Full text of "The work claiming to be the constitutions of the holy apostles, including the canons;"

See other formats

ΨΥ ᾿Ξ) tet ἊΝ he Λ
ah » ᾿. <ee J

’ ©
se eee es
ey) Ln ee

eooee

#8 Rte
* Γι pa
Ose me erate
whee oe
PO re kal ἁφιν
ye 09 iho?
1 bots te OO em epee ee
ν᾿} MS hl Ph ek hy
Py aed eon ΟῚ
wee er here

᾿ eee
ΓΝ ΤΣ +
bf ΓΕ

" m! a Os te ie Or we ame

Aa ν. ΟΣ ΧΩ δὰ
τιν bab ἢ ᾿ Ore ad he @ Ha wo ἢ δὶ
® Pee ay La ‘ ”. Ce eka

* ene

ces ee
seve
ey ΤΩ, "
Δ an eee eh ΟΝ
ὝΤΙΧΥΧΙΣ ᾿ “αυνν
a ae Α ΜΝ wan (soe
ures Pa et ee ee
eede to . ei ΥΩ: ne ee
4} Ψ , τυ νυν hte ON δα μον
Σ eee οὖν ὦ “ἡ δ ον ΒΊΑ
eee ee whe ΕΙΣ
oe Ἦ ὧν»

;
a ee ee |
ΠΥ

om ἐν ὑπο ὁ ote me ΨΚ
11009 ὁ λων fe © BF he ᾿ ‘oO FH & Dr © Oe ee
*? FARES Bt "ὦ ec’ oa any 4
pee UP eee ee he ey
ry eee CRA shS Se
eo μι ὦ bee RO ὁ . 140. Bm oe On ee «thre
- ἐν ee

ore Ade » FA ake
Vel Hae tere eh
“" ἔ εἶ nite, BHO My 5

ee «
~Wanwe net ᾿
νων »ψνυὺ
tg ba BAe ἦν ν
ΡΟ I)

: » J a
ytd Pe Ber PMS mY eRe wet
het ue ‘ ey ete es or ὦ
Jere Pees es Are!
ΕΟ ΩΣ ΟῚ
&?

ψ' . νὰ
ΜΕΥ ete eer a™
» 4 ν φιλο do catia we ΤΑῚ
my tev tee ted bee Bees ψ

* aeore ohare
yt yi eh ee nt
J dee vot

+> eee
Per eh be pr therm)
Renee dT ὧν
ee bb fear Pre OF oer J
Sarees ereert
‘ ἢ ΡΥ +e
Ἢ or stehee es
ede ews 2
’ ΠΟ ΣΧ
Oe 4

Tes 5
ἐψυν νῦν"
ν᾽ εν:
᾿ ne eee
wd ee ha (Lee

are 1) OX
};

lip boca ame Pe
᾽ sees y ἊΝ ΧΕΙ
$ v9 i ἂν si Pee δία
ϑ ν , ὅ » ad

Hy LI Oil plc hacen Mahe ty
4.4% CUP RAPT τέ

» πη ὺ

Μὸν δον

eee J

Aye
“ne

ey " ἵ το

7 v7 * *. ,»
τ ete wle se trees
ἡ δὼ νὰ nw "Ὁ

ἃ δι ΡΥ

᾿ ΧΑ

y } ᾿

ΔΝ ἣν eae τ» oe 2a

ΝΥΝ, ‘ea . PED ee

sf Tal Lf | aid

᾿
Κρ τὶ
Ἀ »
4 aed ey ‘
wt Ri ἌΝ ry

Εν δ ἡ
ἈΝ
ὃ

yes #714 i

a
᾿ δηρὸν τ᾿
ἥν ἀμ ἘΠῚ

iw os ae

ΙΝ]

β
δε ὁ δ᾽.
ἀν δν

ΜᾺ Τ᾽
gtd de Ἃ 3
deere q Ὰ Ff
ea Mg der fete bow Chacd
anew ΡΣ ον *

weed

4 4
ΓΣ ἈΣ ct? ἂν - J "ὅ υ ὃ αὶ
ὁν4 1 ete ἢ ἸνφιενάφΦοι dew YAR?
᾿ ψ' ( μ ν ‘ (ter
#« bind a ον ΟΡ

“y

awa

yo ἢ δὲ
cave .

a
sar

#5
ἀν δά
e444 Gs AAA oe

fiatdvewonwe
ΠΝ

LP 4
ἐν γον 4 6)
ae og αν

v . Α
‘ 4“ ὦ Κι δ ὁ:
{δε aw dae ἕ
ΓΤ ΤΥ 2) ΓῚ vin
oe Ree ee he Re «ὦ a
ΓΑ ΤΕΣ
“3 ‘a

trite
entbarsee rin?
“κε δῶνν ἢ
‘

Le ar
᾿ ᾿

Wy Ot a]
bv AI ie
‘ ὙΠ Bo ΠῚ ᾿ Ἰ { te
t Py ᾿ : bbe ae δ ᾿ A | ᾿ ἡ} Ὁ ey em Ἷ

ΝΥ

1 7, f
.% ᾿ ait ena i
ra ᾿ / Ny r d
aA
i ; i
i :
᾿ γ ᾿
Ὁ
| \
+ ’ t
: q ΠΝ ty, {
if τὴν
"Ὁ S
i : j
\ at ἷ
j
ἡ:
ah
iA \ fn
fa \ Py ᾿ j\
~F Χ 1
Ξ ᾿ ον
7
ἣ ‘
~ Ὶ '
a bey
i ie,
᾿ ΕἾΝ
υ ϊ 7 ft
ι ἃ Mi νὴ,
‘ χὰ
: N i
ue Ἷ fey
Τὰν
Ἵ
i ) : 1 Ξξ
; Ἷ
ἐξ ᾿ : ‘
δ τ ᾿ ᾿
ΕἾ f
‘he , “ ἵ ἘΦ
δ:
, ra ἔς r
: fi
᾽: οΥ :
- ,
ve
ἢ ς
ἐν { ae
S * ¥
* ᾿ ΨΥ!
i"
MS A ᾿ eo
2 t
ἣ
Ϊ ta h
« f ἦν ,
ω 4
᾿
᾿ ψ ' i >
t ἢ
Ὗ Τὴ Υ
᾿ i N U ‘ 4
Ἶ
] ΐ
' i
5 t
ΕΝ a
Al
i ey! Ὁ
i ΓΝ
Ἶ ‘
ν
δ
,
᾿ A ᾿ ᾽
ΜΔ, τὴν
Fy on EAR I
age f 1 ὶ
i i ha
es %
salt γ ᾿ ἊΨ
αὐ ἀ Ὁ] ἱ ae A
a) * μὲ
Η -"
- τ 4 x
. ᾿ Ἢ ,
i ;
: Og Bc
Wik Κα , fa
Ἷ te! 5 1 ,
7 a
! ϊ rv 4

ya aa roo Le ee hu vu
ee. Se 190040
[7 THE WORK 4” / ly ben or
πῶς. CLAIMING TO BE
r
THE CONSTITUTIONS
OF
Ret weky APOSTLE +s.
| INCLUDING THE CANONS;
WHISTON’S VERSION, REVISED FROM THE GREEK:
A PRIZE ESSAY,
AT THRE UNIVERSITY OF BONN,
:
; UPON
THEIR OhIGIN AND CONTENTS;
ν᾽ ; τ het ὦ -»- τῇ
7 re
TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN, ὃ
BY IRAH CHASE, D.D.
| NEW YORK:
D. APPLETON & COMPANY, 200 BROADWAY.
PHILADELPHIA: |
GEORGE 85. APPLETON, 148 CHESNUT STREET.
i‘ M DCCC XLVI.
oe

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1847, by
IRAH CHASE,
In the Clerk’s Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts.

BOSTON:
DICKINSON PRINTING ESTABLISHMENT..... DAMRELL & MOORE,

No. 52 Washington Street.

AND INTELLIGENT,

THE CANDID
OF ALL PARTIES,
THIS VOLUME IS INSCRIBED ;
IN THE HOPE, THAT IT MAY CONTRIBUTE SOMEWHAT
TOWARDS HELPING THEM

TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS THE STATE OF THE CHURCH AT AN EARLY PERIOD,

AND

TO MAKE SUCH REFLECTIONS AS MAY REASONABLY BE EXPECTED,

AT THE PRESENT TIME,
FROM

DISCIPLES OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST.

bs, pie har
_ are ae

PREFACE.

In reading these Constitutions and Canons of the
Apostles, the Christian of the present day will be likely
to exclaim, A splendid specimen of pious fraud! A
strange mixture of good and of evil! He will readily
perceive, however, that he has before him documents
exceedingly important for illustrating the ecclesiastical
history of a very remote period;—a pericd during a
portion of which, at least, heathenism was dominant; the
sighing of Christian prisoners. was heard; the blood of
martyrs was flowing. Here, too, are seen indications of
the bitter controversies which rent the church before and
after the Nicene Council, assembled by Constantine the
Great, A.D. 325; here, some of the seminal principles
from which gradually arose monasticism and the Papal
hierarchy, and other great departures from the spirit and
practice of the primitive Christians. And yet, with all
the error, and superstition, and bitterness, and fraud,
there is so much that is true, so much that is opposed
to superstition, so much of kindness, moderation, and

al PREFACE.

wisdom, so much of intelligence, and of acquaintance with
the sacred Scriptures, so much that is elevated and mani-
festly Christian, so much that inculcates holiness upon
the clergy and upon the laity, so much that is appropriate
and impressive in some of the liturgical pieces; and, for
the most part, there is such a tone of earnestness and sin-
cerity, that, im the absence of the lights which we now
enjoy, multitudes might easily have admitted the claims
here set forth to apostolical authority.

This could the more easily be done by the aid of the
representation that certain secret matters were intrusted
to the rulers of the church, and were to be made known
by them, at their discretion, to the initiated only, and not
to all. For then, if some article of faith or of practice
was not taught in the Scriptures, nor promulgated at all,
for a century, or for several centuries, after the age of
the apostles, no matter. Who, the doubter might be
asked, who can prove that it may not have been pre-
served secretly, and transmitted from one Bishop to
another, till the proper time for its promulgation? . .
Something like this, which has been denominated the
Discipline of the Secret, is indicated in the eighty-fifth
Canon, just at the close of this work: ‘The Constitu-
tions dedicated to you, the Bishops, by me, Clement, in
eight books, which it is not fitting to publish before all,
because of the mysteries contained in them.’ Here, then,
it would seem, we have, at large, the secret code estab-
lished by the apostles, respecting all the affairs of the
church.

Clement of Alexandria, it is said, speaks of the con-

PREFACE. Vii

cealed theories, in contrast with the simple instructions
imparted to the Catechumens. Jerome, in his reply to a
friend who had consulted him respecting an obscure pas-
sage of the apostle Paul on the sacrifice of Melchisedek,
says, ‘ You are not to suppose that Paul could not easily
have explained. himself; but the time was not come for
such explanation. He sought to persuade the Jews, and
not the faithful, to whom the mystery might have been
delivered without reserve.’ Basil, in his work on the
Holy Spirit, c. 27, remarks, that ‘ We receive the dogmas
transmitted to us by writing, and those which have
descended to us from the apostles beneath the veil and
mystery of oral tradition. .. . The apostles and fathers
who from the beginning prescribed certain rites to the
church, knew how to preserve the dignity of the myste-
ries by the secrecy and silence in which they enveloped
them. For what is open to the ear and the eye is no
longer mysterious. For this reason, several things have
been handed down to us without writing, lest the vulgar,
too familiar with our dogmas, should pass from being
accustomed to them to the contempt of them.’
Schelstrate, in a Latin work, printed at Rome in 1685,
on the Discipline of the Secret (De Disciplina Arcani),
contends strenuously for its apostolic origin. And
Thomas Moore, in his Travels of an Irish Gentleman in
search of a Religion, accounts for the apparent heterodoxy
of the fathers of the third century by the Discipline of
the Secret. ‘With Tertullian,’ he remarks, at the close
of his tenth chapter, ‘may be said to have commenced
that change in the public language of the fathers on this

Vill PREFACE.

subject,’ (the Eucharist) — ‘that circumlocution, and not
unfrequently ambiguity, in their notices of this mystery,
—of which before there had been no example, and of
which the Protestants have, in their despair, taken
advantage, as affording some shadow of plausibility to
their arguments against the true Catholic doctrine of the
Eucharist. The system of secrecy to which such ambigui-
ties, and, as it would seem, inconsistencies, in these holy
writers may be traced, forms too remarkable a feature in
the annals of the early church, and is, indeed, too closely
connected with the history of this and other Christian
doctrines, to be dismissed without receiving some farther
consideration.’ In the next chapter he adds, ‘'The truth
seems to be that the principle of this policy was acted
upon, in the Christian church, from the very beginning.
So strongly has not only St. Paul, but our Saviour him-
self, inculcated a sacred reserve in promulgating the mys-
teries of the faith, that there can be no doubt the
succeeding teachers of the church would, in this, as in
all things else, follow their divine Master’s precept. But
though as a principle, this reverential guard over the
mysteries was observed, doubtless, from the very first rise
of Christianity, it does not appear to have been strictly
enforced, as a rule of discipline, till about the close of the
second century.’

Thus ingeniously this gifted Papal advocate pleads for
what Milman, in his History of Christianity (Ὁ. iv. ο. 2.),
well denominates ‘that esoteric doctrine within which
lurked every thing which later ages thought proper to

dignify by the name of the traditions of the church,’

PREFACE. 1X

There is another consideration which may cast some
light upon the origin of the spurious books, which, at an
early period, were circulated under the name of our Lord
himself, or of his apostles, or of apostolical men. It was
believed by many that it is right and commendable to
practise deception in order to promote a good cause.
The fact is mentioned and lamented by various Christian
writers of established reputation. And, alluding to the
new Platonists, Mosheim, in one of his Dissertations per-
taining to Ecclesiastical History (vol. 1. p. 200), says,
‘Those who from among these philosophers attached
themselves to the Christian religion, were so far from
abandoning this opinion, when they became Christians,
that, on the contrary, they approved it in word and deed,
and propagated it more widely than has generally been
supposed. Hence, the early ages were prolific in fictitious
books, and in the disingenuous arts of controversy. I
would not indeed deny that, under the influence of natural
corruption, very many could have fallen into the way of
deeming it right to deceive for the cause of religion; nor
do I think that, before this kind of Platonic wisdom
passed into the church, none of those who had professed
Christianity adopted this most reprehensible practice.
But what I affirm is, that, from the time in which the
disciples of Christ listened favorably to these philoso-
phers, this pestilence was much more extensively diffused
than before, and that it corrupted the manners and the
teaching even of most estimable men; and, therefore, was
exceedingly detrimental to the church. Of this, the
books which distinguish themselves by the names of

x PREFACE.

Clement of Rome, and Dionysius the Areopagite, to say
nothing of others, are a lasting monument.’

The Jewish, Platonizing author of the work ascribed
to Clement, entitled, An Epitome of Peter’s Preaching in
his travels abroad, has repeatedly represented this apostle
as approving and encouraging deception, for the purpose
of overthrowing his great antagonist, Simon Magus.
The venerated philosopher Pythagoras, too, it was under-
stood, had employed deception successfully, to reform the
morals of the vicious. Plato himself had taught that it
might be used by rulers. In the third book of his dia-
logue on the Republic, he says, ‘If lately we reasoned
right, and if, indeed, a lie be unprofitable to the gods, but
useful to men, in the way of a drug, it is plain that such
a thing is to be intrusted only to the physicians, but not
to be touched by private persons. . . . It belongs, then,
to. the governors of the city, if to any others, to make a
lie, with reference either to enemies or to citizens, for the
good of the city; but all the rest must abstain from what
is false.’

’ The passage is quite explicit. It needs no comment.
And although it was very natural for an ardent admirer
of Plato’s excellences to endeavor, as Schleiermacher has
done in his Introduction to the Republic, to ‘refer this
innocent deceit to the mythical style,’ yet few will be sat-
isfied with such a gloss. Impartial readers, in general,
will admire the gentleness and modesty with which Ritter,
in his elaborate History of Philosophy, expresses his dis-
sent, saying, ‘I question whether this is a legitimate
exposition of Plato’s doctrine.’ Origen, it is certain, and

PREFACE. xl

others, in the church and out of it, who were imbued
more or less with the prevalent philosophy of their times,
understood the words in their obvious import. And, in
the circumstances of the early Christian fathers, it is easy
to see what must have been the tendency of the doctrine,
wherever it had influence. It must have contributed to
strengthen all other tendencies and temptations to the use
of fraud in vanquishing opponents, and in preserving the
multitude from danger. The reasoning was short and
conclusive: It is right for rulers to deceive for the pur-
pose of benefiting the city. If this be right for those who
are only civil rulers, and to secure only temporal benefits,
how much more clearly must it be right, and even
meritorious, for those who have been divinely constituted
spiritual rulers, and to secure spiritual and everlasting
benefits !

At the same time, it cought to be borne in mind that
many, both of the clergy and of the laity, may have
heartily disapproved the practice of pious frauds. Indeed,
the multitude were not to know any thing of it. From
the second century there has descended to us an unques-
tionable reference to one case at least, of an author’s
being deprived of his office as a Christian minister for
preparing a spurious book, even (as he alleged) with good
intentions. Speaking of the Acts or Travels of Paul and
Thecla, a work written probably near the close of the
first century or the beginning of the second, Tertullian,
in his book on Baptism (c. 17), mentions that .‘the Pres-
byter in Asia who composed that writing, as if he had
been able to increase Paul’s fame, being convicted of it,

ΧΙΪ PREFACE.

and having confessed that he did it out of love to Paul,
was deposed.’

After the wonderful events of the age in which Chris-
tianity was introduced, unwritten, floating reports would
easily become exaggerated, and adorned or corrupted,
according to the habits of thinking in different circles
and parties, without any deliberate, fraudulent purpose.
And then, some may have committed them to writing,
with the design of preserving what, without due investi-
gation, they supposed to be veritable accounts, or of
making a popular book, or of conveying what they
thought to be important religious instruction. Some,
too, may have written somewhat after the manner of the
historical romance, without intending to have their pro-
ductions regarded as histories, properly speaking; or
they may have proceeded, substantially, on the principle
of the descriptive and polished dialogue, assumed, as it
were, with the knowledge and consent of the reader,
merely or chiefly as a convenient mode of communicating
the lessons of wisdom. Cicero, in the preface to one of
his works in this form (Questiones Academice), says to
his friend, ‘I suppose, when you read, you will wonder
that we said between ourselves what we never said. But
you know the manner of dialogues.’ The license, how-
ever, belonging to these kinds of writing, and to parable
and poetry, to fable and allegory, it is not always easy to
keep within its proper limits.

A thorough discussion respecting the spurious books
among the Christians in the early centuries, would of

itself fill a large volume. ‘To say nothing here of others,

PREFACE. Xl

Dr. Lardner, in his Credibility of the Gospel History, has,
with his usual care and candor, presented many valuable
facts and considerations on this subject. In the second
part of that work (c. 29), under the head of Spurious
Writings of the second Century, he has given a brief and
interesting view of the Acts of Paul and Thecla, the
Sibylline Oracles, the Testaments of the Twelve Patri-
archs, the Recognitions, the Clementme Homilies, and
the Clementine Epitome. A complete collection of these
and the kindred productions that are still extant, accom-
panied with the proper illustrations, would be a welcome
contribution to our sources of ecclesiastical, literary, and
even artistical history.

In the latter part of the seventeenth century, Cotele-
rius, at Paris, rendered an important service by his
edition of the Apostolical Fathers, with various append-
ages. Early in the next century, this was enlarged and
greatly improved by Le Clerc, and published at Amster-
dam in two folio volumes. About the same time, Arch-
bishop Wake published his English version of what he
regarded as ‘the genuine Epistles of the Apostolical
Fathers, St. Clement, St. Polycarp, St. Ignatius, St. Bar-
nabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Martyrdoms of
St. Ignatius and St. Polycarp.’ About the same time,
also, Fabricius, at Hamburg, by his Falsely-entitled Code
(Codex Pseudepigraphus) of the Old Testament, in two
volumes, and by his Codex Apocryphus of the New Tes-
tament, in three volumes, made a noble beginning in
respect to a collection of the writings generally acknowl-
edged to be not genuine. The book of Enoch, trans-

X1V PREFACE.

lated into English by Bishop Lawrence, from an Ethiopic |
Manuscript, was published at Oxford, in 1821. Of the
Codex Apocryphus of the New Testament, Dr. Thilo,
Professor of Ecclesiastical History in the University of
Halle, is publishing an improved edition, with important
additions and critical apparatus. It will be to the learned
an invaluable treasure; for, however worthless some of
the pieces may be in themselves, they may be made to
shed light on some dark places in ecclesiastical antiqui-
ties. ,

Near the close of the last century, Jones, in his New
and Full Method of settling the Canonical Authority of
the New Testament, occupied most of the first two
volumes with learned discussions relative to the apoc-
ryphal books, giving a list of those which are lost, and
inserting in parallel columns the original text and an
English version of a considerable number of those which
are now extant, namely, the Gospel of the Birth of Mary;
the Protevangelion, or an historical account of the birth
of Christ, and the perpetual Virgin Mary his mother, by
James the Less, cousin and brother of the Lord Jesus,
chief apostle and first bishop of the Christians in Jeru-
salem; the First Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ ;
Thomas’s Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ; the
epistles of Jesus Christ and Abgarus, king of Edessa;
the Gospel of Nicodemus, formerly called the Acts of
Pontius Pilate; the epistle of Paul the Apostle to the
Laodiceans ; the epistles of Paul the Apostle to Seneca,
with Seneca’s to Paul; and the Acts of Paul and Thecla.

In 1820, these pieces in English, and the epistles of

PREFACE. XV

the Apostolical Fathers and the Shepherd of Hermas, as
translated by Archbishop Wake, with the Apostles’
Creed, were published in London, under the title of The
Apocryphal New Testament. It is to be regretted that
the manner in which these are brought forward seems to
indicate some unhappy impressions on the mind of the
editor, respecting our canonical books. If any new light
on the canon can be imparted, let it be welcomed. » But
let no one hastily infer that a counterfeit disproves the
existence, or destroys the value of what is genuine. On
the contrary, let any man seriously ask himself, whether
it does not afford some presumptive evidence in favor of
both. And if a book, unheard of before, be forged under
the name of the Apostles, to give sanction to certain
doctrines or precepts, it is good evidence that there had
been made on the public mind a deep and abiding
impression of the sacred character and authority of those
men, as the Apostles of Jesus Christ. Those men must
have wrought the signs of Apostles, to the satisfaction of
those who knew them the most intimately; and, by their
lives and labors, and acknowledged connection with our
Saviour, they must have established their claim of being,
preéminently, the teachers of his religion.

Beausobre, who wrote more than a hundred years ago,
in his celebrated Histoire Critique de Manichée et du
Manicheisme, after a careful discussion respecting many
spurious productions of the early ages, has appended to
the second book of his work a Discourse in which he
shows most clearly, that the forged and apocryphal writ-

ΧΥῚ PREFACE.

ings, instead of weakening, confirm the evidence in favor
of the Christian religion. And more recently, Kleuker,
a German critic, in his Copious Investigation of the
evidences for the genuineness and credibility of the docu-
ments of the Christian religion, has devoted the fifth
volume to the consideration of the Apocryphal writings
connected with Christianity; or of the origin, contents,
and object of the various uncertain or fabricated produc-
tions, having reference more or less to the evangelical
history and doctrine, in comparison with those documents
whose Apostolic origin and object can be proved by
internal and external evidences. In his closing chapter,
he comes decidedly and expressly to the same grand
result to which Beausobre had arrived. Lardner, too,
who cannot be suspected of any superstitious prejudice,
had arrived at the same result, in his immortal work
which has already been mentioned. After the most
extensive and patient examination of ancient writings,
sacred and profane, — genuine, spurious, orthodox, heret-
ical, Jewish, and heathen,—he remarks, in the conclu-
sion, ‘Much has been said by some in late times about
spurious and apocryphal books, composed in the early
days of Christianity. I hope that all objections of that
sort have been answered or obviated in the preceding
volumes. . . . These apocryphal books confirm the his-
tory of the genuine and authentic Scriptures of the New
Testament. . . . They are written in the names of such
as our authentic Scriptures say were apostles and com-
panions of apostles. They all suppose the dignity of our

PREFACE. XV

Lord’s person, and that a power of working miracles,
together with a high degree of authority, had been con-
veyed by him to his apostles.’

Happily, there are many clear and conclusive treatises,
of almost every form and extent, enabling the inquirer to
satisfy himself in regard to the claims of the authentic
documents of our holy religion. If he awake to the
duties which he owes to God, to himself, and to others ;
if he do justice to the evidence, and proceed in the exam-
ination with a sincere and earnest desire to know and
obey the truth, duly bearing in mind his responsibleness
in the sight of Heaven, he may confidently expect to be
preserved from the pernicious snares of error, whether
ancient or modern. Every one that asketh, receiveth ; and
he that seeketh, findeth.

The ‘ Apostolical Constitutions’ seem to have exerted,
silently and indirectly, a powerful influence during several
of the early ages of the church. They could not fail to
facilitate the introduction and prevalence of the doctrines
and usages which they sanctioned. And then, whatever
might befall these writings, the doctrines and usages,
when once established, could easily continue, under the
sanction of custom and of oral tradition, except so far as
they might be disturbed or modified by some new influ-
ence. In the fourth century arose the Arian controversy,
a storm which fiercely agitated Christendom, more than
sixty years, and did not entirely die away for ages. After
the many fluctuations connected with that controversy,
and long after the ascendency of the views of Athanasius,
it was found that the Constitutions had been corrupted,

XVlll PREFACE.

probably by some Arian hand; and accordingly a decree
against them was passed by a general council at Constan-
tinople, A.D. 692; saving, however, the authority of the
eighty-five canons. It has been thought that the decree
was owing, also, in some measure, to latent political
reasons. Be this as it may, the work, in most respects,
continued, and it still continues, to exhibit what had long
been to many the beau-ideal of the church. And the
principal interest which we, of the present day, must feel
in the Constitutions, is that which arises from their cast-
ing light on ecclesiastical history and antiquities. In
this view, it is hoped that the following pages will be
found useful to intelligent and discriminating readers.

In revising the version here presented, Yegard has been
had chiefly to the Greek text of the Constitutions, as
published with notes in the Amsterdam edition of the
Apostolical Fathers, and to the Greek text of the canons,
as recently edited by Bruns in his Bibliotheca Ecclesias-
tica, under the supervision of Neander. The Septuagint
translation of the Old Testament being the one used by
the author and his contemporaries, the references in the
margin are made to the books, chapters, and verses, as
they stand in that Greek translation. Some of its pecu-
liarities which receive no countenance from the Hebrew
original, may here be traced, as having had a decided
influence on the theology and reasoning of the early
fathers.

The Essay on the Origin and Contents of these Consti-
tutions is from the pen of Dr. Ὁ. C. Kraspr, now a

Professor in the University of Kiel. ‘To all who are pre-

PREFACE. ΧΙΧ

pared to enter on a fundamental investigation it furnishes
important aid in solving one of the most difficult problems,
and in understanding the state of the ancient church.
The same author’s Dissertation on the Canons of the
Apostles, which was lately translated by me from the
Latin, and published at Andover, in the Bibliotheca
Sacra and Theological Review, is added, in order to give
a completeness to the examination. Gleseler, in his Text
Book of Ecclesiastical History, mentions these two works
as containing the authorities connected with the subject
of the Constitutions and the Canons.

It would be wrong to detain the reader by apologies,
or criticisms, or commendations. In the few instances in
which it has seemed desirable to add any thing, it has
been added by the translator, and included in brackets.
Whatever may be thought of some of the opinions ad- A
vanced by the author, he is certainly entitled to a fair
hearing. And an Apostle has said; Prove αἱ] things ;
hold fast that which is good.

Boston, November 8, 1847.

εὐ

Las Oh

" oie aay, erat mak '
ashen gs care being ‘eva, oe
ὍΣ γε nee α

sade aca:

r x
Ἣ

ead,
het

xfs eek

. i Me
Τὰς i fore th spe ee

et at oe
ἡ ἐρωμανος ay xn
“cans ἌΡΤΟΝ
ἘΠ νον Cus
Sere. ἐμ aed

Joma Ἐ ὅν. we

. Ὶ me
( ν᾿
ἊΝ é
ws
ἐν ‘ Ψ
᾿ ᾿
4 % - ᾿
.οψῳ{ -
᾿
~
a
'
yeh
"
;
'
4
}

wat τὰ;

oa oe ahve κι i q ἈΠ δὲ
δεν τον γον δ
vie Be URS.” rit wa CRA

ν᾿ ὁ. ι ple’ &

vet hie aie

ν
Κῶ ΔΆ

᾿ τος
oat, & Pa! if: Pom
' i
7
4, ’
» :
κ᾿ »
‘
ἐΐνδνὲἠ Ἂ
{ ᾿
"

᾿ ὯΝ ie i ‘te πον.

4 a Γ. "5, < > ὙΨΆ ᾿
y " 4 *
“ _™ '
etna “κ᾿ iy ¥
‘3 ἂς τὲ
7a ee | * Ἢ

THE

APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS.

BOOK I. ConcERNING THE LAITY.
&
II. ConcEeRNING BisHops, PRESBYTERS, AND DEACONS.
III. Concerninc Wipows.
IV. CONCERNING ORPHANS.
V. CoNcERNING MARTYRS.

VI. CoNCERNING SCHISMS.

VII. Concerninc DEPORTMENT, AND THE EUCHARIST,
AND INITIATION INTO CHRIST.

VIII. ConcERNING GIFTS, AND ORDINATIONS, AND
ECCLESIASTICAL CANONS.

iy. eee eT. = int Ss ἊΨ <a me ,» ; ᾿
+ «A »ε . . ᾿ ~ 4 4 ’ “ὁ Γ yf γ } bp
peal as ἫΝ " - we Fite ee “te
Abs Tl

e : V were πὶ , oA
“ "al 4 .
" Α
ι]
x
¥ ‘ '
μι
Ν
ΝΎ
* on
ha a

al Tee a “he & νυ. ἐλ Ἢ Sa he
: ὩΣ ; 2

ude ES ΤΕ ii hate: vit eae ΠΩΣ wath ap

Dias:

-
( _

> Ligh? Ὺ Fi ξ, : ᾿ τ

- δὲ ca Π ᾿ ‘ay Pra Ρ hes

\ “, ᾿ ἕ ᾿

) ᾿ ᾿ ,

4 .* ‘ x ies

c ν 4 > ro. . ἡ ᾿ , ‘4

a
‘ a

. a” ἐδ
᾿ ᾿ > Δ ἮΝ ‘pint a
v3 e

‘ ‘
ἐ γὼ ;
1 OG ,

3 4 } = awh) . aan "ἡ bitte ΓΝ
bk ἐν cian th a

.»Ὁ"
7

w~
;
os

r i ¢ ; he ’
' ἣΨ ΤῊ ye
ha — Ἐν Ὁ
ν Ὁ .¥
ὯΝ q
Ἅ he ἢ ‘ 4 " ἢ ;
ν ᾿ “ὧν ;
4 ᾧ ἣν ν
nd be ‘a ; a }
# 4 4
x ae ws
4 owe @ a
, 1 4 a:
j εἰν
᾿ ν᾽
) ᾿
᾿ δος
' " 'ΨΑΗ͂
» ay
A) Ngee
4 ¥

CHAPTER I.
ἜΣ

VIII.

CHAPTER I.
II.

III.

Iv.

CONTENTS.

BOOK I.

Concerning Covetousness.

That we ought not to return injuries, nor revenge ourselves on him that
doeth us wrong.

. Concerning the adornment of ourselves, and the sin which ariseth thence.

That we ought not to be over curious about such as live wickedly, but
to be intent upon our own proper employment.

. What books of Scripture we ought to read.
. That we ought to abstain from all the books of those that are out of the

church.

. Concerning a bad woman.

Concerning the subjection of a wife to her husband, and that she must be
loving and modest.

. That a woman must not bathe with men.
. Concerning a contentious and brawling woman.

BOOK II.

That a Bishop must be well instructed, and experienced in the word.
What ought to be the character of a Bishop, and of the rest of the clergy.
In what things a Bishop is to be examined before he is ordained.

That charitable distributions are not to be made to every widow, but that
sometimes a woman who has a husband is to be preferred; and that
no distributions are to be made to any one who is given to gluttony,
drunkenness, and idleness.

. That a Bishop must be no accepter of persons in judgment; that he

must be gentle in his conversation, and temperate in his diet.

. That a Bishop must not be given to filthy lucre, nor be a surety, nor

an advocate.

. What ought to be the character of the initiated.
VIII.

Concerning a person falsely accused, or, on the other hand, a person
convicted.

XXIV

XVIII.

XIX.

xX.
XXI.

XXII.

XXIII.

XXIV.
XXV.

XXVI.

XXVII.

XXVIII.

XXIX.

XXX.

XXXI.

XXXII.

XXXIII.

XXXIV.

XXXV.

XXXVI.

XXXVII.

CONTENTS.

. That a Bishop ought not to receive bribes.
. That a Bishop, who, by wrong judgment, spareth an offender, is himself

guilty.

. How a Bishop ought to judge offenders.

. An Instruction, how a Bishop ought to behave himself to the Penitent.

. That we ought to beware how we make trial of any sinful course.

. Concerning those who affirm that a Penitent is not to be received into

the church. That a righteous person, although he converse with a
sinner, will not perish with him. That no person is punished for
another; but every one must give an account of himself. That we
must assist those who are weak in the faith; and that a Bishop must
not be governed by any turbulent person among the laity.

. That the Priest must neither overlook offences, nor be rash in punishing
them.
. Of Penance. The manner of it, and rules concerning it.

. That a Bishop must be unblamable, and a pattern for those who are

under his charge.

That a Bishop must take care that his people do not sin, considering that
he is a watchman.

That a shepherd who is careless of his sheep incurreth penalty ; and that
a sheep who doth not obey the shepherd is punished.

How the governed are to obey the Bishops who are set over them.

That it is a dangerous thing to judge without hearing both sides, or to
determine punishment against a person before he is convicted.

That David, the Ninevites, Hezekiah, and his son Manasseh are emi-
nent examples of repentance.

Amon may be an example to such as sin with a high hand.

That Christ Jesus our Lord came to save sinners by repentance.

Of first-fruits and tithes; and after what manner the Bishop is himself
to partake of them, or to distribute them to others.

According to what pattern and dignity every order of the clergy is ap-
pointed by God. |

That it is a horrible thing for a man to thrust himself into any sacer-
dotal office; as did Corah and his company, Saul, and Uzziah.

Of an entertainment; and how each distinct order of the clergy is to be
treated by those who invite them to it.

What is the dignity of a Bishop and of a Deacon.

After what manner the laity are to be obedient to the Deacon.

That the Deacon must not do any thing without the Bishop.

That the Deacon must not make any distributions without the consent
of the Bishop, because that will turn to the reproach of the Bishop.
After what manner the Priests are to be honored and to be reverenced

as our spiritual parents.
That the Priests are to be preferred before the rulers and kings.
That both the Law and the Gospel prescribe offerings.
Mention of the Ten Commandments; and after what manner they pre-
scribe.
Concerning accusers and false accusers; and how a judge is not rashly
either to believe them or to disbelieve them, but after an accurate ex-
amination.

XXXVIII.

XXXIX.
XL.

XLI.

XLII.

ALITI.

XLIYV.

XLV.
XLVI.

XLVII.

XLVIII.

XLIX.

LVI.

LVII.

LVIII.

LIX.

LX.

LXI.

LXIl.

LXIII.

CONTENTS. XXV

That they who sin are to be privately reproved, and the Penitent to be
received according to the Constitution of our Lord.

Examples of repentance.

That we are not to be implacable towards him who hath once or twice
offended.

How we ought to receive the Penitent, and how to bear with them that
sin, and when to cut them off from the church.

That a judge must not be a respecter of persons.

How false accusers are to be punished.

That the Deacon is to ease the burden of the Bishops, and to order the
smaller matters himself.

That contentions and quarrels are unbecoming Christians.

That believers ought not to go to law before unbelievers; nor ought
any unbeliever to be called for a witness against believers.

That the judicatures of Christians ought to be held on the second day of
the week.

That the same punishment is not to be inflicted for every offence, but
different punishments for different offenders.

What are to be the characters of accusers and witnesses.

That former offences sometimes render subsequent ones credible.

. Against judging without hearing both sides.
. The caution observed at heathen tribunals before the condemnation of

criminals, affordeth Christians a good example.

. That Christians ought not to have contentions one with another.
. That the Bishops must, by their Deacon, put the people in mind of the

obligation they are under to live peaceably together.

. An enumeration of several instances of divine Providence, and how, in

severy age, from the beginning, God hath invited all men to repent-
ance.

That it is the will of God that men should be of one mind, in matters of
religion, like the heavenly Powers.

An exact description of a church, and the clergy; and what things in
particular, every one is to do in the solemn assemblies of the clergy
and laity for religious worship.

Of commendatory letters in favor of strangers, lay-persons, clergymen,
and bishops; and that those who come into the church-assemblies, are
to be received without regard to their quality.

That every Christian ought to frequent the church diligently both
morning and evening.

The vain zeal which the heathen and the Jews show in frequenting their
temples and synagogues is a proper example and motive to excite
Christians to frequent the church.

That we must not prefer the affairs of this life to those which concern
the worship of God.

That Christians must abstain from all the impious practices of the
heathen.

That no Christian who will not work must eat; as Peter and the rest of
the apostles were fishermen, Paul and Aquila, tentmakers; and Jude
the son of James, a husbandman.

XX1V

ἊΝ.

XVI.

XVII.

XVIII.

XIX.

XxX.

XXI.

XXII.

XXIII.
XXIV.

ΧΧΥ.

XXXVI.

XXVII.

XXVIII.

XXIX.

XXX.

XXXII.

XXXIII.

XXXIV.

XXXV.

XXXVI.

XXXVII.

CONTENTS.

. That a Bishop ought not to receive bribes.
. That a Bishop, who, by wrong judgment, spareth an offender, is himself

guilty.

. How a Bishop ought to judge offenders.

. An Instruction, how a Bishop ought to behave himself to the Penitent.

. That we ought to beware how we make trial of any sinful course.

. Concerning those who affirm that a Penitent is not to be received into

the church. That a righteous person, although he conyerse with a
sinner, will not perish with him. That no person is punished for
another; but every one must give an account of himself. That we
must assist those who are weak in the faith; and that a Bishop must
not be governed by any turbulent person among the laity.

That the Priest must neither overlook offences, nor be rash in punishing
them.

Of Penance. The manner of it, and rules concerning it.

That a Bishop must be unblamable, and a pattern for those who are
under his charge.

That a Bishop must take care that his people do not sin, considering that
he is a watchman.

That a shepherd who is careless of his sheep incurreth penalty ; and that
a sheep who doth not obey the shepherd is punished.

How the governed are to obey the Bishops who are set over them.

That it is a dangerous thing to judge without hearing both sides, or to
determine punishment against a person before he is convicted.

That David, the Ninevites, Hezekiah, and his son Manasseh are emi-
nent examples of repentance.

Amon may be an example to such as sin with a high hand.

That Christ Jesus our Lord came to save sinners by repentance.

Of first-fruits and tithes; and after what manner the Bishop is himself
to partake of them, or to distribute them to others.

According to what pattern and dignity every order of the clergy is ἘΕῚ
pointed by God.

That it is a horrible thing for a man to thrust himself into any sacer-
dotal office; as did Corah and his company, Saul, and Uzziah.

Of an entertainment; and how each distinct order of the clergy is to be
treated by those who invite them to it.

What is the dignity of a Bishop and of a Deacon.

After what manner the laity are to be obedient to the Deacon.

That the Deacon must not do any thing without the Bishop.
That the Deacon must not make any distributions without the consent
of the Bishop, because that will turn to the reproach of the Bishop.
After what manner the Priests are to be honored and to be reverenced
as our spiritual parents.

That the Priests are to be preferred before the rulers and kings.

That both the Law and the Gospel prescribe offerings.

Mention of the Ten Commandments; and after what manner they pre-
scribe.

Concerning accusers and false accusers; and how a judge is not rashly
either to believe them or to disbelieve them, but after an accurate ex-
amination.

XXXVIII.

XXXIX.

XL.

XLI.

XLII.
XLITII.
XLIV.

XLV.

XLVI.

XLVITI.

XLVIII.

XLIX.

LVII.

LVIII.

LIX.

LX.

LXI.

LXII.

LAIII.

CONTENTS. XXV

That they who sin are to be privately reproved, and the Penitent to be
received according to the Constitution of our Lord.

Examples of repentance.

That we are not to be implacable towards him who hath once or twice
offended.

How we ought to receive the Penitent, and how to bear with them that
sin, and when to cut them off from the church.

That a judge must not be a respecter of persons.

How false accusers are to be punished.

That the Deacon is to ease the burden of the Bishops, and to order the
smaller matters himself.

That contentions and quarrels are unbecoming Christians.

That believers ought not to go to law before unbelievers; nor ought
any unbeliever to be called for a witness against believers.

That the judicatures of Christians ought to be held on the second day of
the week.

That the same punishnient is not to be inflicted for every offence, but
different punishments for different offenders.

What are to be the characters of accusers and witnesses.

That former offences sometimes render subsequent ones credible.

. Against judging without hearing both sides.
. The caution observed at heathen tribunals before the condemnation of

criminals, affordeth Christians a good example.
That Christians ought not to have contentions one with another.

. That the Bishops must, by their Deacon, put the people in mind of the