  from  Eusebius  who  says :  fe  QUAD- 
RATUS addressed  a  discourse  to  JElius  Hadrian,  as  an  apoloffv 

*  JT          &•/ 

for  the  religion  that  we  profess;  because  certain  malicious 
persons  attempted  to  harass  our  brethren.  The  work  is  still 
in  the  hands  of  some  of  the  brethren,  as  also  in  our  own ; 
from  which  any  one  may  see  evident  proof,  both  of  the  under- 
standing of  the  man,  and  of  his  apostolic  faith.  This  writer 
shows  the  antiquity  of  the  age  in  which  he  lived,  in  these  pas- 
sages :  '  The  deeds  of  our  Saviour/  says  he,  '  were  always  before 
you,  for  they  were  true  miracles;  those  that  were  healed,  those 
that  were  raised  from*  the  dead,  who  were  seen,  not  only  when 
healed  and  when  raised,  but  were  always  present.  They  re 


g  172.  THE  APOLOGISTS,     ARISTIDES.  709 

mained  living  a  long  time,  not  only  whilst  our  Lord  was  on 
earth,  but  likewise  when  he  left  the  earth.  So  that  some  of 
them  have  also  lived  to  our  own  times.'  Such  was  Quadratus.7' 
ARISTIDES  ('J./>^re/^c)  was  an  eloquent  philosopher  at 
Athens  who  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius  as  a  contemporary  of 
Quadratus.1  His  Apology  likewise  disappeared  long  ago, 
but  a  fragment  of  it  was  recently  recovered  in  an  Armenian 
translation  and  published  by  the  Mechitarists  in  18782.  It  was 
addressed  to  Hadrian,  and  shows  that  the  preaching  of  Paul  in 
Athens  had  taken  root.  It  sets  forth  the  Christian  idea  of  God 
as  an  infinite  and  indescribable  Being  who  made  all  things  and 
cares  for  all  things,  whom  we  should  serve  and  glorify  as  the 
only  God;  and  the  idea  of  Christ,  who  is  described  as  "the  Son 
of  the  most  high  God,  revealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  descended 
from  heaven,  born'of  a  Hebrew  Virgin.  Hisjflesh  he  received 
from  the  Virgin,  and  he  revealed  himself  in  the  human  nature 
as  the  Son  of  God.  In  his  goodness  which  brought  the  glad 
tidings,  he  has  won  the  whole  world  by  his  life-giving  preach- 
ing. [It  was  he  who  according  to  the  flesh  was  born  from  the 
race  of  the  Hebrews,  of  the  mother  of  God,  the  Virgin 
Mariani.]3  He  selected  twelve  apostles  and  taught  the  whole 
world  by  his  mediatorial,  light-giving  truth.  And  he  was  cru- 

1  Hist.  Eccl  IV.  3. 

2  The  discovery  has  called  forth  a  considerable  literature  which  is  mentioned 
by  Harnack,  Texte-und  Untersuehimgen,  etc.,  I.,  p.  110,  note  23.    The  first  part 
is  the  most  important.    See  a  French  translation  by  Gautier,  in  the  f(  Bevue 
de  the*ol.  et  de  philos.,"  1879,  p.  78-82 ;  a  German  translation  by  Himpel  in 
the  "Tubing.  Theol.  Quartalschriffc,'1  1880,  reprinted  by  Harnack,  pp.  Ill  and 
112.    The  art.  Aristides  in  the  first  vol.  of  Smith  and  Wace  (p.  160)  is  behind 
the  times.   Biicheler  and  Eenan  doubt  the  genuineness  of  the  document;  Gau- 
tier, Baunard,  Hirnpel,  Harnack  defend  it ;  but  Harnack  assumes  some  inter- 
polation, as  the  term  theotokos,  of  the  Virgin  Mary,    The  Armenian  MS.  is 
dated  981,  and  the  translation  seems  to  have  been  made  from  the  Greek  in  the 
fifth  century.   -At  the  time  of  Eusebius  the  work  was  still  well  known  in  the 
church.    But  the  second  piece',  which  the  Mechitarists  also  ascribe  to  Aris- 
tides, is  a  homily  of  later  date,  apparently  directed  against  Nestorianisro. 

3  The  bracketed  sentence  sounds  repetitious  and  like  a  post-Nicene  interpo 
lation. 


710  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 


,  l>eing  pierced  with  nails  by  the  Jews;  and  he  rose  from 
the  dead  and  ascended  to  heaven.  He  sent  the  apostles  into  all 
the  world  and  instructed  all  by  divine  miracles  full  of  wisdom. 
Their  preaching  bears  blossoms  and  fruits  to  this  day,  and  calls 
the  whole  world  to  illumination." 

A  curious  feature  in  this  document  is  the  division  of  mankind 
into  four  parts,  Barbarians,  Greeks,  Jews,  and  Christians. 

ARISTO  OF  PELLA,  a  Jewish  Christian  of  the  first  half  of 
the  second  century,  was  the  author  of  a  lost  apology  of  Chris- 
tianity against  Judaism.1 

§  173.  Justin  the  Philosopher  and  Martyr. 
Editions  of  Justin  Martyr. 

*  Jrsrixi  Philosophi  et  Martyris  Opera  omnia,  in  the  CORPUS  ApOLOGE- 
TAEUM  Christianorum  sosculi  secundi,  ed.  Jo.  Car.  Th.  de  Otto,  Jen. 
1847,  3d  ed.  1S76-'S1.  5  vols.  8vo.  Contains  the,  genuine,  the 
doubtful,  and  the  spurious  works  of  Justin  Martyr  with  commentary, 
and  Maran's  Latin  Version. 

Older  ed.  (mostly  incomplete)  by  Robt.  Stephanus,  Par.,  1551  ;  Sylburg, 
Heidelb.,  1593;  G-rabe,  Oxon.,  1700  (only  the  Apol.  J.)  ;  Prudent. 
Maranus,  Par.,  1742  (the  Bened.  ed.),  republ.  at  Venice,  1747,  an<? 
in  Migne's  Patrol.  Gr.  Tom.  VI.  (Paris,  1857),  c.  10-800  and  1102- 
1CS'\  with  additions  from  Otto.  The  Apologies  were  also  often  pub- 
lished separately,  e.  g.  by  Prof.  B.  L.  Gildersleeve,  K  Y.  1877,  with 
introduction  and  notes. 

On  the  MSB.  of  Justin  see  Otto's  Proleg.,  p.  xx.  sqq.,  and  Harnack, 
Texte.  Of  the  genuine  works  we  have  only  two,  and  they  are  cor- 
rupt, one  in  Paris,  the  other  in  Cheltenham,  in  possession  of  Eev. 
F.  A.  Fenwick  (see  Otto,  p.  xxiv.). 

English  translation  in  the  Oxford  "Library  of  the  Fathers,"  Lond.,  1861, 
and  another  by  G.  J.  Davie  in  the  "  Ante-]SFicene  Library,"  Edinb. 
Vol.  II.,  1S67  (465  pages),  containing  the  Apologies,  the  Address  to 
the  Greeks,  the  Exhortation,  and  the  Martyrium,  translated  by  M. 
Dods;  the  Dialogue  with  Trypho,  and  On  the  Sole  Government  of  God, 
trsl.  by  G.  Reith  ;  and  also  the  writings  of  Athenagoras,  trsl.  by  B. 
P.  Pratten.  Older  translations  by  Wm.  Eeeves,  1709,  Henry  Brown, 
1755,  and  J.  Chevallier,  1833  (ed.  II.,  1851).  On  German  and  other 
versions  see  Otto,  Prol  LX.  sqq. 

Works  on  Justin  Martyr. 

Bp.  KATE:  Some  Account  of  the  Writings  and  Opinions  of  Justin  Martyr 
Cambr.,  1829,  3d  ed.,  1853. 

1  See  above,  \  38,  p.  107,  and  Harnack,  /.  c.  I.  115-130. 


1 173.  JUSTIN  THE  PHILOSOPHER  AND  MARTYB.     711 

C.  A.  CEEDNEB,  :  Beitrdge  znr  Einleitung  in  die  bibL  &hr{ften.  Halle, 
vol.  L,  1832  (92-267) ;  also  in  vol.  II.,  1838  (on  the  quotations  from 
the  0.  T.,  p.  17-98 ;  10^-133 ;  157-311).  Credner  discusses  with  ex- 
haustive learning  Justin's  relation  to  the  Gospels  and  the  Canon  of 
the  N.  T.,  and  his  quotations  from  the  Septuagint.  Comp.  also  his 
Geschichte  des  A.  T:  Canon,  ed.  by  Volkmar,  1860. 

*C.  SEMISCH:  Justin  d&r  Martyrer.  Breslau,  1840  and  1842,  2  vols. 
Very  thorough  and  complete  up  to  date  of  publication.  English 
translation  by  Ryland,  Edinb.,  1844,  2  vols.  Comp.  SEMISCH  :  Die 
apostol.  Denkwurdigkeiten  des  Just.  M.  (Hamb.  and  Gotha,  1848), 
and  his  article  Justin  in  the  first  ed.  -of  Herzog,  VII.  (1857),  179-186, 

FR.B6HRINGEK:  Die  Eirchengesch.  in  BiograpUen.  Vol.1.  Zurich,  1842, 
ed.  II.,  1861,  p.  97-270. 

AD.  HILGENFELD :  Krit.  Untersuckungen  uber  die  Evangelien  Justin's. 
Halle,  1850.  Also :  Die  Ap.  Gesch.  u.  der  M.  Just,  in  his  "Zeitschr. 
f.  wiss.  Theol.,"  1872,  p.  495-509,  and  Ketzergesch.,  1884,  pp.  21  *qq. 

*  J.  C.  TH.  OTTO  :  Zur  Characteristic  des  heil  Justinus.    Wieu,  1852.  His 

art.  Justinus  der  Apologete,  in   "Ersch  and  Gruber's  Encyklop." 

Second  Section,  30th  part  (1853),  pp.  39-76.    Comp.  also  his  Prole- 
.    gomena  in  the  third  ed.  of  Justin's  works.    He  agrees  with  Semisch 

in  his  general  estimate  of  Justin. 
C.  G.  SEIBERT:   Justimis,  der   Vertheidiger  des   Christenthums  vor  dem 

Thron  der  Ccesaren.    Elberf.,  1859. 
CH.  E.  FREPPEL  (E.  C.  Bp.) :  Les  Apologistes  Chretiens  du  II. e  stecle. 

Par.,  1860. 
L.  SCHALLEB  :  Les  deux  Apologies  de  Justin  J/.  au  point  de  vie  dogmatique. 

Strasb.,  1861. 
B.  AUBE  :  De  V  apologetique  Chr&ienne  au  11. e  slide.    Par.,  1861 ;  and 

S.  Justin  philosophe  et  martyr,  1875. 
E.  DE  PRESSENSE,  in  the  third  vol.  of  his  Histoire  des  trois  premiers  siecles, 

or  second  vol.  of  the  English  version  (1870),  which  treats  of  Martyrs 

and  Apologists,  and  his  art.  in  Lichtenberger  VII.  (1880)  576-583. 
EM.  RUGKHERI  :  Vita  e  dottrina  di  S.  Giustino.    Eom.?  1862. 

*  J.  DONALDSON:  Hist,  of  Ante-Nicene  Christian  Literature.    Lond.,  vol. 

II.  (1866),  which  treats  of  Justin  M.,  pp.  62-344. 

*C.  WEizslGKER:  Die  Theologie  des  Martyrer s  Justinus  in  the  "Jahr- 
bucher  fur  Deutsche  Theologie.  Gotha,  1867  (vol.  XII.,  I.  pp.  60-120). 

BESTAN:  Ueglise  chretienne  (Par.,  1879),  ch.  XIX.,  pp.  36^-389,  and  ch. 
XXV.  480  sqq. 

*MOBITZ  YON  ENGELHAHDT  (d.  1881):  Das  Christenthum  Justins  des 
Martyrers.  '  Erlangen,  1878.  (490  pages,  no  index.)  "With  an  in- 
structive critical  review  of  the  various  treatments  of  Irenseus  and  his 
place  in  history  (p.  1-70).  See  also  his  art.  Justin  in  Herzog2,  VII. 

G  R  Pop-VES  :  The  Testimony  of  Justin  M.  to  Early  Christianity.  New 
York.  1888. 


712  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311 

ADOLF  STiHELrs :  Justin  der  3farfyrer  und  sein  neuster  Beurtheiler.  Leip- 
zig, 1880  (67  pages).  A  careful  review  of  Engelhardt's  monograph, 

HENRY  SCOTT  HOLLAND  :  Art.  Justinus  Martyr,  in  Smith  and  Wace  III. 
(1880),  560-587. 

AD.  HAKNACK:  Die  Werke  des  Justin,  in  "Texte  und  Untersuchungen," 
etc.  Leipz.,1882.  1.130-195. 

The  relation  of  Justin  to  the  Gospels  is  discussed  by  Credner,  Semisch, 
Hilgenfeld,  Norton,  Sanday,  Westcott,  Abbot;  his  relation  to  the 
Acts  by  Overbeck  (1872)  and  Hilgenfeld;  his  relation  to  the 
Pauline"  Epistles  by  H.  D.  Tjeenk  Willink  (1868),  Alb.  Thoma 
(1875),  and  v.  Engelhardt  (1878). 

The  most  eminent  among  the  Greek  Apologists  of  the  second 
century  is  FLAVIUS  JusTixrs,  surnamed  "Philosopher  and 
Martyr."1  He  is  the  typical  apologist,  who  devoted  his  whole 
life  to  the  defense  of  Christianity  at  a  time  when  it  was  most 
assailed,  and  he  sealed  his  testimony  with  his  blood.  He  is  also 
the  first  Christian  philosopher  or  the  first  philosophic  theologian. 
His  writings  were  well  known  to  Irenseus,  Hippolytus,  Euse- 
bius,  Epiphanius,  Jerome,  and  Photius,  and  the  most  important 
of  them  have  been  preserved  to  this  day. 

I.  His  LIFE.  Justin  was  born  towards  the  close  of  the  first 
century,  or  in  the  beginning  of  the  second,  in  the  Grseco-Roman 
colony  of  Flavia  Xeapolis,  so  called  after  the  emperor  Flavius 
Vespasian,  and  built  near  the  ruins  of  Sychem  in  Samaria  (now 
Nablous).  He  calls  himself  a  Samaritan,  but  was  of  heathen 
descent,  uncircumcised,  and  ignorant  of  Moses  and  the  prophets 
before  his  conversion.  Perhaps  he  belonged  to  the  Roman 
colony  which  Vespasian  planted  in  Samaria  after  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem.  His  grandfather's  name  was  Greek  (Bac- 
chius),  his  father's  (Priscus)  and  his  own,  Latin.  His  education 
was  Hellenic.  To  judge  from  his  employment  of  several 
teachers  and  his  many  journeys,  he  must  have  had  some  means, 
though  he  no  doubt  lived  in  great  simplicity  and  may  have 
been  aided  by  his  brethren. 

1  Tertullian  (Adv.  Vcdent.  5)  first  calls  Lira  pMosophus  et  martyr,  Hippolytus 
(PAtfcw.  YIII.  16),  "Just.  Martyr f  Eusebius  (S. E.  IV.  12),  "a  genuine  lover 
of  the  true  philosophy,"  who  "in  the  garb  of  a  philosopher  proclaimed  the 
dirine  word  and  defended  the  faith  by  writings"  (IV.  17). 


2173.  JUSTIN  THE  PHILOSOPHEB'AND  MARTYR.    713 

His  conversion  occurred  in  his  early  manhood.  He  himself 
tells  us  the  interesting  story.1  Thirsting  for  truth  as  the  greatest 
possession,  he  made  the  round  of  the  systems  of  philosophy  and 
knocked  at  every  gate  of  ancient  wisdom,  except  the  Epicurean 
which  he  despised.  He  first  went  to  a  Stoic,  but  found  him  a 
sort  of  agnostic  who  considered  the  knowledge  of  God  impos- 
sible or  unnecessary;  then  to  a  Peripatetic,  but  he  was  more 
anxious  for  a  good  fee  than  for  imparting  instruction ;  next  to  a 
celebrated  Pythagorean,  who  seemed  to  know  something,  but 
demanded  too  much  preliminary  knowledge  of  music,  astronomy 
and  geometry  before  giving  him  an  insight  into  the  highest 
truths.  At  last  he  threw  himself  with  great  zeal  into  the  arms 
of  Platonism  under  the  guidance  of  a  distinguished  teacher  who 
had  recently  come  to  his  city.2  He  was  overpowered  by  the 
perception  of  immaterial  things  and  the  contemplation  of  eternal 
ideas  of  truth,  beauty,  and  goodness.  He  thought  that  he  was 
already  near  the  promised  goal  of  this  philosophy — the  vision 
of  God — when,  in  a  solitary  walk  not  far  from  the  sea-shore,  a 
venerable  old  Christian  of  pleasant  countenance  and  gentle  dig- 
nity, entered  into  a  conversation  with  him,  which  changed  the 
course  of  his  life.  The  unknown  friend  shook  his  confidence  in 
all  human  wisdom,  and  pointed  him  to  the  writings  of  the 
Hebrew  prophets  who  were  older  than  the  philosophers  and 
had  seen  and  spoken  the  truth,  not  as  reasoners,  but  as  wit- 
nesses. More  than  this:  they  had  foretold  the  coming  of 
Christ,  and  their  prophecies  were  fulfilled  in  his  life  and  work. 
The  old  man  departed,  and  Justin  saw  him  no  more,  but  he 
took  his  advice  and  soon  found  in  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament as  illuminated  and  confirmed  by  the  Gospels,  the  true 
and  infallible  philosophy  which  rests  upon  the  firm  ground  of 

1  Dial.  c.  Tryph.  Jud.  c.  2-8.    The  conversion  occurred  before  the  Bar- 
Cochba  war,  from  which  Tryphon  was  flying  when  Justin  met  him.    Arch- 
bishop Trench  has  reproduced  the  story  in  thoughtful  poetry  (Poem,  Lond. 
1865,  p.  1-10). 

2  This  city  may  be  Flavia  Neapolis,  or  more  probably  Ephesus,  where  the 
conversation  with  Trypho  took  place,  according  to  Eusebius  (IV.  18).    Some 
have  located  the  scene  at  Corinth,  others  at  Alexandria.    Mere  conjectures. 


714  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

revelation.    Thus  the  enthusiastic  Platonist  became  a  believing 
Christian. 

To  Tatian  also,  and  Theophilus  at  Antioch,  and  Hilary,  the 
Jewish  prophets  were  in  like  manner  the  bridge  to  the  Chris- 
tian faith.  "We  must  not  suppose,  however,  that  the  Old  Testa- 
ment alone  efiecied  his  conversion;  for  in  the  Second  Apology, 
Justin  distinctly  mentions  as  a  means  the  practical  working  of 
Christianity.  While  he  was  yet  a  Platonist,  and  listened  to  the 
calumnies  ag-ainst  the  Christians,  he  was  struck  with  admiration 
for  their  fearless  courage  and  steadfastness  in  the  face  of  death.1 

After  his  conversion  Justin  sought  the  society  of,  Christians, 
and  received  from  them  instruction  in  the  history  and  doctrine 
of  the  gospel.  He  now  devoted  himself  wholly  to  the  spread 
and  vindication  of  the  Christian  religion.  He  was  an  itinerant 
evangelist  or  teaching  missionary,  with  no  fixed  abode  and  no 
regular  office  in  the  church.2  There  is  no  trace  of  his  ordina- 
tion; he  was  as  far  as  we  know  a  lay-preacher,  with  a  commis- 
sion from  the  Holy  Spirit;  yet  he  accomplished  far  more  for 
the  good  of  the  church  than  any  known  bishop  or  presbyter  of 
his  day.  "Every  one,"  says  he,  "who  can  preach  the  truth  and 
does  not  preach  it,  incurs  the  judgment  of  God."  Like  Paul, 
he  felt  himself  a  debtor  to  all  men,  Jew  and  Gentile,  that  he 
might  show  them  the  way  of  salvation.  And,  like  Aristides, 
Athenagoras,  Tertullian,  Heraclas,  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  he 
retained  his  philosopher's  cloak,3  that  he  might  the  more  readily 

1  Apol.  II.  12, 13. 

3  Tillemont  and  Maran  (in  Mignefe  ed.  col.  114)  infer  from  his  mode  of  de- 
scribing baptism  (Apol.  1. 65)  that  he  baptized  himself  and  consequently  was  a 
priest.  But  Justin  speaks  in  the  name  of  the  Christians  in  that  passage  (et  We 
after  we  have  thus  washed  him,"  etc.)  and  throughout  the  Apology;  besides 
baptism  was  no  exclusively  clerical  act,  and  could  be  performed  by  laymen. 
Equally  inconclusive  is  the  inference  of  Maran  from  the  question  of  the  pre- 
fect to  the  associates  of  Justin  (in  the  Acts  of  his  martyrdom) :  "  Christiana* 
wsferit  Justinusf"  * 

8  rp'tSuv,  rpiS&viov,  pallium,  a  threadbare  cloak,  adopted  by  philosophers  and 
afterwards  by  monks  (the  cowl)  as  an  emblem  of  severe  study  or  austere  lif^ 
or  both. 


J173.   JUSTIN  THE  PHILOSOPHER  A3TD  MAETYE.    715 

discourse  on  the  highest  themes  of  thought;  and  when  he 
appeared  in  early  morning  (as  he  himself  tells  us),  upon  a 
public  walk,  many  came  to  him  with  a  "Welcome,  philoso- 
pher!"1 He  spent  some  time  in  Rome  where  he  met  and  com- 
bated Marcion.  In  Ephesus  he  made  an  effort  to  gain  the  Jew 
Trypho  and  his  friends  to  the  Christian  faith. 

He  labored  last,  for  the  second  time,  in  Rome.  Here,  at  the 
instigation  of  a  Cynic  philosopher,  Crescens,  whom  he  had  con- 
victed of  ignorance  about  Christianity,  Justin,  with  six  other 
Christians,  about  the  year  166,  was  scourged  and  beheaded. 
Fearlessly  and  joyfully,  as  in  life,  so  also  in  the  face  of  death,  he 
bore  witness  to  the  truth  before  the  tribunal  of  Rusticus,  the 
prefect  of  the  city,  refused  to  sacrifice,  and  proved  by  his  own 
example  the  steadfastness  of  which  he  had  so  often  boasted  as  a 
characteristic  trait  of  his  believing  brethren.  When  asked  to 
explain  the  mystery  of  Christ,  he  replied  :  "  I  am  too  little  to 
say  something  great  of  him."  His  last  words  were :  "  We  de- 
sire nothing  more  than  to  suffer  for  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  for 
this  gives  us  salvation  and  joyfulness  before  his  dreadful  judg- 
ment seat,  at  which  all  the  world  must  appear." 

Justin  is  the  first  among  the  fathers  who  may  be  called  a 
learned  theologian  and  Christian  thinker.  He  had  acquired 
considerable  classical  and  philosophical  culture  before  his  con- 
version, and  then  made  it  subservient  to  the  defense  of  faith. 
He  was  not  a  man  of  genius  and  accurate  scholarship,  but  of 
respectable  talent,  extensive  reading,  and  enormous  memory.  He 
had  some  original  and  profound  ideas,  as  that  of  the  spermatic 
Logos,  and  was  remarkably  liberal  in  his  judgment  of  the  noble 
heathen  and  the  milder  section  of  the  Jewish  Christians.  He 
lived  in  times  when  the  profession  of  Christ  was  a  crime  under 
the  Roman  law  against  secret  societies  and  prohibited  religions. 
He  had  the  courage  of  a  confessor  in  life  and  of  a  martyr  in 
death.  It  is  impossible  not  to  admire  his  fearless  devotion  to 
the  cause  of  truth  and  the  defense  of  his  persecuted  brethren. 


716  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

If  not  a  great  man,  he  was  (what  is  better)  an  eminently  good 
and  useful  man,  and  worthy  of  an  honored  place  in  "  the  noble 
army  of  martyrs/' 1 

II.  WRITINGS.  To  his  oral  testimony  Justin  added  extensive 
literary  labors  in  the  field  of  apologetics  and  polemics.  His  pen 
was  incessantly  active  against  all  the  enemies  of  Christian  truth, 
Jews,  Gentiles,  and  heretics. 

(1 )  His  chief  works  are  apologetic,  and  still  remain,  namely, 
his  two  Apologies  against  the  heathen,  and  his  Dialogue  with  the 
Jew  Trypho.  The  First  or  larger  Apology  (68  chapters)  is 
addressed  to  the  Emperor  Antoninus  Pius  (137-161)  and  his 
adopted  sons,  and  was  probably  written  about  A.  D.  147,  if  not 
earlier ;  the  Second  or  smaller  Apology  (25  chapters)  is  a  sup- 
plement to  the  former,  perhaps  its  conclusion,  and  belongs  to  the 
same  reign  (not  to  that  of  ilarcus  Aurelius).2  Both  are  a  de- 

* 1  add  the  estimate  of  Pressense*  (Martyrs  and  Apologists,  p.  251) :  "The 
truth  never  had  a  witness  more  disinterested,  more  courageous,  more  worthy  of 
the  hatred  of  a  godless  age  and  of  the  approval  of  Heaven.  The  largeness  of 
his  heart  and  mind  equalled  the  fervor  of  his  zeal,  and  both  were  hased  on  his 
Christian  charity.  Justin  derived  all  his  eloquence  from  his  heart;  his 
natural  genius  was  not  of  rare  order,  but  the  experiences  of  his  early  life, 
illumined  by  revelation,  became  the  source  of  much  fruitful  suggestion  for 
himself,  and  gave  to  the  Church  a  heritage  of  thought  which,  ripened  and 
developed  at  Alexandria,  was  to  become  the  basis  of  the  great  apology  of 
Christianity.  If  we  except  the  beautiful  doctrine  of  the  Word  genninally  present 
m  every  mart)  there  was  little  originality  in  Justin's  theological  ideas.  In 
exegesis  he  is  subtle,  and  sometimes  puerile ;  in  argument  he  flags,  but  where 
his  heart  speaks,  he  stands  forth  in  all  his  moral  greatness,  and  his  earnest, 
generous  words  are  ever  quick  and  telling.  Had  he  remained  a  pagan  he 
would  have  lived  unnoted  in  erudite  mediocrity.  Christianity  fired  and  fer- 
tilized his  genius,  and  it  is  the  glowing  soul  which  we  chiefly  love  to  trace  in 
all  his  writings." 

5  The  year  of  composition  cannot  be  fixed  with  absolute  certainty.  The 
First  Apology  is  addressed  "To  the  Emperor  (avTOKpdropi)  Titus  Aelius 
Adrianus  Antoninus,  Pius,  Augustus  Caesar;  and  to  VerissimuS,  his  son, 
philosopher  [i.  e.  Marcus  Aurelius]  ;  and  to  Lucius,  the  philosopher  [?] — son 
by  nature  of  a  Caesar  [i  e.  Caesar  Aelius  Verus]  and  of  Pius  by  adoption ; 
and  to  the  sacred  Senate ;— and  to  the  whole  Roman  people/'  etc.  The  address 
violates  the  curial  style,  and  is  perhaps  (as  Momrosen  and  Volkmar  suspect)  a 
later  addition,  but  no  one  doubts  its  general  correctness.  From  the  title 
*  Vedannma/'  which  Marcos  Aurelius  ceased  to  bear  after  his  adoption  by 


{  173.  JUSTIN  THE  PHILOSOPHER  AND  MARTYR.     717 

fense  of  the  Christians  and  their  religion  against  heathen 
calumnies  and  persecutions.  He  demands  nothing  but  justice 
for  his  brethren,  who  were  condemned  without  trial,  simply  as 
Christians  and  suspected  criminals.  He  appeals  from  the  lower 
courts  and  the  violence  of  the  mob  to  the  highest  tribunal 
of  law,  and  feels  confident  that  such  wise  and  philosophic 
rulers  as  he  addresses  would  acquit  them  after  a  fair  hearing, 
He  ascribes  the  persecutions  to  the  instigation  of  the  demons  who 
tremble  for  their  power  and  will  soon  be  dethroned. 

The  Dialogue  (142  chapters)  is  more  than  twice  as  large  as  the 
two  Apologies,  and  is  a  vindication  of  Christianity  from  Moses 
and  the  prophets  against  the  objections  of  the  Jews.  It  was 
written  after  the  former  (which  are  referred  to  in  ch.  120),  but 
also  in  the  reign  of  Antoninus  Pius,  i.  e.,  before  A.  D.  161,  pro- 

Antonine  in  138,  and  from  the  absence  of  the  title  '*  Caesar,"  which  he  received 
in  139,  the  older  critics  have  inferred  that  it  must  have  been  written  shortly 
after  the  death  of  Hadrian  (137),  and  Eusebius,  in  the  Chronicon,  assigns  it  to 
141.  The  early  date  is  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  in  the  Dialogue,  which  was 
written  after  the  Apologies,  the  Bar-Cochba  war  (132-135)  is  represented  as 
still  going  on,  or  at  all  events  as  recent  (Qvy&v  rbv  vvv  yev6[ievov  Trd/Le^ov,  ex  betto 
nostra  estate  prqfugus,  ch.  I ;  comp.  ch.  9).  But,  on  the  other  hand,  Marcus 
Aurelius  was  not  really  associated  as  co- regent  with  Antonine  till  147,  and  in 
the  book  itself  Justin  seems  to  imply  two  regents.  Lucius  Verus,  moreover, 
was  born  130,  and  could  not  well  be  addressed  in  his  eighth  year  as  *  philoso- 
pher ; "  Eusebius,  however,  reads  "  Son  of  the  philosopher  Caesar ; n  and  the 
term  $&6Go$o(;  was  used  in  a  very  wide  sense.  Of  more  weight  is  the  feet 
that  the  first  Apology  was  written  after  the  Syntagma,  against  Marcion,  who 
flourished  in  Rome  between  139-145,  though  this  chronology,  too,  is  not  quite 
certain.  Justin  says  that  he  was  writing  150  years  after  the  birth  of  the 
Saviour ;  if  this  is  not  simply  a  round  number,  it  helps  to  fix  the  date.  For 
these  reasons  modem  critics  decide  for  147-150  (Volkmar,  Baur,  Von  Engel- 
hardt,  Hort,  Donaldson,  Holland),  or  150  (Lipsius  and  Benan),  or  160  (Keim 
and  Aube*).  The  smaller  Apology  was  written  likewise  under  Antoninus  Pius 
(so  Neander,  Otto,  Volkmar,  Hort,  contrary  to  Eusebius,  IY.  15, 18,  and  the 
older  view,  which  puts  it  in  the  reign  of  Marcus  Aurelius) ;  for  it  presupposes 
two  rulers,  but  only  one  autocrat,  while  after  his  death  there  were  two 
"  Augusti "  or  autocrats.  See  on  the  chronology  Volkmar,  Die  Zkti  Just,  des 
If.,  in  the  "Theol.  Jahrb."  of  Tubingen,  1855  (Nos.  2  and  4) ;  Hort  On  the 
Date  of  Justin  Jf.,  in  the  "Journal  of  Classic  and  Sacred  Philology,"  June 
1856;  Donaldson,  IL  73  sqq.;  Engelhardt,  I.e.  71-80;  Keim,  JRom.  u.  d. 
Christenth.,  p.  425 ;  Benan,  L  c.  p.  367,  note,  and  Harnack,  Texte  und  Unten* 
«tc.  1. 172  sq. 


718  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

bably  about  A.  D.  US.1  In  the  Apologies  he  speaks  like  a 
philosopher  to  philosophers  ;  in  the  Dialogue  as  a  believer  in 
the  Old  Testament  with  a  son  of  Abraham.  The  disputation 
lasted  two  days,  in  the  gymnasium  just  before  a  voyage  of 
Justin,  and  turned  chiefly  on  two  questions,  how  the  Christians 
could  profess  to  serve  God,  and  yet  break  his  law,  and  how  they 
could  believe  in  a  human  Saviour  who  suffered  and  diecL 
Trypho,  whom  Eusebius  calls  "  the  most  distinguished  among 
the  Hebrews  of  his  day,"  was  not  a  fanatical  Pharisee,  but  a 
tolerant  and  courteous  Jew,  who  evasively  confessed  at  last  to 
have  been  much  instructed,  and  asked  Justin  to  come  again,  and 
to  remember  him  as  a  friend.  The  book  is  a  storehouse  of  early 
interpretation  of  the  prophetic  Scriptures, 

The  polemic  works,  Against  all  Heresies,  and  Against  Mar  don, 
are  lost.  The  first  is  mentioned  in  the  First  Apology;  of  the 
second,  Irenoeus  has  preserved  some  fragments  ;  perhaps  it  was 
only  a  part  of  the  former.2  Eusebius  mentions  also  a  Psalter  of 
Justin,  and  a  book  On  the  Sou?,  which  have  wholly  disappeared. 

(2)  Doubtful  works  which  bear  Justin's  name,  and  may  have 
been  written  by  him:  An  address  To  the  Greeks;3  a  treatise 
On  the  Unity  of  God  ;  another  On  the  Resurrection. 

i3j  Spurious  works  attributed  to  him:  The  Epistle  to  Diog- 
ndus,  probably  of  the  same  date,  but  by  a  superior  writer,4  the 
Exhortation  to  the  Greeks?  the  Deposition  of  the  True  Faith,  the 
epistle  To  Zenas  and  Serenus,  the  Refutation  of  some  Theses 
of  Aristotle,  the  Questions  to  the  Orthodox,  the  Questions  of  the 
Christians  to  the  Heatliem,  and  the  Questions  of  the  Heathens 

1  Hort  puts  the  Died,  between  142  and  148  ;  Yolkmar  in  155  ;  Keim  between 
'80-1<J4;  Eaglehardt  in  148  or  after. 

*  On  these  anti-heretical  works  see  Harnack,  Zwr  QueRerilritik  des  Gnosti- 
cisms lJ?7o-,  Lii»>iuN  ir?  Owfcn,  der  altesten  Ketzergeschichte  (1875),  and  Hil- 
genfeld,  D.  A~  fc-y</.>w.  ,<  <  r.-^wtnifkitmx  (1884,  p.  21  s-jo.). 


«?  fiW-...*  '  ..  -    -  .r   vy/i,rac.  *  See  above.  *  170,  p.  702. 

5  Cbhortatio  ad  Grwos,  Aojoc  irapatvsnK^  irpof  TSJUj-/^.  Based  on  Jnlina 
Africanns,  as  proved  by  Donaldson,  and  independently  by  Schurer  in  thtf 
*  Zeitschrift  fur  Kirchengesch."  Bd.  II.  p.  319, 


J  173.  JUSTIN  THE  PHILOSOPHEK  AND  MARTYJEL    719 

to  the  Christians.    Some  of  these  belong  to  the  third  or  later 
centuries.1 

The  genuine  works  of  Justin  are  of  unusual  importance  and 
interest.  They  bring  vividly  before  us  the  time  when  the 
church  was  still  a  small  sect,  despised  and  persecuted,  but  bold 
in  faith  and  joyful  in  death.  They  everywhere  attest  his  hon- 
esty and  earnestness,  his  enthusiastic  love  for  Christianity  and 

*•  9 

his  fearlessness  in  its  defense  against  all  assaults  from  without 
and  perversions  from  within.  He  gives  us  the  first  reliable 
account  of  the  public  worship  and  the  celebration  of  the  sacra- 
ments. His  reasoning  is  often  ingenious  and  convincing,  but 
sometimes  rambling  and  fanciful,  though  not  more  so  than  that 
of  other  writers  of  those  times.  His  style  is  fluent  and  lively, 
but  diffuse  and  careless.  He  writes  under  a  strong  impulse  of 
duty  and  fresh  impression  without  strict  method  or  aim  at  rhet- 
orical finish  and  artistic  effect.  He  thinks  pen  in  hand,  without 
looking  backward  or  forward,  and  uses  his  memory  more  than 
books.  Only  occasionally,  as  in  the  opening  of  the  Dialogue, 
'there  is  a  touch  of  the  literary  art  of  Plato,  his  old  master.1 
But  the  lack  of  careful  elaboration  is  made  up  by  freshness  and 
truthfulness.  If  the  emperors  of  Rome  had  read  the  books  ad- 
dressed to  them  they  must  have  been  strongly  impressed,  at  least 
with  the  honesty  of  the  writer  and  the  innocence  of  the  Christians.2 
III.  THEOLOGY.  As  to  the  sources  of  his  religious  knowledge, 

1  On  these  doubtful  and  spurious  writings  see  Maranus,  Otto,  Semiseh, 
Donaldson,  and  Harnack  (L  c.  190-193). 

2  Comp.  Otto  DeJustiniana  dictione,  in  the  Proleg.  LXIH-LXXVL   Kenan's 
judgment  is  interesting,  but  hardly  just.    He  says  (p.  365) :  "  Justin  rietait  un 
grand  esprit;  il  manquait  &  fafois  de  philosophie  et  de  critique;  son  exegfee  surtout 
passerait  aujour  tf  hui  pour  trte  dtfectueuse;  mats  il  fait  preuve  cCun  sens  general 
assess  droit;  il  avait  cette  espece  de  eredulite  mediocre  quipermet  de  raissonner  sensfr 
ment  sur  des  premisses  puerUes  et  de  s'arreter  a  temps  defw;on  &  n'&re  qu'a  motile 
ab&urde"    On  the  next  page  he  says :  "Justin  etati  un  qprtifaibh;  inais  c'Stait 
wn-nobU  et  bon  cawr."    Donaldson  justly  remarks  (II.  15  sq.)  that  the  faults  of 
style  and  reasoning  attributed  to  Justin  and  other  Apologists  may  be  paralleled 
in  Plutarch  and  all  other  contemporaries,  and  that  more  learned  and  able 
writers  could  not  have  done  better  than  present  the  same  arguments  in  a  mow» 
elaborate  and  polished  form. 


720  8ECOSD  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Justin  derived  it  partly  from  the  Holy  Scriptures,  partly  from 
the  living  church  tradition.  He  cites,  most  frequently,  and 
generally  from  memory,  hence  often  inaccurately,  the  Old  Tes- 
tament prophet-?  (in  the  Septuagint),  and  the  "  Memoirs  "  of 
Christ  or  "Memoirs  by  the  Apostles,53  as  he  calls  the  canonical 
Gospels,  without  naming  the  authors.1  He  says  that  they  were 
publicly  read  in  the  churches  Trith  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament. He  onlv  quotes  the  words  and  acts  of  the  Lord.  He 
makes  most  use  of  Matthew  and  Luke,  but  very  freely,  and 
from  John's  -Prologue  (with  the  aid  of  Philo  whom  he  never 
names)  he  derived  the  inspiration  of  the  Logos-doctrine,  which 
is  the  heart  of  his  theology.3  He  expressly  mentions  the  Reve- 
lation of  John.  He  knew  no  fixed  canon  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment; and,  like  Hernias  and  Papias,  he  nowhere  notices  Paul; 
but  several  allusions  to  passages  of  his  Epistles  (Romans,  First 
Corinthians,  Ephesians,  Colossians,  etc.),  can  hardly  be  mis- 
taken, and  his  controversy  with  Marcion  must  have  implied  a 
full  knowledge  of  the  ten  Epistles  which  that  heretic  included 
in  his  canon.  Any  dogmatical  inference  from  this  silence  is  the 
less  admissible,  since,  in  the  genuine  writings  of  Justin,  not  one 
of  the  apostles  or  evangelists  is  expressly  named  except  John 
once,  and  Simon  Peter  twice,  and  "the  sons  of  Zebedee  whom 
Christ  called  Boanerges/'  but  reference  is  always  made  directly 
to  Christ  and  to  the  prophets  and  apostles  in  general.3  The  last 


a  designation  peculiar  to  Justin,  and 
occurring  in  the  Apologies  and  the  Dialogue,  but  nowhere  else,  borrowed,  no 
doubt,  from  Xenophon's  Memorabilia,  of  Socrates.  Four  times  he  calls  them 
simply  "Memoirs"  four  times  "Memoirs  of  (or  by)  the  Apostles;"  once 
"  Memoirs  made  by  the  Apostles,"  which  constitute  the  one  Gospel  (TO  evayy&tov, 
Dial.  c.  10  1,  and  which  "are  called  Gospels"  (a  Kafalrai  evayysfaa,  Apd.  I.  66, 
a  decisive  passages  ouce,  quoting  from  Mark,  "  Peter's  Memoirs,"  After  long 
and  thorough  discussion  the  identity  of  these  Memoirs  with  our  canonical  Gos- 
pels is  settle*!  notwithstanding  the  doubt*  of  the  author  of  Supernatural  Religion. 
It  i*  possible,  however,  that  Justin  may  have  used  also  some  kind  of  gospel 
harmony  snch  as  hi*  pupil  Tatian  actually  prepared. 

3  One  unquestionable  quotation  from  John  (3:  3-5)  is  discussed  in  vol.  I. 
703  aq.  If  he  did  not  cite  the  words  of  John,  he  evidently  moved  in  his  thought* 

8  e&e  the  list  of  Justin's  Scripture  quotations  or  allusions  in  Otto's  edition. 


8  173.  JUSTIN  THE  PHILOSOPHER  AND  MART  YE     721 

are  to  him  typified  in  the  twelve  bells  on  the  border  of  the  high 
priest's  garment  which  sound  through  the  whole  world.  But 
this  no  more  excludes  Paul  from  apostolic  dignity  than  the 
names  of  the  twelve  apostles  on  the  foundation  stones  of  the 
new  Jerusalem  (Rev.  21 :  14).  They  represent  the  twelve  tribes 
of  Israel,  Paul  the  independent  apostolate  of  the  Gentiles. 

Justin's  exegesis  of  the  Old  Testament  is  apologetic,  typologi- 
cal and  allegorical  throughout.  He  finds  everywhere  references 
to  Christ,  and  turned  it  into  a  text  book  of  Christian  theology. 
He  carried  the  whole  New  Testament  into  the  Old  without  dis- 
crimination, and  thus  obliterated  the  difference.  He  had  no 
knowledge  of  Hebrew,1  and  freely  copied  the  blunders  and 
interpolations  of  the  Septuagint.  He  had  no  idea  of  grammat- 
ical or  historical  interpretation.  He  used  also  two  or  three 
times  the  Sibylline  Oracles  and  Hystaspes  for  genuine  prophe- 
cies, and  appeals  to  the  Apocryphal  Acts  of  Pilate  as  an 
authority.  We  should  remember,  however,  that  he  is  no  more 
credulous,  inaccurate  and  uncritical  than  his  contemporaries  and 
the  majority  of  the  fathers. 

Justin  forms  the  transition  from  the  apostolic  fathers  to  the 
church  fathers  properly  so  called.  He  must  not  be  judged  by 
the  standard  of  a  later  orthodoxy,  whether  Greek,  Roman,  or 
Evangelical,  nor  by  the  apostolic  conflict  between  Jewish  and 
Gentile  Christianity,  or  Ebionism  and  Gnosticism,  which  at  that 
time  had  already  separated  from  the  current  of  Catholic  Chris- 
tianity. It  was  a  great  mistake  to  charge  him  with  Ebionism. 
He  was  a  converted  Gentile,  and  makes  a  sharp  distinction 
between  the  church  and  the  synagogue  as  two  antagonistic 
organizations.  He  belongs  to  orthodox  Catholicism  as  modified 


579-592.  The  most  numerous  are  from  the  Pentateuch,  Isaiah,  Matthew,  and 
Luke.  Of  profane  authors  he  quotes  Plato,  Homer,  Euripides,  Xenopbon, 
and  Menander. 

1  Donaldson  (II.  148)  infers  from  his  Samaritan  origin,  and  his  attempts  in 
one  or  two  cases  to  give  the  etymology  of  Hebrew  words  (ApoL  L  38),  that  he 
must  have  known  a  little  Hebrew,  but  it  must  have  been  a  very  little  indeed  i 
at  all  events  he  never  appeals  to  the  Hebrew  text. 
Vol.  II,    46 


722  SECOOT  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

by  Greek  philosophy.  The  Christians  to  him  are  the  true 
people  of  God  and  heirs  of  all  the  promises.  He  distinguishes 
between  Jewish  Christians  who  would  impose  the  yoke  of  the 
Mosaic  law  (the  Ebionites),  and  those  who  only  observe  it 
themselves,  allowing  freedom  to  the  Gentiles  (the  Nazarenes); 
the  former  he  does  not  acknowledge  as  Christians,  the  latter  he 
treats  charitably,  like  Paul  in  Romans  ch.  14  and  15.  The 
only  difference  among  orthodox  Christians  which  he  mentions  is 
the  belief  in  the  millennium  which  he  held,  like  Barnabas, 
Irenjeus  and  Tertullian,  bat  which  many  rejected.  But,  like  all 
the  ante-Xicene  writers,  he  had  no  clear  insight  into  the  distinc- 
tion between  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New,  between  the  law 
and  the  gospel,  nor  any  proper  conception  of  the  depth  of  sin 
and  redeeming  grace,  and  the  justifying  power  of  faith.  His 
theology  is  legalistic  and  ascetic  rather  than  evangelical  and 
free.  He  retained  some  heathen  notions  from  his  former  studies, 
though  he  honestly  believed  them  to  be  in  full  harmony  with 
revelation. 

Christianity  was  to  Justin,  theoretically,  the  true  philosophy* 
and,  practically,  a  new  law  of  holy  living  and  dying.2  The 
former  is  chiefly  the  position  of  the  Apologies,  the  latter  that  of 
the  Dialogue. 

He  was  not  an  original  philosopher,  but  a  philosophizing 
eclectic,  with  a  prevailing  love  for  Plato,  whom  he  quotes  more 
frequently  than  any  other  classical  author.  He  may  be  called, 
in  a  loose  sense,  a  Christian  Platonist.  He  was  also  influenced 
by  Stoicism.  He  thought  that  the  philosophers  of  Greece  had 
borrowed  their  light  from  Moses  and  the  prophets.  But  his 
relation  to  Plato  after  all  is  merely  external,  and  based  upon 
fancied  resemblances.  He  illuminated  and  transformed  his 
Platonic  reminiscences  by  the  prophetic  Scriptures,  and  espe- 
cially by  the  Johannean  doctrine  of  the  Logos  and  the  incar- 

1  He  calls  the  Christian  religion  (Dial.  c.  8)  p6wj  $i)uoGo$ia  aaQctifa  re  not 
fftufopoc,  sola  philosophia  Ma  atque  utilis. 

3  T£/.svrmo<:  voting  kal  faa&ijKj}  MptvrdTq  xaauv,  nmssima  lex  etfctdus  omnium 
frmissimum.  Did.  c.  IT. 


2  173.  JUSTIN  THE  PHILOSOPHER  AND  JIAKTYR.    723 

nation.  This  is  the  central  idea  of  his  philosophical  theology. 
Christianity  is  the  highest  reason.  The  Logos  .is  the  pre- 
existent,  absolute,  personal  Keason,  and  Christ  is  the  embodi- 
ment of  it,  the  Logos  incarnate.  Whatever  is  rational  is  Chris- 
tian, and  whatever  is  Christian  is  rational.1  The  Logos  endowed 
all  men  with  reason  and  freedom,  which  qre  not  lost  by  the  fall. 
He  scattered  seeds  (ax I  o para)  of  truth  before  his  incarnation, 
not  only  among  the  Jews,  but  also  among  the  Greeks  and  bar- 
barians, especially  among  philosophers  and  poets,  who  are  the 
prophets  of  the  heathen.  Those^who  lived  reasonably  (of  fisra 
lofov  j)e(bffavT£s)  and  virtuously  in  obedience  to  this  preparatory 
light  were  Christians  in  fact,  though  not  in  name ;  while  those 
who  lived  unreasonably  (of  &&>  l&ftju  facoffavrsz)  were  Christ- 
less  and  enemies  of  Christ.2  Socrates  was  a  Christian  as  well 
as  Abraham,  though  he  did  not  know  it.  K"one  of  the  fathers 
or  schoolmen  has  so  widely  thrown  open  the  gates  of  salvation. 
He  was  the  broadest  of  broad  churchmen. 

This  extremely  liberal  view  of  heathenism,  however,  did  not 
blind  him  to  the  prevailing  corruption.  The  mass  of  the  Gen- 
tiles are  idolaters,  and  idolatry  is  under  the  control  of  the  devil 
and  the  demons.  The  Jews  are  even  worse  than  the  heathen, 
because  they  sin  against  better  knowledge.  And  worst  of  all 
are  the  heretics,  because  they  corrupt  the  Christian  truths.  Nor 
did  he  overlook  the  difference,  between  Socrates  and  Christ,  and 
between  the  best  of  heathen  and  the  humblest  Christian.  "  No 
one  trusted  Socrates,"  he  says,  "so  as  to  die  for  his  doctrine ; 
but  Christ,  who  was  partially  known  by  Socrates,  was  trusted 
not  only  by  philosophers  and  scholars,  but  also  by  artizans  and 
people  altogether  unlearned." 

The  Christian  faith  of  Justin  is  faith  in  God  the  Creator,  and 

1  Very  different  from  the  principle  of  Hegel ;  All  that  is  rational  is  real, 
and  all  *hat  is  real  is  rational. 

2  He  calls  them  axpijcrot  (asekas),  ApoL  I,  46 ;  with  reference  to  the  fre- 
quent confusion  of  Xptttr6s  with  Xpyorog,  good.    Comp.  ApoL  I.  4  -  Xpumavoi 
elvai  KaTTjyopov{t€$q'  rb  6s  xpjjffrbv  fitaetG'&fii  ov  dUatov.     Justin  knew,  howeven 
the  true  derivation  of  Xp^ffrdf,  see  Apol.  II.  6. 


724  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

in  hid  Son  Jesus  Christ  the  Redeemer,  and  in  the  prophetic 
Spirit.  AIL  other  doctrines  which  are  revealed  through  the 
prophets  and  apostles,  follow  as  a  matter  of  course.  Below  the 
deity  are  good  and  bad  angels ;  the  former  are  messengers  of 
God,  the  latter  servants  of  Satan,  who  caricature  Bible  doc- 
trines in  heathen  mythology,  invent  slanders,  and  stir  up  perse- 
cutions against  Christians,  but  will  be  utterly  overthrown  at  the 
second  coming  of  Christ.  The  human  soul  is  a  creature,  and 
hence  perishable,  but  receives  immortality  from  God,  eternal 
happiness  as  a  reward  of  piety,  eternal  fire  as  a  punishment  of 
wickedness.  Man  has  reason  and  free  will,  and  is  hence 
responsible  for  all  his  actions;  he  sins  by  his  own  act,  and 
hence  deserves  punishment.  Christ  came  to  break  the  power  of 
Bin,  to  secure  forgiveness  and  regeneration  to  a  new  and  holy  life. 

Here  comes  in  the  practical  or  ethical  side  of  this  Christian 
philosophy.  It  is  wisdom  which  emanates  from  God  and  leads 
to  God.  It  is  a  new  law  and  a  new  covenant,  promised  by 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  and  introduced  by  Christ.  The  old  law 
was  only  for  the  Jews,  the  new  is  for  the  whole  world ;  the  old 
was  temporary  and  is  abolished,  the  new  is  eternal ;  the  old  com- 
mands circumcision  of  the  flesh,  the  new,  circumcision  of  the 
heart;  the  old  enjoins  the  observance  of  one  day,  the  new 
sanctifies  all  days ;  the  old  refers  to  outward  performances,  the 
new  to  spiritual  repentance  and  faith,  and  demands  entire  con- 
secration to  God. 

IV.  From  the  time  of  Justin  Martyr,  the  PLATOITOC  PHILOS- 
OPHY continued  to  exercise  a  direct  and  indirect  influence  upon 
Christian  theology,  though  not  so  unrestrainedly  and  nalvelj 
as  in  his  case.1  "We  can  trace  it  especially  in  Clement  of  Alex- 

1  On  the  general  subject  of  the  relation  of  Platonism  to  Christianity,  see 
Ackerraann,  Das  Christliche  im  Plato  (1835,  Engl.  transl.  by  Asbury,  with  pre- 
fece  by  Shedd,  1861);  Baur,  Socrates  und  Ohristus  (1837,  and  again  ed.  by 
Zeller,  1876) ;  Tayler  Lewis,  Plato  against  the  Atheists  (1845)  ;  Hampden,  The 
Fathers  of  the  Greek  Philosophy  (1862) ;  Cocker,  Christianity  and  Greek  Philoso- 
phy (1870),  Ueberweg's  History  of  Philosophy  (Engl.  transl.  1872),  and  an  ex- 
cellent art  of  Prof.  W.  S.  Tyler,  of  Amherst  College^  in  the  third  vol  of 
Schaff-Herzog's  ltd.  Encycl.  (1883,  p.  1850-53).  On  the  relation  of  Justin  to 
Platonism  and  heathenism,  see  von  Engelhardt,  I.  c.  447-484 


\  173.  JUSTIN  THE  PHILOSOPHER  AND  MARTYR.     725 

andria  and  Origen;  and  even  in  St.  Augustin,  who  confessed 
that  it  kindled  in  him  an  incredible  fire.  In  the  scholastic 
period  it  gave  way  to  the  Aristotelian  philosophy,  which  was 
better  adapted  to  clear,  logical  statements.  But  Platonism 
maintained  its  influence  over  Maximus,  John  of  Damascus, 
Thomas  Aquinas,  and  other  schoolmen,  through  the  pseudo- 
Dionysian  writings  which  first  appear  at  Constantinople  in  532, 
and  were  composed  probably  in  the  fifth  century. .  They  repre- 
sent a  whole  system  of  the  universe  under  the  aspect  of  a  double 
hierarchy,  a  heavenly  and  an  earthly,  each  consisting  of  three 
triads. 

The  Platonic  philosophy  offered  many  points  of  resemblance 
to  Christianity.  It  is  spiritual  and  idealistic,  maintaining  the 
supremacy  of  the  spirit  over  matter,  of  eternal  ideas  over  all  tem- 
porary phenomena,  and  the  pre-existence  and  immortality  of  the 
soul ;  it  is  theistic,  making  the  supreme  God  above  all  the  second* 
ary  deities,  the  beginning,  middle,  and  end  of  all  things;  it  is 
ethical,  looking  towards  present  and  future  rewards  and  punish- 
ments ;  it  is  religious,  basing  ethics,  politics,  and  physics  upon 
the  authority  of  the  Lawgiver  and  Ruler  of  the  universe ;  it 
leads  thus  to  the  very  threshold  of  the  revelation  of  God  iq 
Christ,  though  it  knows  not  this  blessed  name  nor  his  saving  grace, 
and  obscures  its  glimpses  of  truth  by  serious  errors.  Upon  the 
whole  the  influence  of  Platonism,  especially  as  represented  in 
the  moral  essays  of  Plutarch,  has  been  and  is  to  this  day  ele- 
vating, stimulating,  and  healthy,  calling  the  mind  away  from 
the  vanities  of  earth  to  the  contemplation  of  eternal  truth, 
beauty,  and  goodness.  To  not  a  few  of  the  noblest  teachers  of 
the  church,  from  Justin  the  philosopher  to  Neander  the  his- 
torian, Plato  has  been  a  schoolmaster  who  led  them  to  Christ. 

NOTES, 

The  theology  and  philosophy  of  Justin  are  learnedly  discussed  by 
Maran,  and  recently  by  Mohler  and  Freppel  in  the  Eoman  Catholic  in- 
terest, and  in  favor  of  his  fall  orthodoxy.  Among  Protestants  his  or- 
thodoxy was  first  doubted  by  the  authors  of  the  "Magdeburg  Centuries," 
who  judged  hi™  from  the  Lutheran  standpoint. 


726  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Modern  Protestant  historians  viewed  him  chiefly  with  reference  to  the 
conflict  between  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christianity.  Credner  first  en- 
deavored to  prove,  by  an  exhaustive  investigation  (1832),  that  Justin 
was  a  Jewish  Christian  of  the  Ebionitic  type,  with  the  Platonic  Logos- 
doctrine  attached  to  his  low  creed  as  an  appendix.  He  was  followed  by 
the  Tubingen  critics,  Schwegler  (1846),  Zeller,  Hilgenfeld,  and  Baur 
himself  ilSoS.i.  Baur,  however,  moderated  Credner's  view,  and  put 
Justin  rather  between  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christianity,  calling  him  a 
Pauline  in  fact,  but  not  in  name  ("er  ist  der  Sache  nach  Pauliner,  aber 
fan  X<iwn  iwh  will  er  es  nichf  sein  ").  This  shaky  judgment  shows  the 
unsatisfactory  character  of  the  Tubingen  construction  of  Catholic  Chris- 
tianity as  the  result  of  a  conflux  and  compromise  between  Ebionism  and 
Paulinism. 

Rittchl  (in  the  second  ed  of  his  Entstehung  der  altkatholiscken  Kirche, 
1>57)  broke  loose  from  this  scheme  and  represented  ancient  Catholicism 
as  a  development  of  Getitfle  Christianity,  and  Justin  as  the  type  of  the 
"l-atholisch  mrdwde  Heidenchristenthum,'9  who  was  influenced  by  Pauline 
ideas,  but  unable  to  comprehend  them  in  their  depth  and  fulness,  and 
thus  degraded  the  standpoint  of  freedom  to  a  new  form  of  legalism.  This 
he  calls  a  *'  herabgeZnaimener  or  abgeachwdehter  Pauliiiismus"  Engel- 
hardt  goes  a  step  further,  and  explains  this  degradation  of  Paulinism 
from  the  influences  of  Hellenic  heathenism  and  the  Platonic  and  Stoic 
modes  of  though:.  He  says  (p.  48o) :  "Justin  was  at  once  a  Christian 
and  a  heathen.  We  must  acknowledge  his  Christianity  and  his  heathen- 
ism in  order  to  understand  him."  Harnack  (in  a  review  of  E.,  1878) 
agrees  with  Mm,  and  lays  even  greater  stress  on  the  heathen  element. 
Against  this  Stahelin  (1880)  justly  protests,  and  vindicates  his  truly 
Christian  character. 

Among  recent  French  writers,  Aube  represents  Justin's  theology  super- 
ficially as  nothing  more  than  popularized  heathen  philosophy."  Eenan 
{p.  3S9)  calls  his  philosophy  "  une  sorte  cFeclectisme  fondt  sur  un  rational- 
imae  myxtic'*  '  Freppel  returns  to  Maran's  treatment,  and  tries  to  make 
the  philosopher  and  martyr  of  the  second  century  even  a  Vatican 
Bomanist  of  the  nineteenth. 

For  the  best  estimates  of  his  character  and  merits  see  Meander, 
Semisch,  Otto,  von  Engelhardt,  Stahelin,  Donaldson  (II.  147  sqq.),  and 
Holland  (in  Smith  and  Wace). 

§  174.  The  Other  Greek  Apologists.     TaMan. 
Lit.  on  the  later  Greek  Apologists : 

OTTO:  Corpus Apologetarum  Christ  Vol.  VI.  (1861):  TATiAm  ASSY^ 
EII  Opera;  vol.  VII. :  ATHEXAGOBAS;  vol.  VIII. :  THEOPHILUS; 
vol.  IX. :  HERMIAS,  QUADBATUS,  ABISTIDES,  ARISTO,  MILTIA- 
DBS.  MELITO,  APOLLINARIS  (Reliquiae).  Older  ed.  by  MARANTJS, 
174:>,  reissued  by  Migne,  1857,  in  Tom.  VI.  of  his  ll  Patrol.  Gr."  A 
new  ed  by  0.  v.  G-EBHARDT  and  R  SCHWARTZ,  begun  Leipz.  1888. 


?  174.  THE  OTHER  GREEK  APOLOGISTS.    TATIAN.    727 

The  fchird  vol.  of  DONALDSON'S  Critical  History  of  Christ.  Lit.  and  Doctr., 
etc.  (Lond.  1866)  is  devoted  to  the  same  Apologists.  Comp.  also 
KEIM'S  Rom  und  das  Christenthum  (1SS1),  p.  439-495  ;  and  on  the 
MSS.  and  early  traditions  HARXACK'S  Texte,  etc.  Band  I.  Heft.  1 
and  2  (1882),  and  SCHWARTZ  in  his  ed.  (1888). 

On  TATIAN  see  ?  181,  p.  493-i96. 

TATIAN  of  Assyria  (110-172)  was  a  pupil  of  Justin  Martyr 
whom  he  calls  a  most  admirable  man  (#ay//atf*wra7uc),  and  like 
him  an  itinerant  Christian  philosopher ;  but  unlike  him  he 
seems  to  have  afterwards  wandered  to  the  borders  of  heretical 
Gnosticism,  or  at  least  to  an  extreme  type  of  asceticism.  He  is 
charged  with  having  condemned  marriage  as  a  corruption  and 
denied  that  Adam  was  saved,  because  Paul  says :  "  AVe  all  die 
in  Adam."  He  was  an  independent,  vigorous  and  earnest  man, 
but  restless,  austere,  and  sarcastic.1  In  both  respects  he  some- 
what resembles  Tertullian.  Before  his  conversion  he  had 
studied  mythology,  history,  poetry,  and  chronology,  attended 
the  theatre  and  athletic  games,  became  disgusted  with  the  world, 
and  was  led  by  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  to  the  Christian  faith.2 

"We  have  from  him  an  apologetic  work  addressed  To  the 
Greeks.3  It  was  written  in  the  reign  of  Marcus  Aurelius,  pro- 

1  Comp.  Donaldson,  III.  27  sqq. 

2  He  tells  his  conversion  himself,  Ad  Gfr.  c.  29  and  30.    The  following  pas- 
sage (29)  is  striking:  "While  I  was  giving  my  most  earnest  attention  to  ths 
matter  [the  discovery  of  the  truth],  I  happened  to  meet  with  certain  barbaric 
writings,  too  old  to  be  compared  with  the  opinions  of  the  Greeks,  and  too 
divine  to  be  compared  with  their  errors;  and  I  was  led  to  put  faith  in  these 
by  the  unpretending  cast  of  the  language,  the  inartificial  character  of  the 
writers,  the  foreknowledge  displayed  of  future  events,  the  excellent  quality  of 
the  precepts  and  the  declaration  of  the  government  of  the  universe  as  centred 
in  one  Being.    And,  my  soul  being  taught  of  God,  I  discerned  that  the  former 
class  of  writings  lead  to  condemnation,  but  that  these  put  an  end  to  the  slavery 
that  is  in  the  world,  and  rescue  us  from  a  multiplicity  of  rulers  and  ten  thou- 
sand tyrants,  while  they  give  us,  not  indeed  what  we  had  not  before  received, 
but  what  we  had  received,  but  were  prevented  by  error  from  retaining." 

*n/odf  "BAA^flf,  Grotto  ad  Grsecos.  The  best  critical  edition  by  Ed. 
Schwartz,  Leipsig,4  1888.  On  the  MSS.  see  also  Otto's  Proleg.,  and  Har- 
nack's  Texte,  etc.  Bd.  I.  Heft.  I.  p.  1-97.  English  translation,  by  B.  P. 
Pratfcen,  in  the  "Ante-Nicene  library,"  III.  1-48;  Am.  ed.  II. ,  59  sqq. 
The  specimens  below  are  from  this  version,  compared  with  the  Greek. 


728  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

bably  in  Rome,  and  shows  no  traces  of  heresy.  He  vindicates 
Christianity  as  the  "  philosophy  of  the  barbarians,"  and  exposes 
the  contradictions,  absurdities,  and  immoralities  of  the  Greek  my- 
thology from  actual  knowledge  and  with  much  spirit  and  acute- 
ness,  but  with  vehement  contempt  and  bitterness.  He  proves 
that  Moses  and  the  prophets  were  older  and  wiser  than  the 
Greek  philosophers,  and  gives  much  information  on  the  anti- 
quity of  the  Jews.  Eusebius  calls  this  "  the  best  and  most  use- 
ful of  his  writings,"  and  gives  many  extracts  in  his  Pt  ceparatio 
Evangelica. 

The  following  specimens  show  his  power  of  ridicule   and 
his  radical  antagonism  to  Greek  mythology  and  philosophy : 

Ch.  21. — Doctrine*  of  the  Christians  and  Greeks  respecting  God  compared. 

"We  do  not  act  as  fools,  0  Greeks,  nor  utter  idle  tales,  when  we  an- 
nounce that  God  was  born  in  the  form  of  a  man.  (sv  av$p6irov  popffi 
yeyovtvai).  I  call  on  you  who  reproach  us  to  compare  your  mythical  ac- 
counts with  our  narrations.  Athene,  as  they  say,  took  the  form  of  Dei- 
phobus  for  the  sake  of  Hector,  and  the  unshorn  Phcebus  for  the  sake  of 
Admetus  fed  the  trailing-footed  oxen,  and  the  spouse  of  Zeus  came  as  an 
old  woman  to  Semele.  But,  while  you  treat  seriously  such  things,  how 
can  you  deride  us?  Your  Asclepios  died,  and  he  who  ravished  fifty  vir- 
gins in  one  night  at  Thespise,  lost  his  life  by  delivering  himself  to  the  de- 
vouring flame.  Prometheus,  fastened  to  Caucasus,  suffered  punishment 
for  his  good  deeds  to  men.  According  to  you,  Zeus  is  envious,  and  hides 
the  dream  from  men,  wishing  their  destruction.  Wherefore,  looking  at 
your  own  memorials,  vouchsafe  us  your  approval,  though  it  were  only  as 
dealing  in.  legends  similar  to  your  own^  We,  however,  do  not  deal  in 
folly,  but  your  legends  are  only  idle  tales.  If  you  speak  of  the  origin 
of  the  gods,  you  also  declare  them  to  be  mortal  For  what  reason  is 
Hera  now  never  pregnant?  Has  she  grown  old?  or  is  there  no  one  to 
give  you  information?  Believe  me  now,0  Greeks,  and  do  not  resolve 
your  myths  and  gods  into  allegory.  If  you  attempt  to  do  this,  the  divine 
nature  as  held  by  you  is  overthrown  by  your  own  selves ;  for,  if  the 
demons  with  you  are  such  as  they  are  said  to  be,  they  are  worthless  as  to 
character;  or,  if  regarded  as  symbols  of  the  powers  of  nature,  they  are 
not  what  they  are  called.  But  I  cannot  be  persuaded  to  pay  religious 
homage  to  the  natural  elements,  nor  can  I  undertake  to  persuade  my 
neighbor.  And  Metrodorus  of  Lampsacus,  in  his  treatise  concerning 
Homer,  has  argued  very  foolishly,  turning  everything  into  allegory.  For 
he  says  that  neither  Hera,  nor  Athene,  nor  Zeus  are  what  those  persons 
suppose  who  consecrate  to  tliem  sacred  enclosures  and  groves,  but  part* 


\  174.  THE  OTHER  GREEK  APOLOGISTS.    TATIAN.    729 

of  nature  and  certain  arrangements  of  the  elements.  Hector  also,  and 
Achilles,  and  Agamemnon,  and  all  the  Greeks  in  general,  and  the  Barba- 
rians with  Helen  and  Paris,  being  of  the  same  nature,  you  will  of-  course 
say  are  introduced  merely  for  the  sake  of  the  machinery  of  the  poem,  not 
one  of  these  personages  having  really  existed. 

But  these  things  we  have  put  forth  only  for  argument's  sake ;  for  it  is 
not  allowable  even  to  compare  our  notions  of  God  with  those  who  are 
wallowing  in  matter  and  mud." 

Ch.  25.  Boastings  and  quarrels  of  the  philosophers. 

"  What  great  and  wonderful  things  have  your  philosophers  effected  ? 
They  leave  uncovered  one  of  their  shoulders ;  they  let  their  hair  grow 
long ;  they  cultivate  their  beards ;  their  nails  are  like  the  claws  of  wild 
beasts.  Though  they  say  that  they  want  nothing,  yet,  like  Proteus  [the 
Cynic,  Proteus  Peregrinus  known  to  us  from  Lucian],  they  need  a  cur- 
rier for  their  wallet,  and  a  weaver  for  their  mantle,  and  a  woodcutter  for 
their  staff,  and  they  need  the  rich  [to  invite  them  to  banquets] ,  and  a 
cook  also  for  their  gluttony.  0  man  competing  with  the  dog  [cynic  phi- 
losopher], you  know  not  God,  and  so  have  turned  to  the  imitation  of  an 
irrational  animal.  You  cry  out  in  public  with  an  assumption  of  author- 
ity, and  take  upon  you  to  avenge  your  own  self;  and  if  you  receive  noth- 
ing, you  indulge  in  abuse,  for  philosophy  is  with  you  the  art  of  getting 
money.  You  follow  the  doctrines  of  Plato,  and  a  disciple  of  Epicurus 
lifts  up  his  voice  to  oppose  you.  Again,  you  wish  to  be  a  disciple  of 
Aristotle,  and  a  follower  of  Democritus  rails  at  you.  Pythagoras  says 
that  he  was  Euphorbus,  and  he  is  the  heir  of  the  doctrine  of  Pherecydes, 
but  Aristotle  impugns  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  You  who  receive 
from  your  predecessors  doctrines  which  clash  with  one  another,  you  the 
inharmonious,  are  fighting  against  the  harmonious.  .  One  of  you  asserts 
"that  God  is  body,"  but  I  assert  that  He  is  without  body;  "that  the 
world  is  indestructible,"  but  I  assert  that  it  is  to  be  destroyed ;  "  that  a 
conflagration  will  take  place  at  various  times,"  but  I  say  that  it  will  come 
to  pass  once  for  all;  "that  Minos  and  Rhadamanthus  are  judges,"  but  I 
say  that  God  Himself  is  Judge ;  "  that  the  soul  alone  is  endowed  with 
immortality,"  but  I  say  that  the  flesh  also  is  endowed  with  it.  What 
injury  do  we  inflict  upon  you,  0  Greeks?  Why  do  you  hate  those  who 
follow  the  word  of  God,  as  if  they  were  the  vilest  of  mankind  ?  It  is 
not  we  who  eat  human  flesh — they  among  you  who  assert  such  a  thing 
have  been  suborned  as  false  witnesses ;  it  is  among  you  that  Pelops  is 
made  a  supper  for  the  gods,  although  beloved  by  Poseidon ;  and  Kronos 
devours  his  children,  and  Zeus  swallows  Metis." 

'  Of  great  importance  for  the  history  of  the  canon  and  of  exe- 
gesis is  Tatian's  Diatessaron  or  Harmony  of  the  Four  Gospels, 


730  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

imee  widely  circulated,  then  lost,  but  now  measurably  recovered.1 
Theodoret  found  more  than  two  hundred  copies  of  it  in  his  dio- 
cese. Eplmem  the  Syrian  wrote  a  commentary  on  it  which  was 
preserved  in  an  Armenian  translation  by  the  Mechitarists  at 
Venice,  translated  into  Latin  by  Aucher  (1841),  and  published 
with  a  learned  introduction  by  Mosinger  (1876).  From  this 
commentary  Zahn  has  restored  the  text  (1881).  Since  then  an 
Arabic  translation  of  the  Diatessaron  itself  has  been  discovered 
and  published  by  Ciasea  (1888).  The  Diatessaron  begins  with 
the  Prologue  of  John  (Inprincipio  erat  Verbum,  etc.),  follows 
his  order  of  the  festivals,  assuming  a  two  years'  ministry,  and 
makes  a  connected  account  of  the  life  of  Christ  from  the  four 
Evangelists.  There  is  no  heretical  tendency,  except  perhaps  in 
the  omission  of  Christ's  human  genealogies  in  Matthew  and  Luke, 
which  may  have  been  due  to  the  influence  of  a  docetic  spirit. 
This  Diatessaron  conclusively  proves  the  existence  and  ecclesias- 
tical use  of  the  four  Gospels,  no  more  and  no  less,  in  the  middle 
of  the  second  century. 

§  175.  Athenagoras. 

OTTO,  vol.  VII. ;  MIGNE,  VI.  890-1023.    Am.  ed.  by  W.  B.  OWEN",  N.  Y., 

1S75. 
CLARICE:  De  Atkettagorcz  vita,  scriptis,  doctritia  (Lugd.  Bat.   1819); 

DoXALi-rfOX,  III.  1»}7-178;  HARXACK,  Tezte,  1. 176  sqq.,  and  his  art. 

4*Atheu."  in  Herzog,3  I.  748-750;  SPEXCEB  HAJSSEL  in  Smith 

and  \Vace,  I.  204-207;  RENAX,  Narc-Aurtle,  382-386. 

ATHEXAGORAS  was  "  a  Christian  philosopher  of  Athens,"  dur- 
ing the  reign  of  Marcus  Aurelius  (A.  D.,  161-180),  but  is 
otherwise  entirely  unknown  and  not  even  mentioned  by  Euse- 
bius,  Jerome,  and  Photius.2  His  philosophy  was  Platonic,  but 

1  Tu  &a  rsssdaur.    Eusebiu-S  H,  R  IV.  29,  and  Theodoret,  Fab.  Hcer  I.  20, 
notice  the  Diatessaron.    Comp.  Mosinger's  introduction  to  Ms  ed.  of  Ephrcem't 
Com.  i  Venet.  1876),  Zahn's  Tartan's  Diatessar&n,  (1881),  and  Ciasca's  edition 
of  the  Arabic  version  1 18S3i  noticed  p.  493. 

2  The  account  of  Philippus  Sideteq,  deacon  of  Chrysostom,  as  preserved  by 
Xicephonis  Callistus,  5^  entirely  unreliable.    It  makes  Athenagoras  the  first 
head  of  the  school  of  Alexandria  under  Hadrian,  and  the  teacher  of  Clement 
of  Alex.— a  palpable  chronological  blunder— and  states  that  he  addressed  his 


§175.  ATHENAGORAS.  731 

modified  by  the  prevailing  eclecticism  of  his  age.  He  is  less 
original  as  an  apologist  than  Justin  and  Tatian,  but  more  ele- 
gant and  classical  in  style. 

He  addressed  an  Apology  or  Intercession  in  behalf  of  the 
Christians  to  the  Emperors  Marcus  Aurelius  and  Commodus.1 
He  reminds  the  rulers  that  all  their  subjects  are  allowed  to  follow 
their  customs  without  hindrance  except  the  Christians  who  are 
vexed,  plundered  and  killed  on  no  other  pretence  than  that  they 
bear  the  name  of  their  Lord  and  Master,  We  do  not  object  to 
punishment  if  we  are  found  guilty,  but  we  demand  a  fair  trial. 
A  name  is  neither  good  nor  bad  in  itself,  but  becomes  good  or 
bad  according  to  the  character  and  deeds  under  it.  We  are  ac- 
cused of  three  crimes,  atheism,  Thyestean  banquets  (cannibal- 
ism), Oedipodean  connections  (incest).  Then  he  goes  on  to  re- 
fute these  charges,  especially  that  of  atheism  and  incest.  He 
does  it  calmly,  clearly,  eloquently,  and  conclusively.  By  a 
divine  law,  he  says,  wickedness  is  ever  fighting  against  virtue. 
Thus  Socrates  was  condemned  to  death,  and  thus  are  stories  in- 
vented against  us.  We  are  so  far  from  committing  the  excesses 
of  which  we  are  accused,  that  we  are  not  permitted  to  lust  after 
a  woman  iu  thought.  We  are  so  particular  on  this  point  that 
we  either  do  not  marry  at  all,  or  we  marry  for  the  sake  of  chil- 
dren, and  only  once  in  the  course  of  our  life.  Here  comes  out 
his  ascetic  tendency  which  he  shares  with  his  age.  He  even 
condemns  second  marriage  as  "  decent  adultery."  The  Christ- 
ians are  more  humane  than  the  heathen,  and  condemn,  as  mur- 
der, the  practices  of  abortion,  infanticide,  and  gladiatorial  shows. 

Apokgy  to  Hadrian  and  Antoninus,  which  is  contradicted  by  the  inscription. 
But  in  a  fragment  of  Methodius,  DQ  Resurrections,  there  is  a  quotation  from 
the  Apology  of  Athenagoras  (c.  24)  with  his  name  attached. 

1  ILpsapda  (embassy)  Kept  Xptcrriav&v,  Legatio  (also  SupplicatiOj  Iniercessio) 
pro  Christianis.  Some  take  the  title  in  its  usual  sense,  and  assume  that 
Aihenagoras  really  went  as  a  deputation  to  the  emperor.  The  book  was  often 
copied  in  the  fifteenth  century,  and  there  are  seventeen  MSS.  extant ;  the  three 
best  contain  also  the  treatise  on  the  Resurrection.  Both  were  edited  by  Henry 
Stephens,  1557,  and  often  since.  The  objections  against  the  genuineness  aw 
weak  and  have  been  refuted. 


732  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Another  treatise  under  his  name,  "  On  the  Resurrection  of  tin. 
Dead"  is  a  masterly  argument  drawn  from  the  wisdom,  power, 
and  justice  of  God,  as  well  as  from  the  destiny  of  man,  for  this 
doctrine  which  was  especially  offensive  to  the  Greek  mind.  It 
was  a  discourse  actually  delivered  before  a  philosophical  audience. 
For  this  reason  perhaps  he  does  not  appeal  to  the  Scriptures. 

All  historians  put  a  high  estimate  on  Athenagoras.  "  He 
writes,"  says  Donaldson,  "as  a  man  who  is  determined  that 
the  real  state  of  the  case  should  be  exactly  known.  He  intro- 
duces similes,  he  occasionally  has  an  antithesis,  he  quotes  poetry, 
but  always  he  has  his  main  object  distinctly  before  his  mind, 
and  he  neither  makes  a  useless  exhibition  of  his  own  powers,  nor 
distracts  the  reader  by  digressions.  His  Apology  is  the  best  de- 
fence of  the  Christians  produced  in  that  age."  Spencer  Mansel 
declares  him  "  decidedly  superior  to  most  of  the  Apologists,  ele- 
gant, free  from  superfluity  of  language,  forcible  in  style,  and 
rising  occasionally  into  great  powers  of  description,  and  in  his 
reasoning  remarkable  for  clearness  and  cogency." 

Tillemont  found  traces  of  Montanism  in  the  condemnation  of 
second  marriage  and  the  view  of  prophetic  inspiration,  but  the 
former  was  common  among  the  Greeks,  and  the  latter  was  also 
held  by  Justin  il.  and  others.  Athenagoras  says  of  the  pro- 
phets that  they  were  in  an  ecstatic  condition  of  mind  and  that 
the  Spirit  of  God  "  used  them  as  if  a  flute-player  were  breathing 
into  his  flute."  Montanus  used  the  comparison  of  the  plectrum 
and  the  lyre. 

§  176.  Wieophilus  of  Antioch. 

OTTO,  vol.  VIII.  MIGNE,  VI.  col.  1023-1168. 

DoxAjj>30tf,  Critical  History,  ILL  63-106.    EENAU,  Marc-Aur.  386  sqq 

THEOD.  ZAHN  :  Der  Ecangelien-commentar  des  TheophiZiis  von  Antiochien. 
Erlangen  1883  (302  pages).  The  second  part  of  his  Forschung&n  zur 
Gesch.  cfes  nentffitam.  Krtnons  und  der  alikirehlichen  Lit.  Also  his  Supple- 
mention  Ckmentirwm.  1884,  p.  198-276  (in  self-defense  against  H.irnack). 

HABXACK,  Texte,  etc.  Bd.  L,  Heft  IL,  282-298.,  and  Heft.  IV.  (1883),  p. 
97-17-5  (on  the  Gospel  Commentary  of  Theopk,  against  Zahn). 

A.  HAUCK:  Zur  TkeopMwfrage,  Leipz.  1844,  and  inHerzog,axv.  544. 

W.  BORNEHAXN:  Zur  TheopMlmfmge;  In  "Brieger's  Zeitschrift  £ 
Kirchen-Geschichte"  1888,  p.  169-283. 


k  176.  THEOPHILUS  OF  ANTIOCH.  733 

THEOPHILTJS  was  converted  from  heathenism  by  the  study  of 
the  Scriptures,  and  occupied  the  episcopal  see  at  Antioch,  the 
sixth  from  the  Apostles,  during  the  later  part  of  the  reign  of 
Marcus  Aurelius.  He  died-  about  A.  D.  18 1.1 

His  principal  work,  and  the  only  one  which  has  come  down 
to  us,  is  his  three  books  to  Autolycus,  an  educated  heathen 
friend.2  His  main  object  is  to  convince  him  of  the  falsehood  of 
idolatry,  and  of  the  truth  of  Christianity.  He  evinces  extensive 
knowledge  of  Grecian  literature,  considerable  philosophical 
talent,  and  a  power  of  graphic  and  elegant  composition.  His 
treatment  of  the  philosophers  and  poets  is  very  severe  and  con- 
trasts unfavorably  with  the  liberality  of  Justin  Martyr.  He 
admits  elements  of  truth  in  Socrates  and  Plato,  but  charges  them 
with  having  stolen  the  same  from  the  prophets.  He  thinks  that 
the  Old  Testament  already  contained  all  the  truths  which  man 
requires  to  know.  He  was  the  first  to  use  the  term  "  triad "  for 
the  holy  Trinity,  and  found  this  mystery  already  in  the  words : 
"  Let  us  make  man  "  (Gen.  1 :  26) ;  for,  says  he,  "  God  spoke 
to  no  other  but  to  his  own  Reason  and  his  own  Wisdom,"  that 
is,  to  the  Logos  and  the  Holy  Spirit  hypostatized.3  He  also  first 

1  Eusebius  H.  E.  IV.  20,  and  in  his  Chron.  ad  ann.  IX.  M.  Aurelii.    His 
supposed  predecessors  were  Peter,  Evodios,  Ignatius,  Heron,  Cornelius,  and 
Eros.     Comp.  Harnack,  Die  Zeit  des  Ignat.  und  die  Chronologic  der  Antiochen. 
Bischqfe  bis  Tyrannus  (Leipz.  1878  p.  56).    Jerome  (De  Vir.  ill.  25;  Ep.  ad 
Algae-,  and  Prcef.  in  Com.  Matth.}y  Lactantius  (Inst.  div.  I.  23),  and  Gennadius 
of  Massila  (De  Vir.  itt.  34)  likewise  mention  Theophilus  and  his  writings,  but 
the  later  Greeks,  even  Photius,  seem  to  have  forgotten  him.    See  Harnack, 
Texte,  I.  282  pqq.    Kenan  calls  him  "un  doeteur  trtsfecond,  un  catechiste  don& 
d'un  grand  talent  d' 'exposition,  un  polemiste  habile  xelon  lets  idees  du  temps." 

2  Qeo$r/.ov  Trpog  AVTO^VKOV,  TheopJiUi  ad  Autolycum.  *  We  have  three  MSS.  of 
his  books  Ad  Autolycum,  the  best  from  the  eleventh  century,  preserved  in 
Venice.    See  Otto,  and  Donaldson,  p.  105,    The  first  printed  edition  appeared 
at  Zurich,  1546.    Three  English  translations,  by  J.  Betty,  Oxf.  1722,  by  W. 
B  Flower,  Lond.  I860,  and  Marcus  Dods,  Edinb.  1867  (in  the  "  Ante-Nicene 
Libr."  III.  49-133). 

3  AdAutoL  II.  15  (in  MigneYI.  1077),  where  the  first  three  days  of  creation 
are  called  TVTTOC  TTJ£  rptddo^  rov  #eov,  KOI  rov  7i6yov  avrovj  Kal  r^g  Go$iag  CVTOV. 
Comp.  c.  18  (col.  1081),  where  the  trinity  is  found  in  Gen.  1 :  26.    In  the 
Gospel  Com.  of  Th.  the  word  trinitas  occurs  five  times  (see  Zafrn,  I.  e.  143). 
Among  Latin  writers,  Tertullian  is  the  first  who  uses  the  term  trinitas  ( 
Prax.  4;  De  Pud,  21). 


73-i  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

quoted  the  Gospel  of  John  by  name,1  but  it  was  undoubt- 
edly known  and  used  before  by  Tatian,  Athenagoras,  Justin, 
and  by  the  Gnostics,  and  can  be  traced  as  far  back  as  125  within 
the  lifetime  of  many  personal  disciples  of  the  Apostle,  Theo- 
philus describes  the  Christians  as  having  a  sound  mind,  practis- 
ing self-restraint,  preserving  marriage  with  one,  keeping  chastity, 
expelling  injustice,  rooting  out  sin,  carrying  out  righteousness 
as  a  habit,  regulating  then*  conduct  by  law,  being  ruled  by 
truth,  preserving  grace  and  peace,  and  obeying  God  as  king. 
They  are  forbidden  to  visit  gladiatorial  shows  and  other  public 
amusements,  that  their  eyes  and  ears  may  not  be  defiled.  They 
are  commanded  to  obey  authorities  and  to  pray  for  them,  but 
not  to  worship  them. 

The  other  works  of  Theophilus,  polemical  and  exegetical, 
are  lost,  Eusebius  mentions  a  book  against  Hermogenes,  in 
which  lie  used  proofs  from  the  Apocalypse  of  John,  another 
against  Marcinn  and  ''certain  catechetical  books "  (xarqzqTexa 
frftta).  Jerome  mentions  in  addition  commentaries  on  the 
Proverbs,  and  on  the  Gospel,  but  doubts  their  genuineness. 
There  exists  under  his  name,  though  only  in  Latin,  a  sort  of 
exegetical  Gospel  Harmony,  which  is  a  later  compilation  of 
uncertain  date  and  authorship. 

2TOTES. 

Jerome  is  the  only  ancient  writer  who  mentions  a  Commentary  or 
Commentaries  of  Theophilus  on  the  Gospel,  but  adds  that  they  are  in- 
ferior to  his  other  books  in  elegance  and  style;  thereby  indicating  a 
d<'wbt  as  to  their  genuineness.  De  Vir  ill.  25:  "  Legi  sub  nomine  eius 
ThMpJittr  is  EVASTGELIUM  et  in  Proverbia  Salomonis  COMMESTARIOS, 
;•»/'  wilii  e>un  superiorum  Tolunn'num  [the  works  Contra  Marcionem,  Ad 
.iff  '(W/M,  an<l  Contra  Hermogeneni\  elegantia  etphrasi  non  videntur  con- 
<v/-'>  ,"<•/'  He  alludes  to  the  Gospel  Commentary  in  two  other  passages  (in 
rhe  Prei'.  in  his  dim*  on  Matthew,  and  Ep.  121  (ad  Algasiam),  and  quotes 
from  it  the  exposition  of  the  parable  of  the  unjust  steward  (Luke  16  : 
I  sqq.;.  Eusebius  may  possibly  have  included  the  book  in  the  mrrixnTtha. 
3^3/^a  which  he  ascribes  to  Theophilus. 

1  Ad  Autol.  II.  2L':  «'The  Holy  Scriptures  teach  us,  and  all  who  were  moved 
by  the  Spirit,  union;*  whom  John  says:  l In  the  beginning  was  the  Word 
1  Logo*  i,  and  the  \Ynid  was  with  God/  "  He  then  quotes  John  1 :  g. 


?  176.  THEOPHILUS  OF  ANTJOCH.  735 

A  Latin  Version  of  this  Commentary  was  first  published  (from  MSS. 
act  indicated  and  since  lost)  by  Marg.  de  la  Bigne  in  tiacrtp  Bibliothecce 
Patrum,  Paris  1576,  Tom.  V.  col.  169-196 ;  also  by  Otto  in  the  Corp. 
ApoL  VIII.  278-354,  and  with  learned  notes  by  Zahn  in  the  second  vol. 
of  his  Forschungen  zur  Gesch.  des  neutesL  Kanons  (1883),  p.  31-85.  The 
Commentary  begins  with  an  explanation  of  the  symbolical  import  of  the 
four  Gospels  as  follows :  "  Quatuor  evangel ia  quatuor  animalibus  Jigurata 
Jesum  Christum  demomtrant  Matthosus  enim  salvatorem  nostrum  natum 
passumque  homini  comparavit.  Marcus  leonis  gerens  figuram  a  solitudine 
incipit  dicens  :  f  Vox  damomtis  in  dezerto :  parateviam  Domini.'  sane  qui 
regnat  invictus.  Joannes  habet  si/nil itudi/iem  ayuilce,  quod  ab  hni-s  alia 
petiverit;  ait  enim:  '  In  principle*  erat  Verbum,et  verbum  erat  opud  Deum, 
et  Deus  erat  Verbum;  hoc  erat  in  principio  apud  Deum  ;'  vel  quid  Christus 
resurgens  volavit  ad  ccelos.  Lucas  vituli  speciem  gestaf,  ad  cuius  instar  sal- 
vator  noster  est  immolatus,  vel  quod  sacerdotii  figurat  qfficium."3  The  posi- 
tion of  Luke  as  the  fourth  is  very  peculiar  and  speaks  for  great  antiquity. 
Then  follows  a  brief  exposition  of  the  genealogy  of  Christ  by  Matthew 
with  the  remark  ihat  Matthew  traces  the  origin  {f per  reges"  Luke  "per 
tacerdotes"  The  first  book  of  the  Commentary  is  chiefly  devoted  to 
Matthew,  the  second  and  third  to  Luke,  the  fourth  to  John.  .It  concludes 
with  an  ingenious  allegory  representing  Christ  as  a  gardener  (who 
appeared  to  Mary  Magdalene,  John  20  :  15),  and  the  church  as  his  gar- 
den full  of  rich  flowers)  as  follows  (see  Zahn,  p.  85) :  "  Hortus  Domini  eat 
ecclesia  catholica,  in  qua  sunt  rosae  martyrum,  lilia  virginum,  viotae 
viduarum,  kedera  coniugum ;  nam  ilia,  qua:  (Estimabat  eum  nortulanum 
esse  significabat  scilicet  eum  plantantem  dtiersis  lirtutibus  credentium 
vitam.  Amen.^ 

Dr.  Zahn,  in  his  recent  monograph  (1883),  which  abounds  in  rare 
patristic  learning,  vindicates  this  Commentary  to  Theophilus  of  Antioch 
and  dates  the  translation  from  the  third  century.  If  so,  we  would  have 
here  a  work  of  great  apologetic  as  well  as  exegetical  importance, 
especially  for  the  history  of  the  canon  and  the  text;  for  Theophilus 
stood  midway  between  Justin  Martyr  and  Irenseus  and  would  be  the 
oldest  Christian  exegete.  But  a  Nicene  or  post-Nicene  development  of 
theology  and  church  organization  is  clearly  indicated  by  the  familiar  use 
of  such  terms  as  regnum  Christi  catholicum,  catholica  doctrina,  catkolicwn 
dogina^  sacerdos,  peccatum  originale,  monachi,  sceculares,  paganL  The 
suspicion  of  a  later  date  is  confirmed  by  the  discovery  of  a  MS.  of  this 
commentary  in  Brussels,  with  an  anonymous  preface  which  declares  it  to4 
be  a  compilation.  Harnack,  who  made  this  discovery,  ably  refutes  the 
conclusions  of  ZaLn,  and  tries  to  prove  that  the  commentary  ascribed  to 
Theophilus  is  a  Latin  work  by  an  anonymous  author  of  the  fifth  or  sixth 
century  (470-520).  Zahn  (1884)  defends  in  part  his  former  position  against 
Harnack,  but  admits  the  weight  of  the  argument  furnished  by  the  Brussels 
MS.  Hauck  holds  that  the  commentary  was  written  after  A.  D.  200, 
but  was  used  by  Jerome.  Bornemann  successfully  defends  Harnack' s  view 
st  Zahn  and  Hau^tk,  and  puts  the  work  between  450  and  700. 


734  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

quoted  the  Gospel  of  John  by  name/  but  it  was  undoubt- 
edly known  and  used  before  by  Tatian,  Athenagoras,  Justin, 
and  by  the  Gnostics,  and  can  be  traced  as  far  back  as  1 25  within 
the  lifetime  of  many  personal  disciples  of  the  Apostle.  Theo- 
philus  describes  the  Christians  as  having  a  sound  mind,  practis- 
ing self-restraint,  preserving  marriage  with  one,  keeping  chastity, 
expelling  injustice,  rooting  out  sin,  carrying  out  righteousness 
as  a  habit,  regulating  their  conduct  by  law,  being  ruled  by 
truth,  preserving  grace  and  peace,  and  obeying  God  as  king. 
They  are  forbidden  to  visit  gladiatorial  shows  and  other  public 
amusements,  that  their  eyes  and  ears  may  not  be  defiled.  They 
are  commanded  to  obey  authorities  and  to  pray  for  them,  but 
not  to  worship  them. 

The  other  works  of  Theophilus,  polemical  and  exegetical, 
are  lost  Eusebius  mentions  a  book  against  Hermogenes,  in 
which  he  used  proofs  from  the  Apocalypse  of  John,  another 
against  Marciou  and  "  ^crtam  catechetical  books ;?  (xar/jx^rsxdL 
flcph'a).  Jerome  mentions  in  addition  commentaries  on  the 
Proverbs,  and  on  the  Gospel,  but  doubts  their  genuineness. 
There  exists  under  his  name,  though  only  in  Latin,  a  sort  of 
exegetical  Gospel  Harmony,  which  is  a  later  compilation  of 
uncertain  date  and  authorship. 

NOTES. 

Jerome  is  the  only  ancient  writer  who  mentions  a  Commentary  or 
Commentaries  of  Theophilus  on  the  Gospel,  but  adds  that  they  are  in- 
ferior to  his  other  books  in  elegance  and  style;  thereby  indicating  a 
doubt  as  to  their  genuineness.  De  Vir  ill.  25 :  "  Legi  sub  nomine  eius 
[Theophili]  T8  EVANGELIUM  et  in  Proverbia  Salomonis  COMMENT  AKIOS, 
qui  ?trihi  cum  superiorum  voluminum  [the  works  Contra  Mardonem,  Ad 
Aittuhicwn,  and  Contra  JBermogenem]  elegantia  et  phrasi  non  videntur  con- 
gruere"  He  alludes  to  the  Gospel  Commentary  in  two  other  passages  (in 
the  Pref.  to  his  Com.  on  Matthew,  and  Ep.  121  (ad  Algasiam),  and  quotes 
from  it  the  exposition  of  the  parable  of  the  unjust  steward  (Luke  16 : 
1  sqq.).  Eusebius  may  possibly  have  included  the  book  in  the  Karijx^T^d 
QiBTda.  which  he  ascribes  to  Theophilus. 

1  Ad  Autol.  II.  22 :  ''  The  Holy  Scriptures  teach  us,  and  all  who  were  moyed 
by  the  Spirit,  among  whom  John  says :  '  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word 
(Logos),  and  the  Word  was  with  God/  "  He  then  quotes  John  1 :  & 


g  176.  THEOPHILUS  OF  ANT1OCH.  735 

A  Latin  Version  of  this  Commentary  was  first  published  (from  MSS. 
not  indicated  and  since  lost)  by  Marg.  de  la  Bigne  in  Sacrm  Bibtiotkww 
Patrum,  Paris  1576,  Tom.  V.  col.  169-196 ;  also  by  Otto  in  the  Corp. 
Apol.  VIII.  278-324,  and  with  learned  notes  by  Zahn  in  the  second  vol. 
of  his  Forschungen  zwr  Gesoh.  des  neutest.  Kanons  (1883),  p.  31-85.  The 
Commentary  begins  with  an  explanation  of  the  symbolical  import  of  the 
four  Gospels  as  follows :  "  Quatuor  evangelia  qualuor  animalibus  figurata 
Jesum  Christum  demonstrant.  Matthasus  enim  salvatorem  nostrum  natum 
pa&sumque  homini  comparamt.  Marcus  leonis  gerens  figuram  a  solUudine 
incipit  dicens :  '  Vox  clamoftitis  in  deserto :  parate  viam  Domini,'  sane  qui 
regnat  invictus.  Joannes  fiabet  similitudinem  aqwilce,  quod  ab  imis  alta 
petiverit ;  ait  enim  :  '  In  principio  erat  Verbum,  et  verbum  erat  apud  Dcum, 
et  Deus  erat  Verbum;  hoc  erat  in  principio  apud  Deum ;'  vel  qnia,  Christus 
resurgens  volavit  ad  coclos.  Lucas  mtuli  speciem  yestat,  ad  cuius  instar  sal- 
vator  noster  est  immolatus,  vel  quod  sacerdotii  fiyurat  qfficium"  Tiie  posi- 
tion of  Luke  as  the  fourth  is  very  peculiar  and  speaks  for  great  antiquity. 
Then  follows  a  brief  exposition  of  the  genealogy  of  Christ  by  Matthew 
with  the  remark  ihat  Matthew  traces  the  origin  "per  reges"  Luke  "per 
mcerdotes"  The  first  book  of  the  Commentary  is  chiefly  devoted  to 
Matthew,  the  second  and  third  to  Luke,  the  fourth  to  John.  Jt  concludes 
with  an  ingenious  allegory  representing  Christ  as  a  gardener  (who 
appeared  to  Mary  Magdalene,  John  20  :  15),  and  the  church  as  his  gar- 
den full  of  rich  flowers)  as  follows  (see  Zahn,  p.  85) :  "  Hortus  Domini  ext 
ecclesia  catholica,  in  qua  sunt  rosae  martyrumt  Him  virginum,  violae 
viduarum,  hedera  coniuywn;  nam  ilia,  qua',  cetf.imdltat  cum  horhilawnn 
esse  significabat  scilicet  eum  plantantem  dwersis  virtutibus  credenlinm 
vitam.  Amen.'1 

Dr.  Zahn,  in  his  recent  monograph  (1883),  which  abounds  in  raro 
patristic  learning,  vindicates  this  Commentary  to  Theophilus  of  Antiodi 
and  dates  the  translation  from  the  third  century.  If  so,  we  would  have 
here  a  work  of  great  apologetic  as  well  as  exegetical  importance, 
especially  for  the  history  of  the  canon  and  the  text;  for  Theophilus 
stood  midway  between  Justin  Martyr  and  Irenseus  and  would  bo  the 
oldest  Christian  exegcte.  But  a  Nicene  or  post-Nicene  development  of 
theology  and  church  organization  is  clearly  indicated  by  the  familiar  use 
of  such  terms  as  regnum  Cliristi caiholicum,  catholica  doctrina,  cathollcum 
dogma,  sacerdos,  peccatum  originale,  monacM,  swculares,  pagani  The 
suspicion  of  a  later  date  is  confirmed  by  the  discovery  of  a  MS.  of  this 
commentary  in  Brussels,  with  an  anonymous  preface  which  declares  it  to* 
be  a  compilation.  Harnack,  who  made  this  discovery,  ably  refutes  the 
conclusions  of  ZaLn,  and  tries  to  prove  that  the  commentary  ascribed  to 
Theophilus  is  a  Latin  work  by  an  anonymous  author  of  the  filth  or  sixth 
century  (470-520).  Zahn  (1884)  defends  in  part  IHH  former  position  against 
Harnack,  but  admits  the  weight  of  the  argument  furnished  by  tho  Brussels 
MS.  Hauck  holds  that  the  commentary  was  written  after  A.  D.  200, 
but  was  used  by  Jerome.  Bonicmaim  successfully  defends  Harruick's  vie'W 
•urainst  Zahn  and  Ilau^k,  and  puts  the  work  between  450  and  700- 


736  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

§  177.  Melito  of  Sardis. 

(I.)  ETJSEB.  H.  E.  IV.  13,  26;  V.  25.  HIEEON.:  De  Vir.  ill  24.  The 
remains  of  MELITO  in  ROUTH,  Reliq.  Saw.  1. 113-153 ;  more  fully 
in  OTTO,  Corp.  Ap.  IX.  (1872),  375-478.  His  second  Apology,  of 
doubtful  genuineness,  in  CTJRBTON,  SpidUgium  Syriacum,  Lond. 
1855  (Syriac,  with  an  English  translation),  and  in  PITRA,  Spidl. 
jSolesm.  II.  (with  a  Latin  translation  by  Kenan,  which  was  revised 
by  Otto,  Corp.  Ap.  vol.  IX.) ;  German  transl.  by  Welte  in  the  Tub, 
"Theol.  Quartalschriffc"  for  1862. 

(II.)  PIPER  in  the  Studien  und  Kritiken  for  1838,  p.  5^154.  UHLHOBN 
in  "Zeitschrift  fur  hist.  Theol."  1866.  DONALDSON,  III.  221-239 
STEITZ  in  Herzog2  IX.  537-539.  LIGHTFOOT  in  "  Contemp.  Re- 
view," Febr.  1876.  HARNACK,  Texte,  etc.,  I.  240-278.  SALMON  in 
Smith  and  Wace  III.  894-900.  RENAN,  Marc-Aurble,  172  sqq. 
(Comp.  also  the  short  notice  in  IStglise  chrtt.,  p.  436). 

MELITO,  bishop  of  Sardis/  the  capital  of  Lydia,  was  a 
shining  light  among  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor  in  the  third 
quarter  of  the  second  century.  Polycrates  of  Ephesus,  in  his  epis- 
tle to  bishop  Victor  of  Rome  (d.  195),  calls  him  a  "  eunuch  who, 
in  his  whole  conduct,  was  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  sleeps  in 
Sardis  awaiting  the  episcopate  from  heaven  (or  visitation,  TIJV 
dbro  rc£y  obpavwv  ixicrxoKyv)  on  the  day  of  the  resurrection." 
The  term  "  eunuch  "  no  doubt  refers  to  voluntary  celibacy  for 
the  kingdom  of  God  (Matt.  19:  12).2  He.  was  also  esteemed 
as  a  prophet.  He  wrote  a  book  on  prophecy,  probably  against 
the  pseudo-prophecy  of  the  Montanists;  but  his  relation  to 
Montanismjis  not  clear.  He  took  an  active  part  in  the  paschal 
and  other  controversies  which  agitated  the  churches  of  Asia 
Minor.  He  was  among  the  chief  supporters  of  the  Quarta- 
deciman  practice  which  was  afterwards  condemned  as  schismatic 

1  This  is  the  English  spelling.  The  Germans  and  French  spell  Sard* 
(Or.  at  2dp6ei£}  but  also  2<f/)<fcf  in  Herodotus). 

3  Kenan  thinks  of  an  act  of  self-mutilation  (in  Ittyfae  chr&.  436) :  "  Gomtm 
$m  tard  OrigZne,  tt  wulutque  sa  chastete  fM  en  quelque  sorte  mat&riettement 
constatee."  But  St.  John,  too,  is  called  spado  by  Tertullian  (De  Monog.  17) 
and  eunwhus  by  Jerome  (In  Es.  c.  56).  Athenagoras  uses  ewovyta  for  male 
Continence,  Leg.  c.  33:  TO  kv  iraptievsip  not  h  evvov%i?  fielvcu,  in  wrqinitate  e» 
i  ffatu,  wanere. 


2177.  MELITO  OF  SABD1S.  737 

and  heretical.  This  may  be  a  reason  why  his  writings  fell  into 
oblivion.  Otherwise  he  was  quite  orthodox  according  to  the 
standard  of  his  age,  and  a  strong  believer  in  the  divinity  of 
Christ,  as  is  evident  from  one  of  the  Syrian  fragments  (see 
below). 

Melito  was  a  man  of  brilliant  mind  and  a  most  prolific 
author.  Tertullian  speaks  of  his  elegant  and  eloquent  genius.1 
Euscbius  enumerates  no  less  than  eighteen  or  twenty  works 
from  his  pen,  covering  a  great  variety  of  topics,  but  known  to 
us  now  only  by  namo.2  IIo  gives  three  valuable  extracts. 
There  must  have  been  an  uncommon  literary  fertility  in  Asia 
Minor  after  the  middle  of  the  second  century.3 

1  "  Klegans  et  declamatorium  ingcnium,"  in  Ms  lost  book  on  Ecstam,  quoted 
by  Jerome,  De  Vir.  Hi.  24.    Ilnrnack  drawn  a  comparison  between  MeJito  and 
Tertullian ;  they  resembled  each  other  in  the  variety  of  topics  on  which  they 
wrote,  and  in  eloquence,  but  not  in  elegance  of  style. 

2  Eusebius  (IV.  26)  mentions  first  his  Apology  for  the  faith  addressed  to  the 
emperor  of  the  Romans,  and  then  the  following :  "  Two  works  On  the  Passover, 
and  those  On  the  Conduct  of  Life  and  the  Prophets  (rb  rcepl  noTi/retae  KOL  irpoQyT&v, 
perhaps  two  separate  books,  perhaps  nai  for  T&I>)}  one  On  the  Church,  and  another 
discourse  On  the  Lord's  Day  (icepl  Kvpiamje),  one  also  On  the  Nature  (frepl  (bvaeuc, 
at.  Faith,  T/crrt-wr;)  of  Man,  and  another  On  his  Formation  (nepl  TrMaewf),  a 
work  On  the  Subjection  of  the  Swws  to  Faith  [o  irepl  vjraitoifc  nfcrrfiWf  alafti)- 
TTfpiWt  which  Enfinus  changes  into  two  books  lde  obedientia  fidei;  de  sensibus,' 
so  also  Nicephorus],    Besides  these,  a  treatise  On  the  Soul,  the  Body,  <md  the 
MM.    A  dissertation  also,  On,  Baptism;  one  also  On  Truth  and  Faith,  and 
[probably  another  on]  the  Generation  of  Christ.    His  discourse  On  Prophecy, 
and  that  On  Hospitality     A  treatise  called  The  Key  (fj  /cfo/f),  his  works  On 
the  DcvU,  and  The  Revelation  of  John.    The  treatise  On  God  Incarnate  (irept 

rov  &eov,  comp.  EvauftaruaiQ  =  incarnation),  and  last  of  all,  the  discourse 
u)  addressed  to  Antonine.''  He  then  adds  still  another  book  called 
and  containing  extracts  from  the  Old  Testament.  Some  of  these 
titles  may  indicate  two  distinct  books,  as  ra  Trepl  TOV  6ta/36tov,  not  TW  amKa'Mj^g 
'lutwov.  So  Bufinus  and  Jerome  understood  this  title.  See  Heinichen's 
notes.  Other  works  were  ascribed  to  him  by  later  writers,  as  On  the  Incarna- 
tion of  dltrht,  (Trspl  ffapittiffEMs  Xf)((jrm>),  On  the  Oross,  On  Faith,  and  two  de- 
cidedly spurious  works,  De  Ptismione  S.  Joannis,  and  T)e  TrantitM  b.  Marice. 

8  (Joiup.  Eiiseb.  TV.  21,25.  Renan  says  (p.  192):  '*  Jamaia  pent-foe  le 
ttfurvitwnime  n'a  phis  ecrit  qm  durant  le  I&  s&cle  en  Am.  La  culture  litter aire 
etait  extr&rriem&nt  repandue  dans  cette  province ;  Vart  d$erire  y  etait  fort  commun, 
et  le  chrisfianisme  en  profaait.  La  Iitt6rature  den  P&res  d  I'Jfiglise  commencait. 
Les  sticles  suivants  ne  depastirent  pas  ces  premiers  essais  de  Ffloquence  chretienne; 
mais,  au  point  de  vue  de  Porthodoxie,  les  livres  de  ces  Peres  du  IIe  week  qffraient 

Vol.  II.— 47, 


738  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

The  Apology  of  Melito  was  addressed  to  Marcus  Aurelius 
and  written  probably  at  the  outbreak  of  the  violent  persecu- 
tions in-  177,  which,  however,  were  of  a  local  or  provincial 
character,  and  not  sanctioned  by  the  general  government.  H> 
remarks  that  Nero  and  Domitian  were  the  only  imperial  perse- 
cutors, and  expresses  the  hope  that,  Aurelius,  if  properly  in- 
formed, would  interfere  in  behalf  of  the  innocent  Christians. 
In  a  passage  preserved  in  the  "Paschal  Chronicle"  he  says: 

Jr          o      Jr  » 

"  We  are  not  worshipers  of  senseless  stones,  but  adore  one  only 
God,  who  is  before  all  and  over  all,  and  His  Christ  truly  God 
the  Word  before  all  ages/' 

A  Syriac  Apology  bearing  his  name1  was  discovered  by 
Tattam,  with  other  Syrian  MSS.  in  the  convents  of  the  Nitrian 
desert  (1843),  and  published  by  Cureton  and  Pitra  (1855).  But 
it  contains  none  of  the  passages  quoted  by  Eusebius,  and  is 
more  an  attack  upon  idolatry  than  a  defense  of  Christianity, 
but  may  nevertheless  be  a  work  of  Melito  under  an  erroneous 
title. 

To  Melito  we  owe  the  first  Christian  list  of  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures.  It  agrees  with  the  Jewish  and  the  Protestant 
canon,  and  omits  the  Apocrypha/  The  books  of  Esther  and 
Nehemiah  are  also  omitted,  but  may  be  included  in  Esdras. 
The  expressions  "  the  Old  Books,"  « the  Books  of  the  Old  Cove- 
nant," imply  that  the  church  at  that  time  had  a  canon  of  the 
New  Covenant.  Melito  made  a  visit  to  Palestine  to  seek  infor- 
mation on  the  Jewish  canon. 

plusd'unepierreeFwhoppement.  La  lecture  en  devint  swpeete;  on  les  copia  de 
moins  en  mains,  et  ainsi  presque  tons  ces  beaux  ecrits  disparurent,  pour  faire  place 
am  ecrivains  dassiques,  posterieurs  au  conciU  de  Nicee,  ecrivains  plus  corrects 
comme  doctrine,  m<m,  en  general,  bien  moins  originaw  que  cem  du  II*  stecle. 

1  Under  the  heading,  "The  oration  of  Melito  the  Philosopher,  held  before 
Antoninus  Caesar,  and  he  spoke  [?]  to  Caesar  that  he  might  know  God,  and  he 
showed  him  the  way  of  truth,  and  began  to  apeak  as  follows."  Ewald  (in  the 
"Gott.  Gel.  Anz."  1856,  p.  655  sqq.)  and  Eenan  (M.  Aur.  184,  note)  suggest 
that  it  is  no  apology,  but  Melito's  tract  irepl  aty&etas,  as  this  word  very  often 
occurs.  Jacobi,  Otto,  and  Efernack  ascribe  it  to  a  different  author,  probably 
from  Syria. 


\  177.  MELITO  OF  SABDIS.  739 

He  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse,  and  a  "Key" 
\fl  xhiq,  probably  to  the  Scriptures.1 

The  loss  of  this  and  of  his  books  "on  the  Church"  and  "on 
the  Lord's  Day"  are  perhaps  to  be  regretted  most. 

Among  the  Syriac  fragments  of  Melito  published  by  Curcton 
is  one  from  a  work  "  On  Faith,"  which  contains  a  remarkable 
christological  creed,  an  eloquent  expansion  of  the  Regula  Fidei* 
The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  acknowledged  as  the  perfect  Beason, 
the  Word  of  God  ,•  who  was  begotten  before  the  light ;  who  was 
Creator  with  the  Father ;  who  was  the  Fashioner  of  man ;  who 
was  all  things  in  all ;  Patriarch  among  the  patriarchs,  Law  in 
the  law,  Chief  Priest  among  the  priests,  King  among  the  kings, 
Prophet  among  the  prophets,  Archangel  among  the  angels ;  I  le 
piloted  Noah,  conducted  Abraham,  was  bound  with  Isaac,  exiled 
with  Jacob,  was  Captain  with  Moses ;  He  foretold  his  own  suf- 
ferings in  David  and  the  prophets ;  He  was  incarnate  in  the 
Virgin ;  worshipped  by  the  Magi ;  He  healed  the  lame,  gave 
sight  to  the  blind,  was  rejected  by  the  people,  condemned  by 
Pilate,  hanged  upon  the  tree,  buried  in  the  earth,  rose  from  the 
dead  and  appeared  to  the  apostles,  ascended  to  heaven ;  He  is 
the  Rest  of  the  departed,  the  Recovcrer  of  the  lost,  the  Light  of 
the  blind,  the  Refuge  of  the  afflicted,  the  Bridegroom  of  the 
Church,  the  Charioteer  of  the  cherubim,  the  Captain  of  angels ; 
God  who  is  of  God,  the  Son  of  the  Father,  the  King  for  ever 
and  ever. 

1  A  Latin  work  under  the  title  Melitonis  Clams  Sanctos  ficripturce  was  men- 
tioned by  Labbd  in  1653  as  preserved  in  the  library  of  Clcrmont  College,  and 
was  at  last,  after  much  trouble,  recovered  in  Slrassburg  and  elsewhere,  and  pub- 
lished by  Cardinal  Pitra  in  the  Spicikgium  fiolesm.  1855  (Tom.  II.  and  III.). 
But,  unfortunately,  it  turned  out  to  be  no  translation  of  Melito's  ifatg  at  all, 
but  a  mediaeval  glossary  of  mystic  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  compiled 
from  Gregory  I.  and  other  Latin  fathers.  This  was  conclusively  proven  by 
Steitz  in  the  ''Studien  und  Kritiken"  for  1857,  p.  584-59G.  Benan  assents 
(p.  181,  note) :  "  IS  murage  latin  que  (lorn  Pitra  a  publi§  comme  ttant  la  Clef  de 
Mditon,  est  une  compilation  de  passages  des  Pbres  latins  pouvant  serw  d  ^explica- 
tion alUgorique  des  Ventures  qui  figure  pour  la  premiere  fois  dans  la  Bible  de 
Th&odulphe." 

9  Spwiieg.  Sokm.  T.  II.  p.  LIX. 


740  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

§  178.  Apolinarius  of  Hierapolis.    Miltiades. 

CLAUDIUS  APOLINARIUS/  bishop  of  Hierapolis  in  Phrygia,,  a 
successor  of  Papias,  was  a  very  active  apologetic  and  polemic; 
writer  about  A.  D.  160-180.  He  took  a  leading  part  in  the 
Montanist  and  Paschal  controversies.  Eusebius  puts  him  with 
Melito  of  Sardis  among  the  orthodox  writers  of  the  second 
century,  and  mentions  four  of  his  "many  works"  as  known  to 
him,  but  since  lost,  namely  an  "Apology"  addressed  to  Marcus 
Aurelius  (before  174),  "  Five  books  against  the  Greeks"  "  Two 
booh  on  Truth"  "  Two  books  against  the  Jews."  He  also  notices 
his  later  books  "Against  the  heresy  of  the  Phrygians"  (the  Mon- 
tanists),  about  172.2 

Apolinarius  opposed  the  Quartodeciman  observance  of  Easter, 
which  Melito  defended.3  Jerome  mentions  his  familiarity  \viih 
heathen  literature,  but  numbers  him  among  the  Chiliasts.4  Tlio 

1  This  is  the  spelling  of  the  ancient  Greek  authors  who  refer  to  him.    Latin 
writers  usually  spell  his  name  Apollinaris  or  Apollinarius.     There  are  several 
noted  persons  of  this  name :  1)  the  legendary  ST.  APOLLINARIS,  bishop  of 
Ravenna  (50-78  ?),  who  followed  St.  Peter  from  Antioch  to  Borne,  was  sent 
by  him  to  Ravenna,  performed  miracles,  died  a  martyr,  and  gave  name  to  a 
magnificent  basilica  built  in  the  sixth  century.    See  Acta  Sanct.  Jul.  V.  344. 

2)  APOLLIKAEIS  THE  ELDEB,  presbyter  at  Laodicea  in  Syria  (not  in  Phrygia), 
an  able  classical  scholar  and  poet,  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century. 

3)  APOLLINAEIS  THE  YOUNGEE,  son  of  the  former,  and  bishop  of  Laodicea 
between  362  and  380,  who  with  his  father  composed  Christian  classics  to  re- 
place the  heathen  classics  under  the  reign  of  Julian,  and  afterwards  originated 
the  christological  heresy  which  is  named  after  him.    See  my  article  in  Smith 
and  Wace  I.  134  sq. 

2  H.  E.  IV.  27 ;  repeated  by  Jerome,  De  Viris  ill  26.    Two  extracts  of  a 
work  not  mentioned  by  Eusebius  are  preserved  in  the  Clvron.  Pasch.    Copies 
of  three  of  his  apologetic  books,  irpo$  "EMflvaf,  irspl  evae/le'tag,  irepl  ahij&eiac, 
are  mentioned  by  Photius.    The  last  two  are  probably  identical,  as  they  are 
connected  by  KOI.    See  the  fragments  in  Routh,  1. 159-174.     Comp.  Donaldson 
III.  243;  Harnack,  Texte,  I.  232-239,  and  Smith  and  Wace  T.  132. 

3  See  above,  p.  214  sq.,  and  Qhron.  Pasch.  I.  13. 

4  De  Vir.  iR.  18 ;  Com,,  in  EzecL  c.  36.    In  the  latter  place  Jerome  mentions 
Irenffius  as  the  first,  and  Apollinaris  as  the  last,  of  the  Greek  Chiliasts  ("  ut 
Grcecos  nominem,  et  primum  extremumqw  conjugam,  Iren.  et  Ap") ;  but  this  is  a 
palpable  error,  for  Barnabas  and  Papias  were  Chiliasts  before  Irenseus ;  Metho- 
dius and  ISTepos  long  after  Apolinarius.    Perhaps  he  meant  ApolJ^aris  o/ 
Laodicea,  in  Syria. 


2179.  HERMIAS.  741 

fatter  is  doubtful  on  account  of  his  opposition  to  Montanism. 
Photius  praises  his  style.     He  is  enrolled  among  the  waints.1 

MILTIADES  was  another  Christian  Apologist  of  the  later  half 
of  the  second  century  whose  writings  arc  entirely  lost.  JKtiscbius 
mentions  among  them  an  "  Apology"  addressed  to  the  rulers  of 
the  world,  a  treatise  "  against  the  Greeks,"  and  another  "  against 
the  Jews;"  but  he  gives  no  extracts.2  Tertullian  places  him 
between  Justin  Martyr  and  Iren&us.3 

§  1T9.  H&rmias. 


PHILOSOPHI 

Gentilium  Philosophorum  frrisio,  ten  chapters.    Ed.  prince  p,s  with 
Lat.  vers.    Basel,  1553,  Zurich,  1550.    Worth  added  it  to  his  Tatian, 
Oxf.  1700.    In  Otto  and  Maranus  (Migne,  vi.  col.  1167-1180). 
DONALDSON,  III.  179-181. 


Under  the  name  of  the  "philosopher"  HERMTAS 
or  'E/)//£«c),  otherwise  entirely  unknown  to  us,  we  have  a 
"Mockery  of  Heathen  Philosophers"  which,  with  the  light 
arms  of  wit  and  sarcasm,  endeavors  to  prove  from  the  history  of 
philosophy,  by  exposing  the  contradictions  of  the  various  sys- 
tems, the  truth  of  Paul's  declaration,  that  the  wisdom  of  this 
world  is  foolishness  witli  God.  He  derives  the  false  pluloHophy 
from  the  demons.  He  first  taken  up  the  conflicting  heathen 
notions  about  the  soul,  and  then  about  the  origin  of  the  world, 
and  ridicules  them.  The  following  is  a  specimen  from  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  first  topic  : 

"  I  confess  I  am  ycxod  by  the  reflux  of  things.  For  now  I  am  immor- 
tal, and  I  rejoice;  but  now  again  I  become  mortal,  and  I  weep;  but 
straightway  I  am  dissolved  into  atoms.  I  become  water,  arid  I  become 
air:  I  become  fire:  then  after  a  little  I  am  neither  air  nor  fire:  one 

1  Acta  Sanct.  Febr.  II.  4.    See  Wctaer  and  Welte2  1.  1080. 

2  H.  E,  V.  17.    Jerome,  De  Vir.  ill  39.  Comp.  Harnack,  Tcxle,  1,  278-28^ 
and  Salmon,  in  Smith  and  Wace  III.  916. 

8  Adv.  Valwt.  5.  Miltiades  is  here  called  "  ecelesiarum  sophista,"  either 
honorably=r^eior  or  philonopkus  (See  Otto  and  Salmon),  or  with  an  implied 
censure  (*'  mit  einem  ublen  Nebengeschmack,"  {is  Harnack  thinks).  The  relation 
of  Miltiades  to  Montanism  is  quite  obscure,  but  probably  he  was  an  opponent 


742  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

makes  me  a  wild  beast,  one  makes  me  a  fish.  Again,  then,  I  have  dol« 
phins  for  my  brothers.  But  when  I  see  myself,  I  fear  my  body,  and  I  no 
longer  know  how  to  call  it,  whether  man,  or  dog,  or  wolf,  or  bull,  or  bird, 
or  serpent,  or  dragon,  or  chimsera.  I  am  changed  by  the  philosophers 
into  all  the  wild  beasts,  into  those  that  live  on  land  and  on  water,  into 
those  that  are  winged,  many-shaped,  wild,  tame,  speechless,  and  gifted 
with  speech,  rational  and  irrational.  I  swim,  fly,  creep,  run,  sit ;  and 
there  is  Empedocles  too,  who  makes  me  a  bush." 

The  work  is  small  and  unimportant.1  Some  put  it  down  to 
the  third  or  fourth  century;  but  the  writer  calls  himself  a 
"  philosopher  "  (though  he  misrepresents  his  profession),  has  in 
view  a  situation  of  the  church  like  that  under  Marcus  Aurelius, 
and  presents  many  points  of  resemblance  with  the  older  Apolo- 
gists and  with  Lucian  who  likewise  ridiculed  the  philosophers 
with  keen  wit,  but  from  the  infidel  heathen  standpoint.  Hence 
we  may  well  assign  him  to  the  later  part  of  the  second  century. 

§  180.  Hegesippus. 

(I.)  EUSBB.  K  R  II,  23;  III.  11,  16, 19,  20,  32;  IV.  8,  22.  Collection 
of  fragments  in  GKABE,  Spicil.  II.  203-214;  EOUTH,  fteliq.  &  I. 
205-219;  HILGENFELD,  in  his  "  Zeitschrifb  fur  wissenschaftliche 
Theol."  1876  and  1878. 

(II,)  The  Annotatwnes  in  Heges.  Fragm.  by  EOUTH,  L  220-292  (very 
valuable).  DONALDSON  :  L.  *c.  III.  182-213.  NOSGEN  :  Der  Urchl 
Standpunkt  des  Heg.  in  Brieger's  "  Zeitschrift  fiir  Kirchengosch." 
1877  (p.  193-233) .  Against  Hilgenfeld.  ZAHN  :  Der  griech.  Ir&icsus 
und  der  gauze  Hegesippus  im  16ten  Jahr.,  ibid.  p.  288-291.  H.  DANN- 
RETJTHEB :  Du  Temoignage  d'Segesippe  sur  Peglise  chretienne  au  deux 
premiers  sfocles.  Nancy  1878.  See  also  his  art.  in  Lichtenberger's 
"  Encycl."  vi.  126-129.  FEIEDR.  VOGEL  :  De  ffegmppo,  qui  didtur, 
Josephi  interprete.  Erlangen  1881.  W.  MILLIGAN  :  Hegesippus^  in 
Smith  and  Wace  IL  (1880)  875-878.  C.  WEIZSACKER  :  Hegesippus, 
in  Herzog2  V.  695-700.  CASPABI  :  QueEen,  etc.,  Ill  345-348. 

The  orthodoxy  of  Hegesippus  has  been  denied  by  the  Tubingen  critics, 
Baur,  Schwegler,  and,  more  moderately  by  Hilgenfeld,  but  defended 
by  Dorner,  Donaldson,  Nosgen,  Weizaacker,  Caspari  and  Milligan. 

Contemporary  with  the  Apologists,  though  not  of  their  class, 
were  Hegesippus  (d.  about  180),  and  Dionysius  of  Corinth  (about 
170). 

1  Hase  aptly  calls  it  "  eine  oberfldcMich  witeige  Bdu&tigung  uber  paradoxe  PKir 


§  180.  HEGESIPPUS.  7*3 

HEGESIPPUS  was  an  orthodox  Jewish  Christian1  and  lived 
during  the  reigns  of  Hadrian,  Antoninus,  and  Marcus  Aurdius. 
He  travelled  extensively  through  Syria,  Greece,  and  Italy,  and 
was  in  Rome  during  the  episcopate  of  Anicetus.  He  collected 
"  Memorials  " 2  of  the  apostolic  and  post-apostolic  churches.  He 
used  written  sources  and  oral  traditions.  Unfortunately  this 
work  which  still  existed  in  the  sixteenth  century/  is  lost,  but 
may  yet  be  recovered.  It  is  usually  regarded  as  a  sort  of  church 
history,  the  first  written  after  the  Acts  of  St.  Luke.  This  would 
make  Hegesippus  rather  than  Eusebius  "the  father  of  church 
history."  But  it  seems  to  have  been  only  a  collection  of  reminis- 
cences of  travel  without  regard  to  chronological  order  (else  the 
account  of  the  martyrdom  of  James  would  have  been  put  in  the 
first  instead  of  the  fifth  book.)  He  was  an  antiquarian  rather 
than  a  historian.  His  chief  object  was  to  prove  the  purity  and 
catholicity  of  the  church  against  the  Gnostic  heretics  and  sects. 

Eusebius  has  preserved  his  reports  on  the  martyrdom  of  St. 
James  the  Just,  Simeon  of  Jerusalem,  Domitian's  inquiry  for  the 
descendants  of  David  aiid  the  relatives  of  Jesus,  the  rise  of 
heresies,  the  episcopal  succession,  and  the  preservation  of  the 
orthodox  doctrine  in  Corinth  and  Rome.  These  scraps  of  history 
command  attention  for  their  antiquity;  but  they  must  be  re- 
ceived with  critical  caution.  They  reveal  a  strongly  Jewish  type 
of  piety,  like  that  of  James,  but  by  no  means  Judai#ing  heresy. 
He  was  not  an  Ebionite,  nor  even  a  Nazarene,  but  decidedly 
catholic.  There  is  no  trace  of  his  insisting  on  circumcision  or 
the  observance  of  the  law  as  necessary  to  salvation.  His  use  of 
"the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews"  implies  no  heretical 
bias.  He  derived  all  the  heresies  and  schisms  from  Judaism. 
He  laid  great  stress  on  the  regular  apostolic  succession  of  bishops. 
In  every  city  he  set  himself  to  inquire  for  two  things :  purity  of 

1  Eusebius  (iv.  22)  expressly  calls  him  "  a  convert  from  the  Hebrews,"  and 
this  is  confirmed  by  the  strongly  Jewish  coloring  of  his  account  of  James, 
quoted  in  full,  vol.  I.  276  sq.    He  was  probably  from  Palestine. 

2  TTrotfM^uarfl,  or  ^vyydft/iara,  in  five  books. 

3  In  the  library  of  the  convent  of  St.  John  at  Patmos,    See  Zahn,  L  c. 


744  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A,  D.  100-311. 

doctrine  and  the  unbroken  succession  of  teachers  from  the  times 
of  the  apostles.  The  former  depended  in  his  view  on  the  latter. 
The  result  of  his  investigation  was  satisfactory  in  both  respects. 
He  found  in  every  apostolic  church  the  faith  maintained.  "  The 
church  of  Corinth/'  he  says,  "  continued  in  the  true  faith,  until 
Primus  was  bishop  there  [the  predecessor  of  Dionysius],  with 
whom  I  had  familiar  intercourse,  as  I  passed  many  days  at 
Corinth,  when  I  was  about  sailing  to  Rome,  during  which  time 
we  were  mutually  refreshed  in  the  true  doctrine.  After  corning 
to  Rome,  I  stayed  with  Anicetus,  whose  deacon  was  Eleutherus. 
After  Anicetus,  Soter  succeeded,  and  after  him  Eleutherus.  In 
every  succession,  however,  and  in  every  city,  the  doctrine  pre- 
vails according  to  what  is  announced  by  the  law  and  the  pro- 
phets and  the  Lord."1  He  gives  an  account  of  the  heretical 
corruption  which  proceeded  from  the  unbelieving  Jews,  from 
Thebuthis  and  Simon  Magus  and  Cleobius  and  Dositheus,  and 
other  unknown  or  forgotten  names,  but  "  while  the  sacred  choir 
of  the  apostles  still  lived,  the  church  was  undefiled  and  pure,  like 
a  virgin,  until  the  age  of  Trajan,  when  those  impious  errors 
which  had  so  long  crept  in  darkness  ventured  forth  without  shame 
into  open  daylight"*  He  felt  perfectly  at  home  in  the  Catholic 
church  of  his  day  which  had  descended  from,  or  rather  never 
yet  ascended  the  lofty  mountain-height  of  apostolic  knowledge 
and  freedom.  And  as  Hegesippus  was  satisfied  with  the  or- 
thodoxy of  the  Western  churches,  so  Eusebius  was  satisfied 
with  the  orthodoxy  of  Hegesippus,  and  nowhere  intimates  a 
doubt. 

1  Euseb.  IV.  22. 

2  Ibid.  IE.  32.    This  passage  has  been  used  by  Baur  and  his  school  as  an 
argument  against  the  Pastoral  and  other  apostolic  epistles  which  warn  against 
the  Gnostic  heresy,  but  it  clearly  teaches  that  its  open  manifestation  under 
Trajan  was  preceded  by  its  secret  working  as  far  back  as  Simon  Magus, 
Hegesippus,  therefore,  only  confirms  the  N.  T.  allusions,  which  likewise  iraplj 
a  distinction  between  present  beginnings  and  future  developments  of  error. 


8181.  DIONYSIUS  OF  CORINTH.  745 

§  181.    Dionysim  of  Corinth. 

EUSEB.  :    JET.  K  II.  25  j  III.  4;  IV.  21,  23.    HIERON.  :  Zte  Ffo  ill.  27, 
HOUTH  :  j&tf.  8. 1. 177-184  (the  fragments),  and  185-201  (the  annota- 
tions). Includes  Pinytus  Cretensis  and  his  Ep.  ad  Dion.  (Eus.  IV.  28). 
DONALDSON  III.  21^-220.    SALMON  in  Smith  and  Wace  II.  848  sq. 

DIONYSIUS  was  bishop  of  Corinth  (probably  the  successor  of 
Primus)  in  the  third  quarter  of  the  second  century,  till  about  A.  D. 
170.  He  was  a  famous  person  in  his  day,  distinguished  for 
zeal,  moderation,  and  a  catholic  and  peaceful  spirit.  He  wrote 
a  number  of  pastoral  letters  to  the  congregations  of  Lacedsemon, 
Athens,  Nicomedia,  Borne,  Gortyna  in  Crete,  and  other  cities. 
One  is  addressed  to  Chrysophora,  "a  most  faithful  sister." 
They  are  all  lost,  with  the  exception  of  a  summary  of  their  con- 
tents given  by  Eusebius,  and  four  fragments  of  the  letter  to 
Soter  and  the  Roman  church.  They  would  no  doubt  shed  much 
light  on  the  spiritual  life  of  the  church.  Eusebius  says  of  him 
that  he  "  imparted  freely  not  only  to  his  own  people,  but  to 
others  abroad  also,  the  blessings  of  his  divine  (or  inspired)  in- 
dustry."1 His  letters  were  read  in  the  churches. 

Such  active  correspondence  promoted  catholic  unity  and  gave 
strength  and  comfort  in  persecution  from  without  and  heretical 
corruption  within.  The  bishop  is  usually  mentioned  with 
honor,  but  the  letters  are  addressed  to  the  church ;  and  even  the 
Roman  bishop  Soter,  like  his  predecessor  Clement,  addressed  his 
own  letter  in  the  name  of  the  Roman  church  to  the  church  of 
Corinth.  Dionysins  writes  to  the  Roman  Christians :  "  To-day 
we  have  passed  the  Lord's  holy  day,  in  which  we  have  read 
your  epistle.2  In  reading  it  we  shall  always  have  our  minds 
stored  with  admonition,  as  we  shall  also  from  that  written 
to  us  before  by  Clement."  He  speaks  very  highly  of  the  liber- 
ality of  the  church  of  Rome  in  aiding  foreign  brethren  con- 
demned to  the  mines,  and  sending  contributions  to  every  city. 

Dionysius  is  honored  as  a  martyr  in  the  Greek,  as  a  confcssoi 
in  the  Latin  church. 
1  htitov  fahoirovias,  Euseb.  IV.  23.        2  ip&v  rtyv  kirtaroMjv.    Euseb.  II.  23. 


746  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

§  182.  IrenoBUS. 

Editions  of  his  Works. 

S.  IBEK2EI  Episcopi  Lugdun.  Opera  quae  supersunt  omnia,  ed. 

Lips.  1853,  2  vols.  The  second  volume  contains  the  Prolegomena 
of  older  editors,  and  the  disputations  of  Maffei  and  Pfaff  on  the 
Fragments  of  Irenseus.  It  really  supersedes  all  older  ed.,  but  not  the 
later  one  of  Harvey. 

X  IEEN^I  libros  guinque  adversus  Hcereses  edidit  W.  Wioo"  HARVEY. 
Cambr.  1857,  in  2  vols.  Based  upon  a  new  and  careful  collation  of 
the  Cod.  Claromontanus  and  Arundel,  and  embodying  the  original 
Greek  portions  preserved  in  the  PkiZosoph.  of  Hippolytus,  the  newly 
discovered  Syriac  and  Armenian  fragments,  and  learned  Prolego- 
mena. 

Older  editions  by  Erasmus,  Basel  1526  (from  three  Latin  MSS. 
since  lost,  repeated  1528, 1534) ;  GaZZasius,  Gen.  1570  (with  the  use  of 
the  Gr.  text  in  Epiphan.) ;  Grynceus,  Bas.  1571  (worthless) ;  Fevar- 
dentius  (Feuardent),  Paris  1575,  improved  ed.  Col.  1596,  and  often  ; 
Grade,  Oxf.1702;  and  above  all  Massuet,  P.ar.  1710,  Ven.  1734,  2  vois. 
fol.,  and  again  in  Migne's  "  Patrol.  Grseco-Lat.n  Tom.  VII.  Par. 
1857  (the  Bened.  ed.,  the  best  of  the  older,  based  on  three  MSS., 
with  ample  Proleg.  and  3  Dissertations). 

English  translation  by  A.  EGBERTS  and  W.  H.  EAMBAUT,  2  vols., 
in  the  "  Ante-Nicene  Library,"  Edinb.  1868.  Another  by  JOHN 
KEBLE,  ed.  by  Dr.  Pusey,  for  the  Oxford  "  Library  of  the  Fathers," 
1872. 

Biographical  and  Critical. 

Busf.  MASSUET  (E.  C.)-'  Dissertationes  in  Irenaei  libros  (de  heretids,  de 

Irenaei  vitat  gestis  et  s&riptis,  de  Ir.  doctrina)  prefixed  to  his  edition 

of  the  Opera,  and  reprinted  in  Stieren  and  Migne.    Also  the  Proleg. 

of  HAEVEY,  on  Gnosticism,  and  the  Life  and  Writings  of  Iren. 
H.  DODWELL:  Dissert,  in  Iren.    Oxon.  1689. 
TILLEMOISTT  :  Mbmoirs,  etc.  HI.  77-99. 
DEYLI^G:  Iren&us,  evangeZicos  veritatis  confessor  ac  testis.    Lips.  1721. 

(Against  Massuet.) 
STI^BEN:  Art.  Iren<ws  in  "Erschand  Gruber's  EncykL"  Ilnd  sect.  Vol. 

XXIIL  357-386. 

J.  BEAVER:  Life  and  Writings  of  Irenaeus.    Lond.  1841. 
J.  M.  PRAT  (E.  C.) :  Htetoire  de  St.  Irenes.    Lyon  and  Paris  1843. 
L.  DUNCKEE:   Des  ML     Irenaeus  Ghristologie.    Gott.  1843.     Very 

valuable. 
K-  GEATJL  :  Die  Ghristliche  Kirche  an  der  Schwelle  des  Irencefachen  Zdtal- 

ters.    Leipz.  1860.    (168  pages.)    Introduction  to  a  biography  which 
never  appeared. 


2 182.  IKEK&US.  747 

OH.  E.  FKEPPEL  (bishop  of  Angora,  since  1869) :  Saint  Irenee  d  Elo- 
quence chretientie  dans  (a  Gaule  aux  deux  premiers  sibeles.  Par.  1801. 

G.  SCIINEEMANN  :  8a>ncti  Irencei  de  ecclesice  Romance  prlndpatu  testimo- 
mum.  Freib.  i.  Br.  1870. 

BOHRINGEU  :    Die  KircJie  Christi  und  ikre  Zeugen,  vol.  II.  new  ed.    1873. 

HEINRICH  ZIEO JJSR  :  Ireiiwus  der  Bischofvon  Lyon.    Berlin  1871.  (320  p. ) 

E.  A.  LIPSIUS  :  Die  Zelt  des  Irenaus  von  Lyon  und  die  Enidehung  der 
altkatholischeu  Kirche,  in  Sybel's  "  Histor.  ZeitschriJV'  Miinchen 
1872,  p.  2  41  sqq.  See  his  later  art.  below. 

A.  GUILLOUD  :  St.  Irctiee  et  son  temps.    Lyon  1876. 

Bp.  LIGHTFOOT  :  The  Churches  of  Gaul,  in  the  "  Contemporary  Eoview  " 
for  Aug.  1876. 

C.  J.  H.  ROPES:  Irenceus  of  Lyom,  in  the  Andover  " Bibliothcca  Sacra" 
for  April  1877,  p.  284-334.  A  learned  discussion  of  the  nation- 
ality of  Irenes  ( against  Harvey). 

J.  QUARRY:  Irenaws;  his  testimony  to  early  Conceptions  of  Christianity. 
IE  the  "British  Quarterly  Beview"  for  1879,  July  and  Oct. 

KENAN:  Marc  Aurlk.    Paris  1882,  p.  336-344. 

TH.  ZAHN:  art.  Iren.  in  Eerzog 2,  VII.  129-140  (abridged  in  BchalF-lTer- 
zog),  chiefly  chronological;  and  E.  A,  LIPSIUH  in  Smith  and  Waco, 
III.  253-279.  Both  these  articles  are  very  important ;  that  of  Lip- 
sius  is  fuller. 

Comp.  also  the  Oh.  Hist,  of  NEANDER,  and  BAUR,  and  the  Patrol 
of  MOHLER,  and  ALZOG. 

Special  doctrines  and  relations  of  Irenseus  have  been  discussed  by 
Baur,  Dorner,  Thicrach,  H<")fling,  Ilopfcnmillor,  Korbor,  EiLnchl, 
Kirchner,  /aim,  Harnack,  Leimbach,  Eoville,  JIackenacliiuidt.  See 
the  lit.  in  Zahu'n  art.  in  Her^og 2. 

A  full  and  satisfactory  monograph  of  Ircnoeus  and  his  age  is  still  a 
desideratum. 

Almost  simultaneously  with  the  apology  against  false  religions 
without  arose  the  polemic  literature  against  the  heresies,  or 
various  forms  of  pseudo-Christianity,  especially  the  Gnostic ;  and 
upon  this  was  formed  the  dogmatic  theology  of  the  church.  At 
the  head  of  the  old  catholic  controversialists  stand  Ireniciis  and 
his  disciple  Hippolytus,  both  of  Greek  education,  but  both  be- 
longing, in  their  ecclesiastical  relations  and  labors,  to  the  West 

Asia  Minor,  the  scene  of  the  last  labors  of  St.  John,  produced 
a  luminous  succession  of  divines  and  confessors  who  in  the  first 
three  quarters  of  the  second  century  reflected  the  light  of  the 
setting  sun  of  the  apostolic  age,  and  may  be  called  the  pupils  of 
St.  John.  Among  them  were  Polycarp  of  Smyrna,  Papias  of 


748  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

Hierapolis,  Apolinarius  of  Hierapolis,  Melito  of  Sartlis,  and 
others  lass  known  but  honorably  mentioned  in  the  letter  of 
Polycrates  of  Ephesua  to  bishop  Victor  of  Eomo  (A.  D.  190). 

The  last  and  greatest  representative  of  this  school  is  IEEN^EUR, 
the  first  among  the  fathers  properly  so  called,  and  one  of  the 
chief  architects  of  the  Catholic  system  of  doctrine, 

I.  LIFE  AND  CHARACTEK.  Little  is  known  of  .Irenseus  ex- 
cept what  we  may  infer  from  his  writings.  He  sprang  from 
Asia  Minor,  probably  from  Smyrna,  where  he  spent  his  youth.1 
He  was  born  between  A.  D.  115  and  125.2  He  enjoyed  the  in- 

1  Harvey  derives  from  the  alleged  familiarity  of  Irenseus  with  Hebrew  and 
the  Syriac  Peshito  the  conclusion  that  he  was  a  Syrian,  but  Kopes  denies  the 
premise  and  defends  the  usual  view  of  his  Greek  nationality.  See  also  Campari, 
Quellen  zur  Gesch.  des  Taufstywb.  III.  343  sq. 

2  The  change  of  Polycarp's  martyrdom  from  166  to  355  necessitates  a  cor- 
responding change  in  the  chronology  of  Irenseus,  his  pupil,  who  moreover 
says  that  the  Apocalypse  of  John  was  written  at  the  end  of  Domitian's  reign 
(d.  96),  "almost  within  our  age"  (a^edbv  enl  rfc  fjnerspac  yevtag,  Adv.  liter,  v. 
30,  3J.    Zahn  (in  Herzog)  decides  for  115,  Lipsius  (in  Smith  and  Waco)  for 
130  or  125,  as  the  date  of  Ms  birth.   Dod  well  favored  the  year  97  or  98 ;  Grabc 
108,  Tillemont  and  Lightfoot  120,  Leimbach,  Hilgeufeld,  and  Ropes  126, 
Oscar  von  Gebhardt  126-130,  Harvey  130,  Massuet,  Dupin,  Bohringer,  Klmg 
140  (quite  too  late),  Ziegler  142-147  (impossible).     The  late  date  is  derived 
from  a  mistaken  understanding  of  the  reference  to  the  old  ago  of  Polycarp 
(irdvv  ynpakso^  but  this,  as  Zahn  and  Lightfoot  remark,  refers  to  the  time  of 
his  martyrdom,  not  the  time  of  his  acquaintance  with  Jrensens),  and  from  the 
assumption  of  the  wrong  date  of  his  martyrdom  (166  instead  of  155  or  156). 
The  term  Kpfor)  JIMK'KI,  "first  age,"  which  Irenaeus  uses  of  the  time  of  his 
acquaintance  with  Polycarp  (III.  3,  \  4;  comp.  Euseb.  H.  E.  IV.  14),  admits 
of  an  extension  from  boyhood  to  youth  and  early  manhood ;  for  IrenoBua 
counts  five  ages  of  a  man's  life  (Adv.  HOST.  II.  22,  §  4 ;  24,  §  4^-infam,  pai-wlus, 
puer,  juvenis,  senior),  and  includes  the  thirtieth  year  in  the  youth,  by  calling 
Christ  a.  juvenis  at  the  time  of  his  baptism.    Hence  Zahn  and  Lippius  conclude 
that  the  Tp&rr)  famta  of  Irenaeus's  connection  with  Polycarp  is  not  the  age  of 
childhood,  but  of  early  young-manhood.    "  Alsjung&r  Mann,"  says  Zahn,  ''  ctwa 
zwischen  derm,  18.  und  35.    Lebensjahre,  wiU  Ir.  sich  des  Umgangs  mit  Pol  crfreut 
ha&en"  Another  hint  is  given  in  the  letter  of  Iren.  to  Florinus,  in  which  he  re- 
minds him  of  their  mutual  acquaintance  with  Polycarp  in  lower  Asia  in  their 
youth  when  Florinus  was  at  "the  royal  court"  (avty  fiaaikudf}.  Lightfoot  con- 
jectures that  this  means  by  anticipation  the  court  of  Antoninus  Piua,  when  ho 
was  proconsul  of  Asia  Minor,  A.  D.  136,  two  years  before  he  ascended  the  imperial 
throne  (Waddington,  Fastes  des  provinces  Asiatiques,  p.  714).  But  Zahn  reasserts 


g  1B2.  IKE1SLEUS.  749 

strucfcion  of  the  venerable  Polycarp  of  Smyrna,  the  puj)il  of 
John,  and  of  other  "  Elders,"  who  were  mediate  or  immediate 
disciples  of  the  apostles.  The  spirit  of  his  preceptor  passed 
over  to  him.  "  What  I  heard  from  him/'  says  he,  "  that  wrote 
I  not  on  paper,  but  in  my  heart,  and  by  the  grace  of  God  I  con- 
stantly bring  it  afresh  to  mind,"  Perhaps  he  also  accompanied 
Polycarp  on  his  journey  to  Rome  in  connexion  with  the  Easter 
controversy  (154).  He  went  as  a  missionary  to  Southern  Gaul 
which  seems  to  have  derived  her  Christianity  from  Asia  Minor, 
during  the  persecution  in  Lugdumim  and  Vicnnc  under  Marcus 
Aurolius  (177),  he  was  a  presbyter  there  and  witnessed  the  hor- 
fiblc  cruelties  which  the  infuriated  heathen  populace  practiced 
Mposi  his  brethren.1  The  a#ed  and  venerable  bishop,  Pothinus, 
fell  a  victim,  and  the  presbyter  took  the  post  of  danger,  but  was 
spared  for  important  work. 

lie  was  sent  by  the  Galilean  confessors  to  the  Roman  bishop 
Elciithcrus  (who  ruled  A.  D.  177-190),  as  a  mediator  in  the 
Montanistic  disputes.2 

After  the  martyrdom  of  Pothinus  he  was  elected  bishop  of 
Lyons  (178),  and  labored  there  with  zeal  and  success,  by  tongue 
and  pen,  for  the  restoration  of  the  heavily  visited  church,  for  the 
spread  of  Christianity  in  Gaul,  and  for  the  defence  and  develop- 
ment of  its  doctrines.  He  thus  combined  a  vast  missionary  and 
literary  activity.  If  we  arc  to  trust  the  account  of  Gregory  of 
Tours,  he  converted  almost  the  whole  population  of  Lyons  and 
sent  notable  missionaries  to  other  parts  of  pagan  France. 

.  After  the  year  190  we  lose  sight  of  Irenseus.  Jerome  speaks 
of  him  as  having  flourished  in  the  reign  of  Commodus,  L  e.,  be- 
tween 180  and  192.  He  is  reported  by  later  tradition  (since  the 
fourth  or  fifth  century)  to  have  died  a  martyr  in  the  persecution 
under  Septimus  Sevcrus,  A.  D.  202,  but  the  silence  of  Tertullian, 

tho.  more  natural  explanation  of  Bod  well,  that  the  court  of  Emperor  Hadrian  is 
nioaut,  who  twice  visited  Asia  Minor  as  emperor  hetwccn  the  years  122  and  130. 

1  Soe  above,  \  20,  p.  55  sq. 

2  Either  during,  or  after  the  persecution.  Euseb.  V,  S. ;  Jerome,  De  Vir.  itt 


750  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Hippolytus,  Eusebius,  and  Epiphanius  makes  this  point  ex 
tremely  doubtful  He  was  buried  under  the  altar  of  the  church 
of  St.  John  in  Lyons.1  This  city  became  again  famous  in  church 
history  in  the  twelfth  century  as  the  birthplace  of  the  Walden- 
sian  martyr  church,  the  Pauperes  de  Lugduno. 

II.  His  CHARACTER  AKD  POSITION.  Irenseus  is  the  leading 
representative  of  catholic  Christianity  in  the  last  quarter  of  the 
second  century,  the  champion  of  orthodoxy  against  Gnostic 
heresy,  and  the  mediator  between  the  Eastern  and  Western 
churches.  He  united  a  learned  Greek  education  and  philosophi- 
cal penetration  with  practical  wisdom  and  moderation.  He  is 
neither  very  original  nor  brilliant,  but  eminently  sound  and 
judicious.  His  individuality  is  not  strongly  marked,  but  almost 
lost  in  his  catholicity.  He  modestly  disclaims  elegance  and 
eloquence,  and  says  that  he  had  to  struggle  in  his  daily  adminis- 
trations with  the  barbarous  Celtic  dialect  of  Southern  Gaul ;  but 
he  nevertheless  handles  the  Greek  with  great  skill  on  the  most 
abstruse  subjects.2  He  is  familiar  with  Greek  poets  (Homer, 
Hesiod,  Pindar,  Sophocles)  and  philosophers  (Thales,  Pythago- 
ras, Plato),  whom  he  occasionally  cites.  He  is  perfectly  at  home 
in  the  Greek  Bible  and  in  the  early  Christian  writers,  as  Clement 
of  Rome,  Polycarp,  Papias,  Ignatius,  Hermas,  Justin  M.,  and 

1 1£  The  story  that  his  bones  were  dug  up  and  thrown  into  the  street  by  the  Cal- 
vinists  in  1562  has  been  abundantly  refuted."  Encycl  Brit,,  ninth  ed  XIII.  273. 

2  This  is  evident  from  the  very  passage  in  which  he  makes  that  apology  to 
his  friend  (Ado.  Ifar.,  Pref.  \  3) :  "Thou  wilt  not  require  from  me,  who  dwell 
among  the  Celts  (kv  Ke^roZf),  and  am  accustomed  for  the  most  part  to  use  a  bar- 
barous dialect  (P&pfiapov  diateKTw}  any  skill  in  discourse  which  I  have  not 
learned,  nor  any  power  of  composition  which  I  have  not  practised,  nor  any 
beauty  of  style  nor  persuasiveness  of  which  I  know  nothing.  But  thon  wilt 
accept  lovingly  what  I  write  lovingly  to  thee  in  simplicity,  truthfully,  and  in 
my  own  way  (airh&s  teal  afyQ&e  KOL  Mzwn/cfi?) ;  whilst  thou  thyself  (as  being 
more  competent  than  I  am)  wilt  expand  those  ideas  of  which  I  send  thee,  as  it 
were,  only  the  seeds  and  principles  (ffxtpuara  KOI  apx&c) ;  and  in  the  compre- 
hensiveness of  thine  understanding,  wilt  develop  to  their  full  extent  the  points 
on  which  I  briefly  touch,  so  as  to  set  with  power  before  thy  companions  those 
things  which  I  have  uttered  in  weakness."  Jerome  praises  the  style  of  Irenaeus 
as  "  doGtissimus  et  doqumtissimus,"  and  Massuet  (Diss.  IL  \  51)  adds  that  his 
"  Greek  text  as  far  as  preserved,  is  elegant,  polished,  and  grave." 


§182.  IREK/EUS.  751 

Tatian.1  His  position  gives  him  additional  weight,  for  lie  is 
linked  by  two  long  lives,  that  of  his  teacher  and  grand-teacher, 
to  the  fountain  head  of  Christianity.  We  plainly  trace  in  him 
the  influence  of  the  spirit  of  Polycarp  and  John.  "  The  true 
way  to  G-odj"  says  he,  in  opposition  to  the  false  Gnosis,  "  is  love. 
It  is  better  to  be  willing  to  know  nothing  but  Jesus  Christ  the 
crucified,  than  to  fall  into  ungodliness  through  over-curious 
questions  and  paltry  subtleties."  We  may  trace  in  him  also  the 
strong  influence  of  the  anthropology  and  sotcriology  of  Paul. 
But  he  makes  more  account  than  cither  John  or  Paul  of  the 
outward  visible  church,  the  episcopal  succession,  and  the  Haera- 
mente;  and  his  whole  conception  of  Christianity  is  predomi- 
nantly legalistic.  Herein  we  sec  the  catholic  cJiurchlincsH  which 
so  strongly  set  in  during  the  second  century. 

Irenseus  is  an  enemy  of  all  error  and  schism,  and,  on  the 
whole,  the  most  orthodox  of  the  antc-Niccno  fathers.2  We 
must,  however,  except  his  cschatology.  Here,  with  Papias  and 
most  of  his  contemporaries,  lie  maintains  the  pro-mil lomuiriau 
views  which  were  subsequently  abandoned  as  Jewish  dreams  by 
the  catholic  church.  While  laboring  hard  for  the  spread  and 
defense  of  the  church  on  earth,  he  is  still  "  gazing  up  into 
heaven,"  like  the  men  of  Galilee,  anxiously  waiting  for  the  re- 
turn of  the  Lord  and  the  establishment  of  his  kingdom.  He  is 
also  strangely  mistaken  about  the  age  of  Jesus  from  a  false  in- 
ference of  the  question  of  the  Jews,  John  8 :  57. 

Irenseus  is  the  first  among  patristic  writers  who  makes  full 
use  of  the  New  Testament.  The  Apostolic  Fathers  roecho  the 
oral  traditions;  the  Apologists  are  content  with  quoting  the 
Old  Testament  prophets  and  the  Lord's  own  words  in  the 
Gospels  as  proof  of  divine  revelation ;  but  Ircnaous  showed  the 

1  Harvey  claims  for  him  also  Hebrew  and  Syriuc  Rcholorship ;  hut  this  is 
disputed. 

a  Bishop  Lightfoot  ("Contemp.  Rev."  May,  1875,  p.  827)  «iyH  tlmt  FrenmuH 
"on  all  the  most  important  points  conforms  to  the  standard  which  han  satittfied 
the  Christian  church  ever  since."  Benan  (p.  341)  calls  him  "h  modfclc  dt 


f52  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

unity  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  in  opposition  to  the 
Gnostic  separation,  and  made  use  of  the  four  Gospels  and  nearly 
all  Epistles  in  opposition  to  the  mutilated  canon  of  Marcion.1 

With  all  his  zeal  for  pure  and  sound  doctrine,  Irenaeus  was 
liberal  towards  subordinate  differences,  and  remonstrated  with 
the  bishop  of  Rome  for  his  unapostolic  efforts  to  force  an  out- 
ward uniformity  in  respect  to  the  time  and  manner  of  celebrating 
Easter.2  We  may  almost  call  him  a  forerunner  of  Gallicanism 
in  its  protest  against  ultramontane  despotism.  "The  apostles 
have  ordained/'  says  he  in  the  third  fragment,  which  appears  to 
refer  to  that  controversy,  "  that  we  make  conscience  with  no  one 
of  food  and  drink,  or  of  particular  feasts,  new  moons,  and  sab- 
baths. Whence,  then,  controversies;  whence  schisms?  We 
keep  feasts  but  with  the  leaven  of  wickedness  and  deceit,  rending 
asunder  the  church  of  God,  and  we  observe  the  outward,  to 
the  neglect  of  the  higher,  faith  and  love."  He  showed  the  same 
moderation  in  the  Montanistic  troubles.  He  was  true  to  his 
name  Peaceful  (Elpyvaioc)  and  to  his  spiritual  ancestry. 

III.  His"  WRITINGS.  (1.)  The  most  important  work  of 
Irenseus  is  his  Refutation  of  Gnosticism,  in  five  books.3  It  was 

1  See  the  long  lint  of  his  Scripture  quotations  in  Stieren,  I.  996-1005,  and 
the  works  on  the  Canon  of  the  1ST.  T. 

2  Com  p.  §  62,  p.  217  ^q. 

3  "Efayxoc  KOL  civarpotr}  nfc  •fymduvviLov  yv&otug  (1  Tim.  6 :  20),  i.  e.  A  Refutation 
and  Subversion  of  Knowledge  falsdy  so  called;  cited,  since  Jerome,  under  the 
simpler  title:  Adversw  ffcereses  (TT/OOC  aiptaei$).    The  Greek  original  of  the 
work,  together  with  the  five  books  of  Hegesippus,  was  still  in  existence  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  and  may  yet  be  recovered.    See  Zahn  in  Brieger's  "  Zeit- 
schrift  fiir  K.  G-esch."  1877,  p.  288-291.     But  so  far  we  only  have  fragments 
of  it  preserved  in  Hippolytus  (PhilosopJwmena),  Eusebius,  Theodoret,  and 
especially  in  Epiphanius  (Hcer.  XXXI.  c.  9-33).    We  have,  however,  the  entire 
work  in  a  slavishly  literal  translation  into  barbarous  Latin,  crowded  with 
Grecisms,  but  for  this  very  reason  very  valuable.    Three  MSS.  of  the  Latin 
version  survive,  the  oldest  is  the  Codex  Claromontanus  of  the  tenth  or  eleventh 
century.    This  and  the  Arundel  MS.  are  now  in  England  (see  a  description  in 
Harvey's  Preface,  i.  vm.  sqq.  with  fac-similes).     Besides,  we  have  now  frag- 
ments of  a  Syrian  version,  derived  from  the  Nitrian  MSS.  of  the  British 
Museum,  and  fragments  of  an  Armenian  translation,  published  by  Pitra  in  his 
Spidlegmm  Solesmense,  vol.  I.  (1852),  both  incorporated  in  Harvey's  editiott 


2  182.  IREISUEUS.  753« 

composed  during  the  pontificate  of  Eleutherus,  that  is  between  the 
years  177  and  1 90.1  It  is  at  once  the  polemic  theological  master- 
piece of  the  ante-Nicene  age,  and  the  richest  mine  of  informa- 
tion respecting  Gnosticism  and  the  church  doctrine  of  that  age. 
It  contains  a  complete  system  of  Christian  divinity,  but  en- 
veloped in  polemical  smoke,  which  makes  it  very  difficult  and 
tedious  reading.  The  work  was  written  at  the  request  of  a 
friend  who  wished  to  be  informed  of  the  Valentinian  heresy  and 
to  be  furnished  with  arguments  against  it.  Valentinus  and 
Marcion  had  taught  in  Rome  about  A.  r>.  140,  and  their  doctrines 
had  spread  to  the  south  of  France.  The  first  book  contains  a 
minute  exposition  of  the  gorgeous  speculations  of  Valentinus  and 
a  general  view  of  the  other  Gnostic  sects ;  the  second  an  exposure 
of  the  unreasonableness  and  contradictions  of  these  heresies ; 
especially  the  notions  of  the  Demiurge  as  distinct  from  tho 
Creator,  of  the  Aeons,  the  Pleroma  and  Kenoma,  the  emanations, 
the  fall  of  Achamoth,  the  formation  of  the  lower  world  of  mat- 
ter, the  sufferings  of  the  Sophia,  the  difference  between  the  three 
classes  of  men,  the  Somatici,  Psychici,  and  Pneumatic!.  The 
last  three  books  refute  Gnosticism  from  the  Holy  Scripture  and 
Christian  tradition  which  teach  the  same  thing ;  for  the  same 
gospel  which  was  first  orally  preached  and  transmitted  was  sub- 
sequently committed  to  writing  and  faithfully  preserved  in  all 
the  apostolic  churches  through  the  regular  succession  of  the 
bishops  and  elders ;  and  this  apostolic  tradition  insures  at  the 
same  time  the  correct  interpretation  of  Scripture  against  heretical 
perversion.  To  the  ever-shifting  and  contradictory  opinions  of 
the  heretics  Irenseus  opposes  the  unchanging  faith  of  the  catholic 

vol.  II.  431-469.  They  agree  closely  with  the  Latin  Version.  An  attempt  to 
restore  the  Greek  text  from  the  Latin,  for  the  better  understanding  of  it,  hag 
been  made  on  the  first  four  chapters  of  the  third  book  by  II.  W.  J.  Thiersch 
(*'  Stud.  u.  Kritiken,"  1842).  Seraler'a  objections  to  the  genuineness  have  been 
so  thoroughly  refuted  by  Chr.  G.  F-  Walch  (De  authentia  librorum  Ir&nai,  1774), 
that  Mohler  and  Stieren  might  have  spared  themselves  the  trouble. 

1  Eleutherus  is  mentioned,  TIT.  3,  3,  as  then  occupying  tbe  see  of  Borne. 
Lipsius  fixes  the  composition  between  A.  t>.  180  and  185,  Harvey  between  182 
and  188  (I.  CLV111). 
Vol.  II.— 48 


754  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

church  which  is  based  on  the  Scriptures  and  tradition,  and  com* 
pacted  together  by  the  episcopal  organization.  It  is  the  same 
argument  which  Bellarmin,  Bossuet,  and  Mohler  use  against 
divided  and  distracted  Protestantism,  but  Protestantism  differ^ 
as  much  from  old  Gnosticism  as  the  New  Testament  from  the 
apocryphal  Gospels,  and  as  sound,  sober,  practical  sense  differs 
from  mystical  and  transcendental  nonsense.  The  fifth  book 
dwells  on  the  resurrection  of  the  body  and  the  millennial  king- 
dom. Irenseus  derived  his  information  from  the  writings  of 
Valentinus  and  Marcion  and  their  disciples,  and  from  Justin 
Martyr's  Syntagma.1 

The  interpretation  of  Scripture  is  generally  sound  and  sober, 
and  contrasts  favorably  with  the  fantastic  distortions  of  the 
Gnostics.  He  had  a  glimpse  of  a  theory  of  inspiration  which 
does  justice  to  the  human  factor.  He  attributes  the  irregularities 
of  Paul's  style  to  his  rapidity  of  discourse  and  the  impetus  of 
the  Spirit  which  is  in  him.2 

(2.)  The  Epistle  to  Florinus,  of  which  Eusebius  has  preserved 
an  interesting  and  important  fragment,  treated  On  the  Unity  of 
God,  and  the  Origin  of  Evil?  It  was  written  probably  after  the 
work  against  heresies,  and  as  late  as  190.4  Florinus  was  an  older 
friend  and  fellow-student  of  Irenseus,  and  for  some  time  presby- 
ter in  the  church  of  Eome,  but  was  deposed  on  account  of  his 
apostasy  to  the  Gnostic  heresy.  Irenseus  reminded  him  very 

1  On  the  sources  of  the  history  of  heresies  see  especially  the  works  of 
Lipsius,  and  Harnack,  quoted  on  p.  443,  and  Harvey's  Preliminary  Obserra- 
tions  in  voL  I. 


r.  m.  7,  ?  2. 

8  TLspi  novapx'tas  #  irepl  rot  $  dwu  rdv  6edv  xoiqrip  KOK&V.  Euseb.  H.  K  V. 
20;  comp.  ch.  1  5. 

*  Leimbach  and  Lightfoot  regard  the  letter  as  one  of  the  earliest  writings  of 
Irenaeus,  but  Lipsius  (p.  263)  puts  it  down  to  about  A.  D.  190  or  after,  on  the 
ground  of  the  Syriac  fragment  from  a  letter  of  Irenseus  to  Victor  of  Eome 
(190-202)  concerning  "Florinus,  a  presbyter  and  partisan  of  the  error  of 
Valentinus,  who  published  an  abominable  book."  See  the  fragment  in 
Harvey,  II.  457.  Eusebius  makes  no  mention  of  such  a  letter,  but  then 
is  no  good  reason  to  doubt  its  genuineness, 


\  182.  IRENJEUS.  755 

fiouchingly  of  their  common  studies  at  the  feet  of  the  patriarchal 
Poiycarp,  when  he  held  some  position  at  the  royal  court  (prob- 
ably during  Hadrian's  sojourn  at  Smyrna),  and  tried  to  bring 
him  back  to  'the  faith  of  his  youth,  but  we  do  not  know  with 
what  effect. 

(3.)  On  the  Ogdoad1  against  the  Valentinian  system  of  Aeons, 
in  which  the  number  eight  figures  prominently  with  a  mystic 
meaning.  Eusebius  says  that  it  was  written  on  account  of 
Florinus,  and  that  he  found  in  it  "  a  most  delightful  remark/' 
as  follows  :  "  I  adjure  thee,  whoever  thou  art,  that  transcribes^ 
this  book,  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  by  his  gracious  appear- 
ance, when  he  shall  come  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,  to 
compare  what  thou  hast  copied,  and  to  correct  it  by  this  original 
manuscript,  from  which  thou  hast  carefully  transcribed,  And 
that  thou  also  copy  this  adjuration,  and  insert  it  in  the  copy." 
The  carelessness  of  transcribers  in  those  days  is  the  chief  cause 
of  the  variations  in  the  text  of  the  Greek  Testament  which 
abounded  already  in  the  second  century.  Ircnseus  himself  men- 
tions a  remarkable  difference  of  reading  in  the  mystic  number 
of  Antichrist  (666  and  616),  on  which  the  historic  interpretation 
of  the  book  depends  (Rev.  13  :  18). 

(4.)  A  book  On  Schism,  addressed  to  Blastus  who  was  the 
head  of  the  Roman  Montanists  and  also  a  Quartodeciman.2  It 
referred  probably  to  the  Montanist  troubles  in  a  conciliatory 
spirit. 

(5.)  Busebius  mentions3  several  other  treatises  which  are  en- 
tirely lost,  as  Against  the  Greefo  (or  On  Knowledge),  On  Apos- 
tolic Preaching,  a  Book  on  Various  Disputes,4'  and  on  the  Wis- 


tydoddoc.    Euseb.  V.  20. 

a  Uepl  cxfopaToc.  Also  mentioned  by  Euseb.  1.  c.  Corap.  V.  14  ;  Pseudo- 
Tertullian  Adv.  Hear.  22;  and  the  Syriac  fragment  in  Harvey  II.  456;  also 
the  critical  discussion  of  the  subject  and  date  by  Lipsius,  264  sq, 

3  #.  R  V.  26. 


Harvey  and  Llpfftis  mafce  thfe  out  to  h*T« 
been  a  collection  of  homilies  on  various  texts  of  scripture. 


756  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

dom  of  Solomon.  In  the  Syriac  fragments  some  other  lost  works 
are  mentioned. 

(6.)  Irenseus  is  probably  the  author  of  that  touching  account 
of  the  persecution  of  177,  which  the  churches  of  Lyons  and 
Yienne  sent  to  the  churches  in  Asia  Minor  and  Phrygia,  and 
which  Eusebius  has  in  great  part  preserved.  He  was  an  eye- 
witness of  the  cruel  scene,  yet  his  name  is  not  mentioned,  which 
would  well  agree  with  his  modesty  ;  the  document  breathes  his 
mild  Christian  spirit,  reveals  his  aversion  to  Gnosticism,  his  in- 
dulgence for  Montanism,  his  expectation  of  the  near  approach  of 
Antichrist.  It  is  certainly  one  of  the  purest  and  most  precious 
remains  of  ante-Nicene  literature  and  fully  equal,  yea  superior 
to  the  "  Martyrdom  of  Polycarp/'  because  free  from  superstitious 
relic-worship.1 

(7.)  Finally,  we  must  mention  four  more  Greek  fragments  of 
Irenaeus,  which  Pfaff  discovered  at  Turin  in  1715,  and  first  pub- 
lished. Their  genuineness  has  been  called  in  question  by  some 
Roman  divines,  chiefly  for  doctrinal  reasons.2  The  first  treats 
of  the  true  knowledge,3  which  consists  not  in  the  solution  of 
subtle  questions,  but  in  divine  wisdom  and  the  imitation  of 
Christ,-  the  second  is  on  the  eucharist;*  the  third,  on  the  duty 
of  toleration  in  subordinate  points  of  difference,  with  reference 
to  the  Paschal  controversies;5  the  fourth,  on  the  object  of  the 

1  Eusebius,  H.  R  V.  1  and  2;  also  in  Kouth's  BeliquicB  8.  1.  295  sqq.,  with 
notes.    It  has  often  been  translated.    Comp.  on  this  document  the  full  discus- 
sion of  Donaldson,  III.  250-286,  and  the  striking  judgment  of  Eenan  (I,  c.  p. 
340),  who  calls  it  ftun  des  morceaux  ksplus  extraordinaires  que  possdde  aucwne 
litteratwre?  and  "  la  perk  de  la  litterature  ehr&ienne  au  II6  siecle."    He  attributes 
it  to  Irenseus;  Harvey  denies  it  to  him;  Donaldson  leaves  the  authorship  in 
doubt. 

2  Harvey  (L  cLxxn)  accepts  them  all  as  "possessing  good  external  au- 
thority, and  far  more  convincing  internal  proof  of  genuineness,  than  can 
always  be  expected  in  such  brief  extracts." 


perhaps  the  same  treatise  as  the   one  mentioned  by 
Eusebius  under  the  title  n-sp 


*  Discussed  in  J69,  p.  242. 

5  This  Lipsius  (p.  266)  considers  to  be  the  only  one  of  the  four  fragments 
which  is  undoubtedly  genuine. 


J183.  IIIPPOLYTUS.  757 

incarnation,  which  is  stated  to  bo  the  purgiiig  away  of  sin  and 
the  annihilation  of  all  evil.1 


§  183.  Ilippolytus. 

(I.)  S.  HIPPOLYTI  episcopi  et  martyris  Opera,  Greece  et  Lat.  ed.  J.  A- 
FABUICIUH,  Hamb.  1716-18, 2  vols.  fol. ;  ed.  GALLANDI  in  "  Biblioth. 
Patrum,"  Von.  1700,  Vol.  If.;  MIGNE:  Pair.  Gr.}  vol.  X.  col.  583- 
982.  P.  ANT.  DE  LAGAKDE  :  HIPPOLYTI  Rotnani  quce  feruniur 
omnia  Greece,  Lips,  ot  Loud.  1858  (216  pages).  Lagardc  has  also 
published  some  Byriac  and  Arabic  fragments,  of  Hippol.,  in  \unAna- 
lecta  Syriaca  (p.  70-91)  and  Appendix,  Leipz.  and  Loud.  18/58. 

Patristic  notices  of  Hippolytus.  EUSEB.  :  Jf.  E.  VI.  20,  22;  PRUDENT  run 
in  the  llth  of  his  Martyr  Hymns  (ncpi  vrefyavw]  •  HiEttON". :  Da  Vir. 
ill  c.  61;  PHOTIUS,  Cod.  48  and  121.  EPIPHANIUB  barely  men- 
tions Hippol.  (Hc&r.  31).  THEODOJRJET  quotes  several  putwigeB  arid 
calls  him  "holy  Hippol.  bishop  and  martyr"  (floor.  £*ab.  Ill;  1  and 
Dial.  L,  II.  and  III.).  See  Fabricius,  Hippol  I  VIIL-XX. 

R.  HIPPOLYTI  Epis.  et  Mart.  JRefutatiowis  omnium*  haeresium  librorum 
decem  quce  snpwsunt,  ed.  Du^CKEB  ct  SoHNKlDEWitf.  Gott.  1850. 
The  fir.st  ed.  appeared  under  the  name  of  Origeri :  9toptytvm%  Moao- 
Qb/teva,  ij  Kara  Traa&v  alpteav  tfayx°G»  OlWCJIBNlH  PkttoitopkuwiffiM,  #we, 
omnium  h&resium  rcfutafio.  HI  codwe  Paridno  wuna  priwum  ed. 
EMMANUEL  Mi LLEE.  Oxon.  (Clarendon  Press),  1851.  Another  ed. 
by  Abbe  OR  DICE,  Par.  1800.  Aii  English  tranwlation  by  J.  11.  MAC- 
MAHOtf,  in  the  "Ante-Nicone  Christian  Library,"  Edinb.  1808. 

A  MS.  of  this  important  work  from  the  14th  century  wan  diHCOvcrc.d  nt 
Mt.  Athos  in  Greece  in  1842,  by  a  learned  Greek,  Minoi'dcH  Mynas 
(who  had  been  sent  by  M.  Villcmain,  minister  of  public  instruction 
under  Louis  Philippe,  to  Greece  in  search  of  MSB.),  &ud  deposited 
in  the  national  library  at  Paris.  The  first  book  had  been  long 
known  among  the  works  of  Origen,  but  had  justly  been  already 
denied  to  him  by  Huet  and  De  la  Rue ;  the  second  and  third,  and 
beginning  of  the  fourth,  arc  still  wanting ;  tho  tenth  lacks  the  con- 
clusion. This  work  is  now  universally  awcribed  to  Tlippolytus. 

Canones  S.  HIPPOLYTI  Arabice  e  coditibus  Romams  r,um  verswne  Latina, 
ed.  D.  B.  DE  HANEBEBO.  Monach.  1870.  The  canons  are  very 
rigoristic,  but  "  certain  evidence  as  to  their  authorship  is  wanting." 

0.  BARDKNHJSWER  :  Des  fail.  Hippolyt  von  Rom.  Commentar  zum  B. 
Daniel  Freib.  i.  B.  1877. 

(II.)  E.  E.  KIMMEI,:  De  Hippolyti  vita  et  wiptis.  Jen.  1831).  MoHLER: 
Patrol  p.  584  aqq.  Both  are  confined  to  the  older  confused  sources- 
of  information. 

1  See  2  157,  p.  609,  and  Stieren's  ed.  I.  889. 


758  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Since  the  discovery  of  the  Philosophumena  the  following  books  and  tracts 
on  Hippolytus  have  appeared,  which  present  him  under  a  new  light: 

BUNSEN  :  Hippolytus  and  fa's  Age.  Lond.  1852.  4  vols.  (German  in  2 
vols.  Leipz.  1855) ;  2d  ed.  with  much  irrelevant  and  heterogeneous 
matter  (under  the  title:  Christianity  and  Mankind).  Lond.  1854. 
7  vols. 

JACOBI  in  the  "Deutsche  Zeitschrift,"  Berl.  1851  and  '53;  and  Art. 
"  Hippolytus"  in  Eerzog's  Encykl.  VI.  131  sqq.  (1856),  and  in  Her- 
zog  2  VI 139-149. 

BAUB,  in  the  "  Theol.  Jahrb."  Tub.  1853.  VOLKMAE  and  EITSCHL, 
ibid.  1854. 

GIESELER,  in  the  "  Stud.  u.  Krit."  for  1853. 

DOLLINGEE,  (TL  Oath.,  but  since  1870  an  Old  Oath.) :  Hippolytus  und 
Callistus,  oder  die  rom.  Kirche  in  der  ersten  Halfte  des  dritten  Jahrh. 
Regensburg  1853.  English  translation  by  ALFRED  PLTTMMER,  Edinb. 
1876  (360  pages).  The  most  learned  book  on  the  subject.  An  apo- 
logy for  Callistus  and  the  Roman  see,  against  Hippolytus  the  sup- 
posed first  anti-Pope. 

CHE.  WORDSWORTH  'Anglican) :  St.  Hippolytus  and  the  Church  of  Rome 
in  the  earlier  part  of  the  third  century.  London  1853.  Second  and 
greatly  enlarged  edition,  1880.  With  the  Greek  text  and  an  English 
version  of  the  9th  and  10th  books.  The  counter-part  of  Dollinger. 
An  apology  for  Hippolytus  against  Callistus  and  the  papacy. 

L*ABB£  CEUICE  (chanoine  hon.  de  Paris) :  Etudes  sur  de  nouv.  doc.  Jmt. 
des  Philosophumena.  Paris  1853  (380  p.) 

W.  ELPE  TAYLEE  :  Eippol.  and  the  Christ.  Ch.  of  the  third  century, 
Lond.  1853.  (245  p.)  . 

LENOEMABTT:  Controverse  surles  PUlos.  d?0rj,g.  Paris  1853.  In  "Le 
Correspondant,"  Tom.  31  p.  509-550.  For  Origen  as  author. 

G.  VOLKMAE  :  Hippolytus  und  die  rom.  Zeitgenossen.  Zurich  1855. 
(174  pages.) 

CASPAKI  :  Quelkn  zur  Gesch.  des  Tauf symbols  und  der  OlaubensregeL 
Christiania,  vol.  III.  349  sqq.  and  374r-409.  On  the  writings  of  H. 

LIPSIUS  :  Quellen  der  dltesten  Eetzergesch.    Leipzig  1875. 

DE  SMEDT  (R.  C.) :  De  Auctore  Philosophumenon.  In  "  Dissertationee 
Selectee."  Ghent,  1876. 

G.  SALMON:  JERpp.  Romanus  in  Smith  and  Wace  III.  85-105  (very  good.) 

I.  LITE  or  HIPPOLYTUS.  This  famous  person  has  lived 
three  lives,  a  real  one  in  the  third  century  as  an  opponent  of  the 
popes  of  his  day,  a  fictitious  one  in  the  middle  ages  as  a  canon- 
ized saint,  and  a  literary  one  in  the  nineteenth  century  after  the 
discovery  of  his  long  lost  work  against  heresies.  He  was  un- 
doubtedly one  of  the  most  learned  and  eminent  scholars  and 


g  183.  HiPPOLYTUS.  759 

iheologians  of  his  time.  The  Roman  church  placed  him  in  the 
number  of  her  saints  and  martyrs,  little  suspecting  that  he  would 
come  forward  in  the  nineteenth  century  as  an  accuser  against  her. 
But  the  statements  of  the  ancients  respecting  him  are  very 
obscure  and  confused.  Certain  it  is,  that  he  received  a  thorough 
Grecian  education,  and,  as  he  himself  says,  in  a  fragment  pre- 
served by  Photius,  heard  the  discourses  of  Irenseus  (in  Lyons  or 
in  Rome).  His  public  life  falls  in  the  end  of  the  second  century 
and  the  first  three  decennaries  of  the  third  (about  198  to  236), 
and  he  belongs  to  the  western  church,  though  he  may  have  been, 
like  Irenseus,  of  Oriental  extraction.  At  all  events  he  wrote  ail 
his  books  in  Greek.1 

Eusebius  is  the  first  who  mentions  him,  and  he  calls  him  in- 
definitely, bishop,  and  a  contemporary  of  Origen  and  Beryl  of 
Bostra ;  he  evidently  did  not  know  where  he  was  bishop,  but  he 
gives  a  list  of  his  works  which  he  saw  (probably  in  the  library 
of  Csesarea).  Jerome  gives  a  more  complete  list  of  his  writings, 
but  no  more  definite  information  as  to  his  see,  although  he  was 
well  acquainted  with  Rome  and  Pope  Damasus.  He  calls  him 
martyr,  and  couples  him  with  the  Roman  senator  Apollonius. 
An  old  catalogue  of  the  popes,  the  Catalogus  Libcrianus  (about 
A.  D.  354),  states  that  a  "presbyter"  Hippolytus  was  banished, 
together  with  the  Roman  bishop  Pontianus,  about  235,  to  the 
unhealthy  island  of  Sardinia,  anct  that  the  bodies  of  both  were 
deposited  on  the  same  day  (Aug.  13),  Pontianus  in  the  cemetery 
of  Callistus,  Hippolytus  on  the  Via  Tiburtina  (where  his  statue 
was  discovered  in  1551).  The  translation  of  Pontianus  was 
effected  by  Pope  Fabianus  about  236  or  237.  From  this  state- 
ment we  would  infer  that  Hippolytus  died  in  the  mines  of  Sar- 
dinia and  was  thus  counted  a  martyr,  like  all  those  confessors 
who  died  in  prison.  He  may,  however,  have  returned  and  suf- 

1  Dr.  Caspar!  (III.  351  note  153)  thinks  it  probable  that  Hippolytua  came 
from  the  East  to  Kome  in  very  early  youth,  and  grew  up  there  as  a  member, 
wid  afterwards  officer  of  the  Greek  p;.rt  of  the  Roman  congregation.  Liptmw 
(p.  40  aqq.)  supposes  that  irippolytus  was  a  native  of  Asia  Minor,  and  a  pupil 
there  of  Irenseus  in  170.  But  this  is  refuted  by  Harnack  and  Caspar i  (p.  409) 


760  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

fered  martyrdom  elsewhere.  The  next  account  we  have  is  from 
the  Spanish  poet  Prudentius  who  wrote  in  the  beginning  of  the 
fifth  century.  He  represents  Hippolytus  in  poetic  description  as 
a  Roman  presbyter  (therein  agreeing  with  the  Liberian  Cata- 
logue) who  belonged  to  the  JSTovatian  party1  (which,  however, 
arose  several  years  after  the  death  of  Hippolytus),  but  in  the 
prospect  of  death  regretted  the  schism  exhorted  his  numerous 
followers  to  return  into  the  bosom  of  the  catholic  church,  aiid 
then,  in  bitter  allusion  to  his  name  and  to  the  mythical  Hippo- 
lytus, the  son  of  Theseus,  was  bound  by  the  feet  to  a  team  of 
wild  horses  and  dragged  to  death  over  stock  and  stone.  He 
puts  into  his  mouth  as  his  last  words :  "  These  steeds  drag  my 
limbs  after  them;  drag  Thou,  0  Christ,  my  soul  to  Thyself."2 
He  places  the  scene  of  his  martyrdom  at  Ostia  or  Portus  where 
the  Prefect  of  Koine  happened  to  be  at  that  time  who  condemned 
him.  for  his  Christian  profession.  Prudentius  also  saw  the  sub- 
terranean grave-chapel  in  Rome  and  a  picture  which  represented 
his  martyrdom  (perhaps  intended  originally  for  the  mythological 
Hippolytus).3  But  as  no  such  church  is  found  in  the  early  lists 
of  Roman  churches,  it  may  have  been  the  church  of  St.  Law- 
rence, the  famous  gridiron-martyr,  which  adjoined  the  tomb  of 
Hippolytus.  Notwithstanding  the  chronological  error  about  the 
Novatian  schism  and  the  extreme  improbability  of  such  a  hor- 
rible death  under  Roman  laws  and  customs,  there  is  an  important 
element  of  truth  in  this  legend,  namely  the  schismatic  position 

1  He  calls  it  schisma  Novatij  instead  of  Novatlani.    The  two  names  are  often 
confounded,  especially  by  Greek  writers,  including  Eusebius. 

*  Ultima  vox  audita  serais  v&fierabilis  hose  est  : 

''ERrapiant  artus,  fa  rape,  Christej  animam." 

8  Ko.  XT,  of  the  Peristephanon  Liber.  Plummer,  in  Append.  C.  to  Dollinger, 
p.  345-351,  gives^  the  poem  in  full  (246  lines)  from  Bressel's  text  (1860). 
Baronius  charged  Prudentius  with  confounding  three  different  Hippolytis 
and  transferring  the  martyrdom  of  Hippolytus,  the  Roman  officer,  guard,  and 
disciple  of  St.  Lawrence,  upon  the  bishop  of  that  name.  Dollinger  severely 
analyses  the  legend  of  Prudentius,  and  derives  it  from  a  picture  of  a  martyr 
torn  to  pieces  by  horses,  ffhich  may  have  existed  near  the  church  of  the  mar 
tyr  St.  Lawrence  (p.  58). 


§183.  HIPPOLYTUa  761 

of  Hippolytus  which  suits  the  Phttosophumma,  perhaps  also  hi* 
connection  with  Portus.  The  later  tradition  of  i-ho  catholic 
church  (from  the  middle  of  the  seventh  century)  makes  him 
bishop  of  Portus  Romauus  (now  Porto)  which  lies  afc  the 
Northern  mouth  of  the  Tiber,  opposite  Ostia;  about  fifteen  miles 
from  Home.1  The  Greek  writers,  not  strictly  distinguishing 
the  city  from  the  surrounding  country,  call  him  usually  bishop 
of  Rome.2 

These  are  the  vague  and  conflicting  traditions,  amounting  to 
this  that  Hippolytus  was  an  eminent  presbyter  or  bishop  in 
Rome  or  the  vicinity,  in  the  early  part  of  the  third  century,  that 
he  wrote  many  learned  works  and  died  a  martyr  in  Sardinia  or 
Ostia.  So  the  matter  stood  when  a  discovery  in  tho  sixteenth 
century  shed  new  light  on  this  mysterious  person. 

In  the  year  1551,  a  much  mutilated  marble  statuo,  now  in  tho 
LatGran  Museum,  was  exhumed  at  Rome  near  the  basilica  of  St. 
Lawrence  on  the  Via  Tiburtina  (the  road  to  Tivoli).  This  statue 
i«  not  mentioned  indeed  by  Prudentius,  and  was  perhaps  origi- 
nally designed  for  an  entirely  different  purpose,  possibly  for  a 
Roman  senator;  but  it  is  at  all  events  vory  ancient,  probably 
from  the  middle  of  the  third  century.3  It  represents  a  venerable 

1  So  first  the  Paschal  Oironide,  and  Anastaflius. 

2  Salmon  says:    t£0f  the  fragments  collected  in  De  I/igarde's  edition  the 
majority  are  entitled  merely  of  'Hippolytus/  or  'of  Hip  poly  tuw,  bishop  and 
martyr/  but  about  twenty  describe  him  as  '  bishop  of  Borne/  and  only  throe 
place  him  elsewhere.    Tiie  earliest  author  who  can  be  named  as  so  describing 
him  is  Apollinaris  in  the  fourth  century. . . .  Ilippol.  likewise  appearn  as  pope 
and  bishop  of  Rome  in  the  Greek  menologicH,  and  is  alwo  honored  with  the 
eame  title  by  the  Syrian,  Coptic,  and  Abyssinian  churches."    See  the  authori- 
ties in  Dollinger. 

8  The  reasons  for  this  early  age  are:  (1)  The  artistic  character  of  the  state, 
which  ante-dates  the  decline  of  art,  which  began  with  Conntantine.  (2)  The 
paschal  cycle,  which  gives  the  list  of  the  paschal  full  IUOOIIH  accurately  for  the 
years  217-223,  but  for  the  next  eight  years  wrongly,  HO  that  the  table  after 
that  date  became  useless,  and  hence  must  have  been  written  soon  after  222. 
(3)  The  Greek  language  of  the  inscription,  which  nearly  died  out  in  Rome  in 
the  fourth  century,  and  gave  way  to  the  Latin  as  tho  language  of  the  Roman 
church.  Dr.  Salmon  fixes  the  dace  of  the  erection  of  the  statue  at  235,  very 


762  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

man  clothed  with  the  Greek  pallium  and  Roman-  ttfga,  seated  in 
a  bishop's  chair.  On  the  back  of  the  cathedra  are  engraved  in 
uncial  letters  the  paschal  cycle,  or  eaater-table  of  Hippolytus  for 
seven  series  of  sixteen  years,  beginning  with  the  first  year  of 
Alexander  Severus  (222),  and  a  list  of  writings,  presumably 
written  by  the  person  whom  the  statue  represents.  Among  these 
writings  is  named  a  work  On  the  All,  which  is  mentioned  in  the 
tenth  book  of  the  Philosophumena  as  a  product  of  the  writer.1 
This  furnishes  the  key  to  the  authorship  of  that  important  work. 
Much  more  important  is  the  recent  discovery  and  publication 
(in  1851)  of  one  of  his  works  themselves,  and  that  no  doubt  the 
most  valuable  of  them  all,  viz.  the  Philosophumena,  or  Refuta- 
tion of  all  Heresies.  It  is  now  almost  universally  acknowledged 
that  this  work  comes  not  from  Origen,  who  never  was  a  bishop, 
nor  from  the  antimontanistic  and  antichiliastic  presbyter  Caius, 
but  from  Hippolytus ;  because,  among  other  reasons,  the  author, 
in  accordance  with  the  Hippolytus-statue,  himself  refers ,  to  a 
work  On  the  All,  as  his  own,  and  because  Hippolytus  is  de- 
clared by  the  fathers  to  have  written  a  work  Adversus  omnes 
Hcereses.2  The  entire  matter  of  the  work,  too,  agrees  with  the 
scattered  statements  of  antiquity  respecting  his  ecclesiastical  posi- 
tion ;  and  at  the  same  time  places  that  position  in  a  much  clearer 
light,  and  gives  us  a  better  understanding  of  those  statements.3 

shortly  after  the  banishment  of  Hippolytus.  A  cast  of  the  Hippolytus-statue 
is  in  the  library  of  the  Union  Theol.  Seminary  in  New  York,  procured  from 
Berlin  through  Professor  Piper. 

1  Hept  rov  navToe.    See  the  list  of  books  in  the  notes. 

2  On  the  chair  of  the  statue,  it  is  true,  the  Philosophumena  i?  not  mentioned, 
and  cannot  be  concealed  under  the  title  H/%  "EAAsyvaf,  which  is  connected 
by  Koi  mih  the  work  against  Plato.    But  this  silence  is  easily  accounted  for, 
partly  from  the  greater  rarity  of  the  book,  partly  from  its  offensive  opposition 
to  two  Eoman  popes. 

^The  authorship  of  EGppolytus  is  proved 'or  conceded  by  Bunsen,  Gieseler, 
Jacobi,  Dollinger,  Duncker,  Schneidewin,  Caspari,  Milman,  Robertson,  Words- 
worth, Plumtner,  Salmon.  Cardinal  Newman  denies  it  on  doctrinal  grounds, 
but  offers  no  solution  The  only  rival  claimants  are  Origen  (so  the  first  editor, 
Miller,  and  Le  Normant),  and  Cajus  (so  Baur  and  Cruice,  the  latter  hesitating 


I  183.  HIPPOLYTUS.  763 

The  author  of  the  Philosoplmmena  appears  as  one  of  the  most 
prominent  of  the  clergy  in  or  near  Rome  in  tho  beginning  of  the 
third  century;  probably  a  bishop,  since  he  reckons  himself  among 
the  successors  of  the  apostles  and  the  guardians  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  church.  lie  took  an  active  part  in  all  the  doctrinal  and 
ritual  controversies  of  his  time,  but  severely  opposed  the  Iloman 
bishops  Zephyrinus  (202-218)  and  Callistus  (218-223),  on 
account  of  their  Patripassian  leanings,  and  their  loose  penitential 
discipline.  The  latter  especially,  who  had  given  public  offence 
by  his  former  mode  of  life,  he  attacked  without  mercy  and  not 
without  passion.  He  was,  therefore,  if  not  exactly  a  sehismatioul 
counter-pope  (as  Dollinger  supposes),  yet  the  head  of  a  disadectod 
and  schismatic  party,  orthodox  in  doctrine,  rigoristic  in  discipline, 
and  thus  very  nearly  allied  to  the  Montanists  before  him,  and  to 
the  later  schism  of  Novatian.  It  is  for  this  reason  the  more 
remarkable,  that  we  have  no  account  respecting  the  subsequent 
course  of  this  movement,  except  the  later  unreliable  tradition, 
that  Hippolytus  finally  returned  into  the  bosom  of  the  catholic 
church,  and  expiated  his  schism  by  martyrdom,  either  in  the 
mines  of  Sardinia  or  near  Rome  (A.  D.  235,  or  rather  230,  under 
the  persecuting  emperor  Maximinus  the  Thracian). 

II.  His  WRITINGS.    Hippolytus  was  the  most  learned  divine 

between  Cains  and  Tertullian).  Origen  is  out  of  tho  question,  because  of  the 
difference  of  style  and  theology,  and  because  he  was  no  bishop  and  no  resident 
at  Home,  but  only  a  transient  visitor  (under  Zephyrinus,  about  211).  The 
only  claim  of  Caius  is  the  remark  of  Photius,  based  on  a  marginal  note  in  his 
MS.,  but  doubted  by  himself,  that  Caiu-s  wrote  a  work  irepl  rov  7ravT6c  and  an 
anti-heretical  work  called  "The  Labyrinth/'  and  that  he  was  "a  presbyter  of 
Borae,';  and  also  declared  by  some  "a  bishop  of  the  heathen."  But  Cains 
was  an  anti-Chiliast,  and  an  opponent  of  Montanism ;  while  Hippolytus  was 
probably  a  Chiliast,  like  Irenaeus,  and  accepted  the  Apocalypse  as  Johanncan, 
and  sympathized  with  the  disciplinary  rigorism  of  tho  Montanists,  although 
he  mildly  opposed  them.  See  Dollinger,  I  c.  p.  250  sqq.  (Rngl.  translation), 
Volkmar,  I  c.  p.  60-71 ;  and  Wordsworth,  I  c.  p.  16-28.  Two  other  writers 
have  been  proposed  as  authors  of  the  Philosophumem,  but  without  a  shadow 
of  possibility,  namely  Tertullian  by  the  Abb<*  Crnice,  and  the  schismatic 
Novatian  by  the  Jesuit  Torquati  Armellini,  in  a  dissertation  De  princa  refuta- 
twme  haereteon  Oriyen.is  nomine  ac  philosophumenon  tituto  r«ceri$  wdgata,  Bom., 
3862  (quoted  by  Plummer,  p.  354). 


764  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

and  the  most  voluminous  writer  of  the  Roman  church  in  the 
third  century;  in  fact  the  first  great  scholar  of  that  church, 
though  like  his  teacher,  Irenseus,  he  used  the  Greek  language 
exclusively.  This  fact,  together  with  his  polemic  attitude  to  the 
Eoman  bishops  of  his  day,  accounts  for  the  early  disappearance 
of  his  works  from  the  remembrance  of  that  church.  He  is  not 
so  much  an  original,  productive  author,  as  a  learned  and  skilful 
compiler.  In  the  philosophical  parts  of  his  Philosophumena  lie 
borrows  largely  from  Sextus  Ernpiricus,  word  for  word,  without 
acknowledgment;  and  in  the  theological  part  from  Ircnaeus.  In 
doctrine  he  agrees,  for  the  most  part,  with  Ircnseus,  even  to  his 
chiliasm,  but  is  not  his  equal  in  discernment,  depth,  and  mode- 
•  ration.  He.  repudiates  .philosophy,  almost  with  Tertullian's 
vehemence,  as  the_spurce  of  all  heresies ;  yet  he  employs  Jt  to 
establish  his  pwn.yjews.  On  the  subject  of  the  trinity  he  assails 
Monarcnianism,  and  advocates  the  hypostasian  theory  with  a  &eal 
which  brought  down  upon  him  the  charge  of  ditheism.  His 
disciplinary  principles  are  rigor istic  and  ascetic.  In  this  respect 
also  he  is  akin  to  Tertullian,  though  he  places  the  Montanisis, 
like  the  Quartodecimanians,  but  with  only  a  brief  notice,  anion^; 
the  heretics.  His  style  is  vigorous,  but  careless  and  turgid. 
Caspari  calls  Hippolytus  "  the  Roman  Origen."  This  is  true  as 
regards  learning  and  independence,  but  Origen  had  more  genius 
and  moderation. 

The  principal  work  of  Hippolyfcus  is  the  Philosophumena  or 
Refutation  of  all  Heresies.  It  is,  next  to  the  treatise  of  Ircnseus, 
the  most  instructive  and  important  polemical  production  of  the 
ante-Mcene  church,  and  sheds  much  new  light,  not  only  upon 
the  ancient  heresies,  and  the  development  of  the  church  doctrine, 
but  also  upon  the  history  of  philosophy  and  the  condition  of  the 
Roman  church  in  the  beginning  of  the  third  century.  It  further- 
more affords  valuable  testimony  to  the.  genuineness  of  the  Gospel 
of  John,  both  from  the  mouth  of  the  author  himself,  and  through 
his  quotations  from  the  much  earlier  Gnostic  Basilides,  who  was 
a  later  contemporary  of  John  (about  A.  D.  125).  The  composi- 
tion falls  some  years  after  the  death  of  Callistus,  between  the 


2183.  HIPPOLYTUS.  760 

years  223  and  235.  The  first  of  the  ten  books  gives  an  outline 
of  the  heathen  philosophies  which  he  regards  as  the  sources  of  all 
heresies ;  hence  the  title  Philosophumena  which  answers  the  first 
four  books,  but  not  the  last  six.  It  is  not  in  the  Athos-M8,,  but 
was  formerly  known  and  incorporated  in  the  works  of  Origcn. 
The  second  and  third  books,  which  are  wanting,  treated  probably 
of  the  heathen  mysteries,  and  mathematical  and  astrological 
theories.  The  fourth  is  occupied  likewise  with  the  heathen 
astrology  and  magic,  which  must  have  exercised  great  influence, 
particularly  in  Rome.  In  the  fifth  book  the  author  comes  to  his 
proper  theme,  the  refutation  of  all  the  heresies  from  the  times  of 
the  apostles  to  his  own.  He  takes  up  thirty-two  in  all,  most  of 
which,  however,  are  merely  different  branches  of  Gnosticism  and 
Ebionism.  He  simply  states  the  heretical  opinions  from  lost 
writings,  without  introducing  his  own  reflection,  and  refers  them 
to  the  Greek  philosophy,  mysticism,  and  magic,  thinking  them 
sufficiently  refuted  by  being  traced  to  those  heathen  sources. 
The  ninth  book,  in  refuting  the  doctrine  of  the  Noetians  and 
Callistians,  makes  remarkable  disclosures  of  events  in  the  Roman 
church.  He  represents  Pope  Zephyrinus  as  a  weak  and  ignorant 
man  who  gave  aid  and  comfort  to  the  Patripassian  heresy,  and 
his  successor  Callistus,  as  a  shrewd  and  cunning  manager  who 
was  once  a  slave,  then  a  dishonest  banker,  and  became  a  bankrupt 
and  convict,  but  worked  himself  into  the  good  graces  of  Zephy- 
rinus and  after  his  death  obtained  the  object  of  his  ambition,  the 
papal  chair,  taught  heresy  and  ruined  the  discipline  by  extreme 
leniency  to  offenders.  FIcre  the  author  shows  himself  a  viojent 
partizan,  and  must  be  used  with  caution. 

The  tenth  book,  made  use  of  by  Theodorct,  contains  a  brief 
recapitulation  and  the  author's  own  confession  of  faith,  as  a 
positive  refutation  of  the  heresies.  The  following  is  the  most 
important  part  relating  to  Christ : 

"This  Word  (Logos)  the  Father  sent  forth  in  these  last  days  no  longer 
to  speak  by  a  prophet,  nor  willing  that  He  whoukl  be  only  guessed  at  from 
obscure  preaching,  but  bidding  Him  bo  manifested  face  to  face,  in  order 
fchat  the  world  should  reverence  Him  when  it  beheld  Him,  not  giving  His 


766  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

commands  in  the  person  of  a  prophet,  nor  alarming  the  soul  by  an  angel, 
but  Himself  present  who  had  spoken. 

"Him  we  know  to  have  received  a  body  from  the  Virgin  and  to  have 
refashioned  the  old  man  by  a  new  creation,  and  to  have  passed  in  His  life 
through  every  age,  in  order  that  He  might  be  a  law  to  every  age,  and  by 
His  presence  exhibit  His  own  humanity  as  a  pattern  to  all  men,1  and 
thus  convince  man  that  God  made  nothing  evil,  and  'that  man  possesses 
free  will,  having  in  himself  the  power  of  volition  or  non- volition,  and 
being  able  to  do  both.  Him  we  know  to  have  been  a  man  of  the  same 
nature  with  ourselves. 

"  For,  if  He  were  not  of  the  same  nature,  He  would  in  vain  exhort  us 
to  imitate  our  Master.  For  if  that  man  was  of  another  nature,  why  does 
He  enjoin  the  same  duties  on  me  who  am  weak  ?  And  bow  can  He  be 
good  and  just?  But  that  He  might  be  shown  to  be  the  same  as  we,  He 
underwent  toil  and  consented  to  suffer  hunger  and  thirst,  and  rested  in 
sleep,  and  did  not  refuse  His  passion,  and  became  obedient  unto  death, 
and  manifested  His  resurrection,  having  consecrated  in  all  these  things 
His  own  humanity,  as  first  fruits,  in  order  that  thou  when  suffering  mayest 
not  despair,  acknowledging  thyself  a  man  of  like  nature  and  waiting  for 
the  appearance  of  what  thou  gavest  to  Him.2 

"  Such  is  the  true  doctrine  concerning  the  Deity,  0  ye  Greeks  and  Bar- 
barians, Chaldseans  and  Assyrians,  Egyptians  and  Africans,  Indians  and 
Ethiopians,  Celts,  and  ye  warlike  Latins,  and  all  ye  inhabitants  of  Europe, 
Asia,  anvl  Africa,  whom  I  exhort,  being  a  disciple  of  the  man-loving 
"Word  and  myself  a  lover  of  men  (h6yov  V7rap%uv  [ta&qTfc  Kal  0dav#/yw7rof). 
Come  ye  and  learn  from  us,  who  is  the  true  God,  and  what  is  His  well- 
ordered  workmanship,  not  heeding  the  sophistry  of  artificial  speeches, 
nor  the  vain  professions  of  plagiarist  heretics,  but  the  grave  simplicity  of 
unadorned  truth.  By  this  knowledge  ye  will  escape  the  coming  curse  of 
the  judgment  of  fire,  and  the  dark  rayless  aspect  of  Tartarus,  never  illu- 
minated by  the  voice  of  the  Word.  .  .  . 

"  Therefore,  0  men,  persist  not  in  your  enmity,  nor  hesitate  to  retrace 
your  steps.  For  Christ  is  the  God  who  is  over  all  (6  Kara  Trdvruv  &e6$, 
comp.  Rom.  9 :  5),  who  commanded  men  to  wash  away  sin  fin  baptism],8 
regenerating  the  old  man,  having  called  him  His  image  from  the  begin- 
ning, showing  by  a  figure  His  love  to  thee.  If  thou  obeyest  His  holy 
commandment  and  becomest  an  imitator  in  goodness  of  Him  who  is 

1  This  idea  is  borrowed  from  Irenaeus. 

2  The  reading  here  is  disputed. 

8  The  passage  is  obscure :  8f  r/>  atiapriav  eg  av&pAirov  airoTrMveiv  icpoairatje. 
Wordsworth  translates :  "  who  commanded  us  to  wash  away  sin  from  man ; " 
Macmahon  :  ''  He  has  arranged  to  wash  away  sin  from  human  beings."  Bun- 
Ren  changes  the  reading  thus :  "  For  Christ  is  He  whom  the  God  of  all  has 
ordered  to  wash  away  the  sins  of  mankind. ''  Hippolytus  probably  refers  ** 
the  command!  to  repent  and  be  baptized  for  the  forgiveness  of  sin. 


J183.  HIPPOLYTUS.  767 

good,  thou  wilt  became  like  Him,  being  honored  by  Him.    For  God  hns 
a  need  and  craving  for  thee,  having  made  thee  divine  for  Hia  glory." 

Hippolytus  wrote  a  large  number  of  other  works,  exegctical, 
chronological,  polemical,  and  liomilctical,  all  in  Greek,  which 
are  mostly  lost,  although  considerable  fragments  remain.  lie 
prepared  the  first  continuous  and  detailed  commentaries  on 
several  "books  of  the  Scriptures,  as  the  Hexaemcrou  (used  by 
Ambrose),  on  Exodus,  Psalms.  Proverbs,  Ecclcsiastes,  the  larger 
prophets  (especially  Daniel),  Zechariah,  also  on  Matthew,  Luke, 
and  the  Apocalypse.  He  pursued  in  exegesis  the  allegorical 
method,  like  Origcn,  which  suited  the  taste  of  his  age. 

Among  his  polemical  works  was  one  Ayaimt  T/i,My-lwo 
Heresies,  different  from  the  PhifosophwnwMt.,  and  described  by 
Photius  as  a  "little  book,"  l  and  as  a  synopsis  of  lectures  which 
Hippolytus  heard  from  Ircnrous.  It  must  havo  been  written  in 
his  early  youth.  It  began  with  thcMiereny  of  Dositheas  and 
ended  with  that  of  Noctus.2  His  treatise  Against  No'Muu  which 
is  still  preserved,  presupposes  previous  sections,  and  formed 
probably  the  concluding  part  of  that  synopsis.3  If  not,  it  must 


puw.    The  more  usual  diminutive  of  fliflMg  or  /3//Uof  is 

2  Lipsius,  in  his  Quellenkritik  de$  JMpiphanioa,  has  made  the  extraordinary 
achievement  of  a  partial  reconstruction  of  this  work  from  unacknowledged 
extracts  in  the  anti-heretical  writings  of  Epiphanius,  Philastcr,  and  Pseudo- 
TertulJian. 

8  As  suggested  by  Fabricius  (L,  235),  Neander  (1.  682,  Engl.  ed.),  and  Lipfliu*. 
It  bears  in  the  MS.  the  title  "Homily  of  Ilippolytun  against  the  Hereby  of 
one  Noetus"  6pdia  'ITTTTO^..  d$  rf/v  alfieaiv  No?;rov  TIVO^  and  was  first  printed 
by  Vossius  in  Latin,  and  then  by  Fabricius  in  Greek  from  a  Vatican  MS. 
(vol.  II.  5-20,  in  Latin,  vol.  I.  235-24.4),  and  by  P.  dc  Lagarde  in  Greek 
(Hippol  Opera  Or.  p.  43-57).  Epiphanius  made  a  mechanical  use  of  it.  It 
presupposes  preceding  sections  by  beginning  :  "  Certain  others  are  privily  in- 
troducing another  doctrine,  having  become  disciples  of  one  Nootus."  The 
only  objection  to  the  identification  in  that  Photius  describes  the  entire  work 
against  thirty-two  Heresies  as  a  little  book  (fltpfatMptov).  Hence  LipshiH  8ug* 
gests  that  this  was  not  the  awray/ia  itself,  but  only  a  summary  of  HH  contents, 
such  as  was  frequently  attached  to  anti-  heretical  works.  Dollinger  (p.  191 
sqq.)  shows  the  doctrinal  agreement  of  the  treatise  a^aiiiHt  Noctus  with  the 
corresponding  section  of  the  Ph'ttosophwn&ui,  and  fiuds  both  heretical  on  the 
subject  of  the  Trinity  and  the  development  of  the  Logos  as  a  subordinate 
Divine  personality  called  into  existence  before  the  world  by  an  act  of  tho 


T6B  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

have  been  the  conclusion  of  a  special  work  against  the  Mon« 
archian  heretics/  but  no  such  work  is  mentioned. 

The  book  On  the  Universe2  was  directed  against  Platonism. 
It  made  all  things  consist  of  the  four  elements,  earth,  air,  fire, 
and  water.  Man  is  formed  of  all  four  elements,  his  soul,  of  air. 
But  the  most  important  part  of  this  book  is  a  description  of 
Hades,  as  an  abode  under  ground  where  the  souls  of  the  de- 
parted are  detained  until  the  day  of  judgment :  the  righteous  in 
a  place  of  light  and  happiness  called  Abraham's  Bosom ;  the 
wicked  in  a  place  of  darkness  and  misery;  the  two  regions 
being  separated  by  a  great  gulf.  The  entrance  is  guarded  by  an 
archangel.  On  the  judgment  day  the  bodies  of  the  righteous 
will  rise  renewed  and  glorified,  the  bodies  of  the  wicked  with 
all  the  diseases  of  their  earthly  life  for  everlasting  punishment. 
This  description  agrees  substantially  with  the  cschatology  of 
Justin  Martyr,  Ireuseus,  and  Tertullian.3 

The  anonymous  work  called  The  Little -Labyrinth  *  mentioned 

Father's  will,  which  doctrine  afterwards  became  a  main  prop  of  Arianism. 
Doilinger  finds  here  the  reason  for  the  charge  of  partial  Valentinianism  raised 
against  Hippolytus,  as  his  doctrine  of  the  origination  of  the  Logos  was  con- 
founded with  the  Gnostic  emanation  theory. 

1  So  Volkmar  (I  c.  p.  165 :   "  Der  Cod.  Vatic. '  Contra  Noetum'  ist  d&r  ScJduss 
nickt  jener  kurseren  ffareseologie,  sondern  dwr  andern,  wn  Epiphanius  noch 
vorgefundenen Schrift  desselben  Hippolyt,  wie  es  scheint,  gegen  alle  Monarchian&r" 
Caspar!  (III.  400  sq.)  decides  for  the  same  view. 

2  Uepl  7ij$  TOV  travTbg  curias  (or  ovaia^  as  Hippol.  himself  gives  the  title, 
Phttos.  X.  32  ed.  D.  and  Schn.),  or  Uepl  TOV  Kavr6$  (on  the  Hippolytus-statue). 
Greek  and  Latin  In  Fahricius  I.  220-222.    Greek  in  P.  de  Lagarde,  p.  68-73. 
The  book  was  a  sort  of  Christian  cosmogony  and  offset  to  Plato's  Timceus. 

3  Comp.  Doilinger,  p.  330  sqq     He  connects  the  view  of  Hippolytus  on  the 
intermediate  state  with  his  chiliasm,  which  does  not  admit  that  the  souls  of 
the  righteous  ever  can  attain  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven  and  the  beatific  vision 
before  the  resurrection.    Wordsworth  on  the  other  hand  denies  that  Hippol. 
believed  in  a  millennium  and  ''the  Romish  doctrine  of  Purgatory/'  and  ac- 
cepts his  view  of  Hades  as  agreeing  with  the  Burial  Office  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  the  sermons  of  Bishop  Bull  on  the  state  of  departed  souls. 
Hippol  p.  210-216.    He  also  gives,  in  Appendix  A,  p,  306-308,  an  addition 
to  the  fragment  of  the  book  On  the  Universe,  from  a  MS,  in  the  Bodleian 
library. 

A.aftopn&oc  (Theodoret,  HOST.  Fab.  II.  5)  or  onobdaa/ia  /card  rife 
(Euseb.  H.  E.  V.  28), 


§183.  H1PPOLYTUS.  76& 

by  Eusebius  and  Theodoret  as  directed  against  the  rationalistic 
heresy  of  Artemon,  is  ascribed  by  some  to  Hippolytus,  by  others 
to  Caius.  But  The  Labyrinth  mentioned  by  Photius  as  a  work 
of  Caius  is  different  and  identical  with  the  tenth  book  of  the 
Philosophumena,  which  begins  with  the  words,  <f  The  labyrinth 
of  heresies." J 

The  lost  tract  on  the  Charismata2  dealt  probably  with  the 
Montanistic  claims  to  continued  prophecy.  Others  make  it  a 
collection  of  apostolical  canons. 

The  book  on  Antifihrivt*  which  has  been  almost  entirely  re- 
covered by  Gudius,  represents  Antichrist  as  the  complete  counter- 
feit of  Christ,  explains  Daniel's  four  Kingdoms  as  the  Babylo- 
nian, Median,  Grecian,  and  .Roman,  and  the  apocalyptic  number 
of  the  beast  as  meaning  AarsZVoc,  i.  e.?  heathen  Rome.  This  is 
one  of  the  three  interpretations  given  by  Ireu&us  who,  however, 
preferred  Teitan. 

In  a  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse4-  he  givos  another  inter- 
pretation of  the  number,  namely  Dantialos  (probably  because 
Antichrist  was  to  descend  from  the  tribe  of  Dan).  The  woman 
in  the  twelfth  chapter  is  the  church ;  the  sun  with  which  she  is 
clothed,  is  our  Lord  ;  the  moon,  John  the  Baptist  j  the  twelve 
stars,  the  twelve  apostles ;  the  two  wings  on  which  she  was  to 
fly,  hope  and  love.  Armageddon  is  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat. 
The  five  kings  (17 :  13)  are  Nebuchadnezzar,  Cyrus,  Darius, 
Alexander,  and  his  four  successors;  the  sixth  is  the  Roman 
empire,  the  seventh  will  be  Antichrist.  In  his  commentary  on 
Daniel  he  fixes  the  consummation  at  A.D.  500,  or  A.  M.  6000,  on 
the  assumption  that  Christ  appeared  in  the  year  of  the  world 
5500,  and  that  a  sixth  millennium  must  yet  be  completed  before 

1  Caspar!,  Ill  404  fcq.,  identifies  the  two  books. 

2  Tlept  xapiafttfrw  fnrottTftijKfi  TrapdSofft.^    On  the  Hippolytus-statue. 

3  He  pi  TOV  ffurtfpof;  f/(j.(jv  ^Irjaov  X/owrot)  ani  trepl  avTi%pforov9  in  Fabricius  I. 
4-36  (Or.  and  Lat.),  and  in  P.  do  Lagarde,  1-36  (Greek  only). 

*  Included  in  Jerome's  list,  and  mentioned  by  Jacob  of  Edessa  and  by 
Syncellus.  Fragments  from  an  Arabic  Catena  on  the  Apocalypse  in  Lagarde's 
Anal.  8yr.,  Append,  p.  24-27.  See  Salmon  in  Smith  and  Wacc,  HI,  105. 

Vol.  IL-4M. 


770  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  beginning  of  the  millennial  sabbath,  which  is  prefigured  by 
the  divine  rest  after  creation.  This  view,  in  connection  with  his 
relation  to  Irenseus,  and  the  omission  of  chiliasm  from  his  list  of 
heresies,  makes  it  tolerably  certain  that  he  was  himself  a 
chiliast,  although  he  put  off  the  millennium  to  the  sixth  century 
after  Christ.1 

We  conclude  this  section  with  an  account  of  a  visit  of  Pope 
Alexander  III.  to  the  shrine  of  St.  Hippolytus  in  the  church  of 
St.  Denis  in  1159,  to  which  his  bones  were  transferred  from 
Rome  under  Charlemagne.2  "  On  the  threshold  of  one  of  the 
chapels  the  Pope  paused  to  ask,  whose  relics  it  contained. 

I  Those  of  St.  Hippolytus/  was  the  answer.     '  Non  credo,  nan 
&redoj  replied  the  infallible  authority,  '  the  bones  of  St.  Hippo- 
lytus were  never  removed  from  the  holy  city/     But  St.  Hippo- 
lytus, whose  dry  bones  apparently  had  as  little  reverence  for  the 
spiritual  progeny  of  Zephyrinus  and  Callistus  as  the  ancient 
bishop's  tongue  and  pen  had  manifested  towards  these  saints 
themselves,  was  so  very  angry  that  he  rumbled  his  bones  inside 
the  reliquary  with  a  noise  like  thunder.    To  what  lengths  he 
might  have  gone  if  rattling  had  not  sufficed  we  dare  not  con- 
jecture.   But  the  Pope,  falling  on  his  knees,  exclaimed  in  terror, 

I 1  believe,  0  my  Lord  Hippolytus,  I  believe,  pray  be  quiet/ 
And  he  built  an  altar  of  marble  there  to  appease  the  disquieted 
saint." 

NOTES. 

The  questions  concerning  the  literary  works  of  Hippolytus,  and  especial  I  v 
Ms  ecclesiastical  status  are  not  yet  sufficiently  solved.  We  add  a  few  addi- 
tional observations. 

I.  THE  LIST  OP  BOOKS  on  the  back  of  the  Hippolytus-statue  has  been  dis- 
cussed by  Fabricius,  Cave,  Dollinger,  Wordsworth,  and  Volkmar.  See  the 
three  pictures  of  the  statue  with  the  inscriptions  on  both  sides  in  Fabricius, 
I.  36-38,  and  a  fac-simile  of  the  book  titles  in  the  frontispiece  of  Wordsworth's 
work.  It  is  mutilated  and  reads— with  the  conjectural  supplements  in  brackets 
and  a  translation— as  follows : 

1  See  Dollinger,  p.  330  sqq.  (Engl.  ed.) 

3  We  are  indebted  for  this  curious  piece  of  information  to  Dr.  Salmon,  who 
refers  fe>  Senson,  in  the  "Journal  of  Classical  and  Sacred  Philology,"  L  190- 


183.  HIPPOLYTUS. 


771 


[TTpdf  TQVS  'lovtia]  love, 
[ire pi  Traptfe]  viaq. 
[Or,  perhaps,  eig 
[eif  rovg  ^ahfiovf. 
[gjf  T^V  £\yya,GTpinv$ov. 

[airohoyia]  inty  TOV  Kara 

evayyeMov  KOL  aTcoKa^bifJEUs. 
irepl  %apiGiJLQ,Tuv. 

irapddoau;. 
[ac.  j&'/M-oe]. 

TTpfif  "E/lAtfWZf, 

not  :rp3f  TlMrova, 
f)  Kai  Kepi  TOV  Travrdc. 

/jof  aeftfpeivav. 


Against  the  Jews. 

On  Virginity. 

[Or,  On  the  ProverbsJ 

On  the  Psalms. 

On  the  Ventriloquist  [the  witch  at 

Endor?! 
Apology  of  the  Gospel  according  to 

John, 
and  the  Apocalypse. 

On  Spiritual  Gifts. 
Apostolic  Tradition. 
Chronicles  [Book  of]. 
Against  the  Greeks, 
and  against  Plato, 
or  also  On  the  AIL 

A  hortatory  address  to  SevcrinA.  [Per- 
haps the  Empress  Severa,  second 
wife  of  Elogabalns]. 
Demonstration  of  the  time  of  the  Pas- 
cha  according  to  the  order  in  the  table. 
Hymns  on  all  the  Scriptures. 
Concerning  God,  and  the  resurrection 

of  the  flesh. 
Concerning  the  good,  and  the  origin 

of  evil. 

Corap.  on  'this  list  Fabricius  I.  79-89;  Wordsworth  p.  233-240;  Volkmar, 
p.  2  sqq. 

Eusebius  and  Jerome  give  also  lists  of  the  works  of  Hippolytus,  some  being 
the  same,  some  different,  and  among  the  latter  both  mention  one  Against 
Heresies,  which  is  probably  identical  with  the  Philosophumena. ,  On  the  Canon 
Pasch.  of  Hippol.  see  the  tables  in  Fabricius,  1. 137-140. 
II.  Was  Hippolytus  a  bishop,  and  where  f 

Hippolytus  does  not  call  himself  a  bishop,  nor  a  "bishop  of  Borne,"  but 
assumes  episcopal  authority,  and  describes  himself  in  the  preface  to 
the  first  book  as  "  a  successor  of  the  Apostles,  a  partaker  with  thorn  in 
the  same  grace  and  principal  sacerdocy  (apxw&reta),  and  doctors  hip,  and 
as  numbered  among  the  guardians  of  the  church."  Such  language  is 
scarcely  applicable  to  a  mere  presbyter.  He  also  exercised  the  power  ot 
excommunication  on  certain  followers  of  the  Pope  Callisfcus.  But  where 
was  his  bishopric  ?  This  is  to  this  day  a  point  in  dispute. 

(1.)  He  was  bishop  of  Portus,  the  seaport  of  Eome.  This  is  the  tradi- 
tional opinion  in  the  Boman  church  since  the  seventh  century,  and  is 
advocated  by  Buggieri  (De  Portuensi  8.  Hippolyti,  episcopi  et  martyris, 
Sede,  Bom.  1771),  Simon  de  Magistris  ( Acta  Martyrum  ad  Oxtia  Tiberina9 
etc.  Bom.  1795),  Baron  Bunsen,  Dean  Milman,  and  especially  by  Bishop 


Kara  [ra]  kv  T$  irivaiu. 

ydai  [e]if  Trdffaf  r 

Trepl  #[eo]i),  Kal  aapKog  a 


TOV  aya&ov, 


TO  K.aK.fo. 


f72  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A,D.  100-311. 

Wordsworth.    In  the  oldest  accounts,  however,  he  is  represented  as  a 
.Roman  "presbyter."    Bunsen  combined  the  two  views  on  the  unproved 
assumption  that  already  at  that  early  period  the  Roman  suburban  bishops, 
called  cardinales  episcopi,  were  at  the  same  time  members  of  the  Roman 
presbytery.   In  opposition  to  this  Dr.  Dollinger  maintains  that  there  was 
no  bishop  in  Portus  before  the  year  313  or  314;  that  Hippolytus  con- 
sidered himself  the  rightful  bishop  of  Rome,  and  that  he  could  not  be 
simultaneously  a  member  of  the  Roman  presbytery  and  bishop  of  Portus. 
But  his  chief  argument  is  that  from  silence  which  bears  with  equal  force 
against  his  own  theory.    It  is  true  that  the  first  bishop  of  Portus  on 
record  appears  at  the  Synod  of  Aries,  314,  where  he  signed  himself  Ore- 
gorius  episcopus  de  loco  qui  est  in  Portu  Romano.     The  episcopal  see  of 
Ostia  was  older,  and  its  occupant  had  (according  to  St.  Augustin)  always 
the  privilege  of  consecrating  the  bishop  of  Rome,  But  it  is  quite  possible 
that  Ostia  and  Portus  which  were  only  divided  by  an  island  at  the  mouth 
of  the  Tiber  formed  at  first  one  diocese.    Prudentius  locates  the  martyr- 
dom of  Hippolytus  at  Ostia  or  Portus  (both  are  mentioned  in  his  poem). 
Moreover  Portus  was  a  more  important  place  than  Dollinger  will  admit. 
The  harbor  whence  the  city  derived  its  name  Pertus  (also  Portus  Ostien- 
sis,  Portus  Urbis,  Portus  fiomce)  was  constructed  by  the  Emperor  Claudius 
(perhaps  Augustus,  hence  Portus  Augusti),  enlarged  by  Nero  and  im- 
proved by  Trajan  (hence  Portus  Trajani),  and  was  the  landing  place  of 
Ignatius  on  his  voyage  to  Rome  (Martyr.  Ign.  c.  6 :  rov  KaAovptvov  U6pwv) 
where  he  met  Christian  brethren.  Constantine  surrounded  it  with  strong 
walls  and  towers.    Ostia  may  have  been  much  more  important  as  a  com- 
mercial emporium  and  naval  station  (see  Smith's  Diet,  of  Or.  and  Rom. 
Geogr.  vol.  IT.  501-504) ;  but  Cavalier  de  Rossi,  in  the  Bullctino-di  Arcfaol.j 
1866,  p.  37  (as  quoted  by  Wordsworth,  p.  264,  secd  ed.),  proves  from  13 
inscriptions  that  "  the  site  and  name  of  Portus  are  celebrated  in  the  rec- 
ords of  the  primitive  [?J  church,"  and  that  "  the  name  is  more  frequently 
commemorated  than  that  of  Ostia."    The  close  connection  of  Portus  with 
Rome  would  easily  account  for  the  residence  of  Hippolytus  at  Rome  and 
for  his  designation  as  Roman  bishop.    In  later  times  the  seven  suburban 
bishops  of  the  vicinity  of  Rome  were  the  suffragans  of  the  Pope  aud  con- 
secrated him.    Finally,  as  the  harbor  of  a  large  metropolis  attracts 
strangers  from  every  nation  and  tongue,  Hippolytus  might  with  propriety 
be  called  "bishop  of  the  nations"  (kitiaKQ-nog  tdvQv].    We  conclude  then 
that  the  Portus-hypothesis  is  not  impossible,  though  it  cannot  be  proven, 
(2.)  He  was  bishop  of  the  Arabian  Portus  Romanus,  now  Aden  on  the 
Red  Sea.    This  was  the  opinion  of  Stephen  Le  Moyne  (1G85),  adopted  by 
Cave,  Tillemont.  and  Basnage,  but  now  universally  given  up  as  a  baseless 
conjecture,  which  rests  on  a  misapprehension  of  Euseb.  VI.  20,  whore 
Hippolytus  is  accidentally  collocated  with  Beryllua,  bishop  of  Bostra  in 
Arabia.    Adan  is  nowhere  mentioned  as  an  episcopal  see,  and  our  Hip- 
polytus belonged  to  the  West,  although  he  may  have  been  of  eastern 
origin,  lite  Irenasus. 


i  183.  IILPPOLYTUS.  773 

(3.)  Eome.  Hippolytus  was  no  less  than  the  first  Anti-Pope  and 
claimed  to  be  the  legitimate  bishop  of  Home,  This  is  the  theory  of  Dol- 
linger,  derived  from  the  PhUoftop/ium&M  and  defended  with  much  learn- 
ing and  acumen.  The  author  of  the  Pkilosophumcna  was  undoubtedly  a 
resident  of  Home,  claims  episcopal  dignity,  never  recognized  Callistus  as 
bishop,  but  treated  him  merely  as  the  head  of  a  heretical  school 
(dttiaamfaiov)  or  sect,  calls  his  adherents  "  Callistians,"  some  of  whom  he 
had  excommunicated,  but  admits  that  Callistua  had  aspired  to  the  epis- 
copal throne  and  "  imagined  himself  to  have  obtained"  the  object  of  his 
ambition  after  the  death  of  Zcphyrinus,  and  that  his  school  formed  the 
majority  and  claimed  to  be  the  catholic  church.  Callistus  on  his  part 
charged  Hippolytus,  on  account  of  his  view  of  the  independent  per- 
sonality of  the  Logos,  with  the  heresy  of  ditheism  (a  charge  which  stung 
him  to  the  quick),  and  probably  proceeded  to  excommunication.  All 
this  looks  towards  an  open  schism.  This  would  explain  the  fact  that 
Hippolytus  was  acknowledged  in  Eome  only  as  a  presbyter,  while  in  the 
East  he  was  widely  known  as  bishop,  and  even  as  bishop  of  Kome.  Dr. 
Dollingor  assumes  that  the  schism  continued  to  the  pontificate  of  Pon- 
tianus,  the  successor  of  Callistus,  was  the  cau\se  of  the  banishment  of  the 
two  rival  bishops  to  the  pestilential  island  of  Sardinia  (in  235),  and 
brought  to  a  close  by  their  resignation  and  reconciliation ;  hence  their 
bones  were  brought  back  to  Eome  and  solemnly  deposited  on  the  same 
day.  Their  death  in  exile  was  counted  equivalent  to  martyrdom.  Dr. 
Caspari  of  Christiania  who  has  shed  much  light  on  the  writings  of  Hip- 
polytus, likewise  believes  that  the  difficulty  between  Hippolytus  and  Gal- 
listus  resulted  in  an  open  schism  and  mutual  excommunication  (L  c.  III. 
330).  Langen  (Gesch,  der  row-  J&rche,  Bonn.  1881,  p.  229)  is  inclined  to 
accept  Dollinger'a  conclusion  as  at  least  probable. 

This  theory  is  plausible  and  almost  forced  upon  us  by  tho  P/iiiosopku- 
mena,  but  without  any  solid  support  outside  of  that  polemical  work. 
History  is  absolutely  silent  about  an  Anti-Pope  before  Novatbnus,  who 
appeared  fifteen  years  after  the  death  of  Hippolytus  and  shook  the  whole 
church  by  his  schism  (251),  although  he  was  far  less  conspicuous  as  a 
scholar  and  writer.  A  schism  extending  through  three  pontificates  (for 
Hippolytus  opposed  Zephyrinus  as  well  as  Callistus)  could  not  be  hidden 
and  so  soon  be  forgotten,  especially  by  Eome  which  has  a  long  memory 
of  injuries  done  to  the  chair  of  St.  Peter  and  looks  upon  rebellion  against 
authority  as  the  greatest  sin.  The  name  of  Hippolytus  is  not  found  in 
any  list  of  Popes  and  Anti-Popes,  Greek  or  Eoman,  while  that  of  Callis- 
tus  occurs  in  all.  Even  Jeiome  who  spent  over  twenty  years  from  about 
350  to  372,  and  afterwards  four  more  years  in  Eome  and  was  intimate 
with  Pope  Damasus,  knew  nothing  of  the  see  of  Hippolytus,  although  he 
knew  some  of  his  writings.  It  seems  incredible  that  an  Anti-Pope 
should  ever  have  been  canonized  by  Eome  as  a  saint  and  martyr.  It  is 
much  easier  to  conceive  that  the  divines  of  the  distant  Eust  were  mis- 
taken. The  oldest  authority  which  Dolliriger  adduces  for  the  designation 


774  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

"bishop  of  Rome,"  that  of  Presbyter  Eustratius  of  Constantinople  about 
A.D.  582  (see  p.  84),  is  not  much  older  than  the  designation  of  Hippoly- 
tus  as  bishop  of  Portus,  and  of  no  more  critical  value. 

(4.)  Dr.  Salmon  offers  a  modification  of  the  Bellinger-hypothesis  by 
assuming  that  Hippolytus  was  a  sort  of  independent  bishop  of  a 
Greek-speaking  congregation  in  Rome.  He  thus  explains  the  enigmati- 
cal expression  e&v&v  faiawiroe,  which  Photius  applies  to  Caius,  but  which 
probably  belongs  to  Hippolytus.  But  history  knows  nothing  of  two  in- 
dependent and  legitimate  bishops  in  the  city  of  Rome.  Moreover  there 
still  remains  the  difficulty  that  Hippolytus  notwithstanding  his  open 
resistance  rose  afterwards  to  such  high  honors  in  the  papal  church.  We 
can  only  offer  the  following  considerations  as  a  partial  solution :  first, 
that  he  wrote  in  Greek  which  died  out  in  Rome,  so  that  his  books  be- 
came unknown ;  secondly,  that  aside  from  those  attacks  he  did,  like  the 
schismatic  Tertullian,  eminent  service  to  the  church  by  his  learning  and 
championship  of  orthodoxy  and  churchly  piety ;  and  lastly,  that  he  was 
believed  (as  we  learn  from  Prudentius)  to  have  repented  of  his  schism 
and,  like  Cyprian,  wiped  out  his  sin  by  his  martyrdom. 

III.  But  no  matter  whether  Hippolytus  was  bishop  or  presbyter  in 
Rome  or  Portus,  he  stands  out  an  irrefutable  witness  against  the  claims 
of  an  infallible  papacy  which  was  entirely  unknown  in  the  third  century. 
No  wonder  that  Roman  divines  of  the  nineteenth  century  (with  the  ex- 
ception of  Bollinger  who  seventeen  years  after  he  wrote  his  book  on 
Hippolytus  seceded  from  Rome  in  consequence  of  the  Vatican  decree  of 
infallibility)  deny  his  authorship  of  this  to  them  most  obnoxious  book. 
The  Abb6  Cruice  ascribes  it  to  Caius  or  Tertullian,  the  Jesuit  Armellini 
to  Novatian,  and  de  Rossi  (1866)  hesitatingly  to  Tertullian,  who,  however, 
was  no  resident  of  Rome,  but  of  Carthage.  Cardinal  Newman  declares  it 
"  simply  incredible"  that  a  man  so  singularly  honored  as  St.  Hippolytus 
should  be  the  author  of  "  that  malignant  libel  on  his  contemporary  popes," 
who  did  not  scruple  u  in  set  words  to  call  Pope  Zephyrinus  a  weak  and 
venal  dunce,  and  Pope  Callistus  a  sacrilegious  swindler,  an  infamous  con- 
vict, and  an  heresiarch  ex  cathedra."  ( TractSj  Theological  and  Ecclesiastical, 
1874,  p.  222,  quoted  by  Plummer,  p.  xiv.  and  340.)  But  he  offers  no 
solution,  nor  can  he.  Dogma  versus  history  is  as  unavailing  as  the 
poke's  bull  against  the  comet.  Nor  is  Hippolytus,  or  whoever  wrote  that 
"malignant  libel "  alone  in  his  position.  The  most  eminent  ante-Nicene 
fathers,  and  the  very  ones  who  laid  the  foundations  of  the  catholic  sys- 
tem, Irenseus,  Tertullian,  and  Cyprian  (not  to  speak  of  Origen,  and  of 
Novatian,  the  Anti-Pope),  protested  on  various  grounds  against  Rome, 
And  it  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  the  learned  Br.  Bollinger  who,  in  1853, 
so  ably  defended  the  Roman  see  against  the  charges  of  Hippolytus 
should,  in  1870,  have  assumed  a  position  not  unlike  that  of  Hippo- 
iytus,  against  the  error  of  papal  infallibility. 


CAIUS  OF  EOME.  V  YD 


§  184.  Caius  of  Rome. 

EUSEB.  :  H.  E.  II.  25;  III.  28,  31;  VI.  20.  HIERON.  :  De  Vlr.  ill  59. 
THEODOB.:  Fab.  Jffcer.  II.  3;  III.  2.  PHOTIUS:  Bibliotk.  Cod.  48. 
Perhaps  also  Martyr.  Polyc.,  c.  22,  where  a  Caius  is  mentioned  as  a 
pupil  or  friend  of  Irenaeus. 

ROUTH  :  Eel.  &  II.  125-158  (coinp.  also  I.  397-403).  BUBTSEN  :  Analecta 
Ante-Niccena  I,  409  sq.  OASPABI  :  Quellen,  etc.,  III.  330,  349,  374 
sqq.  HAEKACK  in  Herzoga,  III.  63  sq.  SALMON  in  Smith  and 
Wace  I.  384-386.  Comp.  also  HEINICHEN'S  notes  on  Euseb.  II.  25 
(in  Comment.  III.  63-67),  and  the  Hippolytus  liter.,  \  183,  especially 
D6LLINGEE  (250  sq.)  and  VOLKMAE  (60-71). 

Among  the  Western  divines  who,  like  Irenseus  and  Hippo- 
lytus, wrote  exclusively  in  Greek,  must  be  mentioned  CAIUS 
who  flourished  during  tlie  episcopate  of  Zephyrinus  in  the  first 
quarter  of  the  third  century.  He  is  known  to  us  only  from  a 
few  Greek  fragments  as  an  opponent  of  Montanism  and  Chili- 
asm.  He  was  probably  a  Eoman  presbyter.  From  his  name,1 
and  from  the  fact  that  he  did  not  number  Hebrews  among 
I  lie  Pauline  Epistles,  we  may  infer  that  he  was  a  native  of  Rome 
or  at  least  of  the  West.  Enscbius  calls  him  a  very  learned 
churchman  or  eeoleshistic  author  nt  litnw,3  and  quote  lour  times 
his  disputation  with  Proclus  (dcdAofoz  xptxT  IIp6xfov),  the  leader 
of  one  party  of  tlie  Montanists.3  He  preserves  from  it  the  notice 
that  Philip  and  his  four  prophetic  daughters  arc  buried  at  Hiera- 
polis  in  Phrygia,  and  an  important  testimony  concerning  the  monu- 
ments or  trophies  (rpdnaca)  of  Peter  and  Paul,  the  founders  of 
the  Eoman  church,  on  the  Vatican  hill  and  the  Ostian  road. 

This  is  nearly  all  that   is   certain  and   interesting   about 

1  The  name,  however,  was  common,  and  the  New  Testament  mentions  four 
Caii  (Acts  19:  29;  20:  4;  Eom.  16:  24;  1  Cor.  1:  14;  3  John  1),  Eusebius 
five. 

» avfy  EKKhqctaonris  and  foyefoaroc  (II.  25  and  VI.  20).  The  former  term 
does  not  necessarily  imply  an  office,  but  is  rendered  by  Valesius  vir  co</wftc«a, 
by  Heinichen  (Euaeb.  Com.  III.  64)  em  rechlgldubiger  Schriftstetter. 

3  No  doubt  the  same  with  the  "Profits  nosier"  commended  by  Tertullian, 
Adv.  Val.  5.  Comp.  Jerome  (c.  59):  "Proculum  JMmtani  sectatorem."  His 
foUowers  were  Trinitarians;  another  parly  of  the  Montanists  were  Monarchiant 


776  'SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311, 

Caius.  Jerome,  as  usual  in  his  catalogue  of  illustrious  men, 
merely  repeats  the  statements  of  Eusebius,  although  from  his 
knowledge  of  Rome  we  might  expect  some  additional  informa- 
tion. Photius,  on  the  strength  of  a  marginal  note  in  the  MS.  of 
a  supposed  work  of  Caius  On  the  Universe,  says  that  he  was  a 
"presbyter  of  the  Roman  church  during  the  episcopate  of  Victor 
and  Zephyrinus,  and  that  he  was  elected  bishop  of  the  Gentiles 
(l&vtov  Iniffxonoz)"  He  ascribes  to  him  that  work  and  also 
The  Labyrinth,  but  hesitatingly.  His  testimony  is  too  late  to  be 
of  any  value,  and  rests  on  a  misunderstanding  of  Eusebius  and 
a  confusion  of  Caius  with  Hippolytus,  an  error  repeated  by 
modern  critics.1  Both  persons  have  so  much  111  common — $ge, 
residence,  title — that  they  have  been  identified  (Caius  being  sup- 
posed to  be  simply  the  prsenomen  of  Hippolytus).2  But  this 
cannot  be  proven;  Eusebius  clearly  distinguishes  them,  and 
Hippolytus  was  no  opponent  of  Chiliasm,  and  only  a  moderate 
opponent  of  Montanism ;  while  Caius  wrote  against  the  Chili- 
astic  dreams  of  Cerinthus ;  but  he  did  not  deny,  as  has  been 
wrongly  inferred  from  Eusebius,  the  Johannean  authorship  of 
the  Apocalypse;  he  probably  meant  pretended  revelations 
(drroxaAufiets)  of  that  heretic.  He  and  Hippolytus  no  doubt 
agreed  with  the  canon  of  the  Roman  church,  which  recognized 
thirteen  epistles  of  Paul  (excluding  Hebrews)  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse of  John. 

Caius  has  been  surrounded  since  Photius  with  a  mythical  halo 
of  authorship,  and  falsely  credited  with  several  works  of  Hip- 
polytus, including  the  recently  discovered  Philosophumena. 
The  Muratorian  fragment  on  the  canon  of  the  New  Testament 
Iras  also  ascribed  to  him  by  the  discoverer  (Muratori,  1740)  and 
recent  writers.  But  this  fragment  is  of  earlier  date  (A.  r>.  170), 
and  written  in  Latin,  though  perhaps  originally  in  Greek.  It 
is  as  far  as  we  know  the  oldest  Latin  church  document  of  Rome, 
and  of  very  great  importance  for  the  histpry  of  the  canon.5 

1  See  above  {  183,  p.  762  sq. 

'  So  Lightfoot  in  the  "Journal  of  Philology/'  1.  98,  8-nd  Salmon,  U.,  p.  38tJ 

8  See  the  document  and  the  discussion  about  the  authorship  in  Routh.  L  39tf 


£185.  THE  ALEXAND1UAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY,    777 


§  185.    The  Alexandrian  School  of  Tlieology. 

J.  G.  MICHAELIS  :   De  Scholar  Alexandrines  prima  origine,  progressu,  CM 

prcecipuis  doctoribus.    Hal.  1739. 
H.  E.  FE.  GUERIKE:   De  tichola  qua  Alexandria  floruit  catechetica  com- 

mentatio  historica  et  theologica.    Hal.  1824  and  ;25.    2  Parts  (pp.  110 

and  456).  The  second  Part  is  chiefly  devoted  to  Clement  and  Origen. 
0.  F.  W.  HASSELBACH  :   De  Schola,  qua  Alex-  floruit,  catech,    Stettin 

1826.  P.  1.  (against  Guerike),  and  De  disdpulorum  .  .  s.  De  Catechu- 

menorum  ordinibus,  Ibid.  1839. 
J.  MATTEK  :   UHi&toire  de  I'Ecole  d'Alexandric,  second  ed.    Par.  1840. 

3  vols. 

J.  SIMON:  Hisioire  de  VEcole  d'Alexandrie.    Par.  1845. 
E.  VACHEEOT  :   Histoire  critique  de  FjZcole  d*  Alevandrie.    Par.  1851. 

3  vols. 

NEANDER:  1. 527-557  (Am.  ed.) ;  GIESELEB  I.  208-210  (Am.  ed.) 
BITTER  :  Gesch.  der  christl.  Philos.  I.  421  sqq. 

UEBERWEG:  History  of  PhilosopJiy,  vol.  I.  p.  311-310  (Engl.  tnuwl,  1875). 
REDEPENNING  in  his  Origenes  I.  57-88,  and  art.  in  Herzog8 1.  200-292. 

Comp.  also  two  arts,  on  the  Jewish,  and  the  New-Platonic  schools 

of  Alexandria,  by  M.  NICOLAS  in  Lichtenbergcr's  "  Encyclopedic  " 

I  159-170. 
OH.  Bioa  :  The  Christian  Platonics  of  Alexandria.     Tjond.  1886. 

Alexandria,  founded  by  Alexander  the  Great  three  hundred 
and  twenty-two  years  before  Christ,  on  the  mouth  of  the  Nile, 
within  a  few  hours'  sail  from  Asia  and  Europe,  was  the  melropolfo 
of  Egypt,  the  flourishing  seat  of  commerce,  of  Grecian  and  Jew- 
ish learning,  and  of  the  greatest  library  of  the  ancient  world,  and 
was  destined  to  become  one  of  the  great  centres  of  Christianity, 

sqq.,  the  article  of  Salmon  in  Smith  and  Wace  TTI.  1000  aqq.,  and  the  different 
works  on  the  Canon.  Most  of  the  writers  on  the  subject,  including  Salmon, 
regard  the  fragment  as  a  translation  from  a  Greek  original,  nince  all  other 
documents  of  the  Boman  Church  down  to  Xcphyrinus  and  Hippolytua  are  in 
Greek.  Hilgenfeld  and  P.  de  Lagarde  have  attempted  a  re-tranHhition.  But 
Hesse  (Das  Murator.  Fragment,  G-iesscn,  1873,  p.  25-39),  and  CaHpari  (Qutitten,, 
III.  410  sq.)  confidently  assort  the  originality  of  the  Latin  for  the  reason  that 
the  re-translation  into  the  Greek  docs  not  clear  up  the  obscurities.  The  Latin 
barbarisms^ occur  also  in  other  Koman  writers.  Caapari,  however,  thinks  that 
it  was  composed  by  an  African  residing  in  Borne,  on  the  basis  of  an  older 
Greek  document  of  the  Boman  church.  He  regards  it  as  the  oldest  ecclesias- 
tical document  in  the  Latin  language  ("das  dlteste  in  lateinisch&r  Spraeto 
geschriebene  originate  kirchliche  Schri/tetikk"]. 


778  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

the  rival  of  Antioch  and  Rome.  There  the  religious  life  of 
Palestine  and  the  intellectual  culture  of  Greece  commingled  and 
prepared  the  way  for  the  first  school  of  theology  which  aimed  at 
a  philosophic  comprehension  and  vindication  of  the  truths  of 
revelation.  Soon  after  the  founding  of  the  church  which  tradi- 
tion traces  to  St.  Mark,  the  Evangelist,  there  arose  a  "  Catecheti- 
cal school"  under  the  supervision  of  the  bishop.1  It  was 
originally  designed  only  for  the  practical  purpose  of  ^preparing 
willing  heathens  and  Jews  of  all  classes  for  baptism.  But  in 
that  home  of  the  Philonic  theology,  of  Gnostic  heresy,  and  of 
Neo-Platonic  philosophy,  it  soon  very  naturally  assumed  a 
learned  character,  and  became,  at  the  same  time,  a  sort  of  theo- 
logical seminary,  which  exercised  a  powerful  influence  on  the 
education  of  many  bishops  and  church  teachers,  and  on  the 
development  of  Christian  science.  It  had  at  first  but  a  single 
teacher,  afterwards  two  or  more,  but  without  fixed  salary,  or 
special  buildings.  The  more  wealthy  pupils  paid  for  tuition, 
but  the  offer  was  often  declined.  The  teachers  gave  their  in- 
structions in  their  dwellings,  generally  after  the  style  of  the 
ancient  philosophers. 

The  first  superintendent  of  this  school  known  to  us  was  EAN- 
TJENUS,  a  converted  Stoic  philosopher,  about  A.  D.  180.  He 
afterwards  labored  as  a  missionary  in  India,  and  left  several 
commentaries,  of  which,  however,  nothing  remains  but  some 
scanty  fragments.2  He  was  followed  by  CLEMENT,  to  A.  D.  202 ; 
and  Clement,  by  ORIGKEQST,  to  232,  who  raised  the  school  to  the 
summit  of  its  prosperity,  and  founded  a  similar  one  at  Caesarea 


1  Ensebius  (V.  10 ;  VI.  3,  6)  calls  it  Tb  TTJG  /earj^jfffwjf  SiSaffKahsZov,  and 
fadacKafalov  T&V  iep&v  7i6yuv.  Sozomen  (HE.  15),  rb  lepbv  ditiaaKafaZov  r&v 
lep&v  pa&wdTuv;  Jerome  (Catal.  38),  and  Bufinus  (H.  JS.  IL  7),  ecdesiastica 
schola. 

'Clemens  calls  him  "the  Sicilian  bee"  (oixekitb  p&tTra,  perhaps  with 
reference  to  his  descent  from  Sicily).  Jerome  (Catd.  36)  says  of  him :  "Hujus 
muLti  quidem  in  £  Scripturam  exstant  commentarii,  sed  magis  vim  wee  eccletiit 
profutt."  Comp.  on  him  Eedepenning;  Origenes  I.  63  sqq.,  and  Holier  in 
Herzog2  XI.  182.  The  two  brief  relics  of  Pantsenus  are  collected  and  accom- 
panied with  learned  notes  by  Bouth,  Ed.  8. 1.  375-383. 


§  185.  THE  ALEXANDEIAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY.    779 

in^  Palestine.  The  institution  was  afterwards  conducted  by 
Origejaia  pupils,  HERACLAS  (d.  248),  and  DIONYBIUH  (d.  265), 
and  last  by  the  blind  but  learned  PIDYMUS  (d.  395),  until,  at  the 
end  of  the  fourth  century,  it  sank  for  ever  amidst  the  commo« 
tions  and  dissensions  of  the  Alexandrian  church,  which  at  last 
prepared  the  way  for  the  destructive  conquest  of  the  Arabs  (640). 
The  city  itself  gradually  sank  to  a  mere  village,  and  Cairo  took 
its  place  (since  969).  In  the  present  century  it  is  fast  rising 
again,  under  European  auspices,  to  great  commercial  importance. 
From  this  catechetical  school  proceeded  a  peculiar  theology, 
the  most  learned  and  genial  representatives  of  which  were 
Clement  and  Origen.  This  theology  IB,  on  the  one  hand,  a 
regenerated  Christian  form  of  the  Alexandrian  Jewish  religious 
philosophy  of  Philo ;  on  the  other,  a  catholic  counterpart,  and  a 
positive  refutation  of  the  heretical  Gnosis,  which  reached  its 
height  also  in  Alexandria,  but  half  a  century  earlier.  The 
Alexandrian  theology  aims  at  a  reconciliation  of  Christianity 
with  philosophy,  or,  subjectively  speaking,  of  piutis  wltlignosiaj 
but  it  seeks  this  union  upon  the  basis  of  the  Bible,  and  the  doc- 
trine of  the  church.  Its  centre,  therefore,  is  the  Divine  Logos, 
viewed  as  the  sum  of  all  reason  and  all  truth,  before  and  after 
the  incarnation.  Clement  camafrom  the  Hellenic  philosophy  to 
the  Christian  faith;  Origen,  conversely,  was  led  by  faith  to 
speculation.  The  former  was  an  aphoristic  thinker,  the  latter  a 
systematic.  The  one  borrowed  ideas  from  various  systems ;  the 
other  followed  more  the  track  of  Platomsm.  But  both  were 
Christian  philosophers  and  churchly  gnostics.  As  Philo,  long 
before  them,  in  the  same  city,  had  combined  Judaism  with 
Grecian  culture,  so  now  they  carried  the  Grecian  culture  into 
Christianity.  This,  indeed,  the  apologists  and  controversialists 
of  the  second  century  had  already  done,  as  far  back  as  Justin  tho 
tf  philosopher."  But  the  Alexandrians  were  more  learned,  and 
made  much  freer  use  of  the  Greek  philosophy.  They  saw  in  it 
not  sheer  error,  but  in  one  view  a  gift,  of  God,  and  an  intellectual 
schoolmaster  for  Christ,  like  the  law  in  ithc  moral  and  religions 
sphere.  Clement  compares  it  to  a  wild  olive  tree,  which  can  ba 


T80  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

ennobled  by  faith  j  Origen  (in  the  fragment  of  an  epistle  to 
Gregory  Thaumaturgus),  to  the  jewels,  which  the  Ibi-aelitcs  took 
with  them  out  of  Egypt,  and  turned  into  ornaments  for  their 
sanctuary,  though  they  also  wrought  them  into  the  golden  calf. 
Philosophy  is  not  necessarily  an  enemy  to  the  truth,  but  may, 
and  should  be  its  handmaid,  and  neutralize  the  attacks  against 
it.  The  elements  of  truth  in  the  heathen  philosophy  they  at- 
tributed partly  to  the  secret  operation  of  the  Logos  in  the  world 
of  reason,  partly  to  acquaintance  with  the  writings  of  Moses  and 
the  prophets. 

So  with  the  Gnostic  heresy.  The  Alexandrians  did  not 
sweepingly  condemn  it,  but  recognized  the  desire  for  deeper 
religious  knowledge,  which  lay  at  its  root,  and  sought  to  meet 
this  desire  with  a  wholesome  supply  from  the  Bible  itself.  To 
the  fvct><tt<r  $eu8&wfMC  they  opposed  a  f\>&m$  dty&wij.  Their 
maxim  was,  in  the  words  of  Clement:  "No  faith  without 
knowledge,  no  knowledge  without  faith;"  or  :  "Unless  you  be- 
lieve, you  will  not  understand." 1  Faith  and  knowledge  have  the 
same  substance,  the  saving  truth  of  God,  revealed  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  faithfully  handed  down  by  the  church;  they 
differ  only  in  form.  Knowledge  is  our  consciousness  of  the 
deeper  ground  and  consistency  of  faith.  The  Christian  know- 
ledge, however,  is  also  a  gift  of  grace,  and  has  its  condition  in  a 
holy  life.  The  ideal  of  a  Christian  gnostic  includes  perfect  love 
as  well  as  perfect  knowledge,  of  God.  Clement  describes  him 
as  one  "who,  growing  grey  in  the  study  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  preserving  the  orthodoxy  of  ihe  apostles  and  the  church, 
lives  strictly  according  to  the  gospel." 

The  Alexandrian  theology  is  intellectual,  profound,  stirring, 
and  full  of  fruitful  germs  of  thought,  but  rather  unduly  idealistic 
and  spiritualistic,  and,  in  exegesis,  loses  itself  in  arbitrary  alle- 
gorical fancies.  In  its  efforts  to  reconcile  revelation  and  philo- 
sophy it  took  up,  like  Philo,  many  foreign  elements,  especially 
of 'the  Platonic  stamp,  and  wandered  into  speculative  view 

1  Is.  7 :  9  according  to  the  LXX :  lav  $  irtffTebffyre,  ovtte  i$ 


1 186.  CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  781 

which  a  later  and  more  orthodox,  but  more  narrow-minded  and 
less  productive  age  condemned  as  heresies,  not  appreciating  the 
immortal  service  of  this  school  to  its  own  and  after  times.  J 

§  186.    Clement  of  Alexandria. 

(I.)  CLEMENTIS  ALEX.  Opera  omnia  Gr.  et  Lat.  ed.  POTTER  (bishop  of 

Oxford).    Oxon.  1715.    2  vols.     Reprinted  Vcnet  1757.    2  vols. 

fol.,  and  in  MIGNE'S  "  Patr.  Or."  vols.  VIII.  and  IX.,  with  various 

additions  and  the  comments  of  NIC.  LE  Nourry.    For  an  account  ot 

the  MSS.  and  editions  of  Clement  see  FABRICIUS  ;  Biblwtk  Graca, 

ed.  Earles,  vol.  VII.  109  sqq. 
Other  edd.  by  VICTORINTJS  (Florence,  1550);  SYLBITRG  (Heidolb.  1592); 

HEINSIUB  (Gneco-Latin.,  Leyden,  161C) ;  KLOTZ  (Leipz.  1881-34, 

4  vols.,  only  in  Greek,  and  very  incorrect) ;  W.  DINDOJRF  (Oxf.  18G8- 

69,  4  vols.). 
English  translation  by  WM.  WILSON  in  Clark's  "  Ante-Nicene  Library," 

vols.  IV.  and  V.    Edinb.  1867. 
(II.)  EusEBiUS  :  Hist.  Eccl  V.  11 ;  VI.  63  11,  13.    HIERONYMUS  :  De 

Vir.  ill  38;  PHOTius :  BiUiotl.  109-111.    See  the  Testimonies  Vcte- 

rum  de  CL  collected  in  Potter's  ed.  at  the  beginning  of  vol.  I.  and  in 

Migne's  ed.  VIII.  35-50. 
(III.)  HOFSTEDE  ,DE  GjROOT :   Dissert,  de  Clem.  Alex.     Groning.  1826. 

A.  F.  DAEHNE:  DE  yw5er«  CLEM  AL.    Hal.  1831. 
F.  E.  EYLERT  :  Clem.  v.  Alex,  als  Philosop7i  und  Dichter.    Leipx.  1832. 
Bishop  KAYE  :  Some  Account  of  the  Writings  and  Opinions  of  Clement  of 

Alex.    Lond.  1835. 
KLING:   Die  Bedewtung  des  Clem.  Alex,  fwr  die  Entstehung  der  TlmL 

("Stud.  u.  Krit."  for  1841,  No.  4). 
H.  J.  EEINKENB  :    De  Clem.  Alex,  homine,  scriptore,  pMlosopho,  theologo. 

Wratisl.  (Breslau)  1851. 

H.  EEUTEE  :  Clementis  Alex.  Theol.  moralis.    Berl.  1853. 
L^BMMER:  Clem.  AL  de  Logo  doctrina.    Lips.  1855. 
Abbe  COGNAT  :  Clement  ff  Alexandrie.    Paris  1859. 
J.  H.  MILLER:  Id'ees  dogm.  de  Clement  tfAlex.    Strasb.  1861. 
OH.  E.  FKEPPEL  (E.  C.) :  Cl&ment  d'Alexandrie.   Paria,  1866,  second  ed. 

1873. 
C.  MEEK  :  Clemens  v.  Alex,  in  s.  Abliimgigkeit  von  der  yriech.  Philosophie. 

Leipz.  1879. 
Fit.  JUL.  WINTEE  :   Die  Ethik  den  Clemum  v.  Alex.    Leipz.  1882  (first 

part  vfjStuclien  zur  Gesch.  der  chrfatL  Ethi&}. 
JACOBI  in  Herzog2  III.  269-277,  and  WESTCOTT  in  Smith  and  Wace  I 

559-567. 

\IIN:  Supplcmcntum  Chmc'nJinum,.    Third  Part  of  his  Forschunyen 

zur  (/csc/fc.  don  N.  T.  licJwn  Kwum.    Erlangoii  1884. 


782  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

I.  TITUS  FLAVIUS  CLEMENS1  sprang  from  Greece,  probably 
from  Athens.    He  was  born  about  150,  and  brought  up  in  hea- 
thenism.   He  was  versed  in  all  branches  of  Hellenic  literature 
and  in  all  the  existing  systems  of  philosophy  ;  but  in  these  he 
found  nothing  to  satisfy  his  thirst  for  truth.     In  his  adult  years, 
therefore,  he  embraced  the  Christian  religion,  and  by  long  jour- 
neys East  and  West  he  sought  the  most  distinguished  teachers, 
"  who  preserved  the  tradition  of  pure  saving  doctrine,  and  im- 
planted that  genuine  apostolic  seed  in  the  hearts  of  their  pupils." 
He  was  captivated  by  Pantaenus  in  Egypt,  who,  says  he,  "  like 
the  Sicilian  bee,  plucked  flowers  from  the  apostolic  and  prophetic 
meadow,  and  filled  the  souls  of  his  disciples  with  genuine,  pure 
knowledge."  He  became  presbyter  in  the  church  of  Alexandria, 
and  about  A.  D.  189  succeeded  Pantsenus  as  president  of  the  cate- 
chetical school  of  that  city.     Here  he  labored  benignly  some 
twelve  years  for  the  conversion  of  heathens  and  the  education  of 
the  Christians,  until,  as  it  appears,  -the  persecution  under  Septi- 
mius  Severus  in  202  compelled  him  to  flee.    After  this  we  find 
him  in  Antioch,  and  last  (211)  with  his  former  pupil,  the  bishop 
Alexander,  in  Jerusalem.    Whether  he  returned  thence  to  Alex- 
andria is  unknown.  .  He  died  before  the  year  220,  about  the 
samejime  withJ?e^lli^irTle"Tias^no'  place,  any  more  than 
Origen,  among  the  saints  of  the  Koman  church,  though  he 
frequently  bore  this  title  of  honor  in  ancient  times.  .  His  name, 
is  found  in  early  Western  martyrologies,  but  was  omitted  in 
the  martyroiogy  issued  by  Clement  VIII.  at  the  suggestion  of 
Baronius.   .B&jedict  XIV.  elaborately  defended  the  omission 
(1748),  on  the  ground  of  unsoundness  in  doctrine. 

II.  Clement  was  the  father  of  the  Alexandrian   Christian 
philosophy.    He  united  thorough  biblical  and  Hellenic  learning 
with  genius  and  speculative  thought.    He  rose,  in  many  points, 


c.  It  is  strange  that  he,  and  not  his  distinguished  Roman  name-sake, 
should  be  called  Flaviits.  Perhaps  he  was  descended  from  a  freedman  of  Titus 
Flavius  Clemens,  the  nephew  of  the  Emperor  Vespasian  and  Consul  in  95, 
who  with  his  wife  Bomitilla  was  suddenly  arrested  and  condemned  on  the 
charge  of  '*  atheism,"  i.  e.  Christianity,  by  his  cousin,  the  emperor  Domitian. 


J186.  CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDBIA.  783 

far  above  the  prejudices  of  his  age,  to  more  free  and  spiritual 
views.  His  theology,  however,  is  not  a  unit,  but  a  confused 
eclectic  mixture  of  true  Christian  elements  with  many  Stoic, 
Platonic,  and  Philonic  ingredients.  His  writings  are  full  of 
repetition,  and  quite  lacking  in  clear,  fixed  method.  He  throws 
out  his  suggestive  and  often  profound  thoughts  in  fragments,  or 
purposely  veils  them,  especially  in  the  Stromata,  in  a  mysterious 
darkness,  to  conceal  them  from  the  exoteric  multitude,  and  to 
stimulate  the  study  of  the  initiated  or  philosophical  Christians. 
He  shows  here  an  affinity  with  the  heathen  mystery  cultus,  and 
the  Gnostic  arcana.  His  extended  knowledge  of  Grecian  litera- 
ture and  rich  quotations  from  the  lost  works  of  poots,  philoso- 
phers, and  historians  give  him  importance  also  in  investigations 
regarding  classical  antiquity.  He  lived  in  an  age  of  transition 
when  Christian  thought  was  beginning  to  master  and  to  assimi- 
late the  whole  domain  of  human  knowledge.  '*  And  when  it  is 
frankly  admitted  "  (says  Dr.  Westcott)  "  that  his  style  is  gen- 
erally deficient  in  terseness  and  elegance;  that  his  mothod  is 
desultory  ;  that  his  learning  is  undigested  :  we  can  still  thank- 
fully admire  his  richness  of  information,  his  breadth  of  reading, 
his  largeness  of  sympathy,  his  lofty  aspirations,  his  noble  con- 
ception of  the  office  and  capacities  of  the  Faith." 

III.  The  three  leading  works  which  he  composed  during  Kin 
residence  as  teacher  in  Alexandria,  between  the  years  190  and 
1  95,  represent  the  three  stages  in  the  discipline  of  the  human 
race  by  the  divine  Logos,  corresponding  to  the  three  degrees  of 
knowledge  required  by  the  ancient  mystagogtics/  and  arc  related 
to  one  another  very  much  as  apologetics,  ethics,  and  dogmatics,  or 
as  faith,  love,  and  mystic  vision,  or  as  the  stages  of  the  Christian 
cultus  up  to  the  celebration  of  the  sacramental  mysteries.  The 
"Exhortation  to  the  Greeks/52  in  three  books,  with  almost  a 
waste  of  learning,  points  out  the  unreasonableness  and  imrno- 


1  The  anoK&'&apai^  and  the  ptopv,  and  the  fcrdrao,  i.  e.  purification,  initia- 
tion, vision. 

?  Arfyof  irporpeirriris  Trpdf  "EJU^i/af,  Oohortatio  ad  Grcecos,  or  ad 


784  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

iality,  but  also  the  nobler  prophetic  element,  of  heathenism,  and 
seeks  to  lead  the  sinner  to  repentance  and  faith.  The  "  Tutor  " 
or  "Educator"1  unfolds  the  Christian  morality  with  constant 
reference  to  heathen  practices,  and  exhorts  to  a  holy  walk,  the 
end  of  which  is  likeness  to  God.  The  Educator  is  Christ,  and 
the  children  whom  he  trams,  are  simple,  sincere  believers.  The 
"Stromata"  or  "Miscellanies,"2  in  seven  books  (the  eighth, 
containing  an  imperfect  treatise  on  logic,  is  spurious),  furnishes 
a  guide  to  the  deeper  knowledge  of  Christianity,  but  is  without 
any  methodical  arrangement,  a  heterogeneous  mixture  of  curi- 
osities of  history,  beauties  of  poetry,  reveries  of  philosophy, 
Christian  truths  and  heretical  errors  (hence  the  name).  Fie 
compares  it  to  a  thick-grown,  shady  mountain  or  garden,  where 
fruitful  and  barren  trees  of  all  kinds,  the  cypress,  the  laurel, 
the  ivy,  the  apple,  the  olive,  the  fig,  stand  confusedly  grouped 
together,  that  many  may  remain  hidden  from  the  •  eye  of  the 
plunderer  without  escaping  the  notice  of  the  laborer,  who  might 
transplant  and  arrange  them  in  pleasing  order.  It  was,  proba- 
bly, only  a  prelude  to  a  more  comprehensive  theology.  At  the 
close  the  author  portrays  the  ideal  of  the  "true  gnostic,  that  is, 
the  perfect  Christian,  'assigning  to  him,  among  other  traits,  a 
stoical  elevation  above  all  sensuous  affections.  The  inspiring 
thought  of  Clement  is  that  Christianity  satisfies  all  the  intel- 
lectual and  moral  aspirations  and  wants  of  man. 

Besides  these  principal  works  we  have,  from  Clement  also, 
an  able  and  moderately  ascetic  treatise,  on  the  right  use  of 
wealth.8  His  ethical  principles  are  those  of  the  Hellenic 

1  Ttaidaj>uy6e.    This  part  contains  the  hymn  to  Christ  at  the  close. 

2  Sr/j^areZf,  Stromafa,  or  pieces  of  tapestry,  which,  when  curiously  woven, 
and  in  divers  colors,  present  an  apt  picture  of  such  miscellaneous  composition. 

8  Ti'f  6  wtffuiw;  irtofanof,  Qm  dives  scdws,  or  salvetur?  an  excellent  com- 
mentary on  the  words  of  the  Lord  in  Mark  10 :  17  sqq.  A  most  practical  topic 
for  a  rich  city  like  Alexandria,  or  any  other  city  and  age,  especially  our  own, 
which  calls  for  the  largest  exercise  of  liberality  for  literary  and  benevolent 
objects.  See  the  tract  in  Potter's  ed.  II.  935-961  (with  a  Latin  version).  It 
ends  with  the  beautiful  story  of  St.  John  and  the  young  robber, 
has  inserted  in  his  Church  History  (IIL  23). 


8187.  OBIGEN.  78-J 

philosophy,  inspired  by  the  genius  of  Christianity.  He  doos 
not  run  into  the  excesses  of  asceticism,  though  evidently  under 
its  influence.  His  exegetical  works,1  as  well  as  a  controversial 
treatise  on  prophecy  against  the  Montanists,  and  another  on  the 
passover,  against  the  Judaking  practice  in  Asia  Minor,  are  all 
lost,  except  some  inconsiderable  fragments. 

To  Clement  we  owe  also  the  oldest  Christian  hymn  that  has 
come  _down  to  us  ;  an  elevated  but  somewhat  turgid  song  of 
praise  to.  the  Logos,  as  the  divine  educator  and  leader  of  the 
human  race.2 

§187.  Origen. 

(I.)  ORIGENIS  Opera  omnia  Greece  ct  Lat.  Ed.  CAROL.  ET  VINO.  DE  LA 
KUE.  Par.  1733-;59,  4  vols.  fol.  The  only  complete  ed.,  begun  by 
the  Benedictine  Charles  D.  L.  ft.,  and  after  Iris  death  completed  by 
his  nephew  Vincent,  llopubl.  in  Migne's  Ihtrol  Gr.  1857,  8  vols.t 
with  additions  from  GWland  (1781),  Cramer  (1840-44),  and  Mai  (1854), 

Other  editions  by  J.  MJGRLINUS  (eel.  princeps,  Par.  1512-'19,  2  vols.  fol., 
again  in  Venice  1516,  and  in  Paris  1522  ;  1530,  only  the  Lat.  text)  ; 
by  ERASMUS  and  BEATUS  RFIENTANUS  (Bas.  1536,  2  vols.  fol.  ;  1545  ; 
1551  ;  1557  ;  1571)  ;  by  the  Benedictine  G.  GENEBRARD  (Par.  1574; 
1604;  1619  in  2  vols.  fol,,  all  in  Lat.)  ;  by  CORDERIUS  (Antw.  1648, 
partly  in  Greek)  ;  by  P.  D.  HUETIUR,  or  HUET,  afterwards  Bp.  of 
Avranges  (Rouen,  1668,  2  vols.  fol.,  the  Greek  writings,  with  very 
learned  dissertations,  Origeniana  ;  again  Paris  1679  ;  Cologne  1685)  ; 
by  MoNTFAtJCOisr  (only  the  Hexapla,  Par.  1713,  '14,  2  vols.  fol.,  re- 
vised and  improved  ed.  by  FIELD,  Oxf.  1875)  ;  by  LOMMATSCII 
(Berol.  1837-48,  25  vols.  oct.). 

English  translation  of  select  works  of  Origen  by  F.  CROMBIE  in  Clark's 
"  Ante-Nicene  Library,"  Edinb.  1868,  arid  N.  York  1885. 

(II.)  EUSEBIUS:  Hist.  Ecdes.  VI.  1-6  and  passim.  PIiERONYMUS  :  DC 
Vir.  ill  54  ;  J^>.  29,  41,  and  often.  GREGORIUS  TllAUMAT.  :  Oratit 
panegyrica  in  Oriy&nqyn.  PAMPllILtTH  :  Apologia  Grig.  RtlFTNUH  : 
De  Adult&ratione  librorum  Origcnis,  All  in  the  last  vol.  of  Delaruo's 
ed. 


f,  Adutribrationes,  Outlines,  or  a  condensed  survey  of  the  con- 
tents of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  Scriptures.  See  the  analysis  of  tlio  frag- 
ments by  Westcotl,  in  Smith  and  Wace,  III.  563  sq.,  and  /.ahn,  L  c.  64-103. 

a  v/Ltvof  TOV  o-wrry/jof  Xptcrrov,  written  in  an  anapaestic  measure.    See  $  66,  p, 
230.    The  other  hymn  added  to  the  "Tutor"'  written  in  trimeter  iambica,  and 
addressed  to  the  Tra^aywy^,  is  of  later  date, 
Vol.  II.—  *0.' 


f86  SECOND  "PEEIOD.    A.  D.,  100-311. 

(in.)  P.  D.  HTTETIHS:  Origeniana.    Par.  1679,  2  vols.  (and  in  Delame's 

ed.  vol.  4th).    Very  learned,  and  apologetic  for  Origen. 
G.THOMASIUS:  Origenes.    Mn  Betirag  zur  Dogmengesch.    Niirnb.  1837. 
E.  BUB.  REDEPENNING:  Origenes.    Eine  Darstettung  seines  Lebens  und 

seiner  Lehre.    Bonn  1841  and  '46,  in  2  vols.  (pp.  461  and  491  ). 
B6HBIKGEE  :  Origenes  und  sein  Lehrer  Siemens,  oder  die  Alexandrinische 

innerfcirchliche  Gnosis  des  Christenthums.     Bd.  V.  of  Kirckengesch. 

ia  Biographieen.    Second  ed.  Leipz.  1873. 
CH.  E.  FREPPEL  (E.  0.)  :  Orig&ne.    Paris  1868,  second  ed.  1875. 
Oomp.  the  articles  of  SCHMITZ  in  Smith's  "  Diet  of  Gr.  and  Rom.  Biogr." 

HI.  46-55  ;  MOLLEB,  in  Herzog2  voL  XI.  92-109  ;  WESTCOTT  in 
'  "Diet,  of  Chr.  Biogr,"  IV.  96-142;  FARRAR,  in  "Lives  of  the 

Fathers,"  I  291-330. 

Also  the  respective  sections  in  BULL  (Defens.  Fid.  NIC.  ch.  IX.  in 

Delame,  IV.  339-357),  NEAKDER,    BATJR,  and  DORNER  (especially 

on  Origen's  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  and  Incarnation)  ;  and  on  his 

philosophy,  EITTER,  HUBER,  UEBERWEG. 

I.  LIFE  AND  CHARACTER.  ORIGENES/  surnamed  "Ada- 
mantius^  on  account  of  his  industry  and  purity  of  character,2  is 
one  of  the  most  remarkable  men  in  history  for  genius  and  learn- 
ing, for  the  influence  he  exerted  on  his  age,  and  for  the  contro- 
versies and  discussions  to  which  his  opinions  gave  rise.  He^waa. 
born  ofjphjdstiaB^pareritg.  .at.  Alexandria,  in  the  year  185,  and 
probably  J>af>tized,in_childhood,,  according  to  Egyptian  custom 
which^he  traced  to  apostolic  origin.3  Under  the  direction  of  his 
father,  Leonides,4  who  was  probably  a  rhetorician,  and  of  the 
celebrated  Clement  at  the  catechetical  school,  he  received  a  pious 
and  learned  education.  While  yet  a  boy,  he  knew  whole  sections 
of  the  Bible  by  memory  ancL  not  ^rarely  ;  perplexed  .  his^fetfier 
with  questions  on  the  deeper  sense  of  ^Scripture.  The  father 
reproved  his  curiosity,  but  tbanked  God  for  such  a  son,  and 


7f,  Origenes,  probably  derived  from  the  name  of  the  Egyptian  di- 
vinity Or  or  Horiis  (as  Phcebigena  from  Phoebus,  Diogenes  from  Zeus).  See 
Huetius  I.  1,  2  ;  Redepenning,  I.  421  sq. 

»  'Acfyudvnoc  (also  Xa)U&n?pof).  Jerome  understood  the  epithet  to  indicate 
his  unwearied  industry,  Photius  the  irrefragable  strength  of  his  arguments. 
See  Kedepenning,  I.  430. 

^3  So  Moller  (I  c.  92)  and  others.    But  it  ie  only  an  inference  from  Origen's 
view.    There  is  no  record  as  far  as  I  know  of  his  baptism. 

*  Aewv/^r,  Eus.  VI.  1.  So  Neander  and  Grieseler.  Others  spell  the  name 
Leonidas  (Redepenuing  and  Moller). 


§187.  ORIGEN.  787 

often,  as  he  slept,  reverentially  kissed  his  breast  as  a  temple  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  Under  the  persecution  of  Sop  ti  mi  us  Sevcius  in 
202,  he  wrote  to  his  father  in  prison,  beseeching  him  not  to  deny 
Christ  for  the  sake  of  his  family,  and  strongly  desired  to  give 
himself  up  to  the  heathen  authorities,  but  was  prevented  by.  his 
mother,  who  hid  his  clothes.  Leonides  died  a  martyr,  and,  as 
his  property  was  confiscated,  he  left  a  helpless  widow  with  seven 
children.  Origen  was  for  a  time  assisted  by  a  wealthy  matron, 
and  then  supported  himself  by  giving  instruction  in  the  Greek 
language  and  literature,  and  by  copying  manuscripts. 

In  the  year  203,  though  then  only  eighteen  years  of  age,  he 
was  nominated  by  the  bishop  Demetrius,  afterwards  his  opponent, 
president  of  the  catechetical  school  of  Alexandria,  left  vacant  by 
the  flight  of  Clement  To  fill  this  important  office,  lie  made 
himself  acquainted  with  the  various  heresies,  especially  the 
Gnostic,  and  with  the  Grecian  philosophy;  he  was  not  even 
ashamed  to  study  under  the  heathen  Ammonius  Sac<ias,  the 
celebrated  founder  of  Neo-Platonism.  Ho  learned  also  the 
Hebrew  language,  and  madfe  journeys  to  Rome  (211),  Arabia, 
Palestine  (215),  and  Greece-  In  Rome  he  became  slightly 
acquainted  with  Hippolytus,  the  author  of  the  PhUosopJmmcna, 
who  was  next  to  himself  the  most  learned  man  of  his  age.  Dol- 
lingcr  thinks  it  all  but  certain  that  he  sided  with  Hippolytu8  in 
his  controversy  with  Zephyrinus  and  Callistus,  for  he  shared  (at 
least  in  his  earlier  period)  his  rigoristic  principles  of  discipline, 
had  a  dislike  for  the  proud  and  overbearing  bishops  in  large 
cities,  and  held  a  subordinatian  view  of  the  Trinity,  but  he  was 
far  superior  to  his  older  contemporary  in  genius,  depth,  and 
penetrating  insight.1 

When  his  labors  and  the  number  of  his  pupils  increased  he 
gave  the  lower  classes  of  the  catechetical  school  into  the  charge 
of  his  pupil  Heraclas,  and  devoted  himself  wholly  to  the  more 
advanced  students.  He  was  successful  in  bringing  many  emi- 

1  See  Dollinger,  Hippolytws  and  Cdlvstw,  p.  236  sqq.  (Plummets  tranala 
tion). 


788  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

nent  heathens  and  heretics  to  the  Catholic  church ;  among  them 
a  wealthy  'Gnostic,  Ainbrosius,  who  became  his  most  liberal 
patron,  furnishing  him  a  costly  library  for  his  biblical  studies, 
seven  stenographers,  and  a  number  of  copyists  (some  of  whom 
were  young  Christian  women),  the  former  to  note  down  his 
dictations,  the  latter  to  engross  them.  His  fame  spread  far  and 
wide  over  Egypt.  Julia  Mammsea,  mother  of  the  Emperor 
Alexander  Severus,  brought  him  to  Antioch  in  218,  to  learn 
from  him  the  doctrines  of  Christianity.  An  Arabian  prince 
honored  him  with  a  visit  for  the  same  purpose. 

His  mode  of  life  during  the  whole  period  was  strictly  ascetic. 
He  made  it  a  matter  of  principle  to  renounce  every  earthly 
thing  not  Indispensably  necessary.  He  refused  the  gifts  of  his 
pupils,  and  in  literal  obedience  to  the 'Saviour's  injunction  he 
had  but  one  coat,  no  shoes,  and  took  no  thought  of  the  morrow. 
He  rarely  ate  flesh,  never  drank  wine;  devoted  the  greater  part 
of  the  night  to  prayer  and  study,  and  slept  on  the  bare  floor. 
Nay,  in  his  youthful  zeal  for  ascetic  holiness,  he  even  committed 
the  act  of  self-emasculation,  partly  to  fulfil  literally  the  mys- 
terious words  of  Christ,  in  Matt.  19:  12, .for  the  sake  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  partly  to  secure  himself  against  all  temptation 
^^  many 

By  this  inconsiderate  and  misdirected 
heroism,  which,  he  himself  repented  in  his  riper  years,  he  in- 
capacitated himself,  according  to  the  canons  of  the  church/for 
the  clerical  office.'  Nevertheless,  a  long  time  afterwards,  in  228, 
he  was  ordained  presbyter  by  two  friendly  bishops,  Alexander 
of  Jerusalem,  and  Theoctistus  of  Csesarea  in  Palestine,  who  had, 
even  before  this,  on  a  former  visit  of  his,  invited  him  while _a 
layman,  to  teach  .publicly  in  their  churches,  and  Jo.  expound  the 
Scriptures  to  their  people. 

1  This  fact  rests  on  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  (vi.  8),  who  was  very  well  in- 
formed respecting  Origen ;  and  it  has  been  defended  by  Engelhardt,  Redepen- 
ning,  and  Neander,  against  the  unfounded  doubts  of  Banr  and  Schnitzer.  The 
comments  of  Origen  on  the  passage  in  Matthew  speak  for  rather  than  against 
Oiefact.  See  also  Moller  (p.  93). 


759 

But  this  foreign  ordination  itself,  and  the  growing  reputation 
of  Origen  among  heathens  and  Christians,  stirred  the  jealousy 
of  the  bishop  Demetrius  of  Alexandria,  who  charged  him  be- 
sides, and  that  not  wholly  without  foundation,  with  corrupting 
Christianity  by  foreign  speculations.  This  bishop  held  two 
councils,  A.  D.  231  and  232,  against  the  great  theologian,  and 
enacted,  that  he,  for  his  false  doctrine,  his  self-mutilation,  and 
his  violation  of  the  church  laws,  be  deposed  from  his  offices  of 
presbyter  and  catechist,  and  excommunicated.  This  unrighteous 
sentence,  in  which  envy,  hierarchical  arrogance,  and  zeal  for 
orthodoxy  joined,  was  communicated,  as  the  custom  -was,  to 
other  churches.  The  Roman  church,  always  ready  to  anathe- 
matize, concurred  without  further  investigation;  while  the 
churches  of  Palestine,  Arabia,  Phoenicia,  and  Achaia,  which 
were  better  informed,  decidedly  disapproved  it. 

In  this  controversy  Origen  showed  a  genuine  Christian  meek- 
ness. "We  must  pity  them,"  said  he  of  his  enemies,  "rather 
than  hate  them ;  pray  for  them,  rather  than  curse  them ;  for 
we  are  made  for  blessing,  and  not  for  cursing."  He  betook 
himself  to  his  friend,  the  bishop  of  Cuesarea,  in  Palestine, 
prosecuted  his  studies  there,  opened  a  new  philosophical  and 
theological  school,  which  soon  outshone  that  of  Alexandria,  and 
labored  for  the  spread  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  persecution 
under  Maximinus  Thrax  (235)  drove  him  for  a  time  to  Cappa- 
docia.  Thence  he  went  to  Greece,  and  then  back  to  Palestine. 
He  was  called  into  consultation  in  various  ecclesiastical  disputes, 
and  had  an  extensive  correspondence,  in  which  were  included 
even  the  emperor  Philip  the  Arabian,  and  his  wife.  Though 
thrust  out  as  a  heretic  from  Jiis  home,  he  reclaimed  the  erring 
in  foreign  lands  to  the  faith  of  the  church.  At  an  Arabian 
Council,  for  example,  he  convinced  the  bishop  Beryllus  of  his 
christological  error,  and  persuaded  him  to  retract  (A.  D.  244). 

At  last  he  received  an  honorable  invitation  to  return  to 
Alexandria,  where,  meantime,  his  pupil  Dionysius  had  become 
bishop.  But  in  the  Decian  persecution  he  was  cast  into  prison, 
cruelly  tortured,  and  condemned  to  the  stake ;  and  though  he 


790  SECOND  PERIOD.    A. D.  100-311. 

regained  his  liberty  by  the  death  of  the  emperor;  yet  he  died 
some  time  after,  at  the  age  of  sixty-nine,  in  the  year  253  or  254, 
at  Tyrej^robably  in  consequence  of  that  violence.  He  belongs, 
therefore,  at  least  among  the  confessors,  if  not  among  the 
martyrs.  He  was  buried  at  Tyre. 

It  is  impossible  to  deny  a  respectful  sympathy,  veneration 
and  gratitude  to  this  extraordinary  man,  who,  with  all  his 
brilliant  talents  and  a  host  of  enthusiastic  friends  and  admirers, 
was "  driven  from  his  country,  stripped  of  his  sacred  office, 
excommunicated  from  a  part  of  the  church,  then  thrown  into  a 
dungeon,  loaded  with  chains,  racked  by  torture,  doomed  to  drag 
his  aged  frame  and  dislocated  limbs  in  pain  and  poverty,  and 
.  long  after  his  death  to  have  his  memory  branded,  his  name 
,  anathematized,  and  his  salvation  denied ; L  but  who  nevertheless 
did  more  than  all  his  enemies  combined  to  advance  the  cause 
of  sacred  learning,  to  refute  and  convert  heathens  and  heretics, 
and  to  make  the  church  respected  in  the  eyes  of  the  world. 

II.  His  THEOLOGY.  Origen  was  the  greatest  scholar  of  his 
age,  and  the  most  gifted,  most  industrious,  and  most  cultivated 
of  all  the  mt£rMqene_fathers.  Even  heathens  and  heretics  ad- 
mired or  feared  his  brilliant  talent  and  vast  learning.  His 
knowledge  embraced  all  departments  of  the  philology,  philoso- 
phy^and  theology  of  his  day.  With  this  he  united  profound 
and  fertile  thought,  keen  penetration,  and  glowing  imagination. 
As  a  true  divine,  he  consecrated  all  his  studies  by  prayer,  and 
turned  them,  according  to  his  best  convictions,  to  the  service  of 
truth  and  piety. 

He  may  be  called  in  many  respects  the  Schleiermacher  of  thi 
Greek  church.  He  was  a  guide  from  the  heathen  philosophy 
and  the  heretical  Gnosis  to  the  Christian  faith.  Hie  exerted  at 

1  Stephen  Binet,  a  Jesuit,  wrote  a  little  book,  De  salute  Origenis,  Par.  1629, 
in  which  the  leading  writers  on  the  subject  debate  the  question  of  the  salvation 
of  Origen,  and  Baronius  proposes  a  descent  to  the  infernal  regions  to  ascertain 
the  truth ;  at  last  the  final  revision  of  the  heresy-trial  is  wisely  left  with  th* 
secret  counsel  of  God.  See  an  account  of  this  book  by  Bayle,  Diction,  suit 
"Origene,"  Tom.  III.  541,  note  D.  Origen's  "gravest  errors,'7  says  West- 
cott  (/.  c.  iv.  139),  "or?  attempts  to  s^-c  that  which  is  insoluble. " 


J187.  OBIGEN.  791 

immeasurable  influence  in  stimulating  the  development  of  the 
catholic  theology  and  forming  the  great  Nicene  fathers,  Atha- 
nasius,  Basil,  the  two  Gregorics,  Hilary,  and  Ambrose,  who 
consequently,  iu  spite  of  all  his  deviations,  set  great  value  on 
his  services.  But  his  best  disciples  proved  unfaithful  to  many 
of  his  most  peculiar  views,  and  adhered  far  more  to  the  reigning 
faith  of  the  church.  For — and  in  this  too  he  is  like  Schleierma- 
cher — he  can  by  no  means  be  called  orthodox,  either  in  the 
Catholic  or  in  the  Protestant  sense.  His  leaning  to  idealism, 
his  predilection  for  Plato,  and  his  noble  effort  to  reconcile 
Christianity  with  reason,  and  to  commend  it  even  to  educated 
heathens  and  Gnostics,  led  him  into  many  grand  and  fascinating 
errors.  Among  these  are  his  extremely  ascetic  and  almost  doce- 
tistic  conception  of  corporeity,  his  denial  of  a  material  resurrec- 
tion, his  doctrine  of  the  pre-existence  and  the  pre-temporal  fall 
of  souls  (including  the  pre-existence  of  the  human  soul  of  Christ), 
of  eternal  creation,  of  the  extension  of  the  work  of  redemption 
to  the  inhabitants  of  the  stars  and  to  all  rational  creatures,  and 
of  the  final  restoration  of  all  men  and  fallen  angels.  Also 
in  regard  to  the  dogma  of  the  divinity  of  Christ,  though  he 
powerfully  supported  it,  and  was  the  first  to  teach  expressly  the 
eternal  generation  of  the  Son,  yet  he  -may  be  almost  as  justly 
considered  a  forerunner  of  the  Arian  het&rooiwion,  or  at  least  of 
the  semi- Arian  Tiomoioudon^  as  of  the  Athanasian  homoousion. 

These  and  similar  views  provoked  more  or  less  contradiction 
during  his  lifetime,  and  were  afterwards,  at  a  local  council  in 
Constantinople  in  543,  even  solemnly  condemned  as  heretical.1 
But  such  a  man  might  in  such  an  age  hold  erroneous  opinions 
without  being  a  heretic.  For  Origen  propounded  his  views 
always  with  modesty  and  from  sincere  conviction  of  their  agree- 
ment with  Scripture,  and  that  in  a  time  when  the  church  doc- 
trine was  as  yet  very  indefinite  in  many  points.  For  this  reason 

1  Not  at  the  fifth  ecumenical  council  of  553,  as  has  been  often,  through  con- 
fusion, asserted.  See  Hefele,  Coneiliengesch.  vol.  II.  790  sqq.  and  859  sqq, 
Moller,  however,  in  Herzog'^i.  113,  again  defends  the  other  view  of  Norii 
and  Ballerina.  See  the  15  anathematisnus  in  Mansi,  Cone.  ix.  534. 


792  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-31 1. 

even  learned  Koman  divines,  such  as  Tillemont  and  M8&- 
ler,  have  shown  Origen  the  greatest  respect  and  leniency ;  a  fact 
the  more  to  be  commended,  since  the  Roman  church  has  refused 
him,  as  well  as  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Tertulliau,  a  place 
among  the  saints  and  the  fathers  in  the  stricter  sense. 

Origen's  greatest  service  was  in  exegesis.  He  is  father  of  tho 
critical  investigation  of  Scripture,  and  his  commentaries  are  still 
useful  to  scholars  for  their  suggestiveness.  Gregory  Thau- 
maturgus  says,  he  had  "received  from  God  the  greatest  gift,  to 
be  an  interpreter  of  the  word  of  God  to  men."  For  that  age 
this  judgment  is  perfectly  just.  Origen  remained  the  exegetical 
oracle  until  Chrysostom  far  surpassed  him,  not  indeed  in  origi- 
nality and  vigor  of  mind  and  extent  of  learning,  but  in  sotind, 
sober  tact,  in  simple,  natural  analysis,  and  in  practical  applica- 
tion of  the  -text.  His  great  defect '  is  the  neglect  t)f  the  gramma- 
tical and  historical  sense  and  his  constant  desire  to  find  a  hidden 
mystic  meaning.  He  even  goes  further  in  this  direction  than 
the  Gnostics,  who  everywhere  saw  transcendental,  unfathomable 
mysteries.  His  hermeneutical  principle  assumes  a  threefold 
sense — somatic,  psychic,  and  pneumatic;  or  r.teral,  moral,  and 
spiritual.  His  allegorical  interpretation,  is  i  .genious,  but  often 
runs  far  away  from  the  text  and  degenerates  into  the  merest 
caprice ;  while  at  times  it  gives  way  to  the  opposite  extreme  of  a 
carnal  literalism,  by  which  he  justifies  his  ascetic  extravagance.1 

Origen  is  one  of  the  most  important  witnesses  of  the  ante- 
Nicene  text  of  the  Greek  Testament,  which  is  older  than 
the  received  text.  He  compare^  different  MSS.  and  noted 
textual  variations,  but  did  not  attempt  a  recension  or  lay  down 
any  principles  of  textual  criticism.  The  value  of  his^  testimony 
is  due  to  his  ra^oggortumlies  and  life-long  study  oftheJBible 
before  .the  time  when  the  traditionai  Syrian  and ,,  .Byzantine  text 
wsis  formed.  ~ 

JHIs  exegetical  method  and  merits  are  fully  discussed  by  Huetius,  and  by 
Eedepenning  (I.  2Q&-324),  also  by  Biestel,  Gesch.  des  A.  T.  in  <lw  chmti, 
1869,  p.  36  sq.  and  53  sq. 


4188.  THE  WORKS  OF  OEIGEN. 


795 


§  188.   Tlie  Works  of  Origm. 

Origen  was  an  uncommonly  prolific  author,  but  by  no  means 
an  idle  bookmaker.  Jerome  says,  he  wrote  more  than  other 
men  can  read.  Epiphanius,  an  opponent,  states  the  number  of 
his  works  as  six  thousand,  which  is  perhaps  not  much  beyond 
the  mark,  if  we  include  all  his  short  tracts,  homilies,  and  letters, 
and  count  them  as  separate  volumes.  Many  of  them  arose 
without  his  cooperation,  and  sometimes  against  his  will,  from 
the  writing  down  of  his  oral  lectures  by  others.  Of  his  books 
which  remain,  some  have  come  down  to  us  only  in  Latin  trans- 
lations, and  with  many  alterations  in  favor  of  the  later  ortho 
doxy.  They  extend  to  all  branches  of  the  theology  of  that  day. 

1.  His  biblical  works  were  the  most  numerous,  and  may  be 
divided  into  critical,  exegetical,  and  hortatory. 

Among  the  critical  were  the  Hexapla1  (the  Sixfold  Bible)  and 
the  shorter  Tetrapla  (the  Fourfold),  on  which  he  spent  cight- 
and-twenty  years  of  the  most  unwearied  labor.'  The  Hexapla 
was  the  first  polyglott  Bible,  but  covered  only  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  was  designed  not  for  the  critical  restoration  of  the 
original  text,  but  merely  for  the  improvement  of  the  received 
Septuagint,  and  the  defense  of  it  against  the  charge  of  inac- 
curacy. It  contained,  in  six  columns,  the  original  text  in  two 
forms,  in  Hebrew  and  in  Greek  characters,  and  the  four  Greek 
versions  of  the  Septuagint,  of  Aquila,  of  Symmachus,  and  of 
Iheodotion.  To  these  he  added,  in  several  books,  two  or  three 
other  anonymous  Greek  versions.2  The  order  was  determined 

Uhxaptwi*  V5n  latci 


1  Td  Si-anTia,  also  in  the  singular  form  rd 
writers).    Comp.  Fritzsche  in  Herzog  2  1.  285. 

2  Called  Qwinta  (e')t  Sexto,  (5'),  and  Septima  (£')•    This  would  make  nine 
columns  in  all,  but  the  name  Enneapla  never  occurs.     Ooktpla  and  Jleptapla 
are  used  occasionally,  but  very  seldom.  The  following  passage  from  Eabakkuk 
2:  4  (quoted  Kora.  1:  17)  is  found  complete  in  all  the  columco: 


To  ' 


rnv 


ouarafitpc 


cv  mcrrei 
aurov 


6  fie  8ucaw 
77]  eavrou 
irurrec 


010'. 
(HEX.) 


6  £d  fit'icaio? 


OeofionW. 


o  5t  Sirfeuo; 
TJJ  eavroO 


E'. 


o  8e  a;*(uo< 
TJJ"  tavroO 


TJJ  tfaurov 
jrivrti 
^eret. 


zr. 


o  8i  fit'5on 
rjf  tabro 


794  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

by  the  degree  of  literalness.  The  Tetrapla1  contained  only  the 
four  versions  of  Aquila,  Symmachus,  the  Septuagint,  and 
Theodotion.  The  departures  from  the  standard  he  marked 
with  the  critical  signs  asterisk  (  *  )  for  alterations  and  addi- 
tions, and  obelos  ( CO  )  for  proposed  omissions.  He  also  added 
marginal  notes,  e.  g.,  explanations  of  Hebrew  names.  The 
voluminous  work  was  placed  in  the  library  at  Csesarea,  was  still 
much  used  in  the  time  of  Jerome  (who  saw  it  there),  but  doubt- 
less never  transcribed,  except  in  certain  portions,  most  frequently 
the  Septuagint  columns  (which  were  copied,  for  instance,  by 
Pamphilus  and  Eusebius,  and  regarded  as  the  standard  text), 
and  was  probably  destroyed  by  the  Saracens  in  653.  We  pos- 
sess, therefore,  only  some  fragments  of  it,  which  were  collected 
and  edited  by  the  learned  Benedictine  Montfaucon  (1714),  and 
more  recently  by  an  equally  learned  Anglican  scholar,  Dr. 
Field  (1875).2 

His  commentaries  covered  almost  all  the  books 'of  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments,  and  contained  a  vast  wealth  of  original 
and  profound  -suggestions,  with  the  most  arbitrary  allegorical 
and  mystical  fancies.  They  were  of -three  kinds :  (a)  Short  notes 
on  single  difficult  passages  for  beginners;3  all  these  are  lost, 
except  what  has  been  gathered  from  the  citations  of  the  fathers 
(by  Delarue  under  the  title  "Extofat,  Selecta).  (b)  Extended 
expositions  of  whole  books,  for  higher  scientific  study;4  of, 
these  we  have  a  number  of  important  fragments  m  the  original, 
and  in  the  translation  of  Rufinus.  In  the  Commentary  on 

1  rd  rerpaTrZa,  or  TerpaTrhovv,  or  rb  rerpaff£/Udov,  Tetrapla,  Tetraplwn. 

2  BEEKARDTJS  DE  MONTFAUCON  :  Hexaplorum  Origenis  qua  snipermnt.    Parit* 
1713  and  1714,  2  vols.  fol.     He  added  a  Latin  version  to  the  Hebrew  and 
Greek  texts.    C.  F.  BAHBDT  issued  an  abridged  edition,  Leipz.  1769  and  '70, 
in  2  vols.    FKEDERICTJS  FIELD  :  Origenis  Hexajplorum  qu&  supersunt.    Oxon. 
1875.     This  is  a  thorough  revision  of  Montfaucon's  edition  with  valuable 
additions,  including  the  Syro-Hexapla,  or  Syriac  translation  of  the  Hexaplai 
recension  of  the  Septuagint  made  in  617.    See  a  good  article  on  the  Hexapla 
by  Dr.  Charles  Taylor  in  Smith  and  Wace  III.  14-23,  and  especially  the  Pro- 
legomena of  Field,    See  also  Fritzsche  in  Herzoga  I.  285-298. 

,  scholia. 


{188.  THE  WOKKS  OF  OB1GEN.  795 

John  the  Gnostic  exegeses  of  Heracleon  is  much  used,  (c)  Hor- 
tatory or  practical  applications  of  Scripture  for  the  congregation 
or  Homilies.1  They  were  delivered  extemporaneously,  mostly 
in  Csesarea  and  in  the  latter  part  of  his  life,  and  taken  down  by 
stenographers.  They  are  important  also  to  the  history  of  pul- 
pit oratory.  But  we  have  them  only  in  part,  as  translated  by 
Jerome  and  E/ufinus,  with  many  unscrupulous  retrenchments 
and  additions,  which  perplex  and  are  apt  to  mislead  in- 
vestigators. 

2.  Apologetic    and    polemic    works.     The    refutation  of 
Celsus's  attack  upon  Christianity,  in  eight  books,  written  in  the 
last  years  of  his  life,  about  248,  is  preserved  complete  in  the 
original,  and  is  one  of  the  ripest  and  most  valuable  productions 
of  Origen,  and  of  the  whole  ancient  apologetic  literature.2    And 
yet  he  did  not  know  who  this  Celsus  was,  whether  he  lived  in 
the  reign  of  Nero  or  that  of  Hadrian,  while  modern  scholars 
assign  him  to  the  period   A..  D.  150  to  178.     His  numerous 
polemic  writings  against  heretics  are  all  gone. 

3.  Of  his  dogmatic  writings  we  have,  though  only  in  the 
inaccurate  Latin  translation  of  liufinus,  his  juvenile  production, 
De  Prinoipiis,  L  e.  on  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Chris- 
tian faith,  in  four  books.3    It  was  written  in  Alexandria,  and 
became  the  chief  source  of  objections  to  his  theology.    It  was 
the  first  attempt  at  a  complete  system  of  dogmatics,  but  full 
of  his  peculiar  Platonizing  and  Gnosticizing  errors,  some  of 


8  Comp.  J  32,  p.  89  sqq.  A  special  ed.  by  W.  Selwyn  :  Origenis  Contra 
Cd&tim  libri  I-IV.  Lond.  1877.  English  version  by  Crombie,  1868.  The 
work  of  Cekus  restored  from  Origen  by  Keira,  Celsus'  WaJires  Wvrt*  Zurich 
1873. 

1  Uepl  apx&v.  The  version  of  Rufinus  with  some  fragments  of  a  more  exact 
rival  version  in  Delarue  I.  42-195.  A  special  ed.  by  Redcpenning,  Origenex 
de  Princip.,  Lips.  1836.  Comp.  also  K.  F.  Schnitzor,  Orig.  uber  die  Grundlehr- 
en  des  Ckristenthums,  ein  Wiederherstellungsversuch,  Stuttgart  1836.  Bnfinus 
himself  confesses  that  he  altered  or  omitted  several  pages,  pretending  that  it 
had  been  more  corrupted  by  heretics  than  any  other  work  of  Origen.  Tille- 
mont  well  remarks  that  Rufinus  might  have  spared  himself  the  trouble  of 
alteration,  as  we  care  much  less  about  his  views  than  those  of  the  original. 


796  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

which  he  retracted  in  his  riper  years.  In  this  work  Origen 
treats  in  four  books,  first,  of  God,  of  Christ,  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit;  in  the  second  book,  of  creation  and  the  incarnation,  the 
resurrection  and  the  judgment ;  in  the  third,  of  freedom,  which 
he  very  strongly  sets  forth  and  defends  against  the  Gnostics ;  in 
the  fourth,  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  their  inspiration  and  authority, 
and  the  interpretation  of  them ;  concluding  with  a  recapitulation 
of  the*  doctrine  of  the  trinity.  His  Stromata,  in  imitation  of  the 
work  of  the  same  name  by  Clemens  Alex.,  seeems  to  havo  been 
doctrinal  and  exegetical,  and  is  lost  with  the  exception  of  two  ov 
three  fragments  quoted  in  Latin  by  Jerome.  His  work  on  tho 
Resurrection  is  likewise  lost. 

4.  Among  his  practical  works  may  be  mentioned  a  treatise  on 
prayer,  with  an  exposition  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,1  and  an  exhorta- 
tion to  martyrdom,2  written  during  the  persecution  of  Maximit) 
(235-238),  and  addressed  to  his  friend  and  patron  Ambrositis. 

5.  Of  his  letters,  of  which  Eusebius  collected  over  eight  hun- 
dred, we  have,  besides  a  few  fragments,  only  an  answer  to  Ju- 
lius Africanus  on  the  authenticity  of  the  history  of  Susanna. 

Among  the  works  of  Origen  is  also  usually  inserted  the  Phi- 
loGalia,  or  a  collection,  in  twenty-seven  chapters,  of  extracts  from 
his  writings  on  various  exegetical  questions,  made  by  Gregory 
Nazianzen  and  Basil  the  Great.3 

•  §  189.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus. 

I.  S.  GREGORII  episcopi  Neoccesariensis  Opera  omnia,  ed.  G.  Vossitrs, 
Mag.  1604;   better  ed.  by  FEONTO  DUG-BUB,  Par.  1622,  fol.;  in 

i  ILspl  svxve,  De  Oratione.  Delarue,  1. 195-272.  Separate  ed.  Oxf.  1635, 
with  a  Latin  version.  Origen  omits  (as  do  Tertullian  and  Cyprian)  the  dox- 
ology  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  not  finding  it  in  his  MSS.  This  is  one  of  the 
strongest  negative  proofs  of  its  being  a  later  interpolation  from  liturgical 
usage. 

*  E?f  fiaprvpiov  irpoTpSTrriKoc  Myne,  or  Hspl  fiapruptov,  De  Martyrio.  First 
published  by  Wetstein,  Basel,  1574;  in  Delarue,  I.  273-310,  with  Latin  version 
and  notes.  . 

8  First  published  in  Latin  by  Genebrardus,  Paris  1574,  and  in  Greek  and 
Latin  by  Delarue,  who,  however,  omits  those  extracts,  which  are  elsewhere 
•iven  in  their  appropriate  places. 


g  189.  GREGORY  THAUMATURGUS.  797 

"Bibl.  Vet.  Patrum"  (1766-77),  Tom.  III.,  p.  385-470; 

and  mJfagne,  "Patrol.  Gr."  Tom.  X.  (1857),  983-1343.   Oomp.  also  a 

Syriac  version  of   Gregory's  Kara  ^epof  irfonf  in  R  DE  LAGAKDB'S 

Analecta  Syriaca,  Leipz.  1858,  pp.  31-67, 
II.   GKEGOBY  OF  NYBSA:    B/oc  ml  iyK&fuov  pq&ev  dg  rbv  aywv  Tpyrfpiw 

TOV  Qavuarovpydv.     In  the  works  of  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  (Migne,  vol. 

46).    A  eulogy  full  of  incredible  miracles,  which  the  author  heard 

from  his  grandmother. 
English  translation  by  S.  D.  F.  SALMOND,  in  Clark's  "Ante-Nicene 

Library,"  vol.  xx.  (1871),  p.  1-156. 
C.  P.  OASPAEI  :  Alte  und  neue  Quellenzutr  Gesch.  des  Tauf symbols  und  der 

Glaubensregel.  Christiania,  1879,  p.  1-160. 
VICTOR   RYSSEL  :    Gregorius    Thaumaturgus.     Sein  Leben   und  seine 

Schriflen.    Leipzig,  1880  (160  pp.).    On  other  biographical  essays 

of  G.,  see  Ryssel,  pp.  59  sqq.    Contains  a  translation  of  two  hitherto 

unknown  Syriac  writings  of  Gregory. 
W.  MOLLER  in  Herzog2,  V.  404  sq.    H.  R.  REYNOLDS  in  Smith  &  Waco, 

II.  730-737. 

Most  of  the  Greek  fathers  of  the  third  and  fourth  centuries 
stood  more  or  less  under  the  influence  of  the  spirit  and  the 
works  of  Origen,  without  adopting  all  his  peculiar  speculative 
views.  The  most  distinguished  among  his  disciples  are  Gregory 
Thaumaturgus,  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  surnamed  the  Great, 
Heraclas,  Hieracas,  Pamphilus ;  in  a  wider  sense  also  Euscbius, 
Gregory  of  Nyssa  and  other  eminent  divines  of  the  Nicene  age. 

GREGORY,  surnamed  THAUMATURGUS,  "  the  wonder-worker,"  ' 
was  converted  from  heathenism  in  his  youth  by  Origen  at 
Csesarea,  in  Palestine,  spent  eight  years  in  his  society,  and  then, 
after  a  season  of  contemplative  retreat,  labored  as  bishop  of  Nco- 
Csesarea  in  Pontus  from  244  to  270  with  extraordinary  success. 
He  could  thank  God  on  his  death-bed,  that  he  had  left  to  his  suc- 
cessor no  more  unbelievers  in  his  diocese  than  he  had  found  Chris- 
tians in  it  at  his  accession  ;  and  those  were  only  seventeen.  He 
must  have  had  great  missionary  zeal  and  executive  ability.  He 
attended  the  Synod  of  Antioch  in  265,  which  condemned  Paul  of 
Samasota. 

Later  story  represents  him  as  a  "  second  Moses/'  and  attributed 
extraordinary  miracles  to  him.  But  these  arc  not  mentioned  till 
-  century  after  his  time,  by  Gregory  of  Nyssa  and  Basil,  who 


798  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

made  him  also  a  champion  of  the  Nicene  orthodoxy  before  the 
Council  of  Nicsea.  Eusebius  knows  nothing  of  them,  nor  of  his 
trinitarian  creed,  which  is  said  to  have  been  communicated  to 
him  by  a  special  revelation  in  a  vision.1  This  creed  is  almost 
too  orthodox  for  an  admiring  pupil  of  Origen,  and  seems  to 
presuppose  ftie  Arian  controversy  (especially  the  conclusion).  It 
has  probably  been  enlarged.  Another  and  fuller  creed  ascribed 
to  him,  is  the  work  of  the  younger  Apollinaris  at  the  end  of 
the  fourth  century.2 

Among  his  genuine  writings  is  a  glowing  eulogy  on  his  be- 
loved teacher  Origen,  which  ranks  as  a  masterpiece  of  later 
Grecian  eloquence.3  Also  a  simple  paraphrase  of  the  book  of 
Ecclesiastes.4  To  these  must  be  added  two  books  recently 
published  in  a  Syriac  translation,  one  on  the  co-equality  of  the 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  other  on  the  impassibility 
and  the  passibility  of  God. 

NOTES. 

I.  The  DECLARATION  OF  FAITH  (&#««£  m'orewf  /carft  airoKd^v^iv)  is  said 
to  have  been  revealed  to  Gregory  in  a  night  vision  by  St.  John,  at  the 
request  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  the  autograph  of  it  was,  at  the  time  of 
Gregory  of  Nyssa  (as  he  says),  in  possession  of  the  church  of  Neocaesarea. 
It  is  certainly  a  very  remarkable  document  and  the  most  explicit  state* 
ment  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  from  the  ante-Nicene  age.  Caspar! 
(in  his  Alte  und  neue  Quelkn,  etc.,  1879,  pp.  25-64),  after  an  elaborate 
discussion,  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  the  creed  contains  nothing  in- 
consistent with  a  pupil  of  Origen,  and  that  it  was  written  by  Gregory  in 
opposition  to  Sabellianism  and  Paul  of  Samosata,  and  with,  reference  to 


1  The  *  Ejctftcrtf  rfc  mor-sof  /cord  airoKd^v^Lv  is  rejected  as  spurious  by  Gieseler 
and  Baur,  defended  by  Hahn,  Caspari,  and  Ryssel.  It  is  given  in  Mansi,  Cone.  L, 
1030,  in  Hahu,  Bill  der  Synibole  der  alien  Kirche,  second  ed.  p.  183,  and  by  Cas- 
pari, p  1  0-17,  in  Greek  and  in  two  Latin  versions  with  notes. 

2  The  /cara  /zepof  Trforff  (i.  e.  the  faith  set  forth  piece  for  piece,  or  in  detail, 
not  in  part  only)  was  first  published  in  the  Greek  original  by  Angelo  Mai, 
Scriptorum  Vet.  Nova  Oollectio,  VII.  170-176.     A  Syriac  translation  in  the 
Andecta  Syriaca,  ed.  by  P.  de  Lagarde,  pp,   31-42.    See  Caspari,  I.  c.  pp. 
65-116,  who  conclusively  proves  the  Apollinarian  origin  of  the  document.    A 
third  trinitarian  confession  from  Gregory  Mhst-tc  Trpdf  A.lfoavo'v,  is  lost. 

3  Best  separate  edition  by  Bengel,  Stuttgart,  1722.    It  is  also  published  an 
the  4th  vol.  of  Delarue's  ed.  of  Origen,  and  in  Migne,  Pair.  Or.  X.  col.  1049- 
1104.    English  version  in  Ante-Nic.  Lib.,  XX.,     ' 

*  In  Migne,  Tom  X.  col.  987-1018. 


2189.  GREGORY  THAUMATo'JiULS. 


799 


K/f  0eoc,  TLaryp    M}ov 

/'af  vtyeaT&GTis  KOL  <Jyyd/^ewf  Kal  %a- 

.  y//jrjf  did/on, 


j  ft6vo<;  SK  fiovov,  0cof  CK 
%apaKT?/p  Kal  FIK&I*  rift 
a  rrjs  rtiv  O\ 


>  avara- 


fche  controversy  between  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  and  Dionysius  of  Rome 
on  the  Trinity,  between  A.  D.  260  and  270.  But  I  think  it  more  provable 
that  it  has  undergone  some  enlargement  at  the  close  by  a  later  hand. 
This  is  substantially  also  the  view  of  Neander,  and  of  Dorner  (Entwick- 
lttngsg*.sch.  der  L.  V.  d.  Pers-  Christi,  I.  735-737).  The  creed  is  at  all 
events  a  very  remarkable  production  and  a  Greek  anticipation  of  the 
Latin  Quicunque  which  falsely  goes  under  the  name  of  the  "  Athanasian 
Creed."  We  give  the  Greek  with  a  translation.  See  Mansi,  Cone.  I. 
1030;  Migne,  Pair.  Gr.  X.  col.  983;  Caspar!,  I.e.;  comp.  the  compara- 
tive tables  in  Schaffs  Creeds  of  Christendom,  II.  40  and  41. 

GREGORY  TIIAUMAT.  DECLARATION  OF  FAITH. 

There  is  one  God,  the  Father  of  the 
living  Word,  (who  is  his)  subsisting 
Wisdom  and  Power  and  eternal  Im- 
press (Image) :  perfect,  Begetter  of  the 
Perfect  [Begotten],  Father  of  the  only 
begotten  Son. 

There  is  ouo  Lord,  Only  of  Only, 
God  of  God,  the  Image  and  Likeness 
of  the  Godhead,  the  efficient  Word, 
Wisdom  comprehensive  of  the  system 
of  all  things,  and  Power  productive  of 
the  whole  creation ;  true  Ron  of  the 
true  father,  Invisible  of  Invisible,  and 
Incorruptible  of  Incorruptible,  and  Im- 
mortal of  Immortal,  and  Eternal  of 
Eternal. 

And  there  is  one  Holy  Ghost,  having 
his  existence  from  God,  and  being  ma- 
nifested (namely,  to  mankind)  by  the 
Ron ;  the  perfect  Likeness  of  the  per- 
fect Ron :  Life,  the  Cause  of  the  living ; 
sacred  Fount;  Holiness,  the  Beatower 
of  sanctification  ;  in  whom  is  revealed 
God  the  Father,  who  is  over  all  things 
and  in  all  things,  ami  God  the  Son, 
who  is  through  all  things:  a  perfect 
Trinity,  in  glory  and  etornity  and  do- 
minion, neither  divided  nor  alien. 

There  is  therefore  nothing  created  or 
subservient,  in  the  Trinity,  nor  Ruper- 
inducod,  as  though  not  before  existing, 
but  introduced  afterward.  Nor  has 
the  Ron  ever  been  wanting  to  the 
Father,  nor  the  Rpirit  to  t'ue  Son,  but 
thero  i,s  unvarying  and  unchangeable 
the  same  Trinity  forever. 


fMLToe   (Wparou   K.CIL 
a<f>$dpTov    KCU    atidvaroc   aftavarov 
aid  to? 


Kal  sv  TLvev/ia  "Ay/ov,  £K 
r?/v  inrap^tv  e^ov,  Kal  dt'  Tioii  Tf 
(tty/larf/)  ro?f  avftpMTTOft),  elKuv  rnv 
rebiov  rf^f/'rt,  Cw'A  £<jv~w  atria, 
dj/n.  dyi6Tift9  fytuafiov  xoprjydf  tv  p 
davepovrat  Qefy  &  llart/p  w  M  TT«ITWV 
Kal  h  naai,  Kal  Oroc  o  Y/'of  6  J/a  irAvruv 
rptas  rsXela,  rfrif?/  Kal  aWioTJjrt  Kal  patri- 


oi)v  KTt(rr6v  n  fy  Saiftmr  h 
obre  fnetaaKTOv,  &c  Trpdrppov 


rij 


otre  otiv  ev&t,iTK  TTOTS  Tiof  Harpf, 
ivevfj.at  a/I  Ad  arpSTrrof  Kal 


800  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

II.  The  MIRACLES  ascribed  to  Gregory  Thaumaturgus  in  the  fourth 
century,  one  hundred  years  after  his  death,  by  the  enlightened  and 
philosophic  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  and  defended  in  the  nineteenth  century 
by  Oardina]  Newman  of  England  as  credible  (Two  Essays  on  Bibl  and 
Eccles.  Miracles.  Lond.  3d  ed.,  1873,  p.  261-270),  are  stupendous  and  sur- 
pass all  that  are  recorded  of  the  Apostles  in  the  New  Testament. 

Gregory  not  only  expelled  demons,  healed  the  sick,  banished  idok 
from  a  heathen  temple,  but  he  moved  large  stones  by  a  mere  word,  al- 
tered the  course  of  the  Armenian  river  Lycus,  and,  like  Moses  of  old» 
even  dried  up  a  lake.  The  last  performance  is  thus  related  by  St.  Gre- 
gory of  Nyssa :  Two  young  brothers  claimed  as  their  patrimony  the  pos- 
session of  a  lake.  (The  name  and  location  are  not  given.)  Instead  o£ 
dividing  it  between  them,  they  referred  the  dispute  to  the  Wonderworker, 
who  exhorted  them  to  be  reconciled  to  one  another.  The  young  men 
however,  became  exasperated,  and  resolved  upon  a  murderous  duel, 
when  the  man  of  God,  remaining  on  the  banks  of  the  lake,  by  the  power 
of  prayer,  transformed  the  whole  lake  into  dry  land,  and  thus  settled  the 
conflict. 

Deducting  all  these  marvellous  features,  which  the  magnifying  dis- 
tance of  one  century  after  the  death  of  the  saint  created,  there  remains 
the  commanding  figure  of  a  great  and  good  man  who  made  a  most  pow- 
erful impression  upon  his  and  the  subsequent  generations. 

§  190.  Dionysius  the  Great. 

(I.)  S.  DiONYSn  Episcopi  Akxandrini  qua  supersunt  Operum  et  Episto- 
larumfragmenta,  in  MIGJSTE'S  "Patrol.  Gr."  Tom.X.  col.  1237- 1341', 
and  Addenda,  col.  1575-1602.  Older  collections  of  the  fragments  by 
SIMON  DE  MAGISTKIS,  Rom.  1796,  and  ROUTH,  Eel  Saw.,  vol.  IV. 
393-454.  Add  PITEA,  Spicil  fiolesm.  I.  15  sqq.— -English  translation 
by  SALMOND  in  Clark's  "Ante-Nicene  Library,"  vol.  xx.  (1371), 
p.  161-266. 

(II.)  EUSEBIUS  :  H.  E.  IIL  28 ;  YI.  41, 45,  46 ;  VII.  2,  4, 7,  9, 11,  22, 24, 
26,  27,  28.  ATHANASIUS:  De  Sent.  Dionys.  HIEKONYM.  :  De  Vir. 
iU.  69. 

(III.)  TH.  FOESTER  :  De  Doctrina  et  Sententiis  Dionysii  Magni  Episeopt 
Alex.  Berl.  1865.  And  in  the  "Zeitschrift  fur  hist.  Theol."  1871. 
DE.  DITTBIOH  (R.  C.):  Dionysius  der  Grosse  von  Alexandrien. 
Freib. L  Breisg.  1867  (130  pages).  WEi3SlCKE£  in  Herzog2  III.  615 
sq.  WESTCOTT  in  Smith  and  Wace  I,  850  sqq. 

DIONYSIUS  OF  ALEXANDKIA — so  distinguished  from  the 
contemporary  Dionysius  of  Rome— surnamed  "the  Great/'1 

1  First  by  Eusebiua  in  the  Proceem.  toBk.VII:  &  {ityag  ' A/te£avfy&>v 
httffKonroe  £«»**«*.  Alhanasius  (De  Sent.  Dion.  6)  calls  him  "teacher  of  the 
f  atholic  church  "  (ry 


!  190.   BIONYSIUS  THE  GREAT.  80l 

«vas  born  about  A.  D.  190, l  of  Gentile  parents,  and  brought  up 
co  a  secular  profession  with  bright  prospects  of  wealth  and  re- 
nown, but  he  examined  the  claims  of  Christianity  and  was  won 
to  the  faith  by,Qrigen,  to  whom  he  ever  remained  faithful.  He 
disputes  with  Gregory  Thaumaturgus  the  honor  of  being  the 
chief  disciple  of  that  great  teacher;  but  while  Gregory  was 
supposed  to  have  anticipated  the  Nicene  dogma  of  the  trinity, 
the  orthodoxy  of  Dionysius  was  disputed,  He  became  Origen's 
assistant  in  the  Catechetical  School  (233),  and  after  the  death  of 
Heraclas  bishop  of  Alexandria  (248).  During  the  violent  per- 
secution under  Decius  (249-251)  ho  fled,  and  thus  exposed  him- 
self,"THte  Cyprian,  to  the  suspicion  of  cowardice.  In  the  per- 
secution under  Valerian  (24:7),  he  was  brought  before  the  praefect 
and  banished,  but  he  continued  to  direct  his  church  from  exile. 
On" the  accession  of  Gallienus  he  was  allowed  to  return  (260). 
He  died  in  the  year  265. 

His  last  years  were  disturbed  by  war,  famine  and  pestilence, 
of  which  he  gives  a  lively  account  in  the  Easter '  encyclical  of 
the  year  263.2  "The  present  time,"  he  writes,  "does  not 
appear  a  fit  season  for  a  festival  .  .  .  All  things  are  filled  with 
tears,  all  are  mourning,  and  on  account  of  the  multitudes 
already  dead  and  still  dying,  groans  are  daily  heard  throughout 
the  city  .  .  .  There  is  not  a  house  in  which  there  is  not  one 
dead  .  .  .  After  this,  war  and  famine  succeeded  which  we  en- 
dured with  the  heathen,  but  we  bore  alone  those  miseries  with 
which  they  afflicted  us  ...  But  we  rejoiced  in  the  peace  of 
Christ  which  he  gave  to  us  alone  .  .  .  Most  of  our  brethren  by 
their  exceeding  great  love  and  affection  not  sparing  themselves 
and  adhering  to  one  another,  were  constantly  superintending  the 
sick,  ministering  to  their  wants  without  fear  and  cessation,  and 
healing  them  in  Christ/'  The  heathen,  on  the  contrary,  re- 
pelled the  sick  or  cast  them  half-dead  into  the  street.  The  same 
self-denying  charity  in  contrast  with  heathen  selfishness  mani- 

*  When  invited  in  265  to  attend  the  Synod  of  Antioch,  he  declined  on  ao» 
count  of  the  infirmities  of  old  age.    Eus.  VII-  27. 
3  Preserved  by  Eusebius  YII.  22- 
Vol.  II.    51. 


802  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-81L 

fested  itself  at  Carthage  during  the  raging  of  a  pestilence,  undei 
the  persecuting  reign  of  Gallus  (252),  as  we  learn  from  Cyprian. 

Dionysius  took  an  active  part  in  the  christological,  chiliastic, 
and  disciplinary  controversies  of  his  time,  and  showed  in  them 
moderation,  an  amiable  spirit  of  concession,  and  practical 
churchly  tact,  but  also  a  want  of  independence  and  consistency. 
He  opposed  Sabellianisin,  and  ran  to  the  brink  of  tritheism,  but 
in  his  correspondence  with  the  more  firm  and  orthodox  Diony- 
sius of  Rome  he  modified  his  view,  and  Athanasius  vindicated 
his  orthodoxy  against  the  charge  of  having  sowed  the  seeds  of 
Arianism.  He  wished  to  adhere  to  Origen's  christology,  but 
the  church  pressed  towards  the  Nicene  formula.  There  is  noth- 
ing, however,  in  the  narrative  of  Athanasius  which  implies  a 
recognition  of  Roman  supremacy.  His  last  christological 
utterance  was  a  letter  concerning  the  heresy  of  Paul  of  Sarno- 
sata ;  he  was  prevented  from  attending  the  Synod  of  Antioch  in 
264,  which  condemned  and  deposed  Paul.  He  rejected,  with 
Origen,  the  chiliastic  notions,  and  induced  Nepos  and  his 
adherents  to  abandon  them,  but  he  denied  the  apostolic  origin 
of  the  Apocalypse  aud  ascribed  it  to  the  "  Presbyter  Joh%"  of 
doubtful  existence.  He,  held  mild  views  on  discipline  and 
urged  the  Novatians  to  deal  gently  with  the  lapsed  and  to  pre- 
serve the  peace  of  the  church.  He  also  'counselled  moderation 
in  the  controversy  between  Stephen  and  Cyprian  on  the  validity 
of  heretical  baptism,  though  he  sided  with  the  more  liberal 
Roman  theory. 

Dionysius  wrote  man^  letters  and  treatises  on  exegetic,  pole- 
mic, and  ascetic  topics,  t-flt  only  short  fragments  remain,  mostly 
in  Eusebius.  The  chief  books  were  Commentaries  on  Ecclesias- 
tes,  and  Luke;  Againsi  Sabellius  (christological);  On  Nature 
(philosophical);  On  the  Promises  (against  Chiliasm);  On  Mar- 
tyrdom. He  compared  the  style  of  the  fourth  Gospel  and  of 
flie  Apocalypse  to  deny  the  identity  of  authorship,  but  he  saw 
only  the  difference  and  not  the  underlying  unity.1  "All  the 

4  In  Euseb.  YII.  25.    Dionysius  concludes  the  comparison  with  praising 


\  191.  JULIUS  AFKICANUS.  803 

fragments  of  Dionysius,"  says  Westcott,  "  repay  careful  perusal. 
They  are  uniformly  inspired  by  the  sympathy  and  large-heart- 
edness  which  he  showed  in  practice." 

Dionysius  is  commemorated  in  the  Greek  church  on  October 
3,  in  the  Eoman  on  November  17. 

§  191.  Julius  Afrioanus 

(I.)  The  fragments  in  BOUTH:  HeL  Saw.  II.  221-509.  Also  in  GAL- 
LACTDI,  Tom.  II,,  and  MIGKE,  " Patr.  Gr.,"  Tom.  X.  col.  35-108. 

(II.)  EUSEBIUS:  U.  E.  VI.  31.  JEROME:  De  Vir.  ill.  63.  SOCRATES': 
JBT.  E.  II.  35.  PHOTIUS  :  Bibl  34. 

(III.)  FABRICIUS:  "Bibl.  Gr."  IV.  240  (ed.  Harles).  G.  SALMON  in 
Smith  and  Wace  I,  53-57.  AD.  HARNACK  in  Hcrzoga  VII.  %96~ 
298.  Also  FAULT'S  "  Keal-Encykl."  IV.  501  sq. ;  Nico LAI'S  "  Griech. 
Lit.  Gesch."  II.  584 ;  and  Smith's  "  Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Bom.  Biogr." 
I.  56  sq. 

JULIUS  AFRiCANUS,1  the  first  Christian  chronographer  and 
universal  historian,  an  older  friend  of  Origen,  lived  in  the  first 
half  of  the  second  century  at  Emmaus  (Nicopolis),  in  Palestine,2 
made  journeys  to  Alexandria,  where  he  heard  the  lectures  of 
Her^clas,  to  Edcssa,  Armenia  and  Phrygia,  and  was  seiat  on  an 
embassy  to  Rome  in  behalf  of  the  rebuilding  of  Emmaus  which 
had  been  ruined  (221).  He  died  about  A.  D.  240  in  old  age. 
He  was  not  an  ecclesiastic,  as  far  as  we  know,  but  a  philosopher 
who  pursued  his  favorite  studies  after  his  conversion  and  made 

the  pure  Greek  of  the  Gospel  and  contrasting;  with  it  "the  barbarous  idioms 
and  solecisms"  of  the  Apocalypse;  yet  the  style  of  the  Gospel  is  thoroughly 
Hebrew  in  the  inspiring  soul  and  mode  of  construction.  He  admits,  however, 
that  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse  "saw  a  revelation  and  received  knowledge 
and  prophecy,"  and  disclaims  the  intention  of  depreciating  the  book ;  only  he 
cannot  conceive  that  it  is  the  product  of  the  same  pen  as  the  fourth  Gospel. 
He  anticipated  the  theory  of  the  Schleiermacher  school  of  critics  who  defend 
the  Johannean  origin  of  the  Gospel  and  surrender  the  Apocalypse ;  while  the 
Tubingen  critics  and  Benan  reverse  the  case.  See  on  this  subject  vol.  I. 
716  sq. 

1  Suidas  calls  him  Sextus  Africanus.    Euaebius  calls  him  simply  JA$ptnav6s. 

a  Not  the  Emmaus  known  from  Luke  24 :  16,  which  was  only  sixty  stadia 
from  Jerusalem,  but  another  Emmaus,  176  stadia  (22  Eoman  miles)  from 
Jerusalem* 


804  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

them  useful  to  the  church.  He  may  have  been  a  presbyter,  but 
certainly  not  a  bishop.1  He  was  the  forerunner  of  Eusebius, 
who  in  his  Chronicle  has  made  copious  use  of  his  learned  labor 
and  hardly  gives  him  sufficient  credit,  although  he  calls  his 
chronography  "a  most  accurate  and  labored  performance."  He 
was  acguainted  with  Hebrew.  jSocrates  classes  him  for  learning 
with  ^Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Origen. 

His  chief  work  is  his  chronography,  in  five  books.  It  com- 
menced with  the  creation  (B.  a  5499)  and  came  down  to  the 
year  221,  the  fourth  year  of  Elagabalus.  It  is  the  foundation 
of  the  mediaeval  historiography  of  the  world  and  the  church. 
We  have  considerable  fragments  of  it  and  can  restore  it  in  part 
from  the  Chronicle  of  Eusebius.  A  satisfactory  estimate  of  its 
merits  requires  a  fuller  examination  of  the  Byzantine  and  ori- 
ental chronography  of  the  church  than  has  hitherto  been  made. 
Earlier  writers  were  concerned  to  prove  the  antiquity  of  the 
Christian  religion  against  the  heathen  charge  of  novelty  by 
tracing  it  back  to  Moses  and  the  prophets  who  were  older  than 
the  Greek  philosophers  and  poets.  But  Africanus  made  the  first 
attempt  at  a  systematic  chronicle  of  sacred  and  profane  history. 
He  used  as  a  fixed  point  the  accession  of  Cyrus,  which  he  placed 
Olymp.  55,  1,  and  then  counting  backwards  in  sacred  history, 
he  computed  1237  years  between  the  exodus  and  the  end  of  the 
seventy  years'  captivity  or  the  first  year  of  Cyrus.  He  followed 
the  Septuagint  chronology,  placed  the  exodus  A.  M.  3707,  and 
counted  740  years  between  the  exodus  and  Solomon.  He  fixed 
the  Lord's  birth  in  A.  M.  5500,  and  10  years  before  our  Diony- 
sian  era,  but  he  allows  only  one  year's  public  ministry  and  thus 
puts  the  crucifixion  A.  M.  5531.  He  makes  the  31  years  of  the 
Saviour's  life  the  complement  of  the  969  years  of  Methuselah. 
He  understood  the  70  weeks  of  Daniel  to  be  49Q  lunar  years, 
which  are  equivalent  to  475  Julian  'years.  He  treats  the  dark- 

1  Two  Syrian  writers,  Barsalibi  and  Ebedjesu,  from  the  end  of  the  twelfth 
century,  call  him  bishop  of  Edessa ;  but  earlier  writers  know  nothing 
title,  and  Origen  addresses  him  as  "  brother," 


3 191.  JULIUS  AFEICANUS.  805 

ness  at  the  crucifixion  as  miraculous,  since  an  eclipse  of  the  sur 
could  not  have  taken  place  at  the  full  moon. 

Another  work  of  Africanus,  called  Cesti  (Kwrot)  or  Varie- 
gated Girdles,  was  a  sort  of  universal  scrap-book  or  miscellaneous 
collection  of  information  on  geography,  natural  history,  medi- 
cine, agriculture,  war,  and  other  subjects  of  a  secular  character* 
Only  fragments  remain.  Some  have  unnecessarily  denied  his 
authorship  on  account  of  the  secular  contents  of  the  book,  which 
was  dedicated  to  the  Emperor  Alexander  Scvcrus. 

Eusebius  mentions  two  smaller  treatises  of  Africanus,  a  letter 
to  Origen,  "in  which  he  intimates  his  doubts  on  the  history  of 
Susanna,  in  Daniel,  as  if  it  were  a  spurious  and  fictitious  compo- 
sition," and  "a  letter  to  Aristides  on  the  supposed  discrepancy 
between  the  genealogies  of  Christ  in  Matthew  and  Luke,  in 
which  he  most  clearly  establishes  the  consistency  of  the  two 
evangelists,  from  an  account  which  had  been  handed  down  from 
his  ancestors." 

The  letter  to  Origen  is  still  extant  and  takes  a  prominent 
rank  among  the  few  specimens  of  higher  criticism  in  the  litera- 
ture of  the  ancient  church.  He  urges  the  internal  improba- 
bilities of  the  story  of  Susanna,  its  omission  from  the  Hebrew 
canon,  the  difference  of  style  as  compared  with  the  canonical 
Daniel,  and  a  play  on  Greek  words  which  shows  that  it  was 
originally  written  in  Greek,  not  in  Hebrew.  Origen  tried  at 
great  length  to  refute  these  objections,  and  one  of  his  arguments 
is  that  it  would  be  degrading  to  Christians  to  go  begging  to  the 
Jews  for  the  unadulterated  Scriptures. 

The  letter  to  Aristides  on  the  genealogies  solves  the  difficulty 
by  assuming  that  Matthew  gives  the  natural,  Luke  the  legal, 
descent  of  our  Lord.  It  exists  in  fragments,  from  which  F. 
Spitta  has  recently  reconstructed  it.1 

1  D&r  Brief  des  M  Africmus  an  Aristides  kritisch  mtersucht  und  h&rgestellx 
Halle  1877. 


806  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 


§  192.  Minor  Divines  of  the  Greek  Church. 

A  number  of  divines  of  the  third  century,  of  great  reputation 
in  their  day,  mostly  of  Egypt  and  of  the  school  of  Origen,  de- 
serve a  brief  mention,  although  only  few  fragments  of  their 
works  have  survived  the  ravages  of  time. 

I.  HERACLAS  and  his  brother  Plutarch  (who  afterwards  died 
a  martyr)  were  the  oldest  distinguished  converts  and  pupils  of 
Origen,  and  older  than  their  teacher.  Heraclas  had  even  before 
him  studied  the  New-Platonic  philosophy  under  Ammonius 
Saccas.  He  was  appointed  assistant  of  Origen,  and  afterwards  his 
successor  in  the  Catechetical  School.  After  the  death  of  Deme- 
trius, the  jealous  enemy  of  Origen,  Heraclas  was  elected  bishop 
of  Alexandria  and  continued  in  that  high  office  sixteen  years 
(A.  D.  233-248).  We  know  nothing  of  his  administration,  nor 
of  his  writings.  He  either  did  not  adopt  the  speculative  opin- 
ions of  Origen,  or  prudently  concealed  them,  at  least  he  did 
nothing  to  recall  his  teacher  from  exile.  He  was  succeeded  by 
Dionysius  the  Great.  Eusebius  says  that  he  was  "devoted  to 
the  study  of  the  Scriptures  and  a  most  learned  man,  not  unac- 
quainted with  philosophy,"  but"  is  silent  about  his  conduct  to 
Origen  during  and  after  his  trial  for  heresy.1 

IL  Among  the  successors  of  Heraclas  and  Dionysius  in  the 
Catechetical  School  was  THEOGNOSTUS,  not  mentioned  by  Euse- 
bius, but  by  Athanasius  and  Photius.  We  have  from  him  a 
brief  fragment  on  the  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  a 
few  extracts  from  his  Hypotyposds^  (Adumbrations).2 

III.  PIERIUS  probably  succeeded  Theognostus,  while  Theonas 
was  bishop  of  Alexandria  (d.  300),  and  seems  to  have  outlived 
the  Diocletian  persecution.  He  was  the  teacher  of  Pamphilus, 
and  called  "the  younger  Origin."3 

1  Hist.  Eccl  VI  15,  26,  35;  Chron.  ad  ann.  Abr.  2250,  2265. 

2  In  Bouth,  HeliquicB  Sacrce  III.  407-422.    Cave  puts  Theognostns  after 
Fieri  us,  about  A.  D.  228,  but  Routh  corrects  him  (p.  408). 

8  Euseb.  VII.  32  towards  the  close ;  Hieron.  De  Vir.  ill.  76 ;  Prcef.  in  J3i»  ; 


1 192.  MINOR  DIVINES  OF  THE  GREEK  CHURCH.      807 

IV.  PAMPHILUS,  a  great  admirer  of  Origen,  a  presbyter  and 
theological  teacher  at  Caesarea  in  Palestine,  and  a  martyr  of  the 
persecution  of  Maximinus  (309),  was  not  an  author  himself,  but 
one  of  the  most  liberal  and  efficient  promoters  of  Christian 
learning.  He  did  invaluable  service  to  future  generations  by 
founding  a  theological  school  and  collecting  a  large  library,  from 
which  his  pupil  and  friend  Eusebius  (hence  called  "  Eusebius  Pam- 
pili "),  Jerome,  and  many  others,  drew  or  increased  their  useful 
information.  Without  that  library  the  church  history  of  Euse- 
bius would  be  far  less  instructive  than  it  is  now.  Pamphilua 
transcribed  with  his  own  hand  useful  books,  among  others  the 
Septuagint  from  the  Hexapla  of  Origen.1  ,  He  aided  poor  stu- 
dents, and  distributed  the  Scriptures.  While  in  prison,  he  wrote 
a  defense  of  Origen,  which  was  completed  by  Eusebius  in  six 
books,  but  only  the  first  remains  in  the  Latin  version  of  Eufinus, 
whom  Jerome  charges  with  wilful  alterations.  It  is  addressed 
to  the  confessors  who  were  condemned  to  the  mines  of  Palestine, 
to  assure  them  of  the  orthodoxy  of  Origen  from  his  own  writ- 
ings, especially  on  the  trinity  and  the  person  of  Christ.2 

V.  PETER,  pupil  and  successor  of  Theonas,  was  bishop  of 

Photius,  Cod.  118,  119.  Eusebius  knew  Pierius  personally,  and  sayn  that  he 
was  greatly  celebrated  for  his  voluntary  poverty,  his  philosophical  knowledge, 
and  his  skill  in  expounding  the  Scriptures  in  public  assemblies.  Jerome  calls 
him  "  Origenes  junior."  He  mentions  a  long  treatise  of  his  on  the  prophecies 
of  Hosea.  Photius  calls  him  Uafifihov  rov  paprvpoc  flftwfr.  See  Routh, 
Eel.  &  III.  425-431. 

i1'  Jerome  flays  (De  Vir.  itt.  75) :  Pamphilus  . . .  tanto  bibliothe&B  divinoe  amort 
flagravit,  ut  mammam  partem  Origenis  voluminum  sua  m<mu  descripserti,  gux  usque 
hodie  in  Ocssariensi  bitliotheca  habentur.  Sed  et  in  duodedm  prophetas  viginti 
quinque  kfyyfjaeuv  Origenis  volumwa  mpww  ejus  exarata  reperi,  quce  tanto  wnplec- 
tor  et  servo  gaudio,  ut  Grossi  opes  habere  me  credam.  Si  enim  IcetUia,  tst,  unttm 

isan- 


3  See  Eouth's  Ed.  S.  vol.  III.  491-512,  and  vol.  IV.  339-392 ;  also  in 
Delarue's  Opera  Orig.  vol.  IV.,  and  in  the  editions  of  Lommatech  and  Migne. 
Eusebius  wrote  a  separate  work  on  the  life  and  martyrdom  of  his  friend  and 
the  school  which  he  founded,  but  it  is  lost.  See  H.  E.  VII.  32 ;  comp.  VI.  32  ;• 
VI1L  13,  and  especially  De  Mart.  Pal  c.  11,  where  he  gives  an  account  of 
his  martyrdom  and  the  twelve  who  suffered  with  him.  The  Acta  Passionis  S. 
Pamph.  in  the  Act  SS.  Holland.  Junii  I.  64. 


808  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Alexandria  since  A.  D.  300,  lived  during  the  terrible  times  of  the 
Diocletian  persecution,  and  was  beheaded  by  order  of  Maximi- 
nus  in  311.  He  held  moderate  views  on  the  restoration  of  the 
lapsed,  and  got  involved  in  the  Meletian  schism  which  engaged 
much  of  the  attention  of  the  Council  of  Nicsea.  Meletius,  bishop 
of  Lycopolis,  taking  advantage  of  Peter's  flight  from  persecu- 
tion, introduced  himself  into  his  diocese,  and  assumed  the  char- 
acter of  primate  of  Egypt,  but  was  deposed  by  Peter  in  306  for 
insubordination.  We  have  from  Peter  fifteen  canons  on  disci- 
pline, and  a  few  homiletical  fragments  in  which  he  rejects 
Origen's  views  of  the  pre-existence  and  ante-mundane  fall  of  the 
soul  as  heathenish,  and  contrary  to  the  Scripture  account  of 
creation.  This  dissent  would  place  him  among  the  enemies  of 
Origen,  but  Eusebius  makes  no  allusion  to  it,  and  praises  him 
for  piety,  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures,  and  wise  administration.1 
YI.  HIEKACAS  (Hierax),  from  Leontopolis  in  Egypt,  towards 
the  end  of  the  third  century,  belongs  only  in  a  wider  sense  to  the 
Alexandrian  school,  and  perhaps  had  no  connexion  with  it  at  all. 
Epiphanius  reckons  him  among  the  Manichsean  heretics.  He 
was,  at  all  events,  a  perfectly  original  phenomenon,  distinguished 
for  his  varied  learning,  allegorical  exegesis,  poetical  talent,  and 
still  more  for  his  eccentric  asceticism.  Nothing  is  left  of  the 
works  which  he  wrote  in  the  Greek  and  Egyptian  languages. 
He  is  said  to  have  denied  the  historical  reality  of  the  fall  and  the 
resurrection  of  the  body,  and  to  have  declared  celibacy  the  only 
sure  way  to  salvation,  or  at  least  to  the  highest  degree  of  blessed- 
ness. His  followers  were  called  Hieradtm? 

*K  E.  VIIL  13  j  IX.  6.  The  fragments  in  Bouth,  IV.  23-82.  Peter 
taught  in  a  sermon  on  the  soul,  that  soul  and  body  were  created  together  on 
the  same  day,  and  that  the  theory  of  pre-existence  is  derived  from  "  the  Hel- 
lenic philosophy,  and  is  foreign  to  those  who  would  lead  a  godly  life  in  Christ" 
(Eouth,  p.  49  sq.). 

J  Our  information  about  Hierax  is  almost  wholly  derived  from  Epiphanius, 
JETcer.  67,  who  says  that  he  lived  during  the  Diocletian  persecution.  Eusebius 
knows  nothing  about  him;  for  the  Egyptian  bishop  Hierax  whom  he  mentions 
in  two  places  (VII.  21  and  30),  was  a  contemporary  of  Dionysius  of  Alexan- 
dria, to  whom  he  wrote  a  paschal  letter  about  262. 


5  193.  OPPONENTS  OF  ORIGEN.    METHODIUS.         809 


§  193.  Opponents  of  Origen.    Methodius. 


(L)  M«tfoJ£ov  eiriGK6nov  ml  [idprvpo$  ra  siptaKdjLLSva  trdvTa.  In  Gallandi's 
"Vet.  Patr.  Biblioth."  Tom.  III.;  in  Mgrtfs  "Patrol.  Gr."  Tom. 
XVIII.  col.  9-408;  and  by  A.  John  (8.  Methodii  Opera,  et  S.  Metho- 
dius Platonizans,  Hal.  1865,  2  pts.).  The  first  ed.  was  publ.  by  Com- 
befis,  1644,  and  more  completely  in  1672.  English  translation  in 
Clark's  "Ante-Nicene  Libr.,"  vol.  XIV.  (Edinb.  1869.) 

(II.)  HIEBONYMUS  :  De  Viris  ill  83,  and  in  several  of  his  Epp.  and  Com- 
ment. EPIPHANIUS  :  H<xr.  64.  SOCBATES  :  H.  K  VI.  31.  PHO- 
Tius:  Blbl.  234r-237. 

Eusebius  is  silent  about  Method.,  perhaps  because  of  his  opposition  to 
Origen  ;  while  Photius,  perhaps  for  the  same  reason,  pays  more  atten- 
tion to  him  than  to  Origen,  whose  De  Principiis  he  pronounces  blas- 
phemous, BibL  8.  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Arethas,  Leontius  Byzantius, 
Maximus,  the  Martyrologium  Romanum  (XIV.  Kal.  Oct.)  and  the 
Menologium  Grxcum  (ad  diem  20  Jtmii),  make  honorable  mention 
of  him. 

(III.)  LEO  ALLATITJS  :  Diatribe  de  Methodiorum  Scriptis,  in  his  ed.  of  the 
Oonvivium  in  1656.  FA.BRIC.  "  Bibl.  Gr.,'7  ed.  Harles,  VII.  260  sqq. 
W.  MOLLEE  in  Herzog2,  IX.  724-726.  (He  discusses  especially  tho 
relation  of  Methodius  to  Origen.)  G.  SALMON  in  Smith  and  Wacc, 
IIL  909-911. 

The  opposition  of  Demetrius  to  Origen  proceeded  chiefly  from 
personal  feeling,  and  had  no  theological  significance.  Yet  it 
made  a  pretext  at  least  of  zeal  for  orthodoxy,  and  in  subsequent 
opponents  this  motive  took  the  principal  place*  This  was  the 
case,  so  early  as  the  third  century,  with  Methodius,  who  may 
be  called  a  forerunner  of  Epiphanius  in  his  orthodox  war  against 
Origen,  but  with  this  difference  that  he  was  much  more 
moderate,  and  that  in  other  respects  he  seems  to  have  been  an 
admirer  of  Plato  whom  he  imitated  in  the  dramatic  dress  of 
composition,  and  of  Origen  whom  he  followed  in  his  allegorical 
method  of  interpretation.  He  occupied  the  position  of  Chris- 
tian realism  against  the  speculative  idealism  of  the  Alexandrian 
teacher. 

METHODIUS  (also  called  Eubulius)  was  bishop  first  of  Olym- 
pus and  then  of  Patara  (both  in  the  province  of  Lycia,  Ash 


810  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311, 

Minor,  on  the  southern  coast),  and  died  a  martyr  in  311  OP 
earlier,  in  the  Diocletian  persecution.1 

His  principal  work  is  his  Symposium  or  Banquet  of  Ten 
Virgins?  It  is  an  eloquent  but  verbose  and  extravagant  eulogy 
on  the  advantages  and  blessings  of  voluntary  virginity,  which 
he  describes  as  "something  supernaturally  great,  wonderful,  and 
glorious,"  and  as  "  the  best  and  noblest  manner  of  life."  It  was 
unknown  before  Christ  (the  d.pztfdp&svcx;).  At  first  men  were 
allowed  to  marry  sisters,  then  came  polygamy,  the  next  progress 
was  monogamy,  with  continence,  but  the  perfect  state  is  celibacy 
for  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  according  to  his  mysterious  hint  in 
Matt.  19 :  12,  the  recommendation  of  Paul,  1  Cor.  7  :  1,  7,  34, 
40,  and  the  passage  in  Eevelation  14 :  1-4,  where  "  a  hundred 
and  forty-four  thousand  virgins "  are  distinguished  from  the 
innumerable  multitude  of  other  saints  (7 :  9). 

The  literary  form  is  interesting.  "The  Ten  Virgins  are,  of 
course^  suggested  by  the  parable  in  the  gospel.  The  conception 
of  the  Symposium  and  the  dialogue  are  borrowed  from  Plato, 
who  celebrated  the  praises  of  Eros,  as  Methodius  the  praises  of 
virginity.  Methodius  begins  with  a  brief  'dialogue  between 
Eubulios  or  Eubulion  (i.  e.  himself)  and  thfc  virgin  Gregorion 
who  was  present  at  a  banquet  of  the  ten  virgins  in  the  gardens 
of  Arete  (i.  e.  personified  virtue)  and1  reports  to  him  ten  dis- 
courses which  these  virgins  successively  "delivered  in  praise  of 

1  Jerome  makes  him  bishop  of  Tyre  ("  Meth.  Olympi  Lycfa  et  postea  Tyri 
vpiscopits") ;  but  as  all  other  authorities  mention  Patara  as  his  second  diocese, 
-'Tyre"  is  probably  the  error  of  a  transcriber  for  "Patara,"  or  for  *'Myra," 
which  lies  nearly  midway  between  Olympus  and  Patara,  and  probably  belonged 
to  the  one  or  the  other  diocese  before  it  became  an  independent  see.  It  is  not 
likely  that  Tyre  in  Phoenicia  should  have  called  a  bishop  from  so  great  a  dis- 
tance. Jerome  locates  the  martyrdom  of  Methodius  at  "Chalcis  in  Greece" 
(in  Euboea).  But  Sophronius,  the  Greek  translator,  substitutes  "  in  the  East " 
for  "in  Greece."  Perhaps  (as  Salmon  suggests,  p.  909)  Jerome  confounded 
Methodius  of  Patara  with  a  Methodius  whose  name  tradition  has  preserved  as 
a  martyr  at  Chalcis  in  the  Decian  persecution.  This  confusion  is  all  the  morf 
probable  as  he  did  not  know  the  time  of  the  martyrdom,  and  says  thai  some 
assign  it  to  the  Diocletian  persecution  ("ad  ntxfirmum  nwwima persecutionis'*), 
others  to  the  persecution  "  swZ>  Dedo  et  Vcderiaw." 
z  2viur6fftoi>  TUV  MKO,  raptf  &&>»,  Symposium,  or  C&nvimmi  Decem,  Virginum, 


2  193.  OPPONENTS  OF  ORIGEN.    METHODIUS.          81] 

chastity.  At  the  end  of  the  banquet  the  victorious  Thecla, 
chief  of  the  virgins  (St.  Paul's  apocryphal  companion),  standing 
on  the  right  hand  of  Arete,  begins  to  sing  a  hymn  of  chastity  to 
which  the  virgins  respond  with  the  oft-repeated  refrain, 

"  I  keep  myself  pure  for  Thee,  0  Bridegroom, 
And  holding  a  lighted  torch,  I  go  to  meet  Thee."  * 

Then  follows  a  concluding  dialogue  between  Eubulios  and  Ore- 
gorion  on  the  question,  whether  chastity  ignorant  of  lust  is 
preferable  to  chastity  which  feels  the  power  of  passion  and 
overcomes  it,  in  other  words,  whether  a  wrestler  who  has  no 
opponents  is  better  than  a  wrestler  who  has  many  and  strong 
antagonists  and  continually  contends  against  them  -without  being 
worsted.  Both  agree  in  giving  the  palm  to  the  latter,  and  then 
they  betake  themselves  to  "  the  care  of  the  outward  man,"  ex- 
pecting to  resume  the  delicate  discussion  on  the  next  day. 

The  taste  and  morality  of  virgins  discussing  at  great  length 
the  merits  of  sexual  purity  are  very  questionable,  at  least  from 
the  standpoint  of  modern  civilization,  but  the  enthusiastic 
praise  of  chastity  to  the  extent  of  total  abstinence  was  in  full 
accord  with  the  prevailing  asceticism  of  the  father^  including 
Origen,  who  freed  himself  from  carnal  temptation  by  an  act  of 
violence  against  nature. 

The  work  On  the  Resurrection,  likewise  in  the  form  of  a 
dialogue,  and  preserved  in  large  extracts  by  Epiphanius  and 
Photius,  was  directed  against  Origen  and  his  views  on  creation, 
pre-existence,  and  the  immateriality  of  the  resurrection  body. 
The  orthodox  speakers  (Eubulios  and  Auxcntios)  maintain  that 
the  soul  cannot  sin  without  the  body,  that  the  body  is  not  a 
fetter  of  the  soul,  but  its  inseparable  companion  and  an  in- 
strument for  good  as  well  as  evil,  and  that  the  earth  will  not  be 
destroyed,  but  purified  and  transformed  into  a  blessed  abode  for 
the  risen  saints.  In  a  book  On  Things  Created2  he  refutes 


,  Kat  "hapirafiag  $aea<j>6pov$  KpaTovca,  Nv^fe,  {jiravrdai}  aoi. 
2  Ile/«  TOV  yevijr&v,  known  to  ns  only  from  extracts  In  Photius,  Cod.  235. 
Salmon  identifies  this  book  with  the  X&no  mentioned  by  Socrates,  H.  JE,  VI,  13^ 
as  an  attack  upon  Origen. 


812  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Origen's  view  of  the  eternity  of  the  world,  who  thought  it  neces^ 
sary  to  the  conception  of  God  as  an  Almighty  Creator  and  Ruler, 
and  as  the  unchangeable  Being. 

The  Dialogue  On  Free  Will1  treats  of  the  origin  of  matter, 
and  strongly  resembles  a  work  on  that  subject  (nepi  rfe  S^c) 
of  which  Eusebius  gives  an  extract  and  which  he  ascribes  to 
Maxinras,  a  writer  from  the  close  of  the  second  century.2 

Other  works  of  Methodius,  mentioned  by  Jerome,  arc: 
Against  Porphyry  (10,000  lines) ;  Commentaries  on  Genesis  and 
Canticles;  De  Pythonissa  (on  the  witch  of  Endor,  against 
Origen's  view  that  Samuel  was  laid  under  the  power  of  Satan 
when  he  evoked  her  by  magical  art).  A  Homily  for  Palm 
Sunday,  and  a  Homily  on  the  Cross  are  also  assigned  to  him. 
But  there  were  several  Methodii  among  the  patristic  writers. 

§  194.  I/ttdan  of  Antiooh. 

(I.)  LuciAin  Fragmenta  i'n  Kouth,  Rel.  s.  IV.  3-17. 

(II.)  EUSEB.  E.  E.  VIII.  13;  IX.  6  (and  EufinuVs  Eus.  IX.  6).  HIEB 
De  Vir.  ill.  77,  and  in  other  works.  SOOEAT.  :  //.  E.  II.  10.  So- 
ZOM. :  K  jBL  III.  5.  EPIPHAN.:  Anwratus,  c.  33.  THEODOft. :  //.  E. 
I.  3.  PHILOSTORGHUS  :  K  E.  II.  14, 15.  CHEYSOSTOM'S  Horn,  in 
Lueian,  (in  Opera  ed.  Montfaucon,  T.  II.  524  sq;  Migne,  "Pair.  Gr." 
I.  520  sqq.)  ETJIITAB,T  :  Ada  Mart.,  p.  503  sq. 

(HI.)  Acta  Band.  Jan.  VII.  357  sq.  BARON.  Ann.  ad  ann.  311.  Brief 
notices  in  TILLEMOJST,  CAYE,  FABRICITTS,  NEANDER,  GIESELER, 
HEFELE  (Cbnciliengesch.  vol.  I).  HARNACK:  Luc.  dcr  Mart,  in 
Eerzog*  VIII.  (1881),  pp.  767-772.  J.  T.  STOKES,  in  Smith  &  Wace, 
EX,  748  and  749. 

On  his  textual  labors  see  the  critical  Introductions  to  the  Bible. 

I.  LUCIAK  was  an  eminent  presbyter  of  Antioch  and  martyr 
of  the  Diocletian  persecution,  renewed  by  Maximin.  Very 
little  is  known  of  him.  He  was  transported  from  Antioch  to 
Nicomedia,  where  the  emperor  then  resided,  made  a  noble  con- 

1  IIep2  avregovaiov,  De  libero  arbitno.  Freedom  of  the  will  is  strongly  em- 
phasized by  Justin  Martyr,  Origen,  and  all  the  Greek  fathers. 

»  Pray-  Evang.  VII.  22;  comp.  H.  E,  V.  27;  and  Routh,  Ed.  S.  II.  87. 
Moller  and  Salmon  suppose  that  Methodius  borrowed  from  Maximus,  and 
merely  furnished  the  rhetorical  introduction. 


§  194.  LUCIAN  OF  ANTIOCH.  813 

fession  of  his  faith  before  the  judge  and  died  under  the  tortures 
in  prison  (311).  His  memory  was  celebrated  in  Antioch  on  the 
7th  of  January.  His  piety  was  of  the  severely  ascetic  type. 

His  memory  was  obscured  by  the  suspicion  of  unsoundness  in 
the  faith.  Eusebius  twice  mentions  him  and  his  glorious  martyr- 
dom, but  is  silent  about  his  theological  opinions.  Alexander  of 
Alexandria,  in  an  encyclical  of  321,  associates  him  with  Paul 
of  Samosata  and  makes  him  responsible  for  the  Ariau  heresy ; 
he  also  says  that  lie  was  excommunicated  or  kept  aloof  from  the 
church  (dx-'GuvdjwfQt  S/JLSWG)  during  the  episcopate  of  Domnus, 
Timseus,  and  Cyrillus;  intimating  that  his  schismatic  condition 
cmsed  before  his  death.  The  charge  brought  against  him  and 
his  followers  is  that  he  denied  the  eternity  of  the  Logos,  and  the 
human  so?*?  of  Christ  (the  Logos  taking  the  place  of  the  rational 
soul).  Arius  and  the  Arians  speak  of  him  as  their  teacher. 
On  the  other  hand  Pseudo-Alhanasius  calls  him  a  great, and  holy 
martyr,  and  Chrysostom  preached  a  eulogy  on  him  Jan.  1,  387. 
Baronius  defends  his  orthodoxy,  other  Catholics  deny  it.1  Some 
distinguished  two  Lucians,  one  orthodox,  and  one  neretical ;  but 
this  is  a  groundless  hypothesis. 

The  contradictory  reports  are  easily  reconciled  by  the  assump- 
tion that  Lucian  was  a  critical  scholar  with  some  peculiar  views 
on  the  Trinity  and  Christology  which  were  not  in  harmony  with 
tlio  later  Nicene  orthodoxy,  but  that  he  wiped  out  all  stains  by 
his  heroic  confession  and  martyrdom.2 

II.  The  creed  which  goes  by  his  name  and  was  found  after 
his  death,  is  quite  orthodox  as  far  as  it  goes,  and  was  laid  with 
three  similar  creeds  before  the  Synod  of  Antioch  held  A.  D.  341, 
with  the  intention  of  being  substituted  for  the  Creed  of  Nicsea.3 

1  See  Baron.  Annd.  ad  aim.  311;  De  Broglie,  L'Sglise  et  I 'empire,  I.  375; 
Newman,  Arians  of  the  Fourth  Century,  414. 

2  Hefele,  Concilienymh.,  vol.  L,  p.  258  Bq.  (2nd  ed.),  assumes  to  the  same 
effect  that  Lucian  first  [sympathized  with  his  countryman,  Paul  of  Samosata,  in 
his  humanitarian  Christology,  and  hence  was  excommunicated  for  a  while,  but 
afterwards  renounced  this  heresy,  was  restored,  and  acquired  great  fame  hy  his 
improvement  of  the  text  of  the  Septuagint  and  by  his  martyrdom. 

8  This  Synod  is  recognized  as  legitimate  and  orthodox,  and  its  twenty-five 


814  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.  D.  100-811. 

It  resembles  the  creed  of  Gregorius  Thaumatuigus,  is  strictly 
trinitarian  and  acknowledges  Jesus  Christ  "  as  the  Son  of  God, 
the  only  begotten  God/  through  whom  all  things  were  made, 
who  was  begotten  of  the  Father  before  all  ages,  God  of  God, 
Whole  of  Whole,  One  of  One,  Perfect  of  Perfect,  King  of 
Kings,  Lord  of  Lords,  the  living  Word,  Wisdom,  Life,  True 
Light,  Way,  Truth,  Resurrection,  Shepherd,  Door,  unchange- 
able and  unalterable,  the  immutable  Likeness  of  the  Godhead, 
both  of  the  substance  and  will  and  power  and  glory  of  the  Father, 
the  first-born  of  all  creation,2  who  was  in  the  beginning  with 
God,  the  Divine  Logos,  according  to  what  is  said  in  the  Gospel : 
*  And  the  Word  was  God  (John  1 :  1),  through  whom  all  things 
were  made'  (ver.  3),  and  in  whom  ( all  things  consist '  (Col.  1 ; 
17) :  who  in  the  last  days  came  down  from  above,  and  was  born 
of  a  Virgin,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  and  became  man,  the 
Mediator  between  God  and  man,"  etc.3 

III.    Lucianus   is  known    also  by  his  critical  revision  of 
the  text  of  the  Septuagint  and  the  Greek  Testament.    Jerome 

canons  are  accepted,  although  it  confirmed  the  previous  deposition  of  Athana- 
sius  for  violating  a  canon.  See  a  full  acccount  in  Hefele,  1.  c.  I.  502-530. 

1  rbv  [lavoywi}  &e6v.    Comp.  the  Vatican  and  Sinaitic  reading  of  John  1 :  18, 
(tovoysvf/c  tfedf  (without  the  article),  instead  of  &  (jLovoyewis  vl6?.    The  phrase 
(lowyevT/e  tfpdf  was  widely  used  in  the  Nicene  age,  not  only  by  the  orthodox, 
but  also  by  Arian  writers  in  the  sense  of  one  who  is  both  #£<fc  (divine)  and 
liamyei'jie.    See  Hort's  Two  Dissertations  on  this  subject,  Cambr.,  1876.    In  the 
usual  punctuation  of  Lucian's  creed,  rbv  fiovoyevy  is  connected  with  the  pre- 
ceding rbv  vibv  aurou,  and  separated  from  $e6v,  so  as  to  read  "  his  Son  the  only 
begotten,  God,"  etc. 

2  7rpu-6roKov  (not  Trpwnknffrov,  first- created)  Vd^f  /m'ffewf,  from  Col.  1 :  17. 

3  See  the  creed  in  full  in  Athauasins,  Ep.  de  Synodis  Arimini  et  fieleucida 
e&bratu,  %  23  (Opera  ed.  Montf.  I.  ii.  735);  Mansi,  Cone.  II.  1339-'42;  ScharT, 
CJwfe  of  Christendom,  II.  25-28;  and  Hahn,  Bibl.  der  Symb.,  ed.  IL,  p,  184-W. 
Hefele,  I  e.,  gives  a  German  version.    It  is  not  given  as  a  creed  of  Lucian  by 
Athanasius  or  Socrates  (H.  E.  II.  10),  or  Hilarius  (in  his  Latin  version,  De 
Syn.  sire  de  Fide  Orient.,  §  29);  but  Sozomenus  reports  (If.  E.  III.  5)  that  the 
bishops  of  the  Synod  of  Antioch  ascribed  it  to  him,  and  also  that  a  Semi-Arian 
synod  in  Caria,  367,  adopted  it  under  his  name  (VI.  12).    It  is  regarded  as 
genuine  by  Cave,  Basnage,  Bull,  Hahn,  Dorner,  but  questioned  either  in  whole 
or  in  part  by  Eouth  (I.  16),  Hefele,  Keim,  Harnack,  and  Caspari;  but  the  last 
two  acknowledge  an  authentic  basis  of  Lucian  which  was  enlarged  by  the  An" 
tiochian  synod.    The  concluding  anathema  is  no  doubt  a  later  addition. 


5195.  THE  ANT10CHIAN  SCHOOL.  815 

mentions  that  copies  were  known  in  his  day  as  "  exmplaria 
Lucianea"  but  in  other  places  he  speaks  rather  disparagingly  of 
the  texts  of  Lucian,  and  of  Hesychius,  a  bishop  of  Egypt  (who 
distinguished  himself  in  the  same  field).  In  the  absence  of  de- 
finite information.it  is  impossible  to  decide  the  merits  of  his 
critical  labors.  His  Hebrew  scholarship  is  uncertain,  and  hence 
we  do  not  know  whether  his  revision  of  the  Septuagint  was 
made  from  the  original.1 

As  to  the  New  Testament,  it  is  likely  that  he  contributed 
much  towards  the  Syrian  recension  (if  we  may  so  call  it),  which 
was  used  by  Cbrysostom  and  the  later  Greek  fathers,  and  which 
lies  at  the  basis  of  the  textus  ree&ptws.2 

§  195.  T/ie  Antioohian  School. 

KIHN  (R  C.) :  Die  Bed&utung  der  antioch.  Schule.    Weissenburg,  1856. 
C.  HORNTJNG  :  Schola  Antioch.    Neostad.  ad  S.  1864. 
Jos.  HERG-ENBSTHE&  (Cardinal) :  Die  Antioch.  Schule.    Wiirzb.  1866. 
DIBSTEL:    Gesch.  des  A.  Test,  in  der  christl.  Kirche.    Jena,  1869  (pp, 

126-141). 
W.  M6LLER  in  Herzog2, 1.  454-457. 

Lucian  is  the  reputed  founder  of  the  ANTTOOHIAN  SCHOOL  of 
theology,  which  was  more  fully  developed  in  tho  fourth  century, 
He  shares  this  honor  with  his  friend  Dorothcus,  likewise  a  pres- 
byter of  Antioch,  who  is  highly  spoken  of  by  Euscbius  as  a 
biblical  scholar  acquainted  with  Hebrew.3  But  the  real  founders 

1  On  his  labors  in  regard  to  the  Sept.,  see  Simeon  Mctaphrastes  and  Suidafi, 
quoted  in  Routh  IV  3  sq.;  Field's  ed.  of  the  Hexapla  of  Origen ;  Nestle  in 
the  "Zeitschr.  d.  D.  Morgenl.  Gesellsch.,"  1878,  465-508;  and  the  prospectus 
to  the  proposed  ed.  of  the  Sept.  by  P.  de  Lagarde. 

1  Dr.  Hort,  Introd.  and  Append,  to  Westcott  and  FTort's  Greek  Test.  (Lond.  and 
N.  York,  1881),  p.  138,  pays  of  Lnciau:  "Of  known  names  his  has  a  better 
claim  than  any  other  to  be  associated  with  the  early  Syrian  reviBion ;  and  the 
conjecture  derives  Rome  little  support  from  a  passage  of  Jerome  . . .  Prcetennitto 
eos  codices  quos  a  Luciano  et  Ilem/chio  nuncupates  adx&rit  pervcrsa  contenliOj'  etc. 
J>r.  Scrivener,  who  denies  such  a  Syrian  recension  as  an  ignis  fatuus,  barely 
alludes  to  Lucian  in  his  Introduction  to  the  &Uici<m  of  the  N.  Test.,  3rd  ed.f 
Cambr.,  1883,  pp.  515,  517. 

s  Euseb.  H.  E.  YII.  32  (in  the  beginning)  speaks  of  A«/x>#e0£  as  having  known 
him  personally.  He  calls  him  "  a  learned  inau  (%6-ytov  avtipa)  who  was  honored 


816  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

of  that  school  are  Diodorus,  bishop  of  Tarsus  (c.  A.  D.  379-394), 
and  Theodoras,  bishop  of  Mopsuestia  (393-428),  both  formerly 
presbyters  of  Antioch, 

The  Antiochian  School  was  not  a  regular  institution  with  a 
continuous  succession  of  teachers,  like  the  Catechetical  School 
of  Alexandria,  but  a  theological  tendency,  more  particularly  a 
peculiar  type  of  hermeneutics  and  exegesis  which  had  its  centre 
in  Antioch.  The  characteristic  features  are,  attention  to  the 
revision  of  the  text,  a  close  adherence  to  the  plain,  natural  mean- 
ing  according  to  the  use  of  language  and  the  condition  of  the 
writer,  and  justice  to  the  human  factor.  In  other  words,  its 
exegesis  is  grammatical  and  historical,  in  distinction  from  the 
allegorical  method  of  the  Alexandrian  School.  Yet,  as  regards 
textual  criticism,  Lucian  followed  in  the  steps  of  Origen. 
Nor  did  the  Antiochians  disregard  the  spiritual  sense,  and  the 
divine  element  in  the  Scriptures.  The  grammatico-historical 
exegesis  is  undoubtedly  the  only  safe  and  sound  basis  for  the 
understanding  of  the  Scriptures  as  of  any  other  book ;  and  it  is 
a  wholesome  check  upon  the  wild  licentiousness  of  the  allegoriz- 
ing method  which  often  substitutes  imposition  for  exposition. 
But  it  may  lead  to  different  results  in  different  hands,  according 
to  the  spirit  of  the  interpreter.  The  Arians  and  Nestorians 
claimed  descent  from,  or  affinity  with,  Lucian  and  his  school ; 
but  from  the  same  school  proceeded  also  the  prince  of  commen- 
tators among  the  fathers,  John  Chrysostom,  the  eulogist  of 
Lucian  and  Diodorus,  and  the  friend  and  fellow  student  of  Theo- 
dore of  Mopsuestia.  Theodoret  followed  in  the  same  line. 

After  the  condemnation  of  Nestorius,  the  Antiochian  theology 
continued'  to  be  cultivated  at  Nisibis  and  Edessa  among  the 
Nestorians. 

with  the  rank  of  presbyter  of  Antioch  "  at  the  time  of  bishop  Cyrillus,  and  "  a 
man  of  fine  taste  in  sacred  literature,  much  devoted  to  the  study  of  the  Hebrew 
language,  so  that  he  read  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  with  great  facility."  He  adds 
that  he  "  was  of  a  very  liberal  mind  and  not  unacquainted  with  the  prepara- 
tory studies  pursued  among  the  Greeks,  but  iu  other  respects  a  eunuch  by 
nature,  having  been  such  from  his  birth." 


Jiit>.  TJ1K  ANriOCMiAN  SOHOUju  Oi 


NOTES. 

Cardinal  Newman,  when  still  an  Anglican  (in  his  book  on  Ariansofthe 
Fourth  Century,  p.  414)  made  the  Syrian  School  of  biblical  criticism 
responsible  for  the  Arian  heresy,  and  broadly  maintained  that  the 
11  mystical  interpretation  and  orthodoxy,  will  stand  or  fall  together."  But 
Cardinal  Hergenrother,  who  is  as  good  a  Catholic  and  a  better  schola^ 
makes  a  proper  distinction  between  use  and  abuse,  and  gives  the  fol- 
lowing fair  and  discriminating  statement  of  the  relation  between  the 
Antiochian  and  Alexandrian  schools,  and  the  critical  and  mystical  method 
of  interpretation  to  which  a  Protestant  historian  can  fully  assent. 
(Handbuch  der  allgem.  Kirchengeschichte.  Freiburg  i.  B.  2nd  ed.  1879, 
vol.  I.  p.  281.) 

"  Die  Schnle  von  Antiochien  hatte  bald  den  Qlanz  der  Alexandrinischen 
erreichtjja  sogar  iiberstrahU.  Beide  konnten  sich  vielfach  ergdnzen,  da, 
jede  ihre  dgentkumliche  fintwicklung,  Haltung  und  Methode  hatte,  konnten 
aber  auch  eben  wegen  iherer  Verschiedenhdt  leicht  unter  sich  in  Kampf 
und  auf  Abwege  von  der  Kirohwilehre  gerathen.  Wdhrend  bei  den  Alexan- 
drinern  eine  speculativ-intuitive,  zum  Mystischen  sich  liinndgende  Richtung 
hervortrat,  war  bei  den  Antiochenerni  eine  logisch-reflectirende,  durchaux 
nilchterne  Verstandesricktung  wrherrsnhend.  Wahrend  jene  enge  an  die 
platonische  Philosophie  sich  anschlossen  und  zwar  vorherrschend  in  der 
Gestalt,  die  sie  unter  dem  hellenistischen  Juden  P/iilo  gmoonnen  hatte,  waren 
die  Antiochener  einem  zum  Stoidsmus  hinneigenden  Eklelcticismus,  dann  der 
Aristotelischen  Schule  ergeben,  deren  scharfe  Dialektik  ganz  ihrem  Geiste 
zusagte.  Demgemass  wurde  in  der  alexandriimchen  Schuk  vorzugsweise  die 
allegorisch-mystiscJie  Erkltirung  der  htiUyeii  bdii'ijt  gtpflegt,  in  der  Antio- 
chenischen  dagegen  die  buchstabliche,  grammatisch-logische  und  historische 
Interpretation,  ohne  doss  desshalb  der  mystische  Sinn  und  insbesondere  die 
Typen  des  Alten  Bundes  ganzlich  in  Abrede  gestellt  warden  woven.  Die 
Origenisten  suchen  die  Unzulanglichkeit  des  blossen  buchstdblichen  Sinnes 
und  die  NothwendigJceit  der  allegorischen  Aualegung  nachzuweisen,  da  der 
Wortlaut  vieler  biblischen  Stellen  Falsches,  Wider sprechendes,  Gottes  Unwur- 
diges  ergebe;  sie  fehlten  kier  durch  das  Uebermass  des  Allegorisirens  und 
durch  Verwechslung  der  figurliehen  jRedeweisen,  die  dem  IMeralsinne  ange- 
horentmit  der  mystischen  Deutung ;  sie  verfluchtigten  oft  den  historischen 
Oehalt  der  biblischen  Erzahlung,  hinter  deren  dusserer  Schale  sie  einen  ver- 
borgenen  Kern  suchen  zu  mussen  glaubten.  Damit  stand  ferner  in  Verbin- 
dung,  dass  in  der  alexandrinischen  Schule  das  Moment  des  Uebervernunftigen, 
Uhausprechlichen,  Geheimnissvollen  in  den  gottlichen  Dingen  stark  betont 
wurde,  wdhrend  die  Antiochener  vor  Allem  das  Vernunftgemdsse,  dem  mensch- 
Hchen  Geiste  Entsprechende  in  den  Dogmen  hervorhoben,  das  Christenthum 
als  eine  das  mensohliehe  Denken  befriedigende  Wahrheit  nachzuweisen 
suchten.  Tndem  sie  aber  dieses  Streben  verfolgten,  woUten  die  hervorragen- 
den  Lehrer  der  antiochenischen  Schule  keineswegs  den  ubernaturKchen 
Yol  ri,-T)2, 


818  SECOND  PEKIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

akter  und  die  Mysterien  der  Kirchenlehre  bestreiten,  sie  erkannten  diese  in 
d&r  Mehrzahl  an,  wie  Chrysotomus  und  Theodoret;  aber  einzelne  Oelehrte 
konnten  uber  d&m  Bemuhen,  die  Glaubenslehren  leicht  verstdndlich  und  be- 
greiflich  zu  machen,  ihren  Inhalt  verunstalten  und  zerstdren." 

§  196.  Tertuttian  and  the  African  School. 

Comp.  the  liter,  on  Montanism,  ?  109,  p.  415. 

(I.)  TERTULLIAJST  guce  supersunt  omnia.  Ed.  FEAKC.  OEHLEK.  Lips, 
1853,  3  vols.  The  third  vol.  contains  dissertations  De  Vita  et 
Scriptis  T&rL  by  NIC.  Le  Nourry,  Mosheim,  Noesselt,  Semler,  Kaye. 
Earlier  editions  by  Beatus  Ehenanus,  Bas.  1521 ;  Pamelius,  Antwerp, 
1579 ;  Rigaltius  (Bigault),  Par.  1634  and  Venet.  1744 ;  Semler,  Halle, 
1770-3.  6  vols.;  Oberthiir,  1780 ;  Leopold,  in  Gersdorf's  "Biblioth. 
patrum  eccles.  Latmorum  selecta7'  (IV- VII.),  Lips.  1839-41;  and 
Migne,  Par.  1884.  A  new  ed.  by  KEIFFERSCHEID  will  appear  in  the 
Vienna  "  Corpus  Scripfcorum  ecxjles.  Lat." 

English  transl.  by  P.  HOLMES  and  others  in  the  "  Ante-Nicene 
Christian  Library/'  Edinb.  1868  sqq.  4  vols.  German  translation  by 
"K.  A.  H.  KELLNEB.  Koln,  1882,  2  vols. 

(II.)  ETTSEB.  H.  G.  II.  2, 25 ;  III.  20 ;  V.  5.  JEROME  :  BE  VIEIS  ILL.  c.  53. 
(HI.)  NEAJSTDEB:  Antignosticus,  Geist  des  Tertullianus  u.  Mnldtung  in 
dessen  Schriften.    Berl.  1825,  2d  ed.  1849. 

J.  KAYE  :  Eccles.  Hist,  of  the  second  and  third  Centuries,  illustrated 
from  the  Writings  of  Tertullian.  3d  ed.  Lond.  1845. 

CABL.HESSELBEBG:  Tertullian' 's  Lehre  aus  seinen  Schriften  entwic- 
kelt.  1.  2h.  Leben  imd  Schriften,.  Dorpat  1848  (136  pages). 

P.  GOTTWALD  :  De  Montanismo  Tertulliani.  Breslau,  1863. 
HEBMAHK  K6NSCH :  Das  Neue  Testament  Tertullian1  s.    Leipz.  1871 
(781  pages.)    A  reconstruction  of  the  text  of  the  old  Latin  version 
of  the  N.  T.  from  the  writings  of  Tertullian. 
AD.  EBEBT:  Gesch.  der  Chrisfl.  lat.  Lit.  Leipz.  1874,  sqq.  I.  24-31. 
A.  HAUCK  :  Tertullian3 s  Leben  und  Schriften,  Erlangen,  1877  (410 
,  pages.)    With  judicious  extracts  from  all  his  writings. 
ifV.)  On  the  chronology  of  Tertullian's  works  see  N6SSELT :    De  vera 
estate  et  doctrina  Scriptorum  Tertull.    (in  Oehler's  ed.  III.  340-619) ; 
UHLBOBN:  Fundamenta  Chronologies  Tertullianece  (Gottingen  1852)  j 
BONWETSCH  :  Die  Schriften  Tertullians  nach  dw  Zeit  ihrer  Abfassung 
(Bonn  1879,  89  pages) ;  HABNACK  :  Zur  Chronologic  der  Schnften 
TertuUians  (Leipz.  1878) ;  NOELDECHEN  :  Abfassungszeit  d&r  Schriften 
Tertuttiatis  (Leipz.  1888). 

(V.)  On  special  points :  OEIIXINGER:  Tertullian  und  seine  Auferstehungs- 
khre  (Augsb.  1878,  34  pp).  F.  J.  SCHMIDT:  De  Latinitate  Tertul- 
^7w(Erlancr.  1877).  M.  KLUSSMANN:  Curarum  Tertullianearum, 
part.  7.  et  IL  (Halle  1881).  G.  E.  HAUSCHILD:  Tertullian^  P$y- 
rhokqie  (Frankfc  a.  Al.  1880,  78  pp.).  By  the  same :  Die  Grunt* 


I  196.  TERTULLIAN  AND  THE  AFRICAN  SCHOOL.      819 

satze  u.  Mittel  der  WortUldung  bei  Tertullian  (Leipz.  1881,  5(>  pp); 
LUDWIG  :  Tert's  EtUk.  (Leipz.  1885).  Special  treatises  on  Tertuliian, 
by  Hefele,  Engelhardt,  Leopold,  Schaff  (in  Herzog),  Ebert,  Kolberg. 

The  Western  church  in  this  period  exhibits  no  such  scientific 
productiveneas  as  the  Eastern.  The  apostolic  church  was  pre- 
dominantly Jewish,  the  ante-Nicene  church,  Greek,  the  post- 
Nicene,  Roman.  The  Roman  church  itself  was  first  predomi- 
nantly Greek,  and  her  earliest  writers — Clement,  Hermas,  Ire- 
nseus,  Hippolytus — wrote  exclusively  in  Greek.  Latin  Chris- 
tianity begins  to  appear  in  literature  at  the  end  of  the  second 
century,  and  then  not  in  Italy,  but  in  North  Africa,  not  in 
Rome,  but  in  Carthage,  and  very  characteristically,  not  with 
converted  speculative  philosophers,  but  with  practical  lawyers 
and  rhetoricians.  This  literature  does  not  gradually  unfold 
itself,  but  appears  at  once  under  a  fixed,  clear  stamp,  with  a 
strong  realistic  tendency.  North  Africa  also  gave  to  the  West- 
ern church  the  fundamental  book — the  Bible  in  its  first  Latin 
Version,  the  so-called  Itala,  and  this  was  the  basis  of  Jerome's 
Vulgata  which  to  this  day  is  the  recognized  standard  Bible  of 
Rome.  There  were,  however,  probably  several  Latin  versions 
of  portions  of  the  Bible  current  in  the  West  before  Jerome. 

I.  Life  of  Tertullism. 

QTJIJSTTUS  SEPTIMIUS  FLORENS  TERTULLIANUS  is  the  father 
of  the  Latin  theology  and  church  language,  and  one  of  the 
greatest  men  of  Christian  antiquity.  We  know  little  of  his  life 
but  what  is  derived  from  his  book  and  from  the  brief  notice  of 
Jerome  in  his  catalogue  of  illustrious  men.  But  few  writers 
have  impressed  their  individuality  so  strongly  in  their  books 
as  this  African  father.  In  this  respect,  as  well  as  in  others, 
he  resembles  St.  Paul,  and  Martin  Luther.  He  was  born  about 
the  £ear  150,  at  Carthage,  the  ancient  rival  of  Rome,  where  his 
father  was  serving  as  captain  ot  a  Roman  legion  under  the  pro- 
consul of  Africa.  He  received  a  liberal  Greece-Roman  educa- 
tion ;  his  writings  manifest  an  extensive  acquaintance  with  his- 
torical, philosophical,  poetic,  and  antiquarian  literature,  and 


820  SECOND  PERIOD.    A,  D.  100-311, 

with  juridical  terminology  and  all  the  arts  of  an  advocate.  He 
seems  to  have  devoted  himself  to  politics  and  forensic  elo- 
quence; either  in  Carthage  or  in  Eome.  Eusebius  calls  him  "  a 
man  accurately  acquainted  with  the  Roman  laws,"1  and  many 
regard  him  as  identical  with  the  Tertyllus,  or  Tertullianus,  who 
is  the  author  of  several  fragments  in  the  Pandects. 

To  his  thirtieth  or  fortieth  year  he  lived  in  heathen  blindness 
and  licentiousness.2  Towards  the  end  of  the  second  century  he 
embraced  Christianity,  we  know  not  exactly  on  what  occasion, 
but  evidently  from  deepest  conviction,  and  with  all  the  fiery 
energy  of  his  soul;  defended  it  henceforth  with  fearless  decision 
against  heathens,  Jews,  and  heretics ;  and  studied  the  strictest 
morality  of  life.  His  own  words  may  be  applied  to  himself : 
"Fiunt,  non  naseuntur  Qtiristiani"  He  was  married,  and  gives 
us  a  glowing  picture  of  Christian  family  life,  to  which  we  have 
before  referred;  but  in  his  zeal  for  every  form  of  self-denial,  he 
set  celibacy  still  higher,  and  advised  his  wife,  in  case  he  should 
die  before  her,  to  remain  a  widow,  or,  at  least  never  to  marry 
an  unbelieving  husband;  and  he  afterwards  put  second  mar- 
riage even  on  a  level  with  adultery.  He  entered  the  ministry 
of  the  Catholic  church,3  first  probably  in  Carthage,  perhaps  in 
Rome,  where  at  all  events  he  spent  some  time;4  but,  like  Clem- 
ent of  Alexandria  and  Origen,  he  never  rose  above  the  rank  of 
presbyter. 

Some  years  after,  between  199  and  203,  he  joined  the  puri- 
tanic, though  orthodox,  sect  of  the  Montanists.  Jerome  attri- 

1  H.  E.  H.  2.     He  adds  that  Tertullian  was  "  particularly  distinguished 
among  the  eminent  men  of  Eome,*'  and  quotes  a  passage  from  his  Apology, 
"  which  is  also  translated  into  the  Greek." 

2  De  Itesurr.  Cam.  c.  59,  he  confesses:-  "Ego  me  scio  neque  alia  carne  adulteria 
commisisse,  neque  nunc  alia  came  ad  continentiam  eniti,"     Comp.  also  Apolog.,  c. 
18  and  25;  De  Anima,  c.  2;  De  Posn.it.,  c.  4  and  12;  Ad  ScapuL,  c.  5. 

3  This  fact,  however,  rests  only  on  the  authority  of  Jerome,  and  does  not  ap- 
pear from  Tertullian's  own  writings.    Eoman  Catholic  historians,  with  their 
dislike  to  married  priests,  have  made  him  a  layman  on  the  insufficient  ground 
of  the  passage:  "Nonne  et  Laid  sacerdotes  wmus*"    De  Exhort.  Cast.,  c.  7. 

4  De  Oultu  Femin.,  c.  7.    Comp.  Euseb.  IL  2. 


g  196.  TEKTULLIAN  AND  THE  AFRICAN  SCHOOL.      821 

butes  this  change  to  personal  motives,  charging  it  to  the  envy 
and  insults  of  the  Roman  clergy,  from  whom  he  himself  ex- 
perienced many  an  indignity.  l    But  Tertullian  was  inclined  to 
extremes  from  the  first,  especially  to  moral  austerity.     lie  was 
no  doubt  attracted  by  the  radical  contempt  for  the  world,  the 
strict  asceticism,  the  severe  discipline,  the  martyr  enthusiasm, 
and  the  chiliasm  of  the  Montanists,  and  was  repelled  by  the 
growing  conformity  to  the  world  in  the  Roman  church,  which 
just  at  that  period,  under  Zephyrinus  and  Callistus,  openly  took 
under  its  protection  a  very  lax  penitential  discipline,  and  at  the 
same  time,  though  only  temporarily,  favored  the  Patripassiau 
error  of  Praxeas,  an  opponent  of  the  Montanists.     Of  this  man 
Tertullian  therefore  says,  in  his  sarcastic  way  :     He  has  execu- 
ted in  Rome  two  works  of  the  devil  ;  has  driven  out  prophecy 
(the  Montanistic)  and  brought  in  heresy  (the  Patripassiau)  ;  has 
turned  off  the  Holy  Ghost  and  crucified  the  Father.2    Tertul- 
lian now  fought  the  catholics,  or  the  psychicals,  as  he  frequently 
calls  them,  with  the  same  inexorable  sternness  with  which  lie 
had  combated  the  heretics.    The  departures  of  the  Montanists> 
however,  related  more  to  points  of  morality  and  discipline  than 
of   doctrine;  and  with  all  his  hostility  to  Rome,   Tcrtulluin 
remained  a  zealous  advocate  of  the  catholic  faith,  and  wrote, 
even  from  his  schismatic  position,  several  of  his  most  effective 
works  against  the  heretics,  especially  the  Gnostics.     Indeed,  as 
a  divine,  he  stood  far  above  this  fanatical  sect,  and  gave  it  by 
his  writings  an  importance  and  an  influence  in  the  church  itself 
which  it  certainly  would  never  otherwise  have  attained. 

He  labored  in  Carthage  as  a  Montanist  presbyter  and  an 
author,  and  died,  as  Jerome  says,  in  decrepit  old  age,  according 
to  some  about  the  year  220,  according  to  others  not  till  240  ;  for 
the  exact  time,  as  well  as  the  manner  of  his  death,  are  unknown. 
His  followers  in  Africa  propagated  themselves,  under  the  name 


1  De  Kr.  iZter.,  c.  53:  "  Hie  [Tert.']  cum  usque  ad  mediam  atatem  presbyter 
tcolesMe  permansmetf  wwidia  et  contumeliis  dericorum  Romance  ecde&fa  ad  jMatfow 


Adv.  Prax.c.  1. 


822  SECONb  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

of  "  Tertullianists,"  down  to  the  time  of  Augustin  in  the  fifth 
century,  and  took  perhaps  a  middle  place  between  the  proper 
Moutanists  and  the  catholic  church.  That  he  ever  returned  into 
die  bosom  of  Catholicism  is  an  entirely  groundless  opinion. 

Strange  that  this  most  powerful  defender  of  old  catholic  ortho- 
doxy and  the  teacher  of  the  high-churchly  Cyprian,  should  have 
been  a  schismatic  and  an  antagonist  of  Rome.  But  he  had 
in  his  constitution  the  tropical  fervor  and  acerbity  of  the  Punic 
character,  and  that  bold  spirit  of  independence  in  whicli  his 
native  city  of  Carthage  once  resisted,  through  more  than  a  hun- 
dred years'  war/  the  rising  power  of  the  seven-hilled  city  on  the 
Tiber.  He  truly  represents  the  African  church,  in  which  a 
similar  antagonism  continued  to  reveal  itself,  not  only  among 
the  Donatists,  but  even  among  the  leading  advocates  of  Catholi- 
cism. Cyprian  died  at  variance  with  Eome  on  the  question  of 
heretical  baptism ;  and  Augustin,  with  all  his  great  services  to 
the  catholic  system  of  faith,  became  at  the  same  time,  through 
his  anti-Pelagian  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace,  the  father  of  evan- 
gelical Protestantism  and  of  semi-Protestant  Jansenism. 

Hippolytus  presents  several  interesting  points  of  contact.  He 
was  a  younger  contemporary  of  Tertullian,  though  they  never 
met  as  far  as  we  know.  Both  were  champions  of  catholic  ortho- 
doxy against  heresy,  and  yet  both  opposed  to  Koine.  Hippolytus 
charged  two  popes  with  heresy  as  well  as  laxity  of  discipline ; 
and  yet  in  view  of  his  supposed  repentance  and  martyrdom  (as 
reported  by  Prudentius  nearly  two  hundred  years  afterwards), 
he  was  canonized  ir  the  Roman  church  ;  while  such  honor  was 
never  conferred  upon  the  African,  though  he  was  a  greater  and 
more  useful  man. 

II.  Character.  Tertullian  was  a  rare  genius,  perfectly  origi- 
nal and  fresh,  but  angular,  boisterous  and  eccentric;  full  of 
glowing  fantasy,  pointed  wit,  keen  discernment,  polemic  dex- 
terity, and  moral  earnestness,  but  wanting  in  clearness,  modera- 
tion, and  symmetrical  development.  He  resembled  a  fowninp 

1B.C.  264-146. 


{  196.  TERTULLIAN  AND  THE  AFRICAN  SCHOOL. 

mountain  torrent  rather  than  a  calm,  transparent  river  in  the 
valley.  His  vehement  temper  was  never  fully  subdued,  although 
he  struggled  sincerely  against  it.1  He  was  a  man  of  strong  con- 
victions^ and  never  hesitated  to.  express  them  without  fear  or 
fovor. 

Like  almost  all  great  men,  he  combined  strange  contrarieties 
of  character.  Here  we  are  again  reminded  of  Luther ;  though 
the  reformer  had  nothing  of  the  ascetic  gloom  and  rigor  of  the 
African  father,  and  exhibits  instead  with  all  his  gigantic  energy, 
a  kindly  serenity  and  childlike  simplicity  altogether  foreign  to 
the  latter.  Tertullian  dwells  enthusiastically  on  the  divine  fool- 
ishness of  the  gospel,  and  has  a  sublime  contempt  for  the  world, 
for  its  science  and  its  art;  and  yet  his  writings  are  a  mine  of  an- 
tiquarian knowledge,  and  novel,  striking,  and  fruitful  ideas. 
He  calls  the  Grecian  philosophers  the  patriarchs  of  all  heresies, 
and  scornfully  asks :  "  What  has  the  academy  to  do  with  the 
church?  what  has  Christ  to  do  with  Plato — Jerusalem  with 
Athens?"  He  did  not  shrink  from  insulting  the  greatest  nat- 
ural gift  of  God  to  man  by  his  "Oredo  quia  absvrdum  est"  And 
yet  reason  does  him  invaluable  service  against  his  antagonists.2 
He  vindicates  the  principle  of  church  authority  and  tradition 
with  great  force  and  ingenuity  against  all  heresy ;  yet,  when  a 
Montanist,  he  claims  for  himself  with  equal  energy  the  right  of 
private  judgment  and  of  individual  protest.3  He  has  a  vivid 
sense  of  the  corruption  of  human  nature  and  the  absolute  need 
of  moral  regeneration ;  yet  he  declares  the  soul  to  be  born 
Christian,  and  unable  to  find  rest  except  in  Christ.  "  The  testi- 

1  Comp.  his  own  painful  confession  in  De  Patient,  c.  1 :  "  Mwerrimw  ego 
semper  ceger  calonbus  impatienliat.'' 

2  In  a  similar  manner  Luther,  though  himself  one  of  the  most  original  and 
fruitful  thinkers,  sometimes  unreasonably  abuses  reason  as  the  devil's  mistress. 

8  In  this  apparent  contradiction  Luther  resembles  Tertullian :  he  fought 
Romanism  with  private  judgment,  and  Zwinglians,  Anabaptists,  and  all  sec- 
tarians C'Sckwarm — und  Rottengeister"  as  he  called  them)  with  catholic  au- 
thority j  fie  denounced  "the  damned  heathen  Aristotle,"  as  the  father  of 
Popish  scholasticism,  and  used  scholastic  distinctions  in  support  of  the  ubiquity 
of  Christ's  body  against  ZwinglL 


824  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

monies  of  the  soul,"  says  he,  "are  as  true  as  they  are  simple ;  as 
simple  as  they  are  popular;  as  popular  as  they  are  natural ;  as 
natural  as  they  are  divine."  He  is  just  the  opposite  of  the 
genial,  less  vigorous,  but  more  learned  and  comprehensive 
Origen.  He  adopts  the  strictest  supranatural  principles;  and 
yet  he  is  a  most  decided  realist,  and  attributes  body,  that  is,  as 
it  were,  a  corporeal,  tangible  substantiality,  even  to  God  and  to 
the  soul ;  while  the  idealistic  Alexandrian  cannot  speak  spirit- 
ually enough  of  God,  and  can  conceive  the  human  soul  without 
and  before  the  existence  of  the  body.  JTertullian's  theology 
revolves  about  the  great  Pauline  antithesis  of  sin  and  grace, 
and  breaks  the  road  to  the  Latin  anthropology  and  soteriology 
afterwards  developed  by  his  like-minded,  but  clearer,  calmer, 
and  more  considerate  countryman,  Augustin.  For  his  oppo- 
nents, be  they  heathens,  Jews,  heretics,  or  catholics,  he  has  as 
little  indulgence  and  regard  as  Luther.  With  the  adroitness  of 
a  special  pleader  he  entangles  them  in  self-contradictions,  pur- 
sues them  into  every  nook  and  corner,  overwhelms  them  with 
arguments,  sophisms,  apophthegms,  and  sarcasms,  drives  them 
before  him  with  unmerciful  lashings,  and  almost  always  makes 
them  ridiculous  and  contemptible.  His  polemics  everywhere 
leave  marks  of  blood.  It  is  a  wonder  that  he  was  not  killed 
by  the  heathens,  or  excommunicated  by  the  Catholics. 

His  style  is  exceedingly  characteristic,  and  corresponds  with 
his  thought.  It  is  terse,  abrupt,  laconic,  sententious,  nervous, 
figurative,  full  of  hyperbole,  sudden  turns,  legal  technicalities, 
African  provincialisms,  or  rather  antiquated  or  vulgar  latin- 
isms.1  It  abounds  in  latinized  Greek  words,  and  new  expres- 

1  According  to  Niebuhr,  a  most  competent  judge  of  Latin  antiquities.  Pro 
vinces  and  colonies  often  retain  terms  and  phrases  after  they  die  out  in  the 
capital  and  in  the  mother  country.  Benan  says  with  reference  to  Tertnllian 
(Marc-Aurele,  p.  456) :  «  La  'lingua  volgata'  tfAfrique  contnbua  ainsi  dans  une 
large  part  d  lajoiwxdwn  dela  langue  ecclesiastique  de  V  Occident,  et  ainsi  die  exerca 
une  influence  decisive  sur  nos  langues  mod&rnes.  Mais  H  resulta  de  Id,  une  autre 
consequence  /  cest  que  les  textes  fondamentaux  de  la  litterature  latine  chretienne  farent 
ecrits  dans  une  langue  que  lettres  d'ltalie  trouverent  barbare  et  corrompue,  ce  qui 
plus  tard  donna  occasion  de  la  part  des  rheteurs  d  des  objections  eta  des  tpigrammes 


§  196.  TEKTULL1AN  AND  THE  AFKICAN  SCHOOL.       825 

sions;  in  roughnesses,  angles,  and  obscurities ;  sometimes,  like  a 
grand  volcanic  eruption,  belching  precious  stones  and  dross  in 
strange  confusion;  or  like  the  foaming  torrent  tumbling  over 
the  precipice  of  rocks  and  sweeping  all  before  it.  His  mighty 
spirit  wrestles  with  the  form,  and  breaks  its  way  through  the 
primeval  forest  of  nature's  thinking.  He  had  to  create  the 
church  language  of  the  Latin  tongue.1 

In  short,  we  see  in  this  remarkable  man,  both  intellectually 
and  morally,  the  fermenting  of  a  new  creation,  but  not  yet  quite 
set  free  from  the  bonds  of  chaotic  darkness  and  brought  into 
clear  and  beautiful  order. 

NOTES. 

I,  Gems  from  Tertullian's  writings. 
The  philosophy  of  persecution  : 
"  SEMEN  EST  SANQUIS  GHRISTIANORUM."  (Apol  c.  50.) 
The  human  soul  and  Christianity  (made  for  Chrjst,  yet  requiring 
a  new  birth) : 

"TESTIMONIUM  ANIIM  NATURALITER  CIIRISTIAMC."  (I)?,  Text. 
Anim.  c.  2;  see  the  passages  quoted  $40,  p.  120.) 

"FlUNT,  NON    NASCUNTUR  CHRISTIAN!."     (Apol   18.       De    Teal 

Anim.  1.) 

Christ'the  Truth,  not  Habit  (versus  traditional  iam) : 
"CHRISTUS  VERTTAS  EST,  NOST  CONSUETUDO."  (Ik  Viry.  wl.  1.) 
General  priesthood  of  the  laity  (versus  an  exclusive  hierarchy) : 

"NONNE  ET  LAICI  SACERDOTE8  SUMUS?"  (De  Exhort.  Caxt.7.} 

Eeligious  Liberty,  an  inalienable  right  of  man  (versus  compul- 
sion and  persecution) : 

"HUMA3STI    JURIS    ET   NATTTBALI8    POTESTAT1B   EST   UNICUIQUE 

QUOD  PUTAVERIT  COLERE."  (Ad  Scap.  2;  comp.  Apol,  14  and  the 
passages  quoted  g  13,  p.  35.) 

wnsfin."  Comp.  the  works  of  Eonsch,  Vercellone,  Kaulen,  Kanke,  and  Ziegler 
on  the  Itala  and  Vulgata. 

1  Euhnken  calls  Tertullian  "  Latinitatis  pessimum  auctorem  "  and  Bishop  Kaye 
'*the  harshest  and  most  obscure  of  writers,"  but  Niobuhr,  (Lectures  on  Amimt 
History,  vol.  II.  p.  54),  Oehler  (Op.  III.  720),  and  Holmes  (the  translator  of 
Tert  against  Marcion,  p.  ix.)  judge  more  favorably  of  his  style,  which  is 
mostly  "the  terse  and  vigorous  expression  of  terae  and  vigoroufl  thought.'7 
Renan  (Mare  Aurdle,  p.  f56)  calls  Tertullian  the  strangest  literary  phenome- 
non :  "  m  melange  inoui  de  tdent,  de  faussete  £  esprit,  d' eloquence  et  de  mauvriin 
godt ;  grand  tcrivain,  si  Von  admet  gue  sacrifier  toute  grammaire  et  toute  correclim 
d  T  effet  sois  bun  $crire."  Cardinal  Newman  calls  him  "  the  most  powerful 
writer  of  the  early  centuries  "  (Tracts,  Theol.  and  Eccles.,  p.  219). 


826  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Dr.  Baur  (Kirchengesch.  I.  428)  says:  "It  is  remarkable  how 
already  the  oldest  Christian  Apologists,  in  vindicating  the  Christian 
faith,  were  led  to  assert  the  Protestant  principle  of  freedom  of  faith 
and  conscience"  [and  we  must  add,  of  public  worship],  "as  an  inhe- 
rent attribute  of  the  conception  of  religion  against  their  heathen 
opponents."  Then  he  quotes  Tertullian,  as  the  first  who  gave  clear 
expression  to  this  principle. 
[I.  Estimates  of  Tertullian  as  a  man  and  an  author. 

NEANDER  (Ch.  Hist.  I  683  sq.,  Torrey's  translation) :  "Tertullian 
presents  special  claims  to  attention,  both  as  the  first  representative 
of  the  theological  tendency  in  the  North- African  church,  and  as  a 
representative  of  the  Montanistic  mode  of  thinking.    He  was  a  man 
of  an  ardent  and  profound  spirit,  of  warm  and  deep  feelings ;  in- 
clined to  give  himself  up,  with  his  whole  soul  and  strength,  to  the 
object  of  his  love,  and  sternly  to  repel  everything  that  was  foreign 
from  this.     He  possessed  rich  and  various  stores  of  knowledge; 
which  had  been  accumulated,  however,  at  random,  and  without 
scientific  arrangement.   His  profoundness  of  thought  was  not  united 
with  logical  clearness  and  sobriety :  an  ardent,  unbridled  imagina- 
tion, moving  in  a  world  of  sensuous  images,  governed  him.    His 
fiery  and  passionate  disposition,  and  his  previous  training  as  an  advo- 
cate and  rhetorician,  easily  impelled  him,  especially  in  controversy, 
to  rhetorical  exaggerations.    When  he  defends  a  cause,  of  whose 
truth  he  was  convinced,  we  often  see  in  him  the  advocate,  whose 
sole  anxiety  is  to  collect  together  all  the  arguments  which  can  help 
his  case,  it  matters  not  whether  they  are  true  arguments  or  only 
plausible  sophisms ;  and  in  such  cases  the  very  exuberance  of  his 
wit  sometimes  leads  him  astray  from,  the  simple  feeling  of  truth. 
What  must  render  this  man  a  phenomenon  presenting  special  claims 
to  the  attention  of'  the  Christian  historian  is  the  fact,  that  Christi- 
anity is  the  inspiring  soul  of  his  life  and  thoughts;  that  out  of 
Christianity  an  entirely  new  and  rich  inner  world  developed  itself  to 
his  mind:  but  the  leaven  of  Christianity  had  first  to  penetrate 
through  and  completely  refine  that  fiery,  bold  and  withal  rugged 
nature.   We  find  the  new  wine  in  an  old  bottle ;  and  the  tang  which 
it  has  contracted  there,  may  easily  embarrass  the  inexperienced 
judge.    Tertullian  often  had  more  within  him  than  he  was  able  to 
express :  the  overflowing  mind  was  at  a  loss  for  suitable  forms  of 
phraseology.    He  had  to  create  a  language  for  the  new  spiritual  mat- 
ter,—and  that  out  of  the  rude  Punic  Latin,— without  the  aid  of  a 
logical  and  grammatical  education,  and  as  he  was  hurried  along  in 
the  current  of  thoughts  and  feelings  by  his  ardent  nature.    Hence 
the  often  difficult  and  obscure  phraseology ;  but  hence,  too,  the  ori- 
ginal and  striking  turns  in  his  mode  of  representation.    And  hence 
this  great  church-teacher,  who  unite?  great  gifts  with  great  failings, 
has  been  so  often  misconceived  by  those  who  could  form  no  friend- 
ship with  the  spirit  which  dwelt  in  so  ungainly  a  form." 


2  196.  TERTULLIA1ST  AND  THE  AFRICAN  SCHOOL       827 

HASE  (Kirchengcsch.  p.  91,  tenth  ed.) :  "  Die  lateinische  Kirche  hatte 
fast  nur  Ubersetzungen,  bis  Tertullianus,  als  Hcide  Rhetor  iind  8ach- 
walt&r  zu  Rom,  mit  reicher  griec/tischer  Gelehrsamkeit,  die  auch  der 
Kirchenmiter  gem  sehen  Hess,  Presbyter  in  seiner  Vatcntadt  Karthago, 
ein  strengcr,  dusterer,  feuriger  Character,  dem  Christenfhum  (ins  pun- 
ischem  Latein  eine  Ltteratur  errang,  in  welcher  geistreivhe  Rfietorik, 
genialer  so  wie  gesuchter  Witz,  derb  sinnliches  Anfassen  des  Idealen, 
tiefes  Gefuhl  und  juridische  Verstandesansicht  mit  einander  ringen. 
Er  hat  der  afrikanischen  Kirche  die  Losung  angegeben :  Christus 
sprach:  Ich  bin  die  Wahrheit,  nicht,  das  Herkommen.  Er  hat  das 
Gottesbewusstsein  in  den  Tiefen  der  Seele  hochgehalten,  aber  ein  Mann 
der  Auctoritdt  hat  er  die  Thorhdt  des  fkangdiums  der  Weltweixheit 
seiner  Zeitgenossen,  das  Ungla.ubliche  der  Wund&r  Gottcs  dem  gemtinen 
Weltverstande  mit  stolzer  Ironie  entgegengehalten.  Seine  tichriften, 
denen  er  unbedenklich  Fremdes  angeeignet*und  mit  dem  Gcpragu  seines 
Genius  versehen  hat,  sind  theils  polemiseh  mit  dem  hochsteti  tiebbst'ver- 
traun  der  katholischen  Gesinnung  gegen  Jldden,  Juden  und  Jlardikcr, 
theils  erbaulich;  sojcdoch,  dass  auch  injenen  das  Erbauliche,  in  diesvti 
das  Polemische  fur  strenge  Sitte  und  Zucht  vorhanden  'ist" 

HAUCK  ( T&rtullian's  Leben  und  tichriften,  p.  1):  "  Unter  den 
Schriftatellern  der  lateinischen  C/iristenheit  ist  TertulUan  eincr  der  be- 
deutendsten  und  intressantesteu.  Er  itst  der  Anjanyer  der  latdniwhcn 
Theologie,  der  nicht  nur  ihrer  Sprache  seinen  JStcmpt'l  aufyeprfigt  hat, 
sondern  sie  auch  auf  die  Bahn  hinwies,  wefahe  sie  lange  dnhiclt.  Heine 
Personlichkeit  hat  ebensoviel  Anziehendes  als  Abxtossendcs  ;  denn  wer 
konnte  den  JSnist  seines  sittliohen  Strebens,  den  ReicMhum  und  die  Lib- 
haftigkeit  seines  Geixtes,  die  Featigkeit  seiner  Uvberzeuyuny  und  die 
sturmische  Kraft  seiner  Beredtsamkeit  verkennen  f  AUein  ebensowenig 
lasst  sich  ilbersehen,  dass  ihm  in  alien  Dingen  das  Massjehlte.  Seine 
Erscheinung  hat  nichts  Edles;  er  war  nicht  frei  von  Bizzarem,ja  Ge- 
meinem.  £o  zeigen  ihn  seine  Schriften,  die  Denkmaler  seines  Lebens 
Er  war  ein  Mann,  der  sich  in  unaufhorlichem  Streite  bewegte :  s&in 
ganzes  Wesen  tragt  die  'Spur en  hievon." 

Cardinal  HEUGENJROTHER,  the  first  Roman  Catholic  church  histo- 
rian now  living  (for  Dollinger  was  excommunicated  in  1870),  says  of 
Tertullian  (in  his  Kirchengesch.  I.  168,  second  ed.,  1879):  "  fllrmye 
und  ernst,  oft  beissend  sarkastisch,  in  der  fiprache  gedrangt  und  dun/eel, 
der  heidnischen  Philosophie  durchaus  abgendgt,  mit  dem  rbmischen 
JKechte  sehr  vertraut,  hat  er  in  seinen  zahlreichcn  Schriften  Bedeutendes 
fur  die  Darstellung  der  kirchlichen  Lehre  gel&istet,  und  ungcacMd  seines 
Uebertritts  zu  den  Montanisten  betrachteten  ihn  die  spateren  african- 
ischen  Schriftsteller,  auch  Cyprian,  als  Muster  und  Lehrer" 

PBESSENSE  (Martyrs  and  Apologists,  p.  375) :  "  The  African  na- 
tionality gave  to  Christianity  its  most  eloquent  defender,  in  whom 
the  intense  vehemence,  the  untempered  ardor  of  the  race,  appear 
purified  indeed,  but  net  subdued.  No  influence  in  the  early  ages 


82'8  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A-  D.  100-311. 

could  equal  that  of  Tertullian;  and  his  writings  breathe  a  spirit  of 
such  undying  power  that  they  can  never  grow  oJd,  and  even  now 
render  living,  controversies  which  have  been  silent  for  fifteen  centu- 
ries. We  must  seek  the  man  in  his  own  pages,  still  aglow  with  his 
enthusiasm  and  quivering  with  his  passion,  for  the  details  of  his  per- 
sonal history  are  very  few.  The  man  is,  as  it  were,  absorbed  in  the 
writer,  and  we  can  well  understand  it,  for  his  writings  embody  his 
whole  soul.  Never  did  a  man  more  fully  infuse  his  entire  moral  life 
into  his  books,  and  act  through  his  words." 

§  197.  The  Writings  of  T&rtuttian. 

Tertullian  developed  an  extraordinary  literary  activity  in  two 
languages  between  about  190  and  220.  His  earlier  books  in  the 
Greek  language,  and  some  in  the  Latin,  are  lost.  Those  which 
remain  are  mostly  short;  but  they  are  numerous,  and  touch 
nearly  all  departments  of  religious  life.  They  present  a  graphic 
picture  of  the  church  of  his  day.  Most  of  his  works,  according 
to  internal  evidence,  fall  in  the  first  quarter  of  the  third  century, 
in  the  Montanistic  period  of  his  life,  and  among  these  many  of 
his  ablest  writings  against  the  heretics;  while,  on  the  .other 
hand,  the  gloomy  moral  austerity,  which  predisposed  him  to 
Montanism,  comes  out  quite  strongly  even  in  his  earliest  pro- 
ductions.1 

His  works  may  be  grouped  in  three  classes  :  apologetic;  po- 
lemic or  anti-heretical ;  and  ethic  or  practical ;  to  which  may  be 
added  as  a  fourth  class  the  expressly  Montanistic  tracts  against 
the  Catholics.  We  can  here  only  mention  the  most  important  : 

1.  In  the  APOLOGETIC  works  against  heathens  and  Jews,  he 
pleads  the  cause  of  all  Christendom,  and  deserves  the  thanks  of 
all  Christendom.  Preeminent  among  them  is  the  Apologeticw 
(or  Apologeticum}*  It  was  composed  in  the  reign  of  Septimias 
Severus,  between  197  and  200.  It  is  unquestionably  one  of  the 
most  beautiful  monuments  of  the  heroic  age  of  the  church.  In 

1  On  the  chronological  order  see  Notes. 

•  *  Comp.  H.  A.  Woodham:  Tert.  Liber  Apologeticus  with  English  Notes  and 
an  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Patristical  and  Ecclesiastical  Latinity  Cam- 
bridge, 1850.  Am.  ed.  of  Select  Worh  of  Tert.,  by  F.  A.  March,  New  York. 
1876,  p.  26-46. 


g  197.  THE  WRITINGS  OF  TERTULLIAN.  829 

this  work,  Tertullian  enthusiastically  and  triumphantly  repels 
the  attacks  of  the  heathens  upon  the  new  religion,  and  demands 
for  it  legal  toleration  and  equal  rights  with  the  other  sects  of  the 
Roman  empire.  It  is  the  first  plea  for  religious  liberty,  as  an 
inalienable  right  which  God  has  given  to  every  man,  and  which 
the  civil  government  in  its  own  interest  should  not  only  tolerate 
but  respect  and  protect.  He  claims  no  support,  no  favor,  but 
simply  justice.  The  church  was  in  the  first  three  centuries 
a  self-supporting  and  self-governing  society  (as  it  ought  always 
to  be),  and  no  burden,  but  a  blessing  to  the  state,  and  furnished 
to  it  the  most  peaceful  and  useful  citizens.  The  cause  of  truth 
and  justice  never  found  a  more  eloquent  and  fearless  defender 
in  the  very  face  of  despotic  power,  and  the  blazing  fires  of  per- 
secution, than  the  author  of  this  book.  It  breathes  from  first  to 
last  the  assurance  of  victory  in  apparent  defeat. 

"  We  conquer/'  are  his  concluding  words  to  the  prefects  and  judges  of 
the  Roman  empire,  tf  We  conquer  in  dying ;  we  go  forth  victorious  at  the 
very  time  we  are  subdued.  .  ,  .  Many  of  your  writers  exhort  to  the  coui  • 
ageous  bearing  of  pain  and  death,  as  Cicero  in  the  Tusculans,  as  Seneca 
in  his  Chances,  as  Diogenes,  Pyrrhus,  Callinicus.  And  yet  their  words 
do  not  find  so  many  disciples  as  Christians  do,  teachers  not  by  words,  but 
by  their  deeds.  That  very  obstinacy  you  rail  against  is  the  preceptress. 
For  who  that  contemplates  it  is  not  excited  to  inquire  what  is  at  the  bot- 
tom of  it?  Who,  after  inquiry,  does  not  embrace  our  doctrines?  And, 
when  he  has  embraced  them,  desires  not  to  suffer  that  he  may  become 
partaker  of  the  fulness  of  God's  grace,  that  he  may  obtain  from  God 
complete  forgiveness,  by  giving  in  exchange  his  blood  ?  For  that  secures 
the  remission  of  all  offences.  On  this  account  it  is  that  we  return  thanks 
on  the  very  spot  for  your  sentences.  As  the  divine  and  human  are  ever 
opposed  to  each  other,  when  we  are  condemned  by  you,  we  are  acquitted 
by  the  Highest." 

The  relation  of  the  Apobgetieus  to  the  Ootavius  of  Minucius 
Felix  will  be  discussed  in  the  next  section.  But  even  if  Tertul- 
lian should  have  borrowed  from  that  author  (as  he  undoubtedly 
borrowed;  without  acknowledgment,  much  matter  from  Irenseus, 
in  his  book  against  the  Valentinians),  he  remains  one  of  the  most 
original  and  vigorous  writers.1  Moreover  the  plan  is  different ; 

1  Ebert,  who  was  the  first  to  assert  the  priority  of  OctaviuSj  nevertheless  ad* 


830  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Minucius  Felix  pleads  for  Christianity  as  a  philosopher  before 
philosophers,  to  convince  the  intellect ;  Tertullian  as  a  lawyer 
and  advocate  before  judges,  to  induce  them  to  give  fair  play  to 
the  Christians,  who  were  refused  even  a  hearing  in  the  courts. 

The  beautiful  little  tract  "  On  the  Testimony  of  the  Soul,"  (6 
chapters)  is  a  supplement  to  the  Apologeticus,  and  furnishes  one 
of  the  strongest  positive  arguments  for  Christianity.  Here  the 
human  soul  is  called  to  bear  witness  to  the  one  true  God  :  it 
springs  from  God,  it  longs  for  God ;  its  purer  and  nobler  in- 
stincts and  aspirations,  if  not  diverted  and  perverted  by  selfish 
and  sinful  passions,  tend  upwards  and  heavenwards,  and  find  rest 
and  peace  only  in  God.  There  is,  we  may  say,  a  pre-established 
harmony  between  the  soul  and  the  Christian  religion  j  they  are 
made  for  each  other ;  the  human  soul  is  constitutionally 
Christian.  And  this  testimony  is  universal,  for  as  God  is  every- 
where, so  the  human  soul  is  everywhere.  But  its  testimony 
turns  against  itself  if  not  heeded. 

"Every  soul,"  he  concludes,  " is  a  culprit  as  well  as  a  witness :  in  the 
measure  that  it  testifies  for  truth,  the  guilt  of  error  lies  on  it;  and  on  the 
day  of  judgment  it  will  stand  before  the  court  of  God,  without  a  word 
to  say.  Thou  proclainiedst  God,  0  soul,  but  thou  didst  not  seek  to  know 
Him  5  evil  spirits  were  detested  by  thee,  and  yet  they  were  the  objects  of 
thy  adoration ;  the  punishments  of  hell  were  foreseen  by  thee,  but  no 
care  was  taken  to  avoid  them;  thou  hadst  a  savor  of  Christianity,  and 
withal  wert  the  persecutor  of  Christians." 

2.  His  POLEMIC  works  are  occupied  chiefly  with  the  refutation 
of  the  Gnostics  Here  belongs  first  of  all  his  thoroughly 
catholic  tract,  "  On  the  Prescription  of  Heretics." l  It  is  of  a 
general  character  and  lays  down  the  fundamental  principle  of 
the  church  in  dealing  with  heresy.  Tertullian  cuts  off  all  errors 
and  neologies  at  the  outset  from  the,  right  of  legal  contest  and 

mits  (Gesch.  der  christl.  lat.  Lit.  1.  32)  :  "  T&rtullian  ist  cinvr  der  gwialaten, 
origindlsten  und  fntehtbarsten  unter  den  christtwh-lateinischen,  Autorcn." 

1  Prcescriptio,  in  legal  terminologv,  means  an  exception  made  before  the 
merits  of  a  case  are  discussed,  showing  in  limine  that  the  plaintiff  ought  not  to 
be  heard.  This  book  has  been  most  admired  by  E.  Catholics  as  a  masterly 
vindication  of  the  catholic  rule  of  faith  against  heretical  assailants,-  but  its 
force  is  weakened  by  Tertullian's  Montanism. 


?  197.  TPIE  WRITINGS  OF  TEETULLIAN.  8-31 

appeal  to  the  holy  Scriptures,  because  these  belong  only  to  the 
catholic  church  as  the  legitimate  heir  and  guardian  of  Christi- 
anity. Irenseus  had  used  the  same  argument;  but  Tertullian 
gave  it  a  legal  or  forensic  form.  The  same  argument,  however, 
turns  also  against  his  own  secession ;  for  the  difference  between 
heretics  and  schismatics  is  really  only  relative,  at  least  in 
Cyprian's  view.  Tertullian  afterwards  asserted,  in  contradiction 
with  this  book,  that  in  religious  matters  not  custom  nor  long 
possession,  but  truth  alone,  was  to  be  consulted. 

Among  the  heretics,  he  attacked  chiefly  the  Valontinian 
Gnostics,  and  Marcion.  The.  work  against  Marcion  (A.  D. 
208)  is  his  largest,  and  the  only  one  in  which  he  indicates  the 
date  of  composition,  namely  the  15th  year  of  the  reign  of 
Septimius  Severus  (A.  D.  208).1  He  wrote  three  works  against 
this  famous  heretic;  the  first  he  set  aside  a«  imperfect,  tho 
second  was  stolen  from  him  and  published  with  many  blunders 
before  it  was  finished.  In  the  new  work  (in  five  books),  ho 
elaborately  defends  the  unity  of  God,  the  Creator  of  all,  the 
Integrity  of  the  Scriptures,  and  the  harmony  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments.  He  displays  all  his  power  of  solid  argument, 
subtle  sophistry,  ridicule  and  sarcasm,  and  exhausts  his  voca- 
bulary of  vituperation.  He  is  more  severe  upon  heretics  than 
Jews  or  Gentiles.  He  begins  with  a  graphic  description  of  all 
the  physical  abnormities  of  Pontus,  the  native  province  of 
Marcion,  and  the  gloomy  temper,  wild  passions,  and  ferocious 
habits  of  its  people,  and  then  goes  on  to  say : 

"Nothing  in  Pontus  is  so  barbarous  and  sad  as  the  fact  that  Marcion 
was  born  there,  fouler  than  any  Scythian,  more  roving  than  tho  ftarma- 
tian,  more  inhuman  than  the  Massagete,  more  audacious  than  an  Ama- 
zon, darker  than  the  cloud  of  the  Euxine,  colder  than  its  winter,  more 
brittle  than  its  ice,  more  deceitful  than  the  later,  more  craggy  than  Cau- 
casus. Nay,  more,  the  true  Prometheus,  Almighty  God,  is  mangled  by 
Marcion's  blasphemies.  Marcion  is  more  savage  than  oven  thck  beawts  of 
that  barbarous  region.  For  what  beaver  was  ever  a  greater  cmasculator 
than  he  who  has  abolished  the  nuptial  bond?  What  Pontic  mouse  ever 

1  English  iranslation  by  Peter  Holmes,  in  the  "  Ante-Nicenc  Libr.,"  voJ 
VII.,  1868  (478  pages). 


832  SECOND  PEEIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

had  such  gnawing  powers  as  he  who  has  gnawed  the  Gospel  to  pieces? 
Verily,  0  Euxine,  thou  hast  produced  a  monster  more  credible  to  philos- 
ophers than  to  Christians.  For  the  cynic  Diogenes  used  to  go  about, 
lantern  in  hand,  at  mid- day,  to  find  a  man;  whereas  Marcion  has 
quenched  the  light  of  his  faith,  and  so  lost  the  God  whom  he  had 
found." 

The  tracts  "  On  Baptism,"  "  On  the  Soul,"  "  On  the  Flesh  of 
Christ"  "  On  tke  Resurrection  of  the  Flesh"  "  Against  Hermo- 
genes"  "Against  Praxeas"  are  concerned  with  particular 
errors,  and  are  important  to  the  doctrine  of  baptism,  to  Christian 
psychology,  to  eschatology,  and  christology. 

3.  His  numerous  PRACTICAL  or  ASCETIC  treatises  throw  much 
light  on  the  moral  life  of  the  early  church,  as  contrasted  with  the 
immorality  of  the  heathen  world.  Among  these  belong  the  books 
"  On  Prayer"  "  On  Penance"  "  On  Patience" — a  virtue,  which 
he  extols  with  honest  confession  of  his  own  natural  impatience 
and  passionate  temper,  and  which  he  urges  upon  himself  as  well 
as    others, — the  consolation  of  the  confessors  in  prison   (Ad 
Martyres),  and  the  admonition  against  visiting  theatres  (De  Spec- 
taeulis),  which  he  classes  with  the  pomp  of  the  devil,  and  against 
all  share,  direct  or  indirect,  in  the  worship  of  idols  (De  Idolo- 
lafoia). 

4.  His  strictly  MONTAIHSTIC  or  anti-catholic  writings,  in  which 
the  peculiarities  of  this  sect  are  not  only  incidentally  touched,  as 
in  many  of  the  works  named  above,  but  vindicated  expressly 
and  at  large,  are  likewise  of  a  practical  nature,  and  contend,  in 
fanatical  rigor,  against  the  restoration  of  the  lapsed  (De  Ptidir 
citia),  flight  in  persecutions,  second  marriage  (De  Monogamia, 
and  De  Exhortatione  Castitatis),  display  of  dress  in  females  (De 
ChiUu  Feminarum),  and  other  customs  of  the  "  Psychicals,"  as  he 
commonly  calls  the  Catholics  in  distinction  from  the  sectarian 
Pneumatics.    His  plea,  also,  for  excessive  fasting  (De  J&jmiis) 
and  his  justification  of  a  Christian  soldier,  who  was  discharged 
for  refusing  to  crown  his  head  (De  Corona  Militia),  belong  here, 
Tertuliian  considers  it  unbecoming  the  followers  of  Christ,  who, 
when  on  earth,  wore  a  crown  of  thorns  for  us,  to  adorn  their 


2  198.  MINUCIUS  FELIX.  833 

heads  with  laurel,  myrtle,  olive,  or  with  flowers  or  gems.  We 
may  imagine  what  he  would  have  said  to  the  tiara  of  the  pope 
in  his  medieval  splendor. 

NOTES. 

The  chronological  order  of  Tertullian's  work  can  be  approximately  de- 
termined-by  the  frequent  allusions  to  the  contemporaneous  history  of  the 
Roman  empire,  and  by  their  relation  to  Montanism.  See  especially 
Uhlhorn,  Hanck,  Bonwetsch,  and  also  Bp.  Kaye  (in  Oehler's  ed.  of  the 
Opera  III.  709-718.)  We  divide  the  works  into  three  classes,  according 
to  their  relation  to  Montanism. 

(1)  Those  books  which  belong  to  the  author's  catholic  period  before  A.  p. 
200 ;  viz..:  Apologeticus  or  Apologeticum  (in  the  autumn  of  197,  according 
to  Bonwetsch;  198,  Ebert;  199,  Hcssclberg;  200,  Uhlhorn);  Ad  Martyres 
(197) ;  Ad  Nationes  (probably  soon  after  ApoL) ;  De  Testimonio  Animcs; 
De  Pcenitentia  ;  De  Oratione;  De  Baptismo  (which  according  to  cap.  15, 
was  preceded  by  a  Greek  work  against  the  validity  of  Heretical  Baptism) ; 
Ad  Uxorem;  De  Patientia;  Adv.  Judc&os ;  De  Praescriptione  ffcereticorum  / 
De  Spectaculis  (and  a  lost  work  on  the  same  subject  in  the  Greek  lan- 
guage). 

Kaye  puts  De  Spectaeulis  in  the  Montanistic  period.  De  Praescriptione 
is  also  placed  by  some  in  the  Montanistic  period  before  ox  after  Adv.  Mar- 
cionem.  But  Bonwetsch  (p.  46)  puts  it  between  199  and  206,  probably  in 
199.  Hauck  makes  it  almost  simultaneous  with  De  Baptismo.  He  also 
places  De  Idololatria  in  this  period. 

(2)  Those  which  were  certainly  not  composed  till  after  his  transition  tc 
Montanisra,  between  A.  D.  200  and  220 ;  viz. :  Adv.  Marcionem  (5  books, 
composed  in  part  at  least  in  the  15th  year  of  the  Emperor  Septimiua 
Severus,  i.  «.  A.  D.  207  or  208 ;  comp.  1. 15) ;  De  Anima  ;  De  Came  Christi; 
De  Resurrectione  Carnis;  Adv.  Praxean;  Scorpiace  (i.  e.  antidote  against 
the  poison  of  the  Gnostic  heresy);  De  Corona  Militia ;  De  VlrginibvA 
vefandis;  De  JSxhortatione  Castitatis ;  De  Pallio  (208  or  209);  De  Fuga 
inpersecutione;  DeMonogamia;  DeJejuniis;  DePudidtia;  AdScapuUm 
(212);  De  Ecstasi  (lost);  De  Spe  Mdelium  (likewise  lost). 

Kellner  (1870)  assigns  De  Pudicitia,  De  Mbnogamia,  De  Jejunio,  and 
Adv.  Praxean  to  the  period  between  218  and  222. 

(3)  Those  which   probably  belong  to  the  Montanistic  period;  viz.: 
Adv.  Valentinianos ;  De  eultu  Ibninarum  (2  libri) ;  Adv.  Hermogenem. 

§  198.  Minutius  Felix. 

(I.)  M.  MINTTOII  FELICIS  Octavius,  best  ed.  by  OAE.  HALM,  Vienna 

1867  (in  vol.  II.  of  the  "  Corpus  Scriptorum  eccles.  Latin."),  and 

BERNH.  DOMBABT,  with  German  translation  and  critical  notes,  2d 

ed.  Erlangen  1881.    Halm  has  compared  the  only  MS.  of  this  "hook, 

Vol.  II,~53. 


834  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

formerly  in  the  Vatican  library  now  in  Paris,  very  carefully  ("  tanta 
dUigentia  ut  de  nullojam  loco  dubitari  possit  quid  in  codice  uno  scrip- 
tuminveniatur"). 

Ed.  priuceps  by  Faustus  Sdbaus  (Eom.  1543,  as  the  eighth  book  of  Arno- 
bius  Adv.  Gent) ;  then  by  Francis  Balduin  (Heidelb.  1560,  as  an 
independent  work).  Many  edd.  since,  by  Ursinus  (1583),  Meursius 
(1598),  Wbwerus  (1603),  Eigaltius  (1643),  Gronovius  (1709,  1743), 
Davis  (1712),  Lindner  (1760, 1773),  Eusswurm  (1824),  IMkert  (1836), 
Muralt  (1836),  Migne  (1844,  in  "  Patrol."  III.  col.  193  sqq.),  Fr.  Oehler 
(1847,  in  Gersdorf  s  "  Biblioth.  Patr.  ecclesiast.  selecta,"  vol.  XIII). 
Kayser  (1863),  Cornelissen  (Lugd.  Bat.  1882),  etc. 

English  translations  by  H.  A.  HOLDEN  (Cambridge  1853),  and  R 
E.  WALLIS  in  Clark's  "  Ante-Nic.  Libr."  vol.  XIII.  p.  451-517. 

(II.)  JEROME  :  De  vir.  ill.  c.  58,  and  Ep.  48  ad  Pammach.,  and  Ep.  70 
ad  Magn.  LACTANT.  :  Inst.  Div.  V.  1,  22. 

(DDL)  Monographs,  dissertations  and  prolegomena  to  the  different  edi- 
tions of  M.  Fel.,  by  van  ffoven  (1766,  also  in  Lindner's  ed.  II. 
1773);  MEIER  (Turin,  1824,)  NIC.  LE  NOURRY,  and  LUMPER  (in 
Migne,  "Patr.  Lat."  III.  194-231;  371-652);  EOREK  (Wnuciania,) 
Bedburg,  1859) ;  BEHR  (on  the  relation  of  M.  F.  to  Cicero,  Gera 
1870);  E6NSCH  (in  Das  K  T.  Tertull.'s,  1871,  p.  25  sqq.);  PAUL 
P.  DE  FELICE  (Etudes  sur  VOctamus,  Blois,  1880) ;  EJEIM  (in  his 
Celws,  1873, 151-168,  and  in  Rom.und  das  Christenthum,  1881,  383 
sq.,  and  468-486);  AD.  EBERT  (1874,  in  Gesch.  der  christlich-latein. 
Lit.  I.  24r-31) ;  G.  LCESCHE  (on  the  ^relation  of  M.  F.  to  Athena- 
goras,  in  the  "  Jahrb.  for  Prot.  Theol."  1882,  p.  168-178) ;  EENAK 
(Marc-Aurtte,  1882,  p.  389-404) ;  EICHARD  KtJHN:  Der  Octamus  des 
l&nucms  Felix.  Eine  Tiddnisch  pkilosopkische  Auffassung  vom  Chris- 
tenthum.  Leipz.  1882  (71  pages).  See  also  the  art.  of  MANGOLD  in 
Herzog*  X.  12-17  (abridged  in  Schaff-Herzog) ;  G,  SALMON  in 
Smith  and  Wace  ITL  920-924. 

(IV.)  On  the  relation  of  Minuc.  Fel.  to  Tertullian:  Ad.  EBERT:  Tertul- 
lion's  Verhaltniss  zu  Minudus  Felix,  nebst  einem  Anhang  uber  Com- 
modian't  Carmen  apologeticum  (1868,  in  the  5th  voL  of  the  "Abhand- 
lungen  der  philol.  histor.  Classe  der  K.  sSchs.  Gres.  der  Wissenschaf- 
ten") ;  "W.  HARTEL  (in  Zeitschrifb  fiir  d.  Sester.  Gymnas,  1869,  p. 
348-368,  against  Ebert) ;  E.  ELUSSMANIT  ("  Jenaer  Lit.  Zeitg,"  1878) ; 
BONWETSCH  (in  Die  Schriften  Tert.,  1878,  p.  21 ;)  Y.  SCHULTZB  (in 
" Jahrh.  fur  Prot.  Theol."  1881,  p.  485-506;  P.  SCHWENKB  (Ueber  die 
Zeitdes  Mn.  Felin  "Jahrb.  for  Prot  Theol."'  1883,  p.  263-294). 

In  close  connection  with  Tertullian,  either  shortly  before,  or 
rfiortly  after  him,  stands  the  Latin  Apologist  Minucius  Felix.1 

J  Jerome  puts  him  after  Tertullian  (and  Cyprian),  Lactantius  hefore  Tertulliau 


g  198.  MJNUOIUS  FELIX.  &>J 

Converts  are  always  the  most  zealous,  and  often  the  most 
effective  promoters  of  the  system  or  sect  which  they  have  de- 
liberately chosen  from  honest  and  earnest  conviction.  The 
Christian  Apologists  of  the  second  century  were  educated 
heathen  philosophers  or  rhetoricians  before  their  conversion, 
and  used  their  secular  learning  and  culture  for  the  refutation  of 
idolatry  and  the  vindication  of  the  truths  of  revelation.  In 
like  manner  the  Apostles  were  Jews  by  birth  and  training, 
and  made  their  knowledge  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures 
subservient  to  the  gospel.  The  Reformers  of  the  sixteenth 
century  came  out  of  the  bosom  of  mediaeval  Catholicism,  and 
were  thus  best  qualified  to  oppose  its  corruptions  and  to  emanci- 
pate the  church  from  the  bondage  of  the  papacy.1 

I.  MARCUS  MINUCIUS  FELIX  belongs  to  that  class  of  con- 
verts,  who  brought  the  rich  stores  of  classical  culture  to  the 
service  of  Christianity,    He  worthily  opens  the  series  of  Latin 
writers  of  the  Roman  church  which  had  before  spoken  to  the 
world  only  in  the  Greek  tongue.    He  shares  with  Lactantius 
the  honor  of  being  the  Christian  Cicero.2    He  did  not  become  a 
clergyman,  but  apparently  continued  in  his  legal  profession. 
We  know  nothing  of  his  life  exceijyt  that  he  was  an  advocate  in 
Rome,  but  probably  of  North  African  descent.3 

II.  "We  have  from  him  an  apology  of  Christianity  In  the 
form  of  a  dialogue  under  the  title  Odavius*   The  author  makes 

1  We  may  also  refer  to  more  recent  analogies :  the  ablest  champions  of  Bo- 
roanism — as  Hurter,  Newman,  Manning,  Brownson — owe  their  intellectual  and 
moral  equipment  to  Protestantism ;  while  the  Old  Catholic  leaders  of  the  oppo- 
sition to  Vatican  Komanism-— as  Dollinger,  JFrledrich,  Keinkens,  Keusch,  Lan- 
gen,  von  Schulte— were  formerly  .eminent  teachers  in  the  Koman  church. 

2  Jerome  describes  him  as  "insignis  causidicns  Romanifori"  but  he  depended 
on  Lactantius,  who  may  have  derived  this  simply  from  the  introduction  to  the 
book,  where  the  author  speaks  of  taking  advantage  of  the  court  holidays  for 
an  excursion  to  Ostia.    The  gens  Minima  was  famous  in  Rome,  and  an  inscrip- 
tion (Gruter,  p.  918)  mentions  one  with  the  cognomen  Felix. 

8  From  Cirta  (now  Constantino).  This  we  must  infer  from  the  fact  that  he 
calls  Corn.  Fronto  "Oirtensis  nosier,"  Ocfav.  c.  9;  comp.  c.  31,  "tuus  JFronto." 

*  In  40  (al.  41)  short  chapters  which,  in  Halm's  edition,  cover  54  pages,  oct. 
The  book  was  written  several  years  after  the  Dialogue  and  after  th$  death  ol 


836  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

with  his  friend  Octavius  Januarius,  who  had,  like  himself,  been 
converted  from  heathen  error  to  the  Christian  truth,  an  excur- 
sion from  Home  to  the  sea-bath  at  Ostia.  There  they  meet  on 
a  promenade  along  the  beach  with  Csecilius  Natalis,  another 
friend  of  Minucius,  but  still  a  heathen,  and,  as  appears  from  his 
reasoning,  a  philosopher  of  the  sceptical  school  of  the  NeAv 
Academy.  Sitting  down  on  the  large  stones  which  were  placed 
there  for  the  protection  of  the  baths,  the  two  friends  in  full 
view  of  the  ocean  and  inhaling  the  gentle  sea  breeze,  begin,  at 
the  suggestion  of  Csecilius,  to  discuss  the  religious  question  of 
the  day.  Minucius  sitting  between  them  is  to  act  as  umpire 
(chaps.  1-4). 

Caecilius  speaks  first  (chs.  5-15),  in  defence  of  the  heatheii, 
and  in  opposition  to  the  Christian,  religion.  He  begins  like  a 
sceptic  or  agnostic  concerning  the  existence  of  a  God  as  being 
doubtful,  but  he  soon  shifts  his  ground,  and  on  the  principle  of 
expediency  and  utility  he  urges  the  duty  of  worshipping  the 
ancestral  gods.  It  is  best  to  adhere  to  what  the  experience  of 
all  nations  has  found  to  be  salutary.  Every  nation  has  its 
peculiar  god  or  gods ;  the  Roman  nation,  the  most  religious  of 
all,  allows  the  worship  of  'all  gods,  and  thus  attained  to  the 
highest  power  and  prosperity.  He  charges  the  Christians  with 
presumption  for  claiming  a  certain  knowledge  of  the  highest 
problems  which  lie  beyond  human  ken;  with  want  of  patri- 
otism for  forsaking  the  ancestral  traditions;  with  low  breeding 
(as  Celsus  did).  He  ridicules  their  worship  of  a  crucified 
malefactor  and  the  instrument  of  his  crucifixion,  and  even  an 
ass's  head.  He  repeats  the  lies  of  secret  crimes,  as  promiscuous 
incest,  and  the  murder  of  innocent  children,  and  quotes  for 
these  slanders  the  authority  of  the  celebrated  orator  Fronto, 
He  objects  to  their  religion  that  it  has  no  temples,  nor  altars, 
nor  images.  He  attacks  their  doctrines  of  one  God,  of  the 
destruction  of  the  present  world,  the  "resurrection  and  judgment, 

Octavius  (c.  1 :  "disced<w  or  decedens  vir  eximius  et  sanctus  immensum  m,  deride 
rium  noMs  rdiquit}'  etc.). 


8  198.  MINUCIUS  FELIX.  837 

as  irrational  and  absurd.  He  pities  them  for  their  austere 
habits  and  their  aversion  to  the  theatre,  banquets,  and  other 
innocent  enjoyments.  He  concludes  with  the  re-assertion  of 
human  ignorance  of  things  which  are  above  us,  and  an  exhorta- 
tion to  leave  those  uncertain  things  alone,  and  to  adhere  to  the 
religion  of  their  fathers,  "lest  either  a  childish  superstition 
should  be  introduced,  or  all  religion  should  be  overthrown." 

In  the  second  part  (ch.  16-38),  Octavius  refutes  these  charges, 
and  attacks  idolatry  ;  meeting  each  point  in  proper  order.  Ho 
vindicates  the  existence  and  unity  of  the  Godhead,  the  doctrine 
of  creation  and  providence,  as  truly  rational,  and  quotes  in  con- 
firmation the  opinions  of  various  philosophers  (from  Cicero). 
He  exposes  the  absurdity  of  the  heathen  mythology,  the  worship 
of  idols  made  of  wood  and  stone,  the  immoralities  of  the  gods, 
and  the  cruelties  and  obscene  rites  connected  with  their  worship. 
The  Romans  have  not  acquired  their  power  by  their  religion,  but 
by  rapacity  and  acts  of  violence.  The  charge  of  worshipping  a 
criminal  and  his  cross,  rests  on  the  ignorance  of  his  innocence 
and  divine  character.  The  Christians  have  no  temples,  because 
they  will  not  limit  the  infinite  God,  and  no  images,  because 
man  is  God's  image,  and  a  holy  life  the  best  sacrifice.  The 
slanderous  charges  of  immorality  are  traced  to  tho  demons  who 
invented  and  spread  them  among  the  people,  who  inspire  oracles, 
work  false  miracles  and  try  in  every  way  to  draw  men  into  their 
ruin.  It  is  the  heathen  who  practice  such  infamies,  who  cruelly 
expose  their  new-born  children  or  kill  them  by  abortion.  The 
Christians  avoid  and  abhor  the  immoral  amusements  of  the 
theatre  and  circus  where  madness,  adultery,  and  murder  are  ex- 
hibited aud  practiced,  even  in  the  name  of  the  gods.  They  find 
their  true  pleasure  and  happiness  in  God,  his  knowledge  and 
worship. 

At  the  close  of  the  dialogue  (chs.  39-40),  Csecilius  confesses 
himself  convinced  of  his  error,  and  resolves  to  embrace  Chris- 
tianity, and  desires  further  instruction  on  the  next  day.  Minu- 
cius  expresses  his  satisfaction  at  this  result,  which  made  a  decis- 
ion on  his  part  unnecessary.  Joyful  and  thankful  for  the  joint 


838  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

victory  over  error,  the  friends  return  from  the  sea-shore  to 
Ostia.1 

III.  The  apologetic  value  of  this  work  is  considerable,  but 
its  doctrinal  value  is  very  insignificant.  It  gives  us  a  lively 
idea  of  the  great  controversy  between  the  old  and  the  new 
religion  among  the  higher  and  cultivated  classes  of  Roman 
society,  and  allows  fair  play  and  full  force  to  the  arguments  on 
both  sides.  It  is  an  able  and  eloquent  defense  of  monotheism 
against  polytheism,  and  of  Christian  morality  against  heathen 
immorality.  But  this  is  about  all.  The  exposition  of  the 
truths  of  Christianity  is  meagre,  superficial,  and  defective.  The 
unity  of  the  Godhead,  his  all-ruling  providence,  the  resurrection 
of  the  body,  and  future  retribution  make  up  the  whole  creed  of 
Octavius.  The  Scriptures,  the  prophets  and  apostles  are  ig- 
nored, 8  the  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace,  Christ  and  redemption, 
the  Holy  Spirit  and  his  operations  are  left  out  of  sight,  and  the 
name  of  Christ  is  not  even  mentioned ;  though  we  may  reasona- 
bly infer  from  the  manner  in  which  the  author  repels  the 
charge  of  worshipping  "  a  crucified  malefactor,"  that  he  re- 
garded Christ  as  more  than  a  mere  man  (ch.  29).  He  leads 
only  to  the  outer  court  of  the  temple.  His  object  was  purely 
apologetic,  and  he  gained  his  point.8  Further  instruction  is  not 
excluded,  but  is  solicited  by  the  converted  Csecilius  at  the 
close,  "as  being  necessary  to  a  perfect  training."4  We  have 
therefore  no  right  to  infer  from  this  silence  that  the  author  was 
ignorant  of  the  deeper  mysteries  of  faith. 5 

1  "Post  hcec  losf/l  hUaresoue  diacewmus,  Ccecttiw  quod  crediderit,  Octcmus  gau- 
dere  [ad  gaudendum]  quod  vicerit,  ego  \_Minuc.  Fel.]  et  quod  hie  crediderit  et  hie 
merit." 

2  The  only  traces  are  in  chs.  29  and  34,  which  perhaps  allude  to  Jer.  17 :  5 
and  1  Cor.  15:  36,42.     ' 

3  Keim  supposes  that  he  intended  to  refute  Celsus  (but  he  is  nowhere  men- 
tioned) ;  De  Felice,  that  he  aimed  at  Fronto  (who  is  twice  mentioned) ;  Kiihn 
better:  public  opinion,  the  ignorant  prejudice  of  the  higher  classes  against 
Christianity. 

4  C.  40:  "Etiam  nunc  tamen  atigua  consubsidunt  non  obstrepentia  veritati,  sed 
perfects  institutioni  necessaria,  de  quibus  crcwtfmo,  quod  iam  sol  occasai  declivis  eat, 
utdetoto  (or  et  die  toto)  congruentius,  promptius  requiremw." 

5  Benan  (p.  402)  takes  a  different  view,  namely  that  Minuciufl  was  a  liber* 


i  198.  MINUCIUS  FELIX  839 

His  philosophic  stand-point  is  eclectic  with  a  preference  for 
Cicero,  Seneca,  and  Plato.  Christianity  is  to  him  both  theoret- 
ically and  practically  the  true  philosophy  which  teaches  the  only 
true  Go3,  and  leads  to  true  virtue  and  piety.  In  this  respect 
he  resembles  Justin  Martyr.1 

IV.  The  literary  form  of   Octavius  is  very  pleasing  and 
elegant.    The  diction,  is  more  classical  than  that  of  any  contem- 
porary Latin  writer  heathen  or  Christian.    The  book  bears  a 
strong  resemblance  to  Cicero's  De  Natura  Deorum,  in  many 
ideas,  in  style,  and  the  urbanity,  or  gentlemanly  tone.    Dean 
Milman  says  that  it  "  reminds  us  of  the  golden  days  of  Latin 
prose."    Benan  calls  it  "  the  pearl  of  the  apologetic  literature 
of  the  last  years  of  Marcus  Aurelius."    But  the  date  is  under 
dispute,  and  depends  in  part  on  its  relation  to  Tertullian. 

V.  Time  of  composition.     Octavius  closely  resembles  Tertul- 
lian's  Apologetieus,  both  in  argument  and  language,  fio  that  one 
book  presupposes  the  other ;  although  the  aim  is  different,  the 
former  being  the  plea  of  a  philosopher  and  refined  gentleman, 
the  other  the  plea  of  a  lawyer  and  ardent  Christian.    The  older 
opinion  (with  some  exceptions2)  maintained  the  priority  of  Apolo* 
getiGUSj  and  consequently  put  Odtawus  after  A,  D.  197  or  200 
when  the  former  was  written.     Ebert  reversed  the  order  and 
tried  to  prove,  by  a  careful  critical  comparison,  the  originality 

Christian  of  the  Deistic  stamp,  a  man  of  the  world  "qui  n'mpfche  ni  la  gaiett, 
ni  k  talent,  ni  le  godt  aimable  de  la  vie,  ni  la  recherche  de  V  elegance  du  style.  Que 
nous  sommes  loin  de  Vebionite  ou  m&me  du  jwf  de  Galilee!  Octavius,  deal  Ciceron, 
ou  mieux  Fronton,  devenu  chretien-  En  reality  c'est  par  la  culture  intettectuette  qtfil 
arrive  au  deisme.  II  dime  la.  nature,  il  ze  plait  a  la  conversation  des  gens  biens  clo- 
ves. Des  hommes  faits  sur  ce  module  n'auraient  cree  ni  I'&angile  ni  F  Apocalypse  ; 
mais,  reciproquementj  sans  de  tels  adherents,  F&angik,  P  Apocalypse,  les  epitres  de 
Paulfussent  restes  les  escrtts  secrets  d'unesecteferm&e,  qui,  comme  les  esseniens  ou  les 
th&rapeutes,  eutfinalement  disparu."  Kiihn,  also,  represents  Minucius  as  a  phi-, 
losopher  rather  than  a  Christian,  and  seems  to  explain  his  silence  on  the  spe- 
cific doctrines  of  Christianity  from  ignorance.  But  no  educated  Christian 
could  he  ignorant  of  Christ  and  His  work,  nor  of  the  prophets  and  apostles 
who  were  regularly  read  in  puhlic  worship. 

1  On  the  philosophy  of  Minucius,  see  the  analysis  of  Kuhn,  p.  21  sqq. ;  58  *qq. 

4  Blondel  (1641),  Dailte  (1660),  Rosier  (1777),  Busswurm  (1824),  doubted 
the  priority  of  TertulliaEL  See  Kiihn,  1.  c.,  p.  v. 


840  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

of  Octavius.1  His  conclusion  is  adopted  by  the  majority  oi 
recent  German  writers,2  but  has  also  met  with  opposition.3  If 
Tertullian  used  Minucius,  he  expanded  his  suggestions ;  if  Mi- 
nucius  used  Tertullian,  he  did  it  by  way  of  abridgement. 

It  is  certain  that  Minucius  borrowed  from  Cicero  (also  from 
Seneca,  and,  perhaps,  from  Athenagoras),4  and  Tertullian  (in  his 
Adv.  Vaknt.)  from  Irenseus ;  though  both  make  excellent  use 
of  their  material,  reproducing  rather  than  copying  it ;  but  Ter- 
tullian is  beyond  question  a  far  more  original,  vigorous,  and  im- 
portant writer.  Moreover  the  Koman  divines  used  the  Greek 
language  from  Clement  down  to  Hippolytus  towards  the  middle 
of  the  third  century,  with  the  only  exception,  perhaps,  of  Victor 
(190-202).  So  far  the  probability  is  for  the  later  age  of  Minucius. 

But  a  close  comparison  of  the  parallel  passages  seems  to  favor 
his  priority ;  yet  the  argument  is  not  conclusive.6  The  priority 
of  Minucius  has  been  inferred  also  from  the  fact  that  he  twice 

1  In  his  essay  on  the  subject  (1866),  Ebert  put  Octavius  between  160  and  the 
close  of  the  second  century ;  in  his  more  recent  work  on  the  History  of  Christ. 
Lot.  Lit.  (1874),  vol.  L,  p.  25,  he  assigns  it  more  definitely  to  between  179  and 
185  ("Anfang  oder  Mitte  der  achtzig&r  Jahre  des  2.  Jahrh.").    He  assumes  that 
Minncius  used  Athenagoras  who  wrote  177. 

2  Ueberweg  (1866),  Ronsch  (Das  n.  T.  TertuXL  1871),  Keim  (1873),  Caspari 
(1875,  HI.  411),  Herzog  (1876),  Hauck  (1877),  Bonwctsch  (1878),  Mangold 
(in  Herzog2 1882),  Kuhn  (1882),  Eenan  (1882),  Schwenke  (1883).     The  last 
(pp.  292  and  294)  puts  the  oral  dialogue'even  so  far  back  as  Hadrian  (before 
137),  and  the  composition  before  the  death  of  Antoninus  Pius  (160). 

«  Hartel  (1869),  Jeep  (1869),  Klussmann  (1878),  Schultze  (1881),  and  Sal- 
mon "(1883).  Hartel,  while  denying  that  Tertullian  borrowed  from  Minucius, 
leaves  the  way  open  for  an  independent  use  of  an  older  book  by  both.  Schultze 
puts  Minucius  down  to  the  reign  of  Domitian  (300-303),  which  is  much  too 
late. 

4  Renan  (p.  390)  calls  Minucius  (although  he  puts  him  before  Tertullian)  a 
habitual  plagiarist  who  often  copies  from  Cicero  without  acknowledgment. 
Dombart  (p.  135  sqq.)»  and  Schwenke  (p.  273  sqq.)  prove  his  dependence  on 
Seneca. 

6  The  crucial  test  of  relative  priority  applied  by  Ebert  is  the  relation  of  the 
two  books  to  Cicero.  Minucius  wrote  with  Cicero  open  before  him ;  Tertullian 
shows  no  fresh  reading  of  Cicero ;  consequently  if  the  parallel  passages  con* 
tain  traces  of  Cicero,  Tertullian  must  have  borrowed  them  from  Minucius. 
But  these  traces  in  Tertullian  are  very  few,  and  the  inference  is  disputable, 
The  application  of  this  test  has  led  Hartel  and  Salmon  (in  Smith  and  Wace, 
III.  922)  to  the  opposite  conclusion.  And  Schultze  proves  3)  that  Minuciua 
used  other  works  of  Tertullian  besides  the  Apologeticus,  and  2)  that  Minuciua 


2  198.  M1JNUCJLUS  FELIX.  841 

mentions  Fronto  (the  teacher  and  friend  of  Marcus  Aurelius), 
apparently  as  a  recent  celebrity,  and  Fronto  died  about  168. 
Keim  and  Kenan  find  allusions  to  the  persecutions  under  Marcus 
Aurelius  (177),  and  to  the  attack  of  Celsus  (178),  and  hence  put 
Odawus  between  178  and  180.1  But  these  assumptions  are 
unfounded,  and  they  would  lead  rather  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  book  was  not  written  before  200 ;  for  about  twenty  years 
elapsed  (as  Keim  himself  supposes)  before  the  Dialogue  actu- 
ally was  recorded  on  paper. 

An  unexpected  argument  for  the  later  age  of  Minuoius  is 
furnished  by  the  recent  French  discovery  of  the  name  of  Maroiw 
Ccecilius  Quinti  F.  Natalis,  as  the  chief  magistrate  of  Cirta 
(Constantine)  in  Algeria,  in  several  inscriptions  from  the  years 
210  to  217. 2  The  heathen  speaker  Csecilius  Natalis  of  our 
Dialogue  hailed  from  that  very  city  (chs.  9  and  31).  The 
identity  of  the  two  persons  can  indeed  not  be  proven,  but  is  at 
least  very  probable. 

Considering  these  conflicting  possibilities  and  probabilities,  we 
conclude  that  Odavim  was  written  in  the  first  quarter  of  the 
third  century,  probably  during  the  peaceful  reign  of  Alexander 
Severus  (A.  D.  222-235).  The  last  possible  date  is  the  year  250, 
because  Cyprian's  book  DC  Idolorwn  Vanitate,  written  about 
that  time,  is  largely  based  upon  it.3 

in  copying  from  Cicero,  makes  the  same  kind  of  verbal  changes  in  copying 
from  Tertullian. 

1  Chs.  29,  33,  37.    I  can  find  in  these  passages  no  proof  of  any  particular 
violent  persecution.    Tortures  are  spoken  of  in  ch.  37,  but  to  these  the  Chris- 
tians were  always  exposed.    Upon  the  whole  the  situation  of  the  church  ap- 
pears in  the  introductory  chapters,  and  throughout  the  Dialogue,  as  n  compa- 
ratively quiet  one,  such  as  we  know  it  to  have  been  at  intervals  between  the 
imperial  persecutions.    This  is  also  the  impression  of  Schultze  and  Schwenke. 
Minucius  is  silent  about  the  argument  so  current  under  Marcus  Aurelius,  that 
the  Christians  are  responsible  for  all  the  public  calamities. 

2  Mommsen,  Corp.  Lat.  Insaript.  VIII.  G906  and  7004-7098;  Rccu&il  de  Con- 
stantine,  1869,  p.  695.    See  an  article  by  Dessau  in  "  Hermes,"  1880,  t,  xv., 
p.  471-74;  Salmon,  I  c.,  p.  924;  and  Renan,  1.  c.,  p.  390  sq.    Kenan  adtnita 
the  possible  identity  of  this  Csecilius  with  the  friend  of  Minucius,  but 

in  the  interest  of  his  hypothesis  that  he  was  the  son. 

8  Y.  Schultze  denies  Cyprian's  authorship;  but  the  book  is  attestor*  M 
.tome  and  Augustin. 


#42  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 


§199.  Oyprian. 

Comp.  8  22,  47  and  53. 

(J.)  S,  CIPRIANI  Opera  owiwa.  Best  critical  e<L  by  W.  HARTEL,  Tin- 
dob.  1868-'71,  3  vols.  oct.  (in  the  Vienna  lt  Corpus  Scriptorum  eccle- 
siast.  Latinorum  ")  ;  based  upon  the  examination  of  40  MSS. 

Other  edd.  by  Sweynheym  and  Pannartz,  Rom.  1471  (ed.  princeps), 
again  Venice  1477  ;  by  Erasmus,  Has.  1520  (first  critical  ed.,  often  re- 
printed); by  Paul  Manutius,  Rom.  1563;  by  Morell,  Par.  1564;  by 
Rigault  (Rigdtius),  Par.  1648;  John  Fell,  Bp.  of  Oxford,  Oxon.  1682 
(very  good,  with  Bishop  Pearson's  Annales  Cyprianici),  again 
Amst.  1700  and  since;  the  Benedictine  ed.  begun  by  Batuzius 
and  completed  by  Prud.  Maranus,  Par.  1726,  1  vol.  fol.  (a  magnifi- 
cent ed.,  with  textual  emendations  to  satisfy  the  Roman  curia),  re- 
printed in  Venice,  1758,  and  in  Miguel  "Patrol.  Lat."  (vol.  IV. 
Par.  1844,  and  part  of  vol.  V.  9-80,  with  sundry  additions)  ;  a  con- 
venient manual  ed.  by  Gersdorf,  Lips.  1838  sq.  (in  Gersdorfs  "  Bib- 
lioth.  Patrum  Lat."  Pars  II.  and  III.) 

English  translations  by  K  MARSHALL,  Lond.,  1717  ;  in  the  Oxf.  "  Li- 
brary of  the  Fathers,"  Oxf.  1840  ;  and  by  R.  G.  WALLIS  in  "  Ante- 
NiceneLib."  Edinb.  1868,  2  vols.  ;  N.  Yorked.  vol.  V.  (1885). 

(II.)  Vita  Cypriani  by  PONTIUS,  and  the  Ada  Proconsularia  Marty  rii 
Cypr.t  both  in  Ruinart's  Acta  Mart.  II.,  and  the  former  in  most  ed. 
of  his  works. 

(III.)  J.  PEARSON:  Annales  Cyprianid.  Oxon.  1682,  in  the  ed.  of  Fell. 
A  work  of  great  learning  and  acumen,  determining  the  chronologi- 
cal order  of  many  Epp.  and  correcting  innumerable  mistakes. 

H.  DODWELL:  Diss&rtationes  Cyprianicce  tres.  Oxon.  1684;  Amst.  1700; 
also  in  Tom.  V  of  Migne's  "  Patr.  Lat."  col.  9-80. 

A.  F.  GERVAISE:  Vie  de  St.  Cyprien.    Par.  1717. 

F.  W.  KETTBERG-  :  Oyprianus  nach  seinem  Leben  u.  Wirken.    Go"tt.  1831. 

G.  A.  VOCHM:  Life  and  Times  of  Cyprian.  Oxf.  1840  (419  pages).  High- 

church  Episcop.  and  anti-papal. 
AEM.  BLAMPIGNON  :  Vie  de  Oyprien.    Par.  1861. 
CH.  E.  FEEPPEL  (Ultramontane)  :  Saint  Oyprien  et  V  iglise  $  Afrigue 

au  troisieme  stick.    Paris,  1865,  2d  ed.  1873. 
AD.  EBEET  :  Geschiehte  der  christL  latdn.  iMeratur.    Leipz.  1874,  vol.  I. 


J.  PETERS  (R.  C.)  :  Der  Ml  Cyprian.  Lelen  u.  WirJcen.  Eegensb.  1877. 

B.  FECHTRUP  :  Der  h.  Cyprian,  Leben  u.  Lehre,  vol.  I.    Miinster,  1878. 

OTTO  KITSCHL  :  Cyprian  von  Kairihago  und  die  Verfassmg  der  Kirche. 
Gottingen  1885. 

Articles  on  special  topics  connected  with  Cyprian  by  J.  W.  NEVIN 
andVARiEN  (both  in  "Mercersburg  Eeview"  for  1852  and  '53),- 
PETERS  (Ultramontane:  Cyprian's  doctrine  on  the  Unity  of  tht 


( 199.  CYPBIAN.  843 

Church  in  opposition  to  the  schisms  of  Carthage  and  Rome,  Luxemb 
1870);  Jos.  HUB.  EEINKBNS  (Old  Oath.  Bp.:  Cyprus.  Doctr.  on  the 
Unity  of  the  Church.  Wiirzburg,  1873). 

I.  Life  of  Cyprian. 

THASCIUS  CJBCILIUS  CYPRIAOTS,  bishop  and  martyr,  and  the 
impersonation  of  the  catholic  church  of  the  middle  of  the  third 
century,  sprang  from  a  noble  and  wealthy  heathen  family  of 
Carthage,  where  he  was  born  about  the  year  200,  or  earlier.  His 
deacon  and  biographer,  Pontius,  considers  his  earlier  life  not 
worthy  of  notice  in  comparison  with  his  subsequent  greatness  in 
the  church.  Jerome  tells  us,  that  he  stood  in  high  repute  as  a 
teacher  of  rhetoric.1  He  was,  at  all  events,  a  man  of  command- 
ing literary,  rhetorical,  and  legal  culture,  and  of  eminent  ad- 
ministrative ability,  which  afterwards  proved  of  great  service  to 
him  in  the  episcopal  office.  He  lived  in  worldly  splendor  to 
mature  age,  nor  was  he  free  from  the  common  vices  of  heathen- 
ism, as  we  must  infer  from  his  own  confessions.  But  the  story, 
that  he  practised  arts  of  magic^ariscs  perhaps  from  some  con- 
fusion, and  is  at  any  rate  unattested.  Yet,  after  he  became  a 
Christian,  he  believed,  like  Tertullian  and  others,  in  visions  and 
dreams,  and  had  some  only  a  short  time  before  his  martyrdom. 

A  worthy  presbyter,  Csecilius,  who  lived  in  Cyprian's  house/ 
and  afterwards  at  his  death  committed  his  wife  and  children  to 
him,  first  made  him  acquainted  with  the  doctrines  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  and  moved  him  to  read  the  Bible.  After  long 
resistance  Cyprian  forsook  the  world,  entered  the  class  of  cate- 
chumens, sold  His  estates  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor,2  took  a  vow 
of  chastity,  and  in  245  or  246  received  baptism,  adopting,  out  of 
gratitude  to  his  spiritual  father,  the  name  of  Csecilius. 

He  himself,  in  a  tract  soon  afterwards  written  to  a  friend,3 

1  Cafal*  c.  67 :  "  Oyprimus  Afer  primum  gloriole  rhetoricam  docuit." 

2  Pontius,  in  his  Vita,  a  very  unsatisfactory  sketch,  prefixed  to  the  editions 
of  the  works  of  Cyprian,  places  this  act  of  renunciation  (Matt.  19 :  21)  before 
his  baptism,  " inter  fidei  prima rudimenta,"     Cyprian's  gardens,  however,  to- 
gether with  a  villa,  were  afterwards  restored  to  him,  "  Dei  indulgentia."  that 
ie,  very  probably,  through  the  liberality  of  his  Christian  friends. 

8  De  Gratia  Dei,  ad  Dowtum,  c.  3,  4. 


844:  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311 

gives  us  the  following  oratorical  description  of  his  conversion 
"  While  I  languished  in  darkness  and  deep  night,  tossing  upon 
the  sea  of  a  troubled  world,  ignorant  of  my  destination,  and  far 
.from  truth  and  light,  I  thought  it,  according  to  my  then  habits, 
altogether  a  difficult  and  hard  thing  that  a  man  could  be  born 
anew,  and  that,  being  quickened  to  new  life  by  the  bath  of  sav- 
ing water,  he  might  put  off  the  past,  and,  while  preserving  the 
identity  of  the  body,  might  transform  the  man  in  mind  and 
heart.  How,  said  I,  is  such  a  change  possible  ?  How  can  one 
at  once  divest  himself  of  all  that  was  either  innate  or  acquired 
and  grown  upon  him  ?  . . .  Whence  does  he  learn  frugality,  who 
was  accustomed  to  sumptuous  feasts  ?  And  how  shall  he  who 
shone  in  costly  apparel,  in  gold  and  purple,  come  down  to  com- 
mon and  simple  dress?  He  who  has  lived  in  honor  and  station, 
cannot  bear  to  be  private  and  obscure.  .  .  .  But  when,  by  the  aid 
of  the  regenerating  water,1  the  stain  of  my  former  life  was 
washed  away,  a  serene  and  .pure  light  poured  from  above' into  my 
purified  breast.  So  soon  as  I  drank  the  spirit  from"  above 
and  ^as  transformed  by  a  second  birth  into  a  new  man,  then  the 
wavering  mind  became  wonderfully  firm ;  what  had  been  closed 
opened ;  the  dark  became  light ;  strength  came  for  that  which 
had  seemed  difficult;  what  I  had  thought  impossible  became 
practicable." 

Cyprian  now  devoted  himself  zealously,  in  ascetic  retirement, 
to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  and  the  church  teachers,  especially 
Tertullian,  whom  he  called  for  daily  with  the  words  :  "  Hand  me 
the  master!"2  The  influence  of  Tertullian  on  his  theological 
formation  is  unmistakable,  and  appears  at  once,  for  example,  on 
comparing  the  tracts  of  the  two  on  prayer  and  on  patience,  or 
the  work  of  the  one  on  the  vanity  of  idols  with  the  apology  of 
the  other.  It  is  therefore  rather  strange  that  in  his  own  writings 

1 "  Uiufa  genitalis  auxilio,"  which  refers  of  course  to  baptism. 

*  "Da  magistrum/"  So  Jerome  relates  in  his  notice  on  Tertullian,  Cat  c 
63,  on  the  testimony  of  an  old  man,  who  had  heard  it  in  his  youth  from  the 
"notarim  beati  Cypriani."  As  to  the  time,  Cyprian  might  have  personalty 
known  Tertullian,  who  lived  at  least  till  the  year  220  or  230. 


\  199.  CYPBIAN.  845 

we  find  no  acknowledgment  of  his  indebtedness,  and,  as  far  as  I 
recollect,  no  express  allusion  whatever  to  Tertullian  and  the 
Montanists.  But  he  could  derive  no  aid  and  comfort  from  him 
in  his  conflict  with  schism. 

Such  a  man  could  not  long  remain  concealed.  Only  two  years 
after  his  baptism,  in  spite  of  his  earnest  remonstrance,  Cyprian 
was  raised  to  the  bishopric  of  Carthage  by  the  acclamations  of 
the  people,  and  was  thus  at  the  same  time  placed  at  the  head  of 
the  whole  North  African  clergy.  This  election  of  a  neophyte  was 
contrary  to  the  letter  of  the  ecclesiastical  laws  (comp.  1  Tim. 
3 :  6),  and  led  afterwards  to  the  schism  of  the  party  of  Novatus. 
But  the  result  proved,  that  here,  as  in  the  similar  elevation  of 
Ambrose,  Augustin,  and  other  eminent  bishops  of  the  ancient 
church,  the  voice  of  the  people  was  the  voice  of  God. 

For  the  space  of  ten  years,  ending  with  his  triumphant  mar 
tyrdom,  Cyprian  administered  the  episcopal  office  in  Carthago 
with  exemplary  energy,  wisdom,  and  fidelity,  and  that  in  a  most 
stormy  time,  amidst  persecutions  fVom  without  and  schismatic 
agitations  within.  The  persecution  under  Valerian  brought  his 
active  labors  to  a  close.  He  was  sent  into  exile  for  eleven 
months,  then  tried  before  the  Proconsul,  and  condemned  to  be  be- 
headed. "When  the  sentence  was  pronounced,  he  said :  "Thanks- 
be  to  God,"  knelt  in  prayer,  tied  the  bandage  over  his  eyes  with 
his  own  hand,  gave  to  the  executioner  a  gold  piece,  and  died 
with  the  dignity  and  composure  of  a  hero.  His  friends  removed 
and  buried  his  body  by  night..  Two  chapels  were  erected  on  the 
fjpots  of  his  death  and  burial.  The  anniversary  of  his  death  was 
long  observed ;  and  five  sermons  of  Augustin  still  remain  in 
memory  of  Cyprian's  martyrdom,  Sept.  14,  258. 

II.  Character  and  Position. 

As  Origen.  was  the  ablest  scholar,  and  Tertullian  the 
strongest  writer,  so  Cyprian  was  the  greatest  bishop,  of  tiie  third 
century.  He  was  born  to  be  a  prince  in  the  church.  In  exe- 
cutive talent,  he  even  surpassed  all  the  Roman  bishops  of  his 
time ;  and  he  bore  himself  towards  them,  also,  as  "  frater  n  and 


846  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

"  collega,"  in  the  spirit  of  fall  equality.  Augustin  calls  him  by 
eminence,  "the  catholic  bishop  and  catholic  martyr;"  and 
Vincentius  of  Lirinum,  "the  light  of  all  saints,  all  martyrs,  and 
all  bishops."  His  stamp  of  character  was  more  that  of  Peter 
than  either  of  Paul  or  John. 

His  peculiar  importance  falls  not  so  much  in  the  field  of  the- 
ology, where  he  lacks  originality  and  depth,  as  in  church 
organization  and  discipline.  While  Tertullian  dealt  mainly 
with  heretics,  Cyprian  directed  his  polemics  against  schismatics, 
among  whom  he  had  to  condemn,  though  he  never  does  in  fact, 
his  venerated  teacher,  who  died  a  Montanist.  Yet  his  own  con- 
duct was  not  perfectly  consistent  with  his  position ;  for  in  the 
controversy  on  heretical  baptism  he  himself  exhibited  his 
master's  spirit  of  opposition  to  Eome.  He  set  a  limit  to  his  own 
exclusive  catholic  principle  of  tradition  by  the  truly  Protestant 
maxims :  "  Consuetude  sine  veritate  vetustas  erroris  est}  and,  Non 
est  de  consuetudine  prcesoribendum,  sed  ratione  vincendum" 
In  him  the  idea  of  the  old  catholic  hierarchy  and  episcopal  auto- 
cracy, both  in  its  affinity  and  in  its  conflict  with  the  idea  of  the 
papacy,  was  personally  embodied,  so  to  speak,  and  became  flesh 
and  blood.  The  unity  of  the  church,  as  the  vehicle  and  medium 
of  all  salvation,  was  the  thought  of  his  life  and  the  passion  of 
his  heart.  But  he  contended  with  the  same  zeal  for  an  inde- 
pendent episcopate  as  for  a  Roman  primacy ;  and  the  authority 
of  his  name  has  been  therefore  as  often  employed  against  the 
papacy  as  in  its  favor.  On  both  sides  he  was  the  faithful  organ 
of  the  churchly  spirit  of  the  age. 

It  were  great  injustice  to  attribute  his  high  churchly  principles 
to  pride  and  ambition,  though  temptations  to  this  spirit  unques- 
tionably beset  a  prominent  position  like  his.  Such  principles 
are  entirely  compatible  with  sincere  personal  humility  before 
God.  It  was  the  deep  conviction  of  the  divine  authority,  and 
the  heavy  responsibility  of  the  episcopate,  which  lay  at  the 
bottom  both  of  his  first  "nob  episoopari,"  and  of  his  subsequent 
hierarchical  feeling.  He  was  as  conscientious  ip  discharging  tljft 


i  199.  CYPKIAN.  847 

duties,  as  he  was  jealous  in  maintaining  the  rights,  of  his  office* 
Notwithstanding  his  high  conception  of  the  dignity  of  a  bishop] 
he  took  counsel  of  his  presbyters  in  everything,  and  respected 
the  rights  of  his  people.  He  knew  how  to  combine  strictness 
and  moderation,  dignity  and  gentleness,  and  to  inspire  love  and 
confidence  as  well  as  esteem  and  veneration.  He  took  upon 
himself,  like  a  father,  the  care  of  the  widows  and  orphans,  the 
poor  and  sick.  During  the  great  pestilence  of  252  he  showed 
the  -most  self-sacrificing  fidelity  (o  his  flock,  and  love  for  his 
enemies.  He  forsook  his  congregation,  indeed,  in  the  Decian 
persecution,  but  only,  as  he  expressly  assured  them,  in  pursuance 
of  a  divine  admonition,  and  in  order  to  direct  them  during  his 
fourteen  months  of  exile  by  pastoral  epistles.  His  conduct  ex- 
posed him  to  the  charge  of  cowardice.  In  the  Valerian  perse- 
cution he  completely  washed  away  the  stain  of  that  flight  with 
the  blood  of  his  calm  and  cheerful  martyrdom. 

He  exercised  first  rigid  discipline,  but  at  a  later  period — not 
in  perfect  consistency— he  moderated  his  disciplinary  principles 
in  prudent  accommodation  to  the  exigencies  of  the  times.  With 
Tertullian  he  prohibited  all  display  of  female  dress,  which  only 
deformed  the  work  of  the  Creator ;  and  he  warmly  opposed  all 
participation  in  heathen  amusements, — even  refusing  a  converted 
play-actor  permission  to  give  instruction  in  declamation  and 
pantomime.  He  lived  in  a  simple,  ascetic  way,  under  a  sense  of 
the  perishableness  of  all  earthly  things,  and  in  view  of  the 
solemn  eternity,  in  which  alone  also  the  questions  and  strifes  of 
the  church  militant  would  be  perfectly  settled.  "  Only  above," 
says  he  ih  his  tract  De  Mortalitate,  which  he  composed  during 
the  pestilence,  "only  above  are  true  peace,  sure  repose,  constant, 
firm,  and  eternal  security  ,•  there  is  our  dwelling,  there  our  home. 
Who  would  not  fain  hasten  to  reach  it?  There  a  groat  multi- 
tude of  beloved  awaits  us;  the  numerous  host  of  fathers, 
brethren,  and  children.  There  is  a  glorious  choir  of  apostles ; 
there  the  number  of  exulting  prophets;  there  the  countless 
multitude  of  martyrs,  crowned  with  victory  after  warfare  an<J 


848  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D,  100-311. 

suffering ;  there,  triumphing  virgins ;  there  the  merciful  enjoy* 
ing  their  reward.  Thither  let  us  hasten  with  longing  desire; 
let  us  wish  to  be  soon  with  them,  soon  with  Christ.  After  the 
earthly  comes  the  heavenly ;  after  the  small  follows  the  great ; 
after  perishableness,  eternity." 

III.  His  writings. 

As  an  author,  Cyprian  is  far  less  original,  fertile  and  vigorous 
than  Tertullian,  but  is  clearer,  more  moderate,  and  more  elegant 
and  rhetorical  in  his  siyle.  He  wrote  independently  only  on,  the 
doctrines  of  the  church,  the  priesthood,  and  sacrifice. 

(1.)  His  most  important  works  relate  to  practical  questions  on 
church  government  and  discipline.  Among  these  is  his  tract  on 
the  Unity  of  the  Church  (A.D.  251),  that  "magna  charta"  of  the 
old  catholic  high-church  spirit,  the  commanding  importance  of 
which  we  have  already  considered.  Then  eighty-one  Epistles,1 
some  very  long,  to  various  bishops,  to  the  clergy  and  the 
churches  of  Africa  and  of  Rome,  to  the  confessors,  to  the  lapsed, 
&c^ ;  comprising  also  some  letters  from  others  in  reply,  as  from 
Cornelius  of  Rome  and  Firmilian  of  Csesarea.  They  give  us  a 
very  graphic  picture  of  his  pastoral  labors,  and  of  the  whole 
church  life  of  that  day.  To  the  same  class  belongs  also  his  trea- 
tise :  De  Lapsis  (A.X>.  250)  against  loose  penitential  discipline. 

(2.)  Besides  these  he  wrote  a  series  of  moral  works,  On  the 
Grace  of  God  (246);  On  the  Lord's  Prayer  (252);  On  Mor- 
tality (252) ;  against  worldly-mindedness  and  pride  of  dress  in 
consecrated  virgins  (De  Habitu  Virginum] ;  a  glowing  call  to 
Martyrdom  ;  an  exhortation  to  liberality  (De  Opere  et  Eleemosy* 
nis,  between  254  and  256),  with  a  touch  of  the  "opusoperatum'' 
doctrine ;  and  two  beautiful  tracts  written  during  his  controversy 
with  pope  Stephanus:  De  Bono  Patientice,  and  De  Zelo  et 
Livore  (about  256),  in  which  he  exhorts  the  excited  minds  to 
patience  and  moderation. 

(3.)  Least  important  are  his  two  apologetic  works,  the  product 

1  The  order  of  them  varies  in  different  editions,  occasioning  frequent  confb 
Bion  in  citation, 


§  200.  NOVATIAN.  849 

of  his  Christian  pupilage.  One  is  directed  against  heathenism 
(de  Idolorum  Vanitate),  and  is  borrowed  in  great  part,  often  ver- 
bally, from  Tertullian  and  Minucius  Felix.  The  other,  against 
Judaism  (Testimonia  adversus  Judceos),  also  contains  no  new 
thoughts,  but  furnishes  a  careful  collection  of  Scriptural  proofs 
of  the  Messiahship  and  divinity  of  Jesus. 

NOTE. — Among  the  pseudo-Cyprianic  writings  is  a  homily  against  dice-play- 
ing and  all  games  of  chance  (Adversus  Aleatorcs,  in  Hartel's  ed.  III.  92-103), 
which  has  been  recently  vindicated  for  Bishop  Victor  of  Eome  (190-202),  an 
African  by  birth  and  an  exclusive  high  churchman.  It  is  written  in  the  tone 
of  a  papal  encyclical  and  in  rustic  Latin.  Seo  HAKNACK  :  D&r  pseudo-cyprian. 
Tractat  fleAlcatoribuu,  Leipzig  1888.  PH.  SCHAFF :  Tlw  Oldest  Papal  JSncydical, 
in  The  Independent,  N.  York,  Feb.  28, 1889. 

§200.  Novatian. 

Comp.  558,  p.  196  sq.  and  J  183,  p.  773. 

([.)  No  V  ATI  AMI,  Prvtsbyteri  Homanij  Opera  quae  exstant  omnia.  Ed.  by 
<*a.<j)i3eus  (Par.  1/546,  in  the  works  of  Tertullian) ;  Oelenius  (Bas. 
1550  and  1662) ;  Pamdius  (Par.  1598) ;  Oallandi  (Tom  III.) ;  Edw. 
Wclchman  (Oxf.  1724) ;  J.  Jackson  (Lond.  1728,  the  beat  ed.) ;  Migne 
(in  "Patrol.  Lat.''  Tom.  III.  col.  861-970).  Migne's  ed.  includes 
the  dissertation  of  Lumper  and  the  Commentary  of  Gallandi. 

English  translation  by  E.  E.  WALLIS  in  Clark's  "  Ante-Niccna 
Library,"  vol.  II.  (1869),  p.  297-395;  comp.  vol.  I.  85  sqq. 

(II.)  EUSEB.  :  H.  E.  VI.  43,  44, 45.  HIBRON.  :  De  Vir.  ill  66  and  70 ;  Ep. 
36  ad  Damas. ;  Apol  adv.  Ruf.  II.  19.  SOCEATES :  H.  E.  IV.  28. 
The  Epistles  of  CYPRIAKT  and  CORNELIUS  referring  to  the  schism  of 
Novatian  (Cypr.  Ep.  44,  45,  49,  52,  55,  59,  60,  68,  69,  73).  EPIPBA- 
NIUS  :  Haer.  59 ;  SocKATES :  H.  E.  IV.  28.  THEODOE.  :  Ear.  Fab. 
III.  5.  PHOTIUS  :  Biblioth.  4182,  208,  280. 

(Til.)  WALCH:  Ketzerhistorie  II.  185-288.  SCHCENEMAra :  Biblioth. 
Hist.  lit.  Pair.  Latinorum,  I.  135-142.  LUMPER:  Dissert,  de  Vita, 
Scriptis,  et  Doctrina  Nov.,  in  Migne's  od.  III.  861-884.  NEANDEB, 
I.  237-248,  and  687  (Am  ed.).  CASPAUI:  Qaellen  zur  Oesch.  de* 
Tauf symbols,  III.  42S-430,  437-439.  Jos.  LANCED  (Old  Oath.) : 
Oesch.  der  rom.  Kirche  (Bonn  1881),  p.  289-314.  IlAENACK  ;  Nova- 
tion in  Herzog2  X.  (1882),  p.  652-G70.  Also  the  works  on  Cyprian, 
especially  FECHTRUP.  See  lit.  \  199.  On  Novafcian's  doctrine  of  the 
trinity  and  the  person  of  Christ  see  DORNEH'S  EntwiMungsgesch.  der 
L.  v.  d.  Pers.  Ohristi  (1851),  I.  601-604.  ("  Dem  Tertullian  nahe 
stehend,  von  ihm  abhangig,  aber  aucli  ihn  verflachend  ist  Novatian.") 

NOVATIAN,  the  second  Roman  anti-Pope  (Hippolytus  being 

Vol.  II.— M 


850  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

probably  the  first),  orthodox  in  doctrine,  but  schismatic  in  dis- 
cipline, and  in  both  respects  closely  resembling  Hippolytus  and 
Tertullian,  flourished  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century  and 
became  the  founder  of  a  sect  called  after  his  name.1  He  was  a 
man  of  unblemished,  though  austere  character,  considerable 
biblical  and  philosophical  learning,  speculative  talent,  and  elo- 
quence.2 He  is  moreover,  next  to  Victor  and  Minucius  Felix, 
the  first  Eoman  divine  who  used  the  Latin  Language,  and 
used  it  with  skill.  We  may  infer  that  at  his  time  the  Latin 
had  become  or  was  fast  becoming  the  ruling  language  of  the 
Eoman  church,  especially  in  correspondence  with  North  Africa 
and  the  "West ;  yet  both  Novatian  and  his  rival  Cornelius  ad- 
dressed the  Eastern  bishops  in  Greek.  The  epitaphs  of  five 
Roman  bishops  of  the  third  century,  Urbanus,  Anteros,  Fa- 
bianus,  Lucius,  and  Eutyohianus  (between  223  and  283),  in 
the  cemetery  of  Callistus  are  Greek,  but  the  epitaph  of  Cornelius 
(251-253)  who  probably  belonged  to  the  noble  Eoman  family 
of  that  name,  is  Latin  ("  Cornelius  Martyr  E.  E.  X.")3 

At  that  time  the  Eoman  congregation  numbered  forty  pres- 
byters, seven  deacons,  seven  sub-deacons,  forty-two  acolytes, 
besides  exorcists,  readers  and  janitors,  and  an  "innumerable 
multitude  of  the  people/5  which  may  have  amounted  perhaps 
to  about  50,000  members.4 

We  know  nothing  of  the  time  and  place  of  the  birth  and 
death  of  Novatian.  He  was  probably  an  Italian.  The  later 
account  of  his  Phrygian  origin  deserves  no  credit,  and  may  hare 
arisen  from  the  fact  that  he  had  many  followers  in  Phrygia, 
where  they  united  with  the  Montanists.  He  was  converted  in 

1  Novatiani,  in  the  East  also  Katiapol,  which  is  equivalent  to  Puritans. 

2  Jerome  calls  him  and  Tertullian  etoquentissimi  mri  (Ad  Lam.  Ep.  36). 
Eusebius  speaks  unfavorably  of  him  on  account  of  his  severe  discipline,  which 
seemed  to  deny  mercy  to  poor  sinners. 

3  On  the  subject  of  the  official  language  of  the  Roman  Church,  see  especially 
the  learned  and  conclusive  investigations  of  Caspar!,  I  c.  III.  430  sqq.,  and  the 
inscriptions  in  De  Rossi,  Em,,  sotter.  I.  277  sqq.,  293,  and  II.  76  sqq.    Also 
Harnack :  D.  Pseudo-Cyprian.  Tractat  De  Aleatoribus,  1888.   Cornelius  was  not 
buried  officially  by  the  Roman  Church,  but  by  private  members  of  the  same. 

*  See  the  letter  of  Cornelius  to  Fabius,  preserved  by  Euseb.  VI.  33. 


\  200.  NOVATIAN.  851 

adult  age,  and  received  only  clinical  baptism  by  sprinkling  on 
the  sick  bed  without  subsequent  episcopal  confirmation,  but  was 
nevertheless  ordained  to  the  priesthood  and  rose  to  the  highest 
rank  in  the  Eoman  clergy.  He  conducted  the  official  corres- 
pondence of  the  Eoman  see  during  the  vacancy  from  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  Fabian,  January  21,  250,  till  the  election  of  Cornelius, 
March,  251.  In  his  letter  to  Cyprian,  written  in  the  name 
of  "the  presbyters  and  deacons  abiding  at  Rome,"1  he  refers 
the  question  of  the  restoration  of  the  lapsed  to  a  future  council, 
but  shows  his  own  preference  for  a  strict  discipline,  as  most 
necessary  in  peace  and  in  persecution,  and  as  "the  rudder  of 
safety  in  the  tempest."2 

He  may  have  aspired  to  the  papal  chair  to  which  he  seemed 
to  have  the  best  claim.    But  after  the  Decian  persecution  had 

1  Ep.  XXX.  of  Cyprian  (Oxf.  and  Hartel's  edd.).    English  version  in  "  Ante- 
Nic.  Libr.,"  Cyprian's  works,  I.  85-92.    That  this  letter  was  written  by  Nova- 
tian,  appears  from  Cyprian's  Ep.  LV.  (ad  Arifonianwi)  cap.  4,  where  Cyprian 
quotes  a  passage  from  the  same,  and  then  adds:  "Additum  est  etiam  Novatiano 
tune  svribente"  etc. 

2  Ch.  2.    Comp.  also  ch.  3,  where  he  says :  "  Far  be  it  from  the  Roman 
Church  to  slacken  her  vigor  with  so  profane  a  facility,  and  to  loosen  the  nerves 
of  her  fie  verity  by  overthrowing  the  majesty  of  faith ;  so  that  when  the  wrecks 
of  your  ruined  brethren  are  not  only  lying,  but  are  falling  around,  remedies  of 
a  too  hasty  kind,  and  certainly  not  likely  to  avail,  should  be  afforded  for  com- 
munion ;  and  by  a  false  mercy,  new  wounds  should  be  impressed  on  the  old 
wounds  of  their  transgression ;  so  that  even  repentance  should  be  snatched 
from  these  wretched  beings,  to  their  greater  overthrow."    And  in  ch.  7: 
"  Whosoever  shall  deny  me  before  men,  him  will  I  also  deny  before  my  Father 
and  before  his  angels.    For  God,  as  He  is  merciful,  so  He  exacts  obedience  to 
his  precepts,  and  indeed  carefully  exacts  it ;  and  as  he  invites  to  the  banquet, 
so  the  man  that  hath  not  a  wedding  garment  he  binds  hands  and  feet,  and 
casts  him  out  beyond  the  assembly  of  the  saints.    He  has  prepared  heaven 
but  he  has  also  prepared  hell.    He  has  prepared  places  of  refreshment,  but  he 
has  also  prepared  eternal  punishment.    He  has  prepared  the  light  that  none 
can  approach  unto,  but  he  has  also  prepared  the  vast  and  eternal  gloom  of  per- 
petual night."    At  the  close  he  favors  an  exception  in  case  of  impending  death 
of  the  penitent  lapsed,  to  whom  cautious  help  should  be  administered,  "that 
neither  ungodly  men  should  praise  our  smooth  facility,  nor  truly,  penitent  men 
accuse  our  severity  as  cruel."    This  letter  relieves  Novation  of  the  reproach  of 
being  chiefly  influenced  in  his  schism  by  personal  motives,  an  Pope  Cornelius 
{Euseb.  VI-  43),  and  "Roman  historians  maintain  (also  Harnack,  o  Herzog* 
X.  661). 


852  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

ceased  his  rival  Cornelius,  unknown  before,  was  elected  by  a 
majority  of  the  clergy  and  favored  the  lenient  discipline  towards 
the  Fallen  which  his  predecessors  Callistus  and  Zephyrinus  had 
exercised,  and  against  which  Hippolytus  had  so  strongly  pro- 
tested twenty  or  thirty  years  before.  Novatian  was  elected 
anti-Pope  by  a  minority  and  consecrated  by  three  Italian 
bishops.1  He  was  excommunicated  by  a  Roman  council,  and 
Cornelius  denounced  him  in  official  letters  as  "a  deceitful,  cun- 
ning and  savage  beast."  Both  parties  appealed  to  foreign 
churches.  Fabian  of  Antioch  sympathized  with  Novatian,  but 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  and  especially  Cyprian  who  in  the 
mean  time  had  relaxed  his  former  rigor  and  who  hated  schism 
like  the  very  pest,  supported  Cornelius,  and  the  lax  and  more 
charitable  system  of  discipline,  together  with  worldly  conformity 
triumphed  in  the  Catholic  church.  Nevertheless  the  Novatian 
schism  spread  East  and  West  and  maintained  its  severe  disci- 
pline and  orthodox  creed  in  spite  of  imperial  persecution  down 
to  the  sixth  century.  Novatian  died  a  martyr  according  to  the 
tradition  of  his  followers.  The  controversy  turned  on  the 
extent  of  the  power  of  the  Keys  and  the  claims  of  justice  to 
the  purity  of  the  church  and  of  mercy  towards  the  fallen.  The 
charitable  view  prevailed  by  the  aid  of  the  principle  that  out  of 
the  church  there  is  no  salvation. 

Novatian  was  a  fruitful  author.  Jerome  ascribes  to  him 
works  On  the  Passover;  On  the  Sabbath;  On  Circumcision; 
On  the  Priest  (De  Saeerdote);  On  Prayer;  On  the  Jewish 
Meats;  On  Persevera/we ;2  On  Attilus  (a  martyr  of  Perga- 
mus) ;  and  "  On  the  Trinity." 

Two  of  these  books  are  preserved.    The  most  important  is 

1  "Ex  etigw  et  vttis&ima  Mia  parte."    See  JaffS  Regesta  Pontif.  JBom.  p.  7. 
Cornelius,  in  his  letter  to  Fabian  (Euseb.  VI.  43),  describes  these  three  bishops 
as  contemptible  ignoramuses,  who  were  intoxicated  when  they  ordained  Nova- 
tian "  by  a  shadowy  and  empty  imposition  of  hands." 

2  De  Insfantw,  probably  in  persecution,  not  in  prayer.    See  Caspari,  p.  428, 
note  284  versus  Lardner  and  Lumper,  who  explain  it  of  Perseverance  in  prayer: 
but  this  was  no  doubt  treated  in  De  Ora&wne,  for  which,  however,  the  Vatican 

od.  reads  De  Ordimtixm. 


2  201.  COMMODIAN.  853 

his  Liber  de  Trinitate  (  31  chs.),  composed  A.  D.  256.  It  has 
sometimes  been  ascribed  to  Tertullian  or  Cyprian.  Jerome 
calls  it  a  "great  work,"  and  an  extract  from  an  unknown  work 
of  Tertullian  on  the  same  subject.  Novatian  agrees  essentially 
with  Tertullian's  subordinatian  trinitarianism.  He  ably  vindi- 
cates the  divinity  of  Christ  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  strives  to 
reconcile  the  divine  threeness  with  unity,  and  refutes  the  Mon- 
archians,  especially  the  Sabellians  by  biblical  and  philosophical 
arguments. 

In  his  Epistola  de  Gibus  Judaids  (7  chapters)  written  to  his 
flock  from  a  place  of  retirement  during  persecution,  he  tries  to 
prove  by  allegorical  interpretation,  that  the  Mosaic  laws  on  food 
are  no  longer  binding  upon  Christians,  and  that  Christ  has 
substituted  temperance  and  abstinence  for  the  prohibition  of 
unclean  animals,  with  the  exception  of  meat  offered  to  idols, 
which  is  forbidden  by  the  Apostolic  council  (Acts  15). 

§  201.  Commodim. 

I.)  COMMODIAETTS :  Instructiones  adverse  Gentium  Deos  pro  Christiana 
Disciplines,  and  Carmen  Apologeticum  adv&rsus  Judceos  et  Oentcs.  The 
Instructiones  were  discovered  by  Sirmoml,  and  first  edited  by  Rigault 
at  Toul,  1650;  more  recently  by  Fr.  Oehler  in  Gcrsdorf ' s  "  Biblioth. 
P.  Lat.,"  vol.  XVIIL,  Lips.  1847  (p.  133-194,)  and  by  Migne,  "Pa- 
trol." vol.  V.  col.  201-262. 

The  second  work  was  discovered  and  published  by  Card,  Pitra  in 
the  "  Spicilegium  Solesmense,"  Tom.  I.  Par.  1852,  p.  21-49  and  Ex- 
curs.  537-543,  and  with  new  emendations  of  the  corrupt  text  in  Tom. 
IV.  (1858),  p.  222-224 ;  and  better  by  Ronsch  in  the  "Zeitschrift  fur 
hist.  Theol."  for  1872. 

Both  poems  were  edited  together  by  E.  LUDWIG  :  Comnodiomi 
Carmina,  Lips.  1877  and  1878  ;  and  by  B.  DOMBABT,  Vienna. 

English  translation  of  the  first  poem  (but  in  prose)  by  R  E.  WAL- 
LIS  in  Clark's  "  Ante-Nicene  Library,"  vol.  III.  (1870  ,  pp.  434r-474. 

(II.)  DODWELL:  Dissert,  de  cetate  Commod*  Prolegg,  in  Migne^.  189"- 
300.  ALZOG:  Patrol  340-342.  J.  L.  JACOBI  in  Schneider's  "Zeit- 
schriffc  ftir  christl.  Wissenschaft  und  christl.  Leben  "  for  1853,  pp. 
203-209.  AD.  EBERT,  in  an  appendix  to  his  essay  on  TertulJian's 
relation  to  Minucius  Felix,  Leipz.  1868,  pp.  69-102;  in  his  Gesch. 
der  christl.  lat.  Lit.,  I.  86-93 ;  also  his  art.  in  Herzog2  III.  325  sq. 
LEIMBACH,  in  an  Easter  Programme  on  Commodian's  Cformcn  apoL 


854  SECOND  PEBIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

adv.  Gentes  et  Judaos,  Schmalkalden,  1871  (he  clears  up  many 
points).  HERMANN  BONSCH,  in  the  « Zeitschrift  fur  historische 
Theologie  "  for  1872,  No.  2,  pp.  163-302  (he  presents  a  revised  Latin 
text  with  philological  explanations).  YOUNG  in  Smith  and  Wace, 
L  610-611. 

COMMODIAN  was  probably  a  clergyman  in  North  Africa.1  He 
was  converted  from  heathenism  by  the  study  of  the  Scriptures, 
especially  of  the  Old  Testament2  He  wrote  about  the  middle 
of  the  third  century  two  works  in  the  style  of  vulgar  African 
latinity,  in  uncouth  versification  and  barbarian  hexameter, 
without  regard  to  quantity  and  hiatus.  They  are  poetically  and 
theologically  worthless,  but  not  unimportant  for  the  history  of 
practical  Christianity,  and  reveal  under  a  rude  dress  with  many 
superstitious  notions,  an  humble  and  fervent  Christian  heart. 
Commodian  was  a  Patripassian  in  christology  and  a  Chiliast  in 
eschatology.  Hence  lie  is  assigned  by  Pope  Gelasius  to  the 
apocryphal  writers.  His  vulgar  African  latinity  is  a  landmark 
in  the  history  of  the  Latin  language  and  poetry  in  the  transition 
to  the  Romance  literature  of  the  middle  ages. 

The  first  poem  is  entitled  ".Instructions  for  the  Christian 
Life,"  written  about  A.  D.  240  or  earlier.3  It  is  intended  to 
convert  heathens  and  Jews,  and  gives  also  exhortations  to  cate- 
chumens, believers,  and  penitents.  The  poem  has  over  twelve 
hundred  verses  and  is  divided  into  eighty  strophes,  each  of  which 
is  an  acrostic,  the  initial  letters  of  the  lines  composing  the  title  or 

1  In  the  MSS.  of  the  second  poem  he  is  called  a  bishop.    Commodian  gives 
no  indication  of  his  clerical  status,  but  it  may  be  fairly  inferred  from  his  learn- 
ing.   In  the  last  section  of  his  second  poem  he  calls  himself  Gazceus.    Ebert 
understands  this  geographically,  from  the  city  of  Gaza  in  Syria.    But  in  this 
case  he  would  have  written  in  Greek  or  in  Syriac.    The  older  interpretation  is 
preferable,  from  Gaza  (yafc)9  freostwe,  or  gazophylacium  (yafrQvUtctov)  treasury, 
which  indicates  either  his  possepsion  of  the  treasure  of  saving  truth  or  his  de- 
pendence for  support  on  the  treasury  of  the  church. 

2  Kbftrt  suggests  that  he  was  a  Jewish  proselyte ;  but  in  the  introduction  to 
the  first  poem  he  says  that  he  formerly  worshipped  the  gods  (deos  vanos),  which 
he  believed  to  be  demons,  like  most  of  the  patristic  writers. 

3  The  author  upbraids  the  Gentiles  for  persevering  in  unbelief  after  Chris- 
tianity had  existed  for  200  years  (VI.  2).    Ebert  dates  the  Instructions  back 
as  far  as  239.     Alzog  puts  it  down  much  later. 


2  201.  COMMODIAN.  855 

subject  of  the  section.  The  first  45  strophes  are  apologetic,  and 
aimed  at  the  heathen,  the  remaining  35  are  parenetic  and  ad- 
dressed to  Christians.  The  first  part  exhorts  unbelievers  to 
repent  in  view  of  the  impending  end  of  the  world,  and  gives 
prominence  to  chiliastic  ideas  about  Antichrist,  the  return  of  the 
Twelve  Tribes,  the  first  resurrection,  the  millennium,  and  the 
last  judgment.  The  second  part  exhorts  catechumens  and  vari- 
ous classes  of  Christians.  The  last  acrostic  which  again  reminds 
the  reader  of  the  end  of  the  world,  is  entitled  "Nomen  Gazcei."1 
and,  if  read  backwards,  gives  the  name  of  the  author :  Comma- 
dianus  m&ndicus  Christi. 2 

2.  The  second  work  which  was  only  brought  to  light  in  1852, 
is  an  "  Apologetic  Poem  against  Jews  and  Gentiles,"  and  was 
written  about  249.  It  exhorts  them  (like  the  first  part  of  the  "  In- 
structions "  to  repent  without  delay  in  view  of  the  approaching 
end  of  the  world.  It  is  likewise  written  in  uncouth  hexameters, 
and  discusses  in  47  sections  the  doctrine  of  God,  of  man,  and  of 
the  Redeemer  (vers.  89-275) ;  the  meaning  of  the  names  of  Son 
and  Father  in  the  economy  of  salvation  (276-573) ;  the  obsta- 
cles to  the  progress  of  Christianity  (574-6 11) ;  it  warns  Jews  and 
Gentiles  to  forsake  their  religion  (612-783),  and  give?  a  descrip- 
tion of  the  last  things  (784-1053). 

The  most  interesting  part  of  this  second  poem  is  tbe  conclu- 
sion. It  contains  a  fuller  description  of  Antichrist-  than  the 
first  poem.  The  author  expects  that  the  end  of  the  ^orld  will 
soon  come  with  the  seventh  persecution ;  the  Goths  will  conquer 
Rome  and  redeem  the  Christians ;  but  then  Nero  will  appear  as 
the  heathen  Antichrist,  reconquer  Rome,  and  rage  againrt  the 
Christians  three  years  and  a-half ;  he  will  be  conquered  in  turn 
by  the  Jewish  and  real  Antichrist  from  the  east,  who  aftei  the 

1  See  above  p.  854.    Note  1. 
a  The  last  five  lines  are  (see  Migne  V.  col.  261,  262) : 
"  ostenduntur  Ulis,  et  legunt  gesta  de  cceto 
Mcmona  prista  dehito  et  merita  digno- 


curiosilas  docti  inveniei  nomcn  in  is/o." 


856  SECOND  PEKIOD.  A.  D.  100-311. 

defeat  of  Nero  and  the  burning  of  Eome  will  return  to  Judaea. 
perform  false  miracles,  and  be  worshipped  by  the  Jews.  At 
last  Christ  appears,  that  is  God  himself  (from  the  Monarch  ian 
standpoint  of  the  author),  with  the  lost  Twelve  Tribes  as  his 
army,  which  had  lived  beyond  Persia  in  happy  simplicity  and 
virtue;  under  astounding  phenomena  of  nature  he  will  con- 
quer Antichrist  and  his  host,  convert  all  nations  and  take  pos- 
session of  the  holy  city  of  Jerusalem.  The  concluding  descrip- 
tion of  the  judgment  is  preserved  only  in  broken  fragments. 
The  idea  of  a  double  Antichrist  is  derived  from  the  two  beasts 
of  the  Apocalypse,  and  combines  the  Jewish  conception  of  the 
Antimessiah,  and  the  heathen  Nero-legend.  But  the  remarkable 
feature  is  that  the  second  Antichrist  is  represented  as  a  Jew  and 
as  defeating  the  heathen  Nero,  as  he  will  be  defeated  by  Christ. 
The  same  idea  of  a  double  antichrist  appears  in  Lactantius.1 

§  202.  Arnobius. 

(I.)  ARNOBII  (oratoris)  adversus  Nationes  (or  Gentes)  libri  septem.  Best  ed. 

by  BEIFFERSCHEID,  Vindob.  1875.  (vol.  IV.  of  the  ''Corpus  Scrip- 

torum  Ecclesiasticorum  Latinorum,"  issued  by  the  Academy  of  Vi- 
enna.) 
Other  editions :  by  Fau&tw  Sabceus,  Florence  1543  (ed.  princeps)  ; 

Bas.  (Frobenius)  1546;  Paris  1580,  1666,  1715;  Antw.  1582;  Kom. 

1583 ;  Genev.  1597  ;  Lugd.  Bat.  1598,  1651 ;  by  Qrdli,  Lips.  1816  ; 

ffildebrand,  Halle,  1844;  Mgne,  "Patrol.  Lat."  v.  1844,  col.  350 sqq. 

fr.  Oehler  (in  Gersdorf's  "  Bibl.  Patr.  Lat."),  Lips.  1846.    On  the 

text  see  the  Prolegg.  of  Oehler  and  Eeifferscheid. 
English  Version  by  A.  HAMILTON  BRYCE  and  HUGH  CAMPBELL, 

in  Clark's  "Ante-Mc.  Libr."  vol.  XIX.   (Edinb.   1871).  GermajQ 

transl.  by  BENARD  (1842),  and  ALLEKER  (1858). 
(II.)  HIERONYMUS:   De  Vir.  ill.  79;  Chron.  ad  ann.  325  (xx.  Constan- 

tini) ;  Ep.  46,  and  58,  ad  Paulinum. 
(HI.)  The  learned  Dissertatio  pravia  of  the  Benedictine  LE  NOURRY  in 

Migne's  ed.   v.  365-714.    NEANDER:   L  687-689.    MAHLER  (E. 

OJ :   Patrol.  I.  906-916.    ALZOG  (R.  (7.) :   Patrologie  (3d  ed.),  p. 

205-210.    Zmk :  Zu,r  Eritih  und  Erklarung  des  Arnob.,  Bamb.  1873. 

EBERT,  Gesch.  der  christl.  lot.  Lit.  L  61-70.    HERZOG  in  Herzog* 

L  692  sq.  MOULE  in  Smith  and  Wace  1. 167-169, 

l!nst.Div.  VII.  16  sqq. 


2  202.  AENOBIUS.  857 

AIUSTOBIUS,  a  successful  teacher  of  rhetoric  with  many  pupils 
(Lactantius  being  one  of  them),  was  first  an  enemy,  then  an  ad- 
vocate of  Christianity.  He  lived  in  Sicca,  an  important  city  on 
the  Numidian  border  to  the  Southwest  of  Carthage,  in  the  lat- 
ter part  of  the  third  and  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century.  Ho 
was  converted  to  Christ  in  adult  age,  like  his  more  distinguished 
fellow- Africans,  Tertullian  and  Cyprian.  "O  blindness,"  he 
says,  in  describing  the  great  change,  "  only  a  short  time  ago  I 
was  worshipping  images  just  taken  from  the  forge,  gods  shaped 
upon  the  anvil  and  by  the  hammer.  .  .  ,  When  I  saw  a  stone 
made  smooth  and  smeared  with  oil,  I  prayed  to  it  and  addressed 
it  as  if  a  living  power  dwelt  in  it,  and  implored  blessings  from 
the  senseless  stock.  And  I  offered  gricvious  insult  even  to  the 
gods,  whom  I  took  to  be  such,  in  that  I  considered  them  wood, 
stone,  and  bone,  or  fancied  that  they  dwelt  in  the  stuff  of  such 
things.  Now  that  I  have  been  led  by  so  great  a  teacher  into 
the  way  of  truth,  I  know  what  all  that  is,  I  think  worthily  of 
the  Worthy,  offer  no  insult  to  the  Godhead,  and  giro  every  one 
his  due.  .  .  0  Is  Christ,  then,  not  to  be  regarded  as  God  ?  And 
is  He  who  in  other  respects  may  be  deemed  the  very  greatest, 
not  to  be  honored  with  divine  worship,  from  whom  wo  have  re- 
ceived while  alive  so  great  gifts,  and  from  whom,  when  the  day 
comes,  we  expect  greater  gifts  ?" l 

The  contrast  was  very  startling  indeed,  if  we  remember  that 
Sicca  bore  the  epithet  "Veneria,"  as  the  seat  of  the  vile  worship 
of  the  goddess  of  lust  in  whose  temple  the  maidens  sacrificed 
their  chastity,  like  the  Corinthian  priestesses  of  Aphrodite. 
He  is  therefore  especially  severe  in  his  exposure  of  the  sexual 
immoralities  of  the  heathen  gods,  among  whom  Jupiter  himself 
takes  the  lead  in  all  forms  of  vice.2 

1  Adv.  Nat.  1,  39,  ed.  Reifferscheid,  p,  26. 

1  In  book  V.  22  he  details  the  crimes  of  Jupiter  who  robbed  Ceres,  Leda, 
Danae,  Europa,  Alcmena,  Electra,  Latona,  Laodamia,  and  "a  thousand  other 
virgins  and  a  thousand  matrons,  and  with  them  the  boy  Catamitus,  of  their 
honor  and  chastity,"  and  who  was  made  a  collection  of  "all  impurities  of  the 


858  SEC01H)  PERIOD.    A,  D.  100-311. 

We  know  nothing  of  his  subsequent  life  and  death.  Jerome^ 
the  only  ancient  writer  who  mentions  him,  adds  some  doubtful 
particulars,  namely  that  he  was  converted  by  visions  or  dreams, 
that  he  was  first  refused  admission  to  the  Church  by  the  bishop 
of  Sicca,  and  hastily  wrote  his  apology  in  proof  of  his  sincerity. 
But  this  book,  though  written  soon  after  his  conversion,  is  rather 
the  result  of  an  inward  impulse  and  strong  conviction  than  out- 
ward occasion. 

We  have  from  him  an  Apology  of  Christianity  in  seven  books 
of  unequal  length,  addressed  to  the  Gentiles.  It  was  written  A. 
D.  303  ',  at  the  outbreak  of  the  Diocletian  persecution  •  for  he 
alludes  to  the  tortures,  the  burning  of  the  sacred  Scriptures  and 
the  destruction  of  the  meeting  houses,  which  were  the  prominent 
features  of  that  persecution.2  It  is  preserved  in  only  one  man- 
uscript (of  the  ninth  or  tenth  century),  which  contains  also  the 
"Octavius"  of  Minucius  Felix.3  The  first  two  books  are  apolo- 
getic, the  other  five  chiefly  polemic.  Arnobius  shows  great 
familiarity  with  Greek  and  Eoman  mythology  and  literature, 
and  quotes  freely  from  Homer,  Plato,  Cicero,  and  Varro.  He 
ably  refutes  the  objections  to  Christianity,  beginning  with  the 
popular  charge  that  it  brought  the  wrath  of  the  gods  and  jfche 
many  public  calamities  upon  the  Roman  empire.  He  exposes 
at  length  the- absurdities  and  immoralities  of  the  heathen  my- 
thology. He  regards  the  gods  as  real,  but  evil  beings. 

The  positive  part  is  meagre  and  unsatisfactory.  Arnobius 
seems  as  ignorant  about  the  Bible  as  Minucius  Felix,  He  never 
quotes  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  New  Testament  only  once.4 

1  He  says  that  Christianity  had  then  existed  three  hundred  years  (1. 13), 
and  that  the  city  of  Rome  was  one  thousand  and  fifty  years  old  (II.  71).  The 
last  date  leaves  a  choice  between  A.  D.  296  or  303,  according  as  we  reckon  by 
the  Varronian  or  the  Fabian  era. 

2 IV.  36;  comp.  I.  26;  II.  77;  III.  36,  etc:    Comp.  Euseb.  H.  K  VIII.  2. 

3  In  the  Nation.  Libr.  of  Paris,  No.  1661.    The  copy  in  Brussels  is  merely 
\  transcript.    The  MS.,  though  well  written,  is  very  corrupt,  and  leaves  room 
for  many  conjectures.  Eeifferscheid  has  carefully  compared  it  at  Paris  in  1867. 

4  "Has  that  well-known  word  (fllud  wlgatwi)  never  struck  your  ears,  that 
the  wisdom  of  man  is  foolishness  with  God?'"  IL6;  comp.  1  Cor.  3 :  19. 


g  202.  AKNOBIUS.  859 

He  knows  nothing  of  the  history  of  the  Jews,  and  the  Mosaic 
worship,  and  confounds  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees.  Yet  he 
is  tolerably  familiar,  whether  from  the  Gospels  or  from  tradition, 
with  the  history  of  Christ.  He  often  refers  in  glowing  lan- 
guage to  his  incarnation,  crucifixion,  and  exaltation.  He  repre- 
sents him  as  the  supreme  teacher  who  revealed  God  to  man,  the 
giver  of  eternal  life,  yea,  as  God,  though  born  a  man,  as  God  on 
high,  God  in  his  inmost  nature,  as  the  Saviour  God,  and  the 
object  of  worship.1  Only  his  followers  can  be  saved,  but  he 
offers  salvation  even  to  his  enemies.  His  divine  mission  is 
proved  by  his  miracles,  and  these  are  attested  by  their  unique 
character,  their  simplicity,  publicity  and  beneficence.  He  healed 
at  once  a  hundred"  or  more  afflicted  with  various  diseases,  he 
stilled  the  raging  tempest,  he  walked  over  the  sea  with  unwet 
foot,  he  astonished  the  very  waves,  he  fed  five  thousand  with 
five  loaves,  and  filled  twelve  baskets  with  the  fragments  that 
remained,  he  called  the  dead  from  the  tomb.  He  revealed  him- 
self after  the  resurrection  "in  open  day  to  countless  numbers  of 
men;"  "he  appears  even  now  to  righteous  men  of  unpolluted 
mind  who  love  him,  not  in  any  dreams,  but  in  a  form  of  pure 
simplicity."2 

His  doctrine  of  God  is  Scriptural,  and  strikingly  contrasts 
with  the  absurd  mythology.  God  is  the  author  and  ruler  of  all 
things,  unborn,  infinite,  spiritual,  omnipresent,  without  passion, 
dwelling  in  light,  the  giver  of  all  good,  the  sender  of  the 
Saviour. 

As  to  man,  Arnobius  asserts  his  free  will,  but  also  his  ignor- 
ance and  sin,  and  denies  his  immortality.  The  soul  outlives  the 
body,  but  depends  solely  on  God  for  the  gift  of  eternal  duration. 
The  wicked  go  to  the  fire  of  Gehenna,  and  will  ultimately  be 

1  The  strongest  passages  for  the  divinity  of  Christ  are  I.  37,  39,  42  and  53. 
In  the  last  passage  he  says  (Reiflferscheid,  p.  36):  "Deus  ille  sublimis  fuit 
[Christm],  deus  radice  ab  intima,  deus  ah  incognitis  regnis  et  oh  omnium  princip6 


2  "per  puree  speciem  simptici<,atis,'J  I.  46,    This  passage  speaks  against  th« 
story,  that  Arnobius  was  converted  by  a  dream. 


860  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

consumed  or  annihilated.     He  teaches  the  resurrection  of  the 
flesh,  but  in  obscure  terms. 

Arnobius  does  not  come  up  to  the  standard  of  Catholic  ortho- 
doxy, even  of  the  ante-Nicene  age.  Considering  his  apparent 
ignorance  of  the  Bible,  and  his  late  conversion,  we  need  not  be 
surprised  at  this.  Jerome  now  praises,  now  censures  him,  as 
unequal,  prolix,  and  confused  in  style,  method,  and  doctrine. 
Pope  Gelasius  in  the  fifth  century  banished  his  book  to  the 
apocryphal  index,  and  since  that  time  it  was  almost  forgotten, 
till  it  was  brought  to  light  again  in  the  sixteenth  century. 
Modern  critics  agree  in  the  verdict  that  he  is  more  successful  in 
the  refutation  of  error  than  in  the  defense  of  truth. 

But  the  honesty,  courage,  and  enthusiasm  of  the  convert  for 
his  new  faith  are  as  obvious  as  the  defects  of  his  theology.  If  he 
did  not  know  or  clearly  understand  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible, 
he  seized  its  moral  tone.1  "  We  have  learned,"  he  says,  "  from 
Christ's  teaching  and  his  laws,  that  evil  ought  not  to  be  re- 
quited with  evil  (comp.  Matt.  5  :  39),  that  it  is  better  to  suffer 
wrong  than  to  inflict  it,  that  we  should  rather  shed  our  own 
blood  than  stain  our  hands  and  our  conscience  with  that  of 
another.  An  ungrateful  world  is  now  for  a  long  period  enjoying 
the  benefit  of  Christ ;  for  by  his  influence  the  rage  of  savage 
ferocity  has  been  softened,  and  restrained  from  the  blood  of  a 
fellow-creature.  If  all  would  lend  an  ear  to  his  salutary  and 
peaceful  laws,  the  world  would  turn  the  use  of  steel  to  occupa- 
tions of  peace,  and  live  in  blessed  harmony,  maintaining  invio- 
late the  sanctity  of  treaties."2  He  indignantly  asks  the  heathen, 
"  Why  have  our  writings  deserved  to  be  given  to  the  flames,  and 
our  meetings  to  be  cruelly  broken  up?  In  them  prayer  is  offered 
to  the  supreme  God,  peace  and  pardon  are  invoked  upon  all  in 

1 1  must  differ  from  Ebert  (p.  69),  who  says  that  Christianity  produced  no 
moral  change  in  his  heart.  "In  semen  Sttt  ist  Arnobius  durchaut  Heide,  und 
auch  dtelist  ein  Zeugniss  fur  die  Art  seines  Christ&nthums,  das  eben  eine  innwe 
Umwandlung  nicht  bewirkt  hatte.  Das  Gemitih  hat  an  sdnm  Ausdrack  nirqensk 
''mArihett." 

1.9. 


8 


i  203.  VICTOKINUS  OF  PETAU.  861 

authority,  upon  soldiers,  kings,  friends,  enemies,  upon  those  still 
in  life,  and  those  released  from  the  bondage  of  the  flesh.  In 
them  all  that  is  said  tends  to  make  men  humane,  gentle,  modest, 
virtuous,  chaste,  generous  in  dealing  with  their  substance,  and 
inseparably  united  to  all  that  arc  embraced  in  our  brotherhood."1 
He  uttered  his  testimony  boldly  in  the  face  of  the  last  and  most 
cruel  persecution,  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  himself  was  one 
of  its  victims. 

The  work  of  Arnobius  is  a  rich  store  of  antiquarian  and  my- 
thological knowledge,  and  of  African  latinity. 

§  203.    Victorinm  of  Petau. 

(I.)  Oprra  in  the  "  Max.  Biblioth,  vet.  Patrum."  Lugd.  Tom.  III.,  in 
Gattwndi's  "  Bibl.  PP.,"  Tom.  IV. ;  and  in  Mgne's  "  Patrol.  Lat.,"  V. 
281-34-Jt  (De  Fabrica  Mwidi,  and  Scholia  in  Apoc.  Joannis). 

English  translation  by  It.  E.  WALLIS,  in  Clark's  l '  Ante-Nicene 
Library,"  Yol.  Ill,  388-433 ;  N.  York  ed  VH.  (1886). 

(II.)  JEROME:  De.  Vir.  ill,  74.  CASSIODOB.:  Justit.  Div.  Lit.,  c.  9. 
CAVE:  Hist.  Lit.,  L,  147  sq.  LUMPER'S  Proleg.,  in  Migne's  ed.,  V. 
281-302.  ROUTE  :  Eeliq.,  S.  L,  65 ;  III.,  455-481. 

VICTORIOUS,  probably  of  Greek  extraction,  was  first  a  rhe- 
torician by  profession,  and  became  bishop  of  Petavium,  or 
Petabio,2  in  ancient  Panonia  (Petau,  in  the  present  Austrian 
Styria).  He  died  a  martyr  in  the  Diocletian  persecution  (303). 
We  have  only  fragments  of  his  writings,  and  they  are  not  of 
much  importance,  except  for  the  age  to  which  they  belong. 
Jerome  says  that  he  understood  Greek  better  than  Latin,  and 
that  his  works  are  excellent  for  the  sense,  but  mean  as  to  the 
style.  He  counts  him  among  the  Chiliasts,  and  ascribes  to  him 
commentaries  on  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Isaiah,  Ezekiel, 
Habakkuk,  Canticles,  the  Apocalypse,  a  book  Against  all 
Heresies,  " et  mutta  alia"  Several  poems  are  also  credited  to 
him,  but  without  good  reason.3 

1 IV.  36. 

2  Viet.  Petavioneims  or  Petabionen#is;  not  Picttmensis  (from  Poictiers),  as  in 
the  Bom.  Martyrologiuin  and  Baronius.  John  Launoy  (d.  1678)  is  said  to 
have  first  corrected  this  error. 

*  Caurmina  de  Jesu  Christo  Deo  et  howine;  Lignum  Vita;  also  the  kymns  Dt 


862  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.D.  100-311. 

1.  The  fragment  on  the  Creation  of  the  World  is  a  series  oi 
notes  on  the  account  of  creation,  probably  a  part  of  the  com- 
mentary on  Genesis  mentioned  by  Jerome.    The  days  are  taken 
literally.    The  creation  of  angels  and  archangels  preceded  the 
creation  of  man,  as  light  was  made  before  the  sky  and  the  earth. 
The  seven  days  typify  seven  millennia ;  the  seventh  is  the  mil- 
lennial sabbath,  when  Christ  will  reign  on  earth  with  his  elect, 
It  is  the  same  chiliastic  notion  which  we  found  in  the  Epistle  of 
Barnabas,  with  the  same  opposition  to  Jewish  Sabbatarianism. 
Victorinus  compares  the  seven  days  with  the  seven  eyes  of  the 
Lord  (Zech.  4:  10),  the  seven  heavens  (comp.  Ps.  33:  6),  the 
seven  spirits  that  dwelt  in  Christ  (Isa.  11 :  2,  3),  and  the  seven 
stages  of  his  humanity :  his  nativity,  infancy,  boyhood,  youth, 
young-manhood,  mature  age,  death.    This  is  a  fair  specimen  of 
these  allegorical  plays  of  a  pious  imagination. 

2.  The  scholia  on  the  Apocalypse  of  John  are  not  without 
interest  for  the  history  of  the  interpretation  of  this  mysterious 
book.1    But  they  are  not  free  from  later  interpolations  of  the 
fifth  or  sixth  century.   The  author  assigns  the  Apocalypse  to  the 
reign  of  Domitian  (herein  agreeing  with  Irenseus),  and  combines 
the  historical  and  allegorical  methods  of  interpretation.    He  also 
regards  the  visions  in  part  as  synchronous  rather  than  successive. 
He  comments  only  on  the  more  difficult  passages.2    "We  select 
the  most  striking  poiuts. 

The  woman  in  ch.  12  is  the  ancient  church  of  the  prophets 
and  apostles ;  the  dragon  is  the  devil.  The  woman  sitting  on 
the  seven  hills  (in  ch.  17),  is  the  city  of  Rome.  The  beast  from 
the  abyss  is  the  Eoman  empire ;  Domitian  is  counted  as  the  sixth, 
Nerva  as  the  seventh,  and  Nero  revived  as  the  eighth  Eoman 

Orate  or  De  Paschate,  in  Tertullian's  and  Cyprian's  works.    Bouth,  III.  483, 
denies  the  genuineness ;  so  also  Lumper  in  Migne  V.  294. 

1  Comp.  Lucke,  Eml&itung  in  die  Offenb.  JoA.,  pp,  972-982  (2nd  ed.);  and 
Bleek,  Vvrlewngen  fiber  die  ApoL,  p.  34  sq.  Lucke  and  Bleek  agree  in  regard- 
ing this  commentary  as  a  work  of  Victorinus,  but  with  later  interpolationH 
Bleek  assumes  that  it  was  originally  more  pronounced  in  its  chiliasm. 

2  As  Cassiodorus  remarks :  <' frifficillima  qucedam  loca  brwiter  tractavit." 


\  203.  VICTORINUS  OF  PETATL  863 

King.1  The  number  666  (13  :  18)  means  in  Greek  Te&an*  (this 
is  the  explanation  preferred  by  Irenseus),  in  Latin  Dialux.  Both 
names  signify  Antichrist,  according  to  the  numerical  value  of 
the  Greek  and  .Roman  letters.  But  Diclux  has  this  meaning  by 
contrast,  for  Antichrist,  "  although  he  is  cut  off  from  the  super- 
nal light,  yet  transforms  himself  into  an  angel  of  light,  daring 
to  call  himself  light."3  To  this  curious  explanation  is  added, 
evidently  by  a  much  later  hand,  an  application  of  the  mystic 
number  to  the  Vandal  king  Genseric  (rwnypexos),  who  in  the 
fifth  century  laid  waste  the  Catholic  church  of  North  Africa  and 
sacked  the  city  of  Rome. 

The  exposition  of  ch.  20  :  1-6  is  not  so  strongly  chiliustic,  as 
the  corresponding  passage  in  the  Commentary  oil  Genesis,  and 
hence  some  have  denied  the  identity  of  authorship.  The  first 
resurrection  is  explained  spiritually  with  reference  to  Col.  3  :  1, 
and  the  author  leaves  it  optional  to  understand  the  thousand 
years  as  endless  or  as  limited.  Then  he  goes  on  to  allegorize 
about  the  numbers :  ten  signifies  the  decalogue,  and  hundred  the 
crown  of  virginity ;  for  he  who  keeps  the  vow  of  virginity 
completely,  and  fulfils  the  precepts  of  the  decalogue,  and  de- 
stroys the  impure  thoughts  within  the  retirement  of  his  own 

1  This  explanation  of  17 :  10, 11  rests  on  the  expectation  of  the  return  of  Nero 
AS  Antichrist,  and  was  afterwards  justly  abandoned  by  Andreas  and  Arethas, 
but  has  been  revived  again,  though  with  a  different  counting  of  the  emperors, 
by  the  modern  champions  of  the  Nero-hypothesis.  See  the  discusaion  in  vol. 
I,  864  aqq. 

2T=300;  E=5;  1=10;  T=300;  A=l;  N=50;  in  all  6G6.  Dropping 
the  final  n,  we  get  Teita=616,  which  was  the  other  reading  in  13:  18,  men- 
tioned by  Irenseus.  Titus  was  the  destroyer  of  Jerusalem,  but  in  unconscious 
fulfilment  of  Christ's  prophecy ;  he  was  no  persecutor  of  the  church,  and  was 
one  of  the  best  among  the  Roman  emperors. 

8  D=500;  !=;! ;  0=100 ;  L=50 ;  V=5 ;  X=10 ;  in  all=fi66.  "  Td  eat  quod 
Greece  sornt  ruruv,  nempe  id  quod  Lotlne  dicitur  DICLTJX,  quo  nomine  per  anlir 
phrosin  eocpresso  intelligimus  cmtichmtum,  qui  cum  a  Ime  supcma  ab.wiswts  &it  et  ea 
privatiis,  transfigurat  tamen  se  in  angdum  litcis,  audens  sese  dicwe  luG&m.  Item 
invmimus  in  quodom  codice  Qrceco  avrepoc."  The  last  name  is  perhaps  a  cor- 
ruption for  "Avre^of,  which  occurs  on  coins  of  Mcasia  for  a  ruling  dynasty,  or 
may  be  meant  for  a  designation  of  character :  honori  contraries.  See  Migne, 
V.  339,  and  Liicke,  p.  978. 


864  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

heart,  is  the  true  priest  of  Christ,  and  reigns  with  him ;  and 
"  truly  in  his  case  the  devil  is  bound."  At  the  close  of  the 
notes  on  ch.  22,  the  author  rejects  the  crude  and  sensual  chiliasm 
of  the  heretic  Cerinthus.  "  For  the  kingdom  of  Christ,"  he 
says,  "  is  now  eternal  in  the  saints,  although  the  glory  of  the 
saints  shall  be  manifested  after  the  resurrection."1  This  looks 
like  a  later  addition,  and  intimates  the  change  which  Constan- 
tine's  reign  produced  in  the  mind  of  the  church  as  regards  the 
millennium.  Henceforth  it  was  dated  from  the  incarnation  of 
Christ.2 

§  204.  Eusebius,  Lactantius,  Hosius. 

On  EUSEBIUS  see  vol.  III.  871-879 — Add  to  Lit.  the  exhaustive  article 
of  Bp.  LIGHTFOOT  in  Smith  and  Wace,  II.  (1880),  p.  308-348 ;  Dr. 
SALMON,  on  the  Chron.  of  Ens.  ibid.  354-355;  and  SEMISCH  in 
Herzog2  IV.  390-398. 

On  LACTANTIUS  see  vol.  III.  955-959.— Add  to  Lit.  EBEBT  :  Ocsch.  der 
christl  lat.  Lit.  I.  (1874),  p.  70-86;  and  his  art.  in  Herzog2  VIII. 
36^-366 ;  and  E.  S.  FJPOULKES  in  Smith  and  Wace  III.  613-617. 

On  Hosius,  see  §  55  p.  179  sqq. ;  and  vol.  III.  627,  635,  636.— Add  to  Lit. 
P.  BONIF.  G.AMS  (B.  C.) :  Kirchengesch.  v.  Spanien,  Begensb.  1862 
sqq,,  Bd  II.  137-309  (the  greater  part  of  the  second  vol.  is  given  to 
Hosius} ;  W.  M6LLEB  in  Herzog2  VI.  326-328;  and  T.  D.  0.  MORSE 
in  Smith  and  Wace  III.  162-174. 

At  the  close  of  our  period  we  meet  with  three  representative 
divines,  in  close  connection  with  the  first  Christian  emperor  who 
effected  the  politico-ecclesiastical  revolution  known  as  the  union 
of  church  and  state.  Their  public  life  and  labors  belong  to  the 
next  period,  but  must  at  least  be  briefly  foreshadowed  here. 

EUSEBITJS,  the  historian,  LACTANTIUS,  the  rhetorician,  and 
Hosius,  the  statesman,  form  the  connecting  links  between  the 
ante-Nicene  and  Nicene  ages;  their  long  lives — two  died  octo- 
genarians, Hosius  a  centenarian — are  almost  equally  divided 
between  the  two;  and  they  reflect  the  lights  and  shades  of  both.3 

1  "Nam  regnum  Christi  HUTLC  est  smpiternum  in  sanctis,  cum  fuerit  gloria  post 
~esurrectionem  manifestata  sanctorum."  (Migne  V.  344.) 

*  Comp.  g  188,  p.  612  sqq. 

5  Eusebius  died  A.  D.  340 ;  Lactantius  between  32Q  and  33Q ; 
357  and  360. 


2  204.  EUSEBIUS,  LACTANTIUS,  HOSIUS.  865 

Kusebius  was  bishop  of  Csesarea  and  a  man  of  extensive  and 
useful  learning,  and  a  liberal  theologian;  Lactantius,  a 
professor  of  eloquence  in  Nicomedia,  and  a  man  of  elegant  cul- 
ture; Hosius,  bishop  of  Cordova  and  a  man  of  counsel  and 
action.1  They  thus  respectively  represented  the  Holy  Land, 
Asia  Minor,  and  Spain;  we  may  add  Italy  and  North  Africa, 
for  Lactantius  was  probably  a  native  Italian  and  a  pupil  of 
Arnobius  of  Sicca,  and  Hosius  acted  to  some  extent  for  the 
whole  western  church  in  Eastern  Councils.  With  him  Spain 
first  emerges  from  the  twilight  of  legend  to  the  daylight  of 
church  history;  it  was  the  border  land  of  the  west  which  Paul 
perhaps  had  visited,  which  had  given  the  philosopher  Seneca 
and  the  emperor  Trajan  to  heathen  Rome,  and  was  to  furnish  in 
Theodosius  the  Great  the  strong  defender  of  the  Nicene  faith. 

Eusebius,  Lactantius,  and  Hosius  were  witnesses  of  the  cruel- 
ties of  the  Diocletian  persecution,  and  hailed  the  reign  of  impe- 
rial patronage.  They  carried  the  moral  forces  of  the  age  of 
martyrdom  into  the  age  of  victory.  Eusebius  with  his  literary 
industry  saved  for  us  the  invaluable  monuments  of  the  first 
three  centuries  down  to  the  Nicene  Council;  Lactantius  be- 
queathed to  posterity,  in  Ciceronian  Latin,  an  exposition  and 
vindication  of  the  Christian  religion  against  the  waning  idolatry 
of  Greece  and  Rome,  and  the  tragic  memories  of  the  imperial 
persecutors ;  Hosius  was  the  presiding  genius  of  the  synods  of 

1  Hosius  left  no  literary  work.  The  only  document  we  have  from  his  pen  is 
his  letter  to  the  Arian  Emperor  Constantius,  preserved  by  Athanasius  (Hist. 
Arian.  44).  See  Gams,  I.  c.  II.  215  Rqq.  It  begins  with  this  noble  sentence: 
"  I  was  a  confessor  of  the  faith  long  before  your  grandfather  Maximian  perse- 
cuted the  church.  If  you  persecute  me,  I  am  ready  to  suffer  all  rather  than  to 
shed  innocent  blood  and  to  betray  the  truth."  Unfortunately,  in  his  extreme 
old  age  he  yielded  under  the  infliction  of  physical  violence,  and  subscribed  an 
Arian  creed,  but  bitterly  repented  before  his  death.  Athanasius  expressly 
says  (I.  q,  45),  that  "at  the  approach  of  death,  as  it  were  by  his  last  testament, 
he  abjured  the  Arian  heresy,  and  gave  strict  charge  that  no  one  should  receive 
it."  It  is  a  disputed  point  whether  he  died  at  Sirmium  in  357,  or  was  per- 
mitted to  return  to  Spain,  and  died  there  about  359  or  360*  We  are  only  in- 
formed that  he  was  over  a  hundred  years  old,  and  over  sixty  years  a  bishop, 
Athan.  I  c.;  Sulpicius  Severus,  Hist.  II.  55. 
Vnl.  TT.—JK. 


866  SECOND  PERIOD.    A.  D.  100-311. 

Elvira  (306),  Nicsea  (325),  and  Sardica  (347),  the  friend  of 
Athanasius  in  the  defense  of  orthodoxy  and  in  exile. 

All  three  were  intimately  associated  with  Constantine  the 
Great,  Eusebius  as  his  friend  and  eulogist,  Lactantius  as  the 
tutor  of  his  eldest  son,  Hosius  as  his  trusted  counsellor  who 
probably  suggested  to  him  the  idea  of  convening  the  first  oecu- 
menical synod;  he  was  we  may  say  for  a  few  years  his  ecclesi- 
astical prime  minister.  They  were,  each  in  his  way,  the  em- 
peror's chief  advisers  and  helpers  in  that  great  change  which 
gave  to  the  religion  of  the  cross  the  moral  control  over  the  vast 
empire  of  Rome.  The  victory  was  well  deserved  by  three  hun- 
dred years  of  unjust  persecution  and  heroic  endurance,  but  it  was 
fraught  with  trials  and  temptations  no  less  dangerous  to  th<? 
purity  and  peace  of  the  church  than  fire  and  swor& 


ILLUSTRATIONS  FEOM  THE  CATACOMBS. 

ALLEGOBICAL  BEPRESENTATION  OF  OHEIST  AS  THE  GOOD  SHEPHEBB, 

(See  p.  276.) 


THE  GOOD  SHEPHEBD.    (FRESCO  CEILING,  FROM  Bosio.) 

Jn  th<?  centre,  "The  Good  Shepherd."  J*he  subjects,  beginning  at  the  top  and 
joing  to  the  right,  are :  (1.)  The  Paralytic  carrying  his  Bed ;  (2.)  Five  Baskets  full 
>f  Fnigmonta ;  (3.)  Baising  of  Laxams ;  (4.)  Daniel  in  the  Lion's  Den;  (5.)  Jonah 
wallowed  by  the  Fish;  (6.)  Jonah  yomited  Forth;  (7.)  Moses  striking  the  Bock; 
ts.)  Noah  and  the  Dove. 


ILLUSTRATIONS  FROM  THE  CATACOMBS. 

ALLEGOBICAL  BEPBESENTATION  OF  CHEIST  UNDEB  THE  TYPE  OF  ORPHEUS. 

(See  p.  276.) 


OBPHEUS.   (FBESCO  CEILING  IN  THE  CRYPT  OF  ST.  DOMITILLA.) 
Orpheus  in  the  centre,  playing  the  Lyre  to  the  enchanted  Animals,  surrounded  by 
landscapes  and  Scripture  Scenes,  viz.,  beginning  at  the  right:  (1,)  The  Baising  of 
the  mummy-like  Corpse  of  Lazarus;    (2.)  Daniel  in  the  Lion's  Den;  (3.)  Moses 
uniting  the  Bock;  (4.)  BaTid  with  the  Sling. 


868 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


ABKASAX,  469 

Abstainers,  495 

Achamoth,  454 

Acolyths,  131 

^thelatan,  532 

Africa,  Christianity  in,  26  sqq 

Agape,  240 

Agnes,  St.,  70 

Alban,  St.,  70 

Alexander  Severus,  58 

Alexandrian  School  of  Theology,  777 

Allegorical  interpretation,  521,  792,  816 

Allegorical  Representations  of  Christ, 
276  sqq 

Alogians,  572  sq 

Ammonias  Saccas,  98 

ArnuHcmeuta  and  the  Church,  337 

Ancyra,  Council  of,  182 

Anicet,  of  Rome,  213 

Annihilation,  610 

Ante-Nicene  Age,  literature  on  the,  3 
sqq ;  literature  of  the,  621  sqq 

Ante-Nicene  Christianity,  general  char- 
acter of,  7  sqq 

Ante-Niccne  heresies,  428  sq 

Antc-Nicene  Library,  Clark's,  4,  and  of- 
ten in  ch.  xiii 

Antc-Nicene  Rules  of  Faith,  compara- 
tive table  of,  536 

Anthropology,  456 

Anti-Chiliasta,  618  sqq 

A  "Mlegomena,  523 

•>chian   School  of  Theology,   815 

tee,  497 

'tarians,  571  sqo 
i  Pius,  50  sq 


Apocatastasis,  610     * 

Apocrypha,  523 

Apologetic  Literature  of  Christianity, 
104  sqq 

Apologists,  104  sqq.;  114 sqq.;  707  sqq 

Apology,  Positive,  114  sqq 

Apolmarius  (Apollinaris),  of  Hierapolis, 
214,  740  sqq 

Apollinaris  of  Laodicea,  798 

Appollonius  of  Tyana,  99  sq 

Apostles'  Creed,  528  sqq.;  note  on  le- 
gendary formulas  of,  533  sq.;  varia- 
tions of,  534;  comparative  table  of, 
535  sqq 

Apostolic  Canons,  186  sq 

Apostolic  Constitutions,  185  sq 

Apostolic  Fathers,  631  sqq 

Apostolic  mother-churches,  153  aq 

Aquarians,  495 

Ajrdesianes,  479 

Aristicles,  105,  708  sq 

AristoofPella,  107,  709 

Aristotelian  theory  of  creationism,  542 

Aries,  Council  of,  181 

Arnobius,  105;    life    and  works,    856 

Arnold,  Thomas,  81 

Art,  Christian,  266  sqq    • 

Artemon  &  Artemonites,  574 

Asceticism,  387  sqq 

Asceticism,  heretical  and  Catholic,  393 

Asia,  Christianity  in,  23  sq 

Athanasius,  588,  andi  passim 

Athenagoras,  730  sqq 

Augustin  on  heresy,  516 ;  on  the  Canon, 

519,  524,  and  passim 
Autun  Inscription,  305 
Axionicos,  479 

86P 


870 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX, 


BAPTISM,  celebration  of,  247  sqq.;  doc 
trine  of,  253  sqq. ;  infant  b.,  258  sq. 
heretical  b.,  262  sq.;  in  Hades,  685 

Bar-Cochba,  rebellion  of,  37  sq 

Bardesanes,  481 

Barnabas  on  the  Lord's  day,  203;  on 
chiliasm,  615;  Epistle  of,  b71  sqq 

Basilides,  406  sqq 

Baur,  on  the  paschal  controversies,  209 
219;  on  Montanism,  415;  on  the 
pseudo-Clementine  Homilies,  437 ;  on 
Gnosticism,  444,  461,  477  sq. ;  on  Ma- 
niehseism,  499 ;  on  the  Trinity  and  In- 
carnation, 544 ;  on  the  Atonement,  583 ; 
and  passim 

Beausobre,  on  Manichseism,  499 

Beryllns  of  Bostra,  579 

Bible,  Canon  of  the,  516  sqq 

Bishops,  see  episcopate 

Blandina,  55 

Blunt,  624 

Bodek,  54 

Bonwetsch,  231,  234,  416,  818 

Briggs,  613 

Britain,  Christianity  in,  30 

Brotherly  love  and  love  for  enemies,  370 

Bryennios,  225,  636,  639,  640 

Bull,  George,  544 

Runsen,  652,  663, 758 

Burial  of  the  dead,  380  sq 

CAINITES,  490 
Cajus,  of  Eome,  775  sq 
Callistus  (or  Calixtus  I),  on  discipline, 
192;  cemetery  of,  295;  on  patripas- 
sianism,  578  sq.:  his  character,  765. 
See  Hippolytus 

Canon  of  the  H.  Scriptures,  516  sqq 
Carpocrates,  492 
Carthage,  26  sq 
Oaspari,  529,  582,  758,  773, 775, 797, 798, 

849 

Catacombs,  285  sqq. ;  origin  and  history, 
287  sqq. ;  description  of,  294;  pictures" 
and  sculptures  of,  298  sq. ;  epitaphs, 
299  sqq. ;  Autun  inscription,  305;  les- 
sons of,  307  sqq 
Cataphrygians,  see  Montanists 
Catechists,  132 

Catechetical  instruction,  255  sqq 
Catechetical  School  of  Alexandria,  777 


Catholic  unity,  168  sqq 
Catholic  orthodoxy,  513 
Catholic  Theology,  509  sqq 
Catholic  Tradition,  525  sqq 
Cave,  William,  5,  623,  and  passim 
Celibacy,  voluntary,  397  sqq.;  of  th« 

clergy,  403  sqq 
Celsus,  89  sqq 
Cerdo,  484 
Cerinthus,  465  sq 
Champaguy,  le  cointe  de  (on  the  Anto- 

nincs),  50,  iill 
Charity,  370  sqq 
Chastity,  3b'2 

Chiliasm  and  Chiliaste,  C13  sqq 
Christ,   allegorical   representations  o£ 
2,6:    the  incarnation  of,  543   sqq.; 
divinity  of,  548  sqq.;  humanity  of, 
555  sqq 

Christianity,  spread  of,  13  sqq,;  hindran- 
ces and  helps,  14  sqq. ;  causes  of  the 
success,  16  sqq. ;  moans  of  propaga- 
tion, 19  sqq. ;  in  the  Bornan  empire, 
22  sqq. ;  in  Asia,  23  sq. ;  in  Egypt,  24 
sqq.;  in  North- Africa,  26  sqq.;  in 
Italy,  Gaul,  Spain,  Britain,  29  sqq.; 
persecution  of,  31  sq.q.;  obstacles  to 
toleration  of,  42  sqq. ;  literary  oppo- 
sition to,  86  sq.;  Jewish  opposition, 
87  sq. ;  pagan  opposition,  88  sq. ;  ob- 
jections to,  103  sq.;  apologetic  liter- 
ature  of,  104  sqq. ;  moral  effect  of,  118 
sqq.;  reasonableness  of,  120;  adap- 
tation of,  120 
Christian  art,  266  sqq 
Christian  family,  361  sqq 
Christian  life  in  contrast  with  Pagan 

corruption,  311  sqq 
Christian  martyrdom,  74  sqq 
Christian  morality,  334 
Christian  passover,  206  sqq 
Christian  symbols,  273 
Christian  worship,  198  sqq 
Church  and  public  amusements,  338  fiqq 
Church  and  slavery,  347  sqq 
Church,  doctrine  of  the,  168  sqq 
Church  fathers,  625  sqq 
Church  officers,  131  sqq 
Church  schisms,  193  sqq 
Cicero,  on  immortality,  593;  used  b 
Minucius  Felix,  840 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


871 


Clement  of  Borne,  129,  157  sq.  ;  228  sq.; 
on  the  trinity,  G43;  on  justification 
by  faith,  644  ;  life  and  Epistle,  63t>  &qq 

Clementine  Homilies,  43ti  sqq 

Clementine  .Recognitions,  441 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  on  Greek  phil- 
osophy, 1  14  j  on.  the  church,  172  ;  poem 
of,  229  sq.  ;  on  the  eucharist,  244  ;  on 
the  appearance  of  Christ,  277;  on  the 
Christian  family,  3G4;  on  asceticism, 
394;  on  celihacy,  400,  400;  on  the 
Log^s  and  the  divinity  of  Christ,  551  ; 
on  the  humanity  of  Christ,  557  ;  on  the 
Holy  Spirit,  5C2  ;  his  life  and  writings, 
781  sqq 

Clergy  and  laity,  123  sqq 

Colarbasus,  481 

Commodus,  56 

Commodian,  853  sqq 

Communion,  the  holy,  see  Eucharist 

Confessors,  76 

Confirmation,  257  sqq 

Constantine  the  Great,72sqq., 

Cornelius  of  Rome,  167,  850,  852 

Cotelier,  C31 

Cottcrill,  032 

Councils,  175  sqq.  ;  Elvira,  180  sq.;  Aries, 
181  ftq.;  Ancyra,  182  nq.;  Nicsea,  see 


Creation,  doctrine  of  the,  538 

Creation™,  542 

Creed,  the  Apostles',  528  sqq.;  tables  of 
the,  535  sqq 

Cross  and  the  crucifix,  269  sqq 

Cureton,  C51,  and  pas&m 

Cyprian,  martyrdom  of,  61,  62  sq.  ;  on 
episcopacy,  150  «q.;  on  primacy,  IGt; 
on  Catholic  unity,  172  sq.  ;  on  discip- 
line, 104;  on  the  cucharist,  243,  247; 
on  heretical  baptism,  26'3sq.;on 
charily,  375;  life  and  writings  842  sqq 


DlCACONS,  131 

Dccinn  persecution,  60  sqq 
IJpittiurgc,  see  Gnosticism 
Descent  into  Hades,  532 
Didache,  126, 140,  184, 185, 202,  226, 
236,239, 241, 247,  249,  266, 379,  640 
Diocletian  persecution,  04  sqq 
Diodorus,  of  Tarsus,  816 


Diognetus,  Epistle  to;  ou  Christian  life, 
9;  on  persecution,  119;  on  redemp- 
tion, 586;  account  of,  698  sqq 

Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  life  and  writ- 
ings, 800  sqq 

Dionysius  of  Corinth,  745 

Dionysius  of  Eome,  on  the  Trinity,  570 

Disciplina  arcani,  233  sqq 

Discipline,  187  sq 

Divine  and  human  in  Christ,  relation  of 
the,  558  sqq 

Divinity  of  Christ,  548  sqq. ;  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  560  sqq 

Divine  service,  231  sq 

Docetie  or  Docetists,  497 

Dollinger,  579,  758,  763,  773  sq.,787 

Dodwell,  78,  and  passim 

Domitian',  44 

Domitilla,  cemetery  of,  296 

Donaldson,  632,  637,  698,  andjpowww 

Donatist  schism,  1J)7 

Dorner,  544,  799,  849,  and  passim 

Dorothcus,  815 

Dositheus,  462 

Du  Cange,  625 

EASTEK,  206  sqq 

Easter  controversies,  209  sqq 

Ebert,  818,  829,  834,  840,  853,  854,  856, 
800,  864 

Ebionism  and  Ebionites,  429,  432  sqq 

EcclcHiastical  law,  collections  of,  183  sqq 

Egypt,  Christianity  in,  24  sqq 

Elders,  see  Presbyters 

Klkesaites,  433 

Elvira,  council  of,  180 

151  xui,  434 

Encratites,  495 

Engelhardt,  711,  726 

EpioletUH,  321  sqq 

Epiphanes,  493 

Epiphanius,  often  quoted  in  the  ohs.  oc; 
and  xiii 

Epiphany,  221  sq 

Episcopate,  origin  of,  133  sqq. ;  develop- 
ment of,  144  sqq.;  Ignatian  episco- 
pacy, 144;  at  the  time  of  Irenceus  and 
Tertullian,  149  sqq.;  Cyprianio  epis- 
copacy, 150  sqq. ;  pseudo-Clementine 
episcopacy,  151  sq 

Epitaphs  of  the  catacombs,  299  sqq 


872 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


Eanig,  483, 484 

Eschatology,  589  sqq 

Eucharist,  celebration  of,  285  sqq. ;  doc- 
trine of,  24  L  ;  as  a  sacrament, 241  sqq.; 
as  a  sacrifice,  245  sqq 

Eusebiua.  his  history,  4 ;  on  the  Diocle- 
tian persecution,  68  sq. ;  on  the  canon 
of  the  Scriptures,  517  sq.,  522  sq. ;  his 
position,  864  sqq;  very  often  quoted 
in  ch.  ziii 

Ewald,  701,  703, 705 

Exorcists,  131  sq 

FABIANTTS  of  Borne,  61 

Fabianus  of  Antioch,  850,  852 

Fabricius,  623,  and  passim 

Family,  the  Christian,  361  sqq 

Fathers  of  the  Church,  624  sqq 

Fasting,  377  sq 

Felicissimus,  194 

Felicitas,  58 

Festivals,  206  sqq 

Field,  794 

Firmilian,  162 

Fisher,  George  P.,  19  andjporo&ft 

Flavins  Clement,  44,  637,  782 

Florinus,  754 

Freppel,632,747,781,786 

Friday,  celebration  of,  208 

Friedlcender,  312,  337,  360 

Friedlieb,  115 

Fulton,  183 

Funk,  631,  636.    See  Hefele  and  Ap. 

Fathers 
Future  life,  597  sqq 

GALBBITTS,  66, 68, 71 

Gallienus,  63 

Gallus,  62 

Gaul,  Christianity  in,  29 

Gebhardt,  von,  and  Harnack,  636, 671, 
679, 693 

Gibbon,  his  work,  5;  on  the  causes  of 
the  spread  of  Christianity,  17  sq. ;  on 
the  Diocletian  persecution,  67,  69,  78  ; 
on  the  decline  of  the  Eoman  Empire, 
347;  on  the  heathen  family,  359  sq 

Gieseler,  430,  434,  SA&  passim. 


Gloria  in  excelsis,  227 

Gnosticism,  literature  on.  442  sqq.;  mean- 


ing, origin  and  character,  444  sqq. ;  its 

theology,  452;   cosmology,  453   aq.; 

christology  and  soteriology,  455  sq.; 

anthropology,  456 ;  elides,  457 ;  cultus 

and  organization,  458 ;  schools  of,  459 

sq. ;  Gnostic  sects,  497  sq 
God  and  the  creation,  doctrine  of,  538 

sqq 

Gordianus,  59 

Gospels,  516  sqq.;  720;  apocryphal,  443 
Greek  Church  and  celibacy  of  the  clergy, 

412 

Gregory  of  Nazianzum,  406 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  407,  797 
Gregory  Thaumaturgos,  796  sqq 

HADES,  602,768 
Hadrian,  49  sq 
Halm,  833 
Harmonius,  482 
Hartel,  842 

Harnack,  Ad.,  3, 45, 49,  94, 95, 164, 443, 
494, 579, 631, 636, 732, 735, 803, 812, 840. 
Harvey,  W.  Wigan,  529,  746 
Hatch,  124 
Hauck,  818 
Hearers,  189 

Heathenism,  defense  against,  109  sqq 
Heathen  family,  354  sqq 
Hefele,  34, 175,  183,  636,  701,  813,  and 


Hegesippus,  4,  742  sqq 

HeHogabalus,  58 

Heracleon,  479 

Heraclas,  779,  806 

Heretical  baptism,  262  sq 

Heretical  books,  523 

Heretical  and  Catholic  ascetism,  392  sqq 

Heresy,  5  L2  sqq 

Hergenrother,  Cardinal,  on  the  Anti- 

ochian  School,  815,  817 
Hernias,  the  shepherd  of,  131,  678  sqq. 
Hermias,  741  sq 
Hermogenes,  496 
Hesychius,  815 
Hexapla,  793 

Hieracas  (Hierax),  401, 808 
Hierocles,  102 

Hilgenfeld,  209,  428,  435,  444,  631, 
Hippolytus,  on  the  papacy,  160«q.;  on 

discipline,  192  sq. ;  on  the  divinity  of 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


873 


Christ,  555 ;  against  Noetus  and  Cal- 
listus,  578;  on  future  punishment, 
609;  on  Hades,  768;  his  life  and  writ- 
ings, 757  sqq 

Holy  Scriptures  and  the  canon,  516  sqq 

Holy  Spirit,  doctrine  of  the,  560  sqq 

Homologumena,  522 

Hort,  529,  815 

Hosius,  181,  864  sqq 

Humanity  of  Christ,  555  sqq 

Hydroparastatse,  495 

Hymns,  226  sqq 

ICHTHYS,  279 

Ignatius  of  Antioch,  his  life  and  martyr- 
dom, 47  sqq. ;  on  the  episcopate,  145, 
158  sq.;  on  celibacy,  399;  on  the 
divinity  of  Christ,  547 ;  on  the  human- 
ity of  Christ,  556  sq. ;  his  epistles,  651 
sqq 

Ignatian  controversy,  660  sqq 

Immersion,  see  Baptism 

Immortality  of  the  soul,  590  sqq 

Incarnation,  doctrine  of  the,  545 

Infant  baptism,  see  Baptism 

Irenseus,  on  the  number  of  martyrs,  79; 
on  episcopacy,  149;  on  primacy,  159 
sq.,  171 ;  on  the  paschal  controversy, 
213, 217  sq. ;  on  the  eucharist,  242 ;  on 
infant  baptism,  259;  on  Gnosticism, 
443;  on  tradition,  525;  on  God  and 
creation,  538, 540 ;  his  christology,  553, 
556,  559  sq. ;  on  the  Holy  Spirit,  563; 
on  the  Trinity,  569;  on  redemption, 
587;  on  future  punishment,  609;  on 
chiliasm,  617 ;  his  life  and  writings, 
746  sqq 

Irvingism  compared  with  Montaniszn, 
427 

Isidore,  471 

Italy,  Christianity  in,  29 

JACHMANN,  679 
Jackson,  George  A.,  632,  692 
Jacobi,  758,  781,  and  passim 
Jaldabaoth.    See  Gnosticism. 
Jamblichus,  98 
Janitors,  132 

Jason  and  Papiseus,  88, 107 
Jerome,   passim,    especially   in    Ch. 
XIII  , 


Jerusalem,  again  destroyed,  37  sq 

Jewish  (literary)  opposition,  87  sq 

Jewish  persecution,  36  sqq 

John  and  the  Easter  controversy,  219  sq 

Joscphus,  87  sq,  and  passim 

Judaism  and  heathenism  within  the 
Church,  428 

Judaism,  argument  against,  107 

Julia  Mammsea,  59 

Julius  Africanus,  803  sqq 

•Justin  Martyr,  on  the  spread  of  Chris- 
tianity, 22;  apologetics  against  the 
heathen,  107,  114,  119;  on  Sunday 
observance,  203;  on  public  worship, 
223;  on  the  eucharist,  235,  242;  on 
baptism,  247  sq. ;  on  celibacy,  400 ;  on 
the  Logos  and  the  divinity  of  Christ, 
548  sqq. ;  on  the  Holy  Spirit,  5C1 ;  on 
the  Trinity,  569 ;  on  redemption,  58C ; 
on  future  punishment,  G08 ;  on  chili- 
asm,  616 ;  his  life  and  writings,  710 
sqq 

Justin  the  Gnostic,  495  sq 

KAYE,  781,  818,  833 

Keim,  61, 64, 85,93,  701, 841,  andpatrim 

Kneelers,  189 

Kosmology,  453  sqq 

Kuhn,  834,  839 

LACTANTIUS,  66, 105,  864  sqq 
Lagarde,  Paul  de,  184, 442, 703, 705, 757, 

761, 797 
Lapsi,  60,  76, 189  sqq 
Laurentius,  63 
Lecky,  on  the  spread  of  Christianity,  18 

sq. ;  on  persecution,  81    on  the  decline 

of  the  Roman  Empire,  347;  on  Greek 

vice,  356 

Legio  fulminatrix,  56 
Leonides,  57,  786 
Libellatici,  60,  76 
Lightfoot,  fip.,  121,  126,  133, 135,  136, 

225,  636,  643,  653,  690,  747,  748 
Lipsius,  163, 164,  443,  444,  461,  6tt6,  747 
Literary  opposition  to  Christianity,  80 

sq.;  Jewish  opposition,  87  sq.;  Jose- 

phus  and  the  Talmud,  87  sq. ;  Pagan 

opposition,  88  sq 
Liturgy  of  "Clement,  226 
Logos,  doctrine  of  the,  548  sqq 


874 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


Lord's  Day,  201  sqq 
Love  Feast,  239  sq 
Lucian,  of  Samosata,  93  sqq 
Lucian,  of  Antioch,  812  sqq 
Lundy, 408 

MAMMJEA,  JULIA,  59 

Man  and  the  Fall,  541  sqq 

Mandaeans,  434 

Mani  and  the  Manichseans,  498  sqq 

Hanichsean  system,  503;  theology,  504; 

morality,  505;  organization,,  507;  wor- 
ship, 507 

Marcion  and  his  school,  482  sqq 
Marcus  and  the  Marcosians,  480 
Marcus  Aurelius,  persecutions  under,  53 

sqq. ;  life  and  character,  325  sqq 
Marriage,  363  sqq 
Marriage,  second,  366  sqq 
Martyrdom,  Christian,  74  sqq 
Martyrs  and  relics,  worship  of,  82  sqq 
Mary  the  Virgin,  pictures  of,  281  sqq 
Matter,  see  Gnosticism 
Mauritius,  70 
Maximian,  66 
Maximilla,  see  Montanism 
Maximinus  Daza,  68 
Maximinus  the  1  hracian,  59 
Melchizedekians, 
Meletian,  schism,  197,  808 
Melito  of  Sardis,  on  persecution,  54;  life 

and  -writings,  736  sqq 
Merivale,  13,  19 
Methodius,  401 ;  life  and  writings,  809  sqq 
Metropolitan  and  patriarchal  system, 

152  sq 

Metropolitans,  153 
Migne,  his   Patrol.  Lat.,  and   Grseca, 

quoted  passim,  especially  in  ch.  xiii. 
Millennarianism,  424 
Milman,  works,  5  sq.;  on  the  decline*  of 

the  Roman  Empire,  347 
Miltiades,  741 

Minucius  Felix,  105, 113,  833  sqq 
Miracles,  116  sq,  800 
Miraculous  gifts,  423 
Missions,  13  sqq 
Mohler,  168,  623,  an.6.  passim 
Holler,  W.,  538,  786,  797,  809,  815/and 

passim 
Mommsen,  27,  287,  289,  841 


Monarchians,  571  sqq 

Montanism,  literature  on,  415  sqq. ;  ex« 

ternal  history  of,  417  sqq  ;  character 

and  tenets  of,  421 ;  practical  life  and 

discipline,  422 

Moral  reforms,  summary  of,  385  sqq 
Mosheim,  5,  23  and  often 
Muratorian  fragment  of  the  canon,  518, 

776  sq 

NAASSENES,  488 

Nazarenes,  431  sq 

Neander,  259,  443,  472,  483,  and  often 

referred  to 

Neo-Platonism,  95  sqq 
Nero,  44 

Newman,  Cardinal,  163,  800,  817 
New  Testament  in  the  Church,  517  sqq 
Nicsea,  council  of,  on  Easter;  on  clerical 

celibacy,  411 ;  creed  of,  536  sq 
Nicolaitans,  464 
Noetus,  578 

North  Africa,  christianized;  26 
Novatian  of  Home,  196;  on  the  Trinity 

570;  life  and  writings  849  sqq 
Novatian  schism,  196  sq 
Novatus  of  Carthage,  194 

OLD  TESTAMENT  in  the  Church,  516 

Ophites,  488  sq 

Ordination,  127 

Organization  and  discipline  of  the 
Church,  121  sqq 

Origen,  on  persecution,  79 ;  against  Col* 
sus,  89  sqq,  795;  on  miracles,  110, 
116;  on  Christian  morals,  111;  on 
the  Church,  172 ;  on  higher  morality, 
394  sq. ;  on  celibacy,  401 ;  on  Scripture 
exposition,  521 ;  on  creation,  540 ;  on 
preexistence,  542 ;  on  the  divinity  of 
Christ,  551  sq. ;  on  the  humanity  of 
Christ,  557 ;  on  the  Holy  Spirit,  562 ; 
on  redemption,  587 ;  on  final  restora- 
tion, 611;  his  life  and  writings,  785 
sqq 

Orthodoxy  and  heresy,  509, 512  sqq 

Otto,  3,  698,  710,  726,  etc 

Oudin,  623 

Overbeck,  347,  699 

PAGAN  opposition  (literary)  to  Chris* 
tianity,  88  sq 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


875 


Pamphilus,  807 

Pantseims,  778 

Papacy,  germs  of,  154  sqq 

Papias,  on  chiliasm,  615 ;  life  and  writ- 
ings, 693  sqq 

Papiscus,  107 

Paradise,  601 

Parsism,  see  Manichseism 

Passover,  207 

Paschal  Controversies,  209  sqq 

Patriotism,  346 

Patripassians,  576  sqq 

Patristic  literature, 

Paul  of  Samosata,  574  sq 

Paulianists,  576 

Penance,  605  sq 

Penitents,  189  sq 

Pentecost,  220  sq 

Peputians,  see  Montanists 

Peratae,  or  Peratics,  489 

Perpetua,  58 

Persecutions,  32  sqq  ;  under  Marcus 
Aurelius,  52  sqq. ;  under  Decius,  60 
sq. ;  legendary,  63 ;  under  Diocletian, 
64  sqq 

Petavius,  544 

Peter  of  Alexandria,  807 

Philip  the  Arabian,  59  sq 

Philostratus,  99 

Pliilosophumena,  764  sqqj  see  Hippo- 
lytus 

Pictures,  historical  and  allegorical,  274 ; 
of  the  catacombs,  298  sq 

Pierius,  806 

Pitra,  Card.,  4,  696,  736,  738,  752 

Plato  and  Platonism,  95  sqq 

Plato,  on  Immortality,  593 

Platonism  and  Christianity,  725  sqq 

Pliny,  the  younger,  on  Christianity,  46, 
88 ;  on  the  worship  of  the  Christians, 
202,222 

Plotinus,  95 

Plutarch,  330  sqq 

Polycarp,  213;  martyrdom  of,  52;  life 
and  epistle,  664  sqq 

Polycrates,  on  the  Paschal  controversies, 


Ponticus,  55 
Popes,  list  of,  162  sqq 
Porphyry,  98, 101  sq 
,  58 


Pothinus,  55,  749 

Poverty,  voluntary,  396 

Praxeas,  577 

Prayer,  225  sq. ;  of  the  Roman  Church, 


Prayer  and  Fasting,  377  sqq ;  Prayer  for 

the  dead,  COS  sq 
Preaching, 
Precentors,  132 
Preexistence  of  the  soul,  542 
Prepo,  487 
Presbyters,  139  sqq 
Pressense*,  E.  de,  6,  716,  828 
Priscilla,  see  Montamsm 
Proclus,  99,  618,  775 
Prodicians,  497 
Prophecies,  115 
Prudentius,  384 

Pseudo-  Clementine  Works,  648  sqq 
Ptolemy,  480 
Public  amusements,  and  the  Church,  338 

sqq 

Punishment,  future,  609  sqq 
Purgatory,  605 
Pusey,  149, 175 

QUADRAGESIMAL  fasts, 
Quudratus,  708 
Quartodecimani,  211,  215  sq 

READERS,  131 

Recognitions  of  Pseudo-Clement 

Redemption,  doctrine  of,  583  sqq 

Redepciming,  786,  792 

Reifierscheid,  856 

Religious  Freedom,  35  sq. ;  825  sq 

Renan,  6, 19,  5*,  123, 154,  210,  21«,  327, 
416,  637,  638,  639,  644,  653,  824,  825, 
834,  839,  841 

Restoration  of  the  Fallen,  190 

Ritschl,  583,  and  passim 

Roman  Church,  Prayer  of  the,  228  sq 

Roman  Empire,  Christianity  in  the,  22 
sq.;  moral  corruption  of  the,  312  sqq 

Roman  persecution,  causes  of,  40 ;  toler- 
ation, 40  sq.;  intolerance,  41  sq. ;  Ropes, 
637 

Rossi,  Cavalier  de,  265,  285,  and  passim 

Rothe,  137, 168 

Routh,  ReL  Sacrae,  4 ;  often  quoted  in 
ch.  xiii.,  758,  761  sq.,  etc 

Rufinus,  532,  704 


876 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


SABBATH,  see  Lord's  Day 

Sabellius  and  Sabellianism,  580  sqq 

Sabians,  434 

Sacraments,  235  sqq 

Sacrifice,  eucharistic,  237;  245  sqq 

Sacrificati,  60,  76 

Salmon,  G.,  758,  761,  770,  774,  775,  776, 

803,  809,  etc 

Salmond,  S.  D.  F.,  797,  800 
Samosatenians  or  Samosatians,  575 
Saturninus  (Satornilos),  491  sq 
Schisms,  192  sqq 
Schurer,  115,  209,  and  passim 
Schwegler,  219,  632,  and  passim 
Scripture  Lessons,  Beading  of,  224  sq 
Scriptures,  the  Holy,  516 
Sculptures  of  the  Catacombs,  298  sq 
Sebastian  St.,  Cemetery  of,  295 
Secular  Callings  and  Civil  Duties,  343  sq 
Seneca,  on  immortality,  593 
Septimus  Severus,  57  sqq 
Sermon,  225 
Sethites,  489 
Sheol,  600 

Sibylline  Oracles,  115 
Simon  Magus,  438,  461  sq 
Simonians,  461  sqq 
SLxtus  I.,  see  Xystus 
Slavery  and  the  Church,  347  sqq 
Smith  and  Wace,  625  and  often  in  ch. 

xiii 

Socrates,  on  immortality,  592 
Song,  226  sqq 
Spain,  Christianity  in,  29 
Spirit,  the  Holy,  doctrine  of,  560  sqq 
Sprinzl,  632,  637 
Spurious  books,  523 
Stanley  on  baptism,  248  sq 
Slanders,  189 
Stephen  of  Borne,  on  heretical  baptism, 


Stieren,  746 
Stoic  Morality,  318  aqq 
Sub-deacons,  131 
Sunday,  see  Lord's  Day 
Symeon  of  Jerusalem,  47 
Synods,  175  sqq 

TACITUS,  88  sq 

Talmud,  38  sqq.,  88,  596 

Tatian,  493  aqq.,  works  of,  726  sqq 


Taylor,  Isaac,  on  Ancient  Christianity,  9 

Terminalia,  Feast  of,  67 

Tertullian,  on  clergy  and  laity,  126, 128 ; 
on  Episcopacy,  150 ;  on  Catholic  unity, 
161,  171  sq.;  on  the  euchariwt,  243; 
against  infant  baptism,  261;  011  the 
appearance  of  Christ,  277 ;  on  the  the- 
atre, 342;  on  the  Christian  family, 
364;  against  second  marriage,  3(>7; 
relation  to  Montanism,  415  sqq.;  on 
Scripture  and  tradition,  526  sqq. ;  on 
God,  539;  on  the  origin  of  the  soul, 
541;  on  the  divinity  of  Christ,  554; 
on  the  humanity  of  Christ,  557;  on 
the  Holy  Spirit,*1>64;  on  the  Trinity, 
569;  against  Praxeas,  577;  on  fu- 
ture punishment,  COO ;  on  the  millen- 
nium, 617;  life  and  writings,  818  wqq 

Theatre,  339  sqq.;  342 

Theodotus  and  Theodotiana,  574 

Theodoras  of  Mopauestia,  816 

Theognostus,  806 

Theophilus  of  Antioch;  732  sqq 

Thundering  Legion,  56 

Thurificati,  76 

Toleration,  Edicts  of,  71  sqq 

Tradition,  524  sqq 

Draditores,  76 

Draducianism,  541 

CVajan,  45  sqq 

Trent,  council  of,  on  heretical  baptism, 
265;  on  the  Canon  of  the  Scriptures, 
524 

Trinity,  doctrine  of  the,  504  sqq 

frypho,  107 

Twelve  Patriarchs,  Testaments  of,  116 
Types,  116 

ULHOEN,  6,  312,  370,  431,  435, 467,  637, 
652,  etc 

Unitarians,  see  Antitrinitarians 

Universal  Priesthood,  424 

Ursula,  59 

Ussher,  often  quoted  on  the  primitive 
creed,  and  the  writings  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Fathers 

VALENTINUS,  472  sqq.;  school  of,  479 
Valerian,  62 

Victor  of  Borne,  216  sq.j  849  (note) 
Victorinus  of  Petau,  $61  sqq 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


877 


Volkmar,  758,  768,  775 

WA.LLIS,  834,  849,  853,  861 
Wallon,  on  slavery,  354 
Weepers,  189 
Woman,  362  sqq 

Worship,  9;  places  of,  198;   order  of, 
222  sq. ;  of  martyrs  and  relics,  82  sqq 
Westcott,  524,  781, 783,  800,  803 


XYSTTTS  OP  ROME,  703  sqq. ;  sentences 
of,  705  sqq 

ZAHN,  3,  45, 146,  580,  631,  651,  652,  654, 

664,  679,  689,  732,  735 
Zephyrinus,  Pope,  193,  765,  9ee  Hippo 

lytus 
Zoroastrism,  501